THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES FREDERIC THOMAS BLANCHARD ENDOWMENT FUND 0( THE WORK OF THE RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM W A R B U R T O N, LORD BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER. IN SEVEN V O L U T^I E S. VOLUME THE THIRD. LONDON, PRINTED BY JOHN NICHOLSt AND SOLD BY T. CADELL, IN THE STRAND. MDCCLXXXVIII, V.3 THE DIVINE LEGATION O F MOSES. IN NINE BOOKS. VOLUME THE THIRD; CONTAINING BOOKS V. VI. and IX. A2 853773 [ V ] CONTENTS O F THE FIFTH BOOK. BOOK TH E nature of the Jewifli Theocracy explained : And the Doc trine of a future State proved not to be in, nor to maliC part of the Mofaic Difpenfation, p. i — 231. SECT. I. Xj ITTL E light to be got from the fyflems o/'Chrlftlan writers, — or the objeSiions of Dei/Is^ — or from the Rabbins^ — or from the Cuba" lifts , concerning the true nature of th£ Jewlfh Republic, The He- brew People ftparatedfrom the reft of mankind not as favourites, but to preferve the icnowledge of the true God amidft an idolatrous world,-— Vindicated from the calumnious falftoQods of the PoeiVoltairCy p. i — 16. SECT. II. PROVES the Jewifli Government to be a Theocracy. — This form pewn to be necejfary : There being no other y by which opinions could bejuftly puniftjed by civil Laws : And without fuch Laws againfl idolatry, the Mofaic Religion could not be fupporied. — The equity of puniflnng opinions under a Theocracy, explained. Bayle cenfured. Fojier confuted. — The Theocracy eafly introduced, as founded on a prevailing notion of tutelary Deities. An obje£iicn of Mr. Collins to the truth of Revelation examined and confuted. — The eafy introdudlion of the Theocracy, // is fiewn, occaftoned as eafy a defeSiion from the Laws of it. — The inquiry into the reafon of this leads to an explana- tion of the nature of the Jewijh idolatry. — Lord BoUngbroke^ s accufa- tion of the Law of Mofes examined and expofed, p. 16 — 69. SECT. vi CONTENTS OF THE FIFTH BOOK. SECT. III. TR E ATS of the Duration of the Theocracy. — Shewn to have continued till the coming of Christ. — The arguments of Spencer and he Chrc to the contrary examined. — The Prophecy o/'Shiloh explained: the Bipop of Londoris difcourfe upon it examined and cotifuted, p. 69—98. S E C T. IV. THE Confequences of i\. Thtocvzcy confdered. — Shewn that it viuji be adminiftered by an extraordinary Providence^ equally difpenf- ing temporal Rewards and Pufiijljments, both to the Community and to Particulars. That Scripture gives this reprefentation 0/" God's go- vernment.—-And that there are many favourable circumjlances in the character of the fewifi People, to induce an impartial Examiner to be- lieve that reprefentation to be true, p. 98 — 131. SECT. V. S HEpy S, that as temporal Rewards and Punijlmients were the proper fandlion of the Jewifj Law, fo, there were no other ; Mofes entirely omitting the Do5lri?ie of a future State. — That this omiffion ivas not accidental, but defgned; and of a thing well kno%vn by him to be of high importance to Society. — Proved from fever al circumfances in the book of Genefs,' and from the haw of puniflimg the crimes of Parents on their Poferity, which was to fupply the want of the Doc- trine of a future State, — The nature and equity of this haw explai?ied, and defended againji Unbelievers. — // is then jloewn that as Mofes taught not the DoSlrine of a future State of Rewards and Punijjments, fo nei- ther had the ancient Jews any knowledge of it. — Proved from the books of the Old Tjlament, p. 131 — 154. SECT. VI. PROVES the fame point from the books of the New Teflament. "»i I What notion the early Jews had concerning the Soul, explained^ p. 154—167. Appendix </«^ Notes to the Fifth Book, p. 167 — 231. CON- C vli ] CONTENTS O F THE SIXTH BOOK. BOOK VI. CONTAINS an Examination of all the Texts brought from the Old and New Teftaments to prove a future State of Rewards and Punifloments did make part of the Mofaic Difpenfationy S E C T. I. STAT E S the ^leflion, fjews the Adverfaries of this U^ork to have much mi/laken it. — And that the true fate of the queflion alone, is a fufflcient anfwer to all objeSlions^ p. 233 — 240. SECT. II. JE NTE RS on an examination of the Texts brought from the Old Teftament ; frffrom the book of Job which is proved to be an allegoric Poem, written on the return from the Captivity, and re- prefenting the Circumfances of the People of that time. — The famous words, I know that my Redeemer llveth, &c.Jhewntofgnfy, in their literal fenfe, the hopes of a temporal deliverance only, p. 240 — 216. SECT. III. CONTAINS an examination of the rejl of the Texts urged from the Old Teftament, p. 317 — 344. SECT. vill CONTENTS OF THE THIRD BOOK. SECT. IV. CO NT^I NS an examination of the Texn produced from the New Teftainent, in which the ?7atiire of the Apnfolic Rcafonings againji. the "Errors ofjcwifj Converts is explained and Uluftrated, p. ^44 — 368. SECT. V. THE agreement of the Propoftion of no future State in the Mofaic JDifpcnfation, ivith the Vllth Article of the Church of England evinced. That the Old Fathers looked for more than tranfitory Promifes, illuf rated in the famous cafe ^Abraham, where it is proved that the command to offer Ifiac was merely an information^ in a reprefentative A5lion inftead of IVords^ of the Redemption of Mankind hy the great Sacrifice o/' Christ. Sheian how this Inirepr elation overturns all the infidel ohjeSlions againfi the truth of this part of Abra- ham's h'fiory, ^. ■^6^-/1^12. s E c T. vr. To fupport the joregoing Interpretation^ The Original, Nature^ and Ufe of TYVicAi. Rites and secondary Senses /« Prophecies are inquired into. — In the courfc of which Inquiry, the Principles of Mr. Collins' s book concerning the Grounds and Reafons of the Clirif- tian Religion are examined and confuted, and likewife the Rea- foning of Dr. Sykes againfi all double Senfis of Prophecies in his hook intituled. The Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Religion, ^c. The Ufe and Importance of thefe ^lefiions to the fubjeti of The Divine Legation explained^ The Conclusion of the argument, — with a recapitulation of it, p. 413 — 506. Appendix ^W Notes to the Sixth Book, p. 507 — 586. THE THE DIVINE LEGATION O F MOSES DEMONSTRATED. BOOK V. S E C T. I. HAVING now examined the character of the Jewifli People, and the talents of their Lawgiver, I come next to confider the nature of that Pohcy, which by his miniftry was introduced amongft them. For in tliefe two enquiries I liope to lay a ftrong and lading foundation for the fupport of the third general propofition, That the do6lr'me of a future Jl ate of rezvards and punijh' ments is not to be found in, nor did make fart of the Mofaic Difpen^ fation. We find amongfl this people a Policy differing from all the Inftitutions of mankind ; in which the two Societies, civil and religious, were perfectly incorporated, with God Almighty, as A TEMPORAL GOVERNOR, at the head of both. The peculiar adminiftration attending fo fingular a frame of Government hath always kept it from the knowledge of fuperficial obfervcrs. Chriftian writers, by confidering Judaifm as a Rcli- VoL, III. B giou* 2 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. gious policy only, or a Church; and Deifts, as a Civil policy only, or a State; have run into infinite miftakes concerning the reafon, tlie nature, and the end of its laws and inftitutions. And, on fo partial a view of it, no wonder that neither have done juftice to this amazing Oeconomy. Let us fuppofe, the famous pi(fture of the female centaur by Zeuxis, where two different Natures were fo admirably incorporated, that the paffage from one to the other, as Lucian tells us*, became infenfible; let us, I fay, fuppofe this plfture to have been placed before two competent judges, yet in fuch different points of view, that the one could fee only the brutal, the other the human part ; would not the firft have thought it a beau- tiful horfe, and the fecond, as beautiful a woman ; and would not each have given the creature fuppofed to be reprefented fuch func- tions as he judged proper to the fpecies in which he ranked it ? But would not both of them have been miflaken ; and would not a fight of the whole have taught them to reftify their wrong judg- ments? as well knowing that the fun6lions of fuch a coiT)pounded animal, whenever it exifted, muft be very different from thofe of either of the other, fingly and alone. From fuch partial judges of the LAW therefore, little affiflance is to be expe£led towards the difcovery of its true nature, Much lefs are we to expert from the Jewlfh Doctors : who, though they ftill keep (heltered, as it were, in the ruins of this auguft and awful Fabric ; yet patch it up with the fame barbarity of tafte, and impotence of fcience, that the prefent Greeks are wont to hide themfelves amongfl: the mouldering monuments of Attic power and politenefs. Who, as our travellers inform us, take a beggarly pride in keeping up their claim to thefe wonders of their Anceflors magnificence, by white-wafhiiig the Parian marble with * T>i» Sr'^ii«v 51 Ximis yt tjj; xa>.)\j'riS) «'«' IJ-dhiTO. al ©irlaXai liffiy, aJft^Tlj, iVi tc, aSoiioi' to * a>u MfiiTofiOJ, yvtamof, tc-a/ia^ot, — )^ ij ni|i{ it, xj n iffuoyri -ruv aUfiCCTut, xaOo ffti»a'/r1iT«» >^ rvriuTai Tii yvtaiKtiu To iVtixox, n^ifia, x^ a* ddfouf fislnQaUha-a, t^ i\ ■ar^ocrayoiy^j T^ivro/if»>i, Kat^itu Ti)» »4'»» U SalijB, iij to irt^oi £ 7r»1o,ut»»i. Zeuxis, c. 6. torn. I. p. 843. Edit. Reitzji, Amrt. 4°, 1 743. chalk. Sect. r. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3 chalk, and Incrufting the porphyry and granate with tiles and potfherds. But leaft of all fliall we receive light from the fantaftic vifions of our Englifh Cocceians * ; who have fublimed the crude nonlenfe of the Cabalifts, fo long buried in the dull amufement of picking Myflerles out of letters, into a more fpiritual kind of folly ; a quiii- teflence well defecated from all the impurities of fenfe and meaning. Therefore, to iinderftand the nature of the Jewifli Occonomv, wc muft begin with this truth, to which every page of the five books of Mofes is ready to bear witnefs, That the Jtparation of the Ifraelites ivas in order to preferve the dotlrine of the vairY, amidjl an idolatrous and polyiheijiic World. The neceflity of this provifion fhall be fliewn at large hereafter +. At prefent we only defire the Deifl: would be lo civil as to fuppofe there might pofiibly be a fufficient caule. But now, becaufe it is equally true, that this feparatiofi was ful- filling the promife made to x-^braham their Father; thefe men have taken occafion to reprefent it as made for the fake of a favourite people];. And then again, fuppofuig fuch a partial diftindlion to be inconfiftent with the divine attributes, have ventured to arraign the LAW itfelf of impoflure. But this reprefentation of the fi£l is both unjuft and abfurd. They cannot deny but it might be God's purpofe, at lead, tliat it be- came his goodnefs, to preferve the doclrine of the unity amidil: an idolatrous world. But this (we know by the event) could never be effedled but by a feparatlon of one part from the relT:. Nor could fuch a reparation be made any otherwlfe than by bringing that part under Goo's peculiar protedtion : The confequence of which were GREAT TEMPORAL BLESSINGS. Now as fome oue People mud: needs be fele£ted for this purpofe, it feems mofl agreeable to our ideas of divine Wifdom, which commonly effects many ends by the fame means, to make the bkjfings attendant on fuch ^fcleSlion, the * The followers of Hutchinfon. f In the ninth book. J Sec the firft volume of the Divine Legation. B 2 reward 4 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. reward of fome high exalted virtue in the progenitors of the chofeii People. But therefore to obje6l that they were chofen as favour- ites, is both unjuft and abfurd. Thz Jeparation was made for the fake of Mankind in general ; though one People became the ho- noured inftrument, in reward of their Forefathers' virtues. And this is the language of thofe very Scriptures which, as they pretend, furnifti the objeftion. Where God, by the Prophet Ezekiel, pro- mifes to reftore the Ifraelites, after a (hort difperfion through the Countries, to their own land, he declares this to be the end of their feparation : " Therefore fay unto the houfe of Ifrael, Thus faith the " Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of •' Israel, but for mine holy NAiME's sake, which ye have pro- " faned among the heathen, whither ye went. And 1 will fan£lify " niy great name which was profaned amongft the heathen, which '• ye have profaned in the midft of them ; and the heathen fhall *' know that I am the Lord, faith the Lord God, when I fhall be " fan61:ified in you before their eyes *." What God himfelf fays of the people, St. Paul fays of their law: " Wherefore then «' ferveth the Law? It was added because of transgressions; " till the feed fhould come, to whom the promife was made t«" // imis added, fays the Apoftle. To what ? To the patriarchal Religion of the UNITY I- To what end ? Bccaufe of tranfgrfjfions, i.e. the tranfgreflions of polytheifm and idolatry ; into which, the reft of mankind were already abforbed, and the Jews at that time, haftening apace ; and from which, there was no other means of re- ftraining them, than by this addition ; an addition that kept them feparate from all others, and preferved the dodrine of the Unity, till the coming of the promifed feed. But another thing offends the Deifts : they cannot underftand, let the end of this choice be what it would, why God fhould prefer fo perverfe and fottifh a People, to all others. One reafoii hath been given already ; that it was for the fake of their Forefathers, and to. * Ezek. xxxvi. 22, 23. f Gal. iii. 19. J Stc note [A], at the end of this Book.. fulfill Sect. I. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 5 fulfill the promife made to the Patriarchs. But others are not wanting ; and thofe very agreeable to the ideas we have of infinite Wifdom ; fuch, for inflance, as this. That the extraordinary PROVIDENCE, by which they U'ere blefled and proteded, might be- come the more vifible and illuflrious. For had they been endowed with the fliining qualities of the more polifhed nations, the efi-e£ls of that providence might have been afcribed to their own power or wifdom. Their impotence and inability, when left to themfelves, is finely reprefented in the Prophet Ezekiel, by the fimilitude of the vine-tree : Son oj man, what is the vine-tree more than any iree^ or than a branch ivhich is amongji the trees of the foreji? Shall wood, be taken thereof to do any work f or will men take a pin of it to hang any vejjel thereon ? — Therefore thus faith the Lord God, As the vine-tree amongji the trees of the forejl *, &c. For as the vine, which, with cultiva- tion and fupport, is the moft valuable of all trees, becomes the moft worthlefs, when left negleifTed in its own natural ftate : fo the Jews, who made fo fuperior a figure under the particular proteftion of God, when, for their fins, that prote£lion was withdrawn, became the weakeft and moft contemptible of all tributary nations. The Poet Voltaire indeed has had a different revelation. " The ** pride of every individual amongft the Jews (fays he) is interefted ' " in believing, that it was not their detestable policy, their " ignorance, in the arts, and their unpolitenefs, which deftroyed ' ** them; but that it is God's anger which yet purfues them for *' their idolatries t'" This detestable policy (for fo, with the free iitfolence of impiety, chara6teriftic of thefe times, he calls the' MOSAIC institution) was a principle of independency : this igno- rance in the arts prevented the entrance of luxury ; and this impolite- ?;i?/} hindered the praftice of it. And yet parfimony, frugality, and. a fpirit of liberty, which naturally preferve other States, all tended, . * Chap. XV. ver. 3. -j- L'orgueil de chaque Juif eft interefTiJ a croire q\ie ce u'eft point fa DEXEsTAr.i.a poLiTiQjjE, foil ignorance des arts, ia grolTlerete, qui I'a perdu; mais que c'eft la- co- lere de Dicu qui le punit. Rem. ix. fur les penfees de Pafcal, in 6 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. in the ideas of this wonderful Politician, to deftroy the Jevvifli. Egypt was long loft for want of a ipirit of independency; Greece funk by its knowledge in the arts ; and Rome was ruined by its po- litenefs : yet Judica iuffered for the want of all thefe caufes of de- flruftion. Is not this more than a thoufand topical arguments, to prove, that they were ruined by nothing but by their idolatries, w hich brought down God's vengeance upon them r But any con- trivance will ferve a Poet, any argument will latisfy a Freethinker, to keep a God and his providence at a diftance. And that the People were as detestable as their Policy, the lame Poet, the virtuous Voltaire aflures us — " We do not find (fays he) throughout the " whole annals of the Hebrew people one generous adlion. They ♦' are utter flrangers both to hofpitality, to beneficence, and to cle- " mency. Their fovereign-good is the prafllce of Ufury, with all " but their own nation. And this difpolition, the principle of all " bafenefs, is fo inrooted in their hearts, that Ufury is the conftant '* objedl of the figures they employ in that fpecies of eloquence " which is peculiar to them. Their glory is to lay wajle nioitb fire " and /wordy fuch paltry villages as they were jujl able tojlorm : They *' cut the throats of the old men and children, and referve from fiaugh- *' ter only the marriageable virgins. They ajfajfinate their majiers when " they are Jlaves. Tkey are incapable of pardoning when they conquer. '* They are the foes of all mankind*." Such is the flrong colouring of our moral painter. He has dipt his pencil in fulphur to delineate with horns and tails, thefe chofen inftruments of God's vengeance on a devoted Nation, over- * On ne voit dans toutes les Annales du peuple Hebreu aucune adion genereufe. lis ne connaiflcin ni 1' hoipitalite, ni la liberallte, ni la clemcnce. Leur fouverain bonheur eft d'exercer I'lifurc avec les etrangers ; et cet efprit de ufure, principe-de toiite lachete, eft tellement enracine dans leurs coeurs, que c'eft l'obje£t continue! des figures, qu'ils employcnt dans I'efpece d'eloquence, qui leur eft propre. Leur gloire eft de mettre a feu & a fang les petits villages, dont ils peuvent s'emparer. lis cgorgcnt les vieillards& Issenfans; ils ne re fervent que les filles nubiles ; ils aflaflinent leuis Maitres quand ils font efclaves ; ils ne favent jamais pardonner quand ils font Vainqueurs ; ils sont les ENNEMis DU GENRE HUMAiN. Addjt. a I'Hift. Generale, p. 30. run Sect. I. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 7 run with unnatural lust and brutlfh Idolatry; for to their de- ftrudion, the murders, the rapine, and the violations here charged upon the Hebrew People, allude. For tlie reft, it is fo much below all criticism, that one is almoft afhamed to touch upon it. Other- wife, we might obferve, that, in his rage, he hath confounded the chara6ter of the ancient Hebrews with that of the modern Jews, two people as much unlike as the ancient Franks to modern Frencli- men. — We might be merry with the nonfenfe, of VJury's being the ohjeB of their Jigures of eloquence ; which yet is not more ridiculous in the thought than abfurd in theexprefiion ; his meaning, I fuppofe, being, that their figures of eloquence are formed from, and allude to, the circumftances attending their pradice of t^^r)'. But the affair grows more ferious, as we proceed with omx General Hiflorian ; and we fhall find that this unhappy People, however they mayftand with their God, certainly, at prefent, for fomc reafon or other, lye under the Poet's curf. And from liis uncommon know- ledge of their Ufiiry and their eloquence, I (hould fufpedt, he had lately been tranfadling fome money- matters with them, and had been not only out-witted but out-talked too into the bargain. As to their HATRED OF ALL MANKIND, (the chopping-block of infidelity) we have it over again, and more at large, in another place, " You are (fays he to his reader) ftruck with that hatred *• and contempt, which all people have always entertained for the ** Jewifh Nation. It is the unavoidable confequence-of their le- " gislation; which reduced things to the necefiity, that either " the Jews muft cnflave the whole world, or that tliey, in their " turn, muft be crufhed and deftroyed. It was- commanded " THEM to hold all other People in abhorrence, and to think them- " felves polluted if they had eat in the fame difh which belonged to " a man of another religion. By the very law itself, they •' at length found themfelves the natural enemies of the whole " race of mankind*." I believe * .— Vous etcs frappcs dc cettc haiiic &: de ce mepris que toutes les nations ont * toiijours, 8 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. I believe it will not be eafy to find, even in the dirtieft fink of ■ Freethinking, fo much falfliood, abfurdity, and malice heaped to- gether in fo few words. He fays, There was an inevitable necej/ity, arijingfrom the very genius of the Law itfeif, either that this people JJjouhi enjlave the whole world, or that they, in their turn, Jljould be crujloed atid dcjiroycd. It might be thought unreafonable to expe£l that a Poet fliould read his Bible : but one might be allowed to fuppofe that he had heard at leaftof its general contents. If he ever had, could he, unmafked, and in the face of the fun, have faid, " That the mosaic law " dire6led or encouraged the Jewilh people to attempt extenfive con- " quefts ?"' That very Law, which not only affigned a peculiar and narrow diflrift for the abode of its followers ; but, by a number of Inftitutions, adlually confined them within thofe limits : Such as the flated divifion of the land to each Tribe ; the prohibition of the ufeofhorfes; the diAinflion of meati into clean and unclean ; the yearly vifit of each individual to Jerulalem, with many others. The Poet, who appears throughout his whole hiftory to be a much better Muflulman than a Chriftian, was furely, when he faid this, in fome pious meditation on the Alcoran; which indeed, by the Inevitable confequence of its Legiflation, muft either fet the Saracens upon enflaving all mankind, or all mankind on extirpating fo perni- cious a crew of mifcreants. But the Jews, he tells us, were commanded to hold all other People in abhorrence. If he had faid, to hold their Idolatries in abhorrence, he had faid true ; but that was faying nothing. To tell the world that the Jews were commanded to hold the Persons of Ido' later s in abhorrence, was done like a Poet. But when he goes ow to fay, that The Jeivs found, by the very CONSTITUTION OF THE Law ITSELF, that they wcre the natural toujours eu pour la Nation Jiiive. C'eft la fuite inevitable de leur legislation ; il f.ilair, oil fine ce Peiiple lubjuguat tout, ou qu'il fut ecrafe. II lui tut ordonne d' avoir, Ics nations en horreur, & de fe croiie fouillcs s'ils avaient mange dans un plat, qui cut ap- partcmi a un honiine d'un autre Loi — its fe trouverent par leur l«i meme enfin Enne- inis natuicls dn genre uumain. Add. a THift. Generale, p. 174. ENEMIES Sect. I. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. p^ ENEMIES oj all mankind, this was not like a Poet, being indeed a tranfgrefTioa of the probable ; for by the conji'itution of the Law ilfelf, every Jew that could read, found all mankind to be his BRETHREN. For Mofcs, to prevent any fuch eftrangement, which, fome other parts of his Inftitution, ifabufed, might occafion, was careful to acquaint the chofen Family with the origin of the humna, race, and of their defcent from one man and woman ; and, in order to imprefs this falutary truth more ftrongly on their minds, he draws out an exa£l genealogy from Adam, not only of the dire<5l line which, was to inhabit the landof Judea, but of all the collateral branches by which the whole earth was peopled. So that were our Poet to turn Laivgiver, (which he might as well do, as GENERAL HISTORIAN) and fit down to contrive a method by which brotherly love and affeclion might be befl: eflabliflied amongll the fons of men, one might defy him, with all his poetical or hifto- rical invention, to hit upon any more efficacious than that which Mofes has here employed. St. Paul, when he would enlarge the affedlions of the Athenians (to whom all other nations, as well as the Jews, were become barbarians) to that extent which Chriftian benevolence requires, employed no other topic than this, that God- HAD MADE OF ONE BLOOD ALL NATIONS OF MEN : and from thcnCe inferred, tliat they all fland in the relation of brethren to one another. But it may be aflced. What are we then to think of that opium HUMANI GENERIS, with whicli the ancient Pagans charged the Jews ? I have fhewn, in the firft volume of this work, that there was not the leaft fliadow from faSi to fupport this calumny ; and that it was merely an imaginary confequence, which they drew from the others declared hate and abhorrence of the Idols of Paganilra, and firm adherence to the fole worfhip of the 07ie true God. But be- fides this original, the Principles and DoSirine, there was another, the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mofaic Religion ; cither of them fuf- ficient alone to perpetuate this wretched calumny amongft ignorant Vol. III. C and ,o THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. and prejudiced men. That the DoBrine viz% worthy of its original, the enemies of Revelation confefs ; That the eftablifhment of the Ceremonies, as they were neceflary to fupport the DoSlrine, were of no lefs Importance, I (hall now (hew our Poet. To feparate one people from all others, in order to preferve the doclrlne of the Unity, was a juft purpofe. No reparation could be made but by a ceremonial Law. No ceremonial Law could be eftabli(hed for this purpofe, but what mufl make the Gentiles be efleemed unclean by the feparated' People. The confequence of an eftimated uncleannefs, muft be the avoid' ing it with horror : which, when obferved by their enemies, would be malicioufly reprefented to arife from this imaginary odium humani generis. What idea then muft we needs entertain, I will not fay of the Religion, but of the common honefty of a modern Writer, who, without the leaft knowledge of the Jewi(h Nation or their Policy, can repeat an old exploded calumny with the aflTurance of one who had difcovered a newly acknowledged truth? But the Pagans were decent when compared to this rude Libertine. They never had the infolence to fay, that this pretended kate of all mankind was com- manded BY THE LAW ITSELF. They had more fenfe as well as modefty^ They reverenced the great Jewifli Lawgiver, who, they faw, by his account of the origin of the human race, had laid the- ftrongeft foundation amongft his people of brotherly love to all men. A foundation, which not one of the moft celebrated Lawgivers q2- Antiquity had either the wit to inforce, or the fagacity todifcover. Well, but if the Jews were indeed that detestable People which- the Poet Voltaire reprefents them to be, they were properly fitted' however with a Law, which, he aflfures us, was full as detest- able. What pity is it that he did not know juft fo much of his Bible however, as might ferve to give fome fmall countenance af leaft to his Impieties ! We might then have had the Prophet to fup- port the Poety where, fpeaking in the name of God, he fays, — /^ gnve Sect.i. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. ir gave them Statutes that were not good, and Judgments ivhereby they Jhouldnot live'*. But to leave this to his maturer piojeds; and go on with him, in his pious de(ign of eradicating this devoted People ; for he aflures us, we fee, that unlefs they be rooted out, their de- testable POLICY will fet them upon enflaving all mankind. He hath fhewn the People to be detefable, and their i^r^w to be detejlable ; and well has he provided for the reception of both, a moft detefable country. You may, if you pleafe, fuppofe all this done in vindication of the good providence of the God of Ifrael ; for a People fo bad, certainly deferved neither a better Governtnetit nor Habitation. No, he had a nobler end than this ; it was to give the \yt to the Legate of the God of Ifrael, who promifed to them in his Mafter's name, A land Jiowing with milk and honey, the glory of ail lands. Having gotten Mofes at this advantage, by the affiflance of Servetus and his followers, (for he always fpeaks from good autlio- rity) he draws this delightful picture of the holy land. — " All of *' it which is fituated towards the fouth, confifts of deserts of ♦* salt sands on the fide of the Mediterranean and Egypt; and of *' HORRID MOUNTAINS all the way. to Efiongaber, towards the *' Red-Sea. Thefe fands, and thefe rocks, at prefent pofTeffed by a *' few ftraggling Arabian Robbers, were the ancient patrimony of *' the Jews +•" Now admitting this account to be true : i. In the firft place, wc may inform our Poet, that, from the face of a country lying defert, there is no fafe judgment to be made of the degree of its fertility when well cultivated ; efpecially of fuch a one as is here defcribed, confifting of rugged mountains and fandy plains, which, without culture, indeed, produce nothing, but which, by human induftry ^ in a happy climate, may be made to vie with foils naturally the mod •* Ezekiel. Sec p. 79, & feq. •|- Tout ce qui eft fitue vers le naidi confiftc en dcferts de fables falcs du cote de la Mc- dicerranee &: de I'Egypte, & en montagnes affreufes jufqu'a Efiongaber vers la Mei Kcr-jg? . Ces fables & ces rochers, habites aujourd-hui par quclquea Arabes Voleiir?, fon' i'jii- citnne patrie des Juifs. Add. a I'Hiil. Generale, p. 8j. C 2 proline. ,2 THE DIVINE LEGATION BookV. prolific. 2. It appears from the vaft numbers which this country adu- ally fuflained, in the mofl flourishing times of the Theocracy, that it well anfwered the character their Lawgiver had beflowed upon It, of a land flctving tv'tth milk and honey. 3. The Jfraelites, when they took pofleiiion of it, certainly found it to come up to the charafter which Mofes had given them, of a place where they fhould find great and goodly Cities ivbich they had not builded, houfes full of good things, which thev bad not filled; tvells digged which they had not digged ^ and vineyards and olive t?-ees which they had not planted *. If, I fay, they had not found it fo, we fhould foon have heard of it, from the" mod turbulent and difl'atisfied people upon earth. And it was no wonder they found it in this condition, fince they had wreflied it from the hands of a very numerous and luxurious People, who had carried arts and arms to fome height, when they, in any fenfe, could be faid to have Cities fenced up to Heaven. But the Poet has a folu- tion of this difficulty ; for to the Ifraelites, juft got out of their forty- years captivity in the Wildernefs, this miferable country muft needs appear a paradife, in comparifon of the Deferts of Param and Cadllh Barnea t- Now it is very certain, that no Defert thereabout, could' be more horrid or forbidding than that of Judea, as the Poet has here drawn the landfcape. But does he think they had quite forgot the fertile plains of Egypt all this time ? And if they compared the promifed Inheritance to the Wildernefs on the one hand, would they not be as apt to compare it to Egypt on the other ? And what Judea. gained by the firft, it would lofe by the fecond. But he will fay, that Generation which came out of Egypt, fell in the JVildernefs. What if they did ? they left their fondnefs for its flefh pots behind • them, as we are fufficiently informed from the exceffive attachment- of their poflerlty for Egyptian luxury of every kind. 4. But let us- admit his account of the fierillty of the promifed Land, and then fee ' Deut. vi — viii. t — Ce pais fut poureuxune tcire dcliciciifc en comparaifon dcs Deferts de Param 5c ^e Cades-Banic. lb. hoAv. Sect. I. OF xMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 13 how the pretenfions of the Molaic Mililou will fland. We will confider this flerility in either view, r>;' corrigible, or as incorrigible. If corrigible, we cannot conceive a properer region for anfwering the ENDS of Providence, as Mofcs has delivertd them unto us, with regard to this People. The firfl; great ble(iing beftowcd on man- kind, was to be particularly exempliticd in the pofterity of Abraham, which was to be like the fond on the fea-Jhore for vmltitude : and yet they were to be confined within the narrow limits of a fingle difl:ri<St : fo that fome proportionate provifion was to be made for its numerous Inhabitants. Affluence by commerce they could not have; for the purpofe of their feparation required, that Idolaters Ihould no more be perinitted to come and pollute them, than that they fliould gO' amongft Idolaters to be polluted by them : And accordingly, a fuffi- cient care was taken, in the framing of their Laws, to hinder this communication at either end. Thus the advantages from commerce being quite cut off, they had only agriculture to have recourfe to, for fiibfiftance of their multitudes. And the natural flerility of the land would force them upon every invention to improve it. And ar- tificial Qulture produces an abundance, which unallifled nature caii never give to the moft fruitful foil and moft benignant climate. Add fothis, that a People thus fequeftered, would, without fuch conflant attention to the art, and application to the labour, which the meli- orating of a backward foil requires, foon degenerate into barbarous and favage manners ; the firfl product of which has been always ("cen- to be a total oblivion of a God. But if we are to fuppofe what the Poet would feem to infinuate, in difcredit of the Difpenfation, that the foil of Judea was abfolutely incorrigible ; a more convincing proof cannot be given of that ex- traordinary Pkovidence which Mofes promifed to them. ^ot. tiiat if the corrigibility of a bad foil perfe6lly agreed with the end of the Difpenfation, wliich was a feparation, the incorrigililiiy of it was as well fitted to the mean, which was an extraorditiary Provi- dence-. For the hOc, that Judea did not fupport thofe vaft multitudes, being unqueftionablcj and the natural incapacity of the country fo to do 14- THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. do being allowed, nothing remains but that we mufl recur to that extraordinary Providence, which not only was promifed, but was the natural confequence. of. a Theocratic form of government. But I am inclined to keep between the two contrary ;fuppofitions, and take up the premises oi the one, and the couclufion of the other: to hold that the fterility ofjudea was very corrigible; but that all poffible culture would be'inadequate to the vaft numbers which it fulTiained, and that therefore its natural produce was flill further multiplied by an extraordinary blejjing upon the land. To fupport this fyftem, we may obferve, that this extraordinary nflillance was beftowed more eminently, becaufe more wanted, while the Ifraelites remained in the IFildernefs. Moses, whofe word will yet go as far as our G^«^r^/ Hijloriari'^s, fays, that when God took Jacob up, to give him his Law, he found him indeed in a defert Land, and m the wajle howling wildernefs ; but it was no longer fuch, when now'God had the leading of him. " He led him about, ^^ [i. e. while he was preparing him for the conqueft.of the promifed " Land] He inJlruBed hitn^'' [i.e. by the Law, which he there gave *• him] He kept him as the apple of bis eye^'' [i. e. he preferved him there by his extraordinary Providence ;] the effedls of which he defcribes in the next words, — " He made him ride on the high places of the earth," [i. e. he made the Wildernefs to equal, in its produce, the beft cultivated places] "that he might eat the increafe of the *' fields ; and he made him to fuck honey out of the Rock, and oil *' out of the flinty Rock : Butter of kine, and milk of (heep, with " fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Balhan" [i.e. as large as that breed] " and goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat," [i. e. the flour of wheat] " .and thou didfi: drink the pure blood of the " Grape." That this was no fairy-fcene, appears from the efix^ds. — *• Jtfhu- " run waxed fat, and kicked : thou art waxen fat, thou art grown " thick, thou art covered with f;itnefs ; then he forfook God which ** made him, and lightly efteemed the.Roek of his falvation*, &c." * Dcut, chap, xxxii. ver. lo. & feq. This Sect.!. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. i^ This fevere reproof of Mofes certainly did not put the Ifraelites in an humour, to take the wonders in the foregoing account on his word, had the fadls he appeals to been the leafl equivocah On the whole, we can form no conception how God could have chofen a People, and affigned them a land to inhabit, more proper foe the difplay of his almighty Power, than the People of Ifrael and the land of Judea. As to the People, the Prophet in his Parable of the Vine-tree, informs us, that they were naturally, the weakeft and moft contemptible of all nations : and as to the land, the Poet, in his great Fable^ which he calls a General Hiftory, aflures us, that Judea was the vileft; and moft barren of all countries. Yet fomehow or otlier this chojen People became the Inflruflors of mankind, in the nobleft office of humanity, the fcience of true Theology : and the- prowifed Land, while made fubfervient to the worfhip of one God, was changed, from its native fiierility,- to a region ^oii;//;^ with milk and honey ; and, by reafon of the incredible numbers which It fuftained, defervedly entitled the glory of all lands. This is the flate of things which Scripture lays before us. And 1-bave never yet fecn thofe7?ro;/^ reafons, from the Ichools of Infi- delity, that fliould induce a man, bred up in any fchool at all, to pre- fer their logic to the plain fads of the Sacred Hiflorians. I haveufed their teflimony to expofe one, who, Indeed, renounces- their authority : but in this I am not confcious of having tranfgrefled : any rule of fair reafoning.. The Freethinker laments that there is no contemporary Hiftorian remaining, to confront with the JevviJh Lawgiver, and dete£l his impoftares. However, he takes heart, and boldly engages his credit to confute him from his own hiftory. This is a f;iir attempt. But he prevaricates on tlie very firil onfct. Tile Sacred Hiftory, beiides the many c/i';7 facts whicli it contains, has many of a miraculom nature. Of thefe, our Freetliinker will al- low the firft only to be brought in evidence. And then bravely at- tacks his adverfary, who has now one hand tied behind him : for thc- civil and the miraculous fa£ls, in the Jewi(h43irpenfation, have the fame, nay, a nearer relation to each other, than the two hands of the . i6 T H E D I V IN E LEGATION Book V: the Lime body ; for tliefe may be ufed Tingly and Independently, though to dlilidvantage ; whereas the civil and the miraculous fa£ls can neither be underftood nor accounted for, but on the individual iufpe^ion of both. This is confefled by one who, as clear-fighted as he was, certainly did not fee the * confequence of what he fo liberally acknowledged. " The miracles in the Bible" (fays liis philofophic Lordlliip) " are not like thofe in Livy, detached pieces, *' that do not diiliurb the civil Hiflory, which goes on very well " without them. But the miracles of the Jewifh Hiftorian are inti- " mately conneded with all the civil affairs, and make a neceflary " and infeparablc part. The whole hiflory is founded in them ; it '' confifts of little elfe ; and if it were not an hiftory of them, it " would be a hiftory of nothing -f." From all this, I afllime that where nn Unbeliever, a Philofopher if you will, (for the Poet Voltaire makes them convertible terms) pretends to Ihew the falfhood of Mofes's miflion from Mofes'sowa- hiftory of it ; he who undertakes to confute his reafoning, argues fairly when he confutes it upon fafts recorded in that hiftory, whe- ther they be of the miraculous or of the civil kind : fince the two forts are fo infeparably connefted, that they mufl always be taken together, to make the hiftory underftood, or the fafts which it con- tains intelligible. SECT. II. ALLOWING it then, to have been God's purpofe to per- petuate the knowledge of himfelf amidfl an idolatrous World, by the means of a feparated People ; let us fee how this defign was brought about, when the Family, he had chofen, was now become numerous enough to fupport itfelf rnxdet zfeparation ; and Idolatry, which was grown to its moft gigantic flature^, was now to be reprefled. * See the View of Lord Bolingbroke's Philofophy, p. 192. & feq. of the third ediijon. f Bolingbroke's Poltlumious Works, vol. III. p. 279. 