I perceive, Philologus, The unreaſonableneſs of vilifying the Clergy. you have a little tranſported your ſelf by your own Talk, and have loſt your Argument to railly upon the Clergy. But I muſt needs tell you, that this cuſtom you have got of expoſing the Profeſſion and Perſons of the Clergy is one of the worſt qualities I diſcern in Philologus, and is a great blemiſh to thoſe other Gentleman-like accompliſhments which adorn his Character. I ſhall ſpeak to that ſimplicity you would have in Religion, by and by; but in the mean time, I muſt beg leave to ſpeak a word or two upon this irreligious ill-bred Cuſtom of abuſing Clergy-men, which has ſo much obtained among the Gentlemen of this Age. Now this piece of ill-breeding was not of our own Growth here in England, it was brought, like the reſt of our Follies, from France. Our travelling Gentry, who had ſpent their time to no purpoſe beyond Sea, thought they muſt bring home ſomething remarkable, and it was generally that little banter and drollery with which the French Gentlemen uſed to make ſport with their ignorant Friars and Curees. All the improvement it gained in our Nation was more Malice and more Dullneſs; for we Engliſh are generally a grave ſober Nation, and nothing looks ſo awkwar'd in us, and is ſuch a force upon our tempers, as Drollery; ſo that when once we go to imitate Fools we generally are ſuch. And indeed we have imitated the French in this but miſerable ſillily; for I think there is no compariſon of our Clergy and the generality of their Friars who are commonly very ignorant and ſilly, and often-times not only lewd themſelves but Panders to other Mens Debauchery. But generally our Clergy live lives of Vertue and ſtrict Piety, at leaſt few of them are notoriouſly vitious; their Education is commonly ſuch as gives them Learning, equal at leaſt to the Neighbouring Gentlemen; and conſidering the remiſs Education of the Gentry under the late Reigns, for the moſt part ſuperiour. There is nothing vile and contemptible in their Profeſſion, as there is in ſome which tend to vanity or debauchery, or which do denote ſome vile ſervitude and drudgery; but their calling is high and noble, the ſubject of it God, and the moſt ſublime and divine Truths; and the end which they drive at, is to make Men good and peaceable. Now there is nothing in all this that ſhould render this order of Men the ſubject of Contempt and Drollery; and Men might, if they pleaſe, with as much advantage, make ſport with Phyſicians and Lawyers, as they do with Divines. Give me leave to ſay, it is an unmerciful piece of Barbarity to fall foul upon innocent Men, to abuſe their Perſons and Profeſſion, when there is no manner of provocation given them for it; nay, it is moſt pitiful Cowardice to give ſuch uſage only to thoſe who they know, by the Character of their Profeſſion, muſt not revenge it, which they dare not offer to thoſe whom they ſuſpect may. If ſuch a Man believes the Goſpel, he offers one of the greateſt injuries to Religion, by expoſing the Miniſters of it, and leſſening their credit, whereby they are leſs able to reform the lives of wicked Men; and doth withal fooliſhly give the lye to his Faith, by ridiculing and affronting the Officers of that holy Inſtitution, which by his Baptiſm and Communion he has declared the greateſt Veneration for. And truly a Man may as well pretend to bear a great reſpect to the Government, when he is always expoſing and traducing the King and his ſubordinate Magiſtrates, as to pretend an eſteem to Chriſtianity, and to be always railing at its Miniſters. This is a practice ſo ſhameful among Chriſtians, that would render them an opprobry to Infidels, in ſeeing them ſo diſgracing the Diſpenſers of thoſe Doctrines and Myſteries they hope to be ſaved by. Nay to ſpeak more particularly, neither will the known faults of ſome, or many Clergy-men, excuſe this Cuſtom; becauſe though ſome are faulty there are others who conſcientiouſly perform their duty in all reſpects; and therefore to involve all under the ſame imputation is ſhameful Injuſtice. But beſides, the faults of a Clergy-man are of ſo tender a nature, and are of ſo nigh a concern to Chriſtianity, that for the credit of Religion all good Men will be very cautious of divulging them; and therefore where-ever we find Men forward to pick up and relate ſtories of this nature, 'tis a certain ſign they are no Friends to the eſtabliſhed Religion, and is uſually a ſign that they are no good likers of the common Chriſtianity. And truly, Philologus, I muſt own that the Gentlemen of your Sentiments have taken very proper methods by vilifying the Clergy to propagate your Opinions, for this one reaſon, becauſe it may eaſily be obſerved, that the greateſt number of Atheiſts and Deiſts, in this Nation, is made up of ſuch, as have formerly, before they declared for Infidelity, been the greateſt Railers againſt their Parſons. I will not determine whether this comes to paſs by the Judgment of God, or the natural tendency of the thing; but this is certain, as far as my obſervation can reach, that the chiefeſt of the Body of theſe Infidels is made out of the Antimonarchical and Rebellious Party of the late Reigns, and the Jacobites in this; Men that are grown ſowr'd and peeviſh at the miſcarriage of their deſign, and exaſperated againſt the Clergy for their oppoſition to their practices; and ſo have reſolved at laſt to be revenged upon Religion in ſpight to its Miniſters. But I'll warrant you by that ſmile, Philologus, you imagine that the compliance of the Clergy with the laſt Reigns, and at laſt with the preſent Government, is the true reaſon of the growth of Infidelity now. I ſhall leave the Gentlemen of that Order to juſtify their own actions, who know their own Conſcience beſt. But thus much I will ſay, that if the Clergy of the Church of England had not complied with the Government, we had had, by this time, ſuch a medly and confuſion in Religion, as would have made a great many Men have nauſeated all. For nothing can be ſo great a cauſe of Infidelity as the unlimited licenſe of Fanatical Zeal and Enthuſiaſm; and for one Atheiſt or Deiſt we have now we ſhould have had twenty then. And it may be we had been in as bad a condition if the Clergy had not vigorouſly oppoſed the Rebellious Principles and Practices of thoſe dangerous Phanaticks, and their Abettors, who were going to overthrow a Lawful Government, and an Orthodox Church. So that I am ſo far from condemning the Practice of the Clergy of the Church of England in theſe laſt Reigns, that I highly approve it, both as being very uniform, and of a piece with its ſelf, and very conſonant to Reaſon and Law. For by the ſame reaſon they comply with this Government which is eſtabliſhed by Law; they refuſed to comply with the Illegal demands of King James, who was acting againſt Law, and to their utmoſt oppoſed the unlawful Seditions, and at laſt Rebellion of Factious People, who were for advancing the Title of a Lawleſs Heir, who had no pretence to the Crown by any Law in the World, in oppoſition to two Succeſſive Princes, who had undoubted Right to, and were in actual poſſeſſion of it; and to the injury of all the lawful branches of it. So much I have thought fit to ſay concerning the Abuſes which are frequently given to Clergy-men, by Men that have not caſt off all regard to Chriſtianity, but are willing to lay hold on any pretence to fall foul upon them, and to wreek their Spleen. But further, as to Gentlemen of your perſwaſion, who look upon our Religion to be a Fable, and think you can have no tie upon you from that; yet methinks Civility and common Juſtice, which you pretend to be the greateſt Advocates for, ſhould reſtrain you from abuſing any one, eſpecially thoſe who are uſed to beſpeak you with all civility and reſpect. And as for their Dues which you make a ſport in defrauding them of, you know, by Law, they have as good a Title to them as you have to your Eſtate; and your Copy-holders might, with the ſame Juſtice, detain your Quit-Rents, as you do their Tithes. And if Religion be only a Politick Contrivance of State, if the Law think fit to direct it ſo, the Clergy by inſtructing Men to be Virtuous and Religious, and by that means keeping Men peaceable at home, have as good a Plea for the Tenth of our Eſtates, as the Souldiers have now for the Fifth, for fighting againſt our Enemies abroad.

I beg your Pardon for this long digreſſion from our main deſign, which yet your diſcourſe led me to. And now I ſhall ſpeak to the Argument of your Poetical Friend; which one would think ſhould be irrefragable, conſidering it is ſo often repeated by your Gentlemen with ſuch Grace and Emphaſis.

The People partook of the ancient Sacrifices.But had not the People their ſhare of Roaſt meat too as well as the Prieſts? Now here is a good Jeſt ſpoil'd for lack of underſtanding the Roman or Greek Antiquities, or for want of reading the Books of Exodus, or Leviticus. For every Child knows that the Jews were obliged every Year to go to Jeruſalem, not to ſee the Prieſts eat the Paſchal Sacrifices, but to eat it themſelves. And 'tis plain, that the People eat likewiſe of other Sacrifices, by 1 Sam. 9.13. where 'tis ſaid, the people will not eat till Samuel come, becauſe he doth bleſs the Sacrifice. And nothing of the Jewiſh Sacrifices were peculiar to the Prieſts but only the remainders of the voluntary piacular Offerings, Lev. 6.16. And ſo in the Heathen Sacrifices, after ſome ſmall parts were offered to the Gods, the reſt made a Feaſt for all the Sacrificers together, both Prieſts and People in common. So Homer ſpeaks in general of all preſent at that Sacrifice.

And ſo ſpeaking of the Wine in the Sacrifice, which he makes common to all. Likewiſe he ſays, — 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .— —Crowning the Bowls with Wine Which they to all preſent—

And ſo Virgil whom Servius and Macrobius remark to be admirably Verſed in the Sacrificial Rites, ſpeaks of that Sacrifice of Aeneas in the Eighth Book of the Aeneis.

But further Lylius Geraldus, in his Treatiſe de Diis Gentium, informs us out of Herodotus and others, that the people were ſo far from not having a ſhare at the Sacrifice, that they might carry 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Cuts of it home with them to their Friends, ſo that they too might partake of the Sacrifice. Which might perhaps give occaſion to the like cuſtom of the Chriſtians in the Euchariſt. Euſeb. Eccl. Hiſt. Lib. 5. Cap. 24.29. Nay theſe voracious Prieſts were ſo far from eating up the Sacrifice, that many of the remaining parts were afterwards ſold at the Shambles. Vid. Herod. Clio. Auguſto Expoſ. in Rom. which gave occaſion to thoſe ſcruples among the Corinthians, concerning the Idolatry, which St. Paul ſo judiciouſly ſatisfies, 1 Cor. 10. Whatſoever is ſold in the Shambles eat, asking no queſtion for Conſcience ſake, &c. Which Cuſtom the Apoſtate Julian improved ſo far to be revenged upon the Chriſtians at Antioch; as to make all the food which was brought to Market to be firſt dedicated at a Heathen Altar. Theod. Lib. 1. Cap. 14. And ſo much for your gormandizing Prieſts.

Well this is but a ſmall matter to talk of. But I can never forgive the Sanctimonious Brotherhood, for all the miſchief they have done to Natural Religion, by burying its pure and divine Light in ſuch a Load of Ceremonious Trumpery. If it were not for theſe Inventions of Prieſtcraft, a Man might do his duty as far as nature directs, with all the eaſe imaginable. If a Man would but take care to do what unprejudiced nature prompts him to, not to overcharge her with more than ſhe craves, nor to check her in her juſt deſires, and to have as great and auguſt thoughts as he can of the Deity; he might perform the whole buſineſs of Religion to all intents and purpoſes. All the ceremonious foppery which does ſo peſter Mankind, is owing to the Prieſts contrivance, who would not have got ſo much by the free, eaſy directions of nature, as they do by long Catalogues of Articles of Faith, and a fine Pageant-like-Raree-ſhow worſhip. For my money give me good old, Pure, natural Religion, which was in diebus illis. In pious times e'er Prieſtcraft did begin. Before, &c.

I find you are continually harping upon the Prieſts being the Authors of all the ceremonious parts of Religion, and particularly Sacrifice; and that the World was a conſiderable time without either Prieſts or Sacrifice under the conduct of pure natural Religion, and that the Prieſthood was but of late date, and crept into the World by impoſing upon the People pompous Ceremonies. Now to ſet you right, in this miſtake, will you pleaſe to attend to theſe following particulars.

1. There was always in the World a Rank of Men who had the Office of the Prieſthood annexed to them,Prieſts in all places of the World, and all Ages. whoſe office it was to put up Prayers to the Deity for the People, to offer Sacrifices, and the like. That this office was entailed upon Primogeniture, as ſome maintain from Numb. 18.16. Vid. Grot in Luk. 2. I think is not ſo certain; but that it belonged, and was conſtantly practiſed by the Heads of Families and Princes, of Nations in the earlieſt times, is unqueſtionable. So Noah after the Deluge Sacrified for himſelf and Family, Gen. 8.20. The like is recorded of Abraham, and Jacob, and Job. And ſo among the Gentiles, in the higheſt Ages, the Crown and Prieſthood went together; of which the Hiſtory of Melchizedek King of Salem is a remarkable Inſtance in Scripture. And amongſt Prophane Authors Virgil tells us the like of Anius King of Delus.

Upon which Verſe Servius has this note. Sane majorum haec erat conſuetudo, ut Rex eſſet etiam ſacerdos, vel Pontifex. Ʋnde hodie que Imperatores Pontifices dicimus. This was the cuſtom of the Ancients, that the King muſt be alſo Prieſt or Pontifex. And from thence at this day we ſtile the Emperours Pontifices. And ſo likewiſe in his notes on the 10. of the Aeneads, he ſays Aeneas was likewiſe ſacrorum Rex, or Pontifex. And before him Priamus the Trojan King offers the Sacrifice which is deſcribed by Homer. Iliad. 3. And ſo not only Iulus, Aeneas his Son, ſucceeded his Father in the Prieſthood, but the Prieſthood continued for many Ages afterwards at Rome in the Gens Julia, which deſcended from him. Numa inſtituted thoſe ſacra called Regia, which were to be performed by the Kings only; ordaining likewiſe ſome ſubordinate Prieſts, who ſhould ſupply their places, when they were engaged in the Wars. So Julius Caeſar, in right of his Family, was High-Prieſt, and after him Auguſtus; and at laſt the Emperours were Pontifices Max. on courſe. So that you ſee the Prieſthood, Philologus, is not ſuch a modern Incroachment as you Deiſts would pretend.

Let the Invention be early or late it matters not much, for 'tis ſo very and uſeleſs one that Mankind would not be a farthing the worſe for, if it was quite laide aſide; for it coſt us, I am ſure, a great deal of Money, and no body, that I know, is the better for it. For People may live honeſtly, and ſay their Prayers as often as they think fit, without the help of Parſons: or if they muſt have Guides, ſuch an honeſt old Author as Tully, or Seneca, or the good Advice of ſome ſober wiſe Gentlemen, will conduct them in the Rules of Morality, without taking Tithes for it.

The World is very bad as it is,The Advantage of a Miniſtry. but I believe it would be ten times worſe, if there was not an order of Men that did continually put People in mind of their duty; and though they be very negligent of Inſtruction, yet by hearing their Duty ſo continually inculcated ſomething ſticks at laſt, even in the worſt Minds, and keeps them from being ſo profligately wicked as they would otherways be: 'Tis true indeed, 'tis poſſible ſome Men may live good lives without a Prieſthood, or Clergy to inſtruct them; and ſo 'tis poſſible to blunder out a ſtrange way in the dark; but all Men muſt allow 'tis more eaſily gone with an experienced Guide. But beſides, I have one Argument to prove the Uſefullneſs, of a Prieſthood, or Miniſtery, that will reach you Gentlemen that allow no Revelation. All you Theiſts grant to pray to God is a Part of Natural Religion, and that in publick too upon ſpecial occaſions, as to deprecate God's Vengeance in publick Calamities, and to thank him for publick mercies, and the like. Now you would not have all the People at Church to be charming and gabling together every one his own Prayer, but for decency and Order ſake one ought to ſpeak for the reſt, to whom if the Publick allow any thing for his pains, then you have what we call a Prieſthood or Clergy. So that even upon the pure Principles of Deiſm, this Order is requiſite; and you muſt deſtroy your own Hypotheſis by making them uſeleſs and inſignificant. A good and conſcientious Clergy-man that makes it his buſineſs to incourage Piety and Vertue, will do more good than a hundred Tully's and Seneca's; and the World would be well hope up, if they had no other Guides in Morality, than ſome of thoſe wiſe ſober Gentlemen as you call them, many of which continue lewd as long as they can, and in their old Age turn Moral-mongers when they can be vitious no longer. But to go on.

2. Neither is your other ſuppoſition true, that there was ever any Age or Nation in the World,Pure Natural Religion no where practiſed. when or where ſuch a pure Natural Religion as you imagine, without any manner of Rituous worſhip, was ever practiſed. I know not what ſecret Hiſtories your Gentlemen may have of the Golden Age, but as for us dull Believers, we cann't ſee one word in all the ancient Books we meet withal, that gives us the leaſt hint of ſuch a naked natural Religion as you ſpeak of. If we have recourſe to the Poets, to whom we are beholden for all that is known of theſe Golden Ages, when theſe brave men lived; they make Religion as Ritual as it is now; and altogether as full of Sacrifices and Revelations. Nay, the account we have of the Goddeſs Aſtraea, which is a principal part of the Poetical Hiſtory of the Golden Age, is that ſhe was a Numen ſent from Heaven to converſe with Men on Earth, to inſpire them with Juſtice and Sobriety, and to teach them Vertue and a good Life.

Which Fable by the way is but an ancient Tradition of the frequency of God's converſing with holy Men, in the firſt Ages of the World. Neither did thoſe Golden Ages want their Sacrifices more than their Revelations. Nay, if we will believe the Poet Heſiod, he tells us the Golden Age was particularly remarkable for their Sacrificing to the Gods; and that Jupiter was angry with thoſe of the Silver Age, and took that race of Men out of the World for neglecting it.

Neither do we ſee any of the Ancient Poetical Heroes, your Hercules's, and Pollux's, your brave natural Religion-Men, but they are as much in at Sacrifices as other People. As we ſee by the Examples of Priam, Ʋlyſſes, and Achilles, and Aeneas in Homer and Virgil, of Cadmus in Ovid, of Perſeus, Theſeus, and all the Argonauts in Apollonius and other Poets.

And as there was never any Age of the World in which this ſuperfine natural Religion was univerſally practiſed, ſo neither was there, nor is there, any Part or Nation of it, where it can be found. All the anciently known World, from India to Britain, from Africa to Scythia, was all full of Rites and Ceremonies. To begin with our old Britains at home, they were ſo far from profeſſing ſuch a pure natural Religion as you contend for, that they were full of Idolatry and cruel as well as ſilly Ceremony. Their rites were almoſt wholly Magical, and they were ſo much wedded to that Art, as Pliny ſays, Hiſt. Lib. 30. Cap. 1. ut dediſſe Perſis videri poſſint, that they ſeemed to ſet a Copy to the Perſians in it. They adored a multitude of Idols, portenta Diabolica pene numero Aegyptiaca vincentia, as Gildas calls them,Gildas de Excid. Brit. a Company of Deviliſh Monſters almoſt exceeding the number of thoſe in Aegypt; for beſides the Saxons Idols of Tuiſco, Thor, Woden, Seater, &c. they had the Celtick Teutates and Heſus; and likewiſe Belenus, or Bellatucadrus, as appears by an ancient Inſcription lately found in Weſtmorland, dedicated Sancto Deo Bellatucadro; as alſo another old God mentioned by Sedulius, Sedul. in op. Paſcal. (who was a Scotch-Britain) called Geada, or Geta. And when we further conſider the fond Ceremonies uſed by their Prieſts the Druids, in gatheringPlin. Lib. 30. Cap. 1. Plin. Lib. 16. Cap. 43. Oak-branches and ſeeking Miſletoe for their Sacrifices, their cruelty in humane Sacrifices, their killing the VictimVid. Strab. Lib. 4. upon the Altar with Arrows, or binding him round with ſtraw, and ſo burning him a live, with other barbarous and deviliſh Ceremonies; I ſay, when we conſider all this we may very well exclude the Britains from the purity of natural Religion. And if we proceed to our old Neighbours the Gauls, we ſhall find them as deep in Ritual worſhip as the Britains: they had the ſame foppery of the Druids with them, which Caeſar Caeſ. Bell. Gall. Lib. 6. ſays they borrowed from the Britains, and thoſe who would be exact in that Diſcipline travelled thither. They had the ſame humane Sacrifices, and well nigh the ſame Gods, as Lucan informs us, Lib. 1.

The Spaniards, as Macrobius tells us,Macrob. Sat. Cap. 19. worſhipped Simulachrum Martis radiis ornatum cum maximâ religione, Neton vocantes. They adored an Image of Mars adorned with Rays with very great veneration, calling him Netos. They had a Temple with the rites ofStrab. Lib. 4. Apollo Delphinius; and Varro, as Pliny Plin. Lib. 3. Cap. 1. relates, derives Luſitania from Luſus the Companion of Bacchus, whoſe rites were celebrated there. If we look upon the ancient face of Germany there is as little of pure natural Religion to be found as any where elſe, but all is full of Idolatrous Ceremony.Bell. Gall. Lib. 6. And Caeſar ſays they Sacrificed to the Sun, Vulcan, or the fire, and the Moon; which were the only Gods they ſaw, but as for others, ne famâ quidem acceperunt, they never ſo much as heard of. But Tacitus Ann. Lib. 4. andDe rebus Geticis. Jornandes make likewiſe Mars their principal God. Tacitus mentions their ſinging Hymns to Hercules when they went to War, De moribus Germ. and Paulus Diaconus ſpeaks of their Woden whom he interprets Mercury. To ſay nothing of the rites of Tuiſco, Friga, &c. which the Saxons afterwards tranſplanted into Britain. If we look Southward into Africa, we ſhall find them there buſy with the rites and Oracles of Jupiter Hammon, and with the worſhip of an abundance of their dead KingsTertull. Apol. Cap. 24. Lactant. Lib. 1. Cap. 15. ; and if we look Northward into Scythia and Sarmatia, we ſhall find the Scythians bloody with the humane Sacrifices to their Diana Taurica, or Scythica, ſo renowned of old; and the Sarmatians worſhipping in ſtrange rites one Deity called Pogwiſd, another Jeſſa, a third called Lacton; and Nia, Marzana, and Zievonia, Goddeſſes; beſides two famous Deities named Zelus and Poletus, which were jointly worſhipped like the Dioſcuri. I need not make any remarks upon the Ceremonious worſhips of the Aegyptians, Greeks, and Romans; for among them I am ſure natural Religion was buried under Loads of Ceremonies: There we ſhall hear of nothing but Temples, and Prieſts, and Altars; Expiations, Luſtrations, Pomps and Proceſſions; Images, Hieroglyphicks, Auguries, Plays, and a thouſand other Rites, which learned Men have wrote large Volumes to explain. And if we go further Eaſtward into Perſia, and Syria; we ſhall ſee the former employed about ſtrange Ceremonies in the worſhip of the Sun, keeping in the ſacred Fires Sacrificing Horſes to Mithras, with many other rites which the Magi had invented; and ſhall find the Syrians running after a Troop of different Gods with a different Worſhips, Moloch, Aſhtaroth, Baal, Dagon, Beelzebub, Niſroch, Rimmon, Nebo, &c. Vid. Selden de Diis Syris.

And if you pleaſe to look upon the Books of Travels into the Eaſt and Weſt Indies, you will find altogether as much Ceremony in the Heathens worſhip there: So that I beſeech you, Philologus, to ſhew in what part of the World this natural Religion of yours lay ſculking, in this univerſal Reign of Rites and Ceremonies. And if you cannot, I muſt conclude, that this ſtory of the ancient Univerſality of pure natural Religion is all Philoſophical Romance, and never had any being, but in the brains of the Gentlemen of your perſuaſion, and thoſe of ſome Syſtem-Makers, and Preachers of late, drawn from the ſcatter'd ſayings and Books of Philoſophers, which ſome have fanſied into a compleat Syſtem of Religion which alone was owned and practiſed for ſome Ages in the World. But I think it is clear from the foregoing obſervations, that your notion of ſuch a ſimple natural Religion was never practiſed in the World as far as prophane Hiſtory goes; and as for thoſe that allow the ſacred, the Sacrifices of Cain and Abel, will evince Ritual Worſhip to be as old as Mankind it ſelf. Which will be yet clearer when it appears,

What is called Natural Religion was at firſt Revealed.3. That the Common Rules of Morality, or a Good Life, which we generally call natural Religion, were at firſt revealed by God. This may ſeem a little ſtrange to thoſe who are prepoſeſſed by other Opinions; but it ſeems rather more ſtrange to conſider that thoſe moral notions ſhould come into the Soul by the uſual ways they are generally ſuppoſed. It was formerly the current Opinion of the Schools that theſe moral notices were Idea's connate with the Soul, and in a certain manner inſcribed upon it. But it is very odd to think, how ſuch propoſitions as theſe, Parents are to be honoured, Friends are to be aſſiſted, The Marriage-Bed to be undefiled, Whoredom and Drunkenneſs avoided; 'tis odd to think, I ſay, how that theſe propoſitions which are the complication of ſo many diſtinct and ſimple Idea's which we are ſure are generally attained by experience and reaſon, ſhould yet be aſſerted to come into the mind by ſuch an unaccountable way as this of Inſcription. But ſaying no more is meant by this Inſcription, than a kind of natural and univerſal Inſpiration of the Soul, or Imbution of it with theſe moral Principles; this is altogether unagreeable to the Souls of Children, Ideots, and ſome very barbarous People, who we are certain do want moſt of theſe moral notions. So that of late this Opinion of Innate Ideas has been generally exploded by learned men and another taken up, it may be ſubject to as many difficulties, which attributes the origin of theſe moral notions to the deductions of right reaſon, aſſerting that the generality of Men having the uſe of reaſon, and few of them being ſo brutiſh but in their life Time they apply their minds to the conſideration of theſe moral Duties, and ſo by the agreeableneſs of them to the Social Life of Mankind, do eaſily infer the obligation of them. And ſo the Law natural is by this explication nothing elſe, but a Scheme of Vertues and Vices which every Man, by his own reaſon and Experience, has found out to be ſuch from their agreeableneſs and diſagreeableneſs to Society, and to the ends Man is deſigned for. Thus I am ſuppoſed to come to know, that to rob my Neighbour is unlawful, becauſe this is contrary to thoſeVid. Hobb's Leviathan. Pacts of fidelity we have entered into together, or becauſe this is inconſiſtent with that mutualParker's Law of nature. Love and kindneſs we ought to bear to our Fellow Creatures; or becauſe this violates the natural right which accrues to another by occupation,Puffendorff de Jur. Nat. & Gentium. and which cannot be alienated but by Gift, or Sale, or Dereliction. Now there is many a poor honeſt Indian who knows it is his duty not to ſteal, as well as e'er a Hobb's, or Puffendorff of them all; and yet he never in his Life ſo much as dreamt of Pacts, or Fides Data, or Occupation. Suppoſe I bargain with an honeſt Virginian for a Pipe of Tobacco, and a Bottle of Sack, to watch my Tent, whilſt I ſleep, from Wild Beaſts, or Banditti's; now when he might cut my Throat, and run away with all that I have, what is the reaſon that the poor Fellow ſtays walking about as truſtfully with his Bow and Arrow, as if he were ſet Centinal by a Captain that would hang him for running away? Why, ſay moſt of our natural Religion-Men, by frequent exerciſe of his reaſon and thinking, he has come to the knowledge of the horridneſs of the Sin of Murder, and the Baſeneſs of Unfaithfulneſs. But then who can ever think that this poor ignorant wretch ſhould ever have given himſelf to ſuch grave and Philoſophick Diſquiſitions; that he ſhould ever have conſidered that to kill a rational Creature was to deface the Image of the All-wiſe Deity, to uſurp a barbarous power over one naturally equal with himſelf, and to take away that Life which mutual Friendſhip obliged to protect; that to violate a given Faith was a baſeneſs beneath the dignity of a Rational Man, and which if univerſally practiſed would deſtroy all Society out of the World. No certainly, the poor Indian never troubled his Head with theſe matters; his thoughts in his younger days run all upon Hunting, and Swimming, and loving, and afterwards to get good ſtore of Progg for his Wives and Children; but he never thought a word of theſe Rationale's of Morality which were invented by men of a learned Education and buſy Thoughts. How came then this poor fellow to the knowledge of theſe moral Duties? Why truly I can conceive no other way than by Tradition; his Father taught them him, and his Grand-Father his Father, and ſo up to Adam, the common Parent of us all; who had them firſt from God-Almighty as the univerſal Laws that all his Poſterity ſhould be governed by. Nor is it any objection againſt this Opinion, that Tradition does not ſeem to ſome ſo proper a means to convey Morality by to Mankind becauſe of its liableneſs to Corruption, and that it would have been more ſenſibly vitiated than we find it is, had it deſcended by this Method: For tho' Relations of matters of Fact, Ancient Cuſtoms, and difficult Articles of Faith, may ſuffer much by being conveyed this way, becauſe the Underſtandings of Men cannot be ſuppoſed to have a clear underſtanding of theſe things upon the firſt propoſal, and ſo may be liable to miſtake them, which muſt occaſion very great alterations in ſuch a number of Deliveries; but theſe plain Rules of Morality, ſuch as Worſhip God, Honour thy Parents, thou ſhalt do no Murder, thou ſhalt not ſteal, &c. are ſo natural to the underſtanding, ſo eaſy to be embraced by it, and appear upon propoſal to be ſo extreamly uſeful to Mankind, that they muſt be aſſented to and can never be miſtaken or forgot. The ſame is the caſe of theſe Moral Rules, as of very early and uſeful Inventions, ſuch as Spinning, Weaving, Arching, &c. which are conveyed to all the World, not by being written in Books, or in Mans Hearts, but by the handing down from one to another for ſeveral thouſand years together. Now unleſs it was the general Opinion of Mankind, that this was the ordinary way of conveying the Rules of Morality to their Poſterity, to what purpoſe ſhould they take ſo much pains in inſtructing their Children as we find men have done in all Ages, and in all Countries. But if Morality were inſcribed on Mens Hearts, and ſo were all one as if it were implanted in their nature; Parents might with as much Wiſdom pretend to teach their Children to eat and drink, to love their Children, and deſire a propagation of their Species, which they cannot but do; or if theſe moral Duties were the neceſſary and unavoidable, deductions of Reaſon, it would be as ſimple to go about to learn them the rules of Vertue as to teach them that one and one make two. And it is further particularly remarkable, and which may ſerve as a good proof of what has been ſaid, we find the Parents are commanded by God, Deut. 6.6. to teach their Children theſe Moral Duties. For after the recital of the Ten Commandments. (viz. the Moral Law) He adds, And theſe words which I command thee this day ſhall be in thy heart; and thou ſhalt teach them diligently to thy Children, and ſhalt talk of them when thou ſitteſt in thy Houſe, and when thou walkeſt by the way, and when thou lieſt down, and when thou riſeſt up. And 'tis yet further remarkable, that what Moſes here ſays, ſhall be in the Jews hearts, the Apoſtle ſays, Rom. 2.15. was written in the Gentiles Hearts; So that unleſs there can be a ſubſtantial Difference evinced between being in the heart and being written there, all the Doctrine of inſcribed Propoſitions falls to the ground. And I am ſure there is no reaſon why God ſhould write Moral Laws in the groſs and literal ſenſe in the Gentiles Hearts, and put them into the Jews by the ordinary way of teaching and inſtruction.

Riddles not the Corruption of Natural Religion.4. But in the fourth place, Philologus, you are ſomething miſtaken in aſſerting that it was the ancient Riddles, when Men affected to deliver ſacred Truths in the Aenigmatical way that firſt debauched natural Religion, by introducing all the fabuloſity of the Heathen Polytheiſm. This is a poſition which is aſſerted very confidently by ſome, who I believe are better Friends to Religion than you, but I think without juſt ground; for what ever I could ſee.

I beſeech you, Sir, don't go to run down the grounds we build our aſſertion upon, without underſtanding what they are. For there is a great deal of reaſon to believe, that the Aenigmatical way of explaining the nature and providence of the Deity, gave occaſion to the Heathen Polytheiſm, and ſerves very much to apologize for it. For I look upon the Heathen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Jupiter, with the learned AncientsCic. de Nat. Deorum. Lib. 3. Plat. in Timaeo. Salluſt. de Diis & Mund. Cap. 6. , to be but the Aether, or that fluid agitated part of the Univerſe which permeates the pores of all Bodies, and is the cauſe of all motion, generation, fermentation, &c. and therefore is well called Jupiter, quaſi juvans pater. The Goddeſs Juno Cic. ib. Plato in Cratyl., or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (i. e.) quaſi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is the Air, which warm'd, or agitated by the aether, is a principal cauſe of the procreation of Animals and Vegetables, and was for that reaſon worſhipped as the Goddeſs of Child-births.Cic. ib. Natal. Com. Myth. Lib. 2. Cap. 2. Aug. Civ. Dei, Lib. 7. Cap. 19. Saturnus quaſi Satur annis, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is ſaid to be the Father of Jupiter, becauſe before the World was Time was. He is ſaid to dethrone his Father becauſe the Creation of the World put a Period to that long unmeaſured Duration. Ceres quaſi Geres à gerendo, the Goddeſs of Corn, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 qu. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Mother Earth, is only the Ground, as Neptunus, the Sea, or the ſame Deity exerciſing his providence in all; or to uſe St. Auſtin's words, who expreſſes the meaning of the Ancients well, thus;Civ. Dei. Lib. 4. Cap. 11. Vid. De. hac re Var. De Ling. Lat. Lib. 4. Ipſe in aethere eſt Jupiter, ipſe in aere Juno, in mari Neptunus, in inferioribus etiam maris ipſe Salacia, in terrâ Pluto, in terrâ inferiore Proſerpina, in foris domeſticis Veſta, in fabrorum fornace Vulcanus, in ſyderibus Sol, Luna, & Stella: in divinantibus Apollo, in merce Mercurius, in Jano initiator, in termino Terminator, Saturnus in Tempore, Mars & Bellona in Bellis, Liber in vineis, Ceres in frumentis, Diana in ſylvis, Minerva in ingeniis, &c. So that all the ancient Theology and Theogony is only an account of the divine Attributes and Providence in an aenigmatical and mythological manner; and was only owing to the mean capacities of the Vulgar, that they blundered into Polytheiſm by it: juſt as when the Scripture mentions Wiſdom and Religion in the notion of a Perſon, her ways are ways of pleaſantneſs, &c. an ignorant Chriſtian ſhould take her for a Goddeſs, and as when St. Paul Preached 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Jeſus and the Reſurrection, the Greeks took him for a ſetter forth of ſtrange Gods, Act. 17.18. an Introducer of a new God and Goddeſs, which the Athenians in all their Theogony had never heard of. So that at laſt there was but the ſame Deity under Varro's three thouſand Names, and the ſame ſupreme Jupiter was not more diſtinct under all theſe, than when he was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Jupiter Capitolinus, or Stator. And this I think is a fair account of the Riſe of the Heathen Polytheiſm, and the many ſuperſtitious Rites which crept into natural Religion upon it.

I confeſs, Philologus, Heathen Polytheiſm not the diverſe Exhibitions of Providence. you are not miſtaken that many of the Ancient Philoſophers have given this account of the riſe of the Heathen Idolatry which you do, but then I very much queſtion the Truth of their Aſſertion and the Validity of their Arguments, and I think there are other and better Reaſons to be given of the Origin of it. Nor is the Opinion of the Philoſophers much to be relied upon; for they lived long after Polytheiſm was introduced, and knew as little of its Origin as we do; and beſides, they had an Intereſt to ſerve, which was to repreſent the folly of the Heathen Polytheiſm as favourably as they could to Men of Senſe; they were (if I may ſo ſay) the Condoms of Paganiſm, to qualify it, the better to go down with men of Thought and Enquiry. Neither is there any thing in it, for ought I ſee, but a little Wit and Fancy, of which Plato, who (I think) was the Author of it, had enough. For Socrates having ſuffered for an Unitarian, and deriding the Gentile Multitude of Gods, Plato had a mind to Trim the matter, by this kind of Reconciliation, which you have mentioned in his Dialogues Timaeus and Cratylus. And what I pray are all theſe fine derivations of the names of theſe Deities (which are the principal part of the Argument) but mere ſportive rovings of Fancy, and as ſplenetick as making Men and Chariots in the Clouds? I would undertake as eaſily to make theſe Principal Deities to be the four Quarters of the Year, as you have made them the chief parts of the World; and I think with as much veriſimilitude. Let Juno be the Spring, and the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is nigher 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Spring than 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Air. Let 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be the fervid hot Summer. Pluto the rich Autumn, and Neptune (or if you will Saturn) the cold watery Winter. Now if this had come from an old beard, and a Pallium, and had had but the preſcription of two thouſand Years, it would have been lookt upon perhaps by many of your Gentlemen as a rare comment upon the Heathen Theology. But after all, theſe fabulous ſtories of the Gods are uncapable of allegorizing, or having any tolerable myſtical ſenſe put upon them. For what other ſenſe beſides the literal meaning can be put upon the Rapes and Whoredoms of Jupiter, and the other Gods? What myſtical meaning can be put upon Jupiter's rape of Europa, in the ſhape of a Bull, or Danae, in a golden Shower? Indeed ſo far the ſtory may be unriddled, that Jupiter who committed this wickedneſs was a Grecian Prince named Taurus, asPalaeph. de Incred. de Europâ. Palaephetus contends, or in a Ship called the Bull as others: that the golden ſhower by which he corrupted Danae was by giving her money, or by bribing her Keepers. But after all the ſtory is a lewd ſtory ſtill, and which cannot without horrour be heard to be attributed to the ſupreme God of Heaven and Earth. And what good ſenſe can be put upon thoſe yet lewder Amours of Jupiter and his Boy Ganymedi, Apollo and Hyacinthus, Hercules and Hylas? Indeed Plato in his Dialogue de Pulchro, ſeems as if he had a mind to interpret this infamous familiarity of Jupiter with Ganymede into his Platonick Love, but in my mind that very Dialogue lacks Apology its ſelf, for a Man finds there ſo much of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Amator and Amaſius, with ſuch odd alluſions to that execrable Vice, that one had need of very vertuous thoughts and a very charitable mind to allegorize all the ſtrange Metaphors of that diſcourſe into a chaſt meaning. A Man would be hardly put to it, to moralize and unriddle all the Poetical Banter about Jupiter, and Mars, and Venus, and Bacchus, &c. and at the ſame time take them for Gods, or only particular Energies of the Divine Providence. For what can one make beſides ſome fanciful Remarks, of Saturn's devouring his Children; of Jupiter's caſtrating his Father; of Rhea the old Beldam Goddeſs, her being in Love with Atys, a Young Boy; of the Adultery of Mars and Venus; of the Titan's Wars and Vulcan's Celeſtial Forge? Now who can ever imagine that all this horrid, lewd, and ſimple ſtuff, was ever deſign'd for practical Divinity, and to teach Morality to Mankind by repreſenting their Gods ſo mean, ſo fooliſh, and ſo debauched? It remains therefore, that ſome other account, muſt be given of the Heathen Mythology, than that of ancient Riddles, and Theology and Morality's being delivered under thoſe Umbrages.

Therefore I ſuppoſe that the Heathen Idolatry and Mythological Divinity was owing to the illiterate darkneſs of ſome Ages which ſucceeded after the Flood.Cauſed by the darkneſs of the Poſtdiluvian Ages. In Cenſorin. de Die Nat. Cap. 21. Varro does very well divide Time (at leaſt as far as 'twas known to the Heathens) into the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or that obſcure Time which was from the beginning of things to the firſt Cataclyſm (i. e.) Ogyges his Flood; the ſecond was the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 reaching from the firſt Cataclyſm to the firſt Olympiad, called Fabulous, becauſe all the Poetical Hiſtory was tranſacted in it; and ever ſince has been the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Time of Hiſtory, when a true account of matters of Fact have been given us. Now the reaſon why there was no certain account of theſe two former Stages of time was the want of the Invention of Writing, or at leaſt the general uſe of it. So that all the Accounts of former times could only be deduced and carried down by Tradition; and what ſad work this would make in Hiſtory and Theology every one knows. The People of the ſeveral Nations had ſome general Notions of the Deity, they had heard of Gods freely converſing with the Patriarchs after the Flood, of the Miniſtery of Angels, &c. and this they jumbled together with the ſtories of their Kings, like a piece of Turkiſh Chronology. Their Kings, according to the uſual flattery of thoſe Ages, were made Gods, and then the common people who never ſtood upon the Decency of the Character, aſcribed to them all the actions and infirmities which belonging to their Manhood, after they were Gods. When they told a ſtory of former Times in a barbarous Age it was hardly worth hearing, unleſs there was ſomething ſtrange and prodigious in it, and it was ſafe making it as wonderful as one pleaſed, becauſe there was no ſtanding Hiſtories to contradict. From hence no doubt it muſt come to paſs that all our Monkiſh ſtories and Romances much be out done as the barbarity of thoſe firſt Times was the greater, ſo that all the ſtories of Jupiter, and the Centimani, and Pelion and Oſſa, Bacchus and Theſeus, Andromede and Medea, &c. were but the firſt Edition of Giants, Enchanted Caſtles, Knight Errants and Kings Daughters. Therefore it grieves me to ſee learned Men (Chriſtians eſpecially) abuſing their Time and Letters, to fiſh out Philoſophical reaſon for all theſe Lying Fooleries.

By deifying of Princes.2. It was in great meaſure owing to the deifying of Princes. For moſt of thoſe Gods which were worſhipped by the old Heathen were Kings formerly of the Country where they were adored. It is agreed by all, that the great Aſſyrian Belus was either Nimrod, or ſome other great Prince of that Country: And Diodorus Siculus relates the ſame of the Aegyptian Horus, and Oſyris. Hiſt. Stabul. Lib. 1. The Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Jupiter was King of Crete, at leaſt he that was commonly worſhipped; as Tully himſelf is forced to own, though he be ſo great an Advocate for the Natural Deities. Saturnus, Janus, Faunus, Fatua, Do Nat. Deor. Lib. 3. Romulus, and all the Dii indigites, are generally owned to be Princes of Italy, and the Latin Jupiter might probably be Aeneas, who was called Jupiter Indiges. Neither doth he receive his name à juvando, as being ſo principal a part of the Univerſe, as Varro, and Tully pretend; but is only the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the uſual addition of Pater, as Marſpiter, Deiſpiter, in being uſual to change the Greek ζ when put in Latin into J or G, which has the like ſound, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gingiber. And as for Juno, I look upon her to be but the old Jana, and Saturn to be the True name of that old King, which is preſerved ſtill in the Teutonick, Seater. So was the famous Hammon of Africa, Cham the firſt Prince, or Founder of that Country, Bacchus a great Conquerour in the Eaſt, and the celebrated Rhea, or Cybele, an adopted Daughter of Minoes, an ancient King of Phrygia, and Ceres, or Iſis, a Queen of Aegypt. There is no doubt but theſe Deities were firſt taken in as aſcititious and Tutelar Gods of the place, and worſhipped together with the ſupreme God, but in time, like Saint-worſhip among the Papiſts, they juſtled out God-Almighty through pretence of their particular inſpection, and brought his worſhip to little or nothing. And beſides people ſtood upon punctilio's of Honour to have their particular God the greateſt God; ſo that there was not any little hedge God of a puny province but by his Votaries was equalled to the Gods of the King of Aſſyria. Hence Zeal, for their Deities, and a fanciful Bigottry, ſounded abroad a number of their Miracles and Excellencies, which coming to the Ears of Foreign Countries they in time of extremity, when they were willing to try all Experiments, adopted them their Gods too; as theLiv. Hiſt. Lib. 39. c. 10. Mater Idaea was brought to Rome when Hannibal with his Army was ravaging Italy, andId. Lib. 10. Aeſcuſapius was Canonized there in that raging Peſtilence which happened, An. Ʋ. C. 460. So that in time this tranſlating of Deities from one Country to another did very much conduce to the encreaſe of the Heathen Polytheiſm and Fabulous ſtories of their Gods.

3. Another great cauſe of it was the early and almoſt univerſal worſhip of the Sun, Moon, and Stars. It is certain,By the Worſhip of the Sun, Moon, and Stars. that the Idolatry of the Sun and Moon is very ancient, by the Book of Job, which probably is the oldeſt writing extant; for Job there maintaining his Integrity, diſowns his ever having worſhipped the Sun or Moon. If I beheld the Sun when it ſhined, or the Moon walking in brightneſs, and my heart hath been ſecretly enticed, or my mouth has kiſſed my hand; this were alſo an iniquity to be puniſhed by the Judge, for I ſhould have denied the God that is above, Job 31.26, &c. And Macrobius ſpends ſeven whole Chapters in his firſt Book of Saturnalia to prove, that Apollo, Mars, Mercury, Aeſculapius, Salus, Hercules, Iſis, Serapis, Adonis, Attys, Oſyris, Horus, Nemeſis, Pan, and even Saturn and Jupiter, were nothing elſe but the Sun. And if one conſiders the gloriouſneſs of that Planet, and its extraordinary beneficialneſs to the Earth, one can hardly imagine, but that the firſt Idolaters paid their worſhip to it. 'Tis plain by Hiſtory, that the Perſian Mithras was but another name for the Sun. And Learned Men have proved, that the Moabitiſh Baal-Peor, the Syrian Moloch, the Arabian Ʋrotalt, the Aethiopian Aſſabinus, and other Deities were nothing elſe but the Sun. V. Voſſium de Orig. Idol. Spenc. de Leg. Heb. Selden, de Diis Syris. That Hecate and Diana were but other names, for the Moon, is known to every one; and, Orpheus in his Hymns makes her Proſerpina too.

The ſame was in probability the Aegyptian Iſis, the Aſſyrian Aſtarte, or Aſtaroth, the Arabian Alilat, and the Greek Ilithya. The other Planets gave names to ſome Gods, as to Mars, Mercury, Venus, or Dione, as the fanciful Forms of the Conſtellations might do to others, as to Hercules and Orion; and when all theſe different names, which were given the ſame Luminaries in ſo many ſeveral Countries, came to be carried to Greece, and Rome, who underſtood nothing of theſe barbarous Languages, they preſently took them for new Deities, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , outlandiſh Gods, which they had never worſhipped before; ſo that this alone muſt in time ſwell their Liſt of Deities to a conſiderable length.

4. Another cauſe of their Polytheiſm and Fabulous Divinity was their making Gods and Goddeſſes of words,By deifying words. a ſort of Grammatical Deities that were made Gods when of the Maſculine, and Goddeſſes when of the Feminine Gender. Thus Somnus, and Dolor, and Pavor, were He Gods; and Pecunia, Prudentia, and Concordia, were She ones, with a World more of the like. Now when the Heathen had gotten this way of ſtocking Heaven, 'tis a mercy they had not left us the whole Dictionary full of Gods. And juſt at the ſame rate the Nurſes and good Women were the Authors of a multitude of Deities. It was they that invented the Office of Lucina to give an eaſy labour, of Opis to receive the Child;Vid. Var. • ing. Lat. Lib. 4. Auguſt. Civ. Dei, Lib. 4. Cap. 11. of the God Vaticanus, that opened the mouth of the Child to cry; of Levana, that took the Child up when 'twas down; of Cunina which guarded the Cradle, of the Carmentes which read the deſtiny of it, of Rumina which made it Suck, Educe, and Potina, which made it eat and drink; of Menas, Fortuna Barbata, Juguntinus, &c. Now I fancy, Philologus, I ſhould make you break your brains, ſhould I ſet you to give a philoſophical Account of all theſe Deities, which an old Woman could Coin twenty of them in a Breath.

I thank you, Sir, for your kind offer, but I don't care to be ſet to ſuch ſort of work as the Conjurers do the Devils they raiſe, to pick Oatmeal and tell Sand. But although ſome ſilly People might make odd ſort of work with natural Religion heretofore; yet as it was taught and practiſed by the wiſeſt of the Heathen, it was a noble Religion, full of wiſe thought and rational deduction; the dictates whereof were not proved by Chapter and Verſe, but by ſolid and curious reaſoning. And this your Divines are aware of well enough, when they are forced now and then to bring in a ſhred, or two of the ancient Learning, to add a poignancy to their dull Diſcourſes of Morality, to keep the folk from ſleeping; and I obſerve generally an Auditory of a ſudden to look brisk upon Plato and Tully, when they have been nodding over Paul and Peter. And truly there is good reaſon for it, for their Books and ſayings afford us ſuch admirable Lectures of Morality, in them we may ſee the duty of Mankind ſet out ſo fully and exactly, and in ſuch charming ſtrains of Eloquence, that all your inſpired Authors, as you call them, look very poor things to them. Now who can blame me for ſtanding up for Natural Religion, when you ſee it could raiſe theſe Philoſophical Minds to ſuch a noble height, as Revelation can never pretend to? I cannot read a piece of Seneca, or Plutarch, or any of thoſe excellent Philoſophers, but methinks, my Soul is warm'd with the braveneſs of the thoughts, and I am at the ſame time convinced of, and in Love with my Duty. And I doubt not but had I liv'd in thoſe times to have made the obſervation, I might have perceived that the Lectures and Examples of theſe admirable Men had conſiderable influence upon the Lives of the common People; at leaſt, I am ſure, there was force enough in their Doctrine to make them compleatly good. Sit anima mea cum animis Philoſophorum; and in another ſtate, let me but conſort with the Plato's and Zeno's, and I ſhall never envy your Armies of Saints and Martyrs.

I will be kinder to you than you are to your ſelf, and will put up my Prayers to God, that you may have a place in the Reſurrection of the juſt, and may be of the number of God's Elect, and then I am ſure you are ſafe. It ſhall not be my buſineſs to predetermine the future State of thoſe good Heathen that have lived up to the Light of their reaſon; I know they are to ſtand or fall by the judgment of a merciful God, and therefore for my part I am always inclined to hope very well of them. But this I am ſure of, that the Morality of the Heathen Philoſophers was ſo far from being a compleat rule of Morals, that it was very erroneous, both as it repreſented the Nature of God and the notion of Vertue; and that it was ſo far from having any influence upon the Lives of the Commonalty, that for the moſt part it had little or none upon their own. As for the good language and handſom thought, that was the Talent and peculiar Study of thoſe Ages; but then again, that which ſullied all their performances, and ſpoil'd the beſt things they did, or ſaid, was, that Pride and vain glory, which was common to all of them, and which all their words and actions were bottomed upon. For I will make it appear to you, Philologus,

Morality of the Philoſophers grounded upon Pride. Lib. de Animâ.1. That Pride and vain glory was the Primum Mobile, the firſt ſpring of the Morality of the old Philoſophers, and not a deſign of doing good. Now ſuch a pitiful end, as this is, is enough to ſpoil the beſt action in the World. Tertullian, I remember, calls a Philoſopher the Animal of Glory, and if one conſiders the generality of their Writings and Practice, one ſhall find he had great reaſon for it. And Cicero is ſo ingenious as to own the charge though againſt himſelf. For he tells us ſincerely,Cic. de Amicitia. Vult plane virtus honorem: nec eſt vertutis ulla alia merces. Vertue does plainly deſire honour, neither has ſhe any other reward. And if a Man ſcans the whole tenour of the Philoſophers Lives, he can never think they had any other end. For what other account beſides gaining glory and a name in the World, can be given of their hatching ſo many different Principles, both in Phyſiology and Morality, but only to be taken notice of for inventing ſomething ſingular and remarkable? What was it but this vain ambition that put them upon ſuch affected habits which many of them are reported to have worn, upon ſuch ſingular Diet and odd actions which the Writers of their Lives relate of them? If they had deſign'd to do as much good as they could by their Philoſophy, they would have communicated it to all; but inſtead of this, they taught it only to a ſelect number of Men that were their own Diſciples, and this oftentimes under an engagement of ſecreſy, or in a way of Cant which was unintelligible to all others. So that all theſe noble rules of Morality which would have made the World ſo happy, were confined to a few Gentlemen only, that could afford Time and Money to get ſuch Philoſophical Tutours; but for the reſt of the World, for all the Philoſophers, they muſt be content to live like Beaſts ſtill.

The ancient Philoſophers miſtaken in the Nature of God.2. The Doctrine which was taught by the generality of the Heathen Philoſophers was injurious to the nature and attributes of God. Now to conceive wrong notions of Gods nature will perfectly Poiſon Mens Morality; for Men muſt needs ſuit their Actions ſo as to be agreeable and acceptable to the Deity they worſhip. So that if Men fancy God an Impure, Senſual or Careleſs Being, there is no doubt but their Lives will be of the ſame Piece. Therefore the erroneous Opinions of the Heathen Philoſophers concerning the Deity, were not pardonable Blunders, as many others in their Phyſiology were, but ſuch miſtakes as were of fatal conſequence to the Vertuouſneſs of their own and Followers Lives. And what a World of miſtakes ſhall we find them ſubject to of this kind? Some of them were downright Atheiſts, and believed no God at all, asSext. Emp. Hypot. Lib. 3. C. 24. Diagorus, Melius, Theodorus, and Critias Athenienſis. The Spirituality of God was denied by Epicurus, Id. ib. who was an Anthropomorphite, ſimply preſuming that God was of the figure of a Man; and by Zenophanes, who made him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a great impaſſible Sphere or Globe of matter. So Parmenides Eliates Clem. Alex. Protrept. would have the Deity to be Fire and Earth, and Hippaſus Metapontinus, and Heraclitus the Fire only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Cohort. ad Graecos. which Justin Martyr relates of Plato likewiſe. The Ʋnity of the DeitySee Onatus the Pythagoreans Arguments for Plurality of Gods Stob. Eccl. Phyſ. Lib. 1. was Univerſally denied by them all, and they owned either the Gods of the Country, or the Parts of the World to be ſuch; and though it was charged againſt Socrates in his Tryal, that he diſowned his Country Gods, and their worſhip; yet at his Death he diſcovers himſelf to be down-right Pagan, and orders his Executours to Sacrifice the CockPlat. Phaedo. he had vowed to Aeſculapius. And as for Plutarch Plutar • one of the ſobereſt of the Philoſophers, he was the horrideſt Polytheiſt of them all; for he aſſerts two ſupreme Anti-Gods, one infinitely Good, and the other infinitely Wicked, which of all errours is the moſt monſtrous and abominably abſurd. The Infinity of God was denied by all thoſe that aſſerted an infinite number of Worlds,Stob. Ecl. Phyſ. Cap. de Ort. & Inter. as Anaximander, Anaximenes, Archelaus, Diogenes, Leucippus, Democritus, and Epicurus; and by the Stoicks who generally made him the Anima Mundi. For two actual infinites are impoſſible, and if the World be infinite, God is not. And as for the Anima Mundi, they made that only a ſubtil corporeal flame permeating the whole World, and ſo muſt be terminated at the bounds of it, and conſequently finite. The Freedom of the Divine Will was deſtroyed by the Fatality of the Stoicks; and ſo was God's Omnipotence fetter'd by the ſtubborn Laws of their unalterable Fate. As for God's Providence that was perfectly excluded the World by Epicurus, and not allow'd by Ariſtotle Id. Ec. Phyſ. Cap. 25. on this ſide the Celeſtial Spheres. Thus you have ſeen how theſe great Oracles of Reaſon, and brave Natural-Religion Men have been miſtaken, even in the common Notions of the Deity; let us ſee now whether they are not,

Erroneous in their Moral Doctrines.3. Miſtaken in their Opinions concerning Vertue and Vice. I ſhould make a Day of it, ſhould I recite all the ſilly and the wicked Opinions which occur in the Writings and Lives of the Philoſophers; I ſhall only mention ſeme few of them, to put you in mind that theſe old Sages are not ſuch excellent Maſters in Morality as your Theiſtical Gentlemen would pretend, and that their Reaſon is no ſuch infallible Guide in Natural-Religion as you would have it. And now what ſhall we think of the little puny Philoſophers, when the great Plato † himſelf was an Advocate for the community of goods,Plat. Reſpub. Lib. 1. which would perfectly deſtroy all induſtry and peace in a Common-wealth, and what is yet worſe, when he contends for the common uſe of one anothers Wives? The Famous Zeno Lactant. Lib. 3. Cap. 22. the Founder of the Stoical Sect, with his Followers after him, made all Sins equal, and that it was as great a Sin to ſteal a Pin, as to kill ones Father; and Sextus Empiricus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Hyp. Lib. 3. Cap. 24. quotes out of him a Paſſage, wherein he would prove, that it is as lawful to lie with ones Mother, as to ſtroak her Arm; he likewiſe brings in the ſame Zeno with the Celebrated Stoick Cleanthes and Chryſippus Id. ib., as making that execrable Crime of Maſculine Venery a thing indifferent. And Diogenes Laertis Diog. Laert. Vit. Zen. in his Life lays it down as one of his principles, to be merciful to no one, and to pardon no body. And Theophilus Antiochenus Ad Autol. Lib. 2. brings in him and Cleanthes as aſſerting that Sons and Daughters might as lawfully roaſt and eat their Parents Fleſh as other food. He aſſerted that his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Greatneſs of Soul, which was nothing elſe but a Stoical pride, was ſufficient for happineſs;Laert. in Vit. Zen. but his Scholars Panaetius and Poſſidonius ſeeing this liable to ſo many Abſurdities, were forced afterward to allow health, wealth, and ſtrength to make it up. Diogenes the CynickLaert. in Vit. Diog., as all his curriſh Sect denied that there was any ſhamefulneſs in publick Commixtures, and aſſerted, that ParentsTheoph. Antioch. ad Autol. Lib. 2. might lawfully Sacrifice their Children, and eat their Fleſh. And Epicurus Id. ib. allows inceſtuous Copulation with Mother, or Daughter. Ariſtippus Laert. Vid. Ariſtippi. refuſed to maintain his own Children, ſaying they were no more to be regarded than the ſpittle, or the Lice which were produced by the Body. He made the poſitive brutiſh pleaſure of the Body (not Epicurus his Indolence) to be the chief good of Man; and taught that a wiſe Man might commit Theft, or Adultery, or Sacriledge, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , when he ſaw a convenient opportunity, and not otherwiſe: that theſe Crimes are not ſinful in themſelves, ſetting aſide the Opinion of the ſimple Multitude which has made them ſo. And Laertius records a ſophiſtical Argument of his, which he uſed, to prove the lawfulneſs of Sodomy.Cle. Alex. Strom. Lib. 2. Democritus condemns the uſe of Marriage for the trouble of it, and Epicurus agrees with him in the ſame. And even Ariſtotle Ariſt. ad Nicom. Lib. IV. 2. and Tully Cic. de Invent. 2. & Ep. ad. An. are Advocates for Hatred and Revenge, thoſe two moſt Diabolical Diſpoſitions which Mankind is ſubject to. Now this is enough upon this head to ſhew how mighty deficient your natural Religion is to teach Men their duty, and how infirm a Rule of Morals human reaſon is, when theſe ſo great Maſters of it could in theſe matters be ſo ſhamefully miſtaken.

4. Neither was the practice of the Heathen Philoſophers, as to Moral Duties, Their Lives vitious. better than their Principles. And truly without breach of Charity, I may conclude them all, except Socrates (whom I am willing to have a good Opinion of) to be a parcel of Hypocritical deſigning Knaves, who talked a great deal of Vertue, when they had not the leaſt pretence to it. St. Auſtin Aug. de Civ. Dei, Lib. 8. C. 12. remarks Plato to practiſe the Idolatry of his Country, though againſt his Conſcience. His Spleen and Pride were noted by all his Contemporaries; which made Antiſthenes Laert. in Vit. Antiſt., when he ſaw him once vomiting, ſay, I ſee his Gall come up, but where is his Pride? The ſame Philoſopher ſeeing a prancing Horſe with gaudy Trappings, ſaid to Plato, Behold your Picture. He ſpent a good part of his time with Ariſtippus, as a Flatterer in Dionyſius his Court. Diogenes the Cynick kept a dirty Whore called Phryne Tertul. in Apol., and lay with her openly in the ſtreetsLaert. in ejus Vit.. The famous Speuſippus was killed in an Adultery. Ariſtippus Tert. Apol. Lactant. Lib. 3. Cap. 7. Laert. in Ariſtippo., beſides a Houſeful of Boys and Whores which he kept, was familiar, as he acknowledges himſelf, with the famous Strumpet Lais. The ſame Ariſtippus villainouſly forſworeTertul. in Apol. the Money which was depoſited in his hands. Crates, and the Philoſopheſs Hipparchia Laert. in vita Hippar., uſed to ſtrole about the Country, and lie together publickly in the Eyes of the People. Xenophon was a notorious SodomiteDiog. Laert. in Vit. Xenop., and kept a Boy called Clinias, to whom in Laertius he thus expreſſes his ſcandalous Paſſion, I would be blind to all things elſe, ſo I might ſee Clinias; thanks to the day and the Sun that reveal to me Clinias his face: and his Adverſary Mero Pharſalius there upbraids him not for the Vice it ſelf, but for his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he making uſe of grown Men for his lewd purpoſes. Menippus Id. Vit. Menip. the Cynick was a ſordid Uſurer, and hang'd himſelf at laſt for a great loſs. Menedemus Id Vit. Menedemi. another Cynick (as moſt of the Tribe) deſpiſed all induſtry and human Sciences, and one ſhewing him a delicate Sun-dial, ſaid only, 'twas a fine Invention for a Man not to loſe his Supper. The Philoſopher Herillus Id. in ejus Vit. was in his youth a Pathick Boy. Cleanthes Lact. Lib. 3. Cap. 7. , Chryſippus, and Zeno, made away with themſelves; and ſo did Cato, whom Lactantius calls Socraticae vanitatis imitator; and Cleombrotus, by reading Plato's Book of the Immortality of the Soul. In ſhort the Philoſophers in general were noted for their beaſtly corruption of the young Scholars they had the charge of; and this was one of the ArticlesLaert. in Vit. Socr., though perhaps groundleſs, which Anytus and Melitus objected againſt Socrates, and which he was condemned for. Now this imputation was ſo notorious againſt the Philoſophers, that Lucian makes ſport with it throughout his Dialogues, and the Socratici Cynaedi was grown to a Proverb to denote the worſt of thoſe infamous Wretches. Nay I remember ſomewhere that Plutarch does in ſome meaſure Apologize for this Vice of the Philoſophers, becauſe they make amends by the improving their Minds for the corruption of their Bodies. Theſe are the Fathers, Philologus, of your infidel Church, whom you build your Religion upon; but for my part, let my Soul be with Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and all his holy Saints and Martyrs, which I am ſure are in a better condition than theſe lewd unregenerate Wretches.

The Lives of the common Pagans highly vitious.5. And as for the common and illiterate People, one cannot expect that their Lives ſhould be any thing vertuous, when their Philoſophers, who pretended to teach them Vertue, were ſo miſtaken in their Principles, and for the moſt part debauched in their practice. For they poor People, for the moſt part blindly followed the impulſe of their Senſes and Paſſions, and could propoſe no other end of their actions but the preſent gratification of their Affections and Inclinations. For Everlaſting Life and Eternal Glory, which is the great ſpring of the Chriſtian Vertue and Holineſs, was unknown to them; and was the great promiſe only of our bleſſed Saviour, who hath brought Life and Immortality to light through the Goſpel. They had nothing among them like it, but ſome fanciful ſtories of Elyſium, which too was generally lookt upon as a Poetical Dream, and believed by none ſo as to found any Religious action upon it. And therefore the Philoſophers (who depended little or nothing upon the Rewards of a future ſtate,They and the Philoſophers wanted a True End of their Actions. though they might ſometime talk of it) deviſed a hundred ſort of ſeveral Ends of human actions, or notions, wherein they fanſied happineſs did conſiſt, which all referred only to this World; which they would never have done, had they ſtedfaſtly believed a happy ſtate, or a Reward for Vertue in the next. Thus Epicurus would have Man's happineſs to conſiſt in an Indolence or Freedom from all pain, in not hungring, or thirſting, or being cold; and of this he was ſo confident, that he was wont impiouſly to ſay, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he would contend with Jupiter for the Truth of this Opinion. Dinomachus and Callipho made their end, the doing any thing a man might reap pleaſure by. Ariſtotle, and moſt of the Stoicks, made their End to live according to Vertue: ſo that Vertue according to them was its own Reward. Cleanthes his end conſiſted in living agreeable to nature, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in underſtanding Logick, or Reaſoning well. Panaetius his end was, in gratifying the appetites of nature, and Paſſidonius his, in contemplating the Truth and Order of the Ʋniverſe. Herillus his end was, to live according to Philoſophy, of Knowledge. And thoſe of the latter Academy would have it conſiſt in a firmly abſtaining from appearances or repreſentations of ſenſes. Vid. Cic. de Fin. Diog. Laert. & Plutarch. in Vit. Philoſ. & Clem. Alex. Strom. Lib. 2. Anaxagoras his end was, Contemplation; Pythagoras his, the Knowledge of the Perfection of the Vertues of the Soul: Democritus his, the Tranquillity of the mind, which he called the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or well-being: Hecataeus his, ſufficiency: Nauſiphanes his, Admiration: Antiſthenes his, a vacancy from Pride: and the Anicereans, who were a party of the Cyrenaick Sect, deſpiſed their Maſter Epicurus his end, and neither would have pleaſure, nor any thing elſe, the end of human actions, but to do what one liſt. And as for the Immortality of the Soul, it was denyed and ridiculed by all the followers of Democritus and Epicurus, it was doubted by the Academicks, it was made only very vivacious and ſurviving to the Conflagration by the Stoicks: and even the great Socrates the Founder of the Platonick Philoſophy is brought in by Plato in his Phaedo, as only having good hopes of it, and of which he will not be very confident. Now who can expect that the common People among the Heathen ſhould make any great progreſs in Vertue, when the moſt knowing among them had no principle to practiſe it upon? Indeed ſome of theſe whimſical ends of human actions might ſerve a Philoſopher to banter upon, but none of the common People would ever govern their Lives by them. When they did not believe the Immortal Bliſs of another World, they muſt with the Cyrenaick Philoſophers propoſe all their happineſs in the pleaſures of this, which was the moſt ſenſible deduction, and which the Apoſtles does plainly confirm upon this ſuppoſition, what advantageth me if the dead riſe not, let us eat and drink, for to morrow we die, 1 Cor. 15.32. And if we conſider the Lives and Actions of the ancient Heathen, we ſhall find their worſhip of the Gods, and the vitiouſneſs of their Lives wholly agreeable to this Hypotheſis: and though the Lives of Chriſtians generally be not anſwerable to thoſe admirable Laws of our Saviour they are bleſſed with; yet thoſe Divine Precepts have had that influence upon the Chriſtian World, as to make the generality of them live better, and not to be guilty of thoſe notorious Errours and Vices the Heathen were.

And truly, Philologus, The Lives of Chriſtians better than the Pagans in many particulars. it is to me a demonſtrative proof of the great neceſſity of our Chriſtian Revelation, and the defect of Natural Religion, that ſince the Preaching of the Goſpel a great part of the World has been freed from many Epidemical Vices and Errours, which they were over-run with before. I ſhall not now trouble you with ſhewing what an Influence the Chriſtian Doctrine had over the Philoſophy of the Gentiles after its propagation; for it is eaſy for any one to obſerve, that Epictetus and Antoninus, Plutarch and Hierocles, Maximus Tyrius, and Arrian, had quite another caſt in their Morality from the old Philoſophers, and their thoughts appear every where more elevated and Divine after they had mended their Philoſophy by Chriſtian Principle. I ſhall only tranſiently touch upon ſome of thoſe many wickedneſſes and miſtakes which Chriſtianity has diſpelled, and with which the Heathen World was heretofore, and is ſtill (where it continues ſo) infected with.

Idolatry.All Men of your perſwaſion allow that Idolatry and Image-worſhip are very great Errours and very injurious to the Divine Nature; and this you know the Heathen World was over-run with: but Chriſtianity as far as it ſpreads has fairly delivered it from; unleſs where the Papiſts have in ſome meaſure brought it back to the ſcandal of our common Chriſtianity.

Magick.The uſe of Magick was a Vice that the Heathen were almoſt univerſally addicted to, not only Perſians and Gauls, and other barbarous Nations, but alſo the Greeks and Romans, and even the Philoſophers themſelves, as appears by the Examples of Apollonius Thyanaeus, Apuleius, and Porphyry; but in Chriſtian Nations it is rarely known, it is generally abominated, and when detected, ſeverely puniſhed.

The ſeveral ſorts of Augury were either ſuperſtitious Deluſions,Augury or elſe a communication with Evil Spirits by odd ſigns of the Flying of Fowl, by the entrails of Beaſts, or feeding of Chickens, which univerſally obtained among the old Pagans; and which by the Grace of God we Chriſtians are not taxable with.

Human Sacrifices, Human Sacrifices. and the moſt unnatural ſort of it, of their own Children, was a Deviliſh Cuſtom which was common to all the Heathen Nations, and was uſed not only among ſuch barbarous People as the Syrians and the Britains, but among the Greeks and Romans; forJuſtin. Mart. è Demarato in rebus Tragicis, & Dorotheo in rebus Italicis. Lewd Worſhips. Erectheus Atticus Sacrificed his own Daughter to Perſephone, and ſo did Marius his Daughter Diis Averuncanis; which execrable ſuperſtition the Chriſtian World is freed from.

We have nothing in our worſhip like the Heathens lewd Worſhip in the Feaſts of Flora, Priapus and Cybele, in which ſuch abominable Luſts were acted as is a Shame to mention; and this our part of the World may thank Chriſtianity for too.

I do not know whether a perfect and chaſt Matrimony was uſed in any part of the World but among the Chriſtians. Haſty and humorſome Divorces were allow'd both by Greeks and Romans, Ʋnlawful Marriages. and ſometimes they ſuperinduced, as they call it, a new Wife over the other. The Perſians Sext. Emp. Hyp. Lib. 3. Cap. 24. married their Mothers, Aegyptians their Siſters; and Polygamy, was practiſed all over the Eaſt, and in moſt Parts of the World. But Chriſtianity has eſtabliſhed the moſt decent and peaceable kind of Matrimony; which is moſt agreeable to the ends of nature, better for the education and proviſion for Children, and for the mutual ſatisfaction of each other.

We are beholding to the Chriſtian Religion for that humanity and good nature which obtains in the World ſince the Planting the Goſpel, in reſpect of that diabolical Cruelty which reigned among the Heathen.Cruelty. Our Chriſtians, though otherways but bad Men, could take no pleaſure in ſeeing the poor Gladiatours forced to Butcher one another, as they did; they would abominate that ſo many Men ſhould die for no purpoſe, as were exhibited by Trajan, one of the beſt of their Princes, who in three Quarters of a Year Murdered ten thouſand Men this way. Our Fleſh trembles at the thoughts of thoſe horrid puniſhments they took delight in ſeeing inflicted upon the poor Chriſtians; and we cannot, without horrour, now think of Mens being torn aſunder by boughs of Trees, and Wild Horſes, of being roaſted with Salt and Vinegar, of being broil'd upon Grid-irons, and ſcalded in boiling Oil. The moſt cruel Tyrant that ever the Chriſtian World beheld, never, like the Roman Emperours, fidled and ſung over the Flames of a burning City, made an entertainment of ſeeing Men tortured, and were delighted with the muſick of dying Mens groans, as Nero and Caligula were.

We Chriſtians do abhor Self-Murder,Self-Murder. and fix a publick Infamy on thoſe that lay violent hands upon themſelves; but among the Romans it was accounted a piece of Bravery, and countenanced by the Philoſophers. Vid. Sen. de Ir. Lib. 3. Cap. 15. Plin. Nat. Hiſt. Lib. 2. Cap. 63.

Common ſwearing is forbid by our Religion,Common Swearing. and diſcountenanced by all good Men of our Faith, and the moſt wicked are not ſo impudent as to uſe it in their ſerious Diſcourſe, or their Writings; but among the Heathen it was uſed by the moſt ſober Men, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and Meherculè: to ſwear by Jupiter and Hercules, is the uſual Phraſe of Socrates, Plato, and Cicero; to ſpeak nothing of Epicurus, whoſe Books are noted to be filled with unhallowed Oaths.

Expoſing Children.In all places where Chriſtianity has footing, Men have a tenderneſs for their Children, and take care to educate them as well as they can, though to their own detriment; but among the ancient Heathen it was a common thing to throw their Children, when born, into the next Ditch they met with, and leave who chance to find them to take care of them.

Ʋnjuſt Wars.Though the Arms of Chriſtian Princes cannot always be excuſed, yet none of them have ever had the confidence, as the old Heathens had, barefacedly to Proclaim War for Honour and Glory ſake. No Prince among us ever went to Butcher ſo many Countries as Alexander did, only to wear Garlands; or as the Romans did, to have the glory of a Triumph; who, as one obſerves, if they ſhould have reſtored again what they had unjuſtly got, muſt have been reduced to their Romulean Cottages. And I am ſure none of our Divines ever ſtated the caſe as Tully did, That Wars for Glory ſake were not abſolutely unlawful, but only mitius gerenda ſunt, they are not to be carried on with ſuch Cruelty as others.

The moſt prodigal among us are ſoberly parſimonious,Luxurious Living. if compared with thoſe mad exceſſes in the way of living among the Ancient Romans; if we conſider what prodigious quantities of Money were expended in making Shows for the People, in Largitions, in building Baths, Amphitheaters, and the like; if we recollect, how ſome of them have made Suppers that coſt the Revenue of Provinces, that pounded ineſtimable Jewels to drink their Miſtreſſes and Lovers Healths; that Heliogabalus exhibited a Naval Fight in the Amphitheater, and made all the Ships Sail and contend in Wine, and that ſee made a Diſh of the Brains only of ſix hundred Oſtriches; that ſo inconſiderable Fellow as Aeſop the Tragedian, who had got an Eſtate by Stage-playing, made a Diſh of a hundred of the rareſt Singing Birds which imitated Mans Voice, which coſt ſix thouſand Seſterces a piece; ſo that the whole Diſh ſtood him in, of our Engliſh Money, four thouſand ſeven hundred and forty eight found.

Enormous Luſts.We live indeed in a very vitious Age, in which Senſuality does highly abound among Chriſtians: but if you conſider the Lives of the Ancient Heathen, or even Mahometans and Idolaters now adays, our Vices are no ways comparable to their ſcandalous Turpitudes. The Greeks and Germans uſed Maſculine Venery as one of the laudable Cuſtoms of their CountryCor. Nepos. Alcib. Sext. Emp. Hyp. Lib. 3. C. 24. ; and in Aegypt the more common a Whore was, the more honourable, and for this reaſon was allowed to wear a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or a Garland of honour upon her head. In ſhort, the Chriſtian World has indiſputably gained ſo much of Vertue by the means of the Goſpel, that many of thoſe abominable Luſts which were generally practiſed by the Heathens, as appears by their Authors, have never been heard of by the generality of the moſt lewd and debauched Chriſtians.

No devout Worſhip.And laſtly I obſerve, that before Chriſtianity there was hardly any ſuch thing as a conſcientious and devout worſhip of God, or even of their own Deities. They never prayed to God for Vertues and Graces, but only for Riches, Honours, or Children, or the like; Their Prayers were generally ſuch as the Womans in Juvenal.

And all their Sacrifices, which we have an account of, were only deſign'd to bribe the Gods, to procure them a Victory, or ſome ſuch Temporal Advantage, or elſe to return them thanks, for the ſame, Orandum eſt ut ſit mens ſana in corpore ſano, was rather a Philoſophical thought, than the practice either of the multitude or the Philoſophers themſelves; and it was never known that ever Men met together in Aſſemblies, or uſually prayed to God in private, for any bleſſings of this Nature; but under a Revealed Inſtitution.

So that upon the whole, Sir, you ſee, that Natural Religion, as it is the reſult of Reaſon only, is a Rule of Morals miſerably defective. For how ſtrangely at a loſs muſt the poor common People be, to get a knowledge of a great part of their Duty, which the moſt ſagacious and learned Philoſophers blundered at? Or how ſhall we think that Natural Religion is ſufficient to regulate the lives of ignorant and barbarous People, which the World is for the moſt part made up of, when two ſuch knowing Nations, as the Greeks and Romans, were ſo ſcandalouſly miſtaken in it? Make the beſt of Natural Religion you can, it will be at leaſt but a Candle to the Sun, in reſpect of the knowledge which our Chriſtian Revelation affords; for under the Goſpel our very Women and Children, and the ordinarieſt of our Catechumens, are more knowing in Moral Duties, and more right in their notions of the nature and Attributes of God, than the Sages of old were after a Life ſpent in the Porch or the Garden; and tell me any Philoſopher that has bravely defied Death; and we will with infinite Advantage on our ſide, confront him with whole Armies of Chriſtian Martyrs.

This is brave poſitive tearing ſtuff, for a Perſon to talk to a bigotted Auditory, where there is no fear of being contradicted; but I can never believe, that God ſhould give ſuch an imperfect Law, which you would make of the Natural one, to the generally of Mankind, and put no body of all the vaſt ſwarms in the Gentile World in hopes of Salvation, but only ſome few Chriſtians for their believing in Jeſus Chriſt. God Almighty I am ſure is a kind and merciful Father, and contrives the greateſt good for all his Creatures, which they are capable of; and therefore whereas all the Gentile Nations have Immortal Souls, and are capable of Everlaſting Felicity, it can never be ſuppoſed, but that in this World they are in the way to Salvation, and that the Law that is given them, which can be none but the Natural one, is ſufficient to attain it by: So that if this be ſufficient to carry them to Heaven, you may banter what you pleaſe about the imperfection of it. For my part I am for going thither the neareſt way, and that is by Natural Religion: I am not for coaſting about to take in Ceremonies and long Articles of Faith to no purpoſe. Either God Almighty has damned all the Heathen World, that practiſed Natural Religion, which none but a Popiſh or a Calviniſtical cruelty can aſſert; or I, who am for the ſame Natural Religion, am in as comfortable a way of Salvation, as e'er a Goſpeller of you all.

I think, Sir, you conclude a little too faſt,God more ſevere to modern Theiſts than ancient Heathens. when you ſay, that you modern Theiſts are in as good hopes of Everlaſting Happineſs, as the old Heathen; for I take your caſes to be very different. They poor People never were in a Capacity of receiving the glad Tidings of the Goſpel, or they were poſſeſſed with ſuch invincible prejudices of Education under a ſuperſtitious worſhip, that they could not receive the bleſſed ſeed to improvement; which without all doubt God will make great allowances for. But the Perſons of your way, after having received the ſeed of Gods word, have trampled upon it; you have ſeen the light of the Goſpel, and ſhut your Eyes upon it; you have turned Renegado's to your bleſſed Redeemer, and perfidiouſly deſerted his Inſtitution, which in your Baptiſm you ſwore to live and die under. So that you are ſtrangely miſtaken, to think that your condition hereafter will be as good as the old Pagans. Your caſes are as wide, as thoſe of Foreigners and Domeſtick Rebels, in a Civil War; their Obedience was not expected by Chriſt, but you have traiterouſly deſerted him, and fought againſt him, contrary to your ſworn Allegiance. So that whatever mercy they may find at God's hand; you can expect nothing but the utmoſt ſeverity.

And then as for the caſe of the Heathen,Heathens do not go to Heaven. which you would willingly skreen your ſelves under; though I cannot be ſo uncharitable as to think, that all they are concluded under Eternal Damnation, for not being of a Religion they never heard of; yet I can ſee no grounds to believe they ſhall ever be Heirs of our Chriſtian Salvation, or that State of Glory which Chriſt has promiſed to his Followers. To be ſaved, or to partake of whatſoever Glories are comprehended under that name, is the peculiar Priviledge of us Chriſtians; for the Scripture ſays plainly, there is no other name given under Heaven, by which we may expect Salvation, but only the name of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt; that no man cometh to the Father but by him; that God added to the Church ſuch as ſhould be ſaved, and the like. So that a Heathen has no more Title or probability to be ſaved, than I have to be a Nobleman of Venice. Becauſe Salvation, as I obſerved, is the peculiar Chriſtian State of Glory, that place which our Saviour ſays he is gone to prepare for us, John 14.3. So that, though the Heathen may probably have other Places, or States of Glory, ours does not belong to them. Nay it is hardly reconcileable with the diſtributive Juſtice of God, to advance unregenerate Heathens to the ſame State of Happineſs, as thoſe that are redeemed by the blood of his Son, Baptized into his Croſs, have partaken of his Sufferings, and have denied and mortifyed the deareſt of their affections in obedience to his Commands.