1 See note PBI, at the end of tliis Book. The Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATE D. 17 The Ifraelltes were, at this time, groaning under the yoke of Egypt ; whither the all-wife providence of God had conduced them, while there where yet few in number, and in danger of mixing and confounding themfelves with the reft of the Nations. In this diftrefs, one of their own brethren is fent to them with a mefi'age from God, by the name and chara6ler of the God of their Fathers, whofe virtues God had promifed to reward with dlftin- guiflicd bleflings on their Pofterity. The meflage, accompanied with Jlgfis and wonders, denounced their fpeedy deliverance from Egyptian bondage, and their certain pofleflion of the land of Canaan, the fcene of all the promifed bleflings. The People hearken, and are delivered. They depart from Egypt ; and in the third month from their departure, come to Mount Sin.ai. Here God firft tells them by their Leader, Moses, that, if they 'would obey his voice indeed, and keep bis Covenant, then they Jhjuld be a PECULIAR TREASURE to bim above all people, for that the whole EARTH ivas his*. Where we fee an example of what hath been obferved above, that whenever an Inftitution was given to this People, in compliance with the notions they had inbibed in Egypt, a corre(51:ive was always joined with it to prevent the abufe. Thus God having here told them, that if they would obey his voice they fhould be his peculiar Ireafure above all people, (fpeaking in the charadler of a tutelary God ',J to prevent this compliance from falling into abufe, as the divifion of the feveral regions of the earth to feveral celeflial rulers was infeparably connected with the idea of a tutelary Deity, he adds, as a reafon for making this People his Peculiar, a circumftance deftruftive of that pagan notion of tutelary Gods — for that the whole earth ivas his. Well. The people confcnt t ; and God delivers the Covenant to them, in the words of the two Tables ;j;. But this promife, of their being received for Gov s peculiar treafure, cpuld be vifibly performed no otherwife than by their feparatioii * Exod. xix. 5. t Vcr. 8. \ Chap. xx. Vol. III. D from ^8 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. from the reft of mankind. As on the other hand, their reparation could not have been effected without this vifible protedion. And this, Mofes obferves in his interceffion for the people : For wherein Jhall it be known here, that I and thy people have found grace in thy fight? Is it not in that thou goest with us ? So Jhall we be sepa- rated, / and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth *. The better, therefore, to fecure this feparation, God propofes to them, to become their King. And, for reafons that will be explained anon, condefcends to receive the Magiftracy, on their free choice. — And ye fall he unto me a kingdom of pr lefts +, a7id an holy nation. — And all the people anfwered together and faid, AH that the Lord hath fpoken we will do \. God then delivers them a Digeft of their civil and religious Laws, and fettles the whole Con- ftitution both of Church and State. Thus the Almighty becoming their King, in as real a fenfe as he was their God, the republic of the Ifraelites was properly a theocracy; in which the two- Societies, civil and religious, were of courfe iutirely incorporated. A thing neither attended to nor underftood. The name indeed is of familiar ufe : but how little men mean by it, is feen from hence,, tTiat thofe who, out of form, are accuftomed to call it a Theocracy, yet, in their reafonings about it, confuler it as a mere Ariftocracy under the Judges ;. and as a mere Monarchy under the Kings : : whereas, in truth, it was neither one nor the other, but a real and. proper theocracy, under both. Thus was this famous separation m.ade. But it will be aflced^. Why in fo extraordinary a way ? A way, in which the fagacious , Deift can difcover nothing but the marks of the Legiflator's fraud, and the People's- fuperftition. — As to what a mere human Lawgiver could gain by fuch a projeifl, will be feen hereafter. At prefent, it will be fufficient, for the removal of thefe fufpicions, to fhew, that. ■* Exod. xxxiii. i6. f Yor whtTt Cod K King, every /uije^ is, in fome fenfe or other, a />•/>/?; becaufe ia/ th.it cafe, civil obedience niuft have in it the nature of religious miuiftration. { Exod. xix. 6— S. a TH30- Sect. 2. OF MOSE S DEMO N STR ATED. 19 a THEOCRACY WAS NECESSARY, z.stht fepar at ion could not beefFeded sny other way. It appears, from what hath been fhewn above, that the Ifraelltes had ever a violent propenfity to mix witli the neighbouring Nations, JOid to devote themfelves to the pradlices of idolatry : this would naturally, and did, in faft, abforb large portions of them. And the fole human means which prcfcrved the remainder, was the feverity of their civil Laws againft idolatry *. Such Laws therefore were neceflary to fupport ^^feparation. But- penal Laws, inforced by the ordinary Magiflrate, for matters of opinion, are manifeftly iiiijufl:. Some way therefore was to be contrived to render thefe Laws equitable. For we are not to fuppofe God would ordain any thing that fliould violate the rule of natural juftice. Now thefe penal laws are equitable only in a Theocracy : therefore was a THEOCRACY NECESSARY. That the punifhment of opinions, by civil Laws, under a theo- cracy, is agreeable to the ruks of natural juflice, I fliall now endeavour to prove. Unbelievers and intolerant Chriftians have both tried to make their advantage of this part of the Mofaic inftltution. The one ufing it as an argument againft the divinity of the Jewifli Religion, on prefumption that fuch Laws are contrary to natural equity ; and the other bringing it to defend their intolerant principles by the example of Heaven itfelf. But they are both equally deceived by their ignorance of the nature of a Theocracy: which, rio-htly * " If thei-e be found amongll you, within any of tiiy gates wliicli the Loivd thy " God giveth thee, man or woman that hath wrought wickednefs in the fio-ht of the '* Lord thy God in tranfgieffing his covenant, and hath gone and ferved other Gods, ♦' and worfliipped them, cither the fun, or the moon, or any of the hoft of heaven, *' which I have not commanded ; and it be told thee, and thou hall heard of it, and *• inquired diligently, and behold it be true, and the thing certain, that fuch aboiiii- •' nation is wrought in Ifrael ; then flialt thou bring forth that man or that woman *' (which have committed that wicked thing) unto thy gates, even that man or that ** wom»n, and flialt ftonc them with ftoncs till they die." Dcut. xvii. 2, 3, 4, 5. D 2 under- 20 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. underftood, clears the Jewifli Law from an embarrafluig objcdion, and leaves the rights of mankind inviolate. Mr. Bayle, in an excellent treatile for Toleration, when becomes to examine the arguments of the Intolerants, takes notice of that which they bring from the example in queftion. " The fourth " objcdion (fays he) may arife from hence, that the Law of Mofes *' gives no toleration to idolaters, and falfe prophets, whom it " punidies with death; and from what the Prophet Elijah did to '* the Priefts of Baal, whom he ordered to be deflroyed without -' mercy. From whence it follows, that all the reafons I have " employed, in the firft part of this commentary^ prove nothing, " becaufe they prove too much ; namely, that the literal fenfe of " the Law of Mofes, as far as relates to the punifliment of opinions, *' would be impious and abominable. Therefore, fince God could, *' without violating the eternal order of things, command the Jews '* to put falfe prophets to death, it follows, evidently, that he could, *' under the Gofpel alfo, command orthodox believers to inflidl the ** fame punifhment upon heretics. " I am not, if I rightly know myfelf, of that temper of mind, ** fo thoroughly corrupted by the contagion of Controverfy, as to " treat this obje£lion with an air of haughtinefs and contempt; as *• is the way when men find themfelves incapable of anfwering to ■ *' the purpofe. I ingenuoufly own the objedion to be ftrong ; and ** that it feems to be a mark of God's fovereign pleafure, that we- *' fhould not arrive at certainty in any thing, feeing he hath given;. *' exceptions in his holy word to almofl. all the common notices *' of reafon. Nay I know fome who have no greater difficulties to • *' hinder their believing that God was the author of the Laws of- " Mofes, and of all thofe Revelations that occafioned fo much *' flaughter and devaflation, than this very matter of intolerance, *' fo contrary to our cleareft ideas of natural equity*." * Voions prefentement cette iv. objeiflion. On la p.eut tirer de ce que la loi du Moife, , &c. Commentaire PhilofophJqxiCj Part ii. Chap- 4. Whethec Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 21 Whether Mr. Bayle himfelf was oneof thefe backward believers, as by (bme of his expreffions he gives us realbii to fufpeft, is not material. That he dwelt with plealure on this circumftance, as favouring his beloved fcepticifni, is too evident. But fure he went a little too far when he laid, God's word contains exceptions to almojl all the common notices of re aj on *. I hope to ftiew, before I have done with Infidelity, that it contains exceptions to none. Our excellent coun- tryman Mr. Locke, who wrote about this time on the fame fubject, . and with that force and preciiion which is the charader of all his writings, was more realbnable and modeft in his account of this matter. As to the cafe (fays he) of the Ifraelites in the Jewi/Jj Com- monwealth, who being initiated into the Mofaical rites, and made citi'zens of the commonwealth, did afterwards apfiatize from the wor~- fhip of theGoT) of Ifrael; thefe were proceeded againf as traitors and rebels, guilty of no lefs than high treafon. For the commonweallh of the Jeic's, differ ejit, in that, from all others, was an abfohite Theo- cracy; nor was there, nor could there be, any difference between the Commonwealth and the Church. The Laws e/lablifed there concerning the worffip of the one invifble Deity were the civil Laws of that people, and a part of their political Government, in which God himfelf w(^i the Legiflator -j-. This he faid ; but it being all he faid, I fhall endeavour to fupport his lolution by fuch other reafoning as occurs to me. It will be neceflary then to obferve, that God, in his infinite wifdom, was pleafed to ftand in two arbitrary relations towards the Jewifh People, befides that natural one, in which he flood towards them and the reft of mankind in common. The firft was that of a tutelary Deity, gcntilitial and local; the God of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, who was to bring their pofterity into the land of Canaan, and to prote(5l them there, as his peculiar People. The fecond was that of fupreme Magijlrate and Lawgiver, And in both thefe relations he was pleafed to refer it to the people's *' — par les exceptions qu'il a mifes dans fa parole a piefque toutes les notions communes de la raifon. t -Letter concerning Toleration, p, 37, Ed, 1689. fVce 22 THE DIVINE LEGATION' Book V. free ciioice, whether or no they would receive him for their God and King. For a tutelary Deity was hippofcd by the Ancients to be as much matter of elecliou as a civil Magiftrate. The People, therefore, thus folemnly accepting him, thefe neceflary confequences followed from the Horeb contract. I. Firfl:, that as the national God and civil Magiftrate of the Jews centered in one and the fame object, their civil Policy and Religion nihil be intimately uijited and incorporated*; confe- quentlv, their religion had, and very reaionably, A public part, whofe fubje£l was the Society as luch : though this part, in the national pagan Religions, which had it likewife, was extremely abfurd, as hath been Ihewn more at large in the firft volume +• II. Secondly, as the two Societies were thoroughly incorporated, they could not be diftinguilhed ; but muft fiand or fall toge- ther. Confequently the diredion . of all their civil Laws mufl; be for the equal prefervation of both. Therefore, as the renouncing him for King was the throwing him off as God ; and as the renouncuig him for God was the throwing him off" as King; idolatry, which was the rejecting him as GoD, was properly the crimen la?fae majeftatls ; and fo juftly puniihable by .the civil Laws. But there was this manifefl difference in thefe two cafes, as to the effects. The renouncing God as civil Magiftrate might be remedied without a total diflolution of the Conftitution ; not fo, the renouncing him as tutelary God : becaufe, though he might, and did | appoint a deputy, in his office of King, amongft the Tewiffi tribes ; yet he would have no fubftltute, as God, amongft the pagan Deities. Therefore, la neceflity as well as of right. Idolatry was punlffiable by the civil Laws of a Theocracy ; It being the greateft crime that could be committed againft the State, * Such a kind of union and incorporation was mcft abfurdly affefted by Mahomet in imitation of the ycxi'/^.' Oeconomy ; whence, as might be expefted, it appears that neither he nor his a4riftants underftood any thing of its true nature. + See Divine Legation, B. IL Seft. i. p. 136. { The kings of I/racI and jfuJa/j being, as we Ihall flicw, indeed no other. as Sect.2. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 23 as tending, by unavoidable confequencc, to dlflolve the Confti- tution. For the one God being the fupreme Magiftrate, it lublifted in the worfhlp of that God alone. Idohitry, therefore, as the renunciation of one God alone, was in a firidi philofophic, as well ao legal fenfe, the crime of lcfe-ma}efly. Let us obferve fart-lier, that as, by fuch incorporation, religious matters came under civil confideration, fo likewifc civil matters came under the religious* This is what Jofephus would fay, where, in his fecond book againft Apion, fpeaking of the Jewifh Theocracy, he tells us that Mofes did not make Religion a part of Virtue^ but Virtue a part of Religion *. The meaning is, that, as in all human Societies, obedience to thc La^ is moral Virtue ; under a Theocracy, it is Religion. III. The punifhment of Idolatry, by Law, had this farther cir- ■ cumftance of equity, that it was punifhing the rebellion of thofe who had chofen the Governmen.t under which they lived, when' freely propoled to them. Hence, in the Law againfl idolatry, the crime is, with great propriety, called the Transgression OF THE COVENANT -}-• Thus we fee, the Law in queflion ftands clear of the cavils of:' Infidels, and the abufe of Intolerants ].. But to this, the defender of the common rights oj fuh]e5ls may be apt to objed, " that thefe penal laws were unjuft, becaufe nO' ** contra£t to give up the rights of confcience can be binding." To which I reply, with a plain and decifive fa6l. That none of all the idolatrous worfhip the Jews ever fell into, from the time of giving the Law to the total diflblution of the Republic, was • MATTER OF CONSCIENCE; but alvvays of convenience ; fuch as procuring fome temporal good, which they wantonly affeded, or averting fome temporal evil, which they fervilely feared. Tiic iTUth of whlcli appears from hence, that, in the midft of all their * AiTiey o oTi Kj Ta- t^-o'ttw tj;^ youoGiaia; 0^0; To ^^r}<Ti[jiov -rraVTit-v ati too?:; dtr,iifjKS-^' b yae fAtfo^ • + Deut. xvii. 2. t:^See.note [CJ, attl'.e end of this Book. idolntrieSjf, U THE D I V I :\ E LEGATION Book V. idolatries, the God of their Fathers, as we fliall fee, was ever owned to be the Creator and firft Caufe of all things; and the Reli- gion taught by Mofes, to be a Revelation from heaven. But it may be afked, What if their commiffion of idolatry had, at any time, proved matter of confcience; i. e. fuch an aftion as they thouglit they were obliged in duty to perform ? • I reply, thequeftion would have weight, had the Law in diiputc been of human inflitution. But as it was given by God, who knows the future equally with the pad and prefent, and linv the cafe would not happen, it is altogether impertinent. The Queftion, indeed, points out to us, the danger and abfurdity in any human Jegiflature to make penal Laws for retraining the exercife of Reli" gion, on any pretence whatfoever. Thus it is feen, that a feparotion^ fo neceflary to preferve the Uifity-, could not have been fupported without penal laws againfl idolatry ; and, at the fame time, feen that fuch penal laws cut never be equitably inftituted but under a Theocracy. The confe- quence is, that A Theocracy was necessary. But this form of Government was highly convenient hkewife. The Ifraelites, on their leaving Egypt, were funk into the lowefl praflices of idolatry. To recover themj, therefore, by the difcipline of zfeparatiofi, it was neceflary that the idea of God and his attri- butes (hould be imprefl'ed upon them in the moil: fenfible manner. But this could not be done, commodioufly, under his character of God of the Univerfe : under his charader of King of Ifrael it well might. Hence Lt iS) we find him in the Old Teflament fo fre- quently reprefented with afFet^ions analogous to human paflions. The Civil relation, in which he flood to thefe people, made fuch a reprefentation natural ; the grofliiefs of their conceptions made the reprefentation neceflary; and the guarded manner in which it was always qualified, prevented it from being mifchievous. Hence, another inftance of the wifdom of this Oeconomy ; and of the folly of Spinoza, and others, who would conclude from it, that Mofes and the Prophets had themfelves grofs conceptions of the Deity. Nor fhould the Sect. 2. OF MOSE S DEMO N STR ATE D. 25 ?.he indifcrerion of thofe Divines pafs uncenfured, who have taught that God, in the OldTeftament, looks on man with a lefs gracious and benign afpe^t, than in the New. An error, which at one time gave birth to the moft abfurd and monftrous of the ancient liereHes ; and hath at all times furninied a handle to infidelity*. But God, whenever he reprefents himfelf under the idea of Lord of tlu; Univerfe, makes one uniform revelation of his nature, throughout all his Dilpenfations, as gracious andfullofcotnpoljionx as good to ALT., and whofe tender mercies are over all his wckks: yet cx)ndefcendin"; to become the tutelarv God, and civil ]\I;i<rifl:rate of the Jews, it cannot but be, that he fhould be conlidered as having his peculiar inlpedion attached to tivis People, and as punlfliing- their tranfgreffions with feverity. Thefe appear to me the true realons of the Theocratic form cf government. With fuch admirable wifdom was the Jewifli Oeco- nomy adapted, to efFed: the ends it had in view! Yet, notwith- flanding the fplendour of divinity which fiiines through every part of this Theocratic form, Mr. Fofter, a diflenting preacher, tells us roundly, that it is all an idle dream ; and that he will undertake to 'defend the Law, which punllhes Idolatry with death, " not on '^' dark and imaginary^ but on dear and fc/Iid principles'; I therefore *' add, (fays he) fuppofing the Theocratic form of government *' amongft the Jews to be a point inconteftable, it ferns fcarce *' capable of affording zfu/l and fatisfaSiory anfwer to the objedion ** raifed agalnfl: the Hebrew Law for devoting idolaters to death, *' For when the people of Ifrael, fond of novelty, and of im.i- '' tating the cuftoms of other nations, were flubbornly^ and inflexi- *' bly refolved, notwithftandingall the remonflrancesof the Prophet '* Samuel to the contrary, to have a vifible and mortal King; God *' upon this occafvon declared, that they had rcjetfed Lini tlj^t he * It jrtuftbc o-x<ncn (fays Tyndal) that the fame /pi'lt (I,i?,ire not call it a J'plrit of crurl-.y) ioci not alike prevail throughout the Old Tejlament : the nearer "jje come to the ti/iiet of the Co/pel, the milder it appeared. Chridianity as old as the Cldtioi), p. ;;4i. St-c too Lord Bolingbroke's poilhumous works throiigliout. Vol. III. E ^'J/.^on/d 26 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. '■^ fiould not reign over them: and as his former political reign is " founded on a fuppofed compa£l between the Almighty Sovereign *' and his people, that original compaB being now fclemnly " renounced on the part of the people, there mull of courfe be a " diirolution or end of the Theocracy*." He begins with calling the Theocracy a dark principle. And yet, tlie account he gives of it fhews, that he did not find it dark ; and^. what was v/orfe, could not, with all his endeavours, make it fo- He calls it imaginary ; and yet the very Hiflory he quotes to prove its fhort duration, fhews, even by his own proof, it was not ima- ginary, but real. Indeed, if that civil Governmejit, which is founded on ORiGlNAii COMPACT, were dlflblvable at pleafure, that is, as foon as one of the contra£ling parties was grown weary of it (which this Decider on Government and Laws exprefsly fays it is), then Government,, on its moil: lesitimate foundation, would be \.\\q n\o^ dark andima- ginary of all things. When the Parliament rofe up in arms againfl: Gharles I. they wanted juft fuch a Preacher as this (and yet they had many precious ones), to aflTure them, thzi their renouncing the King's Authority had fairly dlflblved the Monarchy, and brought it to a lawful end. For the Leaders of that body, it is plain, knew nothing of this fecret, and were therefore at a great deal of pains to prove, and at laft could hardly get themfelves believed, that Charles himfelf had broken the original CompaSl. But unlefs this CompaSi flands upon a different footing from all other compafts in the world,, we may fafely pronounce, that a bargain or agreement, which has' been made between two parties, can never be dilfolved but by the confent of both of them ; or by a fundamental mifdemeanour in one; if the other party chufes to exadl the forfeiture. Now, in the cafe of the Jews under Samuel, there was a renunciation, it is true, on the part of the People, or, in plainer Englifh, a rebel- lion. But God did not give way to it; he would not (as on the principles of civil juftice he might) exafl: the forfeiture; which- * Sennons, vol. iii. p. 373, 374. was,- Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 27 was, the withdrawing his prote6lion. All this will be proved at -large in its place. The Thcocracx, therefore, ftill tontiiiued under their Kings ; which were indeed no other tlian th^ anointed, or the Viceroys of God. — Such is our Preacher's fuccefs in attempting to ihew Mr. Locke's principle to be diirk and Imaghinry. Let us icz aiext whether he has better fortune in proving his own to be de:.v andfolid. Now his way of juftifying the Law, which puniHied idolntiy ~with death, without the aid of the theocrat'ic princtpic, is this. — " As tlie end for which the civil conflitution of the Jews was *' formed, viz. to prevent their being over-run with idolatry, ••' (which, as it prevailed amongfl: the neighbouring nations, cor- " rupted their internal fenfe of the difference of good and evil, and *' baniflied humanity and decency, and many of the moft confi- •*' derable and important of the focial virtues, by introducing " (hameful impurities and human facrifices, quite deteflable to *' nature) as the end, I fay, for which the civil conftitution oi *' the Jews was formed, appears, when thus explained, and *' abftrafted from all confideration merely religious, to be wife and *• gracious in itfelf ; and as the judicial Laws in that fcheme of " Government were admirably adapted to fubferve and advance this *' wife and gracious end ; it neceffarily follows, that idolatry, which ♦* would have fruftrated the whole defign of the Conftitution, and •' have entirely diflblved and deftroyed it, muft, upon the fame " reafons that are allowed to be juft in all other Policies, have *' deferved capital punifhment*." Here we fee our Preacher approves himfelf jurt: as fkilful in the end of Civil-government, as he did before, in its naiwe and ejfaice. He appears not to know (what he might have feen proved in the firll volume of this work) that civil Society' muft have one particular, diflindl:, and appropriated end ; and that this end can be no other than fecurity to the temporal liberty and property of man ; becaufe {^as is there (hewn) all other ends may be attr.ined witliout civil * Page 375, 376. E 2 Socictv. aa T H E D 1 V I N E L E G AT I ON Book V. Society. This then is the only proper end of Government. Yet. our Preacher falls into that exploded conceit, which makes any attainable end, fo it be a good one, the legitimate bufuiefs of civil. Society, as luch : which confounds this Society with all others, there being no way to keep the Civil diftinft but by afligning it an end peculiar to itfelf. But his fubjeft happening to be the y^w^J government, it fecured his reafoning from the glare of the abfurdity.. And his falle and fallacious account of the i?»fl'of its inftitution, with which he introduces his reafoning, gave a certain plaufibility to the nonlenfe which followed. It is in thefe words, The end for which the civil conjtilution %vas formed, was to prevent their being over-run- with idolatry. 'Now,bycivil con/iitution, a fair reafoner (hould mean- (^where the queftion is concerning the efficacy of a mere civil Govern- ment, in contradiftinftion to the Religious) the civil conftitution- of the Jews as it was fo diflinguiflied. But, in this lenfe,. the end of the civil conjlitution of the Jews was the fame with all other, - namely, fecurity to men's teirporal liberty and property. It is true,- if by their civil conjlitution, , he meant both civil and religious, which • here indeed .was incorporated, and went under the common name: of LAW ; then, indeed itS: end was to prevent idolatry ; but then this- is giving up the point, becaule that iacorporatian was the confe- q^uence of the 'Theocratic form of Government, or, to fpcak more. properly, it was the Theocracy itfelf. Thus he comes round, again to the place on which he had turned his back ; and, before he knows where lie is, eftabliflies the very dofl:rine he would confute,- In a word, our Preacher was got out of his depth ; and here 1 fhall< leave him to fink or fwim ; only obferving, that this great advocate of religious liberty has done his beft (though certainly without de- fgn) to lupport a principle the mod plaufible of any that Perfecutors^ for opinions cm catch hold on, to juftlfy their iniquitous praflice ; namely, that civil government was ordained for the procuring all the. good of all kinds, ivhich it is even accidentally capable of advancing.- And to make fure work, lie employs that adulterate glofs, which> They fo artfully put upon their wicked pradice ; viz, that it is Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 29 for ihefupport of morahly ; for who is fo purblind that he cannot fpy immoraliiles lurking in all heretical opinions ? And thus it is that G.ur Preacher defends civil Government, in punifliing opinions : 'The idolatry of the neighbouring nations (fays he) corrupted their inter- nal fen fe of the difference of good and evil, and banifed humanity and decency^ arid many of the mofl confiderable and itnportant of the facial virtues. A reafon conftantly in the mouths, whatever hatii been in the hearts of Perfecutors, from St. Auftin to St. Dominic *. II. We come, 'in the next place, to fl-icw, that this Theocracy, as it was NECESSARY, {o it would liave an eafy reception ; being founded on the flattering notion, at that time univerfally enter- tained, of TUTELARY DEITIES, GeutiUtial and Local. Thus, to carry on his great purpofe, the Almighty very early rcprefented himfelf to this choien race, as a Gentilitial Deity, The Gon of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob -j- : Afterwards, when he preferred Judea to all other countries for his perfonal refidence (on this ac- count called HIS land I), he came under their idea of a Local Deity : which notion was an eftabliflied principle in the Gentile world, as we have (hewn above, from Plato. It was originally Egyptian ; and founded in an opinion that the earth was at fufl divided by its Creator, amongft a number of inferior and fubordinate Divinities. The Septuagint tranflators appear to have underftoo^ the following paffage, in the fong of Mofes, as alluding to this opinion ; — When the Mojl High divided to the nations their inheritance^ ivhen he feparated the fans of Adam^ he fet the bounds of the people ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. For the Lords portion is his people: Jacob is the lot of his inheritance § ; For, mUtz^ oif according to the number of the children of Ifrael (whiciv * See note [D], at the end of this Book. t See Jer, x. 16. and li. tg. t Levit. XXV. 23. Deut. xi. 12. Pf. x. 16. IT. ;;iv. 25. Jer, ii. 7. Chap, xvi, ver. 18. Eeek, XXXV. 10. Chap, xxxvi. ver. ;, ;o. Chap. x.\A\iii. -.-er. 16, Wifti. of SoK.xii. 7. § Dsut. xxxii, 8, 9, li -^o THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. it they found in the text, tliev undL-rfiood no more than later critics) they WVOtC Kajcc api9i^ov\\f'ys\uv &eS, ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF THE ANGELS OF GoD. Wlilch at lea ft IS intelligible, as referring to that old notion, original to the country where this tranflation was made. And Juftin Martyr tells us*, that in the beginning, God had committed the government of the world to angels, who, abuling their truft, were degraded from their regency. But whether he learnt it from this tranflation, or took it from a worfe place, I Ihall not pretend to determine. The Land, thus felefted by God for his perfonal refidence, he beftows upon his chofen People. Behold (liiys he) the Ia?id of Ca}jaan ivhich I give unto the chilaren of Ifrael Jor a pojfejfion +• This too was according to the common notions of thofe times. Thus Jephthah, who appears to have been half paganized by a bad educa- tion, fpeaks to the King of the Ammonites, IViit not thou pojfefs that which ChemoJJj thy God giveth thee to pofejs ? So, whomjoever the Lord ourQovtJldall drive out from before us, them will we pojfefs |. It was no Wonder, therefore, when God was thus pleafed, for the wife ends of his providence, to be confidered, by a prejudiced people, in this character, that all the pagan nations round about fliould regard the God of Israel no otherwife than as a local tu- telary Deity ; too apt, by their common prejudices, to fee him only under that idea. Thus he is called the God of the Land ^, — the God rf the Hills \\, &c. And it is exprefsly laid, that they fpoh; iigainjl the God of Jerufakm, as againf the Gods of the people of the earth, which itere the work of the hands of man *^'. By which is meant, that they treated him as a local tutelary Deity, of a confined and bounded power : for it was not the old pagan way to fpeak againft one another's Gods, in difcredit of their Divinity : and this circumfcribed dominion was efteemed, by them, no difcredit to it : But, by the Jews, the worfliippers of the true God, it was juftly held * Apologet. i. t Deut. xxxii. 49. X Judg. xi. 24. § 2 Kings xvii, 26. Chap, xviii, ver. 33, & feq. il I Kings XX, ;3. **• 2 Chion. xxxii, ig. to Sect. 2. OF MOSES DE MON STRATED. 31 to be the greateft. Therefore, to call the God of Ifrael the God of the hills f and not of the plain, was /peaking againjl him. For, here again \va muft obferve, that when God, agreeably to the wliole method of this Difpenflition, takes advantage of, or in- dulges his people in, any habituated notion or cuftom, he always interweaves fome charafteriftic note of difference, to mark the infti- tution for his own. Thus in this indulgence of their prejudices con- cerning a tutelary God, 1. He firfi: inftitutes, upon It, a "Theocracy ; a practice jufl; the re* verfe of Paganifm : for there Kings became Gods ; whereas here God condefcended to become King f . 2. Secondly, he forbids all kind of community or intercourfe be- tween the God of Ifrael and the Gods of the Nations, either by joining their wor(hip to his, or fo much as owning their Divinity.. Thus were the Ifraelites dlftlngulfhed from all other people In the mod; effectual manner ; for, as we have often had occafion to ob- ferve, there was a general intercommunity amongft the Gods of pa- ganifm : They acknowledged one another's pretenfions ; they bor- rowed one another's titles; and, at length, entered into a kind of partnerfliip of Worfhip. All the Pagan nations, we fee, owned the God of Il'rael for a tutelary Deity f- But His followers were not permitted to be fo complalfant. There was to be no fellowfhip between God and Belial; though a good underftanding always fub- fifled between Belial and Dagon. But, amidfl: a vaft number of chara£Veriflic circumflances proving the origin of the Mosaic religion to have been different from that of every other nation, there is none more illuflrious than this, That: the Mcfaic religion was built upon a former, namely the Patriar-- €HAL : whereas the various Religions of the Pagan world were all unrelated to, and independent of, any other \. * See note [E], at the end of this Book. •[■ 3 Kings xviii. 25. Jer, iv. 2, 3. X See volume I. booki. And 32 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. And yet the flimous Author of Tbe grounds and reafons of ibc CbrjjVian Religion hath been hardy enough to employ one whole chapter to prove, that tbis inelh-jd of introducing Chrijiiatiity into the ivorld, by building and groimditig it on the Old I'efament, is agreeable to the common method of introducing netv Revelations, 'whether real or P'RKTENnr.D, or an^ changes in religion ; and alfo the nature of things^. " For If (lays he) wc confider the various revolutions " and cliangcs in religion, whereof we have any tolerable hiflory^ *' in their beginning, w^e fliall find them, for the mofi: part, to be " grafted on feme old flock, or founded on fome preceding revek- " tions, which they were either to fupply, or fulfil, or retrieve from " corrupt glofles, innovations, and traditions, with which by time " they were incumbered: and this, which may seem matter " OF SURPRISE TO THOSE, WHO DO NOT REFLECT on the changC- " able nature. of all things, hath happened ; though the old revela- *' tions, far from intending any change, ingraftment, or new " difpenfation, didfortbe mofi part declare they were to laf for ever, " and did forbid all alterations and innovations, they being the laft •' difpenfation intended t*" Here are two things aflerted : i. That thebullding new Religions and new Revelations upon old was agreeable to the common method of the ancient world. 2. That it was agreeable to the nature of things. Thefe are difcoveries one would little have expe(5led. I. Let us firft examine his Facts. — But to judge truly of their force, we mufl: remember, that the obfervation is made to difcredit what Believers call true Revelation, by lliewing that all f;dfe Reli- gions have taken the fame method of propagation. I. His firfl: point is, That this met food was agreeable to the common pra^ice of the ancient 'world. Would not one expeftnow an inflance of fomeconfeffedly falfe Religion, between the time of Abraham and Christ, which pretended to be built on fome preceding Reve- ■^ Grounds and Reafons, &c. p. 20, f Page 21, latlon .^ Sect.2. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 33 lation ? Without doubt : If it were only for this, that there is no other way of proving the proportion. Befides, to fiy the truth, fuch an inftance would be well worth attending to, for its extreme curiofity. But he could not give tlie reader what was not to be had : and therefore he endeavours to make up this deficiency oifaSiy by (hewing, i. That the Jewish Religion, like the CirRisTiAN, pretended to be built on a preceding. '• Thus the miffion of " Mofes to the Ifraelites (fays he) fuppofcd a former revel;uion of " God (who from the beginning feems to have been conflantly *' giving a fucccflion of dilpeufations and revelarious) to their aa- *' ceftors ; and many of the religious precepts of Mofes were bor- *' rowed, or had an agreement with the religious rites of the hea- *' thens, with whom the Ifraelites had correfpondence, and parti- *' cularly witli the religious rites of the Egyptians, (who upon *' that account feem confounded with the Ifraelites by fome pagans, *' as both their religious rites were equally, and at the Gme time, *' prohibited by others) to whofe religious rites the Ifraelites feem *' to have been Cnnformijls during their abode in Egypt*." Go thy way, for a good Reafoner ! — To prove that falfe revelations had the fame pretenfions of dependency on a preceding, as the true have had, he fhews that all the true had thefe pretenfions. But this is but half the atchievement. The beft part is ftill behind. 'Tis a rarity ; a blunder ingrafted on a fophifm. He was not content to fay that Mofes founded his Religion on the Patriarchal : He mufl needs go on, — And many of the religious precepts of Mofes ivcre bor- rowed, or had an agreement loith the religious rites of the Heathens^ ^X)iih whom the Ifraelites had correfpondence , and particularly zvith the religious Rites of the Egyptians. Now, how it comes to pafs tliat Mofes's borrowing from tiie religious Rites of the Egyptians, whofe religion he formally condemned of talfliood, fnould be metamor- phofed into an example of one Religion's being founded upon, or re- ceiving its authority from, another, I con fefs, i cannot compre- hend. If he were not at the head of the Freethinkers, I fliould * Page ■2.2, Vol. III. F fufpea 3f THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. fufpedt feme fmall confufion ia his ideas : and that this great Rea- foner was unable to diftinguifli between, a Religions fupporting it- felj on one preceding, 'which it acknowledged to he true : and a Religion'' s complying, for the fake of inveterate prejudices, ivith fome innocent praSiices f another religion^ ivhich it was erected to overthrow, as Jhl/V. 2. He (hews next, that thofe falfe religious Vk'hich came aftetr the Jewifh and the Chriftiaa, and are confefled to mimick their pe- culiarities, pretended to be built on preceding revelations.-^-" The " rnKfion of Zoroafter to the Perfians fuppofed the religion of the " Magians ; which had been, for many ages paft, the antient na- " tional relitrion of the Medes as well as Perfians. The miflion of " Mahomet fuppofed Chriftianity ; as that did, Judaifm *." This is ftill better. The dellgn of his general obfervation, That it was the common method for new revelations to be built and grounded on pre^- ceding revelations, was to fhew that the revelations, which we call true, imitated the falfe. And he proves it,— by fhewing that the falfe imitated the true. That Mahomet's did fo, is agreed on all hands. And thofe bewildered men who would have us credit the ftory of a late Zoroafter, do, and muft fuppofe that he borrowed from Judaifm. But the truth is, the whole is an idle tale, invented by Perfian writers under the early Califs. However, though the Zoroafter of Hyde and Prideaux be a mere phantom, yet the Religion called by his name, was a real thing, and ftarted up in the firfb ages of Mahometifm, with a Bible to fupport its credit, in imitation of, and to oppofe to, the Alcoran. But this neat device unluckily de^ te6ls the whole import ure : For in the Age of Mahomet, and in the time of the firft Commentators on the Alcoran, the Perfians were efteemcd by them as Idolaters, and without a Bible ; (and they had good Opportunity, by their conftant commerce thither, to be well informed :) Which is agreeable to every thing that the earlier and the later Greek Writers unanimoufly deliver of the Perfian Religion. But that, on the appearance of Mahometanifm, the Perfians fliould * page 2 1, do Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 55 do what the Greeks did on the fuft appearance of Chrlftinnity, refine their old Idolatrous worfliip, till they brought it to what Hyde and Prideaux obferve it is at this da}^ , amongft the remainder of the Magian fe£l in Perfia and India, is nothing fbrange. The wonder is, tliat thefe learned men fliould have fvvallowed fo grofs a cheat,,on the teftimony of later Mahometan Writers ; who had fo many motives to lupport it, and fo flender abiHties to dcteft it ; whofe propenfity to fabling is fo great as even to difcredit any truth that rcfts on their authority ; and whofe talents in the art of lying are fo little proportioned to their inclination to exercife it, that they nevtr fail of defeating their own impofitions. This argument, therefore, was in all refpedls worthy the Author oi The Grounds and Recjotn of the Chrijiian Religion. 3. Laftly, he tells us, that " tl:e Siamefe and Brachmans both *' pretend that they have \\^^ ^ a fuccelJion of incunzate deities amongft •' them, who at due diftances of time have brought new Revela- *' tions from heaven ; each fucceeding one depending on the for- *' mer ; and that religion is to be conveyed on, in that way, for *' ^ver *." — He promifed to prove a fucceffion of Religions in the an- cient world, the later founded and depending on the preceding:' And he proves — a Jaccefjion of incarnate deities, talked of amongft the MODERN pagans of India and Siam ; and, from this fuccedion concludes for a fucceflion of depending Religions, of ivhich they have no kind of notion. Nor are thefe extravagancies, which their priefts do indeed talk of, any other than late inventions o'f their priefts, to oppofe to Mahometan and Chriftian Miflionaries. But a fucceffion of incarnate deities was ^o arch a ridicule on the myfteries of our holy faith, that it was to be brought in at any rate. But now the joke is over, let me tell him, he need not have gone fo far for it. Were not. Coelus, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, z3c. a fuc.ejfon of picamate deities ? yet were any of the Religions, which had thofe Gods for their author or objeil, founded or dependent on (though they fucceeded to) one another ? Here again, our fagaclous Freethinker * Page 23, F 2 w^as 2^(, THE DIVINE LEGATION Book VI was at a fault ; and, with all his logic, could not diftinguifli betweeiv one Religion s being bu'tlt upon another y and one Religion s fimply fuc- ceeding another. II. He comes next to the nature op things. The reader has. fe~n how fl-iort he falls of his reckoning ixoiw faB : But let hinv fairly make up his accounts, and. we fhnll not differ with him about his way of payment ; but willingly receive his deficiencies of Fa£l, in Reafon,. " If we confider (fiws he) the nature of things, we " fhall find that it muft be difficult, if not impoffible, to introduce *' amongfl: men (who in all civilized countries are bred up in the be-- *' lief of fome revealed religion) a revealed religion wholly ncvv, or *' luch as has no reference to a preceding one : for that would be.- " to combat all men in too many refpedls, and. not to proceed on a " I'ufficient number of principles neceflary to be affented to by *■' thofe, on whom the firff impreffions of a new religion are pro- ** pofed to be made*." Here his head was full of the theologic ideas of modern times;, where one Religion is maintained and propagated on the deflruiTliou of all the refl. And that indeed would; be combating all men in too many refpeSfs,. without good evidence in the Religion thus propofed. But had he had the leaft knowledge of Antiquity, he would have known that the Gentile religions of thofe times were founded on different principles, and propagated on different pra£lices. Not one. of thofe numerous Religions ever pretended to accufe another of falfhood ; and therefore was never itfelf in danger of being fo ac- cufed. They very amicably owned one another's pretenfions ; and' all that a new Religion claimed, was to be let into partnerfhip with the refl-, whofe common pradice was to trade in (hares +• Yet, ac- cording to this great Philofopher, // was dijictilt, if not impoffible—- it was combat i7ig all men in too many refpe£ls, — // was not proceeding on a Jtiffident number of principles necejfary to be affented to, &c. But * Page 23, 24. f See the lirll voluine, Book II. p. 429, & fecj, he S-Ecr.z. OF MOSBS DEMONSTRATED. 37 he can make !\Ien, as well as Religions, change their natures when he wants them for fome glorious milchief. It is his more ufual way, and fo it is of all his fellows, to make the People (the grofs body of mankind) run headlong into Religion, without the leaft in- quiry after evidence. But here we arc told it is very difficult, if not ivipojf.b'e, to induce them to think well of a Religion which hath not tiie moft plaufible evidence for its fupport : That the not giving them this, is not proccediiig on a Jufficicnl number of principles, but combating all men in too many refpeSls, &c. And this is all we can get out of him, from the nature of THINGS. But as he has raifed a curiofity which he knew not how to gratify, I (hall endeavour to fupply his ignorance ; and from this nature cf things, fhew the reader, 1. How the Religions of Moses and Jesu5 muft necessarily suppose a dependency on fome pre- ceding. 2. How the ancient Religions of paganifm mufl: neces- SAHILY not suppose any fuch dependency ; and 3. How it came to pafs, that more modern impoftors, rifen fince the coming of Chrif- tianity, imitated the true, rather than the falfe Religions of ancient times, in this pretence to dependency, L The Patriarchal, the Jewish, and the Christian Reli- gions, all profeflcd to come from the only one God, the Creator of all things. Now as the whole race of mankind muft be the common obje(5l of its Creator's care, all his Revelations, even rhofe given only to a part, muft needs be thought ultimately direded to the intcreft of the whole : confcquently every later Revelation muft fuppofe the truth of the preceding. Again, when feveral fuccefTive Revelations are given by him, fome lefs, fome more extenfive, we muft conclude them to be the parts of one entire dispensation; which, for reafons beft known to infinite Wifdom, are gradually enlarged and opened : confcquently every later muft not only fuppofe the truth of every preceding Revelation, but likewife their mutual relation and DEPENDENCY. Hcnce we fee, there may be weighty reafons, why God, from the bcginnin^^ fliould have been conjlantly giving a j'ucccfjion . 38 T H E D I V I N E L E G A T I O N Bock V. Jucci'fion r.f Difpcnfatijns and Rirehitions * ; as this Author, with a lewd iheer, feenis to take a pleafurc in obferving. If theretore, what we call. the true Revelation came from God, thefe -Religions mud needs be, and profefs to be, deptiidcnt on one another. II. Let us fee next how the cafe Rood in tlie ancient Pagan World. Their pretended Revelations were not from the one God ; but all from local tutelary Deities ; each of which was fuppofed to he employed in the care of his own Country or People, and uncon- cerned in every Other's department. Confequer.tly, between earlier and later Revelations of this kind, there could be no more dependency, than there was oppohtion : But each llood on its own foundation, lingle, unrelated, and original. III. But when, by the propagatioi^ of the Gofpel, the knowledge of the ONLY ONE God was Ipread abroad over the whole earth, and the abfurdities of Polytheifm fully underflood by the people, an Impoftor, who would now obtrude a new Religion on the world, muft of necefTity pretend to have received it from that only one Gcd. But the probability of his giving a Revelation now, being feen greatly to depend on his having given one before, ourlmpoftor would be forced to own the truth of thofe preceding Religions, which profefled to come from that God. And as the credit of the new Religion was beft advanced by its being thought a finifhing part of an incomplete Difpenfation, he would, at the lame time, bottom it on the preceding. Befides, as an Impoftor muft needs want that necefiary mark of a divine Miilion, the power of Miracles, he could cover the want no otherwife than by a pretended relation to a Religion which had well eftablifhed itfelf by Miracles. And thus, in fad, Mahomet framed the idea of his'impofture. He pre- tended his new Religion was the completion of Chriftianity, as Chriftianiry was the completion of Judailm ; for tiiat the world not being to be won by the mild and gentle invitations of Jefus, •was now to be compelled to enter in by Mahomet. And fo again, to * Page 11, complete SficT.2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 39 complete tlie imitation, this L-rt and greateft Prophet, as his followers believe him to be, is prctcndcil to be foretold in the New Teftament, as theMefliah was in the Old. Thus this notable obfervation, from whence the Author of the GrrAinds and Reajons of the Cbrlji'ian Religion endeavoured to deduce fo difcrediting a likenefs between all folfc religion, and what we believers hold to be the true, comes, we fee, jufl: to nothing. But he has yet another flagrant mark oi likenefs, in referve:- And thus he goes on, from dilcovery to difcovery. — In building thus upon PROPHECY (lays he) as a principle, Jefus and his Apoflles had the concurrence of all fedls of Religion amongfl the Pagans. Is it poflible ? Yes. For the Pagans univerfally built their Religion on . DIVINATION*. As much as to fay, the people of Amfterdam, in i)uilding their town-houfe upon piles, had (in the mode of laying a foundation) the concurrence of all the cities in England; who build theirs upon flone, or clay, or gravel. In the Jewifh writings there are Prophecies of a future and more perfect Dilpenfation ; which, Jefus claiming to belong to his, his Religion was properly built upon prophecies. The Heathens made Gods of their dead benefactors, and then confulted them at their fhrines, as Oracles ; they infpe(5led the entrails of beafts ; they obferved the flight of birds ; they interpreted dreams and uncommon phaenomena ; and all thefe things they called divination. But what likenefs is there between thefe things and Prophecies, the Prophecies on which Jefus founded his Religion ? Juft as much as there is between Truth and what thefe men call. Free-thinking. But he has found a device to bring them related. 'Tis a mafter-piece ; and the Reader fliall not be robbed of it. They [the Pagans], fays he, learnt that art [Divination] /« y2'/6i?(?/j-, or under difciplinc, as the Jews did prophefying in the Jcbools and colleges of the Prophets ; where, the learned Dodwell fays, the candidates for prophecy ivere taught the rules of divination fraSlifd by the Pagans, laho ivere fkilled therein^ and in pofj'efjion of the art long before them +• This idle whimfy of * Grounds and Reafons, &c. p. 27, 28. f See vol.11, bock iv. § 6. the 40 THE D I V I N' E L E G A 1' I O N Book V, the learfied Dodwell concerning the Ichools of the Prophets has been expofed, as it deferves, aheady *. But for the fiike of fo extraordinary an argument (an impiety, grafted on its proper ftock an ahjurdhy), it deferves to be admitted, though it be but for a moment. The reafoning then flands thus : Divination was an art learnt in the fchools; fo was one kind of Prophecy, or the Jewifh art of Divination : thofe who learnt this Jewifh art of divination were tauglit the rules of pagan divination; therefore pagan divination and another kind of Prophecy, fuch as foretold the coming of the Meffiah, were things of the fame kind. Incom- parable reafoner ! and defervedly placed at the head of modern Free-thinking ! But his learning is equal to his fenfe, and his pre- mifes jufl as true as his conclufion : The Pagans univerfaJly built their Religion on divination. I believe there are few Ichool-boys, who would not laugh at his blunder, and tell him it was juft otherwife, that the Pagans univerfally built divination on their Religion. All that was ever built on divination was now and then a Shrine or a Temple. To return : III. But thefe prejudices, concerning local tutelary Deities, which made the introdudlon of a Theocracy fo eafy, occafioned as eaiy a defe(3:ion from the Laws of it. I. For thefe tutelary Deities owning one another's pretenfions, there was always a friendly intercourfe of mutual honours, though not always of mutual worfliip. For at firft, each God was fup- pofed to be fo taken up with his own people, as to have little leifure or inclination to attend to the concerns of others. — Now this prejudice was thej?r/? fource of the Jewifli idolatry. 3. But the pretenfions of thefe Gods being thus reciprocally acknowledged; and Some, by the fortunate circumflances of their followers, being rifen into fuperior fime, the Rites ufed in their Worfliip were eagerly affeded. And this was the fecond fource of * See vol. II, book iv. § 6. the Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATE D. 41 the IfraeHtes' Idolatry; exemplified in the erection of the golden CALF, and their foudnefs for all Egyptian fuperftitious in general. 