What other proviſion God may make for them.But however, I doubt not but that God may in another manner make proviſion for the honeſt ſober Pagans in another World; for in that very Verſe, in which our Saviour ſays, he goes to prepare a place for us Chriſtians, he tells us, that in his Father's Houſe are many Manſions. There are many glorious Places or Seats in the Univerſe, unto which theſe good People may be transferred there to enjoy a conſiderable happineſs, though very unequal to the Joys of our Chriſtian Paradiſe. Our Manſion or State of Happineſs ſeems to be the choiceſt of all the reſt, one of our Saviour's own chooſing, and taking up. In my Father's Houſe are many Manſions, if it were not ſo, I would have told you; I go to prepare a place for you. It is a Metaphor taken from a Harbinger's Office. And the ſenſe is this: Let not your hearts be troubled, ye believe in God, believe alſo in me. In my Fathers Houſe, &c. I would not have you diſmayed upon my ſufferings, and be diſtruſtful about your future State, upon your being initiated into a new Sect of Religion, as if you were not to enjoy ſo much happineſs hereafter as the Jews, or other Sects of Religious worſhip in the World ſhall; for in my Father's Houſe are many Manſions; there ſhall be ſome degrees of happineſs, ſome ſeat of bleſſedneſs for good People of all ſorts; but I go and prepare a place for you, I who am the beloved of my Father, and the chiefeſt in his Glory, will obtain a place of the moſt extraordinary happineſs for you to abide in.

So that at laſt, though it ſhould be granted, that you Theiſts, that have had a Chriſtian Education, ſhould be admitted to the ſtate of good Pagans in another World, yet you are a very narrow Soul'd People, that you will aſpire to no higher a degree of happineſs, when it lies eaſy before you, only by maintaining your Goſpel-Covenant, which in your Baptiſm you have engaged to.

That is more, Credentius, that I have Faith to believe yet; I have a great many Rubs to get over, before I can come to that. But however I have no abhorrence to your Chriſtian worſhip, I can go to your Churches upon occaſion, hear a Sermon, and ſay my Prayers with you, without any check of Conſcience at all. I have no reaſon to think but I might lawfully go to an Indian Pagod, and worſhip the ſupreme Deity, though under the repreſentation of a Horſe-faced Image, I ſhould never ſtick out to pray to him among Mahometans in a Turkiſh Mosk, or hear Maſs in a Popiſh Chappel; nay I am of Opinion, I might, as one expreſſes it, Summi Entis vim adorare in floſculo An Epiſtle of a Deiſt in Przircovius his works, pag. 600. , adore the power of the ſupreme Being in a little Flower. For the principal part of all Religions is the ſame, viz. Morality and a good Life, and the common notions of Good and Evil; ſo that I do but laugh at all the little ſquabbles of ſo many Angry Sects in the World one with the other; for my part I fall out with none of them, for they all agree with me as far as my Creed goes, ſo that I have no reaſon to forbear Communion with the worſt of them. Indeed moſt of them have added ſome ſuperſtructures of their own to Natural Religion, which I do not approve, but I can ſtep over a hundred things of this nature, for the ſake of Peace and Unity. And to ſpeak freely, I could never approve your Chriſtian Zeal and earneſt Prayer to have all the World of the ſame Chriſtian Religion; for, as the King of Siam has obſerved, that diverſity of Religious Worſhips is one of the great Beauties of the Univerſe. For ſays that wiſe Prince to the Perſon who came to him in the name of an Embaſſadour from the French King, and propoſed to him his turning Chriſtian, I wonder that Prince ſhould ſo buſy himſelf in a matter relating to God, for which there is no ſign that God does ſhew any concern himſelf, as leaving it altogether to Man's Diſcretion. For (ſays he) the true God who created Heaven and Earth, and all the Creatures comprehended therein, and who has endowed them with natures and inclinations ſo various, had it pleaſed him, when he gave Men Bodies and Souls alike, he could have infuſed into them the ſame ſentiments of the Religion they were to profeſs, and have united all Nations under one Law. But 'tis obvious, that Providence permits variety of Sects and Opinions, becauſe God takes as much pleaſure to be adored with different Forms of Worſhip and Ceremonies, as to be glorifyed by the wonderful diverſity of his Creatures, whoſe various Beauties ſet forth his Infinite Power. So that in ſhort, Credentius, I think it every Man's duty to comply with the Religion eſtabliſhed in his Country, whatever his private thoughts may be concerning it, and that God-Almighty is ſatisfied with the inward worſhip of ones mind, though for peace ſake he complies with an erroneous outward one. But however I hold his folly inexcuſable, that will expoſe himſelf to ſuffering and contempt, rather than to comply with a few ſimple Niceties which particular Sects and Nations are fond of; when all of them own Natural Religion for their foundation. In a word, as ſome have boaſted themſelves to be Citizens, ſo I am a Church-man of the whole World; and though you perhaps may be offended at me for an extravagant Latitudinarian, yet I am ſure I have more reaſon on my ſide, than thoſe narrow-ſoul'd People, that are hedging in Salvation, and keeping their Communion only within the bounds of a little Paultry Sect.

Not indifferent to be of any Religion.I thank you, Sir, for this great freedom, for by this frankneſs you have laid open the very Soul of Deiſm, but withal have given ſuch a vile Character of it, as no honeſt Man would be very fond of embracing it. I am afraid there are too great a number of Men in the World of theſe ſentiments, and by whom Religion ſuffers more than by avow'd Atheiſts; for theſe are open and generous Enemies, whilſt the other are ſtriking at the Vitals of the Church, as they lie foſter'd in her Boſom. But that you may underſtand how unreaſonable and wicked this Opinion is, be pleaſed with me a little to conſider,

1. What horrid Hypocriſy and Diſſimulation it is,'Tis Hypocriſy. to communicate with a Religion, that you do not believe a Tittle of the Truth of. There cannot be a greater Falſity and Cheat in all the World than this is. To tell a Lie, or to act a ſhuffling Trick in bargaining, or the like, ſeldom deceives but a very few; but ſuch a wicked diſſimulation, in matters of Religion, deceives a whole Congregation, or it may be in a Man of Figure, a whole Nation, This is the baſeſt act which any Man of honour or any pretence to Vertue can condeſcend to, ſo perfidiouſly to deny the Truth, to make uſe of ſuch falſe Arts, and ſuch little creeping Tricks, to purſue an Advantage. But what is worſt of all, it is the moſt intolerable Affront to God Almighty that can be imagined, to offer to pay a worſhip to him which we are conſcious that neither he nor our ſelves do approve, and to joyn in Prayers and Devations, which we know muſt be an abomination to him. Which muſt,

2. Be more wicked when the worſhip you joyn with is downright Idolatrous.Sometim Idolatry. What excuſe can you make for worſhipping or falling down before a Popiſh Hoſt, which you believe to be only a Wafer, and you pay to it the worſhip due to the ſupreme God? How can you without horrour think of worſhipping an Indian Idol, with pretence it is but a Symbol of the Deity, when 'tis generally but the Repreſentation of ſome horrid Figure the Devil uſes to appear to them in? You may talk what you pleaſe of the Extenſiveneſs of your Communion, but I proteſt I am ſcar'd at ſuch a Religion as you pretend to, and I think you had better, with the Atheiſt, openly bid farewel to all, and lay claim to none.

Morality not the ſame in all Religions.3. As to what you aſſert, that the Morality of all Religions is the ſame, and is the principal part of them; I think that is a great miſtake. For many Religions are ſo made up of Ceremonious Foppery, that Morality is little taken notice of in them; and ſome retain ſuch Dangerous Errours and Faults in their Doctrine and Worſhip, that there is no Communion with them, without violations of moral Honeſty, or intrenching upon the dictates of Natural Religion. As when the worſhip is Idolatrous, when wrong and injurious Notions are entertain'd of God's nature, when Dead Men, Devils, or Images have divine honours paid them; when Indulgences are granted to Sin, and Crimes are pretended to be pardoned without Repentance; when a good Intention ſhall be allow'd to juſtify Evil actions, and the like. So that there is no communicating with ſuch Religions, without committing an Offence againſt the ordinary Rules, even of Natural Religion, and Schiſmatically and perfidiouſly deſerting that true Religion, we have been educated in.

4. As to what you ſay concerning every Mans being obliged to be of the eſtabliſhed Religion of his Country,Not always to be of the Religion of our Country. and to profeſs (to ſpeak in the uſual way) all the Tales which the ſupreme Magiſtrate ſhall think fit to allow; I look upon this to be wildeſt of all Hobbs his ſilly Paradoxes. For if the Magiſtrate be the Publick Conſcience by which all Men are to be governed, as he aſſerts, why did God give every Man a Conſcience of his own, which Natural Religion informs us every one is to be governed and judged by? There are very few Men can quiet their own Conſciences after the Commiſſion of a grievous Crime, only becauſe their Prince might allow it; or believe a Ballad to be Holy Scripture, though there was an Act of Parliament to call it ſo. But if we muſt be of the Religion, which the Magiſtrate enjoyns, we muſt make the Magiſtrate, God Almighty; for no one but he has Authority to command any Religious Doctrine to be believed, but God. Beſides, this Opinion would make Religion the moſt trifling and inconſtant thing in the World; a Man might change his Religion as often as he does his Cloaths; and the poor Men of the Frontiers in Flanders ſhould be Papiſts, Calviniſts or Lutherans, three difference Religions, in ſo many Moons. This would be to render contemptible the nobleſt thing we are capable of doing, the ſervice we owe to Almighty God, and to make it the ſport and May-game of Prophane and Atheiſtical Men.

Sin outward is to comply with a falſe Religion.5. But whereas you aſſert, That God Almighty will be ſatisfied with the inward good Intention and worſhip of the mind, whilſt you outwardly comply with the moſt falſe and erroneous worſhip: This Opinion will open a Gate to all the Deceit and Villany in the World. Upon this Principal, Men may Murder and Steal, for the glory of God; and cut Mens Throats, to ſave their Souls. There would be no tying any Man by Oath or Compact; linguâ juravi, mentem injuratam gero, would always be the burden of their Song, and a good pretence too, if the inward ſenſe of their mind might be allow'd to be different from their Actions.

6. As to what you lay down,No folly to ſuffer for Religion. That 'tis a folly to ſuffer for a True Religion, rather than to comply with a falſe one; I take that to be a moſt falſe and peſtilent Doctrine, but however it is that which your Sect is founded upon. For you Theiſts owe your Origin here in Europe to this puſillanimous Opinion, and to the want of Chriſtian perſeverance, and a patient bearing of Afflictions. For as calamities make good Men better, ſo they make often very ill Men worſe. Not a few ſufferers in our late civil Wars took up with theſe damnable Opinions, becauſe their Religion had expoſed them to ſome Loſſes; and the ſame, I hear, has been the miſhap of many poor Gentlemen in their late perſecution in France. But are Religion and a good Conſcience things of ſo ſlight a value, as to be parted with for ſuch temporal profits? Muſt Truth be thus Sacrificed to intereſt? If a Man believes the Holy Scripture, it will make him tremble when he but thinks of ſuch a perfidious Defection. He that denies me before men, him will I deny before my Father which is in Heaven, Mat. 10.33. 'Tis hardly poſſible that they that were once enlightened, &c. if they ſhall fall away, to renew them again unto Repentance. Nay if he conſiders but the words of a Heathen Poet, it is enough to make him much more honeſt than this comes to.

K. of Siam's Argument anſwered.7. But for the King of Siam's Argument, I wonder how ſo many Men ſhould be dazled with ſuch a Tinſel Reaſon as this. Whether this be the King of Siam's Argument, as is reported, or no, I ſhall not now diſpute, although by the ſophiſtry of it, one would gueſs it had more of the Jeſuit in it, than the Prince. But I pray how he knows, that God takes ſo much pleaſure in theſe various forms of worſhip? This is a thing taken for granted, which no body that owns a Revealed Inſtitution will allow. For if God have revealed his Will by the command of any particular Worſhip as he has done to Jews and Chriſtians, then all other Religions do of courſe fall to the ground. Well, but God permits theſe different Religions, by his not ordering all Men to be of the ſame Sentiments in Religion; whereas he might as eaſily have done this, as to have made their Bodies and Souls alike. But is God's permiſſion a ſign of his good liking? Why then by the ſame rule all the villanies which are committed in the World are well pleaſing to him, becauſe they cannot be done but by his permiſſion. Beſides, 'tis very true on the other ſide, That God might have infuſed into all Men the ſame Sentiments of Vertue and Vice, and have made all Men good alike; but 'tis plain, that he permits the greateſt number of Men to be vicious, which is therefore an evident ſign that he does not concern himſelf about Vertue and Vice, and therefore 'tis a wonder that Men ſhould ſhew ſuch a concern about Morality, which God himſelf by this permiſſion does ſeem to have little regard to. Now you ſee this ſame Argument, if there be any thing in it, will make as much againſt Natural Religion, as it does againſt Revealed; and therefore you Theiſts ought to have a care, how you make uſe of it, for you thereby put a Weapon into the Atheiſt's hands, and plainly give up your cauſe to him. But on the other ſide, you ought to conſider, that as God's permiſſion of Vice is no ſign of his liking it, he having otherways declared his will by giving to all Men a Law of Vertue; ſo his tolerating ſo many falſe Religions, does not evince his Approbation of them, when he has manifeſtly declared his will how he will be worſhiped, viz. in the Chriſtian Religion. This is that way which he himſelf has ſet out for us to walk in, and to go in any other road is but wandering.

I think, Sir, we have talked enough about Natural Religion, and therefore, Sir, if you will oblige me with your Thoughts concerning that Revealed one which is owned by Chriſtians, and will give me ſatisfaction as to ſome ſcruples, I have conceived concerning it, it will be a very agreeable favour. I confeſs I am not very averſe to think, that there is a great defect generally in Man's reaſoning concerning religious matters, and Men's Thoughts do very much vary therein, ſo that it is not a difficult ſuppoſition to ſuppoſe that the gracious Deity, who had compaſſion upon all our infirmities, has contrived a way more certainly to guide fluctuating Nature in ſuch momentous concerns, and may have been pleaſed ſometimes to have enlightened Men with a Ray or two of his Wiſdom, from above, by revelation of ſome divine Truths. But then how ſhall we come to know, to whom he has particularly vouchſafed this favour? What marks of Grace ſhall we go by, to diſtinguiſh who are Heavens darling Favourites, that are bleſſed with ſuch obliging manifeſtations? The Jews and Chriſtians indeed pretend to it, but why not the Turks and Tartars as well as they? But if a bold pretence to Revelation, be an Argument for it, every little Hedge-Sect of Idolaters in India ſhall bid as fair for Inſpiration, as e'er a Jew or Chriſtian of you all. And in truth if there be any ſuch thing as inſpiration, for ought as I know, all the different Religions in the World may be (to uſe the Apoſtle's phraſe) but diverſity of gifts of the ſame ſpirit. The Chineſe may have the ſame Divine Revelation to worſhip their Tanquam and Teiquam, as we have to worſhip Jeſus Chriſt. The Banians and Bramins the Prieſts in India, may have the ſame plea for all the Devotions they claim for their Deities there, and ſo may the Japoneſe for their famous Gods Fotoques and Games, as the Mexicans for the rites paid to their Virachoca. Nor does my conjecture ſtand ſingly alone, but I have your own ſacred Writings to back me in it. For there are many Texts of Scripture, which ſeem plainly to affirm, that God-Almighty has revealed his Will by a Poſitive Inſtitution to the Gentile World, whom you look down with ſo much contempt upon, under pretence of your ſuperabundant privileges. For Gen. 14.18, &c. it is ſaid, that Melchiſedeck was King of Jeruſalem, and Prieſt of the moſt high God; and that he bleſſed Abraham, which was a principal Office of the Moſaical Prieſthood (Numb. 6.23.) and that Abraham pay'd Tithes to him of his Spoils. From whence it is plain, That God had a revealed Inſtitution before the Jews or their Forefather Abraham's time, and that when Abraham is commended for keeping God's commandments, and ſtatutes, and Laws, Gen. 26.5. it is only theſe poſitive injunctions in the Land of Canaan which Melchiſedeck was the Prieſt, or Prophet, or Diſpenſer of. So Malachi 1.10. Who is there among you that would ſhut the doors of my Temple, that fire ſhould not be kindled upon mine Altar. For from the riſing of the Sun unto the going down thereof, my name ſhall be great among the gentiles, and in every place Incenſe ſhall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering, for my name ſhall be great among the heathen, ſaith the Lord of Hoſts. By which words it is plain, That at that time the Prophet did not think the Jews dearer to God than other People, and that the Heathens worſhip was as acceptable to him as theirs. So Pſal. 145.18. The Lord is nigh to all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in Truth. And in the ſame Pſalm v. 9. it is ſaid God is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works. So God himſelf gives a Teſtimony of Job a Gentile, that there was none like him in the Earth, a perfect and an upright Man, Job 1.8. So Jonas ſaid he determined to flee to Tarſus, becauſe he knew God to be a gracious and merciful God, Jon. 4.2. and who would therefore pardon even the Gentile Ninevites. Beſides, we read in Scripture that ſeveral uncircumciſed Gentiles had the gift even of Prophecy, as Enoch, Noah, Abimelech, and Balaam. Nay ſeveral of the Jewiſh Prophets propheſy for the uſe of the Gentiles, Ezechiel propheſies to all the Nations then known. Obadiah propheſies only for the Children of Edom; and Jonas principally for the Ninevites; Iſaias foretells the calamities and deliverance of the Aegyptians, Iſ. 19.19. and the Prophet Jeremy is call'd expreſly a Prophet of the Nations or Gentiles: Before thou cameſt out of the Womb, I ſanctified thee, and I ordained thee a Prophet unto the Nations, Jer. 1.5. and Chap. 48.31. he ſays he will howl for Moab, he will cry out for Moab: and v. 36. My heart ſhall ſound for Moab like Pipes, &c. which pathetick expreſſions ſhew that he was ſent by God a Prophet, as well for the Gentile Moabites as the Jews. But as for the Prophecy of Balaam, that is ſo expreſs, that all the major and minor Prophets cannot pretend more to the Spirit of Prophecy, than this one Gentile Seer. So that, Credentius, you may make what brags you pleaſe of the Jewiſh and Chriſtian Revelations, but if you do not own old Balaam, as much a Heathen as he was, to be a very good Prophet, you will want one of the moſt conſiderable proofs of Chriſtianity. Nay the Scripture gives this Man all the Characters of a Prophetick ſpirit. He hath ſaid who heard the words of God, who ſaw the Viſion of the Almighty, falling into a Trance, but having his Eyes open, Numb. 24.4. Now methinks it is a little unfair, for you, to make ſuch an outcry about God's particular Favour to you by Revelation, when thoſe very revealed Scriptures themſelves, which you make ſuch brags of, allow it to the Heathen as well as you.

One can hardly think you Theiſts are in earneſt, when you object againſt the Scriptures and our Religion, that God has revealed himſelf to other Nations as well as us;No Revelation to the Gentiles for their Religions. I always take you to have a mind only to be pleaſant, and to put a banter upon us Chriſtians, rather than to defend your own Tenents, which do not ſeem much to be furthered by it. And when Spinoſa contends ſo mightily for it, I fancy it muſt be only an humorſom Paradox of that odd Man, and not his ſetled Opinion; or at leaſt the effect of a Pique he had conceived againſt the Jews, and ſo was reſolved to ſet them upon the ſame foot with other Mortals. But that the reſt of the World have no Revelation for the diverſe Religions they profeſs, will appear by conſidering.

Becauſe Idolatrous.1. That moſt of the Religions in the World are Idolatrous. Now it is impoſſible to ſuppoſe, that God by a Revelation ſhould command Men to do that which all wiſe Men would be aſhamed to do: to fall down before Stocks and ſtones, to worſhip the Sun and the Moon, ſenſeleſs, inanimate Creatures, and to adore dead Men, and Tyrannical Princes; or even Herbs, or Beaſts. Now though we ſhould ſuppoſe, that God was in no ways jealous of his honour, and that it was indifferent to him whatſoever Thing we worſhipped, yet as he is the God of Truth, 'tis impoſſible he ſhould command a falſe worſhip, or inſtruct People in paying devotion to things as Gods, which are only mean and perhaps wicked Creatures. Now the far greateſt part of the Unchriſtian World, are and have been ſuch Idolaters; and therefore to make God to have revealed to them their ſuperſtitions, is to make God to repreſent himſelf ſuch as it is impoſſible for him to be; to be delighted in a worſhip which is falſe and wicked, and to be himſelf the Chief Author of the Impoſture; which is ſo horrid, as no body will contend for.

2. Other Unchriſtian Nations that are not Idolaters (as chiefly the Mahometans) profeſs a Religion which allows Immorality,Immoral. the Founder whereof was rather poſſeſſed by the Devil, than inſpired by God. A Lewd debauched Fanatical Wretch, that lived by Rapine and Murder, and ſpent his days in Whoredom, Adulteries and Sodomies. Now his Religion allows its followers to propagate it by the blood of the oppoſers, and by all manner of cruelty and barbarity againſt Men of other perſwaſions. It allows Concubinacy and Whoredom, and even Sodomy it ſelf; and the very rewards it propoſes in another World, are ſuch infamous Luſt, as a good Man would be aſhamed to think of in this. 3. As for your Inſtances out of Scripture,Melchiſedeck. becauſe you ſhould not too much inſult over us, as having wounded us with our own Weapons, will you be pleaſed to accept this anſwer to the firſt, That Melchiſedeck is no proof of a Revelation among the Gentiles, more than of that Univerſal Revelation, which was given by Adam and Noah, to all Mankind; and upon which, as was ſhewn before, what is generally called Natural Religion, is grounded upon. For though Melchiſedeck, was no Jew, as not deſcending from Abraham; yet he was not properly a Gentile, eſpecially ſuch a one as is uſually underſtood by the word, viz. one that has degenerated from the ancient and true Religion, into an idolatrous ſuperſtition. For Melchiſedeck was a true and Orthodox Member of the ancient Noachical Church, and no ways tinctured with the prevailing Idolatrous Vice of thoſe Ages, but in the midſt of the mighty defection to falſe Gods and Idols, was a Prieſt of the moſt high God. So that 'tis a great miſtake to ſay, That God had a Prieſthood among the Gentiles, from the Inſtance of Melchiſedeck; becauſe I ſay Melchiſedeck was no Gentile, but a conſtant Perſeverer in God's Church, from which the Gentiles had even at that time made a defection; he kept up to the Noachical Precepts, which the Gentiles round him had neglected. But if in ſtrict ſpeaking you will have him a Gentile, becauſe he was not circumciſed, it does not from hence follow, that God had an inſtituted Church among other Nations, diſtinctly inſtituted as the Jewiſh was. For the Scripture does not give us a particular account who this Melchiſedeck was: the Jews will have him to be Shem the Eldeſt Son of Noah, becauſe perhaps they would allow no body elſe to be greater than their Father Abraham to bleſs him; but though this does well enough agree with the Age of Shem, who lived till after Abraham's time; yet it is not probable that Shem dwelt in the Land of Canaan, which was the Seat of Cham's Poſterity. But be he Shem, or any one elſe, and though he were a Worſhipper of the true God, yet he was ſo only upon the Principles of the old Revelation made to Noah, which was common to all the World with him: he had not any particular Revelations afforded him, as Moſes, to found a new Church upon; neither he nor his People had any ſuch Favour vouchſafed them, as to have the Oracles of God committed to them, as the Jews had, Rom. 3.2. He was a Prieſt as he was the Elder of a Family in the old Patriarchal way, and not by any poſitive Inſtitution among the Gentiles; and ſo bleſſed Abraham who communicated with him in the Divine worſhip whilſt he did officiate, as he might have done with Abraham in ſuch an Euchariſtical, or any other Sacrifice. 4. As for that Text of Malachi, where it is ſaid, that God's name ſhall be great among the Gentiles; (though Spinoſa tranſlates, it is great among the Gentiles, when the Verb is wanting in the Hebrew, which is wrong, for the Book is prophetick, and ſpeaks of futures, and therefore muſt be rendered ſhall be) this does by no means ſet the Gentiles at that time on a Level with the Jews, but is a remarkable Prophecy of the Kingdom of the Meſſias, when the Partition-Wall ſhould be taken away, and God ſhould have one Church made up both of Jews and Gentiles. 5. As to thoſe places of the Pſalmiſt, that God's tender mercies are over all his works; and that God is nigh unto all them that call upon him: It is the deſign of the Pſalmiſt to ſhew forth God's ſuperlative goodneſs in this Pſalm, and therefore among the reſt of God's Attributes, does praiſe him for his merciful Providence over his Creatures, his tender mercies are over all his works. And ſo his being nigh unto all them that call upon him, does not in the leaſt denote any particular divine Inſtitution like the Jewiſh Revelation among the Heathen, but is only in general, an Aſſertion of God's Univerſal Love to Mankind, and his willingneſs to aſſiſt them, which no reaſonable Man can deny. 6. As for your Inſtance in Job, that he was a good Man and acceptable to God; why, ſo were all the good Patriarchs before the Law, or the Circumciſion; nay though we ſhould grant that God ſpake by Revelation to this good Man, as it may appear from Chap. 38.1. yet it does not follow, that all the Idolatrous Heathen afterwards received the ſame favour. For before the Law, and in other Nations, where the Law was not received, Morality together with the eaſy Noachical precepts, were the Rule of their Duty; and therefore until they had forfeited this communication of the divine favour, by the enormity of their Lives, and their deviation from the True worſhip, they had as good a Title to the Inſpiration of God, whenever he ſhould pleaſe to afford it them, as the Jews had after their Church was inſtituted. 7. But as for what you alledge, that Jonah was only an Ethnick Prophet, I think by your favour, that is a great miſtake. For Jonah was principally a Prophet to the Jews, and propheſied under Jeroboam the ſecond, the King of Iſrael, as is plain from the 14. Chap. of the 2 Kings, where it is ſaid, that Jeroboam reſtored the coaſt of Iſrael from the entering in of Hameth unto the Sea of the Plain, according unto the word of the Lord God of Iſrael, which he ſpake by the hand of his ſervant Jonah, the Son of Amittai, the Prophet, which was of Gath-hepher. Whether or no that Prophecy which is there referred to were ever written or no, or whether it was only verbal, we cannot now determine, there being nothing like it in our Canon of Scripture; but it is from hence very evident, that Jonas was a Prophet originally to the Jews. That he was afterwards ſent to the Gentiles, was a great favour indeed to that Heathen City of Niniveh; but then he had firſt Propheſied to the Iſraelites, and when they had profited little or nothing by it, he like Chriſt and his Apoſtles, turned to the Gentiles. 8. As for your exceptions from Enoch, Noah, &c. they lived before the general corruption by Idolatry, and therefore it is but reaſonable to ſuppoſe, that they living up to the old true Patriarchal Religion, might partake of the divine Revelation as well as the Jews. And the Prophet Ezechiel's Prophecy is wholly taken up in ſhewing God's judgments upon the Jews, and endeavouring to bring them to a true ſenſe of their Sins; only a Chapter or two are interpoſed to foretel God's Vengeance likewiſe upon their Enemies, whoſe wickedneſs God's All-wiſe Providence had made uſe of to be a ſcourge for the Sins of his People. And ſo for the Prophets Iſaiah and Jeremy, their bemoaning the Calamities of the Heathens of Jazer and Edom, that is not a prophecy on their behalf, but only is a lively Hypotypoſis, or Poetical Deſcription of the ſad Miſeries which thoſe People ſhould undergo, to hearten up the Jews in their afflictions when they ſhould underſtand, that God would lay ſuch heavy burdens upon their Enemies; and to ſhew them that they had no reaſon to forſake the true Religion, when they ſhould ſee that the Heathens underwent as ſevere judgment as they. 9. And ſo again as to the Prophecy of Obadiah, whom you aſſert to have been a Prophet only to the Edomites, he was a Prophet only to the Iſraelites, and for ought appears to the contrary, originally of Jewiſh extraction; for I think little credit is to be given to the Jewiſh Authors, who would make him an Edomitiſh Proſelyte. But that Obadiah was a Prophet to the Jews only, is evident by the whole tenour of this ſhort Prophecy, where firſt are denounced God's ſevere judgments againſt the Edomites the Enemies of the Jews, and his vengeance for their Pride and Inſolence, and afterwards the Jews delivery from them, and conqueſt over them. But upon mount Sion ſhall be deliverance, and Jacob ſhall poſſeſs their poſſeſſions. And the houſe of Jacob ſhall be a fire, and the houſe Joſeph a Flame, and the houſe of Eſau for Stubble, and they ſhall kindle in them, and devour them, and there ſhall not be any of the houſe of Eſau; for the Lord hath ſpoken it, v. 17, 18. Now does this look like an Edomitiſh Prophet? But this is juſt as Spinoſa and Hobbs, and the Devil are uſed to quote Scripture. 10. The moſt conſiderable Inſtance is that of Balaam, who may ſeem to be an Ethnick Prophet, by his living in a Heathen Country, and his being at the command of a Heathen King, and by his predicting ſo plainly ſuch remarkable Events, which afterwards ſo punctually came to paſs; as the greatneſs of the Commonwealth of Iſrael, the deſtruction of the Canaanitiſh Nations, and the coming of the Meſſias. But then altho' this be true, yet it does not from hence follow, that the gift of Prophecy was common to other Nations as well as to the Jews, from this Inſtance. Becauſe this Prophecy was deſigned only for the benefit of the Jewiſh Nation, and although it was pronounced by the mouth, of a Heathen Man, yet the deſign and purpoſe of it was for the good of the Jews; and truly it was but a ſmall priviledge of the Heathen to have one of them to pronounce a Prophecy of God only in favour of the Jews, and that too for the utter Extirpation of themſelves. So that for ought I ſee in this Inſtance, Baalam's Aſs would be as good a one altogether to prove, That Inſpiration is common to Brutes too, becauſe God once made uſe of his mouth, to confute his Maſter's folly. 11. Well but Baalam, you ſay, was a true and accuſtomed Prophet, and not made uſe of only by God upon this extraordinary exigence. I am afraid this is an aſſertion which cannot be ſo eaſily made out as ſaid, and indeed the contrary thereof may be proved by the context. For firſt he cannot be a true Prophet of God, becauſe he made uſe of unlawful Arts, and as the Scripture ſays, fought for inchantments, Cap. 24. 1. and what we from the Vulgar, Tranſlate the rewards of divination, are in the original only divinations (i. e.) inſtruments of divination, conjuring Books, Wands, or the like. And ſecondly he is called Koſem, a Diviner, or Sorcerer, Joſh. 13.22. Which word has always an ill Character fixt on it in Scripture, notwithſtanding Spinoſa maintains the contrary, though without any Inſtance of it. I have carefully examined all the words that I find in Scripture which come from this root, and I do not find any, unleſs by way of Metaphor, but carry an ill ſenſe, and ſignify unlawful knowledge of future things; or a lying pretended one; and as for thoſe places of the Prophets, Iſ. 24.25. Jer. 14.14. Ezech. 13.7, and 23. Micah 3.6. &c. Where they may ſeem to ſignify ſimple Prophecy, yet it will be manifeſt by cloſely conſidering the places, that they are only harder words to characteriſe the falſe prophecies of ſome lying Prophets, among the Jews; as if I ſhould call an Aſtrologer a Gypſy, or a Conjurer, names which carry more vulgar diſrepute and ſhamefulneſs in them. I know but two places in Scripture where they are uſed in a good ſenſe: the firſt is, Prov. 16.10. A divining ſentence, or divination (not as we tranſlate it, too far from the original words a divine ſentence) is in the Lips of the King, and his mouth tranſgreſſeth not in judgment. That is, the King is a wiſe ſagacious Man in his judicial determinations, makes ſhrewd conjectures from outward appearance to diſcover Mens inward Intentions, and by that ſort of Political divination awards judgment accordingly. The ſecond is, Iſ. 32. where it is ſaid, The Lord doth take away from Judah the judge and the prophet, the Koſem, the Conjecturer, or the prudent and the Ancient. Where the Septuagint do very well tranſlate Koſem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , one that makes good conjectures or Divinations: which is a Metaphorical ſenſe of the word in moſt Languages, drawn from the Heathen Auguries, as is particularly plain in thoſe verſes of Ovid concerning the Childrens play at Even and Odd: Eſt etiam, par ſit numerus qui dicat, an impar, Ʋt divinatas auferat Augur opes. Ovid. de Nuce.

By your Criticiſms you have roved a little too far from the main point; but pray if Balaam were not a true Prophet, how came he to ſay, that he would bring Balack's Meſſengers word, what the Lord Jehovah the true Judaical God, ſhould ſpeak unto him, Numb. 22.7. The LORD refuſeth to give me leave to go with you, v. 13. I cannot go beyond the word of the LORD my God to do leſs or more, v. 18. And God came unto Balaam, &c. And Balaam ſaid unto God, &c. v. 9, 10. I pray how came he to have this intercourſe with the Lord Jehovah, and yet be ſuch a Heathen Conjurer, as you would make him? Nay how came he to make ſuch fine Prophecies of Jeſus Chriſt, and yet be ſuch a Diabolical Necromancer?

But if Natural Religion be ſo Defective, and Revelation ſo neceſſary, as you contend for, and withal, if the Jews were only bleſſed with this favour, how can we excuſe the partial Juſtice of God, to make ſo much of this odd ſort of People, and leave all the reſt of the World to ſhift for themſelves, as if they were none of his Creatures? Methinks of all the Nations of the World, the divine Prudence ſhould never have picked out this curriſh Nation, to have laviſhed out ſo many favours upon a People that from the time of their Original to their Overthrow were the Opprobry of the World, who as Tacitus and Juſtin tell us,Tacit. Hiſt. Lib. 5. Juſt. Hiſt. Lib. 36. were expelled Aegypt for a pack of ſcabbed Lepers, that would have infected the whole Country; and when they lived at Rome, they were obſerved by Juvenal, Juv. Sat. 6. to be of ſuch a dogged Temper, that they would not ſo much as direct a Man in his way, unleſs he was of the ſame circumciſed Race. Now how can any one, Credentius, ſuppoſe, that God Almighty ſhould overlook all the Nations of the World, and make himſelf ſo extraordinary familiar with this croſs-grain'd Rabble? One would have thought, if the Deity had been inclined to have made a diſtinction between any of his Creatures, that the Greeks or Romans ſhould have ſtood faireſt for ſuch a favour; for they were Nations of great Candor and Generoſity, who had minds that did generally abound with extraordinary Vertue and Honour: but the Jews of all Nations in the World were remarked for ſoure unſociable qualities; and whom their own Prophets cannot forbear calling them often, a ſtubborn, untoward, perverſe, crooked, and ſtiff-necked People. And therefore, Credentius, pray let me ſee how you can excuſe the Juſtice and Wiſdom of God in being ſo liberal of his Revelations to this People only.

I do not in the leaſt ſee, Philologus, how the Juſtice of God is touched by this gracious manifeſtation of his will in particular to the Jews, rather than to other Nations; or that they deſerved it leſs than any other. For,

1. This was no more than what God had done before in other Ages of the World,This agreeable to God's uſual Providence. in order to preſerve to himſelf a Church or choſen People, ſelected from the other ungodly People of the World. Thus are the Children of Seth, God's viſible Church in the Antediluvian Times, who were for this very reaſon called the Sons of God, Gen. 6.2. And the Children of Shem and Japhet, are ſeparated from the prophane off-ſpring of Ham, Gen. 9.26, 27. And therefore in the time of Abraham, when Idolatry was ſpread, well nigh over all the World, it was very wiſely contrived of God Almighty, to ſet up the Poſterity of this good Man, to be the Worſhippers of the True God, when the reſt of the World had lapſed into prophane Idolatry.

2. Neither can this argue any injuſtice in God,No injuſtice in God. becauſe it does not appear that the Heathens had any right to demand of God a Particular Revelation. They had the Law of Nature as 'tis generally called, or the old Adamical Revelation to walk by, and what Rewards, or Puniſhments were annexed to that, they were either to expect, or fear. This was ſufficient (though with more difficulty) to ſquare their Lives by; and God was in no ways obliged to make their Task more eaſy, ſince he might diſpenſe his Rewards upon what Conditions he pleaſed. I doubt not but that good Gentiles had their Reward allotted for them; but then I ſee no Reaſon why they ſhould be their own Caterers, and cut out what work they pleaſed for themſelves. For, if it pleaſed God to ſet the Gentiles to work out their Salvation with more pains and danger, and the Jews and Chriſtians with leſs, why ſhould the divine Juſtice be taxed with Partiality, more than you ſhould be, when you think fit to ſet ſome of your Workmen to an eaſier, and others to an harder Task, when all of them are obliged to undergo the moſt difficult and painful, when you ſhall be pleaſed to aſſign it?

Other Inſtances of Providence as unaccountable.3. Neither can I ſee any reaſon why the Juſtice or Wiſdom of God ſhould be called in queſtion for this liberal diſtribution of Revelations to the Jews alone, for which we can aſſign no reaſon. For there are a thouſand Inſtances in Providence to be made which are ſubject to the ſame difficulties. Tell me why the unhappy Inhabitants of Greenland, and Iſland, are not all born in ſuch a Garden of the World as Italy? Or why God beſtowed ſuch a Delicious ſoil upon the Italians only above all the reſt of the Europeans? Tell me, Philologus, why God has bleſſed you with a more delicate Perſonage, and a happier Stock of Natural Parts than your Neighbours? Why ſuch an one is born to a great Eſtate, and others to none at all. Why ſuch an one is made a Man, and not a Monkey? Why another Thing is an Animal, and not a Tree? Now theſe are all particular favours of God Almighty, which other parts of the Creation want; and yet you will not ſay that this is any reflexion upon the Wiſdom or Juſtice of God. Why therefore ſhould we tax them in beſtowing this favour of particular Revelation to the Jews? For I dare ſay, I can as eaſily prove, That the Jews were as much deſerving of their Prophecy, as any Man can be to be an Italian, or an Engliſhman, to be beautiful or wealthy. We Men are not able to give a reaſon for any of theſe benefits, and therefore muſt refer all to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or good pleaſure of God. Not that this good pleaſure of God is any capricious reſolution of him, but a wiſe determination of his Will, grounded upon juſt reaſon, although unknown to us. Nay, I doubt not, but we Men in another World ſhall be able to give an account of many difficulties in God's Beneficent and Vindictive Providence, which in this World are ſo apt to amuſe us; and that in the great circles and revolutions of God's future Diſpenſations all the preſent Inequalities ſhall be made up, and all accounts ballanced. But after all, the Order of the Ʋniverſe alone is a ſufficient reaſon to ſatisfy all reaſonable Men of the Wiſdom and Juſtice of God, in placing Men and Things in a better or worſe ſtation in the World, and in communicating to them greater or leſſer benefits. If all were to enjoy the ſame favours of the Deity, there would be no ſubordination of Beings, which is the great Beauty of the Univerſe; there would be only one confuſed Heap of good Things without order or deſign, which would be ſo far from being an Argument of the divine Wiſdom, that it would be a conſiderable proof againſt it. Beſides, no one would praiſe God for the Benefits they enjoy, if all enjoy'd the ſame in common with them, for the univerſality would take off the edge of Mens Admiration, and conſequently of their Gratitude; and they would be as liſtleſs to give thanks to God in this condition, as they are to thank God for Health, or Wealth, as when they never experienced either Sickneſs or Poverty. And therefore as God has wiſely contrived it in his Natural and Political Providence, for the Beauty and Order of the Univerſe, that ſome Beings ſhould be Vegetables as well as others Animals, that ſome ſhould be Brutes and others Men; and among Men themſelves, that ſome muſt be Poor as well as others Rich; that ſome muſt labour as well as others govern: ſo likewiſe in his Spiritual Providence, or in his care of the Everlaſting wellfare of Mens Souls, it is no wonder, that God ſhould ordain ſeveral Claſſes or Orders of Future Happineſs, or ſhould be more or leſs bountiful to them in affording them Means in this World of attaining it.

4. And as for the Jews whom you do not think to be ſuch fit Objects of the Divine favour in communicating to them his Revealed will,Jews not ſuch ill People as pretended. as the Greeks or Romans; that is a Point, I am afraid, you will never be able to make out. Indeed it is grown a mighty faſhion of late, even among thoſe that are better Friends to Chriſtianity than you, to caſt very ſevere Reflexions upon the Jewiſh Inſtitution, and, under pretence of ſhewing the Nobleneſs of the Chriſtion Religion, do upon all occaſions be-devil the Poor Jews. I do not think this the beſt way to ſupport Chriſtianity, by undermining the foundation, which it is built upon; for the Law is but the Ground-work of the Goſpel, and if we deſtroy the firſt, the latters falls. And as for the People of the Jews, which of late are ſo much uſed to be vilified, I do not find that they are more liable to cenſure of this nature than other Nations. It cannot indeed be denyed, but that this People were prone to Idolatry, and did very often lapſe into it; which is the occaſion of thoſe very ſevere reprehenſions you meet withal in the Prophets, and which you hinted at juſt now. But then this is in ſome meaſure to be palliated by the mighty grandeur and pageantry of the Idolatrous worſhip of all the Nations round about them, and the great ſcorn and reproach which was caſt upon the Jewiſh ſingularity in the worſhip of one God, which muſt needs have no inconſiderable influence upon vulgar minds. And as for their averſation to a familiarity with the Heathens, it was but a practice agreeable to the Moſaical Law (Vid. Deut. 7.) which was a wiſe command of God, which alone preſerved his True Worſhip, in that Nation only, free from the infection of Idolatrous Nations round them, for ſo many Ages together. And although perhaps in the Times of Trogus and Tacitus, the Jews might be more ſcrupulous this way, than their Law required; yet that muſt be imputed to Phariſaiſm, which was the prevailing Sect among the Jews at that time, and which by falſe Gloſſes and ſuperſtitious Doctrines, had perfectly debauched the Jewiſh Religion, and ſoured the greateſt part of them into an unſociable Temper. But after all the faults that may be charged upon them, the ſtedfaſt worſhip of the One True God, for ſo many Ages in that Nation only, when all the World beſides was over-run with Polytheiſm and Idolatry, when they were ſo much ſcorned and vilified by the Heathen World for his ſake, underwent ſo many Captivities, Perſecutions, and Martyrdoms; this was enough to endear them above the reſt of the World to God Almighty, to incline him to commit his Oracles to them alone, and to guide them by his revealed Word; rather than to the Greeks or Romans, or any other Idolatrous Nation, who, beſides their diabolical ſuperſtitions, were ten times more lewd and debauch'd.

5. As for a few ſcandalous reflexions which are uſually brought againſt the Jews out of Juſtin and Tacitus, Juſtin, &c. conſidered. I think nothing in them is worthy being taken notice of, unleſs it be the diſingenuity of the Relators, who I am confident report things which they themſelves do not give the leaſt credit to. For why, I pray, are not the Holy Scriptures and Joſephus, that are the Books of that Country, fitter to be relied upon, than the miſtaken reports of malicious or half informed Foreigners? I beſeech you, Sir, where would you look for a true account of the Matters of England, in Camden, Speed or Baker, Men of our own Nation, or in Mounſieur Sorbeir of France? I think the queſtion is eaſily reſolved; and then why ſhould you take theſe ſcandalous accounts of the Jewiſh Nation from Juſtin and Tacitus, when you have Writers of their own Nation which give contrary accounts of them? Both of theſe Heathen Authors are notoriouſly miſtaken in their account of the Jews; but becauſe Juſtin gives the fulleſt account, be pleaſed to obſerve one or two of the Abſurdities of his Relation. It is plain, that the foundation of Juſtin's Relation was out of the Book of Geneſis, by the names of Abraham, Iſrael, the particular Hiſtory of Joſeph Minimus aetate inter fratres Joſeph fuit, cujus excellens ingenium veriti fratres clam interceptum peregrinis mercatoribus vendiderunt, à quibus deportatus in Aegpytum, cum magicas ibi artes ſolerti ingenio percepiſſet, brevi ipſi regi percarus fuit. Nam & prodigiorum ſagaciſſimus erat, & ſomniorum primus intelligentiam condidit; nihil que ei divini juris humani que ei incognitum videbatur, adeo ut etiam ſterilitatem agrorum ante multos annos providerit: periiſſet que omnis Aegyptus firme: niſi monitu ejus rex edicto ſervari per multos annos fruges •• ſſeſſet. Juſt. Lib. 36. Cap. 6. , the Envy of his Brethren, his Interpretation of Dreams, his being ſold pereginis mercatoribus, to foreign Merchants, 〈◊〉 • rediction of the Famine, his famili • y with Pharaoh, his ſtoring of the •• rn, and the like. Now it is impoſſible, that ſuch a particular account ſhould be had any where elſe, than from the Bible. The Bible therefore muſt by you Theiſts be allow'd to have ſo much of the Truth of Prophane or ſecular Hiſtory, as to regulate Juſtin's Hiſtory, who ſeems plainly to have copied either at firſt or ſecond hand from it. So that if there be any Truth in Juſtin, the ſame muſt be more expreſs in the Bible, from which Juſtin had his Relation, though he has blended it with other Fables. Nor is it difficult to think how a Heathen ſhould come at a ſight of that Book, or at leaſt a Relation out of it. For Trogus Pompeius, who wrot the Hiſtory which Juſtin Epitomized, was a Retainer in the Family of the Great Pompey who Conquered Judea, and therefore in the Expedition of his Maſter there, without doubt he picked up this imperfect Relation of the Jews, either by reading their Books, and afterwards, forgetting or miſtaking them; or by mixing the True Hiſtory with the Fabulous reports of ſome Neighbouring Gentiles. So that in ſhort, the Scripture-Hiſtory muſt regulate his report. And then ſee how finely This does agree with it. He makes the Jewiſh Original to be from Damaſcus, and that Abraham was King of that place; where Arathes the Wife of Syrus, one of their ancient Kings, was worſhipped. That after Damaſcus, who gave name to the City, ſucceeded Azelus, and then Adores, and then Abraham and Iſrael, which Iſrael divided his Kingdom among his Ten Sons, but made them all to be called Jews from his Son Judah. That Joſeph was Iſrael's Youngeſt So • , and that Moſes was Son to him: That the Jews were drove out of Aegypt for being Scabby; that they were followed after by the Aegyptians, becauſe they had ſtolen ſome of their Sacra, and that the Aegyptians were forced to return home by a Tempeſt: That they were forced to faſt ſeven days in the deſerts of Arabia, which occaſioned the Inſtitution of the Sabbath; That the Memory of their being drove out of Aegypt for their ſcabbineſs, made it a part of their Religion not to converſe with ſtrangers, leſt the Knowledge of their Infirmity ſhould render them contemptible. That Moſes his Son's name was Arvas (i. e.) Aaron, who was an Aegyptian Prieſt, who afterwards ſucceeded Moſes in the Kingdom, and from hence came the cuſtom that the Jewiſh Kings were always Prieſts.

Now what a fooliſh and contradictious account of the Jewiſh Hiſtory is this Report of Juſtin? Who ever heard of the names of Azelus and Adores in the Jewiſh ſtory? When was ſuch a Goddeſs as Arathes worſhipped generally by the Jews, who were always fam'd for the worſhip of one God? where by the way this is only a ſimple miſtake of the Author, to ſay Arathe for the Aſtarte, or Aſtaroth, of the Sidonians. Here is again Abraham miſtaken for the Father, who was the Grand-Father of Iſrael. Here are Iſrael's Ten Sons ſet down for his Twelve; his little Eſtate miſtaken for an Empire, and the Twelve Tribes for Ten Kingdoms. Here is Joſeph taken for Jacob's Youngeſt Son, who was his eldeſt by another Venter; and Moſes paſſes for Joſeph's Son, who lived Three or Four Hundred Years after him. Here is the name of Jews ſaid to be impoſed by Jacob, which was not known till the time of the Captivity, a Thouſand Years afterwards. Here are the Plagues which Moſes inflicted upon Aegypt, altered for the ſcabbineſs of the Jews, as if thoſe heavy judgments came only by infection; and the ſpoiling of the Aegyptians of their Bracelets, Ear-rings, &c. turned into the running away with their Sacra. Here is the Hiſtory of the Manna and Quails confounded with the Inſtitution of the Sabbath; and their Injunction of not communicating with the Nations attributed to the fooliſh Fable about their Itch, or Leproſy. And, beſides, here is again Aaron, Moſes his Brother, miſtaken into his Son, and turned from a Jewiſh into an Aegyptian Prieſt; here is the ſame Aaron made King of the Jews, who was never otherways than Prieſt; and that ſaid to be the original of the Cuſtom of the Jews having their Kings their Prieſts, when never any ſuch Cuſtom obtained amongſt them; but only the Author has blundered the Hiſtory of the Maccabees Government into this Fable. So that, Philologus, I would have your Gentlemen for ſhame leave of, to abuſe the Jewiſh Nation with falſe ſtories out of Heathen Hiſtorians, that knew ſo very little of their Country, and are guilty of ſo many miſtakes about it. For in this ſhort account of Juſtin you ſee there are almoſt as many miſtakes as words; whether they are willful and malicious, or no, I ſhall not determine; but I am ſure the account we find in Scripture, to all reaſonable Men muſt be ten times leſs liable to exception.

You have given us here a great deal of learned Banter, and it is great Pity that Men ſhould ſtudy Scripture ſo much to make ſuch ill uſe of it. But to give an anſwer to this wild ſort of Arguing, which I can hardly perſwade my ſelf you urge in earneſt;

Natural Knowledge not Revelation.1. You aſſert, That Natural Knowledge is the Revelation of God, and that the Scriptures have not any more reaſon to be called ſo than that: But this is a great miſtake. For Natural Knowledge cann't be ſaid properly to be the Revelation, but only the Gift of God. Indeed what ever we know, we ſhould never come to the Knowledge of, unleſs it had pleaſed God's goodneſs to endow us with theſe intelligent faculties; but then no body ſays, that God reveals theſe natural Truths to us, but only he gives us the faculties of diſcerning them. Nay let us be as Platonical as we pleaſe, and aſſert that all the notions of the Soul are but ſo many Intuitions on the Deity, and our viewing ſome of thoſe Infinity of Truths, which he is pleaſed to exhibit to us, by communicating himſelf to us: I ſay although we explain natural Knowledge this way, yet this is far from being the ſame, which we generally underſtand by divine Revelation. For this firſt is a general way of God's communicating himſelf indifferently to all Men; for all Men do indifferently partake of a conſiderable meaſure of Natural Knowledge. But this latter way of God's revealing himſelf, which in particular we call Divine Revelation, is a favour which God has vouchſafed but to a very few of all Mankind, that they might communicate, what was ſo revealed to them, to the reſt. By the firſt, Men only have a power of perceiving the Ideas and Impreſſions of outward Objects, of compounding and dividing thoughts, of affirming and denying concerning them, of fitting premiſſes, and deducing Conſequences; which every ones own experience tells him he has by nature. But the latter is a ſupernatural Impulſe of the Divine Power, which inſtills into Mens Minds Thoughts not attainable by human Reaſon, or elſe gives them an Authority, as coming from God, which they had not before. And therefore it is an idle Fallacy, to call thoſe natural Deductions of Reaſon and Common Ideas of Things by the name of Revelation, from which they do as widely differ, as Light and Darkneſs. This is only a ludicrous Artifice which your ſort of Men have got of making uſe of Religious Terms, when you believe nothing of the Thing, and expoſing Religion, by leaving nothing in it but a few empty names. And beſides, they have another end to ſerve by it, which is this, That then their Infidelity does not appear ſo barefac'd when they make uſe of the old Terms in an Infidel ſenſe; for otherways ſuch Writers as Hobbs, Spinoſa, and the Author of the five Letters, would appear ſo horrid to all Ears that had the leaſt ſpark of Chriſtianity left, that Men would be ſcar'd from them at the firſt reading; and ſo all hopes of making Proſelytes for the Devil would be over. But by this bantering and mincing the matter, Readers are cajoled into Infidelity unawares, and the Authors eſcape the puniſhment likewiſe, which would otherwiſe attend an open and barefac'd Blaſphemy.

2. And it is much ſuch another kind of Argumentation,Prophets not only extraordinary Men. when you would have the Prophets, which are ſometimes in Scripture called the Men of God, to be only Men of good Parts, and very conſiderable Men; becauſe forſooth great things in Scripture are ſometimes called by the name of God. For what though the Mountain of God be a great mountain, and Nimrod a Hunter of God be a mighty Hunter, may not therefore Moſes, and Iſaiah and Jeremy be inſpired Prophets? I pray where lies the conſequence of this? Indeed if they were only in general ſaid to be Men of God, and had no other Title, nor no other demonſtration of their Prophetick Spirit, there would be then ſomething tolerable in this Argument. But the name of Men of God is an expreſſion which is but rarely, but once or twice in Scripture, made uſe of to ſignify a Prophet, 1 Kings, Chap. 13. there are other names which are generally uſed for that purpoſe. Such as Nabi which ſignifies one that has particular converſe and familiarity with God, Gen. 20.7. and Roeh, 1 Chron. 9.22, and 16.28. and Choſeh, 2 Sam. 24.11. 1 Chr. 21.9. both which words ſignify Seers, as denoting Men that are accuſtomed to divine Viſions, or ſupernatural Revelations.

But beſides there are ſuch innumerable expreſſions in Scripture which demonſtrate a particular Revelation from God Almighty, and a peculiar intercourſe of theſe holy Men the Prophets with him, that no reaſonable Man can deny it, unleſs at the ſame time he denies the Authority of the holy Scripture and makes it altogether an Impoſture. Gen. 15.1. The word of the Lord came to Abram in a Viſion ſaying, Fear not, Abram, &c. Now what tolerable ſenſe can be put upon theſe words, but only that this was a particular Revelation of God to Abraham? You cann't ſay that this is only ſome remarkable ſaying of Abraham, and is therefore in the Jewiſh Phraſe called the word of the Lord. For here is no room for any ſuch kind of Metaphor. Here is a particular Dialogue of God and Abraham, God ſaid: Fear not, Abram, I am thy ſhield and thy exceeding great Reward. And Abram ſaid, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, ſeeing I go childleſs, and the Steward of my Houſe is this Eliezer of Damaſcus? Then v. 4. is related the reply of God Almighty. And behold the word of the Lord came unto him, ſaying, This ſhall not be thy Heir, but he that ſhall come forth out of thine own Bowels, &c. Now what can be more poſitive and expreſs of Abraham's immediate Revelation and Intercourſe with God, than this Relation? So again, Exod. 2.5. The Revelation made to Moſes is related as expreſly. God called unto him out of the midſt of the buſh, and ſaid, Moſes, Moſes. Then follows the anſwer of Moſes, and Moſes ſaid, here am I. And the Lord ſaid, I have ſurely ſeen the affliction of my people, &c. Come now therefore and I will ſend thee unto Paraoh. And Moſes ſaid unto God, Who am I, that I ſhould go to Pharaoh, and that I ſhould bring the Children of Iſrael out of Aegypt? And God ſaid, Certainly I will be with thee, &c. And after this rate the Dialogue continues the full length of the Chapter. Now if this be not a relation of an Intercourſe with God, and a Revelation from him, there is no ſenſe to be put upon any words, though never ſo plain, there muſt be no aſſent given to the literal narrations of Thucydides, or Livy; but the credit of both thoſe Hiſtories may as well be criticized away as this.

So again as for the other Prophets, when we are particularly told, that the word of the Lord came unto them at ſuch a time, in ſuch a manner, in ſuch a particular Year of ſuch a King's Reign, what can poſſibly be meant leſs than that God revealed this to them? When they are commanded to take rolls and to write, as Iſ. 8 1. and Jer. 36.2. and the Prophecies ſo commanded to be written, are there recorded; when every Prophecy begins with the word of the Lord, or thus ſaith the Lord, when in ſome of them are particular Interlocutions between God and the Prophet; if this be not Revelation, the Prophets who wrote theſe Writings, muſt be the greateſt Cheats and Impoſtours in the World, in ſo often pretending to it when they had not the leaſt ſhare of it. But it vexes one to ſpend time to anſwer ſo ſimple an Objection, which is worth no ones notice, but that the great Spinoſa has taken ſo much pains in it; and other retailing Infidels after him would ſeem to do ſome great matter with it.

3. Nor are your Criticiſms upon the Hebrew Ruach, or Spirit, more ſolid, Spirit of God in Scripture ſignifies Revelation▪ by which you would pretend that word does not ſignify Revelation or Inſpiration, but only Wind, Life, temper of Mind, and the like. But what an unreaſonable miſtake is this? I do not deny but that word in Hebrew has many ſignifications, as ſeveral other words have in that narrow Language. But then on the other ſide there are a great many places in the Bible, in which it can ſignify only Inſpiration or Revelation, what think you of Gen. 41.38. Where Pharaoh ſays of Joſeph, after he had interpreted his Dream, and propheſied of the Years of Plenty and Famine, Can we find ſuch an one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is? Certainly by the Spirit of God here is meant the Inſpiration of God, or there is no ſenſe at all in it. And ſo again, Numb. 27.18. The Lord ſaid unto Moſes, Take thee Joſhua the Son of Nun, a Man in whom is the Spirit, and lay thy hand upon him; where by Spirit the Chaldee Paraphraſe interprets Prophecy. And what elſe can be meant by that Spirit of the Lord, 1 Kings 18.12. which carried Eliah from place to place, by which he did ſuch mighty Miracles, and ſo undauntedly uttered his, Prophecies, but only a ſupernatural power of God which did continually attend him? And ſo Iſa. 59.21. God tells the Prophet, that it was his Spirit that inſpired him with the words that he ſpoke. Saith the Lord, My Spirit which is upon thee, and the words which I have put into thy mouth, &c. And ſo ſeveral times in Ezechiel, The Spirit of the Lord fell upon me, Ezek. 11.5. and the Spirit entered into me, Chap. 3.24. And often in the Book of Daniel, the Spirit of the holy Gods is ſaid to be in him, Dan. 4.8, and 9, 5.11, and 14. In ſhort, divine Revelation is all over the Old Teſtament called by the name of Spirit; and even that extraordinary Inſpiration which was foretold by the Prophet Joel to prevail under the Goſpel, is called ſo likewiſe: I will pour out my Spirit upon all fleſh, and your Sons and your Daughters ſhall propheſie, your Old Men ſhall dream dreams, and your Young Men ſhall ſee Viſions, Joel 2.28. Where you may particularly obſerve, that the word Spirit is joyned with Prophecy and Revelation. And upon this account the Holy Ghoſt which was the giver of theſe Prophetick Gifts, is in the New Teſtament called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Holy Spirit. And ſo is divine Revelation among the Heathens called by the ſame name. As, Dii coeptis inſpirate meis, and Inſpirante Deo.

It is plain therefore that by the word Spirit in Scripture is frequently underſtood Divine Revelation, which is the effect of the Operation of God's Holy Spirit, conveying to the minds of ſeveral Prophetical Men, whom God has been pleaſed to chooſe, many extraordinary Truths, conducible to the good of his Church. Which is a thing ſo frequent and ſo plain in Scripture, as is not to be bantered away by a little fooliſh Criticiſm; and is a Truth never to be ſhaken, unleſs the Infidels have force enough to overthrow the whole Body of the Scriptures.

Well we will ſee, Credentius, what we can do as to that matter, ſome time or other. But in the mean time methinks you outſhoot your ſelves a little in your Notions of Revelation. For you generally aſſert, that Revelation is cauſed by a more immediate and ſupernatural Application of the divine Spirit, to the mind of Man, and ſo does make known to it, thoſe extraordinary Truths; which indeed is only a Caſt of the Jewiſh Unphiloſophical Ignorance. For when they, poor Wretches, could not underſtand the Natural Cauſes of Inſpiration, they were preſently for a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for calling in God to help out their ſorry Philoſophy. Every thing which was a little ſurprizing to them, they muſt needs attribute to the immediate Act of God, they were every moment making Mountains as well as Men of God; and according to their Philoſophy, an equal degree of the divine power was requiſite as well to make a Great Hunter, as a great Prophet. But if they had underſtood better the Natural Cauſes of Inſpiration, they would never have been guilty of ſuch manifeſt Abſurdities. For that Inſpiration which the Jews, and the Chriſtians after them, would needs have proceed immediately from God, is only the effect of a vivid Imagination. For it is not to be thought that the Prophets had any more immediate Converſe with God Almighty than other Men; but only they had warmer Heads, a quicker Imagination, and a more lively Fancy. Other Mens Imaginations and Dreams did not leave ſuch deep and laſting Impreſſions upon their Minds, but were quickly over, and they perceived that they were but Dreams and Fancies: but the Prophetick Imaginators had ſuch ſtrong Fancies in their Heads, that were as clear to them as the repreſentations made by their outward ſenſes, and they thought they were as certain of what they ſo fanſied, as of what they heard or ſaw.

And 'tis plain from Scripture, that ſtrong Imagination only is the grand Requiſite for Prophecy. And upon this account without doubt the Jews will not allow Solomon the Gift of Prophecy; for he was a Wiſe Man in whom good ſenſe and a clear Judgment was prevalent, and therefore he was ill qualified for Prophecy, to which Fancy was chiefly requiſite. So thoſe famous Men in Scripture, who are renowned for their Prudence, Heman, 1 Chr. 2.6. 1 King. 4.31. Darda, Kalchol, were not Prophets; but on the other ſide, the Prophets were for the moſt part out of the Country People, or Men of no Erudition; or ſometimes Women, as Hagar, Abraham's Maid, had the gift of Prophecy. For theſe People having but little underſtanding, had ſtronger Paſſions, and did abound more in Imagination, than Men who had better ſenſe, and who governed their Fancies by their Reaſon.

And that you may underſtand that Imagination was the Foundation of Revelation, be pleaſed to conſider, that their Prophecies differ'd only by the diverſity of their Imagination, which is a plain Argument, that the one was the cauſe of the other. If the Prophet was of a merry chearful Temper, then Victories and Peace were revealed to him; becauſe Men of that complexion are apt to entertain their thoughts with ſuch delightful ſubjects. If he was a Melancholy Man, then he propheſied only Wars and judgments, and ſuch other diſmal things, which are uſual to go along with ſuch black Thoughts. And ſo the like Diverſity, if the Prophet was addicted to Anger, or Grief, or Pitty. And for the proof of this there is a remarkable Inſtance of Scripture, 2 Kings 3.15. The three Kings of Judah, Iſrael, and Edon, are in a great ſtrait for want of Water for their Armies, they go and conſult Eliſha the Prophet, and he being very Angry at the ſight of his Enemy, the King of Iſrael tells him, if it was not for the preſence of Jehoſophat King of Judah, he would not look toward him, nor ſee him. Now he could not propheſie any thing that was pleaſing to them, whilſt his Choler was ſo high. And therefore he very prudently deſires that a Minſtrel ſhould be brought him: And when the Minſtrel played, the hand of the Lord came upon him. That is, the Muſick put him in a good humour, and then he was inclined to imagine as pleaſant Things as the Kings would have him.

So when Moſes was Angry with Pharaoh, he had revealed to him the miſerable ſlaughter of the Aegyptians firſt-born, Exod. 11. So God was revealed to Cain when his Reaſon was over-clouded with paſſion, when he was very wroth, and his countenance fell, Gen. 4.5. When Ezekiel was impatient with exceſſive Anger, (for the Text ſays, the Spirit lifted him up in bitterneſs, and in the hot Anger of his Spirit, Ezek. 3.14.) then he propheſies the miſeries, and ſtubbornneſs of the Jews.

So Jeremy was alway a Melancholy Man, and weary of his Life, and therefore he does nothing but propheſie dreadfull Calamities, which ſhould befall the Jews; and upon this account King Joſias would not conſult him, but choſe rather to conſult Hulda the Propheteſs, who being a Woman had more tender Paſſions, and to whom it was more fit that the mercy of God ſhould be revealed. Nay oftentimes Revelation does proceed from the ſtrong, though falſe Opinions of Men.

Thus King Nebuchadnezzar's Augurs Propheſie of the Deſtruction of Jeruſalem by looking into the Entrals of Beaſts, and by divining with Arrows, Ezek. 21.21. and thus the Nativity of Chriſt was revealed to the Magicians, Mat. 11. who believed the fooleries of Aſtrology, under the Imagination of a Star, which they ſuppoſed to have ariſen in the Eaſt.

So that in ſhort this Prophetick Imagination was a very good way of recommending a Religion to the Jews, who were a very ignorant People, and were more wrought upon by theſe fanciful Repreſentations of God made by the Prophets, the deſcriptions of his feigned Appearance, Interlocution, Promiſing, Threatning; than by any juſt and Philoſophical Diſcourſes of Vertue and Vice, which ſhould be made to them.

Not but that Natural Knowledge does include more certainty than this Imaginary Prophecy, only this latter ſerves better for the uſe of leſs inquiſitive Men. For Natural Knowledge brings Self-Evidence with it, but Revelation requires always a Sign, or reputed Miracle, which the Prophets were forced to make uſe of as the Credentials of their Prophecy. Indeed Revelation may have ſomething in it of a moral Certainty, that the Men who pretend to it are honeſt, well meaning Men; and that the matter, which they ſpeak, is deſigned for the bettering of Mankind, and the reclaiming them from their Vices: but I think there is little evidence concerning • t, that it proceeds immediately from God, and that it may not proceed from • atural Cauſes, as I think, I have already ſufficiently ſhewed it to have done. Therefore I wonder, Credentius, that a Man of your ſenſe ſhould have recourſe to occult Qualities and an Omnipotent Power to explain matters, which you ſee might be accounted for, by ſuch an • aſy caſt of your Philoſophy.

For my part, Sir,That Prophecy doth not conſiſt in Imagination. I do not care • o make uſe of my Philoſophy to diſpute • way my Religion; nor do I ſee any • eaſon, why Men ſhould uſe ſo much • nduſtry and Artifice to prove, That Revelation does not proceed from God; when wiſe Men in all Ages have ever • llow'd it. Read but Jamblichus his Book of Myſteries, and Tully de Divinatione, and you will ſee the Opinion of thoſe wiſe Heathens, that the divine Nature has • evealed it ſelf to Mankind, and that 〈◊〉 preſcience of future things can come no other way than by a Revelation from God.Xen. Memorabil. Lib. 1. And hear how admirably Socrates • n Xenophon (as well as a Heathen could • e expected) reaſons of theſe matters. Of • ll theſe predictions, to refer none to the revelation of God, but only to humane pru • ence, is (ſays he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to be perfectly mad. That in thoſe things which are obſcure to us, we ſhould conſult the Gods by Divination, for they make known thoſe things to them, to whom they are propitious. Indeed I think it but a vain attempt to go prove to you, That Imagination is not the Cauſe of Inſpiration: for I do not ſuppoſe that in reality you do believe it; only by this odd ſort of diſputing, you endeavour to make our Religion ſtand upon as looſe a bottom as you can, that you may be able to overthrow it at your leaſure. For I dare ſay, you do not believe a word of Revelation at all, and therefore why ſhould you trouble your ſelf about the cauſes of it? All that you and your Maſter Spinoſa mean, when you talk of Prophecies conſiſting in lively Imagination; is, that the inſpired Prophets were only a parcel of Melancholy, crack-brain'd, Enthuſiaſtical Folks, that preached to the People of Judea a number of Phanatical Dreams and Viſions. But becauſe there is ſo much pains taken in this Argument, I will ſhew you, that the Prophets, or inſpired Men of Scripture, were not Men of this complexion, as you contend for, and that the Inſtances which you have alledged, make nothing for this Opinion.

1. For it does not appear, that the Prophets were more Melancholy or Fanciful than other Men are.Prophets not Melancholy. And it is but a fancy of Mounſieur Petit, de Sibyllis Lib. 1. to aſſert, that Melancholy was the chief Diſpoſition to make a Prophet; and that Moſes was an extraordinary Melancholy Man, becauſe he choſe to live a ſolitary Life in the Wilderneſs, feeding his Father-in-law Jethro's Sheep; and becauſe he is noted in Scripture to be ſlow of Speech, Exod. 4.10. For theſe do not appear to be any Arguments at all of Melancholy. For a Paſtoral Life does by no means denote a Man, to be of a Melancholick Complexion, but contrariwiſe more debonair and pleaſant; and therefore the Shepherds in polite Nations, as among the Greeks and Romans, are always deſcribed as Men of great Mirth and Jollity, and ſpending their whole Time in Pleaſure and Gayety. Neither did Moſes leave the Aegyptian Court, for a Melancholy Retirement in the Country; but was forced to fly from Aegypt to avoid the Anger of the King, after it was known, that he had ſlain the Aegyptian. Neither, whilſt he ſo abſconded, did he ſhew any ſign of Melancholy there, but only according to the Cuſtom of his Nation, and generally of thoſe Ages, choſe to make his Employ the Keeping of Sheep. So that David, who is deſcribed in Scripture to be of a ſanguine Complexion, and famed for ſprightful Singing and Playing, may be as well taxed for Melancholy, when he kept his Father's Sheep, as Moſes might. Neither is the ſlowneſs of his Speech any Argument of his Melancholy, becauſe very ſanguine Men are often troubled with that infirmity, which does generally ariſe from ſome defect of the Vocal Organs in the Mouth, and not from Mens Complexion and Temper of Mind. And beſides, what is commonly tranſlated ſlow of Speech is in the original, Heavy, or Difficult of Mouth, which may be any defect of ſpeaking, which does render Men leſs eaſy to be underſtood, by ſtammering or faſt ſpeaking, as well as ſlow ſpeaking. And therefore, Ezekiel 3.5. People of another Nation are ſaid to be heavy of Language, becauſe they could not be eaſily underſtood by the Jews. And Moſes might as well have been very quick in his Talk, and upon that account mightily given to Heſitation; and then this would rather argue him to be of an eager and volatile Temper, than any ways given to Melancholy.

But as for all the reſt of the Prophets, it is plain, that they were no Melancholy Enthuſiaſts, becauſe their Diſcourſes and Writings are perfectly different, from what is uſually ſaid by that ſort of Men. There is nothing comes from them, but what is grave and ſedate, and agreeable to good ſenſe and Reaſon, and a well-compoſed mind. Do we find any thing in them, that is like the mad Tranſports of James Naylor? Read but the lives of Sancta Tereſa, Vid. Dr. Stillingfleet's Fanaticiſm of the Church of Rome. Dr. William's 1 Sermon 1696. and Maria Magdalena de Pazzi, and ſee if the Prophetick Writings bear any manner of Correſpondence with their fooliſh talk. Did ever any one of the Prophets ſpend three Years before his Death, in nothing but repeating ſuch an odd Ejaculation, as thy Will be done in Time, and in Eternity, as Molinos reports of Gregory of Lopez? Beſides their Writings are full of juſt reaſoning and ſerious unaffected Relations, which do by no wiſe agree to Enthuſiaſtical Men. Read but the Hiſtory of the Pentateuch, and other Hiſtorical parts of the Bible, and ſee if they look like the Compoſitions of wild Enthuſiaſts. If Naylor had been to write the Book of Geneſis, he would have made an otherguiſe ſpot of work of it than Moſes has. He would have clogged every Relation with odd Parentheſes, [Great is the Lord of Hoſt! Judgment! Horror! Deſolation, Damnation! &c.]; he would never have kept his brains cloſe to the order of a juſt Narration, but would have jumbled the Creation and the Flood, Noah, and Abraham, and Pharaoh, all together. Do you think that any one of thoſe Popiſh Dreamers could have made uſe of ſuch ſolid Reaſoning, and ſuch Critical Remarks upon the Old Law, as are to be found in the Writings of St. Paul, and the Author of the Book of the Hebrews? Could they have made ſuch wiſe obſervations upon humane Life, and given ſuch Rules of Piety and Converſation, as the Books of Solomon are full of? Could they have framed ſuch admirable Forms of Devotion, as the Book of Pſalms? All that they were able to do, would be to write ſome mad ſtuff, which no Man of ſenſe would have Patience to read three Leaves of. Had the Scriptures no other inſpiration, than the imagination of fanciful Brains, there would no one part of it be coherent with another; Hiſtory would be claſhing with Hiſtory, and Prophecy with Prophecy, and nothing ſuit together, with that order and ſymetry, as now we find it. Ask two craz'd Men in Bedlam to tell a ſtory out of the Bible, and then ſee how theſe Men of Imagination will correſpond together; talk ſingly with two Enthuſiaſtical Quakers, till they be warm upon the Book of the Revelations, and ſee then how finely their Prophecies will agree. I am ſure they will fall infinitely ſhort, of being ſo uniformly of a piece, as the holy Scriptures are. Let the greateſt Infidel of you all conſider, that wonderful correſpondence there is between the four Evangeliſts, among themſelves, where there is no difference to be found, but what among Writers, which had not confederated together, ſhould be; and obſerve the ſame in the Books of Kings and Chronicles. See how the ſame great Deſign is viſible throughout the Moſaical Writings, the Prophets, and the Goſpel. How exactly does the lapſe of Mankind, by Adam, agree with the Reparation made by Jeſus Chriſt? How does the old Levitical Law plainly appear, to be but the Sciography, or rough draught of the Goſpel, and the Characters and Lines of one exactly viſible in the other? For my part, I think it impoſſible for ſo many, though judicious and wiſe Men, without aſſiſtance from God, to carry any one deſign with that exactneſs that the Penmen of the Holy Scripture have: but I am ſure it is the greateſt of Abſurdities to aſſert, that ſuch a noble and uniform Deſign ſhould be carried on, through ſo many Ages by a parcel of wild Enthuſiaſts. So that let the Writers of the Bible be what you pleaſe to ſtyle them, either Inſpired Men or Impoſtors, I ſhall not diſpute that now, they muſt needs be Men well in their Wits, and what is more, Men of good ſenſe.

Prophets had the Inſpiration of the Holy Ghoſt.2. It is very evident from Scripture, That Prophecy proceeded from another Cauſe, viz. the Influence of God's Holy Spirit. The innumerable Inſtances in Scripture of the Prophets and Apoſtles being in the Spirit, of the Spirit's coming upon them, of their ſpeaking things by command, and of the Lord, of their being caught up into heaven, &c. are undeniable Proofs of the cauſe of their Revelation, viz. the Holy Ghoſt, or the Spirit of God. Indeed it is not eaſy, to give a Philoſophical and Notional account of this ſupernatural Influence, or by what means it was conveyed, or by what criterion, or marks; they could diſtinguiſh it from a Deluſion; becauſe we who are not honoured with theſe ſupernatural Gifts, and therefore can have no Idea of theſe things, as having never been the Objects of our Underſtandings; but it is not to be doubted, but theſe Holy Men had as abſolute certainty of the Truth of them as we have of things that do immediately ſtrike our ſenſes, and did as perfectly know them to be the word of God, as that thoſe things are, which we ſee to be, and that they could as little queſtion their Inſpiration, as we do our Senſes. For as the Senſes are only the ordinary way of God's conveying Ideas to us, and theſe are ſo clear to us, by their familiarity and repeated Trials of their faithfulneſs, that we cannot but rely upon them, and cannot but give aſſent to them; ſo the Inſpiration of God to the Prophets, by their clear Evidence continually, and by their wonted Experience of it, left no more doubt in them of the Truth of it, than the Appearance of the Sun does leave in us, that it is Day, or that what we ſee is really ſeen by us, and is not the Deluſion of a Dream. To ſay we ordinary Perſons can have no notion of this Extraordinary Influx of God, and therefore it cannot be, is only to expoſe our own Ignorance; and a Blind Man might with as much Modeſty pretend to demonſtrate againſt the Exiſtence of Colours, or a Clown laugh at Mathematical Theorems, as we pretend to diſpute againſt the certainty of this ſupernatural Influence, which God Almighty has been pleaſed to give us no notices of. Might not God Almighty as well have given us Ten Senſes as Five? And if he has been pleaſed to make an extraordinary Impreſſion upon ſome Mens Minds, which his does not on all, muſt we therefore aſſert this as impoſſible; becauſe we, who do not experience it, do not perceive it? Muſt all Men be blind, becauſe we are ſo? Or muſt every Man be Mad and Enthuſiaſtical that hath better Eyes than we? I am ſure this is a very mad way of Arguing, and yet there is no more reaſon for Men to queſtion the Truth of the Revelation of the Prophets, than blind Men have to queſtion our ſight. Nay the miraculous power which did uſually attend Prophecy, was more undeniable Evidence to the Beholders of their Divine Influence, than the joint aſſertion of the generality of Mankind can be that there is ſuch a Thing as Sight or Colours to a Blind Man; Becauſe Senſation is a greater degree of Evidence, than Teſtimony, and becauſe a Man will ſooner believe his ſenſes than a Thouſand Witneſſes. A Blind Man cannot believe there are Colours but only by being told ſo; but when I ſee a Prophet, doing Miracles, I am ſure he is influenced by God, becauſe I ſee he does works above the power of Nature.

3. You are very much miſtaken,Prophecy not inconſiſtent with Wiſdom. when you aſſert that prophecy is inconſiſtent with Wiſdom, and that Men of good ſenſe, ſuch as Solomon, Kalcol, Heman, &c. were no Prophets, but only, poor Shepherds, Women, and other Perſons of mean parts were endowed with that Gift. One would wonder how Men could lay down an Aſſertion, which is ſo eaſy to be confuted as this is. Pray what muſt be thought of Moſes, to whom there aroſe not ſince in Iſrael a Prophet like unto? Does his noble Genius, his invincible Courage, his ſagacious Prudence, his vaſt Depth in Philoſophy, argue him a Man of mean parts? Methinks the Heathen Longinus his Character of him, that he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , No mean Man, ſhould be enough to free him, at leaſt, from his ſhare in this Calumny. What do you think of Nathan, Iſrael, and Daniel, who were bred up Courtiers, and made a great figure in the Ages, when they lived, and the Writings of two of them ſhew them to be Men of fine parts? But, I think, you have a little outſhot your ſelf, in the inſtance of Solomon, in denying him to be a Prophet. For it is recorded in Scripture, that God revealed himſelf twice unto Solomon, Firſt at his Entrance upon his Kingdom, when he asked Wiſdom of God, 2 Chron. 1.8. Secondly, upon his finiſhing the Temple, 2 Chron. 7.12. Nay what do you think of David, who was a Prophet as well as a King? And as for your Inſtances of Kalkol, and Heman, thoſe great Maſters of Muſick, as if they were Men of too good ſenſe to be Prophets, if you pleaſe to turn to 1 Chron. 25.5. you ſhall there find, that one of them, viz. Heman, is there expreſly called the King's Se •• , or Prophet.

Prophecies no • variable according to the Prophets Paſſions.4. You lay down alſo another very falſe Suppoſition, that the Prophecies vari • d always according to the different Paſſions and Diſpoſitions of the Prophets, and therefore would hence conclude, that their Prophecy was only Imagination. But this is very falſe, and very Illogical. Firſt, it is falſe. For Moſes who is Characterized to be the meekeſt of all Men, did Prophecy as dreadful judgments againſt the Iſraelites as any of the Prophets, Vid. Lev. 26.14. Iſaiah his Prophecy is in the ſeveral places very different, ſometimes he Propheſies joyful, at other times very diſmal things. And even Jeremiah the moſt mournful Prophet of all, does foretel the Jews joyful deliverance from their Captivity, as well as the Captivity it ſelf. And Daniel at that very time, when he was mourning and faſting in Sackcloth and Aſhes, had revealed to him by the Angel Gabriel the joyful coming of the Meſſias, with all the Benefits which ſhould follow from him. Secondly, there is no conſequence in the Argument, if the ſuppoſition were true. For if God did ſo far comply with ſecond cauſes, as ſome times to cooperate with them, it does not follow that thoſe cauſes could produce a ſupernatural effect of themſelves. Tho' God ſhould pick out merry Men to foretel joyful things, and Melancholy ones to foretel ſad ones; it does not follow that either Merry or Melancholy Men could foretel any thing without the aſſiſtance of God. Becauſe prediction is the effect of Divine and Infinite Knowledge, and not of Bodily Temperament: it would be ſtill the Gift of God, though ſuch qualifications were neceſſary for the receiving it.