3. But of thefe tutelary deities their being two forts, gentili- TIAL and local; the one ambulatory, and the other (rationed ; tlie latter were fixed to their pofls, as a kind of bcir-loom^ which they who conquered and poffefled the country were obliged to maintain in their accuftomed honours. And whatever gentHiiial Gods a People might bring with them, yet the local God was to have a neceliary fhare in the religious Worlhip of the new Comers. Nay it was thought impiety, even in foreigners, • while they fojourned only in a ftrange Country, not to facritice to the Gods of the place. Thus Sophocles makes Antigone fiiy to her father, that a flrangcr ihould both venerate and abhor thofe things which are venerated and abhorred in the city where he Telides*. Celfus gives the reafon of fo much complalfance. — " Becaufe (fays he) the feveral parts of the world were, from the beginning, diflributed to feveral powers, each of which has his peculiar allotment and refidence -f--" And thofe who were loth to leave their paternal Gods when they fought new fettlements, at lead held themfeives obliged to worfhio them with the Rites, and according to the ufages of the Country they came to inhabit, Againft this more qualified principle of Paganifm, Mofes thought tit to caution his People, in thefollowino- Words : When the Lord thy God yZ)^// cut off the nations from before thee^ whither thou geejl to pojjejs them, and thou fucceedejl them and dwellejl in their land ; take heed to thyfdf that thou be not fnar^d hy following them, after that they be de/lroyed from before thee, and that thou ENOIJIHE NOT AFTER THEIR GoDS, faying., HOW did tbcfe ATori'7ir> xj To pl^oi ?ici(7^aH. Aft. i. Oedip. Colon. '^ — iXXtt ^ in, «{ i.'<o;, to. jiisn t5; y?; s| <ipx^> a?X» a^>oi{ isthjIzi', iniiitiiisiK iC y.xx. Tii»; o^rn Exiiyoif <^l^3v, viu^<x\vin> Si m;^ oirio* •i»ai ru t| ot^ii x»1a totb; mtofAtrniia, Orig. cont. CeU. lib. V. p. 247. See the paffage, from Plato, p. 230, 231. Vol. III. G naiinns 42 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book \^. nat!0J2s ferve their Gods? even so will 1 do likezvife*. But the adoption of thefe new Gods, as well as of their Rites, was io general, that David makes his being unjudly driven into an idola- trous land, the fame thing as being forced to ferve idolatrous CJods. For thus he cxpoftulates with his perfecutor, " Nov/ " therefore I prav thee let my lord the king 'hear the words of " his fervant ; If the Lord have fiirred thee up againft me, let him '■' accept an offering : but if they be the children of men, curled " be they before the Loid ; for they have driven me out this day " from abiding /« /he inherita?)ce of the Lord, faying. Go serve " OTHER Gous f." To the fame principle Jeremiah likewifa alludes, in the following words, Therefore iviil I cajl you out of this lar.d, into a land that ye know not, neither ye nor your fathers : and THERE SHALL V F. SERVE OTHER GoDS day and night, 'where I will not few you favour \. By which is not meant that they Ihould be forced, any otherwife than by the fuperftitious dread of divine vengeance for a flighted v/orfhip : for at this time, civil reftraint in matters of religion was very rare. But the imaginary vengeance which the tutelary God was fup- pofed to take on thofe, who, inhabiting his Land, yet flighted his Worfhip, was at length really taken on the Idolatrous Gutheans^ when they came to cultivate the land of IlraeL For the Almighty having, in condefcenfion to the prejudices of the Ifraelites, affumed the title of a tutelary local God, and chofen Judea for his peculiar regency ; it appeared but fit that he Ihould difcharge, in good earneft, the imaginary function of thofe tutelary Gods, in. order to diftinguifh himfelf from the lying Vanities of that infa^ tuated age. Therefore when fo great a portion of his Chofen people had been led captive, and a mixt rabble of Eaftern idolaters were put into their place, he fent plagues amongfl: them for their profanation of the holy Land. Which calamity their own principles eafily enabled them to account for. The ftory is. told in thefe words: "And the king of Aflyrla brought men * Dcut. xii. 29,. 30. t 1 Sam. xxvi. 19, \ Chap. xvi. ver. 13. " from Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 43 " from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from *' Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities " of Samaria, inftcad of the children of Ifrael ; and they poflcflcd •' Samaria, and dwelt In the cities thereof. And fo it was, at the " beginning of their dwelling there, that they feared not the Lord; *' therefore the Lord fent lions amongft them which fiew fomc of *' them. Wherefore they fpake to the king of AflV'i-i? faying, *' The nations which thou haft removed, and placed in the cities " of Samaria, know not thk manner of the God of tiik *'land: therefore he hath fcnt lions amongft them ; and bthold •• they flay tiiem, becaule they know not the manner of the God *f of the land. Then the king ot Aflyria commanded, faying, *' Carry thither one of the Prlefts — and let him teach t!:c;:i *' the manner of ihj God of the Inncf. — Then one of tiie Priefts came " and dwelt In Bethel, and taught them how they fliould fear the *' Lord. Howbelt every nation made Gods of their own — every "nation in their cities wherein they dwelt. — So thefe nations ** feared the Lord, and ferved their graven images, both their chil- *' dren and their childrcns children, as did their fathers, fo do the^ r" unto this day*." But leaft this account of the miraculous interpofition fliould be mifunderftood as an encouragement of the notion of local Gods, or of intercommunity of worlhip, rather than a vindication of the fandity of that Country, which was confecrattd to the God of Ifrael, the facred Hiftorian goes on to acquaint us with the per- verfe Influence this judgment had on the new inhabitatUs, lo contrary to tlae divine intention. " They feared llie Lord, and " ferved their own Gods after the manner of the nation?, v.hom " they carried away from thence. Unto this dav, tliey do after the *' former maimers : they fear not the Lord, ncltlicr do thcv after " tlieir ftatutes, or after their ordinances, or afrec the Law and *' Commandment which the Lord commanded t!ie cKildrcn of " Jacob whom he named Ifrael -j-. ' They feared the Lord, and ferved * ^--Kitigs xvJi. i.\. ct fcq. t ^'tr. 33, 34- G 2 their 44 THE DIVINE LEGx^TION Book V. their own Gods \ that is, they feared the vengeance impending on the exclufion of the Worfliip of the God of Ifrael. But they feared not the Lord, neither did after their Statutes. That is, they tranf- grefled the Commandment which they found fo frequently repeated in the Pentateuch, of joining no other Worfhip to that of the God of Ifrael. And this was the true reafon why the Kings of Perfia and Syria (when Judea afterwards hecame a province to them) {o frequently appointed facrifices to he offered to the God of the hmd, at Jerufalem, :n behalf of thcmfelves and fomilies. Nor was the pradice difufed when tlie Jews fell under the Roman yoke ; both Julius Casfar and Auguftus making the lame provifion for xhtt felicity of the Empire. Hence therefore the third fource of the Jewifli idolatries. It was this fuperftltious reverence to local Deities within their own depart- ments, which made them fo devoted, while in Egypt,, to the Gods of thafCountry ; and when in pofleflion of their own land, to the tutelary Gods of Canaan* But this intercommunity of Worfliip, begun by the migration of People and Colonies from one country to another, grew more g-eneral, as thofe migrations became more frequent. 'Till at length the frequency, aided by many other concurrent caufes (occafionally taken notice of in feveral places of this work), made the inter- community univerlal. And this was the lafl fource of Jewifli idola- tries. This drew them into the fervice of every God they heard of; or from whom they fancied any fpecial good might be obtained ; efpecially the Gods of all great and powerful Nations. Thefe pre- judices of opinion, joined to thofe of pradice which they had learnt in Egypt, were the true caufes of their fo frequent lapfe into idolatry. From all this it appears, that their defeftion from the God of Ifrael, wicked "and abominable as it was, did not however confifl in the rejcvfling him as a falfe God, or in renouncing the Law of Mofes as a falfe Religion ; but only, in joining foreign Worfliip and idolatrous Ceremonies to the Ritual of the true God. Their- bias Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 45 bins to the idolatries of Egypt was inveterate cuftom ; their incli- nation for the idolatries of Canaan was a prevailing principle that the tutelary God of the place fhould be worfhipped by its inha- bitants ; and their motive for all other idolatries, a vain expeilatioii of good from the guardian Gods of famous and happy Nations. Thefe were all inflamed by that common Simulation of a debauched People, the luxurious and Immoral rites of Pnganifm ; for it is to be obferved that thefe defections generally happened amidll: the abuies of prcfperity. There is a remarkable paflage in the Book of Jofhua which fets this matter in a very clear light.. The Ifraelites having lapfed into idolatry, Jofliua drew together their Heads and Rulers at Shechem, in order to a reformation. And the topic, he infifts upon for this purpofe, is not, that the God of Ifrael was the only true God, the Maker of all things ; but that he was the family-God of the race of Abraham, for which he had done fo great things. And tliis he profecutes from the 2d vcrfe of the xxiv. chap, to the 1 jth. His conclufion from all is, " Now •' therefore fear the Lord, zn<\Jirve him injincerity, and in truth, and " put away the Gods which your Fathers ferved on the other fide of "the flood and in Egypt*." However (continues he) at lealT: make your choice, and either ferve the Lord, or fcrve the Gods oi other People. '■'■And the people anf^vered, God forbid nve Jlooidd forjake the ^'- :L.ord to ferve other Gods-f: for we acknowledge iiim to be that "God who has done fo great things for us." To this Jofhua replies, " Te cannot ferve the Lord; for he is an holy God: he is a '■'■ jealoui God, he ivill not forgive your iranfgreffions, nor your '■'■fins \." From all this, it appears, that the point debated between Jofhua and his People, was not whether the liraelites fliould return to God, whom they had rejefted and forlakcn ; but whether they fhould ferve him only, or, as Jcfhua'exprefics \t, fcrve him in fincerity and in truth. For on their exclaiming againfl the impiety of reje(fling God, — " God forbid, tie fiould forfalie the Lord; we " will ftill ferve him ;" meaning along with the other Gods,- — * Vcr. 14, t ^'^er. 16, 17. J Ver. 19. their 46 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. their Leader replies, Tc cannot ferve the Lord, for he is an holY God : he is a jealous God. i. e. As a 'holy God, he will not be ferved with the lewd and polluted Rites of the Nations; and as a jealous God, he will not luffer you to ferve Idols of wood and flonc with his Rites. The confequence is, You mufi: ferve him alone, and onlv with that worfhip which he himfelf hath -appointed. That this was the whole of their Idolatry, is farther feen from the accounts which the holy Prophets give us of it, in their reproofs and expoflulations. Isaiah fays, To what purpofe is the multitude of your Sacrifices unto me, faith the Lord: I am full oj the Burnt- offerings of Rams, and -the Fat of fed Beofs, &c.*. To whom are thefe words addreiled ? To thofe w'ho, hefides their numerous Immoralities, there reckoned up at large, delighted in idolatrous worfhip in Groves and high Places. For the Uenunciaticn is thus continued : They Jhall be ajhamed of the' Oaks which ye hare def red, and ye fhall he confou7ide'd for the Gardens that ye have chofen ■\. -He defcribes them again in this manner: A People that provoketh me to Anger continually to my face, that facrificeth in Gardens, and burneth Licenfe vpon Altars of Brick |. Yet, at the fame time, thefe men gloried fo much in being the peculiar People of the Lord, that they faid, Stand by thyfelf, come not near to me, for I am holier than tho'i §. Jeremiah draws them in the very fame colours: Though they fay. The Lord live th, fur ely they fwear fal/ly\\, i.e. vainly, idola- troufly. Why ? The Real'on is given foou after ; they fwore likewife by their idols : How f jail I pardon thee for this? thy Chil- dren have forjaken me, <7«i/ SWORN BY THEM THAT ARE NO GODS ^. Again, IFill ye fcdl, murder, and commit adultery, and swear FALSLY rtwrf'sURN iKCENSE UNTO Baal, and Walk after other Gods that ye know not [i.e. Grange Gods]; and come and sta'sd before * Ch.ip i. ver. 1 1. S Ver. 5. ■f Xev. jg. Chap. V. ver. i. J Chip. Ixv. ver, 3. H Ver. 7. ME Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 47 ME IN THIS HOUSE, ivhich ii called by tiiy Name, ond fay, IVe art delivered to do all thefe ahowlnauons * '? And in another place we find them thus expoftulnting with the Prophet,- — U'heieJo"e l.\th the Lord pro'iO'Miced all this Evil agai>iji us ? or ivhat is our hil^iiity, or •what ii our Sin that we ha-ve co'firriittc'd againjl tie Lord our God f ? and the Proph.et anfwering them in this manner, — hecatij'e your Fathers have forfaken me, Jaith the Lord, and ivalked after othef Gods, and have fe'vcd them, and have tjcorjiyipped them, and have forfaken me, and have not heft my Law : jind ye have doneivorfe than your Fathers \. But is it poffible they could be fo exceeding flupid or impudent as to talk at this rate, had they ever renounced the Religion, or the God of their Forefathers ? EzEKiEL, likewife, fhews plainly that their idolatries confined in polluting the Religion of Mofes with foreign worfliip : " Son of " man, thcfe men have fet up their idols in their lieart, and put *' the ftumbling-block cf their iniquity before their Face : Shall. " I BE iNQi-'iRED ov at all by them? Therefore fpeak unto them, " and fay unto them, Thus faith the Lord God, Every man of the " houfe of Ifrael that putteth up his idols in his heart, and puttetli *' the flumbling-block of iaiquity before his face, and comcth to " the Prophet, I the Lord will anfwer him that cometh according to. "the multitude of his idols §, &c," And again : As for you, O houfe of Ifael, Thus faith the Lord God, Go ye, ferve ye every one his idoh, and hereafter alfo, if ye will not hearken unto me: hut POLLUTE YE MY HoLY Name NO MORE with your gifts and with your idol i \\, i. e. with gifts offered up to me with idolatrous Rite?.. In another place he giveth a terrible inftance of this horrid mix- ture : " They have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, " and with their idols have they committed adultery, and have " alfo caufed their Ions, whom they bare unto me, to pafs for them " through the fire to devour them. Moreover this they. have done *' unto me :, they have dkfiied my sanctuarv in the same. * Chap. vii. ver. 9, lo. f Ch.np. xvi. ver. lo. % Vlt ir, iz, § Chap. xiv. ver. 3, 4. || Chap, xx, ver. 39. " DAV, . 48 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. " DAY, and liavc profaned my Sabbaths. For when they had flaiii " their Children to their idols, then thev came the same day " INTO MY SANCTUARY to profane it ; and lo, thus have they done " ill the midll of mine houic *." Thelc, and innumerable other paflages in the Prophets to the fame purpofe, evidently ihew, that this defeftion from the God of Ifrael confifled not in a rejedion of Him, or of Ins Law. Tills appears ftlll more evident from the following confide* rations : 1. That, in the courfe of their idolatries, they abufed the memorials of their own Dilpenfation to luperftitious Worfliip. Such as the Brazen Serpent of Mofes ; to which, in the time of their kings, they paid divine honours -f- And I am much miftaken if the monument of Tivehejloncs, taken out of Jordan, and pitched in Gilgal for a memorial of their miraculous palfage ;[, was not equally abufed. What induces me to tlilnk fo, is the following paflage of Isaiah : " Draw near hither, ye fons of the forcerefs, " the feed of the adulterer and the whore. Againfl: whom do yo- " fport yourfelves ? — enflaming yourfelves with idols under every " green tree, flaying the children in the valleys under the clifts of "the rocks? Among the smooth stones of the stream is " thy portion ; they, they are thy lot : even to them hast •' thou poured a drink-offering, thou haft offered a meat- " offering. Should I receive comfort in thete § r" 2. The Ifraelites were mofi: prone to idolatry in PRosPEROtrs times ; and generally returned to the God of their fathers in ADVERSITY', as appears from their whole hiflory. Againft this impotence of mind they were more than once cautioned, before they enteredinto the Land of Bleffnigs, that they might afterwards be left without excufe. " And it fhall be (fays Mofes) when the " Lord thy God (hall have brought thee into the land which ■" he fware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Ifaac, and to * Chap, xxiii. vcr. 37 — 39. f 2 Kings xviii. 4. % Jolli. iv. 3. 20, 21, 22. § Ifaiah Ivii. 3. et feq. *' Jacob, Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 49 " Jacob, to give thee great and goodly cities which thou buildedft *' not, and houfes full of all good things which thou filledft hot, *' and wells digged which thou diggedft not, vine-yards and olive- *' trees which thou plantedft not, when thou (halt have eaten and •' be full ; then beware lefl thou forget the Lord which brought *' thee forth out of the Land of Egypt from the houfe of bondage. " Thou fhalt fear the Lord thy God and ferve him, and flialt fwcar ** by his name. Ye fliall not go after other Gods, of the Gods of *' the people which are round about you*." However Mofes him- felf lived to fee an example of this perverfity, while they remained in the Wildernefs : But ye/Jjunm (fays he) it; axed fat ^ and kicked; Tbou art ivaxed fat, thou art grown th'ick^ thou art cornered icit/' fatnefs ; then he for Cook God which made hiniy and lightly efiee7ned the Rock of his Salvation \. And the Prophet Hosea aflures us, that the Day of profperity was the conftant feafon of their idolatry : Ifraelis an emptyvine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himfelf: accord- ing TO THE MULTITUDE OF HIS FRUIT, HE HATH INCREASED THE altars; ACCORDING TO THE GOODNESS OF HIS LAND THEV HAVE MADE .GOODLY IMAGES ;{;. And again: According to their pajlurefo ivere they filed; they were filled, and their heart WAS exalted : therefore have they forgotten me §. This, there- fore, is a clear proof that their defection from the God of Ifrael was not any doubt of his goodnefs or his power, but a wanton abufe of his bleflings. Had they queftioned the truth of the Law, their behaviour had been naturally otherwife : tliey would have adhered to it in times of profperity ; and would have left it in adver- fity and trouble. This the Deifts would do well to confider. 3. The terms, in which God's warnings againfl: this defection are exprefled, plainly (hew that their lapfe into Idolatry was no rcje£tion of him : he will have no fellowship of communion with falfe Gods. The names employed to defign their idol itries are adultery and whoredom. And God's refentmcnt of their defection is ■* Deut. vi. 10. et le<i. and chnp. viii. ver. ii. et feq. f Deut. xxxii. 15. \ Clmp. x. ver. i. § Clnp. xiii. ver. 6. Vol. hi. H perpetually 50 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. perpetually exprefled by the fame metaphor : which (hews that his right over them was ftill acknowledged, juft as an adulterous wife owns the huiband'a right, amidll: all her pollutions with flrangers. Where we may oblerve, that though their idolatry is fo conftantly ftyled ADULTERV, yet that of the Pagans never is ; though it is very often called whoredom. Tlie reafon of this diftin^Sion is plainly intimated in the following words of Ezekiel : " How weak " is thine heart, faith the Lord God, feeing thou dofl all thefe " things, the work of an imperious whorifh woman ? In that thou " buildeft thine eminent place in the head'of every way, and makeft *' tliine high place in every flreet, and haft not been as an har- *' LOT (in that thou fcornefl: hire), but as a wife that committeth *' adultery, which taketh ftrangers inftead of her hufband*." The Jews had entered into a covenant witla God, which had made them his Peculiar : and when they had violated their plighted faith, they flood in that relation to him which an adultress does to her injured hufband. The Gentiles, on the contrary, had entered into no exclufive engagements with their Gods, but the pradlice of inter' communiiy had proftituted them, as a common harlot, to all comers. Thus much, however, muft be confefled, that though the very worfl of their idolatry confifted only in mixing foreign Worfhip with their own ; yet, in their mad attention to thofe abominable things, God's Worfliip was often fo extremely negleded, that He fays, by the Prophet, "They have forfaken me, the fountain of living waters, juft as the Saint- worfhippers in the Church of Rome forfake God, when in their private devotions the Vulgar think only of their tutelary Saints. The feveral principal parts, therefore, of the Ifraclitifh idolatry were thefe, I. Worfliipping the true God under an image, fuch ?^^\\\q golden Calves, I Kings xii. 28. * Chap. xvi. ver. 30, 31, 32, 2. Wor- Sect. 2. OF MOSE S DEMO N STR ATE D. 51 2. Worfhipping him in Places forbidden, as in Groves, 2 Kings xviii. 22. If. xxxvi, 7. 3. And by idolatrous Rites, fuch as cutting ibewfehes with kn'ives, Jer. xli. 5. 4. By profaning the houfe of God with idolatrous images, Jer. xxxii. 34. 5. By worfliipping the true God and Idols together. 6. And laflly, by worfliipplng idols alone, Jer.li. 13. Yet by what follows, ver. 35, it appears, that even th's was not a total apoflacy from God. If the Reader would know what ufe I intend to make of this ac-^ count of the Jewifli idolatry, to the main Queftion of my Work, 1 mufl crave his patience till we come to the laft \\)lumc. If he would know what other ufe may be made of it, he may confider what hath been faid above ; and be farther pleafed to oblerve, that it ob- viates the objedion of a fort of men equally unlkilled in facred and profane Antiquity (of whom more by and by), who, from this circumllance of the perpetual defection of the Jews into idolatry, would conclude that the Difpenfation of God to them could never have been fo illuflrious as their hiftory hath reprefented it. The ftrength of which objection refts on tliefe two fuppofitions, that their idolatry confifted in renouncing the Law of Mofes : And renouncing it as diflatisfied of its truth. Both which fuppofitions we have fliewu to be falfe : the neglect of ihe law, during their mod idolatrous practice, being no other than their preferring impure novel Rites (which moft ftrongly engage the attention of a fuperftitious people) to old ones, whofe fandtity has no carnal allurements. As to its ori- ginal from God, they never entertained the leaft doubt concerning it ; or that the God of Ifrael was the Creator of t!ie Uni\ erfc : They had been better inftrufted. — Tbm faith ihe Lord, the holy one of Israel and his maker *. — As much as to fay, the tutehuy God of Ifrael is the Creator of the Univcrfe : Indeed, in the period jult preceiUng their Captivity, when the extraordinary providence was * Ilaiab xlv, 1 1. *■ H 2 gradual I3' 52 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. gradually withdrawing from them (a matter to be confidered here- after more at large), they began to entertain fufpicions of God's farther regard to them, as bis chofen people. But that nothing of this ever contributed to their idolatry is plain from what we have fliewn above, of its being a wanton defeftion in the midft of peace, profperity, and abundance (the confeffed efFefts of the extraordinary providence of the God of Ifrael), and of their conftantly returning to him in times of difficulty and diftrefs. It is true, tliat this flate of the cafe, which removes the infidel objecllon, at the fame time difcovers a moft enormous perverfity ia that People ; who, although convinced of the truth of a Religion forbidding all intercommunity, was for ever running aftray after foreign Worfliip. However, vi'ould we but tranfport ourfelves into thefe times, and remember what hath been faid of that great principle of INTERCOMMUNITY OF WORSHIP; and how early and deeply the Jews had imbibed all the eflential fuperftitions of Paganifm ; we fhould not only abate of our wonder, but fee good caufe to make large allowances to this unhappy People. But there is another circumilance in this affair too remarkable to be pafled by in filence. As fond as the Jews were of borrowing their Neighbours' Gods, we do not find, by any hints in ancient hiftory, either profane or facrcd, that their Neighbours were difpofed to borrow tlieirs. Nay, we are aflured, by Holy Writ, that they did not. God, by the Prophet Ezekiel, addreffing himfelf to the Jews, i peaks on tliis wife : — jind the contrary is in thee from other women in thy whoredoms, whereas none followeth thee to COMMIT whoredoms : and in that thou giveji a reward, and no re- tvard js green to thee ; therefore thou art contrary *. I have fhewn, eUewhere, that, by this, is meant, that no Gentile nation borrowed the Jewifh Rites of VVorfliip, to join them to their own. For as to Profelytes, or particular men converted to the fervice of the true God, we find a prodigious number in the Days of David and Solo- mon f . So again, in the Prophet Jeremiah, hath a nation Chap. xvi. vei, 34. f 2 Chron. ii. 17. CHANGED Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 53 CHANGED THEIR GoDS, WHICH ARE YET NO GoDS ? But my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit*-, t\e. Hath any of the nations brought in the God of Ilrael into the num- ber of their folfe Gods, as the IfraeUtes have brought in theirs to ftand in fellowlhip with the true f For that the Nations frequently changed their tutelary Gods, or one idol for another, is too noto- rious to need any proof. This then is remarkable. The two principal reafons of the con- trariety, I fuppofe, were thefe : 1. It was a thing well known to all the neighbouring Nations, that the God of Ifrael had an abhorrence of all community or alliance with the Gods of the Gentiles. This unfociable temper would deter thofe people (who all held him as a tutelary Deity of great power) from ever bringing him into the fellowfhip of their country Gods. For, after fuch declarations, they could not fuppofe his company would prove very propitious. And in truth, they had a fingle in- flance of his ill neighbourhood, much to their coft; which brings me to the fecond reafon. 2. The devaftation he brought upon the Philiftines, while the ark relied in their quarters. For they having taken it from the Ifraelites in battle, carried it, as another P(r7/W/K/» f, to AllKlod, and placed ■ it in the temple of their God Dagon ; who pafled two (o bad nights with his new Gueft, that on the fecond morning he was found pared away to hisy^^'y /tump | : And this difalter was followed with a de- folating peftilence. The people of A(hdod, who hitherto had in- tended to keep the Ark as one of their Idol-proteclors, now declare itpould not abide with them, for that the hand of the God of Israel •was fore upon than, and upon Dagon their God ^. They.fent it therefore to Gath, another of their cities; and thefe having carried it about ii) a religious procefhon, it made the fame havock amongft them |(. It was then removed a third time, with an intent ta kiul it to Ekron ; but the men of that city, territlcd wltii the two pre- * Chap, ii. ver. ii. t ^se note [F], ai the eiul of this Eook. X I Sain. V. 4, 5. ^ Vcr. 7. 1: A cr. g. ceding 54 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. ceding calamities, refufed to receive it, faying they bad brought the Jrk of the God of Ifrciel, to Jay them and their people^. At length the Philiftines by fad experience were brought to underftand, that it was the beft courfe to fend it back to its owners : which they did with great honour ; with gifts and trefpafs- offerings, to appeafe the offended Dlvlnltv f. And from this time we .hear no more of any attempts amongfl the Gentile Nations to join the Jewifh Worfhip to their own. They confidered the God of Ifrael as a tutelary Deity, abfolutely unsociable; who would have nothing to do with any but his own People, or with fuch Particulars as would worfhip him alone ; and therefore, in this refped, different from all other tutelary Gods ; each of which was willing to live in community with all the reft. This, the hiftorian Jofephus underftood to be their fentiment, when he makes the Midlanitifh women addrefs the young men of Ifrael in the following manner: Nor ought you to be blamed for honouring thofe Gods which belong to the Country where youfojourn +. Belides, our Gods are common to all the nations, wwrj /onone OF THEM §. Andthusthe matter refted, till occafion requiring that God fhould vindicate his property in that Country which he had chofen for his peculiar refidence, as a tutelary Deity. He then drove the Pagan inhabitants of Samaria into his worfhip, jufl as he had driven the Phlliflines from it ; and, in both cafes, hath afforded to his fervants the mofl illuftrious proofs of divine wifdom, in his manner of qon- duiSling this wonderful Oeconomy to its completion. But from this circumftance of the Inability of the Law to prevent the Ifraelites from falling thus frequently into Idolatry, a noble Writer || has thought fit to ground a charge of impoflure againft * 1 Stim. ver. lo. f Chap. vi. ver. 3. i Sec what hnth been faid above concerning this imaginary obligation. § Msiiixilo J' aJstc, si yiis (If •'!» «?'X^E •>■»« '^''"5 ailrii; Bta; TT^olj/iroitrSs" i^ raDrK. tut fxln r,ji\'i:ut xoiviv <;.'ai» rafo; a-xvlas, Trf J" luX\:pi r^-U (*r,Jiia ToibTB Ttfxiaiotl©'. Aniiq. JuJ. 1. iv. C.6. Sea. 8. ii Lord Bolingbroke. the Sect. 2. OF MOSES DExMONSTR ATE D. ^5 the Lawgiver. It would therefore look like prevarication to let fo fair ail opportunity pafs by without vindicating the Truth from his mifreprefentations ; efpecially when the nature and caufes of that idolatry, as here explained, tend lo directly to expofe all his pom- pous fophiftry. " One of the moft conceivable perfedtions of a law is (fays his " Lordfhip), that it be made with fuch a forefight of all poflible ♦' accidents, and with fuch provifions for the due execution of it in •* all cafes, that the law may be cffedlual to govern and diredl thefe *' accidents, inftead of lying at tlie mercy of them. Such a law *' Would produce its effedl, by a certain moral neceflity refultlng ** from itfelf, and not by the help of any particular conjun6lure. ** We are able to form fome general notions of laws thus perfefl ; " but to make them, is above humanity. To apply thefe re- " fledlons to the Law of Mofes — We cannot read the Bible without '* being convinced, that no law ever operated fo weak and uncertain *' an effedl as the Law of Mofes did. Far from prevailing againfl: *•- accidents and conjunilures, the leaft was fufficient to interrupt the courfe and to defeat the defigns of it; to make that people ♦• not only negleft the Law, but ceafe to acknowledge tlie I^egifla- ♦' tor. To prevent this, was the firft of thefe dcfigns ; and if the " fecond was, as it was, no doubt, and as it is the delign or prc- " tence of all laws, to fecurc the happincfs of the people, this " DESIGN WAS DEFEATED AS FULLY AS THE OTHER; for the *' whole iiiflory of this people is one continued feries of infraiElions " of the Law, and of national calamities. So that tliis hw, coii- " fidered as the particular law of this nation, has proved more in- " effeftual than any other law perhaps that can be quoted. If thi? " be afcribcd to the hardnefs of heart and obflinacy of the people, in *' order to fave the honour of the Law, this honour will be little '* faved, and its divinity ill maintained. This excufe may be ad- " mitted in the cafe of any human law ; but we fpeak here of a law " fuppofed to be diclated by divine Wiidom, which ought^ and *' which would have been able, if it had been fuch, to keep, in a " flatc <( 56 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. '* fliite of fubmiinoii to it, ami of national prorperk)^, even a people " rebellious and obilinate enough to break through any other. If " it be fald the Law became ineffeitual by the fault of thofe who " governed the people, their Judges and their Kings, let it be re- " membered that tlieir Judges and their Kings were of God's ap- " pointment, for the moil part at leafl: ; that he himfelf is faid to " have been their King during feveral ages; that his prefence re- " mained amongft them, even after thev had depofed him ; and " that the High Priefl confulted him, on any emergency, by the *' Urlm an.d Thummim. Occafional miracles were wrought to " in force the Law ; but this vVas a ftanding miracle, that might ferve " both to explain and inforce it, by thewifdom and authority of the •' Legiflator, as often as immediate recourfe to him was neceflary. " Can it be denied that the moft imperfefl fy ftem of human laws •' would have been rendered effeftual by fuch means as thefe* r" 1. The fum of his Lordfhip's reafoning amounts to this, " that the Jewifh Law being ordained for a certain end, it betrays its im- pofture by never being able to attain that end. For, firfl:, \i injinite Wifihtn framed the Law, it muft be moft perfect ; and it is eflential to the perfeftion of a mean, for a Law is nothing but a mean, that it attain its end. Secondly, \i infinite Power admiuiftered it, that Power mufl have rendered even the mofl imperfe£l lyflem effedlual to its purpofe." Thus, we fee, his argument, when reduced to order, divides it- felf into thefe two branches ; Confiderations drawn, firft, from the WifiJom, and, then, from the Powvr of the Deity, to difcredit his workmanfliip. I. We will take him at his bsft, with the improvement of order ; and firfl: examine his conclufions from the circumftance of infinite Wijdoni s framing the Law. Let us admit then for a moment, that his reprefentation of the end of theLaw^ is exaft ; and that his afTertion of its never gaining its end, is true : I anfwer, that this objedion to the divine original * Lord Bolingbroke's Works, vol. iii. p. ic):, 293, ^94. Qnaito Edition. of Sect.2. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 57 of the Jewish Law holds equally againfl the divine original of that Law of Nature, called the Moral Law. Now his Lordfhip pre- tends to believe that the Moral Law came from God : nay, that He was fo entirely the Author and Creator of it, that if he had fo pleafcd, he might have made it ellentially different from what it is. But yet the experience of all ages hath (hewn, that this Law prevailed ftill lefs agamjl accidents and conju7i£liires than the Mofaic. For if the Jews were always tranfgreffing their Law till the Captivity, yet af- ter that difafter they as fcrupuloufly adhered to it ; and in that attachment have continued ever fuice : whereas, from the day the Moral Law was firft given to mankind, to this prefent hour, the hajl accident was fiifficient to interrupt the courfe, and to defeat the defigns of it. How happened it, therefore, that this acknowledged Law of God did not ^o-y^rw and direSi accidents^ infiead of lying at the mercy of i hem ? Was it lefs perfeSl in its kind than the Mofaic ? Who will pretend to fay That, who believes the Moral Law came directly from God, and was delivered intimately to Man, for the fervice of the whole Species ; while the Jewifti Law came lefs di- rectly from him, as being conveyed through the miniftry of Mofes, for the fole ufe of the Jewifh People ? To thefe queftions his Lordfhip would be ready to anfwer, " That it is necefTary for the fubjefts of a moral law to be endowed with free Will : That free Will may be abufed ; and that fuch abufes may render the mofl perfect fyftem of Laws ineffectual." But this anfwer turns upon his Lordfhip, when applied to the defence of the Mofaic Law ; and turns with redoubled force. We fee then how much he was miflaken in concluding, that, be- caufe perfeSlion in its kind is one of the effential qualities of a divine Law, therefore fuch a law mufl of necejjiiy produce its effe(5l. His befl reafon for this fancy is, that he is able to form fame general notions of Laws thus perfect. Which is no more than telling us (notwith- flanding his parade of infuiuated ability), tliat he is able to conceive how the Will may be controlled, and how Man may be transformed Vol. III. I into 58 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. into a Machine. It is true, he owns, that this ia£V, viz. to make laws thus perfeB, is above humanity. It is fo ; and let me add, as much below the Divinity ; whofe glory it is to draw his ' reafonable creatures with the cords of a man. A Law then, which produces its effefts by a certain necefity, muft do it by a neceflity which is phy- fical, and not moral', it being the quality of phyfical, not of moral nccejjity^ that its effeds cannot pofTibly be defeated. Thus, we fee, all there is of truth in his Lordfhip's afTertion, of its being ejfeniial to the perfeSlion of a mean that it attain its end, amounts only to this, A capacity^in fuch a mean to attain its end, naturally and of itfelf. And this, we fay, was the condition of the Mofalc Law ; whatever might be the adtual fuccefs. The qualities of a Law capable of producing its efFed, are to be fought for a priori^ as the Schools fpeak, and not a pofleriori : And if here we find intrinfic marks of excellence^ln the particular Laws; of confummate wifdom in the general Frame and Conftitution of them ; and can likewife difcover thofe accidents, which, at fome periods of the Difpenfation, hindered the effeSl ; we have done all that human reafon can require, to vindicate this divine Law, from his LordHiip's imputations of iropoflure. To treat this matter as it deferves, would require a volume, though not fo large as his Lordihip's. But a few words will fuffice to give the reader a general idea of the truth. And a general idea will be fufficient to (hew the futility of the objedion. The admirable provifion made by the Jewifh Law for preventing idolatry, may be feen in the following inftances. 1. That each fpecific Rite had a natural tendency tooppofe, or to «lude, the ftrong propenfity to idolatrous Worship, by turning cer- tain Pagan obfervances, with which the People were befotted, upon a proper objed. — Hence that conformity between Jewifh and Pa- gan Ceremonies, which fo vainly alarms, and fo vainly flatters, both the friends and enemies of Revelation. 2. That by their multiplicity, and the frequent returns of their celebration, they kept the People conflantly bufied and employed ; fo Sect.2. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 59 fo as to nffbrd fmall time or leifure for the running Into the forbidden fuperftitions of Paganifm. 3. That the immediate benefits which followed the punftual ob* fervance of the Law had a natural tendency to keep them attached to it. 4. But laftly, and above all, that the admirable coincidency be- tween the Injiitiite of Laiv^ and the Adminif ration of Government (whereby the Magiftrate was enabled to punlfli idolatry with death, without violating the rights of mankind), went as far towards the a£tual prevention of idolatrous Worfhip, as, according to human conceptions. Civil Law, whether of human or divine original, could poffibly go. And refling the matter here, I fuppofe, one might fafely defy his Lordfhip, with all his legiflative talents, and his vain boaft of them, to form any general notions of a law mon ferfeSl. But this reafonlng on the natural efficacy of the Mofaic Law, by its innate virtue, to prevent and to reftrain Idolatry, which it did not at all times, in faft, prevent and reftrain, will be further fup- ported by this confideration : That the circumftance which, from time to time, occafioned a defecStion from the Law, was neither an indifpofition to its eftablifhment ; nor any incoherence in its general Frame and Conftitution ; nor averfion to any particular parr, nor yet a debility or weaknefs in its Sandions. The fole caufe of the defeftion was an inveterate prejudice, exterior and foreign to the Law. The Ifraelites, in their houfe of bondage, had been, brought up in the principles of local and tutelary deities and inter- community OF worship ; principles often referred to, on various occafions, in the courfe of this work, for the illuftration of the moft important truths. In thefe Principles, they fiuv the whole race of mankind agree : and, from the Praftice of them, in the worfliip of tutelar Deities, they thought they faw a world of good ready to arife. But not only the hope of good, but the fear of evil drew them ftill more ftrongly into this road of folly. Their Egyptian education had early imprefled that bugbear-notion of a fet of local I 2 Deitifs, 6o THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Deities, who expeded their dues of all who came to inhabit the country which they had honoured with their prote£lion * ; and fe- verely refented the negleft of payment on all new comers. This will eafily account for the frequent defedlions of the Ifraelites in the divided fervice of the Gods of Canaan. — But it is difficult for men fixed down to the impreffions of modern manners, to let themfelves into diftant times ; or to feel the force of motives whofe operations they have never experienced : Therefore, to convince fuch men that the early Jewifh defections were not owing to any want of force or virtue in the Law, but to the exterior violence of an univerfal prejudice, it may be proper to obferve, that, from the Babylonian Captivity to this very time, the Jews have been as averfe to Idolatry under every form and fafliion of it, as before they were propenfe unto it. If it be afked, what it was that occafioned fo mighty a change ? I anfwer. It was in part, the feverlty of that punifliment which they had felt ; and in part, the abatement of that foolifli prejudice which they had favoured, of intercommunity of wor- ship : This, though ftill as general as ever in the Pagan world, had yet loft greatly of its force amongft the Jews, fince they became acquainted with the principles of Gentile Philofophy ; the founder parts of which being found conformable to the reafonable doctrines of their Religion, were applied by them to the ufe of explaining the Law. An ufe which this Philofophy was never put to in the place of its birth, on account of the abfurdit'tes of Pagan worfhip ; for this kept the principles of Philofophy and the pradlices of Reli- gion at too great a diftance to have any influence on one another. Such was the advantage the followersof the Jewifh Law reaped from the Greek Philofophy ; an advantage peculiar to them ; aad which made fome amends for the many fuperftitions of another kind, which the mixing Philofophy with Religion introduced into the practice of the Law : fuperftitions which depraved, and at length * See what has been faid on this matter juft above, in the cafe of the Cutheans, in- habiting Samaria. totally Sect.2. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 6i totally deftroycd the noble fimpliclty of its nature and genius. — But I anticipate a fubjecSl for which I (hall find a much fitter place. At length then we fee, that the Law of Mofes was, indeed, fuch a one as his Lordfhip would require in a law of divine original, namely, that // produced its effeSl, if not' by a phyjical neceffity which bears down all obftrudion before it, yet by a moral, which conftantly kept operating when no foreign impediment flood in the way ! So fiUfe is his Lordfhip's aflertions, that the whole hiftory of this people is one continued feries of infra£iions of the Law, If, by the whole, he means (as his argument requires he fhould mean) the whole both of their facred and merely civil hiftory ; and, by one continued feries of infradiions of the Law, their lapfes into Idolatry ; it is the grofleft milreprefentation : the far greater part of their duration as a diftinft People was free from idolatry ; and an authentic account of this freedom is recorded in their Annals. But if by their whole hijlory, he means (as his caufe might neceffitate him ta mean) only the f?.cred books ; and, by their infraSlion of the Law, only tranfgrefilons in lefler matters, it is illufory and impertinent. 2. We have feen the force of his Lordfliip's conclufion from the circumftance — of infinite Wijdonis framing the Law: We come next to the other circumftance, from which he deduceth the fame conclufion, namely infinite Power'' s adminifiering the Law. *' Let it be remembered (fays his Lordftiip) that God himfelf is " faid to have been their King during feveral ages ; that his prefence *' remained amongft them, even after they had depofed him ; and ** that the High Prieft confulted him, on any emergency, by the " Urim and Thummim. Occasional miracles were wrought " to inforce the Law ; but this was a ftanding miracle that might- •' ferve both to explain and inforce it, by the wifdom and authority •* of the Leglflator, as often as immediate recourfe to him was ** neceftary. • Can it be denied that the mofi imperfeSi fvjlem of human *' Laws would have been rendered effedlual by fuch meansias thefe?" This bad reafoning feems to be urged with much good faith, contrary to his Lordftiip's ufual cuftom ; and ariies from his igno- rance. 6% THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. ranee of a Theocratic adminiftration, as the nature of the admi- niftration may be collefted from the common principles of the Law of Nature and Nations. Let us conlider the affair difpaflionately. God, in giving laws to his chofen people, was pleafed, more himiano, to afilime the title of King, and to adminifter their civil affairs by a Theocratic mode of Government. Every flep in this eflablifhment evinces, that it was his purpofe to interfere no otherwife than in conformity to that political aflumption. He proceeded on the moft equitable grounds o^ civil Government : he became their King by free choice. It muft needs therefore be his purpofe to confine liimfelf to fuch powers of legiJlMtiofi, as human Governors are able to exert ; though Jie extended the powers of adminijlration far beyond the limits of humanity. His Lordfhip's ignorance of lo reafonable a diffinftion occaHoned all this pompous Fallacy. He found in the Mofaic Difpenfiuion occasional miracles pretended: and he imagined that, confiffently with this pretence, Miracles ought to operate throughout, rather than that the ^W of the Law fhould be defeated. But, I prefume, God could not, conformably to his purpofe of ereftinp" a Theocracy, and adminifterins; it more humano, exert miraculous powers in legiflating^ though he very well might, and a£lually did exert them, in governing: becaufe. In legiflation, ^. miracle, that is, a fupernatural force added to the Laws, to make them conflantly obeyed, could not be employed without putting a force upon the Will ; by which God's Laws would indeed produce their efeSi, but it would be by the deflrudion of the fubjeil of them. The cafe was different in adminiflering the Laws made : here God was to a£t tniraculoujiy ; often out of wife choice, to manifeft the nature of the Government, and the reality of his regal character ; fometimes out of necefTity, for the carrying on of that Govern- ment on the Sandlions by which it was to be difpenfed : and all this he might do without the leafl force upon the Will. This is fufficient to expofe the futility of his Lordfliip's conclu- fion from the circumftance of infinite Power's adminiftring the Law ; it SEcr.2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 6^ it being efiential to the Law, that ififinite Potver admlnljlrlng /V, fhould reflrain itfelf within fuch bounds as left the Will perfcdly free. But infinite Power., retrained within fuch bounds, might fometimes meet with unfurmountable obftruclions in the courfe of its direction, under a Theocracy adminiftered more huinano. If. We have feen how weak his Lordfhip's reafoning is in itfelf: Let us now fee how much weaker he makes it by ill management ; till at length it comes out a good argument againfl: his own objedion. " The Law of Mofes (fays his Lordfhip) was fo far from pre- '• vailing over accidents and conjunftures, that the leaft was fuffi- " cient to 'interrupt the courfe and defeat the defign of it, to make *' that people not only negledl the Law, but cease to acknow- *' LEDGE THE LEGISLATOR. To prevent this, was thefirji of ibefe " defigns: and if the fecond was (as it was, no doubt) and as it is ♦' the delign or pretence of all Laws, to fecure the happinefs of *' the people, this design was defeated as fully as the •' other: for the whole hiftory of this people is one continued *' feries of infractions of the Law, and of national *< calamities." To pafs by that vulgar mlftake (which has been fufficiently expofed above) that the Jews ever ceajed to acknowledge their Le- gijlaior ; let me obferve it to his Lordflilp's credit, that he appears to have underftood fo much at leafl: of the Mofaic Inftltutlon, as to fee that the firfi end of it was peculiar to itfelf; and that that which is common to all civil Communities was but tlieyirs;/^ f;;^/ of This. But is it not jflrange, when he faw io far into the nature of the Jewifli-Conftltutloii. that he fhould not fee that this fecond end was entirely dependent on what he hlmfelf makes the principal ; namely, to preferve the Ifraelites from idolatry ; but fliould argue againft the divinity of the Law, as if thefe ends were independant one of another ; and that one might be obtained without the other ? For, .64 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. For, to aggravate the Imbecillity of the Law, he informs us in the padage laft quoted, " that it was not only unable to gain its firft end, but its fecond likewife : that the one ciejig7i was defeated as fully as the other ; that the people were not only idolaters in fpiritual matters, but poor, miferable, and calamitous in their civil inte- refts." Strange ! that he could not fee, or would not acknowledge, that the Law denounces their happinefs and mifery as citizens, in exadl proportion to their adherence to, or their defedlion from, that Law; when he faw and confefled (what their History records), that this was their invariable fortune. The lohole hifory of this people (fays his Lordfhip) is one continued feries of infraSiions of the LaWf and of national cala}?iities. Now if the whole frame of the Mofaic Law was fo compofed, as to do that hy poftive inftitute which the Moral Law does by natural, viz. reward the obedient, and punifli the difobedient (and it certainly was fo compofed, if a continued feries of mfraSlions was followed by a continued feries of calamities), we muft needs conclude that we have here the ftrongeft proof of that divine Wifdom in the Conftitution, which this great modern Law-giver pretends to feek, but aflures us he is not able to find ; and yet, at the fame time, brings this convincing clrcum- ftance of the truth of the Law ; — This defign (fays he) was defeated as fully as the other. Here his rhetoric, as ufual, got the better of his reafoning : Not content to fay, — the 'whole hijtory of this People is one continued Jeries of infr actions of the haw, — he will needs add by way of exaggeration — and of national calamities. Which has fo perverfe an influence on the argument as to undo all he had been labouring to bring about, by difcovering a connexion between infraSlions and calamities, which has all the marks of a divine contrivance- Had it been the declared defign of their Law- giver to fparate the two ends, and to form fuch an Occonomy as that the People under it might be flourifliing in peace and affluence, while they were Idolaters in Religion ; or, on the other hand, true Wor- .fliippers and, at the fame time, calamitous Citizens ; then to find them Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 6^ 5.-' them neither religious nor profperoiis, under a Law which pretended to procure truth without temporal felicity, or to cftablilh peace and profperity in the midfl: of error ; this indeed (without taking in the perverfity of fuch a Syftem) would have fully difcrcdited the pre- tended original. But when, in this Law, truth and happinefs, error and aiilery, are declared to have an infeparable connexion ; the frcethinking Politician, who fhews from hiftory that this con- nexion was conftant and invariable, is intrapped by the retoriion of nature and reafon, to prove againfl: himfelf the Divinity of that Inftitute he labours to difcredit. Still further: When, on reading the liiflory of this extraordinary People, we find (as Jofephus well expreffes it) tliat,> in prvportion tc the negleSl of the Law, eofy things became unfurmountabL', and all their undertakings, how jujl foever, ended in uncurable calamltls *, we cannot but acknowledge the divine direclioii in every ftage of fuch a Difpenfation. For, to comprehend the whole of the Hif- torian's meaning, we mud remember, that there were feme Laws given purpofely to manifefl the divinity of their original : fuch as that agalnjl multiplying horfes ; which, when it was tranfgrefled, eafy things became tmfur mount able ; and that which moft facilitates a vidtory, a ftrong body of Cavalry intermixed with Foot, proved amongfl: the Ifraelites a certain means of their defeat. So again^ when they tranfgreffed the Law which commanded all the males to go annually to the temple, the hiftorian tells us, their mojl juJl tinder^ takings ended in incurable calamities ; and fure nothing could be more ju/l than to defend their borders from invaders ; yet they were fure to be moft infefled with them when they thought themfclvcs bed fecured : that is, while their males were at home, when they Ihould have been worshipping at the Temple. IIL But it is now time to come a little clofer to his LordHiip. He has been all along arguing on a false fact, which his igp.o- « ii{ cvfi^ofuf i>»i«iVii{, i',T> «ot' at w; »yaCi> J^ar erTaJisyuffir. Allliq. V. I. p. 4. Vol. III. T K rancc 66 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. ranee of the nature ol' the Jewifli Sepi^ration hindered hun from feeing. He underftood, indeed, that this extraordinary Oeconomy had, for its primary end, fomcthing very different from all other civil Policies; and that that which was the firft (indeed the only end), in otliers, was but the fecondary, end in this. Yet this primary end he faw fo obfcurely, as not to be able to make it out. He fuppofed it was to keep the 1 fro elites from idolatry \ whereas it was TO PRESERVE THE MEMORY OF THE ONE GoD IN AN IDOLA- TROUS WORLD, till the coming of Chrift : To hep the IJraelites from idolatry, was but the mean to this end. Thus has our political Architeft " miftaken the fcaffold for the pile," as his harmonious friend exprefles it. And the miftake is the more grofs, as the notion of the ultimate end's being to keep the Ifraelites from idolatry, is founded in that vain fancy of Jewifh pride, that their Fathers were felefled as the favorites of God, out of his fondnefs for the race of Abraham. Under this reftified idea therefore let us confider thetruth of -his Lordfhip's affertion, That no Law ever operated fo weak and uncertain an effedl as the Law of Mofes did : far from prevailing againfl acci- dents and conjun£lures, the leaf was ftfficient to interrupt the courfe, and i-o defeat the defgns of it. Now if we keep the true end of the Law in view, we fliall fee, on the contrary, that it prevailed conftantly and uniformly, without the leaft interruption, againfl the moft violent accidents, and in the moft unfavourable conjunctures ; thofe Imean, w^hich happened when their propenfity to the pradlice of idolatry, and their prejudice for X\\& principle of intercommunity , were at the height : for amidft all the disorders confequent thereto, they ftill preferved the knowledge of the true God, and performed the Rites ordained by the Law. And the very calamities which followed the infradion of the Law, of which the neigiibouring Nations occafionally partook, were fuffi- cient to alarm thefe latter, when moft at eaie, amidfl the imagi- nary protedion of their tutelary Gods, and to awaken them to the • awful Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 67 awful fcnfc of a Being dltferent, as well as I'uperior to their National Prote£iors. Which (hews, that the Law fllll operated its effect, ftrongly and coiiftantly ; and flill prevailed againjl accidents and conjunctures, which It governed and directed, inftead of lying at the mercy of them. But as it is very probable that the frequent tranfgreffions, which thofe accidents and conjimclures occafioned, would in time have defeated the end of the Law, the tranfgreflbrs were punilhed by a feventy-years-captivity ; tlie extraordinary cir- cumftanccs of which made fuch an impreflion on their haughty maflers as brought them to confefs that the Cod of Ifrael was the true God; and was fo feverely felt by them, that they had an utter averfion and abhorrence of Idolatry, or the worfhip of falfe Gods, ever after. So that from thence to the coming of Chrift, a courfe of many ages, they adhered, though tributary and perfecuted, and (what has ftill greater force than Perfecutlon, if not thoroughly adminiftcred) defpifed and ridiculed by the two greateft Empires of the world, the Greek and Roman; and though furrounded with the pomp and fplendour of Pagan. idolatries, recommended by the fnfhion of Courts, and the plaufible gloflcs of Philol'ophers, they adhered, 1 fay ftrictly, and even.fuperftitioufly, to the letter of that Law, which allowed of no other Gods belides tlie God of IfraeL Now if this was not gaining its end, we mufl; feck for other modes of fpeeci),. and' other conceptions of things, when we rcalbn upon Government and Laws. Yet this was not all. For the Law not only gained its end, in delivering down the Religion.of the true God into the hands of the REDEEMER OF MANKIND; who fooH fpread it tlifougliuut the whole Roman -Empire ; but even after it had done its dcdined work^. the vigour of the Mofaic Revelation flill working nt the root, ena-- bled a bold Impoilor to extend the principle of the unity flill wider, till it had embraced the remoteft regions of the habitable World: So that, at this day, almofl: all the Natives of the va(l regions of higher Afia, whether Gentiles, ClirilVians, or Mahome- tans, are t!ie profefled worfhippers of the one only God. How K 2 nuu:l\ ^3 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. much the extenfion of the pnnciple of the Unity has been owing to this Caufe, under the permiffion and dire£lion of that Provi- denccj which is ever producing good cut of evil, is known to all who are acquainted with the prefent flate of the Eaflern world. The reafon why I afcribe fo much of this good, to the lafting efficacy of the Mofaic Law, is this : Mahumet was born and brought up an Idolater, and inhabited an idolatrous Country ; fo that had he feen no more of true Religion than in the fuperftftious pr?.clice of the Greek Church, at that time over-run with faint and image-worfliip, it is odds but that, when he fet up for a Prophet, he might have made Idolatry the bafis of his new Religion : But getting acquainted with the Jews and their Scriptures, he came to underftand the folly of Gentilifm and the corruptions of Chriftia- nity ; and by this means was enabled to preach up the do(51;rine of the ONE God, in its purity and integrity. It is again remarkable, that to guard and fecure this doftrine, which He made the funda- mental principle of Ifhmaelitifm, he brought into his Impofture many of thofe provifions which Mofes had put in pra£^ice to prevent the contagion of idolatry. But the great Man with whom we have to do, is fo fecure of his fadl, namely that the Law was perpetually defeated, and never gained its end, that he fuppofes his Adverfaries, the Divines, are ready to con fefs it; and will only endeavour to elude his inference by throwing the ill fuccefs of its operations on the hardnefs of the People's hearts and the impiety of their Governors *. And this affords him freih occafion of triumph. I will not be pofitive that this fpecies of Divines is intirely of his own invention, and that this their apology for Mofes is altogether as imaginary as their famous Confederacy t againfl God ; becaufe I know by experience that there are of thefe Divines, who, in fupport of their paffions and preuidices, are always ready (as I have amply experienced) to admit what Scripture oppoies, and to oppofe what it * Page 29J, 4. ■\ Vol. V. p. 305—307. 393. admits. Sect. 2, 3- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 6^ admits, In almoft every page. But the beft Apologies of fuch men are never worth a defence, and Indeed are rarely capable of any. To conclude: Such as thefe here expofed, are all the reafonlngs of his Lordfhlp's bulky volumes: And no w^onder; when a writer, however able in other matters, will needs dictate In a Seience.of which he did not poffefs fo much as tiic firfl: principles. SECT. III. HAVING thus fhewn the nature of this Theocracy, and the attendant circumftances of its erection ; our next enquiry win be concerning its duration. Moft writers fuppofe It to have ended with the Judges j but fcarce any bring it lower than the captivity. On the contrary, I hold that, in flrld: truth and propriety, it ended not 'till the coming of Christ. I. That it ended not with the Judges, . appears evident for thefe. reafcns : I. Thougli Indeed tlie People's purpofe, in their clamours for a King, was to live under a Gentile Monarchy like tlieir idola- trous neighbours (for fo it Is reprefented by God Jnmfelf, in his reproof of their impiety *) ', yet in companion to their bllndnefs, he, in this inftance, . as In many others, indulged their prejudices, without expoling them to the fatal confe- quence of their projeft : which. If complied with, In the {enf'e they formed It, had been the withdrawing of his extraordinary proteSiion from them, at a time when they could not fupport them- felves without It. He therefore gave them a .^//7^; but fuch an one as was only his viceroy or Deputy ; and who, on that account, was not left to the People's ele(n:ion, as he left his own Regnllty ; but was chofen by hlmfclf : the only ditlerence between God's- appointment of the Judges and of Saul being this, that They were chofen by internal Impulfe ; He, by Lots, or external defignatlon. 1. Tills king had an unlimited executive power ; as God's Viceroy mud needs have. * I Slim, vii, 7. 3. -He- 70 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V, 3. He had no legijlative power : which a Viceroy could not poffibly have. 4. He was placed and difplaced by God at pleafure : of which, as Viceroy, \vq fee tlie perfe£l fitnefs; but as Sovereign by the people's choice, one cannot eafily account for ; becaufe God did not chufe to fiiperfede the natural Rights of his People, as appears by his leaving it, at firfl, to their own option whether they would have God himfelf for their King. 5. The very fame punifliment was ordained for curfing the King as forblafphenaing God, namely, ftoning to death ; and the reafon is intimated in thefe words of Abifhai to David, Shall not Shimei be put to death for this, becaufe he curfed the Lord's anointed * ? This was the common title of the Kings of Ifrael and Judah, and plainly denoted their office of Viceroyalty : Improperly, and fuperftitioufly transferred, in thefe later ages, to Chriftlan Kings and Princes. From tliis further circumftaace, a Viceroyalty is neceflarlly Inferred : The throne and kingdom of Judea is all along expreffly declared to be God's thrane and God's kingdom. Thus, in the firll: book of Chronicles, it is faid that Solomon fat on the Throne ob THE lord, as King, infeadof David his father -f-. And the queen of Sheba, who vifited Solomon, to be inftrudled in his wifdom, and doubtlefshad been informed by him of the true nature of his king- dom, compliments him in thefe words: Bleffed be the Lord thy God^ which delighted in thee to Jet tl-iee on his throne, to be king for THE Lord thy God \. In like manner Abijah fpeaks to the houfe of Ifrael, on their defe£lion from Rehoboam : And now ye ihink to withftand the kingdom of the Lord in the hands of the fons of David §. And to the fame purpofe, Nehemiah : Neither have our kings, our princes, our friejis, nor our fathers^ kept thy law, nor hearkened unto thy commandments, and thy teflhnonies wherewith thou didjl teflify againfl them. For they have not ferved thee in their kingdom II . The fcnfe, I think, requires that the Septuagint * 2 Sam. xix. :i. f Chap. xxix. ver. 23. J 2 Chron. Ix. 8. § z Chron, siii. 8. H Chap, ix, 35. reading Sect.3. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 71 reading fhould be here preferred, which fays EN BASIAEIA. SOT IN THY Kingdom. And this the Syriac and Arabic verfions follow. As Judea is always called his kingdom, fo he is always called the King of the Jews. Thus the Pfalmift: Thine Altars, O Lord of Hojisy my Kino, and my God"^. And again : Let Ifrael rejoice in him that made him : let the children ofTAow be joyful in their King t- y^ndthua the Prophet Jeremiah : The King, ivbojename is the Lord of Hojls t. 7. The penal Laws againft idolatry were flill in force during theii. Kings, and put in execution by their befl rulers, and even by men infpired. Which, alone, is a demonftration of the fiibfiflcnce of the THEOCUAcy ; becaufe fuch laws are abfolutely uiijufl: under every other form of Government. As to the title of King given to thefe Rulers, this will have fmall weight with thofe who refled that Mofes likewife, who was furely no more than God's deputy, is called King : Mofes commanded us a Law ; even the inherilafice of the congregation of Jacob. And he •was King in JefJmrun, when the heads vf the people ^ and the iribes of Ifrael, were gathered together §. Let us now fee what the celebrated M. Le Clerc fays in defence of the contrary opinion, which luppofeth the Theocracy to have ' ended with the Judges. Father Simon of the Oratory had faid, that the republic of the Hebrews never acknowledged any other chief than God alone, who continued to govern in that quality, even durino- the time in which it was fuhjedl to Kings \i^. This was enough to make his learned adverfary take the other fide of the queftion ; who being piqued at Simon's contemptuous flight of his offered afTiftance in the projeft for a new Polyglott, revenged himfelf upon him in thofe licentious ** Letters, intitled, Sciitimens de quelques * Pfalm Ixxxiv. 3. \ Pfalin cxlix. 2. 1 Jer. li. 57. § Dcut. xxxiii. 4 and 5. U La Republiqiie des HebrcAix diffeie en cela de lous les autres ctats du monde, qu'elle n'a jamais reconnu pour chef qnc Dieu feiil, qui a continue de la go\iverner.en cettc qualitc dans les tems memes, qu'clle a etc founitle a dcs rois. Hiftoire Ciit. <}c Vieux Teft. p. 15. Ed. Rotteid. 1685. * * See note fG], atthc etid of tUis Book. Th€9- 72 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Theologieiis de HoUande, where his only bufinefs is to pick a quarrel. lie therefore maintains againft Simon, Tbnt the th ocracy ceafed on eJiahUpoing the throne in the race of David *. What he hath of argument to fupport this opinion is but little ; and may be fummcd up in the following obfervation, That God did not personally interfere -with bis dircSlions, nor df charge the futi^i ions of a Magifrate after the ejiablipment of the Kings as be had done before -f. But this, inllead of proving the abolition of the Theocr.icy, only fliews tliat it was adminiftered by a Viceroy. For in what confifts the office of a Viceroy but to difcharge the fun6lions of his Principal r He had been a cipher, had God flill governed immediately as before. Mr. Le Clerc could fee that God aded by the minijlry of the Judges |, If then the Theocratic function could be difcharged by deputation, why might it not be done by Kings as well as Judges ? The dif- ference, if any, is only from lefs to more, and from occafional to conftant. No, fays our Critic, the cefiion was in confequence of his own declaration to Samuel : For they have not rejcBed thee, but they have rejected me, that I f:iould not rdgn over them^. This only declares the fenfe God had of their mutinous requeft ; but does not at all imply that he gave way to it. For who, from the like words (which exprefs fo natural a refeutment of an open defe£lion) would infer in the cafe of any other monarch, that he * II paroit au contrairc par I'Ecriture, que Dieu n'a gouverne la republique des Hebreux, en qualitc de chef politique, que pendant qu'ils n'avoient point des rois, & peut-etre au coinnaencement que le lois furent etablis, avant que la famille de David fut affermie fur le trone de Ifrael. Sentimens, &c. p. 78. f — Pendant tout ce temps-la, Dieu fit les fondiions de roi, 1! jugeoit des affaires— il repondoit par I'oracle — il regloit la marche de I'armee — il envoyoit mcme quelque- fois un ange — On n'etoit oblige d'obeVr aveuglement, qu'aux feuls ordres de Dieu. IMais lors qu'il y cut des rois en Ifrael, & que le royaume fut attache a la famille dc David, les rois furent maitres abfolus, & Dieu cefl'a de faire leurs fondions. p. 78, 79. X — au lieu qu'auparavant Dieu lui-meme la faifoit, par le miniftere des Juges, qu'il fiifcitoit de temps en temps au milieu d'Ifrael. Def. des Sent. p. 121. § — Cell pour cela que Dieu dit a Samuel, lors qu' Ifraiil voiihit avoir «// ro/ ^oar lejiiger a la manicre dc totttes les nal'iom; ce ntjl fas toi quihont rrjctK, nulls tnoi, ajin que je ne rcgne folntfur tux, i Sam. viii. 7, thereupon Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. y^ thereupon ftepped down from his throne, and fuffcred an ufurper to feize his place ? This, we fee, was poor reafoning. But, luckily for his reputation, lie had an Adverfary who reafoned worfe.— However Simon faw thus much into Le Clerc's cavil, as to reply, 'iTI^at all he bad Jald was quite be/ide the purpoj'e^ for that the thhii to be proved was, that, after the ejlablijhment of the King!, God i;v?j no longer the civil CbieJ *. On which Le Clerc thus infults him : As much as to fay, that in order to prove God was no longer Chief of the Hebreii's after ike eleSlion of a King, it is befde the pwpofc to f.^ew, he never afterwards dif charged the funSlions of a Chief of the republic. It is thus this great Genius happily unravels matters, and difcovers, in an infant, ivhat is^ and ichat is not to the purpofe \. Whether Simon indeed knew iiohy Le Clerc's objection was nothing to the purpofe, is to be left to God and his own confcience, for he gives us no reafons for the cenfure he palVes on if. but that it was indeed nothing to the purpofe, is mofl: evident, if this propofitioa- be true, " That a King does not ceafe to be King, when he puts in *' a Viceroy, who executes the regal office by deputation." Le Clerc returns to the charge in his Defnfe of the Sentimenti :— *' Tlie Ifraelites did not rejed God as Protedor, but as civil Chief, " as I obfervcd before. They would have a King who fhould *' determine fovereignly, and command their armies. Wliich, *' before this, God himfelf did by the miniftry of the Judges, *' whom he raifed up, from time to time, from the midit of "*' Ifrael. In this fenfe wc muft under{l:and abfolutely the words of • Je pafle foiis filence le long difcotirs de Mr. le Clerc touchnnt Ic poinoir dc Dieu fur Ics Ifraelites avaut I'etabliflemeat des rois, d'oiiil pretend prouver que Dieu ].iendant lout c« temps-la fit la t'ondion de roi. Tout ceia efl hors dc propos, puh q\i'il s'agit dc prouver, qu'apres ces temps la Dieu n'a pins ctelcurchef: Sc c'ert cc qii'oii nc prouvera jamais. Repoiife aux Sentimens de quelques Theol. de Hoi. p. 5;. f — C'eft ii dire, que pour prouver que Dieu n'a pas etc chef dcs Hebreux, aprc% I'elcftion des rois, il tit hors de propos de prouver qii'il n'^ phi? fait ics fonclions dc chef de la republique. C "eft ainfi que ce grand genie debrouille lie\ireuicnient les matieres, & decouvre d'abord cc qui eft hois de propo?, dc ce qui tie I'elt pas. Dcfenl. des Sentimens, p. izo. Vol, III. L " God^ 74 THE DIVINE LEGATION Eook V. *' God, In Samuel, that IJloould not reign over them *." It is indeed flrange, that, after writing two books, he fhould ftill infifi: on fo foolifh a paralogifm f, That God's giving up his office of civil Chief, was a necefliuy confequence of the People's demandijig it. For, that they did demand it, I acknowledge. Let us confider then rliis whole matter a little more attentively. Samuel (and I defire the Deifts would take notice of it) had now, bv a wife and painful direiSlion of aftairs, rcftorcd tlie purity of Rcligioti, and refcued his Nation from the power of the Phlliftines, and their other hoflile neighbours; againfl: whom they were utterly vuiable to make head when he entered upon the public Admlniftra- tion. At this very time, the People, debauched, as ufual, by power and profperity, took the pretence of the corrupt condu£l of the Prophet's two fons |, to go in a tumultuary manner, and demand a King. But the fecret fpring of their rebellion was the ambition of their leaders ; who could live no longer without the fplendour of a regal Court and Houfhold ; Give me (fay they, as- the Prophet Hofea interprets their infolent demand) a king and PKiNCES § ; where every one of them might fliine a diflinguifhed Officer of State. They could get nothing when their affairs led them to their Judges' poor refidence, in the Schools of the ProphetSy but the Gift of the Holy Spirit \\ ; which a Courtier, I prefunie, would not prize even at the rate Simon Magus held it, of a paultry piece of money. — This it was, and this only, that made theii? demand criminal. For the chuling Regal rather than- Ariflocratic * Les Ifraiilites ne rejetteieiit pas Dieu comme piotefteiir, mais conime chef poli- tique, ainfi que je I'ai marque, lis voulurent iin roi qui les jugeat fouverainemeiit, & qui conunandat Icurs aimces, au lieu qu'auparavant Dieu lui-mcme le faifoit, par le minrl>ere des juges, qu'il fufcitoit de temps en temps au milieu d'Ifrael. — En ce fens il faut entendre abloiument les paroles de Dieu dans Samuel, afin que jc ne regne point fw CUX, p. 12 1. t However, foolifli as it is, the Reader hath feen, how a late Sermonizer l-.as borrowed it, and how little force he has added to it. J 1 Sam, viii. 5. and xii. 12. § Chap. xiii. ver, lo. g Chap. X. 10. and chap. xix. Viceroys Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. ys Viceroys was a thing plainly indulged to tliem by the Law of Mofcs, ill the following admonition : }f^/j:?i thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God give th thee, tind JJ:)al( pojfefs it, audpalt dwell therein, and fJoalt fay, I will fet a King over tiie, like as the nations that are about me: Thou fjalt in any %vfe fet hiin King over thee, ivhom the Lord thy God shall ciiuse : one fi qui aniongj} thy Brethren Jl:>alt thjii Jet King over thee : Thou ma\eji not fet a Stranger over thee which is nU thy brother*. The plain meaning of which caution Is, that they lliould take care, wjien they demanded a King, that they thought of none other than fuch a King who was to be Gou's Dkpu I V. As therefore Court-ambition only was in the wicked view of the Ringleaders of thele malecontents, and no fooliih fears for the State, or hopes of bettering the public Admini- fhration ; it is evident to all acquainted with the genius oi this Time and People, that compliance witli tlielr demand mufi: have ended in the utter deflruction of the Molaic Religion as well as Law. But it was God's purpofe to keep them separate, in order to pre- ferve the memory of himfelf amidfl: an idolatrous World. And this not being to be done but by the prefervation of their Religion'and Law, we mull needs conclude that he would not give way to thei^- rebellious demand. And what we are brought to conclude from \\-\^ reason of the thing, the hi/iory of this tranfadlion clearly enough confirms. For it hav- ing now informed us how God confented to give this People a King ^ To fhew us, that he had not caft off the Government, but only transferred the immediate Adminiftration to a Deputy, and confe-' quently, that thiir King was ^/V Viceroy ; it telis us next, how [-:e •was pkafcd to brnig them to repentance in an extraordinary way ; the gracious method he comaionly employed when lie intended to pardon. Samuel aflembled the People t ; ^'id to convince them of their crime in demanding a King, called down the prefent vengeance of their offended God in a ftorm of thunder and rain at the time of loheat-harveji \. This fudden defolation brings thcni to a fenfe of * Deut. xvii. i4, ij. f I Sam.xii, \ Cliip. \ii. 17, i S. I' 2 tluir 76 T H E D I V I N E L E GAT I O N Book V. their guilt, and they implore mercy and forgivenefs : " And all the " People fald unto Samuel, Pray for thy lervants unto the Lord *' thy God, that we die not ; for we have added unto all our fins " this evil, to afk us a King. And Samuel faid unto the People, *' fear iiot : (ye have done all this wickednefs : yet turn not afide " from following the Lord, but ferve the Lord with all your heart ; " and turn ye not afide : for then fliould you go after vain things, " which cannot profit nor deliver, for they are vain :) For the Lord " will iwt Jorjake his People, for his great Name's fake : becaufe it " hath pleafed the Lord to make you his People ^.'^ Here, we fee, they repent, are pardoned, and received again into Grace, as appears by the concluding promife, that the Theocratic form (hould be con- tinued. They are ready to give up their King, and yet a regal cha« rader is inftituted. The plain conclufion from all this is, that their King was given, and, now at leaf!:, received as God's deputy. But Father Simon is at length provoked into a Reafon, and that, to fay the truth, no weak one. God, he obferves, kept the eledlion of their King in his own hands -t- But this^ Le Clerc fays, proves nothing. How fo? Becaufe, according to this reafoning, we Jhould be- obliged to Jay that God oftener dij charged the funSlions of civil Chief in the idolatrous realm of the ten Tribes than in that of Judah : for that' •was ekSli've, this, hereditary 'I. And what if we do ? Where will be the harm of it ? The two kingdoms made up but one Common- wealth ; of which God, as Head, governed by two Viceroys. And if he oftener ailed immediately in the kingdom of Ifrael, there was ■* 1 Sam. xii. 19. & feq; f lit une preuve mime qu'il ne ceffoit pas d'etre leur chef par cette elcftion, c'eft qu'il s'cii rend le maitre. Reponfc aux Sentimens, p. 55. J Pour ce que dlt M. -Simon, que Dieuy^ re>i^ maitre cle rdeltion Ja Rois, il nc s'enfuit nul'ement qu'il continuat d'etre pour cela chef politique de la republiqiie d'lfrael ; puilque fi cela etoit, il faudroit dire que Dieu faifoit beaucoup plus fouvciu les fomflions de chef de I'etat dans le royaume Idolatre des dix tribes, que dans celui de Juda. Car ce derniere royaume etoit hereditaire, & etoit poflede par la maifoa de David, fans qu'il fut befoin d'aucune elei''^ion, au lieu qu'il le fit plufieurs cleiflions dans celui des dix tribes.. Pefenfe des Sentimens, p, 121, 122, a plain, Sect. 2. OF MOSE S DEMO N' STR A TE D. 77 a plain reafon for it ; Its inhabitants were more given to idolatrous wordiip ; and needed more the frequency of an extraordinary re- flralnt. And, in effect, we find he did interfere greatly in otlier in- ftances, as well as in the eledion of their Kings. In truth, F. Simon feemcd to fee as little into the force of the ob- fervation (that God refervcd the choice of 1 heir Kifig to himjelf) when he urged it, as M. Le Clerc did, when he defpifcd it : yet it is ftrongly conclufive for the continuation of the Theocracy. For had the vifible King which the Ilraelites demanded been granted to tliem, that is, a King in his own right, fovereign, and at the head of a new Conftitution, or indeed, any other than a Viceroy to tlie King of the Theocracy, the choice of him would have been referved to the People. It was a natural right ; and more than that, a right which God did not think fit to take from them, when he fufl: accepted the regal office for himfelf. But if the People have, by natural Law, a right to chufe their own King, that Knig hath, by civil Law, a prerogative to chufe his own Deputy. When we fee him therefore exercife this prerogative, we may be affured that the Kingchofen was no other tiian his Deputy, as Sovereign of the Theocracy. But to return to the two Combatants. — Here the Dif- pute ended ; and for farther fatisfadlion, Le Clerc refers us to a' book of Spencer's, written profefledly upon this very fubje(5l *. It is his tradl De Theocratia Judaica. What is to be found there, be- (ides the arguments which Le Clerc has borrowed from it, and which have been confidered already, I fliall now with fome reluftance in- form the Reader. This treatife is by no means in the number of thofe on which Spencer raifed his reputation. He goes on a wrong hypothefis ; he Tjfcs weak arguments ; and he is confufed and Inconfiflent in his aflbrtions. * II n'eft pas neceflaire que je m'arrete d'avantagc a cela, aprcs ce qu'en a clit le fa- vaat Spencer dans iin traite qu'il a fait expres fur ccttc maticrc. Lib, i. de Legg. Heb.. Ritual. Defenfe dcs Sent, p. 122. I. He •:8 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V, 1 . ,1 le thinks the Tlieocracy was eftablldied by degrees*, and abio- gatcd Ly degrees t- A conceit highly abfurd, as God was the Law- giver, and Supreme Alagiftrate of the Jews. — He thinks the tirflflep to its liitroduftion was their proteclion at the Red Sea | ; and the f\ii\ ilep to its aboHtion, their demand of a King § : That it was flill more impaired when Saul and David got pofleffion of the throne || : That it approached much nearer to its end when it became hereditary, under Salomon ** : .and yet, for all this, he conftfles that iome obfcure footfteps of it remained even to the. time of Christ -j-'t- 2. In hisreafoning for the abolition of the Theocracy, inflead of employing the general principles of civil Policy, which were the only means of coming. to the truth, he infills much on the difule of Urim and Thummim, ^c. which Le Glerc borrowed from him; and which hath been already confidered. :He brings the delpotic power of the Kings.||, as another .argument; which, I think, proves juft the contrary. I'^or if fo be, that thefe Kings were the Viceroys of God, whofe .power was defpotic, their power muft be defpotic * — Neminem in facris Hteris vel mediocriter verfatmn latere poteft Theocratlam \n ipfo rerum Ifraeliticanira exordio aliqiiatenus obtinuilfe, adaxft^n autem non nifi gradaiim & poft legem in Sinai datum peiveniffe. Vol. i. p. 239. \ Cum autem regiminis hujiis, non fimul & femcl, fed per gradus quofdam, jafturam fecerint, placet hie veritatis f'ugientis veftigia gradatim premcre. Id. ib. J Gradiim primum nd potellatera regiam obtinendam fecifle videtiir Deus, cum gentem Ifraeliticam infigni illo potentiu; & bonitatis iws: docuiiiento (iEgyptiorum in Mari Rubro lubmerfione) libi devinxiflet. Id. ib. § Primo itaque ad certum affirmo, quod IiVaelita?, regem fibi dari poftulantes, gradum primum ad imperii liujus deilderatilTmu ruinam feciffe videantur. Id. ib. 11 Dei regimen nuilto magis iiiiminutum eft, cum Deus Saulcm Si Daviiicm ad rerum arbitrium evoraflet. P. 240. ** Salomone rerum potito, Theocratia multo vicinior a(fcina^cf non imnierito cenfeatur. ft J ud-xi Theocratic vcteris indicia & veftigia quxdam obfciiriora, ad extrema ufque politix fu.-B tempora retinuere — ipfo Domini noftri feculo, Hierofolyma civitas magtii regis audiit. \\). ^\ — adeo ut hinc conftet, cos fe pro regibus geffifle, & poteftatem arbitrariam (Sxercuide. Ib. too. Sect. 2. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 79 too, i. e. Independent on all but the Sovereign. Not fo, if they were Monarchs in their own light. 3. Though, as we obferved, Spencer, in the fecond fcclion of his fourth chapter, fuppofcs a gradual decay of the Theocracy ; and that even fom3 oblcure footllieps of it remained to the time of Christ; yet, in the following fedion, he, all the way, argues upon the fuppotltion of an abfolutc and entire abrogation * by the eftablilhmcnt of the Kings -{-• To proceed. II. That this Theocracy, the adminiftration of which lay, as it were, in abeyance during the Captivity, was again exercifed after the return from it, is evident from the exprefs declaration of the Almighty, by the Prophet Ilaggai : 2V/ noia hejlrong, 0 Zerubbahel^ faith the Lord, and be Jrong, O JrjJJjua, Son of Jcfedecb the High PrieJ}, and bejlrong, all ye People cf the Land, faiih the Lord, and work : for I am -with you, faith the Lord of Hojh ; according to > THE Word that I covenanted with you when you cams-. out of Egypt, so my Spirit remaineth amongst you : fear ye not X. What was that Covenant? That Ifrael fhould be his. People, and He, their God and King. Therefore it cannot barely mean, that he would be their God, and they fhould be his People; for this was but/^r/ of the Cow«^7«/. Nor can it mean that they fhould be conduced by an extraordinary providence, as at their coming out of Egypt, and during the firfl: periods of the Theocracy ; for this was but the effeSis of the Covenant : and befides, we know that that difpenfation of Providence foon ceafed after the Re-eftablifh-- ment. The meaning therefore muft be, that he would ftill continue their King as well as God. Yet at the fame time, when thi;? Theocracy was reflored, it was both fit, on account of its own dig- nity, and necelTcUy for the People's afllirance, that it Oiould be at- tended with fome unuiual difplay of divine favour. Accordingly,, * — Regiminis hnjus nnitati vcl abrogati caufa principalis — De rcgi.niiiis h'.:jii5 . abrogati effe<Su vel eventn brevitcr difTerendiim eft — §{c. p. 2i,i .14.3. f See note [H], at the end of this Book. , \ Chap. ii. ver. 4, 5. ProphctJT 8o THE DIVINE LEGATION Book \ Prophets were raifed up ; and an extraordinary Providence for fome ihort time adminiftered, as appears from many places in thofe Prophets *. III. That the Theocracy continued even to the coming of Christ, may be feen from hence. — • 1. Whenever it was abrogated, itmuftneeds be done in the fame Iblemn manner in which it was eftabllfhed ; lo that the one might be as well knovi^n as the other : becaufe it was of the higheft importance to a people fo ftri£lly bound to obedience, not to be miflaken con- cerning the power under which they lived. Natural equity requires this formality as a neceflary concomitant in the impofing and abro- gating of all civil laws and inftitutions whatfoever. Now the The- ocracy having never been .tlius abolilhed till the coming of Chrift, we conclude that it continued to fubfift till that time. 2. Nor indeed, could it have been abolilhed without diffolving the whole frame of the Republic ; fuice all the Laws of it, whether as to their equity, force, or fitnefs, as well as the whole Ritual of Worftiip, refpedled, and referred to God as civil Governour. But neither by the deckration of any Prophet, nor by the act of any good King, did the Inftitution fuffer the leaft change in any of its parts, from the time of its eftabllfhment by Mofes to its difllolution by Jeeus Christ, either by addition, corredion, or abrogation. Con- fequently, the T^hfocracy was exiftlag throughout that whole period: Nothing being more abfurd than to luppofe that national Laws, all made in reference to the form of Government, (hould remain unva- riable, while the Government itfelf was changed. For what the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews fays of the Priest (in a Con- flitution where the two Societies were Incorporated) muft be equally true of the King. — The Priesthood being changed, there is MADE ALSO, OF NECESSITY, A CHANGE OF THeLaW-)-. And now it was that Jesus, the Messiah, who is here fpoken of as making * Hag. i. 6 — II. Chap. ii. ver. i6 — 19. Zech. viii. 12. Mai. iii. lo, 11. \ Chap.\il. ver. 12, this Sect.3. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 8t this change, in quality of Priest, made it likevvlfe in quaUty of King. For, as we learn from the hiftory of his Miaiflry, he came as Heir of God, to fucceed immediately without any interregnum, in his Father's kingdom : God having delivered up to his Son the kingdom, of which the Father was, till then, in poflcffion. And this change in the Government, from the lempo^'al Theocracy of God the Father, to l\\t fp'irhual Kingdom of God the Son, was made in the fame folcmn and authentic manner in which that Theocracy was introduced. God raifed up from amongfl: his chofen People, a Prophet like unto Mofes^ who exercifed the Legijlalive power, like Mofcs ; and aflumed the Regal power, like God. He gave a new Law to be adminiftered in a new Kingdom, and confirmed the divinity of the Difpenfation by the mofl ftupendous miracles. Thus, we find, the Theocracy did indeed fubfifl till the coming of Chrift. And this Abolition of it by the Son of God, I take to be the true completion of that famous prophecy of Jacob, of which fo much hath been written and difputed. The Sceptre shall not DEPART FROM JuDAH, NOR A LawGIVUR FROM BETWEEN HIS FEET, UNTIL Shilch COME*, i. e. the THEOCRACY fliall Continue over the Jews t until Chrift come to take poffeflion of his Father's Kingdom : For there was never any Lawgiver +, in Juddk, but God by the miniftry of Mofes, until the coming of his Son. Jesus the Messiah, the beft interpreter of the Oracles of God, of which he himfelf is the capital fubjeft, and for whofe fake the chain of Propbejies was fo early drawn out, and extended to fuch a length, feems to have paraphrafcd and explained the words of Jacob * Gen. xlix. lo. ■\ Who took their Name from the Tribe oi Judah ; the reft being incorporated in tliit Tribe, orextinguiflicd in Captivity. ^ Mjhokek, Lc^ijlator, -iwt Lcgls inicrpres. But the firft is its original and proper Signi- fication. And thus Ifaiah [chap, xxxiii. ver. 22.] " The Lord is our 'Jiui^c^ the Lord is our L.WGivER \^'MhhokckcHou\, the Lord \%o\\xKing, he will fave ns." Where the word Mhhohek \% ufed in its proper Signification of Z,<7ii'^;wr; the other Senfe of Difpeufer or Interpreter of the Lav being contained in the tirles of Judge and King. Vol. III. M concerning ^2 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. concerning the departure of the Sceptre from Jtidah^ by his declara- tion recorded in St. Matthew, The Prophets and the Law pro- phesied till John *, i.e. " the Mofaic Law, and the Theocratic Government by which it was difpenfed, continued in Being till the approach of this harbinger of Chrift, John the Baptift ; but was then fuperfeded by the promulgation of a ?Jew Law and the efta- blifhment of a new Kingdom^'' But as this interpretation is fo different from the common, and vinderftands the Prophefy as foretelling that the Jewifh nation fhould not be bereft of Sovereign Power, by falling under a foreign Yoke, till the Advent of the Messiah, the Reader will excufe me, if I de- tain him a little longer on ict important a fubjedl. The common notion of the Sceptre ofjudab, is explained three different ways, each of which has it's particular Followers. r. Some fuppofe the Sceptre of fudah to fignify the sovereignty OF THE Jewish Nation at large. 2. Others again fuppofe it to fignify the sovereignty of th2 TRIBE OF JuDAH. 3. And a third fort contend that It fignifies not a fovereign or re- gal, but a TRIBAL Sceptre only. In the Senfe oi-^ Sovereignty hi the Jewijh people at large., which is the moft general interpretation, and, in my Opinion, the moft na- tural of the three (as the whole People were long denominated from that tribe), the pretended Prophefy was not only never fulfilled, but has been dire6lly falfified : becaufe long before the coining of Shilo, or of Chrift, the Sceptre or Sovereignty in the Jewifh people was ^/<?- parted. During the Babylonian and Perfian Captivity, and while afterwards they continued in a tributary dependence on the Greeks, they could, in no reafonable fenfe, be faid to have retained their Sceptre, their Sovereignty, or independent Rule. But it may be replied, " that the Prophecy by departure^ meant a final departure ; and in thefe inflances it was but temporary : for Cyrus reftored the Sceptre to them ; and when it was again loft in the Grecian Empire, * Matth, xi. 13. the Sect. 3. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. Sj the Maccabei recovered it for them." Tliough this be allowed, yet we muft ftlll confefs, that the Romans, who under Pompey reduced Judea to a depetident Province, efFedually overthrew the Prophecy. Pompey took Jerufialem ; and left to Hyrcanus, thelaft of the Afmonean family, only the oflkcof Hlgh-Pricfl:. From this time, to the birth of Chrift, it was ever in dependence on the Ro- mans, who difpofed of all things at their pleafure. The Senate gav(i theOovernment of Judaea toAntipater ; and then to Merod hisoon, under the title of King. And Archelaus, on the Death of his Fa- ther, did not dare to take pofTeflion of this fubje£l-kingdom, till he had obtained leave of Auguftus ; who afterwards, on complaint of the Jews agalnfl him, baniflied him into the Weft, where he died. Now the precarious Rule of a dependent Monarch could no more be called a Sceptre (which, in the figurative mode of all languages, fig- jiifies Sovereignty J ]j.\\M\ the condition of the Jews could b^ fald to be fovereign, when this Archelaus was depofed, and Coponius a Roman Kniglit made procurator of Judaea, at that time which the fupporters of this interpretation fix for the Departure of the Sceptre. I reckon for nothing another objeiStion which has been made to the common interpretation, " That after the return from the Cap- tivity, the Jews were, from time to time, under a form of Govern- ment refembllng rather the Ariftocratlc than the Monarchic ;" hc- caufe the Sceptre, or Sovereignty, belongs equally to all thofe Forms. This then makes no more agalnn: the common interpretation, than tiie other, 1 am now going to mention, makes for it, namc!\-, that the Senate of Rome gave the Government of Juda:a to Herod under the title of King ; fince the dependent rule of tills Roltclet was as certainly the departure of a Sceptre, as a Sovereignty under an arifto- cratlc Government was the continuance of it. The learned Father Tournemlne was (o cmbarraftcd with thefe difficulties, that in a diflertation on the Sceptre ofJudLib, he endea- vours to fliew, that the proof of the predicted hirtli of Chrift from this Prophefy arlfes not from the ^/t'/irt/Y/^/r (?