5.Paſſions not the Cauſe of Prophecy. As for your Inſtances of ſome Mens being under ſome Paſſions, at the time of their Revelation, and therefore they muſt be the cauſe of it. This is an Argument with a Witneſs. What though Eliſha called for a Minſtrel, muſt therefore Mirth be the cauſe of Prophecy? I ſuppoſe the reaſon why he called for it, was to compoſe his Spirits, which were ruffled at the preſence of a wicked King, and it was therefore proper to render his Mind ſedate, before he preſumed to offer up his Petitions to God, for the prophetick influence of his Spirit. What though Moſes did predict the ſlaughter of the Aegyptian Firſt-born, when he was angry with Pharaoh, muſt Anger be the cauſe of Prophecy? Indeed angry Men may wiſh ill, but they ſeldom, I think, Prophecy it; for if they did, the World would be in a ſad condition. But, I think, Moſes brought it to paſs too; ſo that it appears there was ſomething more in this heavy judgment than a little Scolding Threatning, which you Theiſt make of the reſt of the Prophecies. Cain was wroth when God ſpoke to him, but in thoſe ancient times, God was wont to reveal himſelf to Mankind in other Tempers. And when Ezekiel is ſaid to be in the hot anger of his Spirits, before his Prophecy, this muſt not be underſtood of natural Anger, but only the violent exagitation of the Spirit in him. So the Spirit lifted me up, and took me away, and I went in bitterneſs, and in the heat or anger of my Spirit, but the hand of the Lord was ſtrong upon me. Which is a moſt lively deſcription of the operation of the Prophetick Spirit in the Body of the Prophets, with all his ſtruggles and reluctancies under it. 'Tis a Metaphor taken from a hot fiery Horſe, that ſtruggles and contends, and is impatient under the Bridle of his Rider. It is a Deſcription not unlike that of Sibylla in Virg. Aen. 6.

Neither is there any force in what you ſay, as to the Diſtinction which you would have Joſiah make between Jeremiah and the Propheteſs Hulda; for there is no doubt to be made, but if Jeremiah had been conſulted upon the ſame point, he would have given the ſame anſwer.

6. But in the next place,Vain Opinions not mixed with Prophecy. you advance a ſtrange Paradox, when you aſſert that Prophecy varied according to the idle opinions of the Prophets, as if King Nebuchadnezzar's Diviners, and all the Perſian Magi, were true Prophets. For that paſſage in the 21th of Ezekiel does not ſay that thoſe Diviners did truly Propheſie, but only that the King of Babylon made uſe of thoſe Divinatory Arts, the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and Auruſpicy which are there mentioned; he does graphically deſcribe the coming of the Babylonians, and therefore prophetically relates all the ſuperſtitious rites which were preparatory to that expedition. And as for the Perſian Magi, by whom, you would have our Saviour's Birth to be revealed, whilſt they were looking after their Aſtrological Fooleries; I anſwer, that by this, God gave no countenance to any divination by the Stars, as if there were no more certainty in divine Revelation, than in this ſort of fortune-telling, as you would ſlily inſinuate; but that there being an univerſal Belief throughout the whole Eaſt, that ſome great Man ſhould about that time be born in Judea, as Suetonius relates, theſe Magi, or Wiſe Men, took occaſion to travel into Judea upon the appearance of this extraordinary Star, ſuppoſing that this might prognoſticate ſomething of this great expected Birth. God might take this occaſion to make known the Birth of his Son to the Gentile World, and yet give no countenance to all the fooleries of Judicial Aſtrology. Such an extraordinary Phaenomenon as this was enough to awaken the attention of any inquiſitive Men, though they were not given to that ſuperſtition, ſo as to ſearch after the meaning of it; whoſe diligent Endeavours God was pleaſed to bleſs with the glad Tidings of the Goſpel of Peace, and a Saviour of the World.

7. Beſides,More in Prophecy than fancy and well meaning. I would beg you to conſider, that there is ſomething more in Prophecy than Fancy and Well-meaning. The Prophets were ſomething better than religious Madmen. They generally had a foundation of good ſenſe and a learned Education, being for the moſt part brought up in the Schools of the Prophets, whereof one is mentioned at Naioth in Ramah, where Samuel lived, 1 Sam. 19.19. another at Kiriath Jearim, 1 Sam. 10.5. Neither was Prophecy among the Jews, only the running about the Country, now and then, of a crazed Wretch, as your people are wont to ſay; but in a manner, a ſettled Diſpenſation; there being great numbers of the Prophets in that Nation. For even in the moſt corrupt times, there were Fifty of the Sons of the Prophets together, beholding Elijah when he was caught up into Heaven, • Kings 2.7. and Obadiah hid an hundred Prophets, fifty in a Cave, during the rage of Ahab's perſecution, 1 Kings 18.4. Now it is not poſſible that ſuch a number of Men ſo regularly educated, ſhould all be Enthuſiaſtically mad. But I ſee any thing can be aſſerted, to ſerve a Turn, or to vilify Religion; ſometimes God's Miniſters muſt be mad Fools, at other times cunning Knaves, though methinks the Prieſt-craft, which you are ſo often upon, and Madneſs, do not ſo very well agree.

Come, Credentius, we won't make any words about that matter now; for we are now entering upon another Stage of difficulties, which are ſo many and ſo great, that, I am afraid, they will make you ſweat under them, before you have got through them. What ſay you to the buſineſs of Miracles? Are not theſe think you pretty things to cheat the Mob with? But I am afraid they will never ſtand the Teſt of Philoſophy and Reaſon. One would wonder how ſuch Non-ſenſical Notions as theſe ſhould come into the World, but conſidering the ſtupidity of them, one might gueſs them to be of Jewiſh Original. For probably when the firſt Jews ſaw the Neighbouring Gentiles worſhiping the Natural Gods, as Sun, Moon, Earth, Water, &c. they to ſhew theſe conſtant mutable and viſible Gods, to be under the dominion of their Jehovah, or Inviſible one; began to brag of the Miracles which they pretended Jevovah had done by triumphing over poor Nature for their dear ſake, for whom they were fond to believe all things were made. Thus this notion got from the Jews to other Nations, and ſo they have been coining Miracles ever ſince. But really, Sir, a Miracle in your ſenſe, is Non-ſenſe. For you ſuppoſe ſomething above the power of nature, which is the greateſt and higheſt power in the World. For the power of Nature is the power of God. Nature is one, eternal, fixt, immutable Chain, which is infinitely drawing out and expanding it ſelf, and not capable of the leaſt alteration; now if it was poſſible (as you ſuppoſe) by a Miracle that one Link of this, ſhould be diſturbed or broken, the whole frame of nature would be confounded, and the whole Scheme of future Beings would be infinitely irregular. Nature is the Eternal Will and Decree of God, executing it ſelf, and the Will of God is his very Eſſence; however it is firm and immutable, nay impoſſible to be changed by the contrary Will of God himſelf: and therefore we may be ſure, it is not to be interrupted by the Hocus Pocus of every Capricious Prophet. And indeed Miracles are nothing elſe but the Dreams of blockheaded brains, or a ready ſolution of what the uneducated Mob are wont to gape at, and can give no account of, ſo that I doubt not, but that a common Almanack-maker that could calculate an Eclipſe, or write it out of an Ephemeris, would be a moſt wonderful Prophet among the Indians; but when theſe People, by liberal Education, come to underſtand the exact motions of the Heavenly Bodies, the Miracle would be at an end. Nay any thing that is unuſual is by the vulgar reputed a Miracle, becauſe forſooth they admire it, though it be never ſo natural; but it ceaſes to be a Miracle, when their Admiration is wrought of. Thus a Comet is to them a moſt wonderful Miracle, becauſe it appears but now and then in a great many Years: but the Sun is no Miracle at all, becauſe they ſee it every day; not that they underſtand the nature of the Sun better than that of a Comet, but by continually beholding it, it does not make ſo great impreſſion upon their fancies, and therefore they ceaſe to admire it. And I doubt not but this is the true reaſon of moſt of the reputed Miracles of Scripture, which are but the unuſual works of nature, which would neceſſarily have been for all any Inſpired Perſon; but only, they being uncommon works of nature, the vulgar wondred at them, and deemed them Miracles. O! but we muſt have a care of exploding Miracles, becauſe they do demonſtrate the being of a God; and very lamely too. For the neceſſary Laws of Nature, and the frame of the World, are a thouſand times more demonſtrative of it. For Miracles, or Interruptions in Nature, make wiſe Men rather doubt of it, and ſeem rather fortuitous Blunders, than the wiſe works, or Efflux of the Deity. Nay what proof is there by Miracles of any thing elſe, or that any Doctrine came from God? For the Jewiſh Law allows, that Miracles might be done by falſe Prophets, as appears by Deut. 13.1. If there ariſe among you a Prophet, and giveth thee a ſign or wonder, and the ſign or wonder come to paſs, whereof he ſpake unto thee, ſaying, Let us go after other gods, &c. you ſhall not hearken unto the Prophet, for the Lord your God proveth you. Nay what were the Jews the better for all the Miracles they had among them, ſuppoſing they were true? Moſes with all his Miracles was not gone from them but a few days, but they were turned as arrant Heathens as any in the World, and fancying the Image of God into the figure of a Calf. Nay, for all Miracles and Inſpirations, the great Solomon himſelf was a down-right Epicurean, and imagined all things to come by chance, Eccl. 3.19, 20.

By your leave, good Philologus; You have heaped here together ſo many Falſities, or Miſtakes, that I am forced to interrupt you, before you go any further.

Firſt notion of Miracles not from the Jews.1. I pray what reaſon have you to think that the notion of Miracles had its origin from among the Jews? Had not the Greeks and Romans, in the earlieſt time, before they ever conſorted with the Jews, the ſame notions? What more common in Homer and Virgil than ſtrange Prodigies which are wont to amaze whole Armies, till they be unridled and rendered favourable by ſome Augur? What more uſual in Greek and Latin Authors, than 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Oſtenta, Portenta, Miracula? And you may ſee a whole Chapter of ſeveral of theſe Miracles collected together in Valerius Maximus, and a great deal of the ſame in Plutarch. Inquire of any Barbarous Nations in the World, and you ſhall find, that they have the ſame notion of Miracles, though they never heard of the Jews. For our notion of Miracles, that it is the extraordinary power of God, or a power above Nature, is natural and eaſy to the minds of all Mankind; but that a Miracle ſhould be the neceſſary power of unwonted nature, is only a Dream of the Hobbian Philoſophy, that few People who are awake, think of.

2.No Immutable Chain of Nature. Neither is it any good Argument againſt Miracles, that they would break your fixt and immutable Chain of Nature which you contend for. For there is no proof that there is any ſuch fixt immutable Chain; for if there was, there would be no ſuch thing as Freedom, either in God, or Man, but all things would be bound up by a rigid Fate, of which every word we ſpeak, or action which we do, is a ſufficient Confutation. Now either this fixt immutable Chain of Cauſes is God himſelf, or the Creature, or Work of God. That it is not God himſelf I think I have ſufficiently evinced,Conference with a Theiſt. Part I. in a former Diſcourſe, with you; from the Abſurdities which would follow by allowing in God all the Imbecillities, Vices, and Irregularities in Nature, which are inconſiſtent with his Infinite Perfection. And the Freedom of Man, the Spontaneous Actions of Brutes, and the Alterations and Changes in the inanimate parts of the World, are ſufficient Arguments againſt the latter. Now if the World be the Creature of God, as we have proved it to be, then it muſt be ſubject to his Power and Providence. For God's Creation ſuppoſes it ſubject to his power, for what is not ſubject to the Power of God muſt have a greater Power of its own to reſiſt his Power. But this is impoſſible for the World, or nature to have, becauſe all the power which they can poſſibly have, they had from God in their Creation. Therefore God ſtill keeps the power over them, either to annihilate them, to continue them in their being, or to alter them. To ſay that God has alienated this power, or given them a greater, is more abſurd. For this is in effect to ſay God has diveſted himſelf of his Deity, and made the World God inſtead of himſelf. All that can, with any probability, be ſaid, is, That God by the frame and conſtitution of the World has been pleaſed to make it immutable, and therefore this power being paſſed out of his hands, he cannot recal it, without violation to his Wiſdom, and a perfect Confuſion to the preſent Scheme of Beings. But to conſider this a little. As God by his Omnipotent Power created all things, ſo by his Providence he governs them, and takes care of them. And it is equally abſurd to ſay any thing ſhould not be governed by Infinite Providence, as to aſſert any thing might be created without Omnipotent Power. Both theſe are God's Attributes, and to do Violence to either of theſe is injurious to God. Now how can it be ſaid, that God by his Providence takes care of the World, when he has made ſuch a fatal unalterable World that it is out of his power to take care of? For whatſoever is governable, or the ſubject of Government, muſt be in ones power and alterable: but God can no more govern a fatal World, than a Man can govern the Winds and the Sea. But to govern and take care of his Creatures is the neceſſary Attribute of a Wiſe and a Good God; and therefore the World which he takes care of muſt be governable, and conſequently not Fatal.

But by the way, Sir, is it not more agreeable to the Divine Wiſdom to create a World fixt and immutable, than ſuch a one whoſe Laws ſhould be weak and ſhatter'd, that they muſt need his Aſſiſtance every moment, to preſerve them, and make them go according to his Will?

I do not deny but that the Laws of Nature are in themſelves ſufficiently firm and immutable,God's Providence bet • er than Fatality. and that they will unchangeably preſerve their Courſe when it does not pleaſe God they ſhould be interrupted by his ſuperior power. But it is no reflection upon God's Wiſdom, that he did not make the World ſo immutable, that his Providence could not interpoſe in it. Nay it would have been a greater Reflection upon his Wiſdom, to have made ſuch a World, which it was out of his power to controul. Let any one judge, if a Prince does not act more prudently by granting a limited Commiſſion to a General and Deputy to be ſuperſeded at his pleaſure, than by granting an abſolute and unlimited one, which it is our of his power to reſtrain.

This is true among Princes, becauſe they have a finite underſtanding, and can have no knowledge of futures; and ſo may undo themſelves by not reſerving a power to themſelves upon ſome extraordinary emergency; but God Almighty knows all things, becauſe he eternally decrees them: and therefore nothing can happen afterwards unexpected, or contrary to his foreſight; and therefore he might very well compoſe a fixt and immutable World, without any prejudice to himſelf, or reflection upon his Wiſdom.

Though we muſt not conſider God as a finite Prince,God a wiſe Governour without Fatal Laws. yet muſt conſider him as a wiſe Governour; and he cannot be a wiſe Governour by fatal Laws. For the Laws of Virtue which are certainly God's Laws ſuppoſe Liberty; but to command a thing to be freely done, which cannot but be done, or is impoſſible to be done, does argue a fooliſh Governour; and therefore God cannot do ſo. God muſt therefore reſerve to himſelf the continual management of the affairs of nature to maintain the Freedom of Man's Will; and to adjuſt matters ſo as becomes a good Governour. But to go on where we left of.

3.Miracles not Occurrences, which the Vulgar do not underſtand. It is another of your great miſtakes to aſſert, That Miracles are only ſuch occurrences in Nature as the vulgar do not underſtand. For generally the Miracles which are recorded in Scripture, are ſuch as the vulgar are as proper Judges of as the greateſt Philoſophers. Indeed if the Miracles were only ſome extraordinary performances in recondit Arts and Sciences, then they would afford ſome reaſon for Learned Men, to queſtion their ſincerity. If they were the Reſolution of ſome very difficult queſtions in Algebra, ſome curious Tables of the motions of the Heavenly Bodies for many Years, ſome wonderful performance by Mechanick Philoſophy, which had amuzed the common People into the Opinion that they were Miracles; then ſomething of this nature might be pretended. But when all the Miracles in Scripture are ſuch as the meaneſt Men might be Judges of, and which they cannot be deceived in, the caſe is quite different. Any ordinary Man might be Judge whether it were not by a Miraculous power, that Bitter Waters by a word of the Prophet were made ſweet; that an Iron Hatchet was made to ſwim; that a Dead Child was raiſed to life. Every ordinary Man was as good a Judge of Taſt, of the Heavineſs of Iron, and when the Soul was departed from the Body, as the greateſt Philoſopher. When our Saviour, by a word ſpoke, turned Water into Wine, Cured the Blind and the Lame, and raiſed Men from the Dead; in theſe caſes the relieved Perſons, and every beholder, could tell that this was above the power of nature, as well as thoſe that had continually applied themſelves to the ſtudy of it. There is no need for an Inſight in Philoſophy, or the Mathematicks, for Men to know when they are ſick, or when they are well; to know that though Phyſick does often cure diſeaſed Men, yet words naturally do not; that Medicinal Operations are ſlow and gradual; and therefore when they ſee Men inſtantaneouſly cured of a Diſeaſe, which for a long while has baffled the power of Medicine, that this muſt needs be by a ſupernatural power, when they ſee all natural means have failed.

4. And your Aſſertion is equally falſe,Miracles not make Men doubt of a God. wherein you lay down, That Miracles do rather make Men doubt of a God, than prove his being to them. Now we do not ſay, that Miracles are the beſt Argument to prove the Being of a God, for the moſt excellent frame and contrivance of the World are the moſt obvious proof of it. But Miracles are far from making any wiſe Man doubt of the being of a God. For the wiſe, and conſtant Ends and Regularities in nature are ſo forcible a Proof upon Men of his Being; that every little diſorder cannot make a wiſe Man doubt of it. For if I behold in any work a thouſand Wiſe Ends that I am able to diſcover; I may very well conclude that a few other things were as wiſely deſign'd, whoſe ends I am not able to gueſs at. But why ſhould Miracles make Men doubt of the Being of a God? In my mind they do plainly prove his Exiſtence. For when ever a Miracle is done, there is ſomething done by a power ſuperiour to nature: now if there be a Power ſuperiour to Nature: then Nature is not Self-exiſtent, and conſequently there is a God which created Nature. This muſt be demonſtration to all materialiſts, that allow nothing in the World but infinite and eternal Matter, and a neceſſary concatenation of Cauſes. For if a Miracle or ſupernatural Power breaks or diſturbs one Link of theſe Cauſes, and Nature afterwards goes on undiſturbedly again, it is moſt certain that there is a Power above nature which directs it; for otherways a neceſſary and fatal Nature would move on with an infinite diſturbance. So that I ſay, Philologus, that though to an Epicurean who would have all things come by chance, Miracles are not ſo good a Proof of a Deity, as the Frame of the Univerſe, and the Wiſe Ends of things; yet to a Materialiſt, who will have all things to be nature, the Eviction of a Miracle muſt be demonſtration: for this overthrows his whole Hypotheſis, and tells him to his face, that Matter and Nature are but a limited and ſubordinate Power, and in ſubjection to a ſuperiour Mind or Power, which is God. Nay let the Miracle be true or falſe, either wrought by God, or the Devil, it is home-proof againſt a Materialiſt; for a Witch, or an Apparition, is total Deſtruction to that Philoſophy. Therefore it is no wonder, that ſo great an outcry is raiſed againſt Miracles and preternatural Powers; for if theſe are once evinced, the Hobbiſt is at an End.

5.Falſe Miracles no Argument againſt true ones. And whereas you object againſt Miracles, that they are no Proof of an Inſpiration from God, becauſe there may be a great many falſe Miracles; and that Moſes, in the 13th of Deut. gives them warning of the ſame: I think this is only puzzling the Caſe, and raiſing a duſt inſtead of arguing the Point. For what though there be falſe and pretended Miracles, are there therefore no true ones? Becauſe there have been many falſe Witneſſes, muſt therefore no true Evidence be credited? Becauſe there are very many Quacks and Empiricks, are there no good Phyſicians in the World? Becauſe there are many Knaves, are there no honeſt Men? This is a mad way of concluding, which would deſtroy all humane Society and Converſation out of the World. Men muſt neither eat nor drink, becauſe ſome Men have been poiſoned thoſe ways. They muſt receive no good money, becauſe there is a great deal of Counterfeit. They muſt believe nothing that is told them; becauſe there are many Liars among Men. Now Man would be the moſt miſerable Creature in the World, if he were to ſquare his Actions by this Method. But God has given to all Men judgment and reaſon to diſtinguiſh between Truth and Falſhood, between ſincerity and deſign. And this we muſt make uſe of in conſidering miraculous powers, and proving the Spirits whether they be of God. By this we may diſcern whether the produced Miracle be above the Power of Art or Nature, or whether it does not ſhew the finger of God; whether it be the effect of a deluded Imagination, and not rather the Evidence of clear and undiſturbed Senſe; whether it be the operation of God, or the power of the Devil; whether it tends to the Advancement of the Kingdom of Light, or of Darkneſs; whether it tends to further Moral Goodneſs and Piety, or elſe Wickedneſs and ſuperſtition; whether it contributes to the ſtrengthening or overthrowing of God's Laws; whether it confirms what we are ſure God has revealed before, or contradicts it. Now with this caution we may very well diſtinguiſh true from falſe Miracles, and aſſent to the True, whilſt we reject the Falſe. And therefore Moſes, in the Chapter which you alledged, does with very good reaſon, give the Jews warning that they do not receive Impreſſion from Miracles with too great precipitancy, and gives them a good Rule to judge when they are falſe, viz. namely, when they contradict the ſtanding Rules of Morality or any other Revelation of God. If there ariſe among you a Prophet, or a Dreamer of Dreams, and giveth thee a ſign, or a wonder, &c. ſaying, Let us go after other Gods &c. ye ſhall not hearken unto the words of that Prophet, &c. but ye ſhall walk after the Lord your God, and keep his Commandments, and obey his voice, &c. This is but wiſe and diſcreet caution; but to condemn all true Miracles for the ſake of ſome Impoſtures, is unreaſonable Scepticiſm, and would tend to diſpute all Truth and Certainty out of the World, and make all men turn Pyrrhonicks and Seekers.

6. And it is likewiſe falſe,Inſtances of the Jews, and Solomon, conſidered. which you in the next place lay down; That the Miracles, and Inſpiration among the Jews, had no influence upon their Underſtandings, or Lives, from the Inſtances of the Idolatrous Jews in the Wilderneſs, and King Solomon. Indeed I can by no means excuſe the Jews for their Perfidious Defection to Idolatrous Worſhip, whilſt Moſes was in the Mount; but yet I cannot go with you ſo far, as to aſſert, that the figure of a Calf was thought, by them, to be the Divine Image. For this is ſuch a Groſneſs as is not to be ſuppoſed in Humane Nature; it is moſt probable that they deſigned this only as an Hieroglyphick, or Emblem of the True God, in imitation of the Aegyptians. For as the Aegyptians, with whom they had long converſed, worſhipped their God Apis, under the Hieroglyphick of a Bull, or Calf: ſo the Jews who loved a pompous ceremonious worſhip, thought to worſhip the True God ſo too. For it is plain, that they intended to pay their Devotion to the true God, becauſe in the relation of this paſſage, Exod. 32.4. It is ſaid, This is the Elohim, or God, which brought thee out of the land of Aegypt. Which is more particularly explained in the next Verſe, To morrow is a feaſt to the LORD, or to Jehovah. And as for thoſe places in Eccleſiaſtes, after all that is objected by Atheiſts, and Socinian • , I do not ſee any thing to the contrary; but that theſe are only Proſopopoeia's of Epicureans, wherein the Abſurdities of theſe Opinions are expoſed, and brought into the number of thoſe other Vanities, which in this Book he is condemning.

But after all, Credentius, I cannot be perſwaded, but that it was the prejudiced Opinions of the Unphiloſophical Jews, and their pretence more immediately to the Divine Protection, which gave occaſion to the riſe of ſo many Miracles in Scripture which might otherways be naturally accounted for. It would be too long to run through all the pretended Miracles in Scripture, which I could eaſily make out to be done by the power of Nature; I ſhall only pick out one or two which may ſerve as a ſampler for the Reſt, and may prove, that they all may receive a Philoſophical Solution. Now, 1 Sam. 9.15. God is related to ſend Saul to Samuel, but in this miſſion there was nothing, but what the Order of Nature did require; for Saul at that time was ſeeking his Father's Aſſes. So God is ſaid to ſend the Locuſts as a Plague upon Aegypt, of which there was a plain natural Cauſe, for an Eaſt-Wind blew them out of another Country, and a Weſt-Wind carried them back again. So God is ſaid to ſet the Rainbow in the Clouds, which is produced there by the natural Cauſe of Refraction. And again, there is a wonderful Miracle related in Joſhua of the Sun's ſtanding ſtill, and making a long and miraculous day, when it happened only by the reflection of the Sun-Beams on the Neighbouring Hills, or the refraction which was cauſed by the Air, which at that time was full of Hail and Snow, as is evident from the great ſhower of Hailſtones, which ſo annoyed the Enemy. Now, theſe, and ſuch like Miracles, were deviſed, only to raiſe the common People's Devotions, and to affect their Fancies, which would not receive an Impreſſion by an ordinary way of Relation; but when it was ſaid, That God immediately intereſſed himſelf in ſuch an Action, it made them preſently to prick up their Ears, and be very attentive and devout.

Miracles not naturally come to paſs.Although it cannot be denyed, Philologus, but that the Jews had a Religious way of talking and attributing to God the ordinary effects of his Providence, when brought to paſs by the moſt eaſy and natural means; yet it is impoſſible that thoſe ſupernatural and ſtupendous Relations, which are to be met with in many places of Scripture, are to be accounted for, this way. Neither do your Inſtances, which you have alledged, in any wiſe prove what you contend for. For as for your Inſtance of God's ſending Saul: although Saul by the bent of his own Inclination was ſeeking his Father's Aſſes; yet God by making uſe of this natural Act of his Will and proper Reſolution, brought it to paſs, that he ſhould meet the Prophet Samuel, who came to anoint him King. For unleſs you allow that God Almighty has the power of inclining, over-ruling, and turning to his own proper ends the Wills and Deſigns of Men, you muſt exclude God from having any thing to do in the Government of the World; otherways Mankind would be the arbitrary Lords of the whole Creation, and as a long as they had a free-Will, (unleſs oppoſed by an open and apparent Reſiſtance) they muſt act in Defiance to their Soveraign Lord and Maker. And therefore God in his infinite Wiſdom is pleaſed, to let his Almighty Power mix and blend it ſelf with the natural actions and inclinations of Men, that he may gently lead them to the Ends he has propoſed, whilſt they are ſeemingly going thither themſelves. Which is a great kindneſs and condeſcention to Humane Nature, that he will not ruffle and ſtruggle with them, and force them againſt their Wills to do what he would have them, but only caſts ſuch a gentle influence upon their minds that they ſhall do that of their own accord, which he might otherwiſe have forced them to. 'Tis needleſs to give a philoſophical account of the divine Inclination of the Will, whether it be by exciting new Ideas in the mind, or reviving old ones, by Reminiſcence, or Memory, by raiſing and ſetting a keener Edge upon the Paſſions, by bringing new objects to the ſenſes, or engaging them in a nicer Obſervation: for let the Modus of this be how it will, as long as God is the Governour of the World, and does exerciſe a providence over his Creatures, ſome way or other, he muſt have an Influence over Mens Wills, though at the ſame time they ſeem to make uſe of them with the greateſt Freedom. And this way God Almighty is ſaid to have ſent Saul to Samuel, by gently influencing his Will, and the exterior Objects which inclined it, ſo as to make him ſeem to do that of his own proper motives, which God would have him do. It is not eaſy to aſcertain, where Divine Influence gave the firſt Impreſſion in this caſe. It may be probable upon the fancies of the Cattle, who had ſome unuſual Idea raiſed in their Imagination, which inclined them to wander, and then it was natural enough for Saul their Maſter's Son to purſue them, where he met Samuel. So that you ſee in this caſe that every thing worked with its own proper tendency, but yet all was managed and over-ruled by the Wiſdom and Power of God. But as to your Inſtance in the Rainbow. Now though this does proceed from natural Cauſes, yet it is very properly in Scripture attributed immediately to God. For though it is probable, that the Rainbow was antecedent to the Deluge, (there being the Sun and Seas, and conſequently Clouds and Rainbows) yet God is very properly ſaid to ſet his Bow in the Clouds: becauſe he ſat it there for a Token, or a Sign: although it was a Rainbow, yet it was not a Sign or Token before it was a Rainbow by the ordinary Courſe of Nature, but it became a Token by God's ſpecial Ordinance. And ſo for the matter of the Locuſts, Exod. 10.14. What though they came with an Eaſt-Wind, and went away with a Weſt? Will the pure blowing of an Eaſt-Wind produce Caterpillars? Or ſuppoſing them to be blown from another Country, ſuch innumerable quantities of them, as were never heard of before, ſo great as utterly to deſtroy all the Herbage of Aegypt, were equally, as miraculous, as if there had been an inſtantaneous Creation of them. And what reaſon is there to aſſert this Plague of Aegypt to be natural, when all the others are ſo apparently miraculous? You muſt either deny the Hiſtory, or grant the Miracle; for there is no bantering of all thoſe wonderful and tremendous Plagues with ſuch little Criticiſms. And the ſame I have to ſay to your Explication of the Sun's ſtanding ſtill in Joſhua's time. Now let any reaſonable Man conſider, if there be any thing in that Relation which looks like Spinoſa's account of the matter, viz. the Twilight, being at that time more than ordinary protracted by the refraction of the Sun-beams, through the Snowy Air. I grant ſomething like this may happen, for a minute or two; but what is this to the Suns ſtanding ſtill a whole day? So the Sun ſtood in the midſt of Heaven, and haſted not to go down about a whole day. Joſh. 10.13. Nay though we ſhould grant you, what ſometimes comes to paſs from the thick ſleety Air in Greenland, that the Sun was ſeen when it was a degree or two below the Horizon; yet this will not ſalve the matter. For the Text ſays expreſly, that the Sun ſtood ſtill the whole day in the midſt of Heaven, or the Twelve a Clock Line; that is, it was twelve a Clock for twelve hours together, the Sun ſtaying ſo long in that one Point. But if your account by Refraction were true, the day muſt receive its Lengthening about Sun-ſetting, when the Sun was near the Horizon, and that not above a quarter of an hour at the moſt. Neither could this eaſily come to paſs, in ſo thin an Atmoſphere as that of Paleſtine. Beſides, the Scripture ſays expreſly, that this was prayed for by Joſhua, in order to encourage the Jews, and to diſhearten their Enemies. But why ſhould he pray for ſuch a natural Effect as you would have this to be? Was it worth any ones while to wiſh for a minute or two more day light, which it was impoſſible, that either the Jews, or their Enemies, could obſerve? But I am weary of anſwering ſuch Arguments as theſe, which fall of themſelves, and which I am confident can never convince thoſe that urge them; and 'tis honeſter to deny the Authority of Scripture altogether, than to explain the Force of it away, by ſuch jejune interpretations.

Why then, Credentius, if you would have me appear a Barefaced Infidel, I muſt plainly tell you, that I do not think, that either Moſes, or the Prophets, who ſucceeded him, had any degree of that Inſpiration which they pretended to. For what ever is inſpired muſt needs be true, and agreeable, both to Reaſon and Goodneſs; but there are many things to be found in their Writings and Lives, which are contrary to both. I ſhall begin with Moſes. Indeed, Credentius, you have, in ſome meaſure, vindicated him from ſome Abſurdities, which are uſually imputed to his Hiſtory of the CreationConference with a Theiſt. Part I. , but I'm afraid your Art will fail you in doing as much, for ſome other Objections againſt his Books and Character. Now I pray; Sir, what do you think of his Hiſtory of the Deluge? Don't you think this very odd, that the whole World ſhould be drown'd at the ſame time? For my part I can as ſoon believe, that a Man could be drown'd in his own Spittle, as that the World ſhould be deluged by the Water in it. Now Moſes ſays expreſly, that all the high Hills under the whole Heaven were covered. Now to do this, we muſt have water enough to reach up to the Top of the Pique of Tenariff, which is at preſent three Miles perpendicular, and at the Time of Noah much more, a conſiderable part of it being waſhed down by the rains ſince. Now where ſhall we find water to cover the Earth above three Miles high quite round? If the whole Ocean were circumfuſed, it would do little or nothing towards this effect, much leſs a Rain of forty days. For the Water of the Sea, take one place with another, is hardly a quarter of a Mile deep; for though in ſome places in a deep Channel it may be half a Mile, towards the ſhore it is but three or four fathoms, ſo that all together it is not more than a quarter of a Mile deep. But if this were all pumped out of the Channel of the Sea, and kept againſt its Nature by a Miracle ſtagnating upon the higher Earth; it could cover the whole Earth no deeper in Water than the Sea is now, which is but a quarter of a Mile; So that there will want two Miles and three quarters of the height which Moſes aſſigns to it. This is upon ſuppoſition that the Sea and the Dry Ground are nigh of the ſame Extent; but I believe an exact ſurvey of the Earth about the Northern and Southern Poles, would ſhew that the Earth was much larger. But granting them of the ſame bigneſs; to raiſe the Channel of the Sea, three Miles higher (that is, to the Tops of the higheſt Mountains) round the World, would take up twenty-four times as much Water as there is now in the Sea, twelve Quarters of a Mile deep in Water (i. e. twelve Oceans) to be laid upon the Sea, and twelve more upon the Land. And then pray conſider, what becomes of the pretended Inſpiration of Moſes his Hiſtory, when 'tis Demonſtration that there is not the twentieth part of Water in the World, as is ſufficient to cauſe ſuch a Deluge.

Difficulties of the Deluge accounted for.Your Gentlemen are often wont to call that Demonſtration, which is oftentimes but lame Argument. For nothing can be Demonſtration againſt the Divine Power, but abſolute Incompatibility and Contradiction. And every Suppoſition which ſhews the poſſibility of the thing is ſufficient to overthrow your Demonſtration, as you call it. And therefore ſeveral Learned and Ingenious Gentlemen have of late years ſet themſelves to conſider how to give a Philoſophical Account of the Deluge; and have publiſhed ſome Hypotheſes upon this ſubject, which are full of fine learning and curious Thought. The main of all of them, are good Argument againſt the Infidels, becauſe each Hypotheſis, ſhews the poſſibility of that Deluge which they deny. As for the Ancient ſuppoſitions, that this immenſe quantity of Water was owing to the coming down of the ſuperceleſtial Waters, or the Condenſation of Air; they are, I think, a little too unphiloſophical for this inquiſitive Age, and are therefore like to do very little good among the Unbelievers.

The moſt agreeable,Remarks on the late Theories, &c. and ſurprizing Book which of late Years has offered it ſelf to the World, was Dr. Burnet's Theory upon this ſubject. The Deſign whereof was ſo Great and Noble, the Language ſo exact, the Thought ſo delicate; the whole work ſo uniform and of a piece with it ſelf, and adorned with ſuch variety of pleaſant learning; wherein were ſuch ingenious Accounts given of the Great Revolutions of Nature, of the Formation of the World, the Paradiſiacal ſtate, of the Antediluvian Longevity, the Deluge and Conflagration; that tho' there might want ſome degrees of probability to make every Reader believe his Theory, exactly True, yet it pleaſed moſt of them ſo, as to think it was pitty it was not. Far be it from me to detract from the ingenious gueſſes of that Learned Man; but yet there are ſome things in that Hypotheſis, which ly very difficult in my mind, and do not ſeem ſo agreeable to the Mechanical Laws he goes by, and other Phaenomena, which are obſervable in Nature. The Oval Figure, which he aſcribes to the Antediluvian Earth, ſeems inconſiſtent with the preſent Figure which it is found to be of, that is a Prolate Sphaeroide, or an Oval turned about its leſſer Axis (i. e.) of the faſhion of a Loaf. Which was a prudent deſign of Nature to make it of this figure, becauſe the additional Heaps of Ice and Snow, which are continually lodged at the Poles, by the vapours conſtantly flying North, and South, ſhould never increaſe the Globe beyond a Circle. His excluding the Annual Motion of the Earth, and its Motion of Paralleliſm to the Poles of the World, allowing it only a ſimple Motion round an Axis Parallel to the Poles of the Ecliptick, and conſequently taking away the viciſſitude of Seaſons, which is one of the greateſt Beauties of the World; and leaving the greater part of it uninhabitable, is a matter which one cannot ſo eaſily comply with; eſpecially when the firſt Chap. of Geneſis ſays, that the Stars ſhall be for times, and for ſeaſons, and for Days, and for years. And ſo is his excluſion from thence of the Seas, Hills, and Great Rivers, allowing only ſome trilling ſtreams from the Poles. For the World without the Sea, would be but a Priſon, where Men would be lock'd up from one another without intercourſe, would have no communication in Commerce, Arts, Invention; but People muſt be content to live uncomfortably at home, upon their own Stocks, and their own Improvements. Without Hills, Men would be bereaved, of the Ornament and Convenience of Metals, of the uſefulneſs of Minerals and Stones; and Men would have wanted Money, Domeſtick Utenſils, Phyſick, and Buildings. Nay without Hills to drain off the Miſt and Rains, and Seas to evaporate the Miſt and Rains from, it is unaccountable to me, how there ſhould be ſuch a thing as a River in the World; and I fancy the eaſy deſcent upon the declivity of an Oval as big as the Earth, is not agreeable to the Laws of Hydroſtaticks, and the uſual current of Waters. Nor is it leſs difficult to me to imagine, how a Cruſt of ſo vaſt a Thickneſs, as that of the Earth muſt be, ſhould be broken by any natural force, eſpecially being ſupported equally by the ſubterraneous Waters; or as for any fiſſures or cracks by the Heat of the Sun, they are demonſtrated in the hotteſt Countries, not to go many Yards into the Ground; and as for any Earth-quakes raiſed by evaporation of the Abyſs below, every Ditcher can tell, that the Heat of the Sun-beams does not go ſo many inches under Ground, as this Hypotheſis muſt ſuppoſe Leagues; and beſides Earth-quakes, and ſubterraneous Eruptions, are not cauſed by rarefied Vapours, but by the accenſion of ſulphureous Damps, which like Gun-powder, rend, tear, and carry all before them, and are often wont to break out in viſible Flame. Nay further, thoſe vaſt Fiſſures and ugly Gaps would have been more inconvenient and unſightful in the Antediluvian Earth, than the moſt barren Mountains and rougheſt Seas are with us. Neither does the uſual depth of the Channels of the Sea, ſeem to anſwer to the Depth of the Abyſs; nor the regularity of the Mountains to the accidental Fragments of ſuch a Cruſt. There would then appear frequently prodigious Wells and Gaps, where the fragments did not exactly meet, and ſuch horrid and naked Apices, which could not by this time, have been any thing ſmoothed by Rains, or covered with Graſs or Herbs. Nay even in the very ſituation of the Mountains, and greateſt Hills, there appears wiſe contrivance, and not accidental Fracture; for to go no further than our own Country, all our great Ridges of Hills, in England, run Eaſt and Weſt, ſo do the Alps, in Italy, and in ſome meaſure, the Pyrenees; ſo do the Mountains of the Moon, in Africk, and ſo does Mount Tauras, and Caucaſus. And further there appears a prudent foreſight, in not making the ridges of Hills, continued, but by breaking them off into Tumuli, or Heads, parts of each of which lies obliquely behind another, and generally admits a skew paſſage between. For unleſs there was ſuch a Ridge of Hills frequent from Eaſt to Weſt, the Vapours would all run Northward, and there would be no rains in the Mediterranean Countries, but the Rivers dried up, and the Sea it ſelf in time evaporated and frozen into Polar Ice. And unleſs the Hills were divided into theſe oblique Breaks, ſo as to keep back the Vapours and let in the Northern Air, the World would be far more liable to Peſtilences and Putrefaction than now they are, and all Places as unhealthy as Scanderoon. Theſe things, with the Deduction of the Americans from another race than Noah, and ſome other matters of leſs conſequence, are my reaſons why I cannot ſubſcribe to that learned Doctor's Solution of the Noachical Deluge; and therefore muſt beg his leave to caſt about and ſee if I can find a better elſewhere, that I can more eaſily acquieſce in.

Dr. Woodward, to whom the World is forever indebted, for his curious and diligent Obſervations of Shells and Minerals, and other ſubterraneous Phaenomenas, has promiſed in his Eſſay, a more natural Hypotheſis; but one of the Grounds which he deſigns to build his Theory upon, does ſeem to me ſo precarious and impoſſible, that I muſt ſee a great deal of good proof, before I can aſſent to it. For it does not appear to me, how it is poſſible that the waters continuance a few months upon the face of the Earth ſhould diſſolve the Compages of the moſt rigid Foſſils, and ſuſpend the particles of them all in the circumfuſed water, except only conchous ſubſtances; and that, when the waters were withdrawn, they ſhould be let down to fix and be compacted again. For if it was poſſible that water in ſo ſhort a ſpace could diſſolve Marbles and Adamants, yet methinks the ſame ſhould more eaſily diſſolve Oiſterſhells and Cockles, which are of a more tenuous compoſition, and more eaſy of Diſſolution.

Mr. Whiſton, in his Theory, has avoided moſt of the Difficulties which were chargeable upon the Firſt, and has given the World a Taſt of the extraordinary Mathematical, and Philological Learning he ſtands poſſeſt of. The chief fault I find in him is, that he has ſtuck more to Mr. Newton's than Moſes his Philoſophy, and ſeems too too fond and credulous of his Ingenious Hypotheſis of the Comet. Nay the imputing this great Cataſtrophe to the neceſſary Laws of a Comets Trajection, which the Scriptures tell us was ſent by God for the Sin of Mankind, ſeems to give too great a ſcope for the ſcoffs of Libertines, and the Atheiſtical Fatality. His Turning Days into Years, and denying the Diurnal Revolution of the Earth at firſt, is methinks a little too bold, when it does not ſeem at all to favour his Hypotheſis, but only to give God ſix Years time to work in, when the Infidels already grudge him ſo much at ſix days. His fancying two Courſes of Rain from the Scripture, which only ſeems to repeat the Relation of one, is not to me ſo ſatisfactory; nor his Excluſion of Clouds and Miſts, which is agreeable indeed to the Burnettian Theory, but, I think, not to his. Neither can I conceive, that the bare paſſing through the Tail or Atmoſphere of a Comet could afford the thouſand part of the Water that Theory has occaſion for, and he himſelf is forced to fetch a great part of it from the Abyſs. Nor is it credible, that the Earth, a cold Planet, ſhould go off with 750,000. Miles of the Comets Tail, which could not be ſupported by the Comet it ſelf, but only by reaſon of the burning heat of the Body of it. And it is a miſtake, I ſuppoſe, to think, that the round Circle about the Body of the Comet is a watry Atmoſphere much groſſer than the Tail, ſo as to afford nine times as much Water to the Earth paſſing through that, as through the Tail; for the Ring is by ſome curious obſervers thought to be only the curling and winding round of the ſmoke, riſing at firſt to a determinate height from all parts of the Comet, and then making off to the part oppoſite to the Sun, as you may ſee Fig. III. Neither do I fancy that the Earth, paſſing even through the Atmoſphere of a Comet, could gain any more Water by that, than any thing can do by paſſing through the ſmoke of a Chimney; for both of them are but ſmoke, only the former is the thinner, as being the Fume ariſing from the Terreous part of the Comet, by its Parelion almoſt vitrified and calcined, the aqueous parts being firſt evaporated and ſent off farther in the extremity of the Tail. And beſides, I cannot conceive, how the Earth ſhould not almoſt have been fired, and Noah, and his Ark, burnt to powder, by the glowing heat of the melted Planet; for according to my little Philoſophy, I ſhould imagine it as comfortable living in a red hot Oven for an hour or two, as in ſuch a ſultry Atmoſphere as this. And it is hard to think, that this Comet ſhould give no more diſturbance in this part of the Univerſe, but only to turn the Earths Annual Orbit, from a Circle to an Ellipſis; for according to Mr. Newton's Principles, if the Comet had been bigger than the Earth, it had carried it away to rights in its Parabola, through the vaſt extra-Saturnine ſpaces, and if it had been leſs, it had been ſtopt by the Earth, and ſo we had been troubled with its ſmoaky Tail about us ever ſince. Or if it had been of the ſame bigneſs with the Earth, and if it had well nigh the ſame celerity with the Earth, we ſhould have had the ſame troubleſom Companion nevertheleſs; or however, it is ten thouſand to one, but it would have run away with our Moon, if it had happened to have come nigher to That than the Earth does. Nor does it ly eaſy upon my mind, how ſuch a prodigious quantity of Water, that he ſuppoſes to have come from the Comet, could be diſpoſed of; it is impoſſible it could be one quarter of it ſuſpended in the Air, or lodged in the Channels of the Seas; for the Channels could bear no proportion to it. Nor can I think the Seas were ſo much as inlarged by the Deluge, but that they both, before and ſince, have been growing leſs, and leſs, by the prodigious quantities of Water employ'd in the production of Trees and Plants, which are reduced afterward into Mold, and always retain the ſpecies of Earth, or ly buried in the Ground, and never return to the Sea again. To ſay nothing of how much more is employed in the concretion of Stones and conchous ſubſtances, how much is licked up by the Aether out of the Atmoſphere as the Earth is ſwiming through it, how much more flies over in vapours to the Poles, notwithſtanding the Barricado of the Hills is frozen there and never returns again, unleſs ſome few Particles, it may be, of them at ſome ſeaſons of the Year in Winds: and to paſs over the obſervations of the Channels of great Rivers near the Sea, which ſeem formerly to have been far broader than they are now, and the many great Countries which the Sea has deſerted. And beſides laſtly, in my mind it is impoſſible that the ſwelling of the Abyſs ſhould alter the figure of the Earths Cruſt, from a Circle or Oval to a Sphaeroide; that the Water had force enough to do it; or that this effect could happen without ſhattering the whole Compages being of a brittle ſaxeous ſubſtance, into pieces. Theſe are my reaſons, why I cannot acquieſce in the Hypotheſis of that ingenious and learned Gentleman, as exactly True; Yet I think it a curious Eſſay to ſhew the Infidels not only the poſſibility of the Moſaick Hiſtory, but how finely it may be made to correſpond with Philoſophy; and after all, that 'tis eaſier to find faults with this Theory, than to compoſe another ſo good.

Well! Now you ſee how theſe great Wits are miſerably at a loſs, to explain this unaccountable Hiſtory; and therefore it is in vain to try any further to explain that, which will admit of no ſolution. So that you had better ingenuouſly give up the Cauſe, and own that it is an impoſſible Relation, calculated only for the Illiterateneſs of thoſe times, to make the Jews ſtand in fear of the Deity, when they were told that ſuch a Tragical Puniſhment was inflicted by him upon Mankind for their Sins.

If God was the cauſe of the Deluge, as our Religion ſuppoſes, and not Natural and Mechanical Cauſes of their own proper Tendency; then God might bring it to paſs a thouſand ways, that we know nothing of; for his Omnipotence will be able to bear up againſt all the pretended Impoſſibilities that you are able to raiſe againſt the Hiſtory of the Deluge.

Tradition in all Nations of a Deluge.1. But if this Hiſtory of the Deluge be ſuch an impoſſible unaccountable Hiſtory, how come all the Nations of the World, to have ſuch an impoſſible Notion got into their Heads? Though ſeveral Men might have the ſame unaccountable fancies, yet it is hard to think that all Men ſhould be troubled with the ſame Dreams. And it ſeems to me to have more impoſſibility, that all Nations ſhould have Traditions of a Deluge, if there had been no ſuch thing as a Deluge; than any you can ſhew me in the Deluge it ſelf. The Babylonians, Phoenicians, Aſſyrians, in their Hiſtories make mention of a Deluge, as you may ſee in Euſebius and Joſephus. Deucalion's Flood was ſo famous in all the Greek and Latin Mythologiſts and Poets, that nothing more need be ſaid of it. Martinius in his Hiſtory of China relates the ſame of the Chineſe; and ſo does Joſephus Acoſta, Herera, and De Laet of the Americans. And Lucian De Deâ Syriâ. relates the ancient Tradition they had of the Deluge at Hierapolis in Syria; which is almoſt as exact as the Moſaick relation of it. The account, though it be ſomething long, is not unpleaſant, and deſerves conſideration. This Race of Men, which now is, was not the firſt; but that Race was quite deſtroyed. But theſe are of a ſecond Generation, and from their firſt Progenitor Deucalion have increaſed to ſo great a Multitude as we ſee. Now of thoſe former Men they tell this ſtory: They being contentious, did very unrighteous things, they neither kept their Oaths, nor were hoſpitable to ſtrangers; for which this great misfortune befel them: All of a ſudden the Earth gave out of her ſelf a great quantity of Water, there were mighty ſhowers, the Rivers overflowed, the Sea was much higher, by which all things became Water, and all Men periſhed. Only Deucalion was left unto the ſecond Generation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This is agreeable to what the Scripture ſays of Noah his being a Preacher of Righteouſneſs to the ungodly Antediluvians. upon account of his good Counſel and Piety. Now he was ſaved after this manner. He had a great 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (i. e.) an Ark or Cheſt, into which he came with the Children and Women, of his Houſe; and then entered, Hogs, and Horſes, and Lions, and Serpents, and all other Animals, which live upon the Earth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , all of them with their Mates. And he received them all, and they did him no harm; for by aſſiſtance from Heaven there was a great amity between them. So all ſailed in this one Cheſt, as long as the Water did predominate. But theſe things are told in the Greek Histories of Deucalion. But of thoſe things which happened after, one thing worthy of great admiration is told by the Inhabitants of Hierapolis; That in their Country, there was a great Gap into which all this Water ſunk. Ʋpon which, Deucalion built Altars and a Temple over the Gap, and conſecrated it to Juno. I my ſelf ſaw the Gap. It is very little at the bottom of the Temple, as I told you. Whether it was formerly bigger or no, and grown narrower by Age, I cannot tell; but this I can tell, that That which I ſaw was but little. Now they make this the ſign of the Hiſtory. Twice in a year Water is brought into the Temple: and not only the Prieſts bring it, but all Syria and Arabia. Nay Men come even from Euphrates to the Sea, all carrying Water; which they firſt pour into the Temple. Then the Water deſcends into the Gap; and though the Gap be ſmall, yet it receives a prodigious quantity of Water. And when they do this they tell, that Deucalion firſt inſtituted this Cuſtom, to be a Memorial of the Calamity, and his Deliverance from it. This is the ancient Tradition which thoſe about the Temple tell.

From which Relation it is remarkable, that it was the Opinion of the People of Syria, that there had been an univerſal Deluge, that a certain Man and his Family were ſaved in an Ark, and a Male and Female of every kind of Animals, to reſtore again the drowned Creation; and that all this vaſt quantity of water ſunk into an Hiatus of the Earth, and made the World habitable again. Now I hope, that Moſes his Relation is not ſo incredible when it has the joynt Teſtimony of ſo many Nations, and particularly the Heathen Syrians ſo exactly correſponding with it. Indeed this ſtory in Lucian is told after his way drollingly, as if he did not believe it; but yet there is no queſtion to be made but that it was the relation of thoſe People, though he has a mind to expoſe it.

But I need not trouble my ſelf to prove the Being of a Deluge by Tradition of Nations, when late obſervations have given Demonſtration of it. The Beds of Shells which are often found on the Tops of the higheſt Mountains, and petrified Bones and Teeth of Fiſhes, which are dug up hundreds of Miles from the Sea, Trees and Shrubs buried many fathoms under ground, are the cleareſt Evidence in the World, that the Waters have ſome time or other overflow'd the higheſt parts of the Earth; which was the Deluge which we contend for. The truth of theſe matters is not to be conteſted now, by any that have but the leaſt Inſight in Experimental Philoſophy. Nor can it be with any degree of probability ſaid, that all theſe ſubterraneous Bodies are but only the Mimical and mock Productions of Nature, for that theſe are real Shells, the niceſt Examination both of the Eye and the Microſcope do atteſt; and that they are true Bones, may be experimented by burning them; and then they will firſt turn into a Cole, and afterwards into a Calx, as other Bones do. How far Nature may ſport her ſelf in the ſubterraneous World, in the impreſſion of the Images of Terreſtrial Plants upon Slate and Coles, I will not diſpute; but that it ſhould produce True Bones and Shells, which anſwer in all reſpects to thoſe of the Genuine Animals, is incredible, and next to the boldneſs of an Epicurean Concourſe, for the Frame of the World.

2.That the Deluge was poſſible. I ſhall therefore only ſet my ſelf to prove, that there is Water enough in or about the Earth to drown it, and to riſe up to that height which Moſes did report it did.

I confeſs I do no think, that the Waters of the Sea are one quarter enough for ſuch a Deluge, and therefore it muſt be ſought for elſewhere. That there is a vaſt quantity of Waters under ground,Vid. Dr. Burnet's Theor. p. 1. and an Abyſs within the outward Cruſt of the Earth, is I think evident to any who conſiders, that in many places the Sea diſgorges it ſelf into the bowels of the Earth, and does not paſs off by any Out-Current. The ſingle Mediterranean Sea is a ſufficient Inſtance of this: for conſidering how many, and ſome vaſt Rivers run into it, and it having no viſible outlet, what ſhould become of the Waters? Nay conſidering that there are two Currents of the Sea ſet into it, one at the Straits of Gibralter, and another vaſtly ſtrong one of the Pontus, which the Ships do, with difficulty, bear up againſt; it muſt neceſſarily be allowed, that this Sea does empty it ſelf by ſubterraneous paſſages into ſome great receptacle of Waters underneath. For otherways, many Ages ago the Mediterranean had over-flow'd and drowned ſeveral Countries on the adjacent Shores. Nay the fathomleſs bottoms there which ſome have tried in vain with ſo much Cordage to reach,Vid. Dr. Smith's Account to the Royal Society in the Philoſophical Tranſactions. is the moſt evident proof which can be of the Truth of this Aſſertion. And the ſame holds likewiſe in the Caſpian-Sea. And I think there is little doubt to be made, but thoſe dangerous Gulfs and Eddies which the Sailors ſhun in many parts of the Ocean, are but only great Holes or ſubterraneous Paſſages, through which the upper Sea is gulping down into the Abyſs beneath. Now if there be ſuch a great Receptacle of Waters beneath the Earth, as there is no queſtion to be made of it, ſo many mighty Seas continually running into it, then the Earth muſt be hollow, and only a ſuperiour Cruſt concluding within it an Abyſs of Waters, as is repreſented, Fig. I. and Fig. II. If there be the ſame Quantity of Water remaining as there was at the Creation, then the total Hollow of the Earth will be filled up with Water: but if any part of it be loſt, or conſolidated upon the outward ſuperficies of the Earths Cruſt; then by the Laws of Attraction, if the Water does not exceed in Gravity the Circumambient Earth, it will lye round it in the Ring P S R Q and there will be a Hollow in the Central Part u w x z. But if the Body of Water be of greater Gravity than the Cruſt of the Earth, then the Maſs of it will lie next to the thickeſt part of the Earth, or where there is more Matter; ſo that if the Earth be thicker about the Pole X, or if there be any Internal ſolid there, it will then lie round part of the Limbus of the Earth U T X Y and leave the Hollow at U Y. Fig. II. Now ſuppoſe the Diameter of the Earth or Terraqueous Globe to be, as it is thereabouts, 8000 Miles, and the thickneſs of the Cruſt of the Earth a 32d part of this, as the ſecond Figure repreſents, then the Cruſt will be 250 Miles thick, which will be a ſolidity ſtrong enough to contain the Internal Waters, to reſiſt the chapping from the Sun, to keep a conſiſtency in all the rapid motions of the Earth. Or let it be an Eighth part, as is repreſented, Fig. I. and then the Earths Cruſt will be 500 Miles thick, which to be ſure is abundantly ſufficient. Now upon either of theſe two Suppoſitions, there will be Water enough, when drawn out upon the ſuperficies of the Earth, to drown the World to a far greater height, than what Moſes relates. Now it is but ſuppoſing, that God by a Miraculous power ſucked out part of this Abyſs through the Foramina, or ſubterraneous paſſages which ly diſperſed at Bottom of the Sea, as ſuppoſe about the Point T of Fig. II. to the height of four or five Miles; and then the higheſt Mountains will be laid under Water, the Water diffuſing it ſelf both ways from h to k; ſo that if it be in h four Miles high, it will be at leaſt three in k, And then if after that the ſuſpending force were taken off, and the Water deſcended through the ſame Foramina, and left the Earth dry as it was before; you have, Philologus, at leaſt a poſſible Account of the Deluge.

But truly, Sir, this Miraculous power ſticks moſt in my Stomach; That is ſo ſtrangely Unphiloſophical and ſuch a ſubterfuge of dull Divines, that methinks any Man of ſenſe ſhould be aſhamed to make uſe of that ſhift. Beſides, I am not very well reconciled to your Waters which you ſuppoſe to fill up the Hollow of the Earth. Indeed thoſe who allow a Central ſolid have ſomewhat more to ſay for themſelves; but your Hypotheſis deſtroys the Laws of Specifick Gravity, and makes the lighter Waters moſt unnaturally to ly below the Cruſt of the heavy Earth.

But ſtill, Credentius, this unaccountable Miracle lies hard upon me, eſpecially when your Divines allow, That God generally works by Second Cauſes, even when he acts Miraculouſly and above the power of Nature; by giving Nature as it were a power ſuperior to it ſelf. And indeed in the preſent caſe, it looks very odd, that God ſhould engage his Omnipotence to make the Water of the Abyſs aſcend contrary to its Nature, or that his Inferiour Agents the Angels ſhould be employ'd inviſibly to pump up ſo much Water from thence as would drown the World. Without doubt it would lie more eaſy upon Mens Minds, if this great Cataſtrophe were accounted for in a more natural way; in which the Laws of the Univerſe are not ſo forcibly oppoſed as in this ſuppoſition.

For my part, it lies as eaſy upon my mind to think, in general, that God miraculouſly raiſed up the Water of the Abyſs, and ſent ſuch continual Spouts and Rains, that in forty days time the whole World was drowned; as if I was able to find out thoſe immediate Cauſes he made uſe of in this dreadful Judgment. For after all I muſt own it to be the Finger of God, either making uſe of intermediate Cauſes, or himſelf immediately producing the Effect. If I am ſure the Effect was miraculous, what need I care where the divine power was firſt impreſſed, whether immediately upon the effect it ſelf, or upon any of its pre-exiſting and neceſſary Cauſes? I am ſure by the divine Relation, that God is in it either firſt or laſt, and this is ſufficient for my Conviction; and I think, the Holy Scripture is not ſo much obliged to gratify our Curioſity. I doubt not but there are innumerable ways which God could have made uſe of to drown the World, even by intermediate and natural Cauſes, which the wiſeſt Philoſopher never dreamt of; and if any of theſe ways are ſhewn to be poſſible, then all the Arguments which would infer the Impoſſibility of the Deluge are at an End. Now to comply with your curioſity for once, I will endeavour to ſhew what ſecond Cauſes God might poſſibly make uſe of in the deluging the World, and by what means the Abyſs was drawn up over the Face of the Earth. Not that I am ſo vain to think that he did make uſe of theſe means; but that if he did, the effect would be ſo far from being impoſſible, that it would, upon that condition, be neceſſary.

Now it is moſt generally among the beſt Philoſophers agreed, that the Moon is the Cauſe of the Tides, and that the nigher ſhe is to the Sea, as at her time of Southing, ſhe raiſes the Water the higher by her Attraction of it towards her. So that if by the ſupernatural power of God the Moon were brought very near to the Earth, or the Earth to the Moon, ſuch a vaſt Tide would be raiſed, upon ſuppoſition there is communication between the Abyſs and the Upper Seas, that the World would be drowned to the height which Moſes aſſigns. Now I fancy this might come to paſs by the pure Acceleration of the Earth's Annual Motion. For let C D A B repreſent the Annual motion of the Earth in the time of the Antediluvians, Fig. IV. which is a perfect Circle, in which it is probable all the Planets, after their Creation at firſt, revolved. Let B repreſent the Earth, and I the Moon, revolving round the Earth in the Circle I p i l. Now when the Earth was in the Point I, let us ſuppoſe its Annual motion to be accelerated, ſo as to exceed the Exact Proportion there was formerly between the Attraction of the Sun H, and the Celerity of the Earth; and then the Earth, inſtead of coming to the point B in the Circle C D A B, will go off to the Point c and move in the Ellipſis E F D A. Now by this new Elliptical motion the Earth in the point c will be nigher to the Moon I, by the diſtance B c, than it was in the point B; which would raiſe ſuch a Prodigious Tide as would produce the Effect we contend for. And then the Moon for a conſiderable time would revolve about the Earth at c in the Circle I m h, inſtead of its ancient Orbit I p i l, which will ſo long keep up the Tides over the whole face of the Earth, as is deſcribed Fig. I. and II. But the Tides will decreaſe gradually as the Moon by her Menſtrual Courſe ſhall have made more Perihelions, for every time ſhe comes nigher to the Sun, the Sun will more and more conduce together, with the reſiſtance of her own Impreſſed Motion, to draw her from her late contracted to her ancient and more enlarged Orbit. So that a month or two after, when the Earth, in its Annual Courſe, ſhall be in the Point F, and the Moon be in her Perihelion Q ſhe ſhall then have enlarged her Orbit to o Q • greater than her contracted one w y z, or m h I, ſo that after five months, the time of the Continuance of the Deluge, when the Earth ſhall have come to the point D, then the Orbit of the Moon ſhall be inlarged to u s t, equal to her former one I p i l, or as great as her other ſhe had before the Acceleration of the Earths Motion. So that then the Moon being as far diſtant from the Earth as formerly ſhe was, thoſe great Tides will be over, and the Deluge at an End; all the Waters being again ſunk into the Belly of the Earth, through the ſame Cavities by which they aſcended.

But ſtay, Sir, this does not much mend the matter, for this attributes the cauſe of the Flood only to the breaking up the Fountains of the great Deep, which Moſes likewiſe attributes to another cauſe, viz. the Rain of forty days and forty nights.

Indeed, Moſes ſays, that at the beginning of the Deluge it rained forty Days and Nights; but he does not ſay that theſe Rains added any thing conſiderably to the Deluge of the whole World. They only raiſed the Waters to ſuch a height that the Ark was born up, and ſwam upon the Waters. And the Flood, or Rain, was forty Days upon the Earth: and the Waters increaſed and bore up the Ark, and it was lift up above the Earth, Gen 7.17. But in the two following Verſes is expreſſed the Effect of the Waters riſing out of the Abyſs. And the Waters prevailed and increaſed greatly upon the Earth, and the Waters prevailed exceedingly upon the Earth, and all the high Hills, that were under the whole Heaven were covered. So that what was the Effect of the Rains to lift up the Ark, Moſes calls only increaſing of the Waters; but when he afterwards ſpeaks of the eruption of the Abyſs, he ſays a great deal more, that Waters increaſed greatly, and prevailed exceedingly. And indeed this previous Flood from the Rains, or Preludium of the Deluge, was wiſely deſigned by God Almighty, that the Ark might be lift up, before the Torrent from the Abyſs came; or otherways ſuch a mighty Current running with ſo great a Force, would have overthrown and drowned it before it could have been lifted up. But a Rain of forty Days having before made a Land-Flood, great enough to bear up the Earth, the fury of the roaring Torrent of the Abyſs would be broken by the yielding Waters under the Ark; and ſo would by degrees be raiſed to the height which the Waters roſe to without Danger. I will not contend that there was no more than this forty Days Rain; for it is probable that it Rained the greateſt part of the Time that the Waters covered the ſurface of the Earth; for the Sea then being above as large again as it formerly was, muſt ſupply a far greater quantity of vapours than could poſſibly be ſuſpended in the Air, and therefore muſt fall down in frequent, or continual ſpouts, or Rains. This I take, Philologus, to be a poſſible account of the Deluge, and is a ſufficient confutation of them who decry it as an impoſſibility.

Well! ſuppoſing that the Abſurdities of Moſes his relation of the Deluge are not ſo great as are generally imagined, yet I cannot allow him to be a true Prophet; becauſe the pretended Miracles by which he endeavoured to eſtabliſh his Laws and Doctrines, ſeem to me to be mere Artifice contrived only to beguile the ſilly Jews, and to lead them tamely by the Noſe without oppoſition. They poor Creatures! thought that God wrought mighty Miracles by his hand, whilſt he was only working Deſigns for himſelf, to purchaſe himſelf Admiration among the Rabble, or elſe to gain a Juriſdiction under the ſpecious name of a Theocracy. But alas! theſe Miracles are all Craft and Colluſion, which any Cunning Man might ſeem to do, If he had but ſuch ſimple Inſpecters. Witneſs his pretending to receive the Law in Mount Sinai; where he gave out that he converſed with God, who appeared there in ſmoke, and thundering and lightening. No doubt the poor folks were ſtrangely amazed at this terrible Scene. But Moſes or any other intelligent Man, knew well enough, that there was no great matter in it. For all this wonderful Appearance was in all probability only a Volcano in that Mountain, which Moſes did very politically forecaſt, that the Jews ſhould not come to the knowledge of. For if they had run gazing up the Mountain as well as he, the ſecret would have been found out, and the Miracle ſpoil'd. But Moſes very prudently commands, Ex. 19.13. that a hand ſhall not touch the Mountain, but he ſhall be ſtoned or ſhot through, whether it be beaſt or man: nay, not ſo much as the Prieſts themſelves muſt come up, leſt the Lord break forth upon them, ver. 24. but only Moſes and Aaron, who were let into the Myſtery, muſt come there. Nor is this Volcano in Mount Sinai only a Conjecture, but is confirmed by the obſervation of Travellers, who ſtill behold the Mountain full of Aſhes, which do plainly ſhew the Ruins, as it were, of an extinguiſhed Aetna. This, Credentius, is an Objection not to be bantered off; for if this ſtands, your whole revealed Religion ſhakes; becauſe this is the very Foundation of the Jewiſh and Chriſtian Inſtitution; and if there be any Trick here, as is much to be feared, all that is built upon it, is good for nothing.

There is ſo much falſe ſuggeſtion and groundleſs Aſſertion in this laſt Objection, that it is intolerable; and one had need of the Patience of that Holy Religion you are oppoſing, to be unmoved at it.

1. But 'pray, Sir, what By-Ends had Moſes to ſerve by his playing this ſham Prank, as you do ſuppoſe, in the Mount? He could not get a greater Authority over them than He had before; he had been their Deliverer from the Aegyptians, and was their conducter in the Wilderneſs, and had as abſolute command over that People as could be deſired. Neither could Fame or a Deſire of raiſing his Family, put him upon any ſuch indirect Methods. For he ſeems to have been the moſt ſincere and modeſt, and moſt diſintereſted Man of all Men that ever lived. He is ſo open and faithful in his Hiſtory, as to record his own Failures, and thoſe of his deareſt Relations, his Brother, and Siſter. He gave the Prieſthood, which was the moſt conſiderable honour in that Nation, away to his Brother Aaron's Family, contenting himſelf that his own Poſterity ſhould only be ranked among the Ordinary Levites. And at his Death diſpoſed of the Government to Joſhua, a Stranger. Neither is it credible, that he would make uſe of ſuch a mean trick as this, which was ſo eaſy to be diſcovered by every bold Man, whoſe curioſity might prompt him to venture the Menaces, eſpecially when he had eſtabliſhed ſufficiently in them an Opinion of his miraculous power, by all the wonders which he had done in Aegypt, and at the red Sea.

2. Nor is there any tolerable ground for this ſuppoſition of a Vulcano's being formerly in Mount Sinai: I know your Brother Infidels make a mighty Noiſe with this ſtory, but I believe they have very little Authority for it. I have ſeen ſeveral Draughts and Deſcriptions of this Mountain in Books of Travels, but never found any thing which made for this ſtory. The likeſt matter, which ever I could find, and which might perhaps give contenance to this Aſſertion, is a Relation I find in the Travels of Chriſtophorus Furerus a German Knight.Itinerarium Chriſtophori Fureri Printed at Norimberg, 1621. And he in the Deſcription of St. Catharines Hill, which is nigh Sinai, has theſe words. In valle propinquâ Collis eſt miri aſpectus, quaſi totus exuſtus eſſet & cineribus tectus, quo loco Moſen ovium ſoceri ſui paſcendarum curam habuiſſe memorant. In the Neighbouring Valley there is a Hill which is wonderful to look upon, appearing as if it was all burnt and covered with Aſhes; in which place they ſay is the place where Moſes kept his Father-in-Laws Sheep. Now unleſs it can be ſuppoſed that this Hill was Mount Sinai, it will ſignify nothing. But the ſame Furerus gives a particular Deſcription of Sinai in the following Chapter, and therefore, that can be none of the Hill which he before deſcribed. This is in all probability ſome little Hill nigh St. Catharines and Mount Sinai, whoſe Earth is of a blackiſh colour and barren, not unlike many of our Heaths. And this is all the ground I can find they have for the Volcano of Sinai. But ſuppoſing that little Barren Hill, were Mount Sinai, they very little underſtand the Nature of a Volcano, to think there ſhould remain no other Marks of it, than only a black ground like Aſhes. Read but the Deſcriptions of Mount Aetna in Polybius and Strabo, and you will ſtrait be of another mind. For all ſuch Burning Mountains have an Open Mouth on Top of them through which they belch out their Flames, which the Ancients called the Crater; becauſe the diſgorged Cinders and melted Metals of Mount Aetna, being hardened about the Brims of the Hiatus, did reſemble the Lips of a Pitcher. Now 'tis impoſſible there ſhould be a Burning Mountain without ſuch a Crater, or Hiatus; which would needs appear after the Fire was gone out, in the figure of a Monſtrous Gap unto the End of the World.

3. Nay this Appearance of God, or of an Angel repreſenting him, in Flames of Fire, with Earth-quake, Thunder, &c. is very agreeable to all the Ancient Theology. For my part I am of Opinion with many of the Ancients, that it was a ſuperior Angel that perſonated God, and not the ſecond Perſon of the Trinity, as ſome. And this is more agreeable to Scripture, as when it is ſaid, Gal. 3.19. That the Law was given by Angels in the hand of a Mediator (i. e.) Moſes. And ſo Joſephus remarks of his Nation;Antiq. Hiſt. Lib. 15. We have received of God the beſt and holieſt Parts of our Law by Angels. And ſo the Author of the Queſtions to the Orthodox,In Juſt. Martyr's Works. The Angels which ſpoke in Gods ſtead to men, were called after Gods name, as the Angel which ſpoke to Jacob and to Moſes. Nay ſometimes men are called Gods. To both theſe it is granted to poſſeſs God's Name and his Place, by reaſon of the Office which is intruſted to them. But when their Office expires, they then ceaſe to be called Gods, becauſe they received that compellation only for the ſake of the Office. And therefore Jamblicus Jamb. de Myſteriis Sect. 2. Cap. 3. calls the Heroes and Daemons 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Spirits that appear for themſelves to Men; whilſt the ſuperiour Spirits have their Repreſentatives. And ſo Socrates Plutarch de Genio Socratis. could not believe that the Gods did appear 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and ſaid all were Pretenders and Cheats who affirmed it. Now that when Great Angels appeared, very great Flames of Fire were ſeen, and great commotion in the things about happened, may be known from the words of an Heathen Author, and who is therefore more unexceptionable.Jamb. de Myſteriis Sect 2. Cap. 4. As often as Archangels appear, certain parts of the World are ſhaken, and a fore-running Light uſhers them in, and according to the largeneſs of their Empire, is the largeneſs of their preceding Light proportioned. And ſo again afterward, the Archangels are full of an exceſſive Splendour, Angels have ſome Light, and Daemons a turbid one, &c. And again he ſays, Archangels Fire is undivided, that of Daemons is divided, and more circumſcribed; and the Fire of the Archontes, the higher they are, is the brighter. And ſo God himſelf is repreſented by the Ancients as dwelling, or incloſed in Fire. So Orpheus in his Hymns: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 — For round thy burning Throne attending ſtand Crowds of Angelick Orders— And ſo the Chaldaick Oracles.

And to the ſame purpoſe that Oracle which is extant in Cedrenus and Malela, Not. in Jamblichum pag. 300. and corrected by the learned Dr. Gale, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. There does from the capacious Heaven deſcend Vaſt and Eternal Light, Immortal Fire, Which all things tremble at, Earth, Heaven, Sea, With the Tartarian Vaults; which Daemons dread: Fatherleſs Father of all things, alone, Father and Son to his Eternal ſelf, Born of himſelf, Ʋntaught, Ʋnchangeable, His Nature unacceſſible to Reaſon, His Habitation Fire; and this is God, Of whom we Angels are a ſlender part; And now in ſilence from our Altars go.

Now this Notion was ſo frequent in the moſt ancient and Oriental Theology, that it might poſſibly give original to the Worſhip of the Fire among the Chaldeans and Perſians; to thoſe Magi among the Cappadocians, called Pyrethi, which Strabo Lib. 15. make mention of; to the Veſtal Fires among the Greeks and Romans, and the like Cuſtom among theSolinus Cap. 35. Britans. Therefore the Unbelievers ſhew a great deal of Ignorance, when they tax this Relation of Moſes repreſenting God's appearing on the Mount in a flame of Fire, with any Incongruity, or invent any groundleſs ſtories to account for it; ſeeing this is nothing but what is agreeable to the Ancient Divinity and the uſual Sentiments of moſt Nations in the World. And ſo as for the Earth-quake, or ſhaking of the Mountain, it is no more than what all Nations have thought has come to paſs at the preſence of God. As Pſal. 68.8. The Earth ſhook, the Heavens alſo dropped at the preſence of God. And Pſal. 104.32. He looketh on the Earth, and it trembleth. And Virgil in his Deſcription of the Approach of Phoebus, does in a manner but tranſlate the words of Moſes.

So whenever the coming of Hecate is deſcribed, as in Theocritus his Pharmaceutria, &c. Or when any great Deity appears, as that great Demogorgon which Lucan mentions, Lib. 3. the Earth is always ſaid to tremble.

But after all here was not the leaſt ground to ſuſpect any Deceit in this wonderful occurrence; for Moſes deals very openly with the Iſraelites in this matter, and ſuffers them to come up into the Mountain after the LORD had departed thence. And there is a ſignal given them when they ſhall venture to come. When the Trumpet ſoundeth along, they ſhall come up to the Mount, Exod. 19. v. 13. Now if there had been any thing of this pretended Vulcano in the Mountain that Moſes had cheated them with, to be ſure Moſes had forbid them to come up to the Mountain altogether; for their viewing thoſe natural Eruptions afterwards would have laid open the Cheat; as much as if they had been preſent, when Moſes gave out he was receiving his Law from God, who exhibited himſelf in that Appearance.

But ſtill, Credentius, there is another of this Legiſlator's Actions, which ſticks much in my ſtomach, and that is his making the Jews believe that by a divine power he turned the Waters of the Red-Sea into two ſolid Walls ſtanding up on each ſide of the Iſraelites to let them paſs through upon the dry-ground. But to ſay nothing of the pleaſantneſs of this Miracle: Methinks this was but a caſt of the Legiſlator's Cunning; to coin a Miracle out of the Seas Low-water. For it is a Tradition among the Aegyptians, that Moſes being a little more ſubtile than the ignorant Jews, or the Aegyptians which purſued him, underſtood the exact time of the Tide of that Sea, and ſo carried over upon the Ebb, his People ſafe, whilſt the Aegyptians were loſt for lack of better obſervation.Ant. Lib. 2. Cap. ult. Which Thought ſo wrought upon the Learned Joſephus, that he allow'd the ſame to be done by Alexander, in paſſing the Pamphylian Sea. Or however this Miracle is much leſſened, if we aſſert with a great many of the Divines, that the Jews did not croſs the Sea; but only went in a little way, and came out again on the ſame ſide; and then ignorant folks that lived far off from the Sea, might be impoſed upon at the ſame rate, every time 'tis low water with us.

It is a wonder at this time of Day that you witty Gentlemen who are endeavouring to ſettle all things upon a new Bottom, ſhould be beholding to one of old Porphyry's Cavils to beſpatter our Religion; or to an idle Tale of the Aegyptians. But in anſwer to theſe Inſinnations.

1. I am of Opinion,The Iſraelites did not paſs round the Head of the Sinus. there is no reaſon to think, but that the Iſraelites paſſed quite through the Channel of the Sea from one ſhore to the other. For the only reaſon which gave riſe to the other Opinion was the Relation of the Journies of the People, Numb. 23. where v. 6. it is ſaid that they departed from Succoth which is on the Aegyptians ſide of the Red Sea, and pitched in Etham, and from thence moved to Pi-hahiroth, paſſed through the midſt of the Sea into the Wilderneſs, and ſo went three days journey into the Wilderneſs of Etham. Whence they conclude that Etham, and the Wilderneſs of Etham, muſt needs be on the ſame ſide of the Sea; and conſequently the Jews did not march croſs the Sea, but only through one ſide of it, in a ſemicircle, and out again a little higher on the ſame ſide. But this is contrary to the expreſs words of Scripture which ſay, they paſſed through the middle of the Sea. And as for the difficulty about Etham, that is fairly ſolved, by allowing only two Ethams, the one a Town which they encamped at, on the Aegyptian ſide, the ſecond on the Erabian ſide, a Wilderneſs. Inſtances of which are common enough in Scripture and Prophane Hiſtories. But if we muſt needs have the Wilderneſs of Etham denominated from the Town, Mr. Le Clerk Diſſert. de Maris Idumaei traject. has ingeniouſly gueſſed that Etham the Town was ſituated nigh the upper part of the Sinus Arabicus, and gave denomination to a great Deſert which ſurrounded the Head of that Bay, and reached down a conſiderable way on both ſides. So that though they marched from the Wilderneſs of Etham croſs the Bay, they would be only in another part of the Wilderneſs of Etham ſtill.

The Waters did not ſtand erect.2. Neither do I ſee any reaſon to aſſert that the Waters are miraculouſly conſolidated; or that they did in a literal ſenſe ſtand on an heap, or erect like a Wall. But only God ſent a ſtrong Wind, as the Text ſays, which blew back the Tide and all the waters, which covered the ſands over againſt Pi-hahiroth, further towards the Ocean; leaving ſome waters ſtagnating towards the Head of the Sinus all along towards the Mediterranean Sea. So that by this mean the ſholes about Pi-hahiroth muſt needs be left dry, for the Iſraelites to paſs over: Indeed it muſt be a North wind which muſt produce this effect, or at leaſt a North-Eaſt; whereas our Tranſlation ſays, an Eaſt. But there is no neceſſity of tranſlating Cadim Eaſt, it ſignifying only a ſtrong wind. And ſo St. Jerom interprets it, ventum vehementem & urentem, a vehement and burning wind. And Pſ. 48.7. Thou breakeſt the ſhips of Tarſis with a Kadim, the LXX.Vid. Cler. Diſs. tranſlate it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with a mighty wind. Vid. Ez. 27.26. Job 27.21. Jer. 18.17. And then this explication will be very agreeable to the words of the Text, and that diviſion which is aſſigned to the Waters there. And the Lord cauſed the Sea to go back by a ſtrong Eaſt-Wind all that night, and made the Sea dry-land, and the Waters were divided, Ex. 14.21. Now as for thoſe words in the ſong of Moſes and Miriam, where it is ſaid, that the Flouds ſtood upright as an heap, and the Depths were congealed in the heart of the Sea, that muſt be taken only as a Poetical or Metaphorical Expreſſion. And where it is ſaid that the Waters were a Wall unto them, it muſt be underſtood only that there were Waters on both ſides the ſholes they paſſed over. And this is agreeable to the expreſſion in the Prophet Nahum, Art though better than No-ammone, or populous No, that was ſituate among the Waters, that had Waters round about it, whoſe Rampart was the Sea, and whoſe Waters were a Wall? Nah, 3.8.