/"/^;^ ^rc/z-v, but from M2 it. 84 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. its re-eftabli(hment under the Meffiah *. Which thefis (as the in- telligent reader may obferve) fiiirly put him in the road ; and, had it been purfued, would have led him to the (anie I am hereendeavour- hig to eftablifh. The fecond branch of the common interpretation is, That by the Sceptre is fignificd a ckiljlvcreignty in the tribe of Judab. This, in my opinion, hns ftill lels of lability tlian the other. It fuppofes that the Sceptre, or the fupreme rule of tlie Jcwifli People, remained in natives of that Tribe, from the time of David to the coming of Chrift. But Petavius hath (hewn, that from the giving of the Pro- phecy to the time of David (a Space of above fix hundred Years), there was but one or two Rulers defcended ffom the Tribe of Judah : And that from the death of Sedecias to the birth of Chrift (a fpace of near the fame number of years) all the Rulers of the Jewifh People were of other Tribes ; the Afmonean princes particularly be- ing all of the tribe of Levi f. The Abbe de Houteville, who, at a very eafy rate, hath obtained the reputation of an able defender of Revelation t, hath indeed invented a curious expedient to evade this difficulty. His fyftem is, that the rulers of the tribe of Levi (and fo I fuppofe of the reft) exercifed this Sovereignty by leave, or deputa- tion from the Tribe of Judah. To inch wretched fhifts are learned men reduced, when they have reverfed the order of things, and made Truth to wait upon their Syftems; inftead of making their Syftems fubfervient to Truth. * Journal de Trevoux, Mars 1705, & Feb. 1721. J. At complures antiquonim receiitionimque qui in ilia Jacobi fententia Judam'^t- culiaride tribu intellexerunt, id fibi Patriarcham voluilTe credunt, ex ftirpe ac progenie yW^ filMipfius perpetuo Judaeis prsefuturum aliquem eonimque fore principem, donee Chriftus adveniat.^ Sed in hujus reddenda difti ratione multum oeftuant, liquidem vetufta- tis omni tefte memoria refelluntiir, quie non folum ante Davidem unura alterumve dun- taxat ex ilia tribu rexiffe popuhim oftendit, annis circiter 675 ab edita prophetia ; fed etiam port Sedecias necem, occafumque Urbis & Tennpli ad Chriftum ufque de alia quam y«</^ftirpe duces extitifle annis 588 ; etenim Machabceos conftat ex Levitica et Sacerdo- tali progenie defcendere. Ration. Teraporum, Par. II. L. III. C. 16. X See his book,,intit\i'ed, RcUgionj>rcut'ee far les Fails. Thcfe Sect. 3- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 85 Thele two fenfes (by one or other of wliicli the common inter- pret.ition hath been long fupportcd) being found on a 11 rider Icru- tiny, to be intenable, men caft about for a third ; and a happy one it was thought to be, wliich contrived, that Sceptre flioukl Ilgnify a domcjtic, not a civil rule; a trihal, not a sovereign Sceptre \ and of which, they lay, Judah, at the giving of the Prophecy,, was already polTeflcd. This expedient, the learned Dr. Sherlock, Bifhop of London, has honoured with his fupport and protection*. Jt would be want of refpe£l to fo eminent a Perfon, to pafs over this refinement with the fame ilight notice that has been given to the other two. I fiiall therefore do myfelf the honour to confidcr his Lordfliip's reaioning more at large. His Lordlliip's firiT: argument in fupport of a tribal Sceptre is — That the Sceptre's not VEPAKriyG Jrom "judah fliews plainly that Judah had a Sceptre when the prophecy was given. — " Is there any " fenfe (fays his Lordfliip) in faying that a thing Ihall not depart, " which never was yet in pojfejfwn ? The prophecy is not a grant *' of the Sceptre, but a confirmation of it. Now a confirmation of " nothing is nothing : And, to make it fomething, \.\-\q poffejjlm of " the thing confirmed mufl be fuppofed. I know not by what rules *' of language or grammar, thefc words can be conflrued Into a. " grant of the Sceptre. And tliough fo many writers and inter— *' preters have followed this fenfe, yet I do not remember to have " feen one pafl'age or parallel exprellion frcm the Scripture, or any. " other author, produced to juftify the interpretation -j-." Is there any Ser.fe (his Lordlhip a(ks) in faying a thing fioall not- DEPART which never was yet in pofiejjion'? Yes certainly, a very good one, in a Prophesy, where the fubjed Is not of a prefent but of a future pofleffion ; and where the Holy Spirit Is wont to call the things that are not, as though they were. The Subject Is a Sceptre,. which could in no {twit, not even In the fenfe of a tribal fceptre, be in poflellion of Judah before he became a Tribe. His Lordfhip,. ij)deed, fuppofes he became a Tribe immediately after the death of. * Ufe and Intent of Prcphefy, Diflert. III. 5th Edit. 1749. f Page 326, 7. Jacob. — 86 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V, Jacob. — This power in the hands of the Tribes took place immediately upon the death of Jacob *. But if it did ? Was not that acceflioii as properly ytf/«rr, as if it had been a thoiiAuid years after? Judah then, at the time of this Prophecy, not being in pofl'effion of his Sceptre, a confirmation of nothing is nothing, &c. fo that all the abfurdities here imagined ftick to his Lordfhip's JKvd. of the Sceptre, as well as to the common one. But let us fuppofe that Jacob's Prophecy and death were individual ; and then lee how he proves his afl'ertion, that Judah and the Reft became Tribes immediately on the death of Jacob. His proof is a little extraordinary — JFhcn Mofes and Aaron led them into the Wildernefs (fays his Lordfhip) Wf hear of the 'E'LX)k-r?, rf the people, and the Y^vlkks of the congrega- tion \. His affertion is, that the tribal Jcepfe fprung up from the afhes of Jacob ; and his proof, that it arole and fiouriflied in the ■Wildernefs. This is indeed the truth ; it was a Native of that place ; as may be fairly prcfiimed from the occafion which the Ifraelites had of a tribal rule (namely, to fit them for the warfare they were now about to undertake), and as may be fairly proved from the firfl: chapter of the book of Numbers — " And the Lord *' fpake unto Mofes in the wildernefs of Sinai : Take ye the fum *' of all the congregation of the Children of Ifrael, after their *' families, by the houfe of their Fathers — all that are able to go *■'• forth to war in Ifrael \ Thou and Aaron fhall number them \\\x\\ *' their armies. And with you, there shall be a Man of every " tribe ; every one Head of the house of his Fathers — and they *' aflfembled all the congregation ; and they declared their pedi- *' grees, after their families, by the houfe of their Fathers — Thefe " were thofe which were numbered : and the Princes of Isradl " BEING TWELVE MEN, EACH ONE WAS FOR THE HOUSE OF HIS " Fathers. And the Children of Ifrael fliall pitch their tents, •' every man by his own camp, and every man by his own flandard, *' throughout their Hofts — And the Children of Ifrael did according •*' to all the Lord commanded them |." Then follows the order of * Page 323. 'j- Ibid. % Numb. i. 4, 5. 18. 44. ^2. 54. the Sect. 3- OF INIOSES DEMONSTRATED. S; the Tribes ill their tents *. Now, furely, tills detailed accour.t of thtfe tribnl Sceptres hath all the mark of a new Inftitution. The Bifhop's hypothefis therefore is without foundation : the Sceptre was fomething in reverjton. Indeed the particular words, as well as the general nature of Prophefy, declare the fubject: to beef things future. — " And Jacob called to his fons, and faid, Gather '•'■ yourjehes together that I tnay tell you what Jl:all bcfull you in the " LAST DAYS-j-." The Bifhop owns, that mojl of the Interpreters^ from thefe words, take it for granted^ and it is the common votion, that the Sceptre was not to be fettled in fii dab's family till fome ages after the death of Jacob J. I think they had not reafon fo to do. How does his Lordrtiip prove they had ? In this manner. " The obfervation, *' when rightly applied, is right. And if the continuance of the " Sceptre of Judah be, as I fuppofe, the thing foretold, it extends ♦' to the very lafl: days of the Jewifh State ; and in this refpe^fl the "■ interpretation is juftlned § :" /. e. If you will agree that futurity refers to the continuance y and not to the ejiablifjnient of the Sceptre,. his Lordfhip will fliew you, how well he can evade this objedion. But though we were incUned to be thus complalfant, the book of Numbers would not fufter us : which Informs u^ (we fee) that even the tribal Sceptre was eftabliftied long after the death of Jacob. But to go no farther than the Prophefy. If each Tribe had a Sceptre then exifting, how happened it that Judah's is only named, by ivay of CONFIRMATION, as hls Lordflilp will have it. For, by ivay of GRANT, we find Dan too had a Sceptre — Dati shall judge his People as one of the Tribes [or Sceptres] of Ifrael. But then Dan's is a reverjionary Sceptre ; and fuch a one deftroys all his Lordflilp has been eredling. To proceed — The Prophefy (fiiys the Blfliop) is not a grant of a fceptre, but a confirmation. The Prophefy itfelf plainly inti- mates the contrary. Jacob having told his fons that lie would inform them of ivhat fjould befall them in the lafi dnys^ when he * Numb. chap, ii, t Gen, chap, xlix, ver, u X Page 326, § Page 327. come":. 88 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. conies to Judah, he fl^ys, Tb\;, Fcu'/jcr^s Childrenjliall bow downbejore tl'ec*. I'his, if it was any thing, was the promife of a future Sceptre ; and confequeiitly it was the grcvit. The Bifliop goes on — ISloio a conjinnatio'i of tiothh.g is ?iolbing. Without doubt. But lie fuppofes (what i have fliewn to be a miftake), that there was no ^r^«/. If there were a ^r^«/, then the conhrmation of it was the confirmation oi Jometb'mg. He feems to be apprehenfive of fo obvious an anfwer, for he immediately adds — / hio-zv not by what rules of language or grammar thej'e words cajt be conjiriied into a grant of the Sceptre. By the plaineft rule in the world; that of common fen f^ the firft and capital rule in every Art ns well as grammar. For if Jacob made a declaration concerning fome future prerogative, as the words — Thy father'' s Children fiall bozv down bej ore thee — prove he did; and that this was the firil: time that Judah heard of it, as the words — I will tell you what /hall befall you in the lajl days-^'^xovt it was ; What can this Pro- phecy be but the grant of a Sceptre"? '* Though fo many writers and interpreters (fays the Bifliop) " have followed this fenfe, yet I do not remember to have i&tw " one paflage or parallel expreflion from the Scripture or any *' other writer produced to juftify the interpretation." As for any other Writers than thofe of Scripture, I know of none who have prophefied : and the language of prophefy hath peculiarities unknown toother Compofitions. But a Scripture-writer I am able to produce ; and the fame who has recorded this Prophecy of Jacob. — On Abraham's departure out of Haran, he being then fev«nty-five years of age, the Lord^ as Mofes tells ns, appeared unto him andfaid — Unto //^ seed ivill I give this Land-f. Was this now a grant, or a confirmation only of Seed.'' " A confirmation only, fays his Lordfliip : All the grant contained in thefe words is the grant of the land : and this fhews (will he fay) that the Seed was now exifting : for a non-entity is incapable of receiving any grant or donation : befides, a confirmation of nothing is nothing, and * Gen. chap, xlix, ver. S. 4" Chsp. xii. ver. 7. fo Sect.3. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 89 fo ot»." — Notwithftanding all this, it fo happens that Abraham had then no Seed. Here now is zparalld exprejjion, which holds a fortiori. For if it lie a little anomalous to talk of a thing's departing which was never yet in pojfejion^ it feems to be much more abfurd to talk of giving to perfons who were never yet in Being. Befidcs, the promife of Rule aiftually accompanies the promile of its duration: but the- exprefs promife of Seed does not accompany the promife of a pro- vifion for it : I fuppofe the reafon of tliis difference of expreffion in the two places is, becaufe to get a Son is a much commoner cafe than to get a Sceptre. His Lordfliip having thus fliewn, that Judah's Sceptre was a Sceptre in pojjeffion, he will prove next, that it was not a civil, but a tribal Sceptre ; which did not ftretch its fovereignty over a whole nation, but was confined to the oeconomic rule of the fiogle tribe of Judah. — " Another thing fuppofed (fays he) by mofl: interpreters is, *' that the Sceptre, here mentioned, is an emblem of Dominion "over all the tribes of Jacob. But how c?.n that be? Had not *' Jacob fettled zfceptre in every tribe? as is evident, ver. 16. Dan '■'■ JJjii II judge his people as one of the Sceptr,es of IJrnel. Supnofe a " Father has divided his eftate amongfl: twelve Sons, -and fhould " fay of one of them, The F.Jlatc fall not depart fom John, for •' ma/iV ages ; could you poifibly fuppofe him to mean more than " the fare of the Eftate given to John ? Could you underftand him " to mean that all the eftate, the twelve ftiares, fhould come to John " and continue in his fimily ? The cafe is the fame here. Twelve " Princes are created ; Of one of them Jacob fays, the Sceptre fall not '"'■ depart from him until Shiloh come. Is it not plain then, that the " Sceptres are diftinguifhed here; and that it is foretold of one, that " it fhall long outlaft the reft ? — confequently the Sceptre here is an *' emblem of Authority in and over one tribe only*." His Lordlliip's reafoning, on which he grounds his parallel, ftands thus — Judah's fceptre was the fame with Dan's ; now Dan's * Tjgc 3iS, 9. Vol. III. N was po THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. was a tribal Sceptre ; therefore Judah's. But the very words of the Prophecy fhew that the Sceptres vjex&fpecifcally different. Of Dan it is faid, he fliall judge his People as one of the tribes or Sceptres of Israel. Here is a tribal Sceptre marked out in exprefs and proper terms. But of Judah's Sceptre it is faid, Thy Father's Children SHALL Bow down before thee. Whowere thefe Children but the eleven tribes t So that here a civil and zfove- reign Sceptre is as properly and exprefsly marked outfor Judah, as before, z tribal one for Dan. This (hall judge his own tribe; but the other fhall, with his own tribe, judge the reft alfo. And yet if you will rely on his Lordfhlp's Authority, he has a cafe in point % and he affures us " that Judah's grant is the fame as that of a Father's to his Son John, who when he had divided his eftate amongft his twelve Sons fhould fay of John's part, that it fhould not depart for many ages." He tells us next, " that the fenfe of the word Lawgiver will follow the fate of the word Sceptre *." In this, I perfedly agree with him. And therefore as his fenfe of the word Sceptre is found to be erroneous, his fenfe of the word Lawgiver muft fall with it. All that follows has nothing to do with the queftionof a tribal Sceptre till we come to page 344. From thence to 350, he endea- vours to take advantage of the hypothefis, to fhew that this tribal Sceptre never departed from Judah till the coming of Chrift : And here he had an eafy taik. But unluckily confounding ceconomic with: fziv'/Rule, he embaraffes himfelf as much, to make out the com- pletion of the Prophecy, as the fupporters of the other two branches of the common interpretation are wont to do. — As where he talks of the Jews in Babylon ordering all matters relating to their own CIVIL (zW ecclksiastical yJff'airs-f. — Their coming back to their own Country as a People a7id a nation governed by their own laws — though never so free a people as they had been formerly. They lived under fibjeliim to the Perfan Monarchy and under the empire of the Greeks end Romans ;{;. — The Evangelifls fjeiv that they. * Page 3:9. t Page 345- * Page 347- lived Sect.3. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 91- lived under their ov/-ii'Lk\vs,andz-x.'ECVTET) ]VDGmn-^T amongjl tbem- Jelves* — Had the exercifi of ]M'd\c\k-l Authority amon^Jl them' felves-\-. Thus, like the Succeifors of Peter, who enlarged his i?oc/5 into a Citadel, his Lordfhip at lafl: lengthens his tribal Sceptre into a fovereign. But if here he extends it over a People and Nation, he contrails it as much by and by ; and we fee it fhrink up into a mere philofophlcal or Stoical Regality. His Lordlhip undertakes to prove that the Jews were a Free people, from their own con- Icioulnefs of their free condition. — IV hen our Saviour (Hiys the Bifhop) tells the Jews " The truth (hall make you free ;" they reply, " We are Abraham's Children, and were never in bondage to any *' man |." Tins his Lordflilp urges as a proof of their Civil f- ee' dom. But if the Jews, who expefted a carnal Meffiah to lead real armies againfl: their enemies, could fuppofe that Jefus made them an offer of fending Truth in perfon, to execute this commiffion for them, their ftupidity muft have exceeded every thing we have been told of it, by their Enemies. To be plain with liis Lordfhip, tiie fubjedl here debated, between Jefus and his Adverfaries, is moft foreign from his Lordfliip's purpofe. Our blefled Saviour is here addrefling himfelf to the Pharisees, a rank of men not ignorant of the Greek philofophy (though greatly miftaking its ufe when they brought fo much of it into the Law), and therefore, with a Stoical dignity, he tells them — the truth JJmll fct you free. They anfwer him in the fame tone, IVe are Abrahanis Children^ and were never in bondage to any man. That is, " Our principles are of divine extraction, and we never fuffered ourfclves to be inflaved to human decifions." Surely (fays his Lordfliip) they had not forget their captivity in Babylon. Forgot! Why, Jelus had faid nothing to put them in mind of it. The queftion is not about their free- dom from Babylon, but from Error. — Much lefs (fays he) c.uld they be ignorant of the power of the Romans over them at that ii'iie, and yet we fee they account themfelvesfree. And why fhould tlicy not, * Page 349. t rage 350. % Page 349. N 2 when 92 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. when the Queftion between Jefus and them was only who fliould make them lo, He or Abraham. Strange! that his Lordfliip's own account of their civil conciivon under x\\q. power of the Romans iTiould not have brought him to fee, that the fubjedl in hand was only of their vioral Coruiilion. Stranger ftlU ! that his folution of this difficulty ihould not have led him to difcover that it was but imaginary — tbey -ivere free (fa)'s his Lordfhip)yor they lived by their otvn Laics ^ and executed judgment among f themjelves. — Had he added — but, at the precarious nod of an arbitrary Tyrant — it would doubtlefs have given great force to his obfervation : For, about this time, Coponius, a Roman Knight, was named Procurator of Judea. Nay, even the precarious privilege of punifliing capitally was now taken from them : They had a pagan Governor : and Juftice was admi- niflered, not by their own Forms of Law, but by the Roman. An admirable charafter of civil Freedom /- His Lordfhip feems to be no happier in anfwering others objec- tions, than in urging his own proofs. " You will fay (continues- *■' he) why did not Jacob foretell alfo the continuance of the Sceptre *' of Benjamin ? For the tribe of Benjamin run the fame fortune '* with that of Judah : they went together into captivity : they: ''returned home together; and were both in Being when -5'/6//(5>6' " came *." Upon my word, a (hrewd objedion. Let us fee how his Lord- {hips quits his hands of it. His firft anfwer is, — That from the divifon of the Kingdom after the death of Solomon, the tribe of Ben- jamin and the remnant oj Jfrael, that is, part cf all the other tribes^ adh/:red to Judah as their head +• Here his Lordfliip feems fairly to ha,ve given up the Caufe ; his- anfwer proving, in fo many vVords, that Judah'' s Sceptre was not tribal, but civil. Let us examine it ftep by flep. Benjamin and the- remnants of all the other tribes adhered to fud.ih as their head. Now luch an adherence can be no other than an acknowledgement of a- Civil Sceptre in Judah. Yet his Lordfliip gives this as a reafou * I'^ge 3SS. t rage 355, 6. why. SfcT. 3- OF MOSES DloMON ST 11 ATE D. 95 why tlie continuance of Jiulah's Sceptre is foretold, and not Ben- jamin's. Therefore the Sceptre, whofe continuance is foretold, was a civil, not a tribal, Sceptre, even on his own principles. If this needed a fupport, the words of the Prophecy afford it amplv : his Lordfliip fays, that Benjamin and the remnaiits of all the other tribes adhered to "Judah as their head ; and this adherence, Jacob foretells — T'/^y Father's children Jijall vA'Lh down before the. Suppofing therefore that this Sceptre of Judah were of the civil kind, his Lordfhip, it muft be owned, has given a very fcitisfiiilory reafon why Benjamin's tribal fceptre was not mentioned. But if both were tribal Sceptres, the continuance of Benjamin's had as good a claim to the Prophet's notice (for any thing the Bifliop has fliewn to the contrary) as Judah's. Since, as 'Tribes, they both continued to exift, and to exift diftinft. His fecond anfwcr to the Objeftioii feems as little fatisfa6tory as the fir ft — Though the continuance of the Sceptre of Benjamin is not foretold, yet the continuance of the tribe or people of Benjamin /? dflindily foretold*. Would you defn-e a more conclufive argument againft his own notion of a tribal Sceptre? If this prophetic Sceptre of Judah was a civil one, there is a very good reafon why the con- tinuance of the people, and not of the Sceptre of Benjamin, fhould be foretold; becaufe what Judah and Benjamin had in common was their continuing to exift as diftincl tribes; the Scepf e being pecu- liar to the firft : But if a tribal Sceptre be the fubjecl of the Pro- phecy concerning Judah, then no poffible reafon can be affigned. why the co«//««<7«c^ of Benjamin's Sceptre Hiould not be honoured, with the divine notice as well. as Judah's ; fuice his Lordfliip affures. us — they both run the fame fortune ; they went together into captivity ;- they returned together to Judea ; and -were both in being when Shiloh came. And while a Tribe continues diftindl, a tribal Sceptre conti- nues with it ; juft as the head of a family exifts fo long as ti\erc is ;t family to govern. * Page 356. . A-ll! 94 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V, All this confidered, his Lordfhip in my humble opinion had done well not to load himfelf with more than he had occafion to carry : efpecially as he had fo little to anfwer for, in the fuccefs of this hypothelis ; for he tells us at the end of his Dissertation, that he h.u nothing more to add, but to acquaint the reader that the interpretation of JacoVs Prophefy now advanced^ was not a mere invention of his own ; that it was, as to the main point, the fame with that which is the fourth in VivKTivi, and by him rcjeSied, butforjuch re.fons as had been fully obviated in this differtation. — That // was the fame which Junius <?«</ Tremellius, and our own learned Coun- tryman, AiNswORTH, had efpoufed', and which not many years ago •was revived and improved by Mr. Joncourt *. Now, from what hath been faid it appears, that of all the three branches, into which the common interpretation fpreads, though they be equally weak, the laft betrays its weaknefs moft. But, what is of principal confideration, it is, of all the three, leall: luitable to the Dignity of Prophecy ; the whole body of which has a perpetual reference to one or other of the great parts of the Difpenfation of Grace. Now the firft branch refers with fuitable dignity to a whole People at large : the fecond to the fame People under the Government of one certain line : while the third concerns only the fortunes of a fingle Tribe, and under a Family- idea. The common interpretation therefore being fliewn fo very excep- tionable in all its branches, what remains for us to conclude but that the true and real meaning of the Sceptre of Judah is that theocratic Government which God, by the vicegerency of Judges, Kings, and Rulers, exercifed over the Jewifh nation ? We liave {hewn from various confiderations of weight, that this Theo- cracy, which was inftituted by the miniftry of Mofes, continued over that People till the coming of Shiloh or Chrill: ; that Pro- phet like unto' Mofes whom God had promifed to raife up. And to iiipport what hath been urged from reafon, to illuftrate this impor- * Page 358. tant Sect. 3- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 95 tant truth, we have here a Prophetic declaration enouncing the fame thing, — the Jcepti'e Jhcill not depart jrom Judah till Shihh come: Shiloh is Chrift. Now Chrifl: is not the Succeflbr of thofe Vice- gerents of the Jcwifli State, but of God himfelf, the King of the Jews. The Sceptre therefore which defcends to him, through the hands of rhofe vicegerents, is not merely a civil, but a theo- cratic Sceptic. This, at the fame time, explains the Evangelic doftiiue of Christ's Kingdom, arifing out of the Theocracy or Kingdom of God. Hence the diflindion in that famous declaration of Chrift, fo much abufed to factious and party purpofes, that His Kingdom was not of this world: The Theocracy which was adminillered over the Jews only, and in a carnal manner, was a Kingdom cf this uoi'ld: but when transferred to Shiloh, and extended over all mankind,, and adminlflered in a fplritual manner, it became a Kingdom rot of this ••jcorld. And the making the Sceptre cf Judah neither Tribal^ nor merely Civil, but properly Theocratic, clears the Prophefy from thcfe infuperable difficulties which render all the- other interpretations hurtful or dilhonourable to the Prophetic fyflem in general. Thefe are the fuperior advantages of the fenfe I have here endea- voured to eftabiifh. Nor are thefe all the advantages. The Pro- phefy is feen to embrace a much nobler objedl than was imagined. It was fuppofed to relate only to the fortunes of the Jewi/Jj Occc~ nomy, and wo find it extends itfelf to the u^hole Difpenfation of Grace. It was confidered but as a fimple Prophecy, while it had the dignity of a Revelation. It was miflaken fov the fpecies, when it is indeed, of the genus. But to all this an Anfwerer may reply, i. " That, as we admit the Theocracy to be a Kitigdom of this World, the fame objection will lie as well againft the continuance or duration oi ^Theocratic Sceptre as of a mere Civil one." l]ut here we muft diftingulfh. The Theocracy was Indeed carnal in its adniinJJlraiion, but in its original it was Divine. Therefore, as where the fubje£t is of the continuance of a mere civil Sceptre, we cainiot but underfland the continuartce of its~ 96 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. its admini/lration, becaufe the adminiflratiou is' infeparable from tiie exlftence ; fo where the fubjeft is of the contuiuance of a Theo- cratic Sceptre, we muft underftand that contuiuance to confifl: In Its remaining unrevoked, fmce what Is of divine original exifts, inde- pendently of its being adually adminlftered ; it exifls till it be formally abrogated. This difference is evident from the nature of things. Forms of Government ordained by Men ceafe when Men no longer admlnlfter them; becaufe, in the nonadminlftratlon of them, they are naturally fuppofed to revoke what they had ordained : But men's ceafing to admlniller (whether by choice or force) a Form of Government given by God, does not (on any rules of logic or ideas of nature) imply God's revocation of that form of Govern- ment. Again, we muifl remember what has been fald of tlie efFefl: and confequence of a Theocracy. It not only imited, but incorporated the two Societies, civil and religious, into One. And this incor- porated body of the Jewlfh State went by the name of the Law. Now under that part of the Law which more intimately regarded Religion, the Jews always lived free till the publication of the Gofpel ; though the other part of it, regarding the foverelgn adml- niftratlon of civil policy and juftlce, they had loft from the time of Pompey. For a power precarioufly enjoyed, and ready to be aboliflied at the nod of a Conqueror, can never be called Sovereign (which Implies the being free and independant) w^lthout the worft abufe of words, which is, the quibbling upon them. So that a Sovereignty in this Theocracy was flill adminlftered to the laft, though in part. However this partial exerclfe was confentanecus to the Syftem on which this Theocracy was difpenfed ; its Admiiiiftra- tlon being ordained to have a gradual decline. The Jews, for their traufgreflions, being firlt of all deprived of that natural effe61: of Tlieocratlc rule, the extraordinary providence : and then, for their incorrigible''manners, further puniflied by an Infringement of their civil foverelgnty : but ftill the Theocracy, as to that more eftential, thfi Religious part, remained unhurt till the coming of Chrift : ^ And Sect. 3- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. i)-j And let it be obferved, that it was this part in particuhir which was to be affigned over to him, from the Father. Thus, as I faid before, this is not fo properly a prediclion of human events, as a revelation concerning the courfe of God's Difpenfation. 2. Secondly, it hath been obje£led that " according to the fenfe here put upon the Sceptre, it fliould have been faid — the Sceptre Jl.hill not depart from Jehovak inftcad of Judaii." But fuch Objeftors do not advert, that the Theocracy was adminiftercd by Vicegerents of JuDAH. And this likewifc will account for tlie expreffion of a Luzv- giver between his feet. 3. Laflly, it may be faid, " That by this interpretation of the Sceptre of fudah we deprive the Prophecy of one principal part of tlie information it was fiippofed to give, namely, the time of Chrift's advent, which the common interpretation is luppofed to fix exaclly." To this I anfwer, that Religion loles nothing by this change, fuice there are fo many other Prophecies which point out the time with infinitely more precifion. Oji the other hand, Reli- gion gahis much by it, in evading a number of o'ojedions, which had fligmatized the fuppolcd Predi^liou with apparent marks of falfliood. Thus we fee tiiis noble Prophecy, concerning the transfer of the Kingdom of God, to Christ, contains a matter of much greater dignity in itfelf, and of much greater moment for the fup- port of Christianity, than could arife from the perplexed queAion about the reign of tlie Afmonsan Princes, or the Continuance of the power of life and death amongft a tributary People. For, in predifting the Abolition of the Low, it fupplies us with a new and excellent Argument for the Converfion of the Jewifli People, fatally perfuaded of its eternal obligation. The Reafons of my being fo particular concerning the duration of the Theocracy are various, and will be feen as occafion offers. Only the reader may here take notice, that it was necefliiry for the prefent purpofe, to fhew its continuance throughout the whole duration of the Republic, in order to vindicate the juftice of Vol. 111. O thofe 98 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. thofe Laws all along in force, for the punifhment of idolatrous Worfhip. SECT. IV. '^"^HUS far as to the nature and duration of the Mofaic Re- JL public. Let us now fee what peculiar consequences neceffarlly attended the admin iftratlon of a theocratic form of Government. One necefl'ary confequence was an extraordinary Provi- dence. For the affairs of a People under a Theocracy, being admlnlftered by God as King ; and his peculiar and Immediate adml- nlftratlon of human affairs being what we call an extraordinary Pro- vidence ; It follows that an extraordinary Providence mufl needs be exerclfed over fuch a People. My meaning Is, that if the Jews were indeed under a Theocracy, they were indeed under an extra- ordinary Providence : And if a Theocracy was only pretended, yet an extraordinary Providence mufl neceflarlly be pretended likewife. In a word, they muft be either both true or both fall'e, but fllll infeparable, in reality or Idea. Nor does this at all contradidl (as was fuggefted by Doftor Sykes even after he had feen his fug- geflion confLited) what 1 obferve concerning the gradual decay and total extlndion of the extraordinary Providence, while the Theo- cracy yet exifted. For when I fay an extraordinary Providence was ofie necejf.uy confequence of a Theocracy, I can only mean that It was foin Its original conflltutlon, and In the order and nature of things : not that in this, which was matter of compa£l, the contravening a£ts of one Party might not make a feparation. For, as this extra- ordinary Providence was (befides Its being a mode of adminlftration arlfing out of a Theocracy) a reward for obedience. It became liable to forfeiture by difobedience, though fubjedlon to the Government fllU continued. I beg leave to illuflrate this pofition both by a foreign and a domeftlc Inffance. The ^raril In the Roman State were fuch who, for their crimes, were deprived of the Sect. 4- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 99 the right of Citizens : Yet thefe delinquents were obliged to pay the public taxes. At home, a voice in the fupreme Council of the kingdom is the neceflary confequence of an Englilli Barony ; yet they may be feparated by a judicial Sentence; and adually have been fo feparated ; as we may fee in the two famous cafes of Lord Verulam, and the Earl of Middlefex, in the reign of James the PirlT: ; who were both deprived of their feats in the Houfe of Lords, and yet held their Baronies, with all the other rights pertaining to them. Thus a puniHiment of this kind was inflicted on the rebellious Ifraelites : they were deprived of the extraordinary Providence : and were yet held fubjedl to the Theocracy^ as appears from the Sentence pronounced upon them, by the mouth of the Prophet Ezekiel : — " Ye polluted yourfelves with your idols even unto this day : and *' (hall I be enquired of by you, O houfe of IJrael? As I live, faith *' the Lord God, I will not be enquired of by you. And that which *' Cometh into your mindjhall not be at all, that ye fay. We will be as the *' Heathen^ as the Families of the Countries toferve IVood and Stone. *' As 1 live, faith the Lord, with a mighty Hand, and with a Jlr etched *• out Arm, and with Fury poured out, will I rule over you. And I ** will bring you out from the People, and will gather you out of tht *' Countries wherein ye are fcattered, with a mighty Hand, and with a *' flretched out Arm, and with Fury poured out. And I will •' bring you into the Wildernefs of the People, and there will I *' plead with you Face to Face. Like as I pleaded with your Fathers *' in the Wildernefs of the Land of Egypt, ib will I plead with you, *' faith the Lord. And I will cauje you to pa fs under the Rod. And / *' will bring you into the Bond of the Covenant." Chap. xx. ver. 31 — 27' ^^'^^ here we fee denounced, that the extraordinary Providence (hould be withdrawn; or, in Scripture phrafe, that God would not be enquired of by them ; That they fhould remain in this condition, which their Fathers had occafionally felt in the wildernefs, when the extraordinary Providence, for their fignal dlfobedlence, was, from time to time, fufpended : And yet, that, though they flrove to dlfperfe themfelves amongft the People round about, and O 2 projedcd loo THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. projefted in their minds to he as the heathen, a7id the families of the Countries to ferve wood andjlone, they fliould ftill be under the go- vernment of a Theocracy ; Which, when adminlftered without an extraordinary Providence, the blefling, naturally attendant ca it, was, and was juftly called, the Rod and Bond of the Covenant. Bnt now if you will believe a Profeffor of Divinity and a no lefs eminent dealer in Laws, the cafe grows worfe and worfe, and, from a contradidion in my fyftem, it becomes a contradiclion in God's. For thus Dr. Rutherforth defcants upon the matter : " As the *' Law was gradually deprived of its Sandion, the Obligation of it '• grew continually weaker, till at laft, after the people were re- " turned from the Captivity, it muft have ceafed to oblige them at " all. For whatever maybe the cafe of God's moral Law, yet " moft certainly, as he withdraws the Sandtions of his POSiTlva " ones, he takes off fomething from their obligation ; and when he *' has wholly withdrawn the promife of reward and the threatening " of punifhment, those Laws oblige no longer*." To thia Determination of the learned Profeffor, concerning Obligation, I have nothing to oppofe but the Determination oi Gon himfelf: who^ by the mouth of one of his Prophets, declares, That the Laws fiall Jiill oblige, though the SanSlion be withdrawn. " Ye pollute *' yourfelves with your Idols, &c." — as the reader may find it tranfcribed juft above. Here God declares he would withdraw that extraordinary Providence which naturally attended a Theo- cracy— I will not be enquired of by you. " Yet do not (fays he)- deceive yourfelves in an expectation that, becaufe for your crimes 1 withdraw this fandtion of my Law, the Law will oblige no longer, — and that which comet b into your mindfl^all not be at all, that ye fay we will be as the heathen : For, in order to the bringing about my own great purpofes, I will ftill continue you a feledl and fequtftered people — I will bring you out from the people^ and will gather you out from the Countries wherein you arejcattered. And will ftill rule ovev * Page 329. you Sect.4-. of MOSES DEMON 3TRx\TED. loi you by my Law; now, in my wrath, as before in my mercy. JVltb fury poured out I 'will rule over you, and bring you into the bond of the Covenant. I luppofe the thing that led our Dodo r into tills rafli judgment. That when the fanclions of a pojitive law are ifithdraicn, the obligalion to the law cecfes, was his totally mifunderftandlng the principles of the beft writers on the Law of Nature : Not by their fault, 1 dare aflTure the Reader. — 'The Law of' Nature is written In the heart ; but by Whom, is the queftlon. And a qucflion of much importance^ for if not written by a competent Obliger It Is no Law, to bind us. The enquirers therefore into this matter had no other way of coming to the Author of the Law but by confidering the efFedls which the obfervance or inobfervance of it would have on mankind. And they found that the obfervance tended to the benefit of all, the inob- fervance to their deftrutflion. They concluded therefore that it muft needs have been given by God,, as a Law to mankind ; and thefe effecfls of its obfervance or inobfervance they called the fanSlion. Hence it appears that the knowledge of our obligation to the Law of nature arifes from the knowledge of ihcfandiion. And, this fandtioii away, we had not been obliged, becaufe we could never have dif-^ covered any real ground of obligation. But the pofilive Law of the Jews was written in flone by the finger of God, in a vilible manner; in which the lenfes of the People were appealed to, for the truth of the tranfadion. Here th?^ knowledge of their obligation did not arife from their knowledge of the fandion, but from quite another thing, namely, the immediate knowledge they had by their fenfes^ that God, their foverelgn Lord and Mafler, gave them the Law. To inforce which, a Janilion in- deed was added ; but a fandlon that added nothing to the obliga- tion, nor confequently that took from it, when it was withdrawn. Tills is a plain and clear flate of the cafe. Yet fo miferably has our Profellbr miftaken It, that for want of feeing on what principle it was which the writers on the Law of Nature proceeded, when- they fuppofed obligation to depend on the fmSlion, he hath, of a parti- cular 103 THE DIVIxNE LEGATION Book V. cular cafe, made a general maxim : and in applying that maxim, he hath turned every thing topfy turvy, and given us jufl the reverfc of the medal. He fuppofes the taking the lanclion from the moral Law might not deftroy the obligation (which it certainly would) ivhatfoeveri fays he, might be the caiife of God's moral Laws; and that taking away the fanilion from his pofitive Law would deftroy the obligation (which it certainly would not). \yhat might further miflead our Profeflbr (for the more fuch men read the lefs they underftand) is the attribute the Roman Lawyers give to fuch civil Laws as are made without a penal fanftion. Thefe they are wont to call. Leges imperfeSice : And our great Civilian mioht believe that this alfigned imperfccllon had a reference to the obligation they impofed, whereas it refers to the efficacy they were able to work. He fhould have known at leaft this firft principle of Law, That it is the Authority of the Lawgiver, not the.SANCTioN he annexes to his Law, which makes it, I will not fay, operate properly (for this is nothing to the purpofe), but inakes it oblige really, which is only to the purpofe. In a word, I know of nobody but HoBBES, befides this Doftor, who pretended to teach that the obligation to Laws depended upon their JanBion : and this he did, becaufe he derived all right and wrong from the Civil Magiftrate : which, for aught I know, our learned Profeffor may do likewife, as only miftaking right and wrong (by a blunder like to the fore- going) fov good zud evil. Yet hath this grave man written mod enormoufly both on Laws and Morals : And is indeed a great Wri- ter, juil: as the mighty Giant, Leon Gawer, was a great Builder ; of whom the Monk of Chefter fo fweetly fmgs : *' The Founder of this City, as faith Polychronicon, *' Was Leon Gawer, a mighty ftrong Giant, *' Which builded Caves and Dungeons many aone : *' No goodly Building, ne proper, ne pleafant." But our bufuiefs at prefent is not with the a£tual adminiftration ,of an extraordinary Providence, but with the Scripture reprefenta- .tion of fuch an adminiftration. And this the facred hiftoryof the Jews Sect.4. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 103 Jews attefts in one uniform unvaried manner; as well by re- cording many inftances of it in particular, as by conflantly referring to it in general. I. The firft is in the Hiftory of Miracles. For an equal Provi- dence being, by the nature of man's fituation and affairs, neceflhrily admlniftered partly by ordinary and partly by extraordinary means, thefe latter produce what we call Miracles, the fubjeft of the facred Writers their more peculiar regard. But I apprehend it would be thought prefuming too much on the reader's patience, to expedl his attention, while I fet myfelf formally to prove that many mirncks are related in the facred hiflory of the Ifraelites. The limpler fort of Deifts fairly confefs that the Bible records the working of many Miracles, as appears even from the free names they give to thofe accounts. But there are refiners in Infidelity, fuch as Spinoza and his mimic Toland; who acknowledge many of the fa6ls recorded, but deny them to have been miraculous. Thefe are to our purpofe, and an Appeal to the commou fenfe of Mankind is a fuificient anfvver to them all. And furely I fhould have done no more, had they not attempted to draw in to their Party mucli ■- honefler men than themfelvcs. For fuch, therefore, even charity requires us to attempt fome kind of defenfe. The infamous Spinoza would perfuade us that Josephus hlmlelf was as backward in the belief of Miracles as any modern Pagan whatfoever. The handle, for his calumny, is * that Writer's re- lation * — Scriptnra de natura in genere quibufdam in locis affirmat cam fixam atqiie im- inucabilem ordiiicm fervare. — Philofophus prxtcrea in fiio Ecct. clariffime docet nihil novi in natura contingere.-=— Hxc igitur in Sciiptura exprcfle docentur, at nullibi, quod in natura aliquid contingat, -quod ipfius legibus repugiict, aut quod ex iis nequcat fcqui, adeoque neqiie etiam Scripture affingendum. — Ex quibiis evidcntiiTime fequitiir mirnciiht res naturales fuifle. — Attamcn — de iiis uniciiique, proiit fibi melius efle lentiet, ad Dei cultuin & religionem integro animo fufcipicndum, libcrum eft exiftimare. Quod etiam Josephus sentit ; fic cnim in conchifione /. i. .4niiij. fcribit, KuHus vera diJcrcJat verba mlrac-tli^ Jl antiquh hotninihus, i£ malitla privatls i<ia faliitistiijuet per mare fafla, Jive voluntati Dei, five fponie revelata : dum & cis, q\ii cum Alexandre rege Macedoniie fuerunt oliin, & ;.n. IO+ T HE DIVINE L E G A T J O N Book V. lation of the y^<^(\^^ of xht Red-fea % which he compares to Alex- ander's through the Pampbylian, and which concludes with faying that every Mafi may believe of it as }?c pleafes. No unufual way with this Hiftorian of introducing or ending a miraculous Adventure. Tliis hath indeed fo lihertine an air, that it hath betrayed fome Be- lievers into the fame falfe judgment concerning Jofephus ; as if he afforded only a political or philofophical belief to thefe things ; and gave a latitude to ihofc oj Jjis own Religion ^ t? think as they flipuld lee CHulc. But here lies the difficulty ; the Hiftorian is every now and then putting on a very different afpect, and talking like ji mod determined Believer. Many are the places where he expreffes ithe fulled: ^nd firmeft affent to the Divinity of the A/c/^w Religion, and to the Truth of the facred Voluixes. To mention only one or two, from a Book fo known, and in a point fo notorious. The following words of his .Introdudlion (where he cannot poffibly be confidered as a tranflator, or relator only of what he found in the facred books, from which he compofed his hiftory) thefe, .1 fay, fliew in how dif- ferent a light he regarded Mofes from all other Lawgivers : " And *' DOW I earneftly intreat all who take thefe Volumes in hand, to *' apply themfelves with their whole faculties to thecootemplatiou *' of the Divine Nature, and then turn to our Lawgiver, and fee *' whether he has not made a reprefentation of .that Nature entirely *' worthy of it ; always affigning fuch Aiflions to GoD, as beqom,e ** his excellence, and preferving the high fubjedl clear from anyim- " pure mixture of Fable. Though if we confider the diftance and *' antiquity of the Time he wrote in, we cannot but underftand he ** was at full liberty to invent and falfify at pleafure. For he lived *' full two thoufand years ago. — A diflajice of Time to which even & antiquitus a refiftentibus Painphylicum mare divifum fit, & cum aliud iter non eflet, tranfitum prahult its, i-olcnte Deo, per eum Pcrfarum tlejlrucre prinatatum ; i^ hoc corifitauur onines, qui oHhs AkxanAri JcripJ'crunt; DE His itaque, sicUT PLACUERIT cvii<1EEt, EX- UTiMET, Hxc funt verba Jofephi, ejufque de fide >iiK.ACVtORUM judicium. Traia. Theologico-Pol. C. vi. de Miraculis, p. Si, 82. " the Sect.4. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 105 *' the Poets dared not to carry up the birth of their Gods, the adlions " of their Heroes, or the eflabliihment of their Laws *." Here, we lee, the Hiftoriaii exprefsly declares that Moses in his writings em- ployed no degree ofJiSlion, fo common in the pradlice of other ancient Lawgivers. And how truly divine he fuppofed the Lav/, appears from hi^ obferving, in the fame place, that, while the Jews religioufly ob- ferved its Precepts, all things went well and profperoufly ; but that, whenever they tranfgrefled, then nothing but difafters followed. And left any one Ihould pretend, he meant no more than that na- tional happinefs was the natural confequence of adhering to the Laws of their Country ; or that thofe Laws, being founded on Jufi: and Right, God (whofe general Providence it is agreed he acknowledged) would reward the virtuous obfervers, whatever were the original of fuch Laws ; left, I fay, this Ihould be pretended, he adds, that thcfe difafters followed whenever they tranfgrefled the Law, though in purfultof things juft and good. His words are thefe : " Upon the *' whole, what the Reader of this Hiftory may chiefly learn from *' it is this : That thofe who obfeauiouflv ftudv the Will of God, *' and reverence his well eftabliftied Laws, pafs their lives in incre- ** dible profperity ; Happinels, the reward from God, ever attend- *' ing their obedience. But in proportion to their negledt of thefe ** Laws, eafy things become unfurmountable, and all their under- *' takings, how jujUy foever direSted, end in incurable calamities f." In which words, 1 take it for granted, he had the cafe of Sattl par- • 'hJ>) toIhv Tfcj i'>l!i.|'o(if>a; toi; 3i?;.i»ij crajaxaXi Tai» yflifj.-rf ©ef Tr|<wa»f';t"-> *& ^^xiuK^di Tr.r r.fihi^in NoftoQiTnK, 11 Tijy Ti ptViv (xiiZ u^ioii xctiitintri, xj Ti; iujijj.ei ■afmiya.q an Ta; raigafei,- i6»li9i|Ki, ■airni x«9afi» To» wtfi airS ^v^^a^af Xiyov tSj w«{' a^Xoi? aJajjUftov©' fiuBoXoyiaj' KaiToiJi, eVoy tjri ju^xii Xf''^ "•» waAaioTiili, roc>.Xr,» 'X"' "■^"^' 4''"*^' z^'KacrfiaTuv, yiyoir; ya^ xs^o ituii •io-;^iXi'iiii», — lip 03-ov ■cX^Q'©' uluto; a/ ai/Xi'* oi sroK^lai Tat yiviVfii ri'v 0iSv, f*>;Tiyi T»s Ti!* xiSfiiz-as ■z^*^it(, 1 Ttii tiftai omivifxiTi IroXfiwTKV, Vol. i. p. 3, 4. •f To Qvio>.oi it ftaXira ti; «v Ik rairr,; (x»9ot t^j irf^ia;, iif^iirai xiiTr.t Ji;\'e7», on fj-lt Tom; ©f3 yvuixri HolaKoKtt^ So" tf K^ Ta JcaXaf; tOfit.o9ili^tvlx fm TcX^oro't «ragao«if!tv, t0«r1* KstT-^ovrati tss^ci irircft'>. K^ yi^af iuJ«if*o>(as wjoKiiiai crafi 0iS' naQ' oVo» J' at aTorv(rt tSj Taruv axsto5i iTifitXtiaft a«-o{« (xi» yi'»i1ai Ta iu»fi(ia, TfiVnat J' it$ Qvft,(pofui ifniciVfj, o,Tt wot' i>, »■> iyaSoi oja* riraixs-ag-iv. Vol. i. p. 3, .}. Vol. III. P ticularlv. io6 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. ticularly in his view. Again, fo full was his perfuafion of the Di- vinity of the Law, that he extols the Jews for fuffering Ptolemy, the Ton of Lagiis, to take their City by ftorm on the feventh day, rather than violate the Sabbatic reft. Agatharchides (fays he) thlnh this fcruple iicorthy of contempt and laughter. But thofe wha weigh it without prejudice, will fee fowething truly great, and defernjing of the bighefl commendations, in thus ahvays preferring their Piety towards God, ajid adherence to his Law, before their own ffety, or even the freedom of their Country *. Thefe paflages, we fee, have all the marks of a very zealous Be- liever. And what makes the greateft difficulty of all, is, that the very places in which the Hiftorian ufes fuch ofFenfive latitude of ex- preffion are thofe where he employs his utmoft endeavours to fhew the real Divinity of his Religion ; of which thefe Miracles are pro- duced as evidence ; an evidence he iludioufly feeks, and feems to-; dwell upon with pleafure. This varying afpeft, therefore, fo indifferently affumed, creates- all the embarafs. But would men only do in this cafe what they ought 10 do in all, when they pafs their judgment on an ancient writing, that is, confider the Knd, and Time, and Genius of the Writer, together with the Charader of thofe to whom the work is' addrefied ; they would find Jofphus to be indeed a fteady Follower of the Law, and a firm Believer of its miraculous ^UzhXiihinenti and, at the fame time, difcover the eafy folution of all thofe- untoward appearances which have brought his Religion intoi (jueftion. The cafe, with our Hiftorian,. ftood thus : His Country was now in great diftrefs ; its Conftitution overturned, and his Brethren in. apparent danger of utter Extirpation ; calamities arifing as much from the ill-will which the Heathens had entertained of their Reli- gion i- for its unfociable nature, as for their own turbulent and re- •ii) tf^o]iuuctt. Vol, if. p. 45 8* ■f- See no.te [1], at the end of this Book. belHous- Sect.4. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 107 bell'ious Carriage. This ill-will had been much increafed by their fuperlor Averfiou to Chrijliimity, confidered by them as a Se£l o^ Ju- daijhi; which had carried its infociability as far, and its pretenfions much farther : fo flir as to infift on the neceflity of all Mens fubmitting to its dominion, and renouncing their own Country Religions as the Impoftures of Politicians, or the Inventions of evil Demons. This put the Heathen world into a flame, and produced thofc mad and wicked Perfecutions that attended the firlT: Propagation of the Chri/iiJii Faith*. Such was the unfriendly flate of things, whtn Jofcphus undertook an Apology for his Nation, in the History of its An- tiquities. Now as their conquerors' averfion to them, arofe from the fuppofitlon that their Religion required the belief and obedience of all Mankind (for they had, as we obferved, confounded '^judaijia with Chr'ifiiafiity), to wipe off this invidious Imputation, we mull conclude, would be ever in the Author's thoughts. So that when the courfe of h'S Hiflory leads him to fpeak of the effects of God's extraordinary Providence in his conduct of this People, he fome- times adds to his relation of a miraculous adventure, but in this every Man may believe as he pleafes. A declaration merely to this effedl : " The yewijh Religion was given by God for the ufe of his chofen *' People, therefore the Gentiles might believe as they pleafed. The ** Jcivs did not pretend they fhould leave their own Country " Religion to embrace theirs f : That in this they were different *' from the Chrijlian Se£l, which required all Mankind to follow " the Faith of a crucified Saviour under pain of total deftrudllon \, " But that yet they were not fo unhofpitable, but that they received " with open arms all who were willing to worlhip one God the *' Creator of the Unlverfe §." Thus \Sfc fee how It canie to pafs (which was the main difficulty), that the places where he gives * See the firft vohimc, book I. ■J- See note [K], at the end of this T^ook, I Sec note [L], at the end of this Book. § '~"^ tSto /*o»o» iivai xe»Dr, it Sa^itrut, ogoj aCio;>t^ -r^xfil A»i^v~it;, !i^.»i«Mi'>ot{ ;.; Xtf- i.«J» aeSsi? Ttv ©i5». Vol. i. I>. 536. P 2 fuch loB THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. fuch a Intltude of Belief, are thofe very places where he moft labours to prove the Divinity of his Religion. But this folution clears up all difficulties, and (hews the HiftorianV great confiftency, as well as artful addrefs, throughout the whole work. Jofcphus profeflcs the moft awful regard to the facred Vo- lumes ; and yet, at the fame time, takes fuch liberties of going from their authority, that it provoked the honefl refentment of a late ex- cellent Writer* to the following afperities : " Nee levis fit fufpicio '^' ilium Hebraice non fcivifle, cum multis indiciis linguae ejus im- " peritiam prodat. Quivis certe, cui vel mica falls eft, fentiat ilium *' Hiftorias Sacras pro arbitrio interpolafl'e, demendo, addendo, im- *' mutando, ut Antiquitates fuas ad Letlorum Graecorum & Roma- " norum palatum accommodaret." But this licenfe, though furely to be condemned, was however fomething more legitimate and fober than is generally fuppofed ; his deviation from Scripture being in thofe places only, where an exa6): adherence to it would have increafed that general averfion to his Nation, whofe effefts were at that time fo much to be dreaded, either as expofing \ht ferverfe nature of the People, or the twjoclahle genius of their Religion. To give an inftance or two of each : I. The murmuring oi. x\\Q Ifraelites, for bread zndi JleJIj in the Wil- dernefs, is reprefented In Scripture, and juftly f, as an adt of horrid: ingratitude towards- God. Yet Jofephus makes Mofcs own they had realbn for their complaints ;|;. And isi the execrable behaviour of the Alen oiGibeah to the Levite and his wife, though Scripture exprefsly fays they attempted a more unnatural crime than adultery, yet the Hiftorian pafies this over in filence, and makes all the perfonal out- rage attempted, as well as committed, to be offered to the woman §. The Reader will now eafily account for v.hat Mr. WhiJIon could not,. his Author's omlfllon of the ftory of the golden Calf\\. For this was * Bifliop Hare. f Exod. xvi, J, tjaOnv J' an a?.oj.(ii; ai/Tt;; ^^a. tr,-i amUw 73to fOjwiTaj. Antiq- JuJ. I. iii. C, I . § ^,. § j4,:t. Jucl. ]. V. c. 2. § 8. II See note [M], at the end of this Book. Sect. 4. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 109 lb amazing a perverfity, at that juinflure, that it mufl: have made the very Pagans themfelves afliamed ot their JewiJJj brethren in idolatry. 2, Again, we are told in Scripture, that when the Cutheans, or Satnaritans, heard that the Jews, who were returned from the Captivity, were rebuilding the Temple, they came and defwed to be partners in the work, and joint Worfhippers of the God for whom it was ereded ; to which the Jeivs gave this round reply . Tou have nothing to do with us, to build an Hoiife unto our God, hut ive ourfehes together will build unto the Lord God of Ifrael, as King Cyrus the King of Perfia hath commanded us*. And Nebemiah, on the fame occafion, gave them a ftill rougher anfwcr : Ihe God of Heaven he will frofper us, therefore we his Servants icill arife and build: but you have no Portion, nor Right, nor Alemorial in JerviiA- lem -t". This was a tender place : it was touching upon the very fore, in an exprefs declaration of the Unfociablcnejs complained of. The ftory therefore, we may be fure, was to be foftened before the Gentiles were to be intruded with it. Accordingly, Jofephus makes them fpeak in thefe obliging terms: That they could not poflbly admit them as partners in the work ; for that the command to build the 'Temple li'as direcled to them frjl by Cyrus, and now by Darius : That indeed they "were at liberty to worf.vp along with them : and that this was the only Co/ninunity, in religious matters, that they coidd enter into with' them, and which they would do with as many of the ref of Mankind^ as 'were willing to come up to the Tefuple to adore the God of Heaven t. The reafon the Scripture Jews give for the refufal of the offer to be joint partners with them in their work and worfliip is, that it was a Temple built in the Land rf Ifrael, and to the honour of the God of Ifrael. The reafon Jofephus''s Jews give for their refufal is obe- * Ezra iv. 3, + Neh. ii 20. Tor >ac')tSf>Tij:o* ftin iro Kil^B, ni i\ ijjro Aapia" 'a^oivt.viui ^\ auTorj eflicrjii. xat tSto [A-tiot ti'jai xotv^y, i» ■ fii\wv.if wfc; cu/Tu; Kj ■srHjn a.t9,^inioi;, ifmmniioii 11; to I'ffiv cr:?fi> To» ©fo'ir. Vol. i. p, 556. dience I JO THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. dience to the King of Perfia : elfe, as for community of woifliip, tliey were very ready to receive them. And now was not that a wife * projecl which propofed reforming the facred T'ext by the Writings of Jofephus f But tliis Explanation will enable us to conclude with certainty noainll that Jpuriom paflage -concerning Christ. I think I have already offered one demonftrative argument againft it -)-• And I fuppofe, tlie many marks of forgery are fo glaring, that moft men would be willing to give it up, were "'jojephus' s iilence on fo extra- ordinary an occafion but eafy to be accounted for. Now we have fo far laid open his conduft as to fee, that the preaching up of Christ was an atTixir he would itudioufly decline. His great point, as we obferved, was to reconcile the Gentiles to his Countrymen, But the Pagan averfion was greatly increafed by the new Se6l of Chr'if- tia7is, fprung, as was well known, from the Country of Judea. It was therefore utterly deftrudlive of his purpofe to fliew, as he mufl: have done, in giving them an account of Christ, the clofe connexion between the two Religions. Of all dangerous fubjedls, therefore, Jofephiis would be careful to avoid this J- So that (cer- tain as 1 am of the Writer's purpofe, and not Ignorant of the liberty he took with the facred Records, when it ferved his ends, of adding and omitting at pleafure) I ftiould have been as much furprifed to liave found the H'ljlory oi Jesus in his Works as others are to be told that it is not there. This too will equally well account for his omiflion of Herod's flaughter of the Children at Bethlehem, which Scaliger fo much wondered at § ; which Collins fo much * Mr. Whiilon's. " + See vol. i. \, " La plus forte preuve qii'on ait, pour foutenir que Ic paffage en queflioii, oil il eft parle de Jesus Chiist, eft dajofeph, c'eft qu'il n'eft pas croyable, qu'il n'ait rien dit de Jesus Christ. Photius fournit une reponfe a ce raifonnement, en parlant de Jujlc dc Tibcriile, qui a ecrit I'Hiftoire des Juifs en Grec, et qui vivoit du tems de loleph, avec qui il a eu de grands dcmelez. Jufte de Tiberide, dit Photius n'a point parle de Jesus Christ parce qu'il etoit Juil" de Nation et de Religion." P.Simon, Bibl. Crit. V. II. p. 41. ^ Animad. in Chron, Eufebii. triumphed S-ECT. 4« OF MOSES DEMONSl'R ATE D. m triumphed in*; and for the fake of wliich, our Whitby fecmcd ready to give vip the truth of the fl:ory -j-. Thus did this excellent Writer out of extreme love to his Country (the moft pardonable however of all human frailties) make too free with Truth and Scripture; though mofl: zealoufly attached to the Religion of his Forefathers : as thofe Men generally arc who love their Country beft. And a Jew he ftricflly was, of a very different Stamp too, from that poor paltry Mimic of the Greek Sophifts, Philo \. Of whom his Mafter Plato ivoidd have /aid, what Jo- fephus tells us Arljiotle did fay, of one of his Jcwijld Acquaintance, A Greek he was, and not in speech only, but in Soul- LIKEWISE §. I judged it of importance to fet this matter in a true light : Becaufe many, I fuppoCed, would think it a fair prejudice againft the Divinity of the Mojhic Religion, had a perfon fo eminent amongfl: his Countrymen while the Republic was yet exifting, and of fo learned an age ; fo converfant in the JcwiJJo Records, and fo fklllcd in the bed Grecian Literature ; had fuch a one afforded only a political or philofophic Faith to tiie facred Volumes. But then it will follow on the other hand, that the fuicere Belief of one, {o circumflanced, will be as fair a prejudice in its favour. Not that I am over fond of this kind of evidence, in matters where every one is obliged to judge for himfelf; and confequently,. where every one, on a due application to the fubjedl, is capable of judging. Much lefs would I lay great weiglit on the opinions ot Men out of theii: own Profeflion, however eminent in any other. What is it to Truth, for inftance, what a Courtier judges of a Church ; a Politician of Confcience ; or a Geometer, grown grey in DemonJlraUon, of moral Evidence f To go on : * Scheme of literal Prophecy confidered. f Comment on the New Teftament, J Phila, in his life of Mo/a, brings in the Egyptian Priefts rcafoning on the Platonrr principliis, concerning the foul that informed Mojes's body ; which is altogether as weiK judged, as if a modern Writer of the Life oi Ptoh-my the AUrononier flioiild bring hiiiir in explaining Sir Ifaac Neivton^s Prhtcipia. Miracles,, 112 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Miracles, therefore, as they are recorded to be continued through {o hirge a period of this RepubUc, I give for one proof that the Scriptures have reprefented the Ifraelites as Uving under an extraordinary Providence. I iay, as they are recorded to be fo cow// • fiued: For when miracles are only given at the firfl propagation of a Rellgicn (as of the Chriftian), they are to be no otherwife efteemed of, than as the Credentials of a new Revelation : Thefe being like the Cloud which conducted the Ifraelites in their journeyings in the wildernefs ; the other like the fame Cloud which abode upon the Mercy-feat: Thefe like the Manna rained down from heaven only for a prefent fubfiftence ; the other like the fame Manna preferved uncorrupted in the Ark, to be a teftimony to future ages.' II. This extraordinary Providence is reprefented as adminiftered ; I. Over the State in general. 2. Over private Men in particular. And fuch a reprefentatio'.i we fhould expedl to find from the nature of the Republic ; becaufe, as an extraordinary Providence over the STATE neceflarily follows God's being their tutelary Deity ; fo an extraordinary Providence to particulars follows as neceflarily from his being their supreme Magistrate *. As to this Providence over the State, it would be abfurd to quote particular texts, when the whole Bible is one continued hiftory of it. Only it may not be amifs to obferve, that from a paliage in Ezekiel,, where God fays, Becaufe that Moab a>!<j Seir do fay., Behold the house of Judah is like unto all the Hea- then -j-j it appears the Jews had boafted, and the Gentiles, till then, had acknowledged, tliat they were under an extraordinary Providence. As this therefore is ib plain, I fhall not hazard the obfcuring it by many words: but go on to fhew, that Scripture reprefents this Providence as adminiflered likewifc to Particulars. In the Dedication of the firft Temple, Solomon addrefles his ■Prayer to God, that the Covenant between him and the People inight remain for ever firm and inviolate, and the old Oeconomy be * Sec note [N], at the end of this Book. f Chap, xxv, vcr. 8. f^iU Sect. 4. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 113 flill continued. And after having enumerated divers parts of it, he proceeds in this manner : " When the heaven is Ihut up, and there *' is no rain, becaufe they have finned agninfl: thee; yet if they *' pray towards this Place, and confefs thy name, and turn from •' their fm when thou doft affli6l them : Tlien hear thou from !iea- " ven, and forgive the fin of thy Servants, and of thv Pejpie *'• Israel, wlien thou haft taught them the good way, wherein •' they fhould walk ; and fend rain upon the Land, which tliou " hall given unto thy People for an inheritance. If there be dearth " in the Land, if there be peftilencc, if there be blafting or mil- *' dew, locufl or caterpillers : if their enemies beiiege them in the " cities of their Land ; whatfoever lore, or whatfbever iicknef^i "" there be : Then what prayer or what fupplication fhall be made *' of ANY Man, or of all tiiy People Israel, iv/je/2 every one '^ JImiU knoiv his ozvn fore, and bis own gi'tef, and (hall fpread forth " his hands in this houfe ; then hear thou from heaven and forgive, " and RENDER UNTO EVERY Man according unto all his ways, *' whofe heart thou knowefl: *." Solomon in this petition, which, with refped to the given Covenant, we might properly call a Petition of rights, Ipeaks the language of one who extended the temporal fandtions of the Law to partjculars and indi- viduals. For he defires God, according to the terms of tlie Cove- nant, to render unto every man according to all his ituiys. But when is it that he prays for the exertion of this extraordinary providence to particulars ? At the very time when it is adminiftring to the ftate in general. — If there be dearth in the land, if there be pejilence, if there be b la/ling or mildew, locufi or caterpillers, if their enemies befiege them, &c. The neceffary confequence is, that as fure as Solomon believed an extraordinary Providence exercifed to the State in gene- ral, fo furely did he believe it exercifed to individuals in particular. The Pfalmift bears his teftimony to the fame Oeconomy : / have -been young (fays he) and now am old: yet have 1 not feen the Righteous forfaken, nor his feed begging their bread ■^. God himfelf declares it, * 2 Chion. vi. 26. See alfo note [O], at the end of this Book. f Pfal. xxxvii. ;j. See alfo note [PJ, at the end of this Book. \oh. III. Q^ by 114 THE DIVINE LEGATION BookV. by the Prophet llalah : Say ye to the Righteous that it fJjull be well ivilh him : J or they jl:all eat the fruit of their doings. I To unto the JViched, it fhall be ill with him : for the reward of bis hands pall be given him * . And again :' He that walketh right eoufly and fpeaketh uprightly, he. he fl:iall dwell on high : his place of defence pall be the munitions (frocks., bread pall he given him, his waters fmll be fure •{• ■ And we learn, from a parabolical command in Ezekiel, how exa£lly thefe promifes were fullilled : " And the Lord faid unto him, Go '• through the midll; of the city, through the midft of Jerufalem, " and let a mark upon the foreheads of the men that figh, and *' that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midft *• thereof. And to others he faid in mine hearing. Go ye after him " through the city, and fmite : let not your eye fpare, neither have " ye pity. Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little chil- •' dren, and women ; but come not near any man upon whom is the " mark ; and begin at my San<5luary ;[;," &c. The fame Prophet in another place, alluding to Abraham's interceffioa for Sodom, declares from God, that when his judgments come out againft the land of Judea, the Righteous, found in it, fhould fave only them* felves ; which plainly (hews a providence extending to particulars.— ** Son of man, when the land finneth againft me by trefpafling " grievoufly, then will I ftretch out mine hand upon it, and will " break the ftafF of the bread thereof, and will fend famine upon it, " and will cut off man and bead from it. Though thefe three men "Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they fhould deliver but their " own fouls by their righteoufnefs, faith the Lord God." Ch. xiv. 13, 14. But God, by the Prophet -^woj, defcribes this admi- niftration of Providence in the fulleft manner : " Alfo I have " witholden the rain from you, when there were yet three months to " ' the harveft ; and I caufed it to rain upon one city^ and caufed it not to •'" ram upon another city: one piec^ was rained upoji, and the piece * Chap. iii. ver. 10, 71. -j- Chap, xxxiii. ver. 15, 16. J Chap. ix. ver. 4 — 6. See alfo note [Q], at the end of this Book. **"ivhert' Sect. 4. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 115 *' whereupon it rained not, withered. So two or three cities wan- *' dered unto one city to drink water; but they were not fiitisfied : *' yet have ye not returned unto me, faith the Lord. I havefmitten *' you with blafting and mildew, CyC.*" And again: Lo, I ivill command f and Iwillfft tkehoujeof Ifrael among Jl all Nations, like ai Corn isjifted in ajieve, yet JJiall not the Icajl grain fall upon the earth \. Theib declarations of God's providence are fo exactly correfpon- dent to Solomon's petition ; that they fccm as it were the fiat to it +. Thus we fee the Law, as well by its exprcfs declarations as by its eflential nature and genius, extended its fanftions of temporal rewards and punifhments as well to Particulars as to the General. And as in civil Government, univerfal pradlice Ihews the neceffity of a more exadt difpenfation of puniftmient than of reward, fo we may obferve from the paflages laft quoted that the Mofaic Law had the fame attention ; which occafioned the Wife Man to fay, Behold the Righteous Jljall be recompefifed in the Earth: mvch moke the Wicked and the Sinner §. The infpired writers of the New Test a me xt give evidence to this difpenfation of Providence under the Old. The Author of the Epiflle to the Hebrews argues from it as a thing well known and generally allowed : For if the Word fpoken by Angels was Jledfojl, and 'EM^Vi\ TRANSGRESSION AND DISOBEDIENCE RECEIVED A JUST RECOMPENCE OF REWARD, howjliall we efcape if we negle'd fo great falvation || /* St. Paul, in his Epiftle to the Romans, fpeaking of the advan- tages which Chriftianity had over Judalfm, fays : Therefore bing jufiifed by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jefus Chriji. By whom alfo we have accefs by Faith into his Grace, wherein we f and, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And not otily fo, but WE GLORY IN TRIBULATION ALSO, knowing that Tribulation * Chap. iv. ver. 7 — 11. f Chap. ix. ver. 9, X See note [R], at tlie end of this Book. § Prov. xi. 31. II Chap, ii. ver. i, j. Q 2 vtnrketlf ii6 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. ivorketh patience"^, &c. Here St. Paul oppofing the advantages which the Gentile Converts had by Faith, to thofe which the Jews, in contempt to the Gentiles, gloried to have by the Law, adds, in order to fliew thofe advantages in their highefl: fuperiority, that the Chriflian Gentiles could slory even in that which was the very opprobrium oF the Jews, namely tribulation. For thefindlion of the Jewifli Law being temporal rewards and punifliments, admi- niftered by an equal providence ; Tribulation was a punifliment for crimes, and, confequently, an high opprobrium -}-• But the fol- lowers of Chrifl, who were taught, that wc viuji through much TRIBULATION enter into the kingdom of God"^, had the fame reafou to glory in the roughnefs of the road, as the ancient Agonifl:^ had in the toils which procured them the viftory. This is urged with great addrefs. But the Critics, not taking the Apoille's meaning, have fuppofed in their ufual way, that he here broke in upon his argument, with an idea foreign to the point in hand. This will help us to explain an odd remark of the excellent Maimonides : That their wife men talked of a thing which was not TO BE FOUND in the Law, namely, that which fame of them call the Chastisements OF Love, by which they meant /^^j/ Tribulations might befall a man without any precedent fn §, and only in order to multiply his reward. And that this was the very opinion of the SeSi Ci^/Zf^ Muatzal, of which, or in favour of which opinion, there is not one fngle Word to be found in the Laiv \\. This feems to have per- * Rom. V. I. Si feq. f See note [S], at the end of this Book. •f Afls xiv. Z2. § This explanation was neceflary; for, another kind of chajlifements of Love there was in the La\^, namely, paternal chajlifemenis. Thus Mofcs : Thou Jtialt alfo con- fiiier in thine heart, that as a man chajleneth his fon, fo the Lord thy God chajteneth thee, Deut. viii. 5. 11 Unum tamen occurrit in verbis fapientum noftrorum, quod non invenitur in i.hge; id nempc, quod qnidam eorum drcnnt castigationes amoris. Juxta hanc enim fententiam poilunt tribulaTiones alicui evenire fine prscedente peccato, fed lit multiplicetur ejus Reiriuneratio. Atque haec ipfillima eft fententia Seftre Muatzoli, de qua, aut pro qua, ne verbulum quidem in Lege reperitur. More Nevoch. I3uxtorfii, p. 381. plexed Sect. 4- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. n; plexed our Rabbi ; nnd with caufc. He lived wiicii his countrymen were under a common providence, and had the doclrine of a future {late of rewards and punifhments, which, he took for granted, was always in the Jcwifh Oeconomy. Thefe things difabled him from feeing that — no chastisements of love wasa neceliary confequence of temporal rev/ards and punifliments adminiflered by an equal providence : And Hkewife that when this fantlion ceafed, and a future flate was known, then chastisements of love became a neceflary confequence. But if by the Law, Maimonides did (as the Jews frequently do) Include the writings of the Prophets, then he was very much miftaken in fliying there Is not one word in it concerning the chafij'ements of love. For Zecharlah, prophefylng of a new Dif- penfation, defcribes this fort of chajlifenients in very exprefs terms : '• And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine «' them as fiver is reffied, and ivill try them as gold is tried: and thev " fliall call on my nnme, and I will hear them." So admirablv do all the parts of God's grand Oeconomy fupport one another. We have feen what teftimonies their coeval writers afford of an : extraordinary Providence. But we mufi: not fuppofe the Jews always held the fame language. The difference is great between the early and later Jews, even during the exiftence of the Republic. Take an inftance from the Pialmift, and the writer of Ecclefia- ftlcus. The former fays, / have been young, and now am old, yet have I not feen the Righteous forfaken, nor his Seed begging their bread ^. . The latter. — / ook at /A^ Generations of old, and fee: Did ever any truf in the Lord and tvns confounded P Or did any abide in his Fear and ivas forfaken ? Or vuhovi did he ever dcfpife that called upon him f ? The Pialmlll: living under an extraordinary Providence appeals to iiis own times; the Author of Eccleliafticus living when it was long celled, appeals to former times. But as we have been told, that this talk of a particular Providence is only an Eaftern Hyperbole, in which every thing is afctibed to God, I think it ■* Pfdl. xxxvii. 25. t Chap. ii. ver. 10, &c. not ! 1 8 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. 3iot improper to take notice here of one lingular circumftance in tavourot the Reporters. We may obferve tlien, that the fpiiit of GentUifm was always uni- torm ; and, throughout its whole duration, had ever the fame un- varied pretenfions to divine Intercourfe, fupported by the fame fort of Oracles and Divinations. But amongfl the Jeivs matters were on another footing. After their perfe(S fettlement, on their return from Captivity (when we know from the courfe and progrefs of God's Oeconomy, that the extraordinary Providence was to ceafe), we hear no more of their pretences to it, though they now adhered more ilriilly than ever to the Religion of their forefathers. They made no claim, as we fee by the excellent Writer of the firft Book of Maccabees^ either to Prophets, Oracles, or extraordinary Difpenfations. When they write unto the Lacedemonians, for the renewal of their Alliance, they tell them, at the fiime time, that they need it not, FOR. THAT THE.Y HAVE THE HOLY BoOKS OF ScRIPTURE IN THEIR Hands to comfort them *. Language very different from their forefathers', .when God was wont to lend immediate help from the Sandluary. .How ingenuoufly does the fame Hiftorian relate the misfortune of Bethjura, caufed by the obfervance of the Sabbatic Year -j-? A misfortune of which we have no inftance be- fore the Captivity ; and therefore a plain evidence that the extra- ordinary Providence was indeed withdrawn. Befides, if we conlider the nature of the -Re%/«5«, the genius of the People, and the cir- cumftances of the Time, we Ihall find, they all concurred to favour the continuance of a pretenfion to an extraordinary Providence, had it been only a pretenjion. I. The Mofaic Religion, like the P^^^w, hzA z public part, and therefore the Jews might, with the greateft eafe, have ftlU carried on the Superftition of Oracles, had their Oracles been indeed a fu- perftiiion ; efpeclally as they were now become fo clofely attached to their Religion. For when did ever Gr^^c^ or //^/y confefs that tiieir Oracles were become dumb, 'till the Confulters had generally * Cliap. 5tJi. ver. 9. f i Mace, vi. 49, forfaken Sect. 4. OF MOSE S DEMO N STR ATE D. 119 forfaken them, and the whole frame of their Religion was falling to pieces ? Befides, the pra^lice of this Superftition had been as eafy as it was commodious ; for the Oracular Voice was wont to come from the Mercy-Scat behind the Veil. 2. The genius of the People too would have contributed to tlft continuance of this claim. For fome how or other, it was become their character to require a Sign * ; and though, now, really fuper- flltious, yet the lumlour fpent itfelf rather in telling lyes of former times i", than in inventing any of their own. This, on a fuppofition of the human invention of their Law, is altogether unaccountable. But take the matter as we find it in their facred Books, and nothiiip; is more eafy. For if they had indeed been long accuflomed to a miraculous Difpenfation, they would, ever after, be flrongly difpofed . 16 require a Sign ; but it would be only fuch a Sign as bore the evi- dent marks of a Divinity ; which not being to be had in human in- ventions, they would be kept fafe from delufions, and made fenfible of the difference of times: And fuch was, in fadt, their cafe. 3. Add to all this, that the ti'ne of the Maccabees was the feafon of Enthufiafm, when that airy Spirit is at its height ; after the national Genius, long funk by oppreflion, begins to rife and recover itfelf to a VHidication of public Liberty. And of this we have a fignal inlT:ance in the perfon of Judas Maccabaus himfelf ; who, iii imitation of Gideon., would fet upon an army of twenty thoufand foot and two thoufand horfe, with only eight hundred ftraggling defpe- radoes ; which rafli and fanatic attempt was followed with the for- tune that might, at this time, have been expelled J;. — In fuch a feafon too, artful Leaders are mofl difpofed to fupport themfclves bv infpirations ; have moft need of them ; and are thought, by the People, mofi: worthy to receive them. There is the fame difference between the Writers of the New Teftament and of the Old, as between the Writers of the feveral ages of the Old. The Apoflles (who worked Miracles as well as . * I Cor. i. 12. t See note [T], at the end of thi? B.^ok. J 1 Mace. ix. 6. Mofes . no T H E D I V I N E L E G A T I O N Book V. Mofes and the Prophets) reprefent the followers of Christ as under the fame common Providence with the reft of mankind : Unlike in this, to the firft propagators of the Law, who always declared the Ifraelites to he under an extraordinary Providence. From all this I conclude, that as amidft the concurrence of fo many favourahle circumftances, no fuch claim was made ; but that, contrary to the univerfal pra6lice of all fiilfe Religions, the Jews faw and owned a great change in the Divine Oeconomy, that therefore their former pretenfions to the peculiar protection of Heaven were TRUE. But it hath been objected that the early facred Writers themfelves frequently fpeak of the inequality of Providence to Particulars * : and in fuch a manner as Men living under a common Providence are accuftomed to fpeak. It is very true that thefe Writers do now and then give intimations of this inequality. And therefore, though we fliall hereafter prove an extraordinary Providence to have been adlually adminiftered, in which, not only this objedion will be feen to drop of itfelf, but the particular paffages, on which it is founded, will be diftinftly conlidered ; yet, for the Reader's fatisfii«Slion, it may not be amifs to fhew here, that thefe reprefeutations of ine- quality are very conliftent with that before given of the extraordinary Providence. We fay therefore, I. That when the Sacred Writers fpeak of the inequalities of Pro- vidence, and the unfit diftribution of things, they often mean that ftate of it amongft their Pagan neighbours, and not in Judea: As particularly in the Book oi PJalms and Ecclefajles f. * — Afaph de Dei providentia dubltavit, & fere a vera via deflexiflfet — Salomon etiani, cujus tempore res J\ul3eor{im in fummovigore erant, fufpicatur omnia cafu contingere — Denique omnibus fere prophetis hoc ipfuiu valde oblcurum fuit, nempe quomodo ordo naturae & hominum eventus cum conceptu quern de providentia Dei formaverant, pofleiit convenire. — Spinozx Theologico-Pol. p. 73, 74. f See Appendix. II. We Sect.4. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 121 II. We fomttlmes find Men coim^phmmg of ifiegua/iiies in events, which were Indeed the effects of a mod f^?/^/, Providence. Such as the punifliment of Pofertty for the crimes of their Forefathers ; and of 5'w/^/V^j for their J'^/'7o-j. Of the firft, the Prophet £)2^/f/V/ gives us an inftance in the People's cafe: What 'mean ye, that you vfi this Proverb concerning the hand of \{\zfi\, faying. The Fathers have eaten four grapes, and the Childrens teeth are fct on eJge* I" — Of the fecond, David gives it in his own; not duly attending to the jnftice of this proceeding, where he fl^ys, But tbcfe Sheep, tvhat have they done -j- ? And that he was fometimes too halh- in judging of thefe matters appears from his own conftflion : Behold, thefe are the ungodly, ivho profper in the world, they increafe in riches. — JVhen I thought to knciu this, it was too paijfu! for me : until 1 went into the SanSluary of God; then underfood I their end. Surely thou didjl ft them infippery places: thou cafedf them down into dcJlru^ion. — So fcolfj was I, and ignorant: I was as a heafi before thee\. That is, I underftood not the courfe of thy j 11 (lice, till I had confidered the way in which an equal Providence mufl: necelTarily be adminiftered under a Theocracy, and the cotifequences of fuch an AdminiiLrntion. For, III. Even admitting the reality of an equal Providence to Parti- culars in the Hebrew State, the adminiflration of it muft needs be attended with fuch circumftances as fometimes to occafion thofe ob- fervations of /«^^«<2//V)'. For 1. it appears from the reafon of the thing, that this adminiflration did not begin to be exerted in parti- cular cafes till the civil Laws of the Republic had failed of their effi- cacy. Thus where any crime, as for inftance difobedience to Parents, w^s public, it became the objed of the civil -Tribunal, and is accord- ingly ordered to be punifhed by tlie Judge §. But when private and fecret, then it became the objeft of Divine vengeance ||. Now the confequence of this was, that when the I>aws vvcre remifsly or cor- ruptly adminiftcred, good and /// would fomt times liappcn unequally * Chap, xviii. wr. 2. f 2 Sam xxiv. 17. t Pfalm lx\iii. 1; — 2;, § Exod. xxi, 15, and 17. |j Dent, xxvii. i6. and Prov. \xx. r;. Vol. III. R to 122 T HE DIVINE LEGATION Book V • to men. For we are not to fuppofc that Providence, in this cafe, generally, interfered till the corrupt ad mini ft ration itlelf, when ripe for vengeance, had be.en firft puniftied. i:. In this extraordinary adrnlniftrarlon, one part of the wicked was fometimes fuffered as a fcourge to the other. 3. The extraordinary Providence to the State might fometimes clafh with that to Particulars, as in the plague for numbering the people. 4. Sometimes the extraordinary Providence was fufpended for afeafon, to bring on a national repentance: But at the fame time this fufpenfion was publicly denounced *. And a very fevere puniftiraent it was, as leaving a State which had not the fandion of a future ftate of rewards and puniftiments in a very dif- confolate condition. And this was what occafioned the complaints of the impatient Jews, after they had been fo long accuftomed to ati extraordinary adminiftration -j-. IV. But the general and full folution of the difficulty is this, The common caufe of thefe complaints arofe from the gradual with- drawing the extraordinary Providence. Under the Judges it was perfedlly equal. And during that period of the Theocracy^ it is re- markable that we hear of no complaints. When the people had rebellioufly demanded a king, and their folly was fo far complied with, that God fufFered the Theocracy to be adminiftered by a Vice- roy, there was then, as was fitting, a great abatement in the vigour of this extraordinary Providence ; partly in natural confequence, God being now farther removed from the immediate adminiftration ; and partly in punifhment of their rebellion. And foon after this it is that we firft find them beginning to make their obfervations and complaints oi inequality. From hence to the time of the Captivity^ the extraordinary Providence kept gradually decaying, till on their full re-eftablifliment, it intirely ceafed ];. For what great reafons, befides punifhment for their crimes ; and what confequences it had '' IfaiaTTiii. 5. Chap. lix. ver. 2. Chap. l.\iv. ver. 7. f If V. 19. Jtrem. xvii. 15, Amos, v. 18. Zeph. 1. 12. Ma'.ac. ii, 17. I See note [Uj, at the end of this Book. on Sect.4. of MOSES demonstrated. 123 on the religious fentiments of the People, will be occafionally ex- plained as we go along. But now, let it be obferved, that though I have here accounted for the appearances of an unequal Providence, yet this is ex ahundant'i; the very nature of my gep.eral argument evincing, that there muft needs have been an equal Providence a6tually admiuiftered : for a People in foclcty, without both a future State and an equal Provi- dence, could have no belief in the moral government of God: And under fuch circumftances, it hath been fhewn, that they could not long fublift, but muft fall back again into all the confuHon of a (avage ftate. We mufl: conclude therefore, that what appearances foever there may be of inequality in the adminlflration of Providence, in the early times of the Jewifli Theocracy, they are but appear apices : that is, nothing which can really affect fuch a mode of admlniilra- tion*. The Advcniaries therefore of the /)/*:'///? L^^^Z/'o;/, fuch of them, I mean, wlio profefs themfelves Believers, Ihould confider that, while they ojipofe the reality of an extraordinary Providence over the Jewifh people, they are weakening the evidence for the miracles recorded in the Old Tcftament, But this is the leafl of their care. One of them, with an afllirance that hath fomething In it of a prodigy, affirms, " that the Providence adminiflercd under the JL^w was exatSlly the fame kind with that adminiftered under the Go/pel t." How this could be the cafe without impeaching tlie vera- city of God himfclf, as not making good his repeated engagements, this man would do well to confider before he becomes the fcorn and contempt of Unbelievers. But as fuch fort of men bear worfe the difgrace of folly than impiety, I fliall confider this Portent on its ridiculous fide only. Temporal rewards and puniHiments adminiftered by the hand of God, followed, as a confequence, from the Jewidi Government's being T'heocratical; and an extraordinary Providence followed, as a- confequence, from the difpenfatlon of temporal rewards and punlfh- ment^. Yet here wc have a Regius Profefior of Divinity affirming,- * See note [X], at the end of this Book. f I^'" Rntl".rt'orth. R 2 Tluit 124 THE DIVINE ]>EGAT10N Book V. That both temporal Sanctions and an extraordinctry Providence are ad- niiiililered under the Gofpel in the very fame manner they formerly were under the Latx\ In which it Is difficult to determine what nioft to admire ; his modefty or his wit. For if it does honour to his wit to maintain conclulions deftitute of their premiiles, it as' ftrongly recommends his modefty to contradict the whole tenour of the New Teftament. But there is neither end nor meafure to party- bigotry. Fauftus, the Manichean, contended that the Jews and Chriftlans got the dodlrlne of the one only God from the Gentiles. Is this a wilder fancy than what many modern Divines have aflerted, that the Gentiles got the doftrine of future rewards and punifhment from the Law of Mofes ? Or are either of thefe more extravagant than the folly I am going to expofe, namely. That the temporal fanofions of the Law are transferred into the Gospel ? Now, if you fhould alk vihetherthe Gofpel claim.ed to be a Theocracy ; I fuppofe at firft, they would fay no; till they found the advantage you get over them by this anfwer. And then I make no doubt, they would as readily {?Ly,yes. For what Ihould hinder them ? Does the Gofpel difclaim, in ftronger terms, its being a temporal Kingdom, when Chrlll: fays, his kingdom ivas not of this world, than it difclaims- temporal sanctions, when it fays, ^ea, and all that will live ' godly in Jefus Chrif fl^all fuffer perfecution *, or than it difclaims an extraordinary providence where it declares that the Jews had the promife of the life that now is, and the Chriflians of that which is to come •\ ? But not to ftiretch our conjeiflures to the lengths thefe men are dlfpofed to go ; let us conhder how far they have already gone. They lay the temporal fmSliom of the Law are transfer red into the Gof- pel: and they prove it by thefe two notable texts. The firft is of St. Paul, '' Children, obey your parents iji all *■' things : for this is right. Honour thy Father and thy Mother " (which is the fnft ccMiimandment with promife) that it may be " well with thee, and thou mayeft live long on the earth ;};." All * 2 Tim. ill 12. I I Tim. iv, 8. J Fph. vi. ;:, 3. that SfiCT. 4- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 125 that I here find transferred, from the Law to the Gofpel, are the WO' (is of the fifth Commandment. For the Apoftle having faid. Children, obey your parents in the Lord : for this is right ; he fupports his exhortation by a quotation from the Decalogue ; juft as any mo- dern preacher, but This, would do, without ever dreaming oi tem- poral fanSlious in the Gofpel ; the obfcrvalion tlie Apoftle makes upon it being in thefe words — wZ>/V/6 is the firjl commandment ivitb promife ; as much as to fay, " Vou may fee, from this circumftance, how very acceptable the performance of this duty is, to God :" The only inference which common fenle authoriles us to draw from it being what, in another place, he thus exprefles, — Godlincfs [or the obfervance of God's commands] /f ^roy?/i?i^/t' unto all things, having the promife of the life that nozv is [under the Law] and of that ivhich is to come [under the Gospel]. The other colour for this clandeftine transfer oi temper alfan5lio7is, is from St. Peter : " Who is he that will harm you, if you be followers of that which \z good * ?"' So fays the Apoftle ; and fo too faid his Maftcr ; to whofe words Peter alludes, > Fear not them -which kill the body : but rather fear him -which is able to dejlroy body and foul in hell -f. But as if the Apoftle had it in his thoughts to guard againfl: this abfurd vifion oi temporal farMions, he immediately fub- joins — " But, and if ye futfcr for righteoufnefs f\ke, happy are ye." Our Doilor having (o well made out this point, we need not wonder at his confidence, when he affures us, thdt there is full as good evidence of an extraordinary providence under the ChriJiianDifpen- fation as under the Jeivi/lj. This though the language of Toland, Tindal, Collins, and the whole tribe of Free-thinkers, yet comes fo unexpeded from a Regius Profeflbr of Divinity, that we fliould be very careful not to miftake his meaning. If, hy full as good, he would infinuate that an cxtraordinay providence was adminiftered under both Difpenfations, I (hall "be ii^ pain for his intellects: if he would iullnuate, that an cxtrao' dinary * : Pet. iii. 13. f M:\U. x. 28. prd-iJe:ire 126 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. providence was adrniiiiftered in neither, I lliall be in pain for his Profefforfhip. But he Is in pain for nothing; as the reader may perceive by his manner of fupporting this impertinent paradox. His proofs follow with equal eafe and force. — IJ'^y unto you, that if iivo of you fiall agree on earthy as touching any thing that they f: all of, it fhall be done for them of my Father which is in Heaven^, — And every one that bath forfaken houfes, or brethren, or fijlers, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for %ny name'' s fake, Jl:>all receive an hundredfold, and fall inherit evcrlafing life ■f. — T'ake therefore no thought foying, IFhat fall tvc eat ? or ivhat fall ive drink ? or whereivithal fall tve be cloathed ? for your heavenly Father knoiveth that you have need of all tbefe things. But feek ye frf the Kingdom of God and his righteoufnef, and all thefe things fall be added unto you '^. And a'lain. If ye af: any thing in my name, I will give it §. — " No more, my mofl: wife Friend ! Thou haft my wonder ; that's enough. My underftanding Ihali come after ;" faid, once on a time, a plain good man to a profound philofopher like this. Now not to repeat again the illogical bravado of taking and fup- porting a conclufion divorced from its premijfes ; fuch as is the con- tending for temporal fandions and an extraordinary providence where there was no Theocracy, from whence they could be derived ; we have here a Profeflbr of Divinity who has his elements of Scripture- interpretation yet to learn. The fir fl rule of which is, i. " That all, does not fignify allfmply, but^// of one kind; and, of what kind, the context muft dlredt us to determine." When therefore, the members oi ChnOLsfpiritual Kingdom are promifed they fhall obtain all they afk, this ^//muft needs be confined to things fpiritual. Now when here we find thofe, who are bid to leave their temporal pofTef- fions and propagate the Gofpel, have the promife of a hundredfold, are we to feek for the performance, in Paleftine, or in a better Country |j ? Again, Where under the Law, we read of temporal Promifes, we read likewife that they were fulfilled. Where, under * Matth. xviii. 