Not beat back by a natural Wind.3. Nor did this come to paſs by any natural Wind, but by a miraculous one, which the Scripture ſays was ſent immediately by God, for that purpoſe. For no Hiſtories give account, that ever ſince that time, the Waters were ſo blown out, which muſt have often come to paſs, if the cauſe had been natural; nay more frequently of late than formerly, the Waters of all Creeks and Sinus's, being more ſhallow in theſe later Ages of the World, than the Centuries which were nigher to the Deluge. But if ſuch Ebbs had been ſo natural and frequent as the Infidels pretend, it was impoſſible that Moſes could have put ſuch a Banter upon ſo great a Multitude, who could not have all been ignorant of the Tide of ſo Neighbouring a Sea, nor would the Aegyptians have ventured into the danger of a Sea, the time of whoſe return they muſt needs know as well as Moſes. Nay it is impoſſible, that ſuch a great Army ſhould be drown'd by the coming back of an ordinary Tide, and that there ſhould not remain ſo much as one of them. It muſt therefore be allow'd, that God kept the Waters back by this preternatural Wind, till the Iſraelites were paſſed over, and then ſuffered them to return back upon the Aegyptians, in their full fury.

4. Alexander's paſſing the Pamphylian Streights, no Parallel. It does not make any thing againſt the Truth of this Miracle, that Alexander paſſed his Army over the Streights of the Pamphylian Sea; for thoſe Streights are naturally dry at every low Water; which, I believe, Joſephus was ignorant of, which made him compare it with this great Occurrence in the Moſaical Expedition. Now of that matter Strabo writes thus,Strab. Lib. 14. About Phaſelis there are Streights towards the Sea, through which Alexander paſſed his Army. There is alſo a Mountain called Climax, which lies to the Pamphylian Sea, leaving a ſtreight paſſage to the ſhore, which is quite bare, in good weather; but when the Waves ariſe, it is for the moſt part covered with them. Now the Road by the Mountains is about, and difficult, and therefore in calm weather they go by the ſhore. Now Alexander name thither in ſtormy weather, and truſting to his Fortune, would go over before the Waves were abated, which made his Souldiers go all day up to the Navel in Water. And much to the ſame purpoſe does Plutarch ſpeakPlutar. Vit. Alexandri.. This March through Pamphylia has been a ſubject to many Hiſtorians of mighty wonder, and fine Declamation, as if the Sea, by order of the Gods, gave place to Alexander, which almoſt always is a rough Sea there, and does very rarely open a ſmooth way under thoſe broken Rocks. And this Menander hints at in his Comedy ſpeaking of a Wonder 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. But Alexander himſelf in his Epiſtles ſpeaks of no Miracle, but only ſays he paſſed by Climax as he came from Phaſelis. Now 'tis plain this was no Miracle, by the joint Authority of theſe two Excellent Hiſtorians, who make the paſſage there an ordinary Thing; but the Moſaick Tranſit muſt remain a Miracle ſtill, till you can find as good Hiſtorians to vouch for the ſame commonneſs of a paſſage through the Red Sea.

The Aegyptian Tradition groundleſs.5. As for your alledging the Tradition of the Aegyptians making this Miracle only a Trick of Moſes: I think there is little to be built upon the credit of the Aegyptian Traditions, which if hearkened to, would fill all Hiſtory full of Fable. And they are leſs to be depended upon, when they ſeem to be ſet up on purpoſe to diſcredit the Nation of the Jews, whom they had ſuch a mortal Enmity to, and whom to diſcredit they coined ſo many Lies, as appears by the Books of Manetho, Lyſimachus, &c. Well, but what is this Aegyptian Tradition? It is only a report of the Memphites which was as ſtrongly oppoſed by the Heliopolitans. Vid. Clem. Alex. Strom. Lib. 1. Euſeb. Praep. Lib. 9. Cap. 27. As appears from the fragment of Artapanus his Hiſtory of the Jews. Now the Memphites (ſays he) tell, that Moſes who was well acquainted with all the Country, knowing the Time when the Tide would be out, carried over all the Multitude when the Sea was dry. But the Heliopolitans ſay otherways, That the King followed the Jews going away with what they had borrowed from the Aegyptians, bringing with him a great Army and his holy Animals. But Moſes was commanded by a Divine Voice to ſtrike the Sea with his Rod; he touched the Sea with his Rod, and the Waves giving place, he led over his Forces in a dry Tract. Now ſet this Tradition of the Heliopolitans which is very agreeable to the Letter of Scripture, and that of the Memphites, which ſeems only to be a groundleſs Cavil againſt the Jews, both together; and what do they make more for the Infidels than the Believers? And why are the Memphites to be believed againſt the Scripture-Hiſtory, more than the Heliopolitans for it? But there is no wonder to be made but that there would be variety of Traditionary Stories in the Neighbourhood about ſuch a wonderful Occurrence as this. And thus we find a like ſtory among the Ichthyophagi, who were ſituated not far off from that place of the Red-Sea, where the Iſraelites in probability went over, being over againſt Mount Sinai, Hiſt. Fab. Lib. 3. thus related by Diodorus Siculus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Among the Ichthyophagi who live hard by, this Hiſtory is handed down by tradition from their Forefathers, that once there was a mighty Ebb of the Sea, ſo that every place of this Bay was dry, which then looked green, the Sea flowing to the contrary parts. But when the Earth had for ſome time appeared, there then came again a great Tide, and made the Bay as it was before. So that you ſee, Philologus, that theſe Traditions of the Aegyptians are ſo far from diſcrediting the Truth of this Moſaical Miracle, that they tend much to ſupport it. It not being to be ſuppoſed, that the Tradition of ſuch a remarkable Action ſhould be totally loſt in the Country where it was performed; or that it ſhould be handed down with all the particulars of Truth, with which he that did it himſelf has related it. And beſides, if you conſult the Deſcriptions of this Bay given by Belon, Furerus, Thevenot, &c. You will not find that any ſuch Reflux ever happens there now, or that, though there be ſome ſhoals which incommode the Ships, Men can at any time paſs over upon dry ground.

This is pretty plauſible, Sir; but pray how will you be able to excuſe his Laws from the Abſurdities which they abound with? Now theſe ſtab the Jewiſh Religion to the Heart; for how can thoſe Laws have God Almighty for their Author, which do not ſo much as ſeem to be compoſed by wiſe Men? I cannot ſtay to run through his whole Syſtem of Laws; but for my part I look upon a great number of them to be abſurd and ridiculous, others contrary to common Juſtice, and the reſt but mean and pitiful, and unworthy of God the Author. What more ſilly than the command of not eating the blood of an Animal? as if it was worth the cognizance of a Legiſlatour to forbid Men the uſe of Black-Puddings. Is it worthy a Divine Law to forbid the ſowing of Maſlin, or that poor Folks ſhould wear Linſey-Wolſey? And does it not look a little like a jeſt gravely to eſtabliſh, that an Ox and an Aſs ſhall not be yoked together? Beſides, there are other things in the Body of his Laws, which contradict the common notions of ordinary Juſtice. What is the ſetting up in his Common-wealth ſo many Aſylums, but only making a Rendezvous, or an Alſatia, for a number of Hedg-Rogues to plague their honeſt Neighbours; His Lex Talionis is unmerciful Cruelty, that when I by chance, or in a ſcuffle, have beat out a Mans Eye, I muſt ſtand ſtill to let him bore out mine in cold blood. His redemption of Eſtates, after the year of Jubilee, is to diſcourage good Parts and Induſtry, and to entail Eſtates for ever, it may be, upon the Block-headed Heirs of thoſe particular Families which firſt laid hands upon them. His other Laws about Murder, Theft, Sacrifices, &c. are ſuch as are equaled by the meaneſt Common-wealths, and the ordinarieſt ſuperſtitions; only here are ſome things more ridiculous than are to be found elſewhere, with a deal of Injunctions about Red-Cows, Scape-Goats, and forty things more of the ſame Nature. But if God had been the Author of theſe Laws, and this Inſtitution, they had without all doubt been grounded upon admirable reaſon, excellently fitted to the benefit of Mankind, and the uſefulneſs of them to Society, and to make Men good would have been apparent to all that conſidered them; but theſe ſeem only to be an odd jumble of Arbitrary Precepts; for which there is no other but a Womans Reaſon to be given, Becauſe, forſooth, God would command them. And is not this a fine way of making Laws—

I find you are running,The Jewiſh the beſt of all Political Laws. Philologus, upon your old ſtrain, and therefore I muſt beg leave to interpoſe a little. I believe it is want of due conſideration of the Laws of Moſes, which makes you talk againſt that, which when you underſtand better, you would rather admire. For my part I look upon the Judaical to be the moſt excellent Civil Conſtitution which ever was, or ever will be in the World; and if you will but compare the three Legiſlative Books of Moſes, with what are extant of the Aegyptian, Attick, and Lacedemonian Laws, the Roman twelve Tables, their Plebiſcita, and Imperial Reſcripts, nay even when they were collected into the Digeſts, You will find, that they all fall ſhort of theſe Laws of Moſes. I do not ſpeak this at random, nor in the leaſt to detract from the Roman Laws; but conſidering the Circumſtances of the Jewiſh Nation, their Laws do, I think, far exceed the other. Indeed the Jewiſh Laws were not drawn up into ſuch an exact a Syſtematical Method, nor adorned with ſuch Artificial Terms, nor do ſo preciſely ſet out the minute Boundaries of Right and Wrong, as the Roman; but yet they are better calculated for ordinary Juſtice and Neighbourly Society;The extraordinary mercifulneſs of them. and what is better yet, for Mercy and Charity. I ſay Mercy and Charity, and I defy any Civil Conſtitution in the World to ſhew ſo many good-natur'd Laws, and enacted with ſuch a tender regard to their Fellow Creatures, as the Jews can. What more kind Conſtitution could there be than to ordain Cities of Refuge for the innocent Man-ſlayer to fly to, to avoid the impotent Anger of the Relations of the killed, which according to the Cuſtom of thoſe times, were wont immediately to revenge their Kindreds Death; thereby to give him Time to clear himſelf: which if he could not, the Law allows him to be dragged even from the Horns of the Altar, Exod. 21.14. The kind uſage which by thoſe Laws is to be given to Slaves; and the ſtripes which are not to be exceeded in puniſhing Criminals, are another Argument of the Mercifulneſs of theſe Laws above others. The great care which is taken to prevent miſchief which might happen by the flat roof'd Buildings of thoſe times by ordering Battlements to be made round them; and the penalty of Womens taking abortive potions, do confirm the ſame. The forbidding the Jews to ſuffer a Beggar among them, and not allowing new Married Men to be forced from their Wives the firſt year to the Wars, are a Tenderneſs which moſt other Nations are wanting in. Indeed the ſame Laws puniſh Adultery with Death, but then they are ſo mild as to puniſh Theft with only abundant Reſtitution. In which ſanctions you may ſee an admirable Temperament of Juſtice and Clemency; and which may ſerve for an Example to other Governments, where Adulteries which are irreparable are pretended to be recompenſed by pecuniary Mulcts, and Thefts, for which reſtitution may be made, are Capital. Nay in theſe Laws there is a tender Regard had to Beaſt themſelves, of which the forbidding to muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corn, is a ſufficient inſtance; mercifully providing that the poor Beaſt which provides ſuſtenance for us, ſhould not be denied its natural cravings after its own. And ſo it is in the caſe of the coupling an Ox and an Aſs and other 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , tenderly taking care that one Beaſt of greater ſtrength ſhould not force another poor Creature of leſs toil beyond its ability. Thus much I have thought fit in ſome few particulars to point out the Merciful Diſpoſition of theſe Laws, which is not ſo viſible in any civil Conſtitution in the World as in this.

The great Wiſdom in them.And, beſides, you may perceive as much Wiſdom and excellent Deſign running through the whole frame of it. The Diſtinction of Families and Regiſtery of their names was the moſt uſeful thing which could be in a Common-wealth; thereby to know its own ſtrength and abilities, to prevent Law-ſuits, and to ſettle Inheritances. The ſabbatical or fallow year was a noble contrivance to keep a Country in fertility, and from being worn out of heart by covetous Tillers. The weekly Sabbath, ſetting aſide the Religiouſneſs of it, was a wonderful eaſe both to Servants and Cattle, and muſt even upon this account be eſteemed a very wiſe Eſtabliſhment, which other Nations were wanting in. But their ſevere puniſhment of Idolatry of all ſorts, and the great encouragement of the Worſhip of the one true God, from whom the whole World had relapſed, is ſuch a Glory of the Judaical Laws above all other, as can never be eclipſed by all that can be ſaid againſt them by Infidel Tongues. Talk what you will of your Solon's, Lycurgus's, and Numa's, but the Idolatrous Worſhips which they eſtabliſhed by their Laws is enough to ruin their Character in the Opinion of all ſober Deiſts; whilſt they muſt needs have a ſecret eſteem for the Jewiſh Legiſlatour in ſetting the Worſhip of the one true God among his People alone, in oppoſition to the whole Idolatrous World. Nay that hoſtile odium which the Hiſtorian calls their Averſion to a free converſation with other Nations which their Law obliged them to, was that which preſerved both their Religion and their Laws from the encroaching powers of their Neighbouring Potentates: For if they had wanted this, they had been loſt in their Babylonian Captivity, and forever mixed with that Idolatrous Nation. And truly this ſurlineſs was ſuch a good piece of Policy among the Jews, that we Engliſhmen in the midſt of our complaiſance, ſhould not do amiſs to learn, who have ſo long been fond of fetching over the Cuſtoms of a Neighbouring Nation, that they ſeeing us ſo very obliging, were once in a fair way to have ſent us over their Government and Religion too.

Objections againſt particular Laws anſwered.As to your exceptions which you have raiſed againſt ſome particular Inſtances in the Moſaical Law, I think they are not very material. The forbidding of the Blood of Animals for food was a Noachical Precept, as well as Moſaical; which God by a new ſanction thought fit under Moſes his diſpenſation to continue. And at the firſt giving of it in Noah's time it was a very proper Injunction, and highly rational: For God at the ſame time gave Mankind a Licence to eat the Fleſh of Animals, excepting only the Blood. This being as it were a kind of Sacrament, or Token, to put them in mind of the tenderneſs they ought to have in ſhedding Human Blood; as appears by the Context, where Murder is forbidden, and Blood is required for Blood. As to your objection againſt the Law of ſowing mixed ſeed, I preſume the reaſon which Philo gives is ſufficient, that the ſtrength of the ground might not be worn out thereby, and no incouragement given to the Husbandman's Covetouſneſs. The wearing linſey woolſey was probably a proud fantaſtick faſhion of the Heathens at that time, which therefore the Jews were forbid to imitate. Though further I believe all the three Conjunctions mentioned, Deut. 22. of yoking the Ox with an Aſs, the mingling of ſeeds, and wearing Linnen mixed with Woollen have, as Theodoret obſerves, ſomething emblematical mixed with the precept, to make Men have the greater abhorrence of all venereal commixtures contrary to nature. As for the Lex Talionis of the Jews, let it have been as rigid as you would make it, it is no more than what was practiſed in other Nations, and had a place among the celebrated Roman Laws in the 12 Tables.Nuct. Anic. Lib. 20. c. 1. And as it is ſet down in Aulus Gellius is thus; SI MEMBRƲM. RƲPERIT. NI. CƲM. EO. PACIT. TALIO. ESTO. But the Jews ſay that for Mutilations where Death did not enſue, a pecuniary Mulct was generally accepted and granted to the maimed perſon; and that the Judge did never inflict the Talio, but upon the deſire of the injured party, who unleſs he were very malicious would rather accept a recompence in Money. And ſo for the Return of mortgaged Eſtates to the owners at the Jubilees, there is no manner of injuſtice in this Law, becauſe the Eſtate could be ſold for no more Money than an Annuity from the time of ſale till the year of Jubilee, was worth, and it was at the purchaſer's peril if he ventured more upon it. And there was incouragement enough for Men of Parts and Induſtry to raiſe themſelves by purchace only of Annuities for fifty years: Nay further this Law ſeems to be excellently contrived to hinder the encroaching purchaces of Covetous Men, which has given ſo much diſturbance in all Common-wealths, and which occaſioned the Leges Agrariae, which gave ſuch great Content to the RomanLiv. Hiſt. Lib. 4. cap. 48. Lib. 6. c. 11.14. Citizens. So Ariſtotle in his Politicks ſays,Ariſt. Pol. Lib. 2. c. 7. That Solon made a Law, and that other Countries have the ſame, that every Man ſhould not purchaſe as much Eſtate as he had a mind to. And again, the Law forbids to ſell a Man's Houſhould goods; Id. Lib. 6. c. 4. as the Law of the Locri, which obliges a Man not to ſell them unleſs he can make it out that ſome great calamity has befel him. Beſides, the Law commands to keep thoſe ancient Patrimonies which came by Inheritance. And ſo again in another place. In many Cities it is eſtabliſhed by Law, that no one ſhould have power to alienate the ancient Inheritances. And there is a Law which is ſaid to be of Oxylus, which injoyns that no one ſhould lend Money to another, and take his Eſtate as a Pawn for it. So that if this be a fault in the Moſaical Laws, the Attick and Roman are liable to the ſame Cenſure. As for the Red Heifer which is commanded to be Sacrificed, Numb. 19.2. the reaſon moſt probably is, that ſuch an one is more beautiful and choice, ſuch as the Ancients made uſe of for Sacrifice; of whichPlut. Iſid. & Oyſr. Plutarch ſays the Aegyptians were ſo ſcrupulous, that if a Red-Bull had but one black or white Hair, he was unfit for Sacrifice. And laſtly for the Scape-Goat, I take that to be an Expiatory Sacrifice purpoſely deſigned to be a Type of our bleſſed Saviour, and was expiatory only by relation to his ſufferings.

For my part I have no great liking to your Types and Figures; but why ſhould not theſe Laws be given in oppoſition to the Zabii, thoſe ancient Idolaters, which Learned Men of late have found out; and from whoſe Doctrines methinks they give a pretty handſome Rationale of the Moſaick Laws.

Let this Rationale be as pretty as you pleaſe, I believe it is very falſe, and that there were never any more ſuch a Nation as the Zabii, than the Ʋtopians. They never had any more being than in the Dreams of the falſifying Jews, who four or five hundred years • go writ ſome Sham-Books, under their Name. I do not doubt but that Maimonides ſaw them, and was impoſed upon by them, ſo that the cheat does not lie at his door. The Zabii among the ancient Arabians were eſteemed a Name for Sorcerers,Aul. Gellius Lib. 4. c. 1. or Fortune-Tellers, and ſignified no more than the Chaldaei Az. 2. in Latin and the Gypſies in Engliſh. And thus 'tis uſed in the Alchoran Hiſt. Dyn. p. 281. : and Abu • -Pharaj • us ſet out by Dr. Pocock, ſays their Profeſſion was the ſame with that of the ancient Chaldeans. Now ſhould not we make pretty work of it, if we ſhould go to give an account of the old Aegyptian rites and cuſtoms, and the Coprick Language, from the lies and cant of our vagrant Gypſies? and truly the caſe is the very ſame of thoſe Books which Maimonides relies upon, that pretend to give an account of the old Chaldean Idolaters in Abraham's and Moſes his time, and to be wrote as long ago as that.Vid. Maimon. More Nevoch. Part. III. Cap. 29. Now if theſe Zabian Books, which Maimonides and his Followers ſo much rely upon, prove to be Forgeries, then all this Zabian Hypotheſis fall to the ground. Now theſe Zabian Books which Maimonides ſaw, were one called Haiſtamchus, another Hattel eſhmaoth, or of ſpeaking Images; another called Tamtam, another named Haſſcharabh, another of the Degrees of the Celeſtial Orbs, and of the Aſcendant Figures in each degree, another Book of ſpeaking Images, a certain Book attributed to Hermes, a Book wrote by Iſaack the Zabian, which diſputes for the Law of the Zabians, and his great Book of the Cuſtoms and Particularities of the Zabians. Beſides, another Book of Agriculture. Now is not this a pretty Library of Books, for the Abrahamical and Moſaical Times. But if they are ſo ancient as is pretended, how came they never to be heard of, but among the Jews in Aegypt, or Spain, about four or five hundred years ago? One would have thought, that ſome of the Writers of the Old, or New Teſtament, ſhould have ſpoke of ſome of them, or ſome of the Learned Fathers, who underſtood the Orientals, as St. Jerom and Origen, who were ſo inquiſitive this way; methinks, they ſhould have ſomewhere mentioned them. But to go no further, ſome of theſe Books carry forgery in their very Titles. The Book of ſpeaking Images looks like the ſtories of the Talismans which the Arabian talks ſo much of about that time. The Book of Celeſtial Orbs and Aſcendants looks like a forgery about Rambam's time, when the Follies of Judicial Aſtrology among the Arabians were at the height. But Iſaack the Zabian was infatuated to give himſelf that name, pretending to be older than Abraham, and yet take his Son's Name. Or however his Jewiſh Name muſt needs tell all the World, he was no Zabian. And beſides Iſaack, in his great Book, treats of the Temples dedicated by the Zabii to Intellectual Forms; whence any body would know, the Book to be wrote by ſome one, who had been bred in a School of the Peripatetick Philoſophy. And the Diſputes in thoſe Books about the Eternity of the World ſhew, they were compiled by ſome one, who had been where Ariſtotle's Arguments upon that ſubject had been bandied about. I ſhould weary you, to tell you all the ſimple Tales which Maimonides quotes of theſe Books; which are all compoſed in the very ſtrain of the Talmud; from whence any body may gueſs their Original. They make Abraham very doughtily diſputing with a great King of the Zabians, That there is another God beſides the Sun, and that the Sun is but the Hatchet in the hand of God. For which the King claps Abraham up into Priſon; but notwithſtanding that, Abraham diſputes there ſtill; ſo that the King at laſt fearing, leſt Abraham ſhould do miſchief among his People by his ſubtile Diſputations, ſeizes all his Goods, and baniſhes him to the further part of the Eaſt. Now does this look like a Zabian, or rather not like a Jew, who had a mind to aggrandize the great Parts of his Progenitor? Beſides, the fooliſhneſs of that Writer is betrayed, by making ſuch great Monarchies in thoſe Ages of the World, when Kingdoms were generally confined to Cities, or ſmall Provinces, as appears by Abraham's fighting half a ſcore of ſuch Kings with 318 Men. The ſame Books tell you ſtrange Tales, of Adam, and Seth, and Noah, &c. which plainly ſhew them to be wrote by one, who was acquainted with the Moſaick Genealogy. That Adam was the Apoſtle of the Moon, and exhorted Men to her Worſhip; that Seth was a Renegado to his Father's Worſhip, and ſo was Noah, who condemned Image-worſhip. That Adam went into a far Country nigh India, and brought home a Tree with Flowers, Leaves, and Branches of Gold; and likewiſe a Tree of Stone, with the Leaves of another green Tree, whoſe Leaves would not burn in the Fire; that was ſo large that ten thouſand Men of the bigneſs of Adam might ſhelter themſelves under it, and that the two Leaves which he brought with him were ſo large, that each of them would cloath two Men. But I will tire you no longer with theſe inſipid Talmudical Lies, which methinks any body might gueſs, a Jew to be the Author of. But however, what rare ſtuff is this to explain Scripture by? One would wonder how it ſhould come into the heads of Learned Men to think, that God in framing his Sacred Laws ſhould have any regard to ſuch idle Tales. For my part I pity them when I ſee them ſo ſweating themſelves in ſuch a ſilly Enterpriſe, and throwing away ſo much Labour and Learning to no manner of Purpoſe: and beſides the great Advantage they give to the Infidels, to expoſe the Laws of God, when they ſee that Chriſtians ſettle them upon ſo ſlender a foundation.

It behoves you to be as zealous for your Religion as you can, for you find we get ground upon you every day. We live in a very prying Generation, and 'tis not laying your hand over a ſore place in your Religion, that will ſecure it now, you muſt maintain your cauſe by pure dint of Argument, or loſe it. But what ſay you now to your great Legiſlator, when we ſhall prove, that all his Celebrated Religion which he pretended to give the Jews from Heaven, was only pinched from the Worſhip of the Heathen Aegyptians? And this your own Divines are ſenſible of at laſt, and, by reaſon of the plain Evidence of the Caſe, have given over the Cauſe to us. For ſome of them have proved the Chriſtian Religion to be all Jewiſh; and others the Jewiſh Religion to be derived from the Heathen: and therefore for my part, I am for taking my Religion at the Fountain head, and ſo will continue a Primitive Heathen in defiance to all innovation. I have nothing to ſay to Chriſtianity, for the Judaical Laws are the matter now in hand, and theſe, I ſay, were moſt of them (the Ceremonial eſpecially) nothing but Aegyptian Rites, which Moſes brought over with him thence; which is a conſiderable Argument againſt the Divinity of them: for to be ſure God Almighty would never have copied his Laws from a parcel of ſimple Idolaters. To begin with Circumciſion, which is pretended to be the Characteriſtick of the Jews, that to be ſure was taken from the Aegyptians, or ſome other Nation; that Ceremony being uſed not only in Aegypt, but in Aethiopia, by the Colchi and Arabians. Thus the Ʋrim and Thummim was enjoyned in imitation of that Locket of Jewels, which hung from the Neck of the Aegyptian High-Prieſt, mentioned byHiſt. Fab. Lib. 1. c. 37. Diodorus Siculus. The Linnen-Garments which the Jewiſh High-Prieſt and other inferiour ones wore, were copied from the Aegyptian Prieſt, who wore the like, as Herodotus Herod. Hiſt. Lib. 2. c. 37. and Plutarch Plutarch de Iſide & Oſyr. relate. The Cherubims were only the imitation of Apis his Hieroglyphick, or Image the Bull, or of thoſe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ſo much in faſhion among the Aegyptians; as the Image of Sphinx upon their Temple Doors does evince. And ſo was the Ark of the Covenant fetched from the uſe of the Ciſta, in the Rites of the Aegyptian Oſyris, the Orgia of Bacchus, and the Eleuſinian Sacra. The Feaſts of New Moons were taken from the like practice, among the Heathen; and ſo were the Jewiſh Purifications from their Luſtrations. And laſtly the Temple of Jeruſalem, was but a Copy of thoſe Aegyptians, who are obſerved by Herodotus Herod. c. 4. , to be the firſt Authors of Altars, Images and Temples. And what I pray becomes of your Religion now, when the Foundation of it was borrowed, you ſee, from the moſt ſtupid of all the Heathen Idolaters, that fell down and Worſhiped the very Pot-herbs of their Garden?

I am heartily ſorry that the learned Author De Legibus Hebraeorum has put a keen Sword into the Infidels hands,Jewiſh Rites not derived from the Aegyptian. the better to attack Religion with, which their blunt Arguments would have been leſs able to do. Not that I think, if Dr. Spencer's ſuppoſition ſhould be true, that the Judaical Rites were derived from the Aegyptian; that the Infidels would abſolutely get the better of us. For 'tis poſſible that God Almighty might make ſuch condeſcentions to the hardneſs of the Jews hearts and their ſlaviſh hankering after the Pomp of the Aegyptian Worſhips, as to allow them in ſome particulars of their Ceremonies. But I think there is no neceſſity of granting this; for all the Rites commanded by the Jewiſh Law ſeem either perfectly ſet up in oppoſition to their ſuperſtitions, or are ſuch as were practiſed in common with them, and the ancient Patriarchs, or elſe were ſuch ordinary performances in Religious Worſhip, as no Nation could eaſily avoid. I confeſs, I am far from the other opinion of thoſe who aſſert, That the Aegyptians, and others of the Heathen World, learned all theſe Religious Acts from the Jews, becauſe ſome of them they might learn from their common Fore-Fathers, and others they might jump upon by chance, or be led to them by the natural Tendency of the thing. There are a Thouſand things which Men do very alike, and yet neither of them can be ſaid to learn or copy from one another; nor can be ſo much as ſaid to dream of what the other did. Indeed, Men of Wit and Learning may make a pother about them, ſhew their own parts in maintaining a Paradox, and amuſe unwary People; but they can make nothing ſolidly out in ſuch a manner. To make uſe of an odd Inſtance. I will undertake to take an ordinary Scrivener's Conveyance, that is drawn up after the moſt blundering Rate, and put it into a Learned hand that will vouchſafe to lay out time this way; and he ſhall fetch your Parallel caſes for every period or word out of the Antiquities of Greece and Rome, bring like quotations to every line out of the Codes and Pandects, alledge appoſite ſayings out of Tully and Demoſthenes, Libanius and Themiſtius; ſo that the Scrivener might almoſt ſeem to have ſtollen the Conveyance out of theſe Books: whereas perhaps the poor Man never heard a word of them in all his Life. And truly I think Dr. Spencer's Book is but a Project of the ſame Nature. He finds that ſome things in the Jewiſh and the Heathen Ceremonies agree, and therefore reſolves the firſt was derived from the latter. Now 'tis an eaſy thing for a learned Man, that has leiſure enough, to pick up out of ſuch a number of Heathen Books, which are extant, a great many expreſſions in their Explication of Heathen Rites, which may make them look ſomething like the Jewiſh Ceremonies; and yet in reality they might be no more alike than the Scrivener's Conveyance to Cicero's Oration pro Milone. But to ſpeak to the particulars which you have mentioned:

1. Circumciſion, Circumciſion not from the Aegyptians. though it were not a Rite purely Judaical, yet it was firſt given to Abraham, and ſo deſcended down to all his Poſterity; and as to what other uſe of it there was in other Nations, it was learned from him and his Off-ſpring. As for the uſe of Circumciſion among all the Iſmaelitiſh Race in Arabia, and among the Edomites and other Deſcendants from Eſau and Abraham's Sons by Ketura they being of the Seed of Abraham as well as the Jews, it is no wonder that they maintained their Paternal Rite as well as the other. As for the Colchi, Grotius has proved them to be probably of the Ten Tribes carried away by Salmanaſſer, for the Scholiaſt upon Ariſtophanes declares, that they own themſelves to be of Jewiſh Extraction. And if the Teſtimony of Alexander Polyhiſtor, Joſ. Lib. 1. c. 16. quoted by Joſephus be to be credited, that the name of Africa came from Afer the Son of Abraham by Ketura, who planted a Colony there; then we have an eaſy account how Circumciſion came to the Aethiopians alſo. There remain then only the Aegyptians, and why they might not learn it from Abraham, or Joſeph, eſpecially when he was in his grandeur in Pharoah's Court, I confeſs I could never ſee any good Reaſon. Indeed, it is ſomething difficult to think, that a whole Nation ſhould learn ſuch a troubleſome Rite of a Stranger. But the whole People of the Aegyptians were not circumciſed only the Hierophantae, and the Prieſts.Epiph. Har. 30. And they might take this up in emulation to Joſeph, that they might not ſeem to be out-done by him in any extraordinary mark of Holineſs; as the Magicians vied with Moſes in pretending to do the ſame Miracles with him. And I take it to be plain, that no other Nation made uſe of an univerſal Circumciſion of all their Males, but the Jews only. The Aegyptians had among them a ſort of a Female Circumciſion mentioned by Strabo, a cuſtom never dreamt of among the Jews. And 'tis evident that the Gentiles generally believed that Circumciſion was the Characteriſtick only of a Jew, or elſe thoſe reproachful names given to the Jews upon this account, ſuch as verpus, recutitus, curtus, &c. mentioned by Juvenal, Martial and others, have no ſenſe in them; they being deſigned to ſtigmatize the Jews by them, for a particular ſingularity in this matter above other Nations; which if ſo many Nations, as you pretend, had uſed, there would be no ground for. But we never find, that theſe odd names were given to the Aegyptians, Arabians, the Colchi, or the Aethiopians; and therefore 'tis plain, that they were not univerſally circumciſed, as the Jews were.

2. And ſo for the Ʋrim and Thummim, Nor Ʋrim and Thummim. although the Heathen Aegyptians might uſe ſomething like it, yet 'tis more probable, as Grotius ſays, that they did it ut pueri virorum res imitantur, imitate this as Boys uſe to do what is done by Men; than that this uſage ſhould be taken from the Heathen: This being the Cuſtom of the malicious Daemons, to put their Idolatrous Worſhippers upon, as may be ſeen in many particulars, as learned Men have proved at large. There are two Authors which make mention of this analogous Rite of the Aegyptians, Diod. Hiſt. Fab. Lib. Ael. Var. Hiſt. Lib. 14. c. 24. Diodorus Siculus, and Aelian. Diodorus ſays that the Chief Juſtice of Aegypt had an Image of Precious Stones hanging from his Neck by a golden Chain, which they called Alethea, or Truth. And that the Cauſes then began, when the Chief Juſtice had fitted to himſelf this Image of Truth. And Elian relates the ſame not much unlike. Of old among the Aegyptians the Prieſts were Judges. And the Chief Judge was the ancienteſt among them, who gave judgment to all. Now he of all Men ought to be the moſt Juſt and Impartial. He had an Image about his Neck of Saphire Stone, which was called the Image of Truth. And Diodorus adds further, that after the Litigants had twice given their Libels to the Judges, then the 30 Judges confer among themſelves, and the Chief Juſtice does 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , apply the Image of Truth to the other ſide. Now in all this there is nothing ſo like the Ʋrim and Thummim, as does neceſſarily evince that this Jewiſh cuſtom was derived from the Aegyptian. For in Aegypt this was the Ornament of the Chief Juſtice, among the Jews the Enſigns of the High-Prieſt. Among the Jews, it was a ſtanding Oracle to conſult in extraordinary affairs of ſtate, among the Aegyptians uſed in ordinary Juſtice. Nor does it appear to me, that this Aegyptian Alethea was any more, than an Honorary Enſign of the chief Judge, who could not regularly perform his Office without it, and had nothing more Oracular in it than a Serjeant's Coif, or an Alderman's Chain. And Petrus Vallenſis in a Letter wrote from Grand Cairo ſeems to have ſeen a Mummy of one of theſe old Judges, which does aſcertain the Figure of the Aegyptian Alethea. Where he ſays he had ſeen a Mummy, about whoſe Neck a Golden Collar was painted, hanging from his Neck like the Knights of the Golden Fleece. And in the middle upon his Breaſt, was the repreſentation of a Plate of Gold, with the Figure of a Bird upon it. Epiſt. 18. Now this is very different from the Ʋrim and Thummim of the High-Prieſt, which was made of Cloth beſet with Pretious ſtones. All the difficulty is what Diodorus means by his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by applying the Alethea to the contrary ſide. Now ſince no Hiſtory mentions any thing oracular in this; we cannot fancy it more than only ſome Hieroglyphical Memento to the Judges, of the Regard they ought to bear to Juſtice and Truth; or to the Witneſſes or Litigants, which the Chief Juſtice did often exhibit to them, to put them in mind of their Duty. But you will ſay, how then came the Jews to have an Uſage ſo very like the Aegyptian, if they did not learn it from thence? Why, I anſwer it was a common Enſign of Honour in all Nations, to wear a Golden Chain, and many other People have uſed it as well as the Jews and the Aegyptians. Thus not only Pharaoh, when he had a mind to advance Joſeph to honour and a place of great Truſt, put a Chain of Gold about his Neck, Gen. 4.42. but the King of Babylon did the ſame to Daniel, Dan. 5.29. For as Crowns and Scepters in all Nations have been Enſigns of the Regal Authority, ſo are Gold Chains and Rings Tokens of the higher Honour, and uſed not only by the Eaſtern Satrapae, but even by the noble Gauls in the Weſt. As is evident by what Pliny relates of the riſe of the Family of the Torquati at Rome from the firſt Torquatus, Plin. Hiſt. Lib. 20. who was called ſo from his killing a noble Gaul and taking his Chain from him, yet reeking with blood, and puting it about his own Neck. Now what great occaſion for wonder is there that the Chief Juſtice of Aegypt had a Chain, with a remarkable Medal appendant to it different from other Nobles? Or why might not the Jewiſh High-Prieſt hang his Breaſt-Plate by a Golden Chain, without going to Aegypt for the Invention? For any other Nation could have taught that wonderful contrivance as well as the Aegyptian. And as to the Appendants, there is ſo little agreement between them, viz. a Cloth a ſpan ſquare beſet with Jewels, and a Golden Medal repreſenting the Figure of a Bird, that one of theſe can hardly be ſaid to have given riſe to the other.

3.Prieſts linnen Garments not from Aegypt. As for your borrowing the uſe of Linnen only for the Garments of the Prieſts; I think the juſt contrary thereof is true, and that the Jews in this were rather perfectly oppoſite to the Aegyptians, than their Imitators. The Breaſt-Plate and Robe of the Jewiſh High-Prieſt were ordered to be made of Scarlet, Blue and Purple Woolen Cloth, only embroidered with wreaths of fine Linnen. But the uſe of Woollen Cloth was, as Plutarch ſays, execrable to the Aegyptian Prieſts, de Iſ. & Oſyr. And Herodotus tells us,Herod. Lib. 2. c. 37. that they wore only linnen, and ſhooes of the Papyrus, and that it is unlawful to them to uſe any other garments or ſhooes. But the Jewiſh High-Prieſts Robes were rather like the Babylonians than the Aegyptians. For of the Babylonians Herodotus writes thus, This is the faſhion of their Clothing. They uſe a linnen Garment down to the Ankles, over this they put on another of Wooll, and over all a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ,Id. Lib. 1. a kind of a ſhort white Coat, which does exactly reſemble the Ephod. And beſides he relates this of the Laity among the Aegyptians, That they wear linnen Coats fringed about the Legs, which they call Calaſyris, over this they put white woollen Garments, but they do not come into the Temples with them, nor are buried in them, that being profane. Now to take all this together, it ſeems rather that Moſes his Laws, concerning the Sacerdotal Robes, were given in pure oppoſition to the Aegyptians; by ordering that the Jewiſh High-Prieſt, the moſt Sacred Perſon of all, ſhould wear ſome of his Garments of Linnen and others of Woollen, like the ordinary Aegyptians in their common converſation; and that the ſubordinate Prieſts ſhould be dreſt in the Temple but like the common Laity in Aegypt.