19. + Matth. xix. 29. % Matth vi. 31. & feq. ^ John xiv. 14. |i Heb. xi. 16. the Sect. 4- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 127 the Gospel, we read that ihofe tvho, for the fake ofChrtfl^ forfake hoiifes, or brethren, orfjkrs, or father or mother, or 1? fc or children, or lands, Jhall receive an hundredfold ; What are we the.re to look tor ? For the good things of this world, which this Iharp-iighted Doclor is fo eager and intent to find ? — Now admit there might be no great inconvenience in receiving a hundred houfes for one ; would not a hundred wives a little embarras his Profefforfhip ? And as to the houfe and land — Where did he learn that this was literally fulfilled, even to thofe who had the beft title to them if they were literally promifed, 1 mean the Apostles, yet thefe we always meet on foot ; ftrangers upon earth ; and without either houfe or home. He, who then pufled for a learned Apoflle, once at Rome, indeed, got a warm houfe over his head; yet let us not forget that it was but a hired one. Here, in this Capital of the World, he received all who came to him. But though a good Divine, as times then went, he never rofe to a Regius Profeflbrfhip. The fccond elementary rule of interpretation is, " That all the promifes of extraordinary bleilings, made to the fufl propagators of the Gofpel, are not to beunderflood as extending to their fuccefTors of all Ages, or to the Church in general." To apply this likewife to the thing in quc-flion. If it ihould be admitted that great temporal blejtngs were promifed to the firft dlfciples of Chrift, it will not fol- low that their fucceflbrs had a claim to them, any more than they had to \\\t\r fpiritual gifts and graces, fuch as the power of working- miracles, prophefying, fpeaking with tongues, &"<;. Becaufe as divine Wifdom faw thefe latter to be neceflary for the difcharge of their peculiar function ; fo divine Goodnefs might be gracioufly pleafed to bellow the Other on them, as the reward of their abundant Faith, and fuperior Courage in the day of trial, when the Powers of this world were bent on their deflrudlion. But this (blelTcd be God) is neither the learned Profeflbr's cafe, nor mine. The worft that has befallen me in the defence of Religion, is only the railino^s of the Vile and Impotent : and the worfl that is likely to befal him is only the ridicule of all the rcPc. Happy had it been for himfelf and mucli 128 THE DIVINE LEGATION Bcok V. much happier for liis hearers, had our Profcflbr's modefty dilpoied lum rather to feek hiftruftioii from thofe who have gone- before, than to impart it to thofe who are to come after. Hooker has fo admirably expofed this very fpccific folly which our Dodor has run into, of arguing againft his fenfes, in making the Difpenfation of Providence under the Mofaic and Chrjft'mn Oeconomies to be the fame, that I Cannot do him better fervice than to tranfcribe tlie \\-ords of that divine ornament of the Englifl:i Priefthood. — " Shall "_we then hereupon argue even against our own experience " AND KNOWLEDGE ? Shall we feek to perfuade men that, of necef- *' lity, it is with us as it was with them, that becaule God is our^, *' in all refpefts as much as theirs, therefore, either no fuch way " of diredlion hath been at any time, or if it have been, it doth *' Jlill continue in the Church ? er if the iame do not continue, that *' yet it muft be, at the leaf!:, fupplied by fome fuch means as " pleafeth us to account of equal force ? A more dutiful and reli- *' gious way for- us, were to admire the Wifdom of God which " fhineth in the beautiful vari-ety of things, but moft in the manifold *' and yet harmonious diHTmilitude of thofe ways, whereby his " Churcli upon earth is guided from age to age throughout all the *' generations of men *." But this was one of the charitable expedients employed to fet me right, and to prevent t-he difgrace of fcribbllng mucii to no purpofe. However, as in a work of this nature, which partakes lo much of the Hidory of the human mind, I may be allowed occafion ally, and as it falls in my way, to give as well, examples of its more uncom- mon degrees of depravity and folly, as of its improvements and ex- cellencies, 1 Ihall go on. My conflant friend Dr. Stebbing proceeds another way to work, bu.t all for the fame good end. He defires me and my reader to confider, " what it was that Mofes undertook ; " and what was the true end of his Miffion. It was to carry the *' children of Ifrael out of Egypt, and put them in poflefTion of the *' Land of Canaan, in execution of the Covenant made with Abra- * Eccl, Pol. b, iii. fee. lo. " ham. Sect.4. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 129 " ham. The work in the very nature of it /v^«//W the admi- " niftration of an extraordinary Providence ; of which it ought " THEREFORE TO BE PRESUMED that Mofes had both the ajfiirance *' and experience : otherwife he would have engaged in a very mad " undertaking, and the people would have been as mad in follow- " ing him. This sh:rt hint points out hie true internal " EVIDENCE of Af^/j Divine Legation, and this evidence has no *' fort of dependence upon the belief or dilhclief of the doclrine of a " future ftate. For fuppofing (what is the truth) ihat tlie liraelites " did believe it ; what could this belief efFc(5l ? It might carry them " to Heaven, and would do fo if they made a proper ufe of it, but *' it could not put them in pofleffion of the Land of Canaan. Mr. " Warburton therefore has plainly millaken his point." This intimation of my miftake is kind : and I fliould have taken his hint, ziJ}}ort as it is, but for the following reafons : I. Tliis hint would ferve the Mufti full as well, to prove the Divine Legation of Mahomet : for thus we may fuppofe he would ar- gue : — " Mahomet's work was not like Mofes's, the fubdual of a fmall tracl of Country, poflefled by feven Tribes or Nations, with a force of fome hundred thoufand followers ; but the conqueft of al- moft all Afia, with a handful of Banditti. Now this xvork, fays the learned Mahometan, in the -very nature of it, required the adminiflra- tion of an extraordinary pr or idence, of which it ought therefore TO BE PRESUMED, that Mahomet had both the ajfurance and experience ; other'wife he would have engaged in a very mad undertaking, and the people iz'oiild have been as mod in following him.'''' Thus hath t!ie learned Doflor taught the Mufti how to reafon. The worft of it is, that I, for whom the kindnefs was principally intended, cannot profit by it, the argument lying expofed to fo ter- rible a retortion. To this the Doctor replies, that the cafes are widely different : and that I myfelf allow them to be different, for tliat I hold, the Legation of Mofes to be a true one ; and the Lega- tion of Mahomet, an Impofturc. — Rlfum teneatis, Amici ! Vol. 111. S But I50 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. But there Is another reafon why I can make nothhig of this gra clous hint. It is becaufe I propoled to prove (and not, as he fays I ouoht to have done, to presume upon) the Divinity of Mofes's niKiion, by an v.ternal argument. Indeed he tells me, that if I be for proving., he has pointed out fuch a one to me. He fays fo, 'tis true : but in ^o faying, he only Ihews his ignorance of what is meant by an internal argument. An internal argument is luch a one as takes for its medium fome notorious Fa£l, or circum- flance, in the frame and conftitution of a Religion, not in contejl ; and from thence, by neceliary confequence, deduces the truth of a faft fupported by teflimony which ii in cofiteji. Thus, from the no- torious Fail of the omiflion of a future State in Mofes's inftitutioa of Law and Religion, I deduce his Divine Legation. But the learned Artift himfelf feems confcious that the ware he would put into my hands is indeed no better than a counterfeit piece of trumpery ; and fo fiir from being an interna! argument, that it is no argument at all : For he tells us, It ought therefore to BE PRESUMED, thot Mofes had both the ajftirance and experience that God governed the Ifraelites by an extraordinary Providence. But what follows is fuch unaccountable jargon ! — For fi(ppf{fng the Ifraelites did believe a future State, what ivould this belief effeSl 2 It might carry them to Heaven, but it could not put them in pojj'ejjion of the land of Canaan. This looks as if the learned Doftor had fup- pofed that, from the truth of this affertion, That no civil Society wi- der a common Providence could fubfijl u-ithout a future flate, I had in- ferred, that, isoiih a future fate. Society would be able to work wonders. — What efficacy a future ftate hath, whether little or much, atK.(fls not my argument any otherwife than by the oblique tendency it hath to fupport the reafoning : and I urged it thus ; — " Had not the Jews been under an extraordinary Providence, at that period wliea Mofes led them out to take poffeffion of the land of Canaan, they were mofi: unfit to bear the want of the doctrine oi -^ future fate :" Which obfervation I fupported by the cafe of Odin's followers, and Mahomet's t. Sect. 4,5- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 131 Mahomet's ; who, In the fame circumftances of making conquefts, and feeking new habitations, had this Do6trine feduloufly inculcated to them, by their refpective Le'aders. And the hlftoiies of both tJu fc Nations inform us, that nothing fo much contributed to t!ie rapidity of their fuccefles as the enthufiafm which that Doclrinc infpired. And yet, to be fure, the Do£lor never faid a fivelier thing, who is celebrated for facing many, than when he afked, — What could this belief effect ? It wight carry them to Heaven ; but it could net put them in pcffejfion of the Land of Canaan. Now unluckilv, like mofl of thefe witty things, when too nearly infpedled, we find it to be jiifl the reverfe of the truth. The belief could never carry them to Heaven, and yet was abundantly futficient, under fuch a leader as Mofes, to pill them in poffcjfwn of the land of Canaan. The Arabians' belief oi ■3. future flate could never, in the opinion at lead: of our or- thodox Do^Elor, carry them to Heaven ; yet he muft allow it enabled them to take and keep poffeflion of a great part of Europe and Afia. But the Doflor's head was running on the efficacy of the Chrifian Faith, when he talked of belief carrying men to heaven.' — Yet who knows, but when he gave tlie early Jews the knowledge of a. future fate, he gave tliem the Chrfian faith into the bargain ? SECT. V. THUS we fee that an extraordinatiy Providence vvas 1 HE NECESSARY CONSEQ^EN'CE OF A THEOCRACY ; and that this Providence is reprefented in Scripture to have been really admi- niftered. Temporal rewards and punishments, therefore, (the effects of this providence) and not future, must needs ue the Sanction' of tlicir Law and Religion. Having thus prepared the ground, and laid the foundation, I go on to Ihew that future Rewards and Punifhmcnts, which could NOT BE THE SANCTION of the Mofaic Difpeiifation, were not taught in It at all : and that, in confequence cf this Omiffion, S 2 the 132 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. the PEOPLE had not the doctrine of a future frate for many ages. And here iny arguments will be chiefly direfted againll: the believing part of my opponents; no Deift *, that I know of, ever pretending that the do£trine of a future flate was to be found in the Law. Mofes delivered to the Ifraelites a complete Digeft of Law and Religion : but, to fit it to the nature of a Theocratic Government,, he gave it perftilly incorporated. And, for the obfervance of the intire Inftitution, he added the fan6tioix of rewards and punifh- ments: both of which we have fhewn to be neceffary for the fup- port of a Republic : and yet, that civil Society, as fuch, can admi- nifter only one t- Now in the Jewifh Republic, both the rewards and punifhments promifed by heaven were temporal only. Such as health, long life, peace, plenty, and dominion, &c. Difeafes, immature death, war, famine, want, fubjedion, and captivity, &c. And in no one place of the Mofaic Inflitutes is there the leafl mention, or any intelligible hint, of the rewards and punifhments of another life. When Solomon had reflored the integrity of Religion ; and, to the regulated purity of WorflVip, had added the utmofl magnifi- cenee ; in his dedication of the new-built Temple, he addrefles a long prayer to the God of Ifrael, confifiing of one folemn petition for the continuance of the old covenant made by the miniflry of Mofes. He gives an exatfl account of all its parts, and explains at large the sanction of the Jewifli Law and Religion. And here, as in the writings of Mofes, we find nothing but temporal re- wards and punishments ; without the leafl hint or intimation of a future flate. The holy Prophets fpeak of no other. Thus Ifaiah : " Then " fhall he give the rain of thy feed that thou fhalt fow the ground " withal, and bread of the increafe of the earth, and it Ihall be fat " and plenteous ; and in that day fhall thy cattle feed in large * See note [Y], at the end of this Book. t /. f. Tunif—nients. See the fiilt vol. p. 58. " paflures. Sect.5. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 133 " paftures. — And there (hall be upon every high nn)untaln, and " upon every high b.ill, rivers and ftreams ot" water*." And Jeremiah: " I will liirtly confume them, faith the Lord ; there " fhall be no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig-tree, and the " leaf" (hall fade, and the things that I have given them (hall pals *' away from them. — I will lend ferpents and cockatrices amongft " you, which will not be charmed, and they (hall bite you, fliith " the Lordt'" Nay fo little known, in thcle times, was any other kind of rewards and punilhmeiits to the Jewilh People, that, when the Prophets foretell that nkw Difpcnfation, by which, life and immortality icere brought to light, they exprefs even thofe future rewards and punifhments under the image of the prefent. Thus Zechariah, propliefying of the times of Christ, defcrlbes the punifliment attendant on a refufal of the terms of Grace, under the ideas of the Jewifli Oeconomy : " And it fhall be that whofo " will not come up oi ail the families of the earth wnto Jeriifiilem, to " worfliip the King the Lord of Hofls, even upon them shall be ** NO RAIN 1." I would have thofe men well confider this, who perfifl in thinking " that the early Jews had tiie u'ocfrine of a future ftate of rewards and punifhments, though Moles taught it not ex- prefsly to them ; and then tell me why Zechariah, when prophely- ingof the Golpel-times, fhould chufe to exprefs thefey?//z^r^ rewards and punifhments under the image of the />r^«/ ? Indeed, were it not for the amazing prejudices which have obtained on this fubject, a writer's pains to fhew that a future flate of rewards and punifhments made no part of the Mofaic Dirpenfatlon, would appear as abfurd to every intelligent reader, as lus would be who ihould employ many formal arguments to prove that Sir Ifaac New- ton's Theory of Light and Colours is not to be found in Ariflotle's books de Coelo Cs de Colo'ibus. I will therefore for once prefume To much on the privilege of Common Senfe, as to luppofc, the impar- tial reader may be now willing to confefs, that the dodrine of Life. * Chap. XXX, ver. 23, 25. f Chap. viii. ver. 13, 17. \ Chap. xiv. ver, 17. and 134- THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. and Immortality was not yet known to a people while they were ft ting in darknefs, and in the region cindfiadow of death * ; and go on to other matters that have more need to be explained. II. I fliall fhew then, in the next place, that this omission was not accidental ; or of a thing which Mofes did not well underftand : but that, on the contrary, it was a defigned omiflion ; and of a thing well known by him to be of high importance to Society. I. That the do6\:rine of a future ftate of Rewards and Punifhments was ftudioufly omitted, may appear from feveral circumftances in the book of Genefis. For the hiftory of Mofes may be divided into two periods ; from the Creation to his Miflion ; and from his Mif- fion to the delivering up his command to Jofhua : The firfl was written by him in quality of historian; the fecond, of legis- lator ; in both of which he preferves an equal filence concerning the doctrine of a future ftate. I. In the hiftory of the Fait of Man it is to be obferved, that he mentions only the inftrument of the agent, the serpent ; not the agent himfelf, the devil : and the reafon is plain ; there was a clofe conneftion between that agency, — The fpiritiial effedls of the Fall,— the work of Redemption, — and the dodriiie of a future State. If you fay, the connection was not fo clofe but that the Agent might have been mentioned without any more of his hiftory than the temptation to the Fall ; I reply, it is true it might ; but not without danger of giving countenance to the impious doctrine of Two Principles, which at this time prevailed throughout the Pagan world. What but thefe important confiderations could be the caufe of the omiflion t ? when it is fo evident that the knowledge of this grand enemy of our welfare would have been the likelieft cure of Pagan fuperftitions, as leaching men to efteem of Idolatry no other- wife than as a mere diabolical illufion. And in fa6l we find, that '^' Mattli. iv. lb. i See note [Z], at the end ol' this Book. when Sfcr. 5. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 135 when the Ifraelites were taught, by the later Prophets, to confider it in this hght, we hear no more of their Idolatries. Hence we fee, that the folly of thofe who, with Collins, would have a mere ferpent only to he underftood, is jufl. equal to theirs who, with the Cabbalijls, would have that ferpent a mere x^llegory. 2. In the hiftory of Enoch's tranjlation * to Heaven t» there is fo fliudied an obfcuriiy that feveral of the Rabbins, as Aben Ezra and Jarchi, fond as they are of finding a future {fate in the Pentateuch, interpret this tranflation as only fignifying an immature death. And Enoch ixuilked with God, and he ivas not, for God took him. How different from the other hiftory of the tranflation of Elijah ? " And "■ it came to pafs when the Lord would take up Elijah into Heaven •' by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elifha from Gilgal, &c. — " And it came to pafs as they flill went on and talked, that behold " there appeared a chariot of fire, and horfes of fire, and parted them " both afunder, and Elijah went up with a whirlwind into " Heaven ;[." But the reafon of this difference, is -evident : When the latter hiflory was written, it was thought expedient to makeup- preparation for the dawning oi tl future ftate of reward and punifh- ment, which in the time of Mofcs had been highly improper. The refle<3;ions of an eminent Critic'on thisoccalion, will fhew how little lie penetrated into the true dcfign of this Oeconomy. " JMirum eft " Mofem rem tantam, Ir modo immortalem Henochum facliim *' CREDiniT, tarn obiter, tamque obfcure, quafi eam latere " VELLET, perftrinxille. Forte cum haec ex antiquiflimis monu- '* mentis exlcriberet, nihil pricter ea quae nobis tradidit invenit, qui- '-' bus aliquid adjicere religio fuit §." For Mofes both knew and believed the Immortality of Enoch, and purpofely obfcured the fa6f, from whence it might h^ve been colle£led. But what is moft fingu- lar in this reflection i.-, that the learned Commentator, to aggravate the obfcurity, fays it is as obfcure, as if he purpofely defigned to bide * Gen. V. 24. -j- Hcb. xi. 5. J 2 Kings ii. i, 11. ^ Vid. Cltrkum in Ge'.i. v. 21, 1% 136 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. //, fiippofing fuch a delign to be the higheft improbability ; which \vas indeed the fact, and is the true folutioii of the difficulty. 3. Ill his hiftory of the Patriarchs, he entirely omits, or throws into fliade, the accounts of thofe Revelations, with which, as we learn from the writers of the New Teftament, fome of them were aiflually favoured, concerning the Redemption of mankind. Of thefe favours we Ihall give ere long a great and noble inftance, in the cafe of Abraham, who, as we are affured'by Jesus himfelf, rejoiced to fee Christ's day, and Jaw it, and tvas glad. From whence therefore could all this ftudied caution arife, but to keep opt of fight that doflrine, which, for ends truly worthy of the divine Wifdom, he had omitted in his Inftitutes of Law and Reli- gion ? This fhews the weaknefs of that evafion, which would recon- cile the OMISSION, to the People's knowledge of the dodiine, by fuppofing they had been fo well inftruiSled by the Patriarchs, that J Mofes had no occafion to fay any thing farther on that fubjedt. Let me obferve by the way, that thefe confiderations are more than a thoufand topical arguments to prove, that Mofes was the real author of the book of Genefis. But the proof deduced there- from will be drawn out and explained at large hereafter. II. That the importance of this Do6trine to Society was well un- derftood by Mofes, may appear from a particular provifiou in his Liftitutes (befides that general one of an extraordinary providence), evidently made to oppofe to the inconvenient confequences of the OMISSION. We have fhewn at large, in the firft volume, that under a com- mon or unequal providence, civil Government could not be fupported without a Religion teaching a future ftate of reward and punifli- ment. And it is the great purpofe of this work to prove, that the Mofaic Religion wanting that do6lrine, the Jews muft really .have enjoyed that equal providence, under which holy Scripture .reprefents them to have lived : and then, no tranfgreflbr efcaping punidiment, S£CT. 5. OF iMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 137 piinlfliment, nor any obferver of the law mlfling his reward*, human alTIiirs might be kept in good order, without the doctrine of a future State. Yet ftill the violence of irregular paflions would make fome men of flrongcr complexions fuperior to all the fear of perfonal temporal evil. To lay hold therefore on Thefe, and to gain a due afcendant over the mofl: determined, the punifliments, in this Inflitution, are extended to the Posterity of wicked men ; which the inftinclive fondnefs of Parents to their ofispring would make terrible even to thofe who had hardened themfelves into an infenllbility of perfonal punifhment : I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, vijiting the ini- quity of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth genC' ration of them that hate me -j-. Now that this puni(hment was only to fupply the want of a Future fate is evident from hence I : Towards the conclufion of this extra- ordinary Oeconomy, when God, by the later Prophets, reveals his purpofe of giving them a new Dijpeffation ^, m which a Future Hate of reward and punifhment was to be brought to light, it is then declared in the moft exprefs manner, that he will abrogate the Law of punifliing Children for the crimes of their Parents. Jeremiah, fpeaking of this tieiv Dilpenfation, fays: " In ihofe days they fliall *' fay no more, The Fathers have eaten a four grape, and the " Children's teeth are fet on edge : but every one fjall die for his ** own iniquity, every man that eateth the four grape, his teeth *' (hall be fet on edge. Behold the days come, faith the Lord, that *' I will make a new covenant with the Houfe of Ifrael, — not *' according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers in the *' day that I took them by the hand to bring them cut of the land *' of Egypt II," Cs'f. And Ezekiel, fpeaking of the fame times, * See note [AA], at the end of this Book. + See note [BB], at the end of thie Book. [ See note [CCj, at tlie end of this Book. § See note [DD], at the end of this Book. | Chap, xxxi. 29 — ^i. Vol. IIL T fays : i^^ THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V; fays : " I will give them one hesrt, and will put a new fpirif" " within you, ^c — But as for them, whofe heart walketh aftet *' the heart of their abominable things — I wi/I recompenfe their tvay *' UPON THEIR OWN HEADS, faith the Lord God*." And again : '* What mean ye, that yon ufe this Proverb concerning the land " of Ifrael, faying, The F'athers have eaten four grapes, and the " Child rens' teeth are fet on edge t ? As I live, faith the Lord " God, Ye fhall not hove occajion any more to ufe this Proverb in «' Ifrael. Behold all fouls are mine ; as the foul of the Father, fo " alfo the foul of the Son is mine : the foul that Jinneth, it fiall «' die^r And yet (to (hew more plainly that the abrogation of the Law was folely owing to this new Difpenfation) the fame Prophets, when their fubjedt is the prejent Jewifh Oeconomy, fpeak of this very Law as ftill in force. Thus Jeremiah : " Thou fheweft loving kind- " nefs unto thoufinds, and recompenfejl the iniquity of the Fathers *' into the bojom of their Children after them §." And Hose A : " Seeing thou hajl forgotten the Law of thy Gody I will afo forget " thyChildren\\r From all this I conclude, That, whoever was the real Author of what goes under the name of the h.aw of Mofes, was at leall: well acquainted with the inipo''tance of the do6lrine of a future flate of reward and punifhment ; and provided well for the want of it. But the blindnefs of Infidelity is here moft deplorable. The Deifts are not content with condemning this Law of injuftice, but will accufe the Difpenfition itfelf of inconfiftence ; pretending that the Prophets have direftly contradicted Mofes in their manner of denouncing punifliment. It is indeed the landing triumph of infidelity. But let us return (fays Spinoza) to the Prophets, whofe difcordant opinions we have undertaken to lay open. The xviiith chap. o/'Ezekiel does not feein * Chap. xi. ver. 19 — 2 i. + See note [EE], at the end of this Book. \ CUap. xviii. ver. 2 — 4. § Chap, xxxii, ver. 18. 1| Chap, iv, ver, 6. to (( S'Ecr. s- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 139 io agree iviih the 7th ver. oj^ the xxxivth chop. 0/" Exodus, nor with the iSthvcr. of the xxxlid chap, of Jeremiah, tj'c*. — " Tliere " are feveral miftakes (Hiys Tindal) crept into the Old Tefla- *' meat, where there's fcarce a chapter which gives any hiftorical " account of matters, but there are fome tilings in it which could *'_ not be tliere originally. — It muft be owned, that the lame fpirit " (I dare not call it a fpirit of cruelty) does not alike prevail *' throughout the Old Tcftament ; the nearer we come to tlie times " of the Gofpel, the milder it appears : for though God declares in " the Decalogue, that he is a jealous God, vi/iting the iniquity of the " parents upon the children to the third and fourth Generation, and accordingly Achan, with all his fomily, was deflroyed for his *' {ingle crime; yet the Lord afterwards iiiys. The foul that ftineth '* /'/ fmll die ; the fon Jhall not bear the iniquity of the father f, " &c +." I. Let us fee then what thefe men have to l;iy on the firft point, the injufice of the Law. They fet out On a falfe fuppofitlon, tliat this method of puniihment was part of an unlverfal Religion given by God as the Creator and Governor of mankind : whereas it is onlv part of a civil Inftitute, given by him to C7ie People, as their tutelary God and civil Governor. Now we know it to be the practice of all States to punifh the crime of Lefe Majefly in this manner. And to render it jufi, no more is required than that it was in the compad: (as it certainly was here) on men's free entrance into Society. When a guilty Pofterity fufFered for the crimes of their Parents, they were deprived of their natural unconditional rights ; when an innocent, they only forfeited their conditional and civil : But as this method of punifhment was adminiltcred with more lenity in the * — Seel ad Prophetas revertamur, quorum difcrepantes opiniones eti;im notare fuf- cepimus. — Cap. faltem xviii. Ezech. non videtur convenire cum verfu 7. cap. xxxiv* Exod. nee cum ver. iS. Cap. xxxii, Jcr. &:c. Trai5t. Theologico-Pol. p, 27, i^S. f Chrijlianity as oIJ ai the Creation, p. 240, 241. \ See iiote [Ff ], at the end of this Book. T 2 Jewifli I40 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Jewifii Republic, fo it was with iufiaitely more redlltude, than in any other. For although God allowed capital punifhment to be inflifted for the crune of lefe majejly, on the Ferjon of the offender^ by the delegated adminiflratiou of the Law; yet concerning his Family or PoJI.riiy he refervtd the inquifition of the crime to himfelf, and ex- prefsly forbid the Magiftrate to meddle with it, in the common courfe of juftlce. Tbe Fathers Jlmll not be put to death for the Children, neither JJ:all the Children be fut to death for the Fathers : every man fjall be put to death for his ovon fin*. And we find the IMagiilrate careful not to intrench on this part of God's jurildiftioii. We are told, that as loon as Amaziah the Ion of Joafli king of Judah became firmly efiabhlhed in the throne, He flew hisfervanis ivhich had fain the King his Father. But the children of the mur- derers he few not : according unto that ivhich is written in the book of the law of Mofcs [Deut. xxiv. 16.] wherein the Lord commanded fay- ing. The Fathers f}all not be put to death for the Children, Zsc f. Yet fuch hath been the perverfity or flupidity of Freethinking, that this very text itfelf hath been charged with contradiding the xxth chap- ter of Exodus. Now God's appropriating to himfelf the execution of the Law in queftion would abundantly juftlfy the equity of it, even fuppofing it had been given by him as part of an imiverfal reh- gion. For why was the Maglftrate forbidden to imitate God's me- thod of punlfliing, but becaufe no power lefs than omnifcient could, in all cafes, keep clear of injuftice in fuch an inquifition ? But God not only referved this method of punilhment to himfelf, but has gracioufly condefcended to inform us, by his Prophets, after ivhat manner he was pleafed to adminifier it. Your injciuities (fays he) and the iniqjjities of your fathers together, ivhich have burnt incerfe upon the mountains^ and blafphemed me upon the bills : therefore will I meafure their former work into their bofom |. And again : " But ye fay, Why ? doth not the Son bear the iniquity *' of the Father ': When the Son hath done that which is lawful and " right, and hath kept all my ftatutes, and hath done them, he fhall * Deut. xxiv. 16. f i Kings xiv. 5, 6. J If. Ixv. 7. '* furely Sr.cT.5. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 141 " furely live. — But when the Righteous turneth away from his *' righteoufnefs and committeth iniquity — fhall he live*?" So much for that cafe in which the Pofl:erity were Iniquitous, and fuffered punilhment, in the ftrict and proper fenfe of the word. But doubtlefs, an innocent Pofterity were fometimes punifhed, according to the denunciation of tliis Law, for the crimes of their wicktd Fathers t ; as is done by modern States, in attaint of blood and con- fifcation : and this, with the highefl: equity in both cafes. In our Gothic Conftitutions, the throne being the fountain of honour and fource of property. Lands and Titles defcend/rov; //, and were held as fiefs of it, under perpetual obligation of military and civil fervices. Hence the laws of forfeiture for high treafou ^, the mofl: violent breach of the condition on which thofe fefs were granted. Nor was there any injuftice in the forfeiture of what was acquired by no natural right, but by civil compa£l, how much fo- ever the confifcation might affedl an innocent pofterity. The fame principles operated under a Theocracy. God fupported the Ifraelites in Judea, by an extraordinary adminiftration of his providence. The confequence of which were great temporal blef- iings to which they had no natural claim; given them on condition of obedience. Nothing therefore could be more equitable than, on tlie violation of that condition, to withdraw thofe extraordinary blefllngs from the Children of a Father thus offending. How then can the Deift charge tliis Law with injuftice ? llnce a Poflerity when innocent was affe£i:ed only in their civil conditional rights ; and, when deprived of thofe which were natural and unconditional, were always guilty. From all this it appears, that the excellent Grotius himfelf had a very crude and impcrfe(Sl notion of the whole matter, when he re- folved the juftice of it intirely into God's fovereign right over his * Ezek. xviii. 19 and 24. And fee note [GG], at the end of this Book. ■\ This appears from the rife of that proverb in Ifrael, The Fathers have eaten four trapes, and the Childrens teeth are fet on edge, \ See note [HH], at the end of this Book, creatures. 142 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. creatures. *' Deu5 quidem in lege Hebraels data paternam impieta- " tern in pofleros fe vindicaturum minatur : fed Ipfe Jus Domini! " pleniflimum habet, ut in res noftras, ita in vitam noftram, ut " munus fuum, quod fine ulla cav.fa & quovis tempore auferre cul- " vis, quando vult, poteil:*." II. As to the fecond point, the charge oi Cofitradtciion in the Dif- penjat'rjjz, we now fee, that, on the contrary, thefe different declara- tions of God's manner of punifhing in two fo diftant Periods, are the MOST DIVINE INSTANCE of conftancy and uniformity in tlie mani- feftations of eternal Juftice : So far are they from any indication of a milder or fever er Spirit, as Tyndal with equal Infolence and folly hath objected to Revelation. For while a future Jlate was kept hid from the Jews, there was abfolute need of fuch a Law to retrain the more daring Spirits, by working on their Inftinfts ; or, as Cicero exprefles it — ut caritas liberorum amiclores Parentes ReipublicEe red- deret. But when a dodrlne was brought to light which held them up, and continued them after death, the objefts of divine ju-flice fj it had then no farther ufe ; and was therefore reafonably to be abo- liflied with the reft of the judicial Laws., peculiar to the Mofalc Difpenfatlon, But thefe men have taken it into their heads (and what comes flowly in, will go (lowly out) that it was repealed for its injujlice ; though another reafon be as plainly intimated by the Pro- phets, as the circumflances of thofe times would permit ; and fo plainly by Jeremiah, that none but fuch heads could either not fee or not acknowledge it. In his tlilrty-firft chapter, foretelling the advent of the new Difpenfatlon, he exprefsly fays, this Law fhall be revoked: In those da 'is they Jh all fay no more. The Fathers hai:e eaten a four grape, and the Childrens teeth are fet on edge. But every one pall die for his own iniquity \. Yet, in the very next chapter, fpeaking of the old Difpenfatlon, under which they then lived, he as exprefsly declares the Law to be flill in force. When I had deli- * Be Jure Bel. & Pac. vol. ii. p. 593. Ed, Barbeyiac, Aiift. 1720. f See note [II], at the end of this Book. j Yer. z(), 30. vered Sect. 5- OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 143 •vered the evidence of the pur chafe unto Baruch, I prayed unto the Lord, faytngy — Thou pewfl loving kiudnefs unto thoufands, and recompenfeji the iniquity of the fathers into the bofom of their Children after them *. Is this like a man who had forgot himfelf ? or who fufpeded the I^aw of ciLielty or injufliice ? But the ignoranc of Free-thinking was here unafFe6led ; and indeed the more excufable, as the matter had of old perplexed both Jews- and Chriftians. The Synagogue was fo fcandalized at Ezekiel's- Declarations againft this mode of puniHiment, that they deliberated a long time whether lie fhould not be thrown out of the Canon, for contradiding MosES in fo open a manner t. And Sentence Iiad an lafl: pad upon him, but that one Chananias promlfed to reconcile the two Prophets. How he kept his word, is not known, for there is nothing of his extant upon the fubje£l ; only we are told that he ap-^ proved himfelf a man of honour, and, with great labour and fludy,, at length did the bufinefs +. Or I GEN was fo perplexed with the different a{rertions§ of thefe two- Prophets, that he could find no better way of reconciling them than by having recourfe to his allegorical fanaticifm, and fuppofing the words of the firfl to be a Parable or Myflic fpeech ; which, however,, he would not pretend to decipher. Tliis learned Father, having quoted fbme pagan Oracles intimating that Children were puniOicd for the crimes of their Forefathers, goes on in this manner : " How "" much more equitable is what our Scriptures fliy on this point ? •' Th<: Fathers Jhull not he put to death for the Children, neither JJ:all ♦' the Children be put to death Jar the Fathers : every man f:; all bt put * Ver. 16 and i8, f Les Juifs diient qu' Ezechiel etoit ferviteiir de Jeremie, & que le Saaliedrin delibcr* long-tems, fi Ton rejetteioit fon Livre du Canon dcs Ecritiires. Le fujet de leur ch:igrin centre ce Prophete vient de fon extreme oblciiritc, St de ce qu'il enfeigne diverfcs cliofes contraircs a Moife — Ezechiel, difcnt-ils, a declare, ^e le Jils vc portnoii fluiViniquite de fon fere, centre cc que Moife dit cxprefrement, ^le Ic Sdgncur vaij^e Plniijuite dcs Peres, fur les Enfans, jufquH la tro'ificmc i£ quairiemc generation, Calinct, Dilfcrt. vol. ii. p. 361, J See note [KK], at the end of this Book.. § Exod. xx. EiJtk. :«vii^. *' to 144. THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. " to death for his own fitly Deut. xxiv. i 6> ^f. — But if any one " flioukl obje6l that this verfe of the oracle, " On the Ch'ildrem Children and their Pofterity ; " is very like what Scripture fays, that God vijits the iniquity of the '■'^ Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth Generation of " them that bate him, ExoD. xx. 5. he may learn from Ezekiel th'^X " thole words are a PARABLE ; for the Prophets reprove fuch as " fay, 'The Fathers have eaten four Grapes, and the Children^ teeth are '■'■ fet on edge ; and then it follows : As I live, faith the Lord, every *' one fi all die for his otvnfins only. But this is not the place to ex- *' plain what is meant by the vAVih^hE oi viftitig iniquity unto the <' third and fourth generation* " There could hardly be more miflakes in fo few words. The two texts in Deuteronomy and Exodus, which Origen reprefents as treating of the fame fubjeft, treat of fubjefts very different : the firft, as we have fhewn above, concerns the Magiftrate's execution of the Law ; the other, that which God referves to himfelf. Again, becaufe the text of Exodus apparently occafioned the Proverb mentioned by Ezekiel and Jere- miah, therefore by a ftrange blunder or prevarication, the Father brings the Proverb in proof that the Law which gave birth to it, was but a Proverb oTi parable itfelf f. n. We have now fheWn that Moses did not teach a future flate of reward and punifliment ; and that he omitted it with defign ; that he underftood its great importance to fociety; and that he provided for the want of it. And if we may believe a great Statefman and * "Oj* ^s ouw TaTH ^iAlio» TO, Ovu aVo9«yS»7ai, £sf. la) Si Ti? ojuoiov ei/ai ^«y?i Tw T«j A7roo*otf5 u^x^ixi inal/^i'» It* rtKvx, £x» r^irrv j^ Tilx^vv yivewv ror^ ^iCtiOh £^t'J fxoMiTu^ on If 'su liQiiuviX wapateoXij To ToitJTo* ilyai A/Xeitlat, otirfjiu^vu ra, KtyctvltK^f Oi «TaTE^E^ e^aiov t/Aifaxa, j^ 6»>i'.Ta<. Ov xaloi tit 'aa^itlec St xaijo* iri) Jmyiicracroai t» (r>if*«irii h 'Bt^l t2 TfiTin "^ Tsia^Tr.n yt>f«» BWoJiJoairSai ras a/xaf1i«4 i!7«{«Co^i. Cont. Cclf. p. 4OJ. ■f See note [LLj, at the end of this Book. Philofopher, Sect. 5- O F MOSE S D EMONST RATED. 145 Phllofopher, *' Mofes had need of every Sanction that his know- *' ledge or his imagination could foggefi: to govern tlie unruly people, ** to whom he gave a Law, in the name of God*." But as the proof of this point is only for the fake of its confe- quence, that therefore the people had not the knoivledge of that doSlr'me^ our next ftep will be to eflablifh this confequence : Which (if we take in thofe circumflauces attending the Omifjujn, juft explained above) will, at the fame time, fliew my argument in fupport of this Om'ifjion to be more than negative. Now thougli one might fairly conclude, that the People's not having this Dodlrine, was a necefl'ary confequence of Mofes's not teaching it, in a Law which forbids the leafl: addition t to the written Inftltute; yet I fliall fliew, from a circumftance, the clearefl: and mofl inconteftable, that the Ifraelltcs, from the time of Mofes to the time of their Captivity, had not the dodlrine of a future ftate of reward and punlftimcnt. The Bible contains a very circumftantial Hiftory of this People throughout the aforefaid period. It contains not only the hiftory of public occurrences, but the lives of private perfons of both iexez^ and of all ages, conditions, charaders and complexions ; in the ad- ventures of Virgins, Matrons, Kings, Soldiers, Scholars, Merchants, and Huibandmeu. All thefe, in their turns, make their appear- ance before us. They are given too in every circumftance of life ; ■captive, viAorious ; in ficknefs, and in health ; in full fecurlty, and amidft impending dangers ; plunged in Civil bufuiefs, or retired and fequeftered in the ferv Ice of Religion. Together with their Story, we have their Compofitions likewife. Here they fing their tri- umphs ; there, their pallnodla. Here, they offer up to the Deity their hymns of praife; and there, petitions for their wants : here, they urge their moral precepts to their Contemporaries ; and there, they treafure up their Prophecies and Predi<5lions for pofterity ; and to both denounce the promifes and threatenlngs of Heaven. Yet in none of thefe different circumftances of life, in none of thefe va- * JSo///»^iro/r'j ?/V/4/, vol. v.p. 5:3. f Deut. iv, i. Chap. xii. ver. 3^. V01-. in. U rious 146 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. rlous carts of compofitlon, do we ever find them adding on the mo- tives, or influenced by the profpecl of future rewards and punifh- ments ; or indeed expre(ring the leall hope or fear, or even common curiofity concerning them. But every thing they do or fay refpe6ls the prefent life only; the good and ill of which are the foleobjeds of all their purluitd and averfions *. Hear tlicn the fum of all. The facred Writings are extremely va- rious both in their fubje*.^, ftyle, and compofition. They contain an account of the Creation, and Origine of the human race ; the hiflory of a private Family, of a cholen People, and of exemplary men and women. They confifi; of hymns and petitions to tiie Deity, precepts of civil life, and religious Prophecies and Prcdiiflion?. Hence I infer that as, amidH: all this variety of writing, the Do6Vrine of a future Aate never once appears to have had any (liare in this People's thoughts; it never did indeed make part of their Religious opi- nions t« -And when, to all this, we find their occapmal reafoninf* only concluiive on the fuppofition that a future flate was not amongit the Religious doftrines of the People, the above confiderations, if they needed any, would receive the flrongeft fupport and confirma- tion. To give one example out of many. The Pfalmift fays, For the rod of the JVicked JJ.wll not rcjl upon the lot of the Righteous: lef the Kighteous put forth their hands unto iniquity \. That is, " God will vigoroufly adminirter that extraordinary Providence which the nature of the Difpenfation required to be adminiftered, left the Righteous, not feeing themfelves exempt from the evils due to wickednefs, fhould conclude that there was no moral Governor of the world ; and fo, by making their own private intereft the rule of their adlions, fall into the pradice of all kind of iniquity." But this could never be the confequence where an unequal difpenfation of Providence was attended with the knowledge and belief of a future flate. And here I will appeal to thofe who are mofl: prejudiced againll: this reafoning. Let them fpeak, and tell me, if they were * See note [MM], at the end of this Book. i See note [NNJ, at the end of this Book, \ Pf. cxxv. 3. now Sect. 5. OF MOSES DExMO NSTRATED. 147 now firfl: fhewu fome hiftory of an old Greek Republic, delivered in the form and manner of the Jewifh, and no more notice in it of a future {late, Whether they could poflibly believe that that Doctrine was National, or generally known in it. If tiicy have the leaft in- genuity, they will anfwer. They could not. On what then do they fupport their opinion here, but on religious Prejudices ? Prejudices of no higher an original than fome Dutch or German Syftem : for, as to the Bible, one half of it is filent concerning Itje and hnmortality ; and the other half declares that the dodrine was brought to light through the Gojpcl. But to fet this argument in its fullefl light. Let us confider the Hiftory of the reft of mankind, whether recorded by Bards, or Statefmen; by Fhilofophers, or Priefts : in which we fhall fmd the doctrine of a future Jlate ftill bearing, throughout all the various cir- cumftances of human life, a conftant and principal (hare in the de- terminations of the Will. And no wonder. We lee how ftrong the Grecian world thought thefandtion of it to be, by apafl'agein Pindar, quoted by Plutarch In \\\s X.r:x&. o{ Superjlitiofi, where he makes it one circumftance of the fupcrior happinefs of the Gods, over men, that they ftood not in fear of Acheron. But not to be difi:ra(Sl:ed by too large a view, let us feleft from the reft of the Nations, one or two moft refembling the Jewifli. Thofc which came neareft to them (and, if the Jews were only under human guidance, indeed extremely near), were the Suevi of the north, and the Arabs of the fouth. Botii thefe People were led out in fearch of new Pofleffions, which they were to win by the fword- And both, it is confefled, h-x6.X.h.Q Ao^nnt oi a Future Jiafe inculcated unto them by their leaders, Odin and Mahomet. Of the Arabs we have a large and circumftantial hiftory : Of the Suevi we have only fome few fragments of the fongs and ballads of their Bards ; yet they equally ferve to fupport our Conclulion. In the large hiftory of the Saracen Empire we can fcarce find a page, and in the Runic rhymes of the Suevi Icarce a line, where the dodlrine of a future ftate was not pufhing on its influence. It was their conftant U 2 Viaticum 148 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Viaticum through hte ; it ftimulated them to war and flaughter, and fpirlted their longs of triumph; it made them infenfible of pain, immoveable in danger, and fuperlor to the approach of death*. For, what Cicero lays of Poetry in Rome, may be more truly applied to the Doftrine of a Future lliate amongft thefe Barbarians : " Cetera^ ♦' ncque temporum lunt, neque astatum omnium, neque locorum. " Iliec fludia adolefcentiam alunt, lenedlutem obledlant, fecundas *' resornant, adversis perfugium ag solatium pr^bent-j--" But this is not alb For we find, that when a future ftate became a popular do6tilne amongft the Jewilh People (the time and occa- lion of which will be explained hereafter) that tlien it made as con- fiderable a figure in their Annals, by influencing their determina- xhns I, as it did in the hiftory of any other people. Nor is it onlv on the filence of the fiicred Writers, or of the fpeakers they introduce, that I fupport this conclullon ; but from their pofitive declarations; in which they plainly difcover tliat there was no popular expecVation of a future ftate, or Refurredlion. Thus the woman of Tekoah to David : For we miijl needs die, and are as ^vaterfpilt on the ground, ivhich cannot he gathered up again §. Thus Job : As the cloud is con fumed, and vaniJJ:eth atvay : fo he that goeih down to the grave pall come up no more ||. And again : " There is " hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will Iprout again — " though the root thereof wax old in the earth, and the ftock there- ** of die in the ground, yet through the fcent of water, it will bud •' and bring forth boughs like a plant. But man dieth and wafteth '• away : yea, man giveth up the ghoft, and where is he ? As the *' waters fall from the Tea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up : fo " man lieth down and rifeth not till the Heavens be no more, they " fhall not awake nor be raifed out of their fleep **." Here the Jewifh Writer, for fuch he was, as (hall be fhewn hereafter (and might, indeed, be underftood to be fuch from this declaration alone) * See note [OO], at the end of this Book. f Pro Jrchia Poeta, Se£l, 7. X Sec the fecond book of Maccabees. § 2 Sam. xiv. 14. II See note [PPJ, at the end of this Book, ** Chap, xiv. ver. 7 — 12. oppofes 3tcT. 5. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 149 uppofes the revival of a vegetable to the irrecoverable death of a rational animal. Had he known as much as St. Paul, he had doubt- lefs ufed that circumftance in the regetable world (as St. Paul did) to prove analogically, the revival of the rational animal. The Plalmift lays, In death there is no remembrance of thee : in the grave u-ho JIjciH give thee thanks * ? And again : Whiit profit is there in my blood, when I go down to the pit ? Shall the dujl proife thee,J}.wll it declare thy truth -t ? And again : " Wilt thou fhew wonders to " the dead ? Shall the dead arise and praife thee ? Shall thy lov- " iiig kindnefs be declared in the grave, or thy faithfulnefs in de- " flrudlon ? Siiall thy wonders be known in the dark ? and thy *' righteoufnefs in the land of forgetfulnefs |?" The writer of the book of Ecclefiaftes is flill more exprefs : For the living know that they Jloall die : but the dead know not any thins., neither have they any more a reward, for the memory of them is forgotten §. Hezekiah, in his fong of Thankfgiving for his miraculous re- covery, fpeaks in the fame ftrain : " For the grave cannot praife " thee, death cannot celebrate thee : they that go down into the pit " cannot hope for thy truth. The living, the living, he (hall praife •* thee, as I do this day : The father to the children Ihall make known " thy truth |j." Laftly Jeremiah, in his Lamentc-tions and complaints of the people, fays. Our fathers have sinned and are not, and WE have born their iniq^iities**. Which implies, that the fathers being dead bore no part of the punifhment of their fins, but that all was thrown upon the children. But could this have been fuppofcd. had the People been inflru£led in the do£lrine of future rewards and punifhments ? Yet a learned Anfiverer, in contradiction to all this, thinks it fuf- 6cient to fay, That " thefe parages may imply no more than that * Pfalm vi. 6. f Ptilm xxx. lo. \ Pfalni Ixxxviii. ii — 13. § See note [QJ2.]i at the end of thi« Bock. ]] If. xx.wiii. iS, 19. •♦ Chap. V. ver. 7. *« the ijo THE DIVINE LEGATION Bjok \^ ■*' the dead cannot fet forth God's glory before men, or make his *' pralfe to be known upon earth'*.''' Now 'I think it mufl: needs imply fomething more, fince tlie dead are fiiid to be unable to do this under the earth as well as upon it. For it is the Grave which is called the latid offorgetfulnefs, or that where all things are forgotten. And in another place it is faid, T'bc dead praife not the Lord, neither any that go do%vn into Jilencerf. Surely, a plain intimation that all intercouile of praife between man and his Maker ceafed on death, as -well below ground asahove; otherwife why didthefacred writer tell us it was the Grave -which was the place oijilence to the dead ? It the Anfwerer's interpretation be right, this -world, and not the other, was the place. Had the Pfalmift fuppofed, as the Dodor does, that the dead continued in a z-^'^^zx'iy ox revienibering the goo d- nefs of God, this remembrance could be no where more quickly or forceably excited than in that World where the divine goodnefs is <:learly unveiled to the Jpirits of jujl men made perfeSl | ? On the contrary, the Grave is uniformly reprefented by all of them, as the landof darknep, Jilence, and forgetfulnefs. But fuice, of all the facred writers, the Pfalmift is he who is fuppofed by the adverfaries of the D. L. to have moft effe6lually confuted the Author's fyftem, I fliall quote a paflage from his hymns, which, I think, fairly enough decides the controverfy. — Hitherto we have only heard him fay, that the dead forget God ; we fhall now find him go further, and fay that God forgets them. — " I am counted with them that go down into the pit. — Free amongft the dead, like the flain that lie in the grave, -whom thou rememherefl no more : and they are cut off from thy hand §. Let the ferious reader take notice of thelaft words, — they (the dead) are cut from thy hand, i. e. they are no longer the object of thy Providence or moral Government. On this account it is, that in the beginning of the fentence he calls thefe dead free ; that is, manumifed, fet at liberty; in the fame fenfe that Uzziah the \e^tx\ freedom is fpoken of b_y the * Dr. Stebbing's Exam. 8ic. p. 64. f Pf. cxt. 17. J Heb. xii. 23. § PI'. Ixxxviii. 4, 5. facred Sect. c. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. id facred hiflorian. — ^rui Uzziab the King was a Leper, and dwelt in a feveral houfe [or, as the margin of our tranflation tells us, itfignifies in the Hebrew, a free house, or houfe of freedom"^ being a Leper^ for he was CUT OVT Jrofii the houfe of the Lord. The phrafe oi cutting of\ 8cc. fignifying the fame in both places, the taking awny all iur tercourfe and relation between two : And if that intercourfe con.. fiHed mfervice on the one lide, and proteiftion on the other, as be- tween Lord and Subje£l, Maflcr and Servant, he who owed frvice - is witli great propriety of figure faid to be free or mani/mised. Hezeklah, as quoted above, delivers the very fame fentiment^ though in a ditferent expreffion — ihey that go dow7i into the pit cannot hope for THY TRUTH. What this truth is, the following words declare, — the living, the living, they fall praife thee. The father to the CHILDREN shall MAKE KNOWN THY TRUTH. As mUch aS tO fay, *' the truth not to be hoped for by them who go down into the piit, is The nature and the hifory cf Gdfs Dijpenfation to his chofen people %'' in which, by- a particular precept of the Law, the Fathers were commanded to inflruft their Children. Thus the Pialmifl: and this other Jewifli Ruler agree in this principle, that the Dead are no longer the object of God's general Providence, or of his particuUir :. which evinces what I was to prove, "That the body of. the Ex\RLV Jews had no expectations of a future state ok. REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS." And here let me take notice of x paflage which the contenders for the contrary Doftrine much con-; tide in. It is where David, fpeaking of his dead, child, fays, I fall go to hiniy but he will not return to vie. But whither was he to follow, his departed child .' He himfelf tells you, — into a land of darknefsy. fience, and forge tfilnefs, where he was to be no longer in a capacity of remembering the goodnefs and mercy of God, or even oi being reineni'- bcred by him ; but was to be cut offjrom his hand, that is, was to be no longer the objtdl: of his. Providence or moral Government. To proceed. If now we fet all thefe pafi'ages together, we find. it to be the fame language throughout, and in every circumftance. of life ; as well in the cool philcfophy of the author of Ecclefiaftet,- a$ 152 THE DIVINE LEG ATI O N Book V. as amidft the diftrefles of the Pfahnift, and the exultations of good Hezeklah. But could this language have been ufed by a People in{lru6led in the doctrine of life and immortality ? or do we find one word of it, on any occafion whatever, in the Writers of the ^s^ew Teftament, but where it is brought in to be confuted and condemned*? All this, to thoughtful men, will, I fuppofe, be deemed -con- vincing. Whence it follows that their fubterfuge is quite cut off, who pretend, that Mofes did not indeed propagate the Doftrine of a future ftate of rewards and puni(hments in ivriting, but that he de- livered it to TRADITION, which conveyed it fafely down through all the ages of the Jewifh Dirpeafation, from one end of it to the other. For we fee, he was fo far from teaching it, that he ftudioufly contrived to keep it out of fight ; nay provided for the want of it : and the people were fo far from being influenced by it, that they had not even the idea of it. Yet the writers of the Church of Rome have taken advantage of this filence in the Law of Mofes concerning a future flate, to advance the honour of tradition : For, not fee- ing the dodlrine in the written law, and fancying they faw a neceflity that the Jews fhould have it, they concluded (to fave the credit of the Jewi(h Church and to advance the credit of their own) that Mofes had carefully inculcated it, in the traditional. This weighty point. Father Simon proves by the fecond book of Macca- bees ; and triumphs over the Proteftants and Socinians (as he calls them) for their folly in throwing that book out of the Canon, and thereby difabling themfelves from proving a future ftate, from the Old Teftamcnt t« A very * " Let to eat and tlfink, for to-morrov} we die. Be not deceived: evil communica- lions corrupt good nnanners," ice. i Cor. xv. 32, f Monf. Simon avoit dit, pour appuyer la Tradition, que la refurre(Sion des corps ne peut fe demontrer par le VieuxTeftament — ces expreflions plus claires dela refurrcftion & du fiecle a venir, qui fe trouvent dans \t fecond Livre Maccabees, font une preuve evidente que les J uifs avoient une Tradition touchant la Refurreftion, dont ils n'eft fait aucune mention dans les anciens lirres de I'Ecriture. Les Proteftans & ks Sociniens qui ne re» 9oivei>t Sect.5. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 153 A very worthy proteftant Blfliop does as much honour to Tradilioriy in his way. In fome Mijcellanies of the Bifhop of Cloyne, puh- lifhed in 1752, we find thefe words — " Mofes, indeed, doth not in- " JiJ} on a future fate, the common basis of all political In- " STITUTIONS. — The behef of a future fl:ate (which it is manifefi; " the Jews were pofleilled of lung before the coming ofChrif) feems to "" have obtained amongft the Hebrews from prim£eval tradition, *' which might render it unneceflluy for Mofes to inff on that *' article *." Though the Bifhop has not the merit of faying this with a profefl'ed delign, like Father Simon, pour appuyer la Tradition^ yet the Church of Rome has not the lefs obhgation to him for af- figning fo much virtue to this their powerful alTiftant, which has conveyed to them all they want ; and indeed moft of what they have. But if the traditional doftrine of a future ftate prevailed amongft the Jews, in the time of Mofes, and that he would truit to the fame conveyance for the fafe delivery of it down to the times of Chrift, how came it to pafs that he did his beft to weaken the effi- cacy, by ftudioufly contriving to draw men off, as it were, from the Doctrine, and always reprefenting it under the impenetrable cover of temporal rewards and punifliments ? 2. If a future ftatc obtained by Tradition, What occafion was there for the Law of punifhing the tranfgreflion of the parent upon ■the children ? 3. If it obtained by Tradition, How happened it that the Jews are not reprefented in their Hiftory fometimes at leaft, as afting on the motives, and influenced by the profpeft of a future ftate, and •exprening their hopes concerning it like the reft of mankind, who had it by Tradition, or otherwife ? 4. If it obtained by Tradition, How came Hezekiah to fay, that ihey ivho go down into the pit cannot hope for the truth : and David, •^oivent point les Alaccalecs ne pourront pas la prouver folidement par le Vie\ix Tclla- inent. Pere Simon, Rcponfe au Scntimens de quelqucs Theologiens de Hollaudc, ^c ;p. 39. * Page 68. Vol. III. X to 154 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. to reprefent the dead as going into the place oi filence zw^ forgetfuU nefs^ where they were no longer to praife and celebrate the goodnefs of God ? On the contrary, are there not paffages in the books of Solomon and Job, which plainly (hew that no fuch tradition ob- tained in their refpecftive times ? 5. If it obtained by 'Tradition, What occafion for the adminiftra- tion of an extraordinary Providence under the Law ? Or from, whence arofe the embarras of David and Jeremiah (not to fpeak of the difputants in the book of Job) to account for the profperity of fome wicked Individuals, in the prefent life ? In a word, to the maintainers of this Tradition may be very appofitely applied the words . of Jefus to the Traditiovijls in general, when he told them, they made the ivord of God of none effeSl through their traditions. For certainly,, if any thing can render that word of God which brought life and im-r mortnUty to light by the Gofpel, of none effe6l, it is the pretended PRIMEVAL TRADITION whicli the good Bifhop fo much infifts upon. The learned Prelate indeed obferves, that the fews were pojfefj'ed. of a future fate long before the coming of Chrif. But what is this to. the purpofe, if it can be fhewn, that the knowledge of it might be, obtained from a quarter very diftant from the old Hebrew Traditions %, and efpecially if from the colour and complexion of the Dodrine, it can be fliewn, that it did, in fa6t, come from a diftant quarter ? namely, from their Pagan neighbours ; patched up out of fome. dark and fcattered iniinuations of their own Prophets, and varnifhed over with the metaphorical expreffions employed to convey them.. But not to anticipate what I have to fay on this head in the laft volume, I proceed in the courfe of my argument. SECT. VI. WI^AT is yet of greateft weight, the infpired writers of the New Tejiament exprefsly aflbre us that the dodlrine of a future State of reward and punifhment did not make part of the Mofaic Difpenfation. Their Sect.6. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 155 Their evidence may be divided into tivo parts. In the firft, they prove that temporal Rewards and Punifhments were the fanclion ot" the Mofalc Difpenfation : and in the fecond, that it had no other. I. St. Paul, in his epiflle to Timothy, enforcing, againfl: certahi judaizing Chrifcians, the advantages of moral above ritual obfcrvances, fays, " Bodily exercife profiteth little ; but godlinefs Is profitable *' unto all things ; having the promifc of the life that now is, and " of that which is to come *." Tiiat is, though numerous ritual obfervances were enjoined by the Law, and fome there. muft needs be under the Gofpel wherever there is a Chriftian Church, yet they are of little advantage in comparifon of moral virtue ; for that, under both Religions, the rewards proper to each were annexed only to godlinefs : that is to fay, under the Jewiih, the reward of (be life that now is ; under the Chriftian, of that tvhich is to come. This interpretation, which fhews temporal rewards to be foreign to the na- ture of the Chriftian Oeconomy, I fupport, I . From other pafl'ages of the fame Writer, where he exprefsly informs us that Chriftians have not the promife of the Ife that now is. For to the Corinthians he fays, fpeaking of the condition of the followers of Christ, if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men moji mlferabie -f. To underftand the force of which words, we muft conlider, that they were addrefled to Jewl(h Con- verts tainted with Sadducifm, who argued from the Mofaic Difpen- fation to the Chriftian : And holding that there was no future ftate in the former, concluded by analogy, that there w-as none in the latter. The argument on which they built their firft Pofition was, that the fandlions of the Law were temporal rewards and punifti- ments. Our Apoftle therefore argues with them, as is his ufual way, on their own principles. " You detij, fays he, a refurredion •' from the dead, or a future ftate of reward and punifliment. And " why ? Becaufe there is no fuch do£trine in the Law\ How do you ** prove it ? Becaufe the fandtions of the Law are temporal rewards * I Tim. JT. 8. t ' Cor. xv. 19. 2 " and ,36' THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. *' and punifliments. Agreed. And now on your own principle I " confute your conclufion. You own that the Jews had an equlva- " lent for future rewards and punifhmentrs, namely the prefent. But ♦♦ Chriftlans have no equivalent. So fiir from that, they are^ with " regard to this world oiily, of all men moji mijerabk', having there- " fore no equivalent for the rewards of a future flate, they mufl: *' needs be entitled to them." This (hews the fuperior force of the Apoftle's reafoning. And from hence it appears not only that Chrif- tians HAD NOT, but that the Jews had the promife of the life that now is. 2. If we underhand the promife of the life that noiv is to extend to the Chriftian Difpenfation, we deftroy the ftrength and integrity, of St. Paul's argument. He is here reafoning agalnft judaiziug Chrlftians. So that his bufiuefs is to fhew, that godlinefs, in every flate, and under every Difpenfation unto which they imagined them- felves bound, had the advantage of bodily exercife *. The author of the epiftle to the Hebrews, fpeaking of Jesus, fays : '^fter the fmilitude of Melchifedec there arifeth another Priejl, who is made not after the Law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endhfs life-f. The Jewifh Religion, called a carnal comtnandmerit, is here oppofed to the Chriflian, called ike power of an endlefs life. By carnal commandment then mult needs be underftood a Law promifnig carnal things, or the things of this life. II. That the Molaic Difpenfation had only the fandion of tem- poral rewards and puni(hments, or that it taught not future, let us hear St. John ; who in the beginning of his Gofpel affures us, that the La.w "mas given by Mofes^ but that Grace ^W Truth came by Jefus Chrifl |. As certain then as the Law did not come by Jefus Chrift, fo certain is it, according to this Apoflle, that Grace and Truth did not come by Mofes. This Grace and Truth cannot be * See note [RR], at the er.tl of this Book. •t Chap, vii. vei. 15, 16. J Chap. i. ver. 17, under- Sect. 6. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 157 underflood generlcally ; for, the grace or favour of God was beftowed on tlie chofeii race, and truth, or the revealed will of God, JiJ come by Mofes. It mud: therefore be {ome /pedes of grace and truth, of which the Apoftle here predicates ; the publication of which fpecles conftitutes what is called the Gofpel. And this all know to be re- demption from death, and reftoration to eternal lite. Again, to this part likewife, let us once more hear the learned Apoftle : y^s by one man Jin entered into the world, and death by Jin ; and Jo death pajfed upon all men. Jar that all have Jinned : Jor until the Laiv, Jin vjas in the world, but Sin is not imputed where there is no ■ Lazv. Never thelejs Death reigned Jrom Adam to Mojes *. It is St. Paul's purpofe to fhew, that death came by Adam through fin, and fo pafltd upon all men ; and that lije came by Jesus Christ : But having faid that Sui, which brings forth Death, is not imputed where there is no Law, left this fhould feem to contradidt what he - had faid of Death's pafling upon all men, he adds, neverthelejs death reigned prom Adam to Mofes ; taking it for granted that his followers • would underftand it muft needs reign from Mofes to Christ, as - having made Sins being imputed to confift in there being a Law given. Now I afk how the Apoftle could poflibly fay, that Death reigned under the Mofaic Difpenfation, if that People had the know- - ledge of immortal life to be procured by a Redeemer to come, any more than it can be faid to reign now with the fame knowledge of a Redeemer paft ; fince we agree that the efficacy of his death extends to all preceding as well as fucceeding Ages? Accordingly in his epiftle to the Corinthians he calls the Jewifli Law, the ministk a- TiON OF DEATH, and the ministration of Condemnation +• 2. In his epiftle to the Galatians, he fays, — Bejore v ai-vk cafne, •we were kept under the Law, Jlnit up unto the faith ichich J:ould ajterivards be revealed \ ; i. e. we were kept in fubjecHon to the Law of Mofes ; and, by that means, fhut up and fequeftered from the rtil of the Nations, to be prepared and made ready for the tirft reception of the FAITH, when it fhould in God's appointed time be revealed- * Rem. V. w, ttfeg, f zCor. iii. 7, .//f^. \ Cal. 111.53. unto 15S THE DIV4NE LEGATION BookV. unto men. From thefe words therefore it appears, that till that time, the Jews had no knowledge of this faith. So much we muft have concluded though he had not faid, as he does afterwards. That till that time, the Jews were hi bojidage under the elements of fhis ivorld^. Now could men acquainted with the doftrine of life and mmortaUty be faid, with any fenfe of propriety, to be in fuch a ftate of bondage ? For though men in bondage may have an idea of Liberty, yet of this liberty they could have no idea without un- derftanding, at the fame time, that they were partakers of its benefits. 3. In his fecond epiftle to Timothy he exprefsly fays. That Jesus Christ hath abolished death, and hath brought life AND immortality TO LIGHT THROUGH THE GoSPEL -f". But HOW if Death were aboliflied by Jesus Christ, it is certain it had reigned till his coming : and yet it is as certain, that it could reign 110 longer than while the tidings of the Gofpel were kept back ; becaufe we agree that Christ's death hath a retrofpe6l operation : therefort thofe under the Law had no knowledge of life and immortality. Again : If life and immortality were brought to light through the Gof- pel, confequently, tillthe preaching of the Gofpel, it was kept hid and out of fight ;[;. But if taught by Mofes and the Prophets, it was not brought to light through the Gofpel : therefore the generality of thofe under the Law had no knowledge of a future flate. But Scripture is ever confident, though mens fyftems be not. And for this reafon we find that Ife and immortality, whicii is here faid to be brought to light through the Gofpel, is fo often called the mystery of THE Gospel § : that is, a myfery till this promulgation of it by the (iifciples of Christ : Which had been hid from ages and from genera- tions, but 'Was then made manifefl unto the Saints ||. The term was borroweil from thofe famous Rites of Paganifm, fo named ; and is * Chap. iv. ver. 3. +2 Tim, i. 10, 'X See note [SS], at the end of this Book. ;^ See note LTTJ, at the end of this Book. .j| Col. i. 26, applied Sect. 6., OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 159, applied with admirable juftnefs. For as the Myjlcnes were commu- nicated only to a few of the wife and great, and kept hid from the. populace: fo life and immortality^ as we fhall fee, was revealed by God, as a fpecial favour, to the holy Patriarchs and Prophets, but kept hid from the body of the Jewifli Nation. 4. The Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews fays: That the Law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a bet-- TER HOPE DID*. Now, that could not be laid to be brought in^ which was there before. And had it been there before, the LaiVy it feems, had- been per fcft ; and, coufequenlly, would have fuper- feded the ufe of the Go/pel. Therefore this bctt>;r hope, namely, of immortality in a future flate, is not in the Mofaic Difpenfation. Let us obferve farther, that as the Gofpel, by. bringing in a teller hope, made the Law perfeBy It appears, there was that relation be- tween the Lanv and Gojpcl which is between the beginning and the • completion of any matter. From whence thefe two confequences . follow : I. That the Law wanted fomething which the Gofpel fup-- pJied : And what was that fomething but the dodlrine of a future State ? 2. That the Law muft needs make fome preparation for.- that better hope which the Gofpel was to bring in. What it was, the fame writer tells us, namely, That 'it had a shadow [o-kiuv] of: good things to come^ but-«o/ the very image [e/xo'yo;] of the things \, Hence it is evident that by t\\\% floadoiv is meant fuch a typical re- • prefentation,fo faintly delineated, as not to beperceived by vulgar eyes,, intent only on a carnal Difpenfation. Tliis was contrived for admi- rable purpofes : For if, inftead of ■^frndoiv or fiiint outline of a delign, . the Image itfelf, in full relief, had glaringly held forth the objefb intended, this object, fo dlfi:in6tly defined, would have drawn the Jews from that Oeconomy to which it was God's pleafure tluy Ihould long continue in fubje£liou : And had there been no delinea- tion at all, to become ftronger'ln a clearer light, one illuftrious evi- dence of the Dependency between the two Religions had been-. wanting. * Chap, vji. ver. ig. . -J- Cliap. x. vcc, i. Again», i6o THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. Again, the fame Writer, to the famepurpofe, fpeaking of Christ fays, But now bath he obtained a more excellent Minijhy, by hoiv much alfo he is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was ejlablijhed upon better promises. For if the firjl Covenajit hadbeen faulthfs, then pould no place have been found for the Second*, i. We fee that this better Covenant was eftabhfhed by Christ, and not by Mofcs. 2. If the firfl: Covenant had been faultlefs, that is, had contdimeA better promifes, or taught the dodrine of a future flate, there had been no room for a fecond. - To fum up all, This admirable writer gives in the laft place, the fuUeft evidence to both parts of the pro pofition, namely, " That temporal rewards and punifhments were the fandion of the Jewifli Difpenfation ; and that it had no other." For in tke fecond chapter .ive finxi thefe remarkable affertions. Ver. 2. Forif.thewordfpoken by Angels was flcdfaf, and every .tranfgrefjion and difobedience received a just recompence of re- ward, How pall tve efcapc &c. Ver. 5. For untc the Angels hath he not put In fubjeSlion the world tTo come, whereof we fpeak. Ver. 1 4, 15. ii^ [Chrift] alfo hirnfelf likewife took part of the fame j Fflefli aiid blood] that through death he might defray him that had the power of death ; that is, the Devil; and deliver them, who through fear of Death were all their lite-time fubjeB to bojidage. ..Let us lay thefe three texts together. And we fliall find, i. from 'ver. 2. that the fandlion of the Law, or the word fpoken by angels, ■was of a temporal nature — every tranfgreffion received a jujl recom- , fence, 1. From ver. 5. that the Law. taught no future ftate — the world to come not being put in fubje£iion to thefe angels. And 3. from -ver. 14, If,, that the people had not tlieJcnowiedge of fuch a flate — .■being all their life-'timefubjeB to bondage. For the Devil is here faid to hzvQ power of death, as he brought it into the world by the delu- sion of the FIRST Man, Therefore, before death can be abolifhed, .Hif who had the power of it, muft be deftroyed. But his deftrudion * Chnp. viii. ver, 6/ 7, is Sect.6. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. i6i is the work of the second Man. Till his coming therefore, the Jews, as we arc here told, were through fear of death all. their life- time fubjeSi to boyuhge. Chrift then brought them into the glorious liberty of the children of God* ^ by fetting before them life and im- mortality -f-. To all this, I hope, the reader will not be fo inattentive to objed, " That what is here produced from the New Tellament to prove that the followers of the Law had no future flate, contradI6ls whnt I have more than once obferved. That the later JewKh Prophets had given flrong intimations of an approaching Dilpenlation, with a fu- ture ftate." For the queftion is concerning a future ftate's being the Sandtion of the Law, not of later intimations, of its being ready to become the fandion of the Gospel. As inconfiderate would be this other objeftion, " Tliat my point is to prove that this Dlfpenfation had tio future fate of reward and puni/ljinent at all, and my evidence from the New Teftament only fhews they had not the Chrifian T)o5li ine of it^ For to this I an- fwcr, I. That thofe I argue with, if they hold any difference be- tween the Chriftian and general Dodlrine of a future ftale of reward and puniftiment, it is only this, that the Chriftian Doflrine was revealed; the other, a conclufion of natural reafon. Now if the Jews had this Doftrine, they muft needs have it, as revealed ; con- fequently the fame with the Chriftian. 2. That though I myfelf fuppofe the natural and the Chriftian Doftrine of a future ftate of reward and punifhment to be very different things ; yet I fhall fhew, in due time, that if Mofes were indeed God's Meflenger, and would teach a future ftate, it could be no other than the Chrftian Do6lrine of it. But as thofe, I have to do with, may be ready to tell me, that this due time, like that of ihcjews^ Mejfiah, is either paft or will" * Rom. viii, ji. t For the further ilhiftration of this matter, I would recommend to the Readei's ferious perufal the firfl chapter of The fnt and candid Examination of the Bi^lljofi of Lon- Jou's Principles, Vol. IIL Y never i62 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. never come, they will, I fuppofe, readily bear with me while I an- ticipate the fubjeft, and in a very few words prove what is here af- ferted. Revelation teacheth that mankind loft the free gift of im- moitallife by the tranfgreffion of Adam; and, from thence, became mortal, and their exiftence confined to this life. Revelation likewife teacheth that the mean which Divine Wifdom thought fit to employ in reftoring man from death to his firft ftate of immortality, was the Jacrifice oj Chr'iji on the crofs. Hence it appears to be a thing impof- fible, that any Meflenger from God, any Agent or Inftrument made life of for conducing this grand Difpenfation towards its comple- tion, could (were it in his choice or in his office to promulgate the do(5trine of a future State) fpeak of any other but that purchafed by Chrift, and promulged and proclaimed intheGofpel, fuice in fa6t, on the principles of Revelation, there is no other ; and to inculcate another, would be impeaching the veracity of God, and the eternal fiability of his councils. To conclude. There is one thing which plainly evlnceth that if the Jews had the knowledge or belief of a future state of re- ward and punifhment, they muft have had the knowledge of the REDEMPTION of man by the death and fuffering of Jefus Chrift, likewife. And it is this, That all the Sacrifices in the Jewifti Ri- tual regarded only temporal things. A very competent judge in thefe matters allures us, — Univerfa Judaeorum fimul congefta Sacri- ficia ad aftequenda hujus vitiE commoda omnia fafla erant *. The confequence is this. That if the Jewilh religion taught its followers a future ftate of rewards and punifliments, it either afforded them no means of attaining future happinefs, or it inftrufted them in the dodrine of the Redemption. To fay thefirft, contradidls the nature of all Religion ; to fay the latter, makes the Jewifti ufelefs, and the Chriftian falfe, as contradicting its repeated declarations, that life and immortality^ or the doctrine of the Redemption, "was brought to light through the Gojpcl. * Outiam de Saer. p. 305, But Sect. 6. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. i6j But what was alked by St. Paul's Adverfarles, will peihaps be afked by mine. Is the Law then againjl the promises ofGoa? Or does the Law, becaufe it had no future flate, contradict the Gospel, which hath ? The Apoftle's anfwer will ferve me, — God forbid : For if there bad been a Law "which could have given life, verily righteoufnefs Jhould have been by the L,K\w *. Tliat is, if the genius of the Law liad produced fuch a Dilpenfation as was proper to con- vey to mankind the free gift of life and immortality, this gift would have been conveyed by it. All this fliews that the Law was not contrary to the Gofpel, but only that it was not of fufficient excel- lence to be the vehicle of God's laft beft gift to mankind. And it fhews too (and it is a very fit remark, as the refult from the whole, with which to conclude this fifth Book) that a future ilate was not the San£lion of the Law of Mofes, or, in the Apoftle's more em- phatic words, that the L.aiv did not (becaufe it could not) give life. Thus, I prefume, it is now proved beyond all reafonable queftioii, that the doctrine of a future state of reward and pu- nishment is not to be found in, nor did make part of, the Mosaic Dispensation. It will be afked then, " What were the real fentiments of thefe early Jews concerning the foul ?'* Though the queilion be a little out of time, yet as the anfwer is fliort, I fhall give it here. They were doubtlefs the fame with thofe of the refl of mankind, who have thought upon the matter ; that it survived the bodv : But hav- ing, from Mofes's filence and the eftablifhment of another Sandion, no expeftation of future rewards and punifhments, they fimply con- cluded that // returned to him who gave it -f. But, as to any inte- refting fpeculations concerning its ftate of furvivorftilp, 'tis plain they had none. Indeed how fhould they have any ? when personality did not enter into the idea of this furvlvorfiip, that being; onlv an- nexed to the rewards and puni/Jiments of a future ftate. Hence it was that thofe ancient Phllofophers (almoft all the thciflical Philo- * Gal. iii. 21. -j- Ecclef. xii. 7. Y 2 fophers i64 THE DIVINE LEGATION Book V. fophers of Greece) who confidered the foul as a substance dlftinft from the body, and not a mere (xl'af.ity of it (for they were not fuch idiots as to conceive, that thought could refult from any com- binations of matter and motion), thofe Philofophers, I flay, who confidered the foul as a fubftance, and yet difbelieved a future (late of rewards and punifhments, denied it all future perfonality, and held the refufionof it into the to e-, or the foul of the world*. Andjuft fuch interesting speculations concerning it had the few phllofophic Jews of the moft early times, as appears from the book of Eccleiiaftes, which fpeaks their fentiments. Who knoweth (fays this autlior) the jpirit of man that goeth upward^ and the fpirit of the beoji that goeth downward to the earth f ? And again : " Then " fhall the duft return to the earth as it was, and the spirit " SHALL RETURN UNTO GoD WHO GAVE IT |." Yet tllis Writer, perfe(5tly confonnable to what I have delivered, fays, at the fame time : But the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more A REWARD, for the 7nemory of them is forgotten §. And where was the wonder ? that a matter which fo little con- cerned them, namely, the future condition of a portion of etherial Spirit diverted of its Perfonallty, fhould only float idly in the brain, when we refle£t that even the knowledge of the first cause of ALL THINGS, while be made no^zxtoi the National IVorfiip, was entertained by the Gentiles (as appears from all Antiquity) with the utmoft unconcern, neither regulating their notions, nor influencing their adlions. But from this uninterefting ftate, in which the Doftrine, concern- ing the Soul, remained amongft the early Jews, the Sadducees con- cluded that their Anceflors believed the extinSfion of the foul on death. Hence likewife came fome late Revivers of this opinion, of the txiinSiion of the foul ; though maintained under the fofter name of its SLEEP between death and the refurreftion : For they go upof> * See Div. Leg. vol. I. b. iii. f Chap. iii. ver. 21. Vid. Clerli-. & Drufmm in loc. J Chap. xii. ver. 7. Vid. Clcricum in loc, § Chap. i-x. ver. 5. the Sect. 6. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 165 the Sadducean principle, that the foul is a quality only, and not a Jiibjlunce. In llipport of this opinion, the Revivers of it proceed on the fo- phllm, which Polytheifts employ to combat the unity of the God- head. All Philofopbical arguments (lays the Reviver, after having quoted a number of wonderful things from Scripture, to prove the foul a quality, and mortal) dtiiivn from our notiom of matter^ and urged againfl the piffibility of life^ thought and agency, being fo con- ?iecicd ivitbfome portions of it as to conjlitute a compound Bcimr or Per- fon, are merely grounded on our ignorance *. Juft fo the Polytheifh " All arguments for the Unity, from metaphyfics, are manlfeftly vain, and merely grounded on our ignorance. You Believers (fays he) muft be confined to Scripture : Now Scripture affures us, there ARE Gods many," which, by the way, I think a ftronger text, certainly a direflcr, againfl the unity of the Godhead, than any this learned Writer has produced for ihefeep of the Soul. But what fay Believers to this ? They fay, that Scripture takes the unity, as well as the ex'fence of the Deity, for granted ; takes them for truths de- monftrable by natural light. Juft fo it is with regard to that imma- terial fubjlance, the Soul. Scripture fuppofes men to be fo far in- formed of the nature of the Soul, by the fame light, as to know that it cannot be deftroyed by any of thole caufes which bring about the extindlion of the body. Our Dreamers -f are aware of this, and therefore hold with Unbelievers, that the Soul is nofuhfiance, but a quality only ; and io have taken effedual care indeed, that its repofe Ihall not be dlfturbed in this, which we may emphatically call, the SLEEP OF DEATH. We Can never" prove (fays another of thefc fleepers 'I) that the Soul of man is offuch a nature that it can and mii/l exiji and live, think, c£i, enjoy, &?c. feparate from, and inJependmt of the body. All our pre fen t experience f:e%vs the contrary. The ote- * ConJiJeratlons on the Tlieory cf Religion, p. 3'98.Ed. 3d. t St. ]\\<lt:\ Jihl'y dreamers only defiled the Flcjh. Tiicfc deJiU the Spirit. X Taylor of Norwich.. 1 66 THE D r V I N^ E LEGATION Book V. rations of the mind depend co'H?,'v A^ri.^ and invariably upon the Jlate of the boJv, of the brain in particular. Iffome dying perfons have a lively life of their rational faculties to the very hift, it is becaufe death has invaded fame other part ^ and the brain remains found and vigorous* . This is the long-exploded trafh of Coward, Toland, Collins, &c. Atid he who can treat us with it at this time of day, has either never read Clarice and Baxter on the fubjed (in which he had been better employed than in writing upon it), or never underftood them. So far as to the abftradt truth. Let us coniider next the praiftical confequences. Convince the philofophic Libertine that the Soul is a quality arifnig out oi matter, and vanifhing on the dif- folution of theyirw, and then lee if ever you can bring him to be- lieve the Chrifcian Do6lrine of the Resurrection? While he held the Soul to be an immaterial fubftance, exifting, as well in its reparation from, as in its conjundtion with, the body, and he could have no reafon, arifing from the Principles of true Phi lofophy, to ftagger in his belief of this revealed Do^nne. — Thou fool that which thou fozvef is not quickened except it die f, is good philofophy as well as good divinity : for if the body, inftead of its earthly nature, were to have a heavenly, it mull needs pafs through death and corruption to qualify it for that change. But when this body died, what occa- fion was there for the Souly which was to fuffer no change, to fall afleep ? But their feep of the Soul is mere cant : and this brings me to the laft confideration, the fenfe and confiftency of fo ridiculous a notion. They go, as we obferved, upon the Sadducean principle, that the Soul is a quality of body, not a fubjlance of itfelf, and fo dies with its fubftratum. Now Jleep, is a modification of Exiftence, not of non-exlftence ; fo that though the fleep of a Subjiance hath a meaning, the fleep of a quality Is nonfenfe. And if ever this Soul of theirs re-exerts its faculties, it muft be by means of a re- production, not by a mere awaking ; and they may as well * lb. p. 401. f St. Paul. (1 Cor. xv. 36.) talk Sect. 6. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 167 talk of the sleep of a mufliroom turned again into the fubftance of the dunghill from whence it arofe, and from which, not the fame, but another mufhroom (hall, in time, arife. In a word, neither Unbelievers nor Believers will allow to thefe middle men that a new-exifting Soul, which is only a quality refulting from a glorified body, can be identically the fame with an annihilated Soul, which had refulted from an earthly body. But perhaps, as Hudibras had difcovered the Receptacle of the ghojls of defunSi bodies^ fo thefe gentlemen may have found out the yet fubtiler corner, where the ghojli ofdefun& qualities repofe. A P P E N D rX. [ ,6S ] APPENDIX. LATE noble and voluminous Author *, who hath written with more than ordinary fpleen againit the Religion of his country, as it is founded in Revelation and eftablifhed by Law, hath attacked with more than ordinary fury the Author of 'The Divine Legation of Mofes demon- Jirated, and of 'The Alliance between Church and State -cindicated. I lliall fhortly find a fitter place to examine his reafoning againft the Alliance. At prefent let us fee what he has to urge againft the argument of the Divine Legation, which is founded on thefe two fafts, the omijfion of the Do6lrine of a future State of Rewards and Punifhmenti in the Mofaic Difpen- fation ; and the adminiflration of an extraordinary Providence in the fame Difpenfation. His Lordlhip begins with the omission, which he acknowledges : and to evade the force of the argument arifing from it, cafts about for a reafon, independent of the extraordinary Providence, to account for it. His firft folution is this, — " Moses did not believe the immortality *' OF THE Soul, nor the rewards and punilhments of another life, though *' it is poffible he might have learnt thefe Dodtrines from the Egyptians, " WHO TAUGHT THEM VERY EARLY, perhaps as they taught that of the " Unity of God. When I fay, that Mofes did not believe the inunortality " of the foul, nor future rewards and punifliments, my reafon is this, that *" he taught neither, when he had to do with a people ivhotn a Theocracy " could not refrain ; and on whom, therefore, terrors of Punifliment, future " as well as prefent, eternal as well as temporary, could never be too much " multiplied, or too ftrongly inculcated f," This reafoning is altogether worthy of his Lordfhip. Here we have a Doctrine, confelTed to be plaufible in itfelf, and therefore of eafy ad- * Lord Bolingbroke. f Vol. iii. p. iSg. mittance ; Atpend. of MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 169 niUtance ; mod alluring to human nature, and therefore embraced by all mankind ,• of higheft account among the Egyptians, and therefore ready to be embraced by the Ifraelites, who were fond of Egyptian notionsjof ftrong -ft efficacy on the minds of an unruly People, and therefore of indifpenfable ufe ; Yet, all this notwithftanding, Mo/es did not believe it, and, on that aC'. coimty zvculd not teach it. — But then, had Moses's integrity been fo fevere How came he to write a Hiftory which, my Lord thinks, is, in part at lead, a fidtion of his own ? Did he believe that ? How came he to leave the Ifraelites, as my Lord aflures us he did, in pofleffion of many of the fu- perftitious opinions of Egypt ? did he believe thefe too ? No, but the* ferved his purpofe ; which was, The better governing an unruly People. Well, but his Lordfhip tells us, the dodtrine of a future ftate ferved this purpofe beft of all ; for having to do with a Pevple whom a Theocracy could not rejtrain, terrors of pimiJJmtent, future as zvell as prefent, eternal as well as temporary, could never be too much 7iiultiplied, or too Jlrongly incul- cated. No matter for that. Moses, as other men may, on a fudden grows fcrupulous ; and fo, together with the maxims of common politics, throws afide the principles of common fenfe ; and when he had employed all the other inventions of fraud, he boggles at this, which beft ferved his purpofe; was moft innocent in itfclf ; and was moft important in its general, as well as particular ufc. In his Lordfliip's next Volume, this OmiJJion comes again upon the ftage; and then we have another reafon afligned for Moses's condudt in this matter. " Moses would not teach the Dodtrine of the immortality of the *' foul, and of a future ftate, on account cf the many fuperjiitions which " this Dodrine had begot in Egypt, as we muft believe, or believe that "he knew nothing cf it, or assign some whimsical reason for his ** omission *." We have feen before, that Moses omitted a future ftate, becaufe be did not believe it. This reafon is now out of date ; and one or other of the three following is to be aftigncd ; either becaufe it begot fuperftitions ; or becaufe he knew nothing of it ; or if you will allow neither of thefc, you muft have recourfe, he tells you, to Warburton's whimsical reason, that the "Jews were under an extraordinary Providence, * Vol. iv. p. 470. Vol. in. Z Let