Not the Cherubim.4. And ſo for the figure of the Cherubim, there is as little ground for the pretended imitation in this as the other. There is no conſtat in any records of the Aegyptian Antiquities, that there was any thing among them like a Mercy-Seat or Covering over the Ark, adorned with ſuch like figures. I think there is no neceſſity to aſſert, that this Covering of the Ark was to be abſolutely plain, without any manner of Sculpture. And if the figure of ſomething muſt be engraved, why not the figure of Cherubim as well as any thing elſe? Do you think that Imagery was proper only to the Aegyptians? Or do you think that all Nations in the World muſt be beholding to them to make a figure of any thing? Had not they Eyes to behold poſtures, and fancies to delineate them without going to Aegypt for them? Nay is there not in this Ordinance a particular oppoſition to the Aegyptian Idolatry? For their Temples were generally filled with the Images of Monkeys, and Calves, and Serpents, the repreſentations of real Animals, which according to the natural Deiſm of thoſe Times, they fancied to be Parts or exhibitions of the Deity, and had ſupreme worſhip given them. But Moſes here orders figures to be made,Antiq. Lib. 3. Cap. 6. which had little or no reſemblance of any thing in the World; and therefore Joſephus ſays they had a form 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , like nothing that is ſeen by Men. Their Images had divine Worſhip paid to them, and Temples conſecrated to their Honour; but theſe by the Moſaick Inſtitution were made ſubſervient to the ſupreme Deity, and conſtituted Attendants upon his Mercy-Seat; as it were in deſpight to the Aegyptian Polytheiſm, ſhewing that theſe were the repreſentations only of Angelick Natures, who were ſo far from being Gods, that they were only God's Miniſtring Spirits. What was the particular figure of theſe Cherubims, at this diſtance is hard to imagine. Indeed, Grotius and others have very ingeniouſly conjectured from the Creature • ſeen by Ezekiel in his Viſions, Ezek. 1.5. and 10.15. which he calls Cherubims, that they had the Face of a Man, the Wings of an Eagle, the Mane of a Lyon, and the Feet of an Ox. And by this Grotius will have the Diſpenſations o • the Divine Providence by the miniſtery of Angels Symbolically repreſented; The Lyon repreſenting the Severity of his Juſtice, the Eagle the Celerity of his Bounty; The Man his Goodneſs and Mercy; and the Ox the ſlowneſs of his Puniſhment; which comes, (as the Greek Proverb ſays) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with an Ox's foot. Whether or no the Angelick Appearances in this Form were common to the Patriarchs, I ſhall not now diſpute; but the Ideas of the Cherubim ſeems to have been ordinary enough among the Jews, by Moſes his not deſcribing them • s he does other Things; and was as • ell known as the painting among us of • n Angel, in the figure of a Beautiful Tall Youth with Wings. Among all the • egyptian repreſentations, I do not find • ny thing like this to repreſent the Ange • ck Natures; and therefore 'tis in vain to • ring in their other Simulacra 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which were Hieroglyphicks of their Oſyris, • ſis, &c. which they worſhiped not as Angelick natures depending upon the • upreme Deity, but as Sympiternal Deities • hemſelves. Neither need we grant that his Hieroglyphical, or Symbolical Imagery was at all owing to the Aegyptians, more • han to other Nations; that ſort of enig • atical repreſentation being in uſe over • ll the Eaſtern Countries, and even the Teraphim in uſe in the Patriarchs time, Gen. 31.19. And as for the Image of Sphynx, which was frequently Pictured upon the Doors of the Aegyptian Temples, as Clemens Alex. relates, Strom. 5. that cannot be conceived in any wiſe to have contributed an Origin to the Cherubim, not only becauſe they were ſituated in a quite different place; but becauſe the occaſion of the Sphynx being painted there, was to be an Hieroglyphick, that a great many of the Ceremonies in their Temples were enigmatical, and had another hidden meaning more than their outward one did declare.

Nor the Ark.5. Indeed Dr. Spencer has amaſſed together an abundance of Learning to prove, that the Aegyptians, and Ancient Idolaters made uſe of a Ciſta, an Ark or Cheſt,Plut. de Iſid. in their ſuperſtitions. That the Stoliſtae, or thoſe of Oſyris his Wardrobe, made uſe of a Cheſt or Ark; which any body might gueſs, without that Doctor's learning, was to keep their Cloths in He ſhews a great Deal of the uſe of the Ciſta in the Orgian and Eleuſinian Sacra.

Now what a mighty wonder is this, that theſe Idolatrous Prieſts, who pretended to ſuch an abundance of myſterious and abſconded Rites in their ſuperſtitions, ſhould make uſe of a Cheſt to keep their Trinkets in, from the Eyes of the Vulgar. If they had been laid open to every Bodies Eyes, all their myſterious Sacredneſs had been loſt; which was kept up by their lying under Lock and Key. Beſides, theſe Prieſts of Cybele and Bacchus, were a ſort of Itinerant Gypſies, that carried about their Trinkets from place to place, and therefore they muſt have a Cheſt, or ſomething like it, to carry their Raree-ſhow in; unleſs you would have them put them in their Pockets. For my part, I cannot imagine any Analogy between theſe Ciſtae, and the Ark of the Covenant; only they were both Repoſitories, the one for the Law, the other for the Idolaters lewd Fopperies. If the Law was to be laid up carefully, why was not a Cheſt a very proper and appoſite Convenience for this Purpoſe? Or why muſt they needs copy from Aegypt ſuch a wonderful Contrivance? Certainly no Nation in the World could be ſo ſtupid, as not preſently to think of this themſelves. But who can think without horror that God Almighty ſhould inſtitute his Sacred Ark in imitation of the Lewd Ciſtae of the Heathen? Read but Clemens Alexandrinus his Protrepticon, and ſee what thoſe Ciſtae were filled with, Phalli, Pudenda Bacchi, &c. and let any modeſt Chriſtian judge, if it can be ſuppoſed, that the Purity of the Divine Law could condeſcend, to be the Ape to ſuch hor • id Debauchery.

6.Feaſts of the New-Moons not Aegyptian. The reaſon why the Feaſts of the New Moons were commanded to the • ews, was not, I conceive, any wiſe in • mitation of the Gentiles; but to engage them more particularly to Piety, and in obſervation of the Ancient Patriarchal Uſage. They were enjoyned them as a pious Inſtitution, that ſome portion of each diviſion of Time might be kept Holy to give a Bleſſing to the reſt; for as the Sabbath was ſet aſide to be kept Holy in the Week, the Paſſover, Feaſt of Tabernacles, &c. for the Year; ſo was the Feaſt of the New-Moon ordained to give a Bleſſing to the Month. Indeed, it cannot be denied, but that the Heathen • kept holy the New-Moons too, whe • they offered up conſiderable Sacrifice to the Gods, as Meurſius, and Monſieu • Petit have ſufficiently proved, and D • Spencer more at large. And it is plai • from that paſſage of Demoſthenes, • rat. I. in Ariſtog. when he ſays, that in the New-Moons all com • up to the Acropolis, and ſupplicate the God to give Bleſſings to the City and themſelves. But then I can never aſſent, that Moſe • took this from the Heathens. It rathe • ſeems to me to be a practice of the Tru • Worſhipers of God through all Age • down from the earlieſt Times; and f • deſcended both to the Jews and Gentile • from their common Progenitor Noah • And it is yet more probable to aſſig • theſe Feaſts an Original in thoſe ancien • Times, when perhaps the Lunar wa • the only Year, the Solar Motion being not yet ſufficiently adjuſted; and then the New-Moon muſt with them have all the Solemnity of a New-Years Day. Which Opinion will be yet more ſatisfactory, if we conſider the obſervation which a learned Man has made,Jo. Cler. in Numb. 28. That God does not bid the Jews remember to keep holy the New-Moons, as he does the Sabbath, but only gives them ſuch rites to obſerve them with, ſuppoſing they knew, that they were to be obſerved before.

7.Nor waſhings. And as for Waſhings and Luſtrations, I cannot aſſent that they had by any means their Original from the Gentiles Luſtration, but were probably brought into uſe by the firſt Sacrificers in the Eaſtern Countries, and might be as old as Noah or Adam. For waſhing the Hands and the Feet was a part of the Ancient Cultus, or Neatneſs, which was a preparation which was never omitted, when they enterprized any thing which required Neatneſs or Reverence. Thus we find it uſed always before Meals in Abraham's time, Gen. 18.3, 19, 2. And without doubt natural Reaſon would ſuggeſt that the ſame reſpect was owing to God Almighty, by all who approached his Altar at a Sacrifice; and was as eaſy and natural a Token of their Reverence they owed to him, as putting off the ſhoes and bowing down. And I doubt not, but the ſprinkling the People with Water mixed with the Aſhes of the Sacrifice, was as ancient: It being uſed; not only in the Jewiſh, but in the Roman Sacrifices. Ovid. Faſt. Lib. 4. For it was thought requiſite that all, who were preſent, ſhould in ſome meaſure partake of the Sacrifice; therefore as I ſhewed you before in the beginning of this Diſcourſe, ſome eat of it there, and others carried pieces of it home with them. But in expiatory Sacrifices, for the whole People where the Sacrifice would not ſuffice for all to eat of it, it was thought ſufficient to mix the Aſhes of it with Water, and ſo to ſprinkle them all with it, that ſo all might receive ſomething of the Expiation.

Nor the Temple.8. After ſo many Ages from the firſt uſe of Temples, it is a very difficult matter exactly to aſcertain the Original of them. 'Tis true, Herodotus ſays the Aegyptians firſt invented them, becauſe the Greeks derived moſt of their Cuſtoms from that Nation, and therefore the Greek Writers ſeldom fetch the Original of any thing any further. I am apt to think that there was not a general uſe of Temples, till ſuch time as Idolatry ſpread over the World, and had dedicated the Tombs of Heroes to a ſuperſtitious uſe. But yet long before this, and as ancient as the Noachinal Times, there were not wanting Temples, or Houſes dedicated to a Religious uſe. For good Men in all Ages have uſed a Religious Worſhip in Publick, even in Enos his time, when men began to call upon the name of the Lord in publick Congregations, after Mankind was conſiderably increaſed; and therefore in great Cities and ſetled Polities the Convenience of Temples for appointed places to meet together in, and to defend from the Injuries of the Weather, could not be long wanting. The ancienteſt places of Religious Worſhip I take to be Groves; which were uſed by the Patriarchs, and were Lawful places of Worſhip till ſuch time as, by reaſon of the Idolatrous ſuperſtition they were applied to, they were taken away by the Moſaical Law. So Lucian ſays, that Woods and Mountains were firſt conſecrated to the Gods. Lib de Sacrif. And Pliny ſpeaking of Trees ſays, Haec fuere Numinum Templa, priſco que ritu ſimplicia rura etiam nunc Deo praecellentem arborem dicant. Theſe were formerly the Temples of the Gods, and thoſe rural places which maintain the ancient and ſimple Rites, are wont to dedicate an extraordinary Tree to ſome God. Thus Gen. 21.33. Abraham planted a Grove in Berſheba, and called there on the name of the Lord the Everlaſting God. And it probably was in a Grove, where Abraham deſigned to Sacrifice Iſaac, and where the Ram was caught in a Thicket by his Horns, Gen. 22.13. And ſo probably was the place where Jacob ſlept, Gen. 28.22. which he ſays ſhall be called the houſe of God. Not that from hence can be concluded that there were no Temples at that time, becauſe the Patriarchs did not uſe them. For they living a Paſtoral unſettled Life could not have convenience to build them, and were therefore contented with the more ancient Cuſtom; but this very laſt Text implies there were at that time Temples or Houſes of God, becauſe Jacob, Metaphorically, calls that ſtone, or Place ſo, which is an undoubted Alluſion to the Temples of thoſe Times. And in all probability Noah built a Temple preſently after the Flood, for the Convenience of Religious worſhip. He is in Scripture expreſly ſaid, to have built an Altar, Gen. 8.20. which is directly contradictory to Herodotus, who make the Aegyptians Inventors of Altars too. And why he might not build a Temple, as well as an Altar, I ſee no reaſon. Nay prophane Hiſtory gives a great deal of incouragement to the Conjecture that he did. For Lucian in his deſcription of the famous Syrian Temple before mentioned, ſays, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Moſt Men ſay that this Temple was built by Deucalion, namely that Deucalion in whoſe time the Deluge happened. So that this ancient Tradition makes Temples as old as the Flood, and does confirm, that Noah was the firſt builder of Temples. And Janus, whom learned Men will have to be another name for Noah too, is ſaid by Macrobius out of Zeno, primum in Italiâ templa feciſſe, & ritus inſtituiſſe Sacrorum, Lib. 1. Sat. cap. 9. He firſt built Temples in Italy, and inſtituted Sacred Rites. So that upon the whole I think, there is vaſtly more reaſon to think, that the uſe of a Temple among the Jews came rather down to them by Patriarchal Tradition, than that it was copied from the Aegyptian Idolatry.

And I doubt not,Other Nations have Cuſtoms as like the Jewiſh but that a great many uſages in the Jewiſh Law came the ſame way, and were taken up both by the Heathens and them from their common Progenitours; and ſometimes it may be by chance and ordinary convenience. And I dare ſay, a learned Man might as eaſily prove that the Jewiſh Ceremonies were derived from any other Nation, where the like are to be found, as the Aegyptians. Vid. Ap. Lib. 3. Cap. 4. Philoſtratus deſcribes the Veſtment of the ancient Indian Prieſts juſt like the Jewiſh; and ſays they uſe Oil in their Conſecration. And Strabo ſays it is a great crime there (as among the Jews) to offer a maimed Victim;Str. Lib. 15. that they have a Lex Talionis, and that there is a Law, that no Indian ſhould be a Slave. The Brachmans, the Indian Prieſts wear Bells about them like the Jewiſh High-Prieſt. Slaves there have their Ears bor'd through, and a perpetual Light is kept in their Temples; Women and New-Born Children are unclean till they are purified with Luſtrations. They puniſh Inceſt and Adultery with death. Only the Brachmans like the Levites muſt go into the inward Parts of the Temple. They are defiled by a dead Body, and have Cakes before their Idols like the ſhew Bread; and the Brachmans like the Jewiſh High-Prieſts muſt marry Virgins.Vid. Thevenot. Huet. Dem. Prop. 4. Cap. 6. And the Inhabitants of the Country of Tangath redeem their firſt-born with a Ram. Now when the Jewiſh and the Indian Rites are ſo very like, why might not I aſſert, that Moſes had them from India, as well as you from Aegypt? Nay even the Barbarous Tartars have many things not unlike the Jews.Vid. Conring. Theſ. Rerump. They celebrate the New-Moons with Songs and Compotations, they bewail their Dead Thirty Days, they breed no Hogs, and puniſh Adultery with Death. And ſo as to the new World, the Children of the People of Mexico and Jucatan are Circumciſed; and the Mexicans keep in a perpetual Fire. The Charibeans celebrate the New-Moon with the ſound of a Trumpet, and abſtain from Swines Fleſh. Thoſe of Mechoacana are defiled by dead Bodies; and thoſe of Peru, and new Spain, marry their Brothers Wives. And in Nicaragua Women after Child-Birth are unclean. Beſides, the Attick and Roman Laws and Rites are in many things as like the Jewiſh as the Aegyptian. The Attick Laws eſtabliſh that no 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Heireſs ſhould marry out of her own Tribe, their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Cakes anſwer to the ſhew-Bread;Plut. Sol. and the Law of Solon that Women in grief ſhould not tear their Cheeks is not unlike that of Moſes, Lev. 19.28. Their Prieſts were to marry Virgins and Citizens; and no Lamb was to be a Sacrifice leſs than a Year old. And we may ſay the ſame of the Roman. Their Sacrifices bore a great correſpondence with the Jewiſh, the burning the Holocauſta, their Mo • a S • lſa, Luſtrations, &c. Their Nudip • dales ſeem very like the Eaſtern Devotion of • ulling off the ſhooes. Their Puer •• ae abſtaining Forty Days from the Templ • the Frondeae Caſae in the Feaſts of Anna • erenna, and the Neptunalia, ſo like the Feaſt of Tabernacles; the unhallowing of a Prieſt that touched a dead Body, or who • ſſociated with his Wife before Sacrifice; all look as like the Jewiſh Laws, as any Cuſtom in Aegypt. From all which I conclude, that ſince ſo many Nations, in ſo different parts of the World, have the ſame Rites with the Jews, either by chance or Tradition, or it may be by the mimikry of the Devil; I am ſure it is very great Boldneſs to ſay, that all theſe came to the Jews from the Aegyptians.

Well, Credentius, you have made a fine learned Harangue upon the matter, if we Infidels were to be convinced by that. But I have a notable Objection which lies both againſt Moſes and all the Sons of the Prophets. And that is, they appear to be like the reſt of the Jews, miſerable ignorant People, and after all their mighty pretences to the Knowledge of the Divine Nature, are ſcandalouſly ignorant concerning it. They every where ſeem to be groſs Anthropomorphites, repreſenting God as having Eyes, and Hands, and Feet. Adam to whom God made his firſt Revelation, knew nothing of God's Omnipreſence, or Omniſcience, but pretended to hide himſelf from him, and to make a ſimple Excuſe to him. And Moſes, who relates the ſtory brings in God like a Man walking in the Garden. The ſame Moſes was ſo ſilly as to fancy God viſible, and to deſire to ſee him, Exod. 33. And ſome of the Prophets endow God with humane Paſſion, and make him to repent, to be ſorry, and to be glad. But above all the contrivance of the Prophet Jonah is the wiſeſt, who thought to run away to Tarſhiſh out of God Almighty's reach, as if God had no power out of the Country of Judea. Now who can expect Revelation to come from thoſe Heads, which were not furniſhed with the common notions of natural Religion?

You do a great injury to the holy Scriptures and to the memory of the Holy Men, recorded there, to conceive ſuch an extravagant Opinion of them: eſpecially when it is taught there, that God is a Spirit, that he beholds all things, is preſent every where, that he is not a Man,Jews far from being Anthropomorphites. and the like. And therefore you ought in all candor to ſuppoſe that theſe expreſſions which attribute Hands, Eyes, &c. to God, are only to be taken metaphorically, and are ſpoke only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , after the manner as Men ſpeak. And to this the Jewiſh Writers, who are ſuppoſed to underſtand their own Language beſt, do unanimouſly agree. This Maimonides ſpends ſeveral Chapters in his firſt Book of his More Nevochim to prove. So the Targum, when the Scripture ſeems to impute any corporeal Action to the Deity, interprets it in a way more agreeable to the Divine Nature. As Gen. 28. And behold the Lord ſtood above it. Onkelos paraphraſes, the glory of the Lord ſtood afore it. So Gen. 31.49. The Lord watch between me and thee, The Targum ſays, the Word of the Lord watch between me and thee. And this is the conſtant uſe of that Interpreter, ſays Maimonides More Nev. Lib. 1.Author Halic. Ol. c. 1. quoted by Hottinger in his Diſſertat. Theolog. Philolog. Cap. 46. And a Jewiſh Rabbin writes, that when they meet with any expreſſion, or Metaphor, concerning the Deity of this Nature, they are uſed to interpoſe Cabiacol, if I may ſo ſpeak. Vid. Buxtorf. Lexicon Talm. Rad. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Now the true reaſon why the Scripture does expreſs the Attributes of God by Bodily actions and properties, is not, that thoſe Writers thought God of a bodily ſhape, but by the reaſon of the narrowneſs of the Hebrew Tongue they wanted abſtracted Terms to expreſs them by. And when theſe Corporeal Terms were applied to God, the People of that Nation knew as well what was meant by them, as the Schools do by all their Quiddities. Thus the Eye of God is the ſame as the Providence of God. So Jer. 39.12. Caſt thine eye upon him (i. e.) take care of him. And 2 Chr. 16.9. The Eyes of the Lord run to and fro through the whole Earth; (i. e.) God takes care of all People in it. So the Heart of God was as well underſtood to the Jews, as if it had in more Scholaſtick Language been called his Decree, or his Will. David was a Man after God's own heart, that is, lived as he would have him, or according to his Will, or Laws. By the Mouth of God they eaſily underſtood his revealed Will, by the Hand of God his Power. By God's ariſing, his Vengeance; by his hiding himſelf, his Dereliction, or withholding his Grace and Providence. Vid Maim. More Nev. Lib. 1. Adriani Iſagog. Lit. Sac. ed. per David Hoeſchelium. Nor is there any reaſon to blame the Sacred Writers for theſe Metaphorical ways of expreſſing the Nature of God, becauſe they are beſt adapted to give the People an underſtanding of them,Hebrew Language as well expreſſes the nature of God as the Scholaſtical. and to animate their affections towards God; whilſt dry Scholaſtical and abſt acted terms would lie flat upon their Minds, and ſerve only to amuſe and confound them. And after all, the moſt preciſe and Philoſophick way of ſpeaking concerning the Deity muſt needs be very improper and altogether Metaphorical. For Languages were not compoſed to ſpeak of the Deity, but for Men to maintain an intercourſe with one another; and therefore unleſs we would contrive a perfect ſet of new words, we cannot ſpeak at all of God if we ſhould not uſe our old Terms in a tralatitious ſenſe. And thus the words Providence and Mercy, &c. if we reſpect their Original uſe, and do not take them in a Metaphorical ſenſe, are altogether as abſurd, when applied to the Deity, as the Eye, or Hand, or Heart of God, in the groſſeſt ſenſe: For how improper is it, literally ſpeaking, to ſay, God looks before him like Men when they act cautiouſly, or that God has that yearning of Bowels which pittiful Men have over a compaſſionate Object? And truly if we ſhould perfectly contrive new Words to ſpeak of theſe tranſcendent Truths, they are ſo far above the reach of our underſtandings, and we are acquainted ſo little with them, that even then there would be a World of improprieties in our ſpeech concerning them. Therefore I think, that we may ſit down very well contented with the Jewiſh Forms of Speech concerning the Nature of God; and that we have rather great reaſon to bleſs his Goodneſs in ordering it to be explained in ſuch a way as is intelligible to the meaneſt People, who would have been but amuſed and diſtracted at the abſtruſe niceties and explications which Philoſophick and Scholaſtick brains would have made concerning it. This I take to be a very proper Explication of thoſe human Parts and Affections which are in many places of Scripture attributed to God.

But as concerning ſome natural Actions which are applied to him, as his Walking, Coming, Going, Wreſtling, &c. this to be attributed to the Angel which did repreſent the Deity in thoſe Appearances. And I doubt not but it was ſuch a Vicarious Angel which appeared frequently before the Fall to Adam and Eve in Paradiſe. And that it was the Voice, or ſound of him whom they heard walking in the Garden in the Cool of the Day. That is, they heard that Wind or Voice which uſed to go before the Repreſenting Angel which they were ſufficiently acquainted with. For with this circumſtance the divine Appearance uſed to be attended. As the Lord anſwered Job out of the whirlwind, Job 28. And 1 Kings 19. And behold, the Lord paſſed by, and a great and ſtrong wind rent the mountains, and after that, an Earth-quake, and a Fire, and ſtill ſmall Voice. Now the guilty couple underſtanding by theſe preludes the coming of the vicarious Angel hid themſelves for fear. Nor did they pretend to make ſimple Excuſes to God Almighty out of Ignorance of his Omniſcience, as you falſly imagine. For they are ſo far from that, that they unhappy Creatures plainly confeſs the fact upon the firſt charge, in all the naked circumſtances of it. The woman whom thou gaveſt me to be with me, gave me of the Tree, and I did eat. The Serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. There is nothing in theſe words which implies any thing like ſuch abſurd Excuſes. Only ſome fanciful Expoſitors will make Adam here to ſhift off the Crime upon his Wife, which God had given him, and to caſt a ſevere Reflection upon God's Ordinance of Wedlock, which they ſay he here ſlily inſinuate to be the cauſe of his Fall; and will have Eve to lay all her blame upon the Devil. But the words import no ſuch thing, here is only a juſt confeſſion of exact matter of fact; and I think there is no reaſon they ſhould make their caſe worſe than it was, and take the blame of others upon them, when they had ſufficient of their own. Neither is it to be ſuppoſed that Moſes deſired to ſee the Divine Eſſence, but only to have the Glory of the repreſenting Angel more particularly manifeſted to him which had hitherto been wrapt up in a Cloud; that That might be a more evident Token to the murmuring Jews of his divine Miſſion. And it pleaſed God to hearken to this requeſt, and to let the divine glory make ſuch impreſſion upon his Face as dazled the Eyes of his Beholders. And the Children of Iſrael ſaw the face of Moſes, that the Skin of Moſes's face ſhone, &c. And as for your inſtance in Jonas, which you Triumph ſo much in, no body can with any reaſon think, that he ſhould be ſo ſilly, as to imagin that that Great God whom he worſhiped as the Maker of Heaven and Earth, ſhould have no power over him out of the land of Judea; or that he could ſuppoſe when he got to Tarſhiſh, he ſhould be out of God's preſence. That was the leaſt of Jonas's Thoughts; and the words of the Text do not imply any thing like it. It is ſaid, Jonas aroſe up to fly to Tarſhiſh, not Miphne, from the face or preſence of God, but Milipene from before the face or preſence of God; dead facies Jehovae: That is, he turned his back upon God at that hazardous and uncomfortable Revelation, and endeavoured by any ways to get off from the Appearance of God at that Time. He might have thought of any other place to flie to, where his dejected Fancy let him, as well as Tarſhiſh; but only that place lying juſt contrary to Ninive, he contrived to fly thither. He could not think of avoiding God's univerſal preſence, which he could not but know was every where, but only by flying ſomewhere he might avoid God's Prophetick preſence at that time which he had either hopes he ſhould not be tried with again, elſe fondly imagained, as moſt of the other Jews did, that no Revelation could be afforded in a Gentile Country.

I deſign to ſpeak but one word more concerning your Prophets of the Old Teſtament; but that ſhall be a home Thruſt at laſt. They ſeem to me to be either a parcel of Whimſical Crack-brain'd People, that play'd a hundred Enthuſiaſtical pranks to make the Rabble gape at them; or elſe were ſeditious Mutineers, that ſet themſelves up, under the umbrage of God's Authority, to be ſaucy with their Princes. One of them you may find puſhing with a great pair of Horns upon his Head, another lying 390 days upon one ſide, and a third marrying a Whore in the midſt of his Prophetick Spirit. You may ſee Samuel carrying himſelf after that preſumptuous rate to King Saul, as if he was a School Boy. And Hanani the Prophet gives King Aſa, whom the Scripture remarks for a good King, intolerable Language and provocation, only for making a League with the King of Syria. And I think the King did very well for putting the Seer into the Priſon-Houſe for his pains. Now are theſe Men fit to be truſted with Revelation for the government of the Lives of all Mankind, that are not able to govern their own actions or paſſions with common decency?

Your prejudices, Philologus, tranſport you too far in cenſuring the actions of the holy Prophets, without conſidering the Cuſtoms of thoſe times, and the extraordinary Meſſages they were ſent about. There are none of their Prophetick Speeches which were delivered to the Princes of thoſe times, but what are made with all due Decency and regard to their Character; but yet the Prophets having an immediate Commiſſion from God himſelf, they ought to have ſpoken with greater Boldneſs to them than every ordinary Haranguer, who could only pretend to ſpeak by way of Perſwaſion. When they were commanded by God, to reprimand wicked Princes, and to denounce Judgments againſt them, they had betrayed their Truſt if they had not ſpoken the Truth with boldneſs; and had incurred the penalty of thoſe who feared God leſs than Man. And as for ſome unuſual actions which they did, as Micaiah's making him Horns of Iron, that was the uſual way of thoſe Times to propheſy by ſigns: for under ſuch Hieroglyphical repreſentations moſt of the Morality and Divinity of the Eaſtern Nations were couched. Neither were all thoſe ſigns which are related in the Prophetick Writings really acted, but ſome of them only in Viſion; and this in all probability was the caſe of Hoſea, when he took the Wife of Whoredoms, and of Jeremy, when he is ſaid to have lain ſo many days on one ſide. As for your Inſtances in the Prophets Samuel and Hanani; Samuel had had the Adminiſtration of the Jewiſh Theocracy immediately under God, before Saul, and was a Prince when he was but a Peaſant, had ſingled him out and Anointed him King, and when beſides he had the command of God to rebuke that headſtrong King; this will bear him out in all his ſeverity of Expreſſions he uſed towards him. And as for Hanani, he did very juſtly reprove King Aſa, for his relying on the King of Aſſyria, and not on the Lord his God. 'Tis not his bare making a League with the King of Aſſyria, which he is reproved for, but for his putting more confidence in this than in God's Providence. Beſides, to compaſs this he had uſed very indirect means; for he purchaſed that King's favour, by ſacrilegiouſly taking the Treaſures of the Houſe of the Lord 2 Chr. 16.7. to make a preſent to him.' And though the Scripture does affirm of this King Aſa, that his heart was perfect all his days, yet this is to be underſtood only of his Zeal againſt Idolatry; yet ſeveral grievous faults he was guilty of, as particularly the impriſoning this Holy Prophet, and his oppreſſing the People at the ſame time, v. 10. and even in his laſt diſeaſe it is recorded, that he ſought not to the Lord, but to the Phyſitians, v. 12.

We are arrived now at laſt to a leiſure to talk more particularly of the Mediatorſhip, and a ſatisfaction to be made for Sins. Now your whole Religion is bottomed upon the ſuppoſition of that which is all falſe and erroneous, and inconſiſtent with the Nature and goodneſs of God. For this ſuppoſes God a rough implacable Being, that is eaſy to be offended, and hard to be pleaſed; when on the contrary nothing is ſo good and kind and willing to be reconciled to his Creatures. Indeed the wickedneſs of Men, who have been apt to think every one as bad as themſelves, has inclined them to have ſuch hard Thoughts of God Almighty, and made many of them think, for many Ages ago, the Deity to be a ſevere ſort of Being, and the ſubtile Prieſts found it for their Advantage to encourage the notion; and hence the Practice of Sacrificing got into the World. For when Men found they had done ſomething which was diſpleaſing to God Almighty, they thought to make him amends another way, and ſo would ſacrifice a good fat Bullock or Ram, at his Altar. This was the firſt ſilly Logick in early and Barbarous Ages, and the Prieſts for their profit have been improving it ever ſince; till at laſt they have vamped it up into that Mediatorſhip and ſatisfaction which the Chriſtian Religion is grounded upon. But in the firſt and purer Ages of the World, theſe idle worſhips were unknown, when they worſhiped God with Prayers only, and Praiſe, and never thought of appeaſing the Deity with theſe fooliſh Briberies, which muſt be ſo far from being grateful to him, that they muſt needs be his Averſation.

And this the Scripture Writers themſelves are forced to own, although they were bred up under Sacrifices. In burnt-offerings and Sacrifices for Sin thou haſt no pleaſure. Pſal. 40.7. To what purpoſe is the multitude of your Sacrifices unto me, ſaith the Lord, I am full of the fat of the burnt offerings of Rams, and the Fat of fed Beaſts, and I delight not in the Blood of Bullocks, or of Lambs, or of He-Goats, and the concluſion from all which the Prophet makes is, that they ſhould lay aſide this Expiatory Trumpery, and take up with good honeſt Deiſin and natural Religion: Put away the Evil of your doing from before mine Eyes, ceaſe to do Evil, learn to do well, ſeek judgment, relieve the oppreſſed, judge the Fatherleſs, plead for the Widow, Iſ. 1.12, &c. So that you ſee this Sacrifice and Expiatory ſatisfaction is all Butcherly ſtuff, which is neither acceptable to God, nor agreeable to the ſentiments of Wiſe Men.

Expiation conſiſtent with the Mercy of God.You run away a little too faſt with your Argument, when you make ſuch exclamations about the ſeverity and implacableneſs of the Deity, where it is aſſerted, that he requires Expiation and Satisfaction for Mens Sins. Wicked Men, that are reſolved to live on in a Courſe of Sin, may flatter themſelves, that God has nothing in him but Mercy; but I am afraid in time they will find, That God in his Laws has regard to his Juſtice too. I will not aſſert, That it is impoſſible that God as God, all whoſe Attributes are infinite, ſhould forgive the Sins of Men without a ſatisfaction to his Juſtice; but yet I ſay, that conſidering God as a Legiſlatour who deſigns to govern Men by his Laws, it is not agreeable to his Wiſdom to ſuffer his Laws, to be trampled upon with impunity by Bold and Regardleſs Sinners. And indeed all God Almighty's Attributes are directed by his infinite Reaſon and Wiſdom, and his Mercy is not, as a great many take it to be, a ſort of Feminine tenderneſs that cannot hold out againſt the Cries of ſuffering Offenders: but ſuch a good and wiſe relaxation of the puniſhment which his Juſtice in rigor might demand, as may ſecure the honour of his Laws, his Eternal Juſtice and Purity, and with all make all poſſible allowances for the Infirmities of Mankind. And upon this reaſon I take the nature of Expiatory Sacrifices in all Ages to have been grounded, to ſhew the great Averſion God has always had to Sin, and to deter Men from Sin, by ſhewing the great ſatisfaction which he required for it. And therefore I do not approve the Reaſon which a late AuthorDiſcourſe concerning Natural and Revealed Religion, p. 100. gives, that the end of Sacrifices was to make Sin coſtly to the Offender, and to appeaſe the Conſciences of penitent Sinners, by ſhewing that God accepted the Death of the Beaſt in lieu of theirs. For theſe are only general Ends, but the moſt principal and particular End which was aimed at in the Sacrifices of Beaſts was, that they might be Types and Fore-runners of the Great Sacrifice of our Bleſſed Lord, from the Efficacy of whoſe infinite ſatisfaction they received all their Expiatory Nature. For as the Apoſtle argues, Heb. 10.6. It is not poſſible that the blood of Bulls and Goats ſhould take away Sins; and therefore theſe muſt all have reference to the infinite ſatisfaction of Chriſt, which alone can. So that theſe Beſtial Sacrifices both before and under the Law, were to the Sacrifice of Chriſt as the Tabernacle to the Temple, God Almighty was pleaſed to accept them as expiatory till ſuch time as that great Sacrifice was finiſhed: but as when the Temple was built, the Tabernacle was deſtroy'd. So after the ſuffering of Chriſt, theſe ritual Sacrifices were at an End. Nay we have rather great reaſon to adore the infinite Mercy of God, than to tax him with ſeverity, for accepting of ſuch vicarious ſufferings; for he might in juſtice have demanded the perſonal ſuffering of the Offended himſelf, his Life, for every Trangreſſion, which would ſoon have put an end to the Race of ſinful Mankind. To have forgiven all without any ſatisfaction would have been in effect to have given an uncontroulable licence to Sin; and to have puniſhed to the utmoſt rigor, would have left no room for Men to adore his Mercy: but by this admirable mixture of Juſtice and Compaſſion, his own Honour is preſerved, and Mens Sins are pardoned.

Neither can I aſſent to your Opinion,The Origin of Sacrifices from ancient Revelation. that Sacrifices are the pure Invention of Men, for it is highly probable that they were at firſt inſtituted by God Almighty, and Directions for the performance of theſe ſacrificial Rites given to the firſt of Mankind, and ſo have been handed down to the ſeveral Branches of their Poſterity ever ſince. Indeed, Grotius, and ſome others are of Opinion, that Sacrifices owe their Original to the Gratitude of Mankind, who in thanks to God were willing to return back to God ſome part of the good things they did enjoy; and that before the Flood there was no Sacrifice offer'd of Animal Creatures. But granting, that Gratitude have Origin to Euchariſtical Sacrifices, we are as much at a loſs to find a reaſon for the Piacular, unleſs we allow they came by the Inſtitution of God. Neither is his reaſon convincing, by which he would prove that no Beaſt was Sacrificed till after the Deluge; viz. becauſe Sacrifices are never but of ſuch • hings whereof Men uſed to eat: now there being no fleſh eat before • he Deluge, that indulgence being afterwards granted to Noah, he concludes, that no fleſh was Sacrificed. But this Argument is but weak. For it is very much to be doubted whether the Antediluvians did not eat fleſh; and Bochartus contends ſtrongly that the Grant to Noah, Gen. 9. was not larger than what was afforded to Adam, Gen. 1. And beſides in piacular Sacrifices in many Nations they never ſtood upon the edibility of the Sacrifice; but oftentimes Sacrificed Horſes or Men. Beſides, it is probable that theſe Expiatory Sacrifices of Blood commenced from the firſt fall of Mankind, to be the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or vicarious Puniſhments for the Lives of Adam's Off-ſpring then forfeited. And then there is ſome reaſon for their Inſtitution at that time; but there is none that I know for their being ſet up in the Time of Noah. And when the Scripture ſays expreſly that Abel Offered of the firſtlings of his Flock and the fat thereof, methinks it is a jejune interpretation, to ſay he Offered only Lanam & lac pinguiſſimum, Wool and very Fat Milk (i. e.) Cream. I am therefore perſwaded, and I think upon good ground, that a Model of Sacrificial Rites, or at leaſt a command in general of Piacular Sacrifices was given to our firſt Parents, and by them tranſmitted down to all their Poſterity. For otherways it is impoſſible to give a ſatisfactory account why we ſhould meet with the ſame in all Ages, in all Countries from the Eaſt to the Weſt-Indies, from Africa to Scythia, and there find Men practiſing the ſame Piacular Rites almoſt in an uniform manner. If their Sacrifices were owing to the Gratitude or Reaſoning of the different Inhabitants, they would be as widely different as their Cuſtoms and Manners are; but when we find ſo many different People that have no intercourſe with one another doing exactly the ſame things as if it were by confederacy, killing the Sacrifice, burning the Fleſh, and that too upon an Altar, by the Miniſtery of a Prieſt, and with an Opinion that their ſins are diſcharged by that vicarious puniſhment of the devoted Animal, with many other like circumſtances; this muſt needs prove that they could not all jump upon theſe things by chance, but had them delivered down to them by ſome ancient Predeceſſor, who was Progenitor to them all.

Conf. Part I. p. 154. And as I proved to you before by this Argument, that the Americans did proceed from the Europeans; ſo I think it is as plain that they did all proceed from Adam, from whom the general Syſtem of ſacrificial Rites has been propagated to them after the ſucceſſion of ſo many Ages. And here we may fix our foot, and ſettle the Commencement of all Moral and Ritual Religion, and whatſoever we find of them both, though never ſo vitiated in the different parts of the World, eſteeming them to be but corrupted ſtreams of the ancient Revelation afforded to our firſt Father: and as for thoſe Texts of Scripture which you alledge, they do by no means undervalue or caſt any reflection upon God's Ritual Laws and Sacrifices. But the deſign of them is to ſhew, that Men ſhould not place their Obedience only in the Ritual Parts of Religion, whilſt they neglect the more ſubſtantial Duties of Morality; and this is a Truth which every honeſt Chriſtian, as well as you Deiſts, thinks himſelf bound to believe.

I confeſs what you ſay does not altogether want ſome Probability. But ſtill methinks theſe vicarious Puniſhments ſeem but inſignificant Trifles in matter of Religion, becauſe they do not make Men the better or the more innocent. Indeed if theſe Expiations either in themſelves, or as they had relation to the Death of Chriſt, did perfectly take away ſins, then there is ſomething in what you ſaid: but they only leave the Man as they found him, unleſs true repentance did make him better. So that the Mediatorſhip without Repentance ſignifies nothing at all, and Repentance where they know nothing of this Mediatorſhip muſt by all charitable Men be allow'd to be valid; and therefore what need of the Mediatorſhip or ſatisfaction at all? Repentance after ſinning is all that Man can do, or God can require. 'Tis true the Debt we owe to God Almighty by ſinning is infinite, and what then,Oracles of Reaſon, p. 207. If I owe a Million and can pay but a thouſand pounds, my Creditor can have but all. 'Tis true my Body is then ſubject to impriſonment, that is to the further Extent of the Law; but then that Law is void of Mercy. So that when I have done my All, that is repented, what need is there of Expiation; when God's Mercy will acquit me, as having paid what I was able?

But, Credentius, this ſatisfaction, as you call it, in the Mediatorſhip, is a Buſineſs which lies ſo croſs in my Brains, and is pregnant with ſuch a number of Abſurdities, that I can never away with it. And therefore you ſee, that not only we, but your Brother Chriſtians the Socinians, are ſo aware of the Groſsneſs of this Doctrine, that they are unanimouſly agreed upon it, to explode it; as giving Men ſuch a barbarous notion of the Deity, as is inconſiſtent with the Excellency of his Nature. For ſatisfaction does ſuppoſe an angry revengeful Temper, which deſires to be glutted with the puniſhment of the offending Party; which when that is brought about, becomes tame, good-natur'd, and reconcileable. But this is ſuch a pitiful imbecillity, even in humane nature, as wiſe Men are aſhamed of; and therefore to attribute this to the infinite Purity and Wiſdom of God, is no leſs, I think, than the moſt daring Blaſphemy. But ſuppoſing there was ſuch an Angry Vindictive Nature in the Deity, yet methinks even then he ſhould rather chooſe to take revenge upon every one for their own Demerits, which would be agreeable to Juſtice; and not make one Innocent Perſon, viz. Jeſus Chriſt, who had no Sin, as you ſuppoſe, to ſuffer for the Sins of all other wicked Men; and to lay the deſerved Sufferings of ſo many outragious Offenders upon the back of the moſt pious and ſpotleſs Man, that, by your account, ever came into the World. But when we farther conſider, that this innocent Perſon is owned by you to be the Son of God, and his only Son too, and muſt nevertheleſs be Sacrificed to appeaſe this Vindictive nature of God before he could be reconciled to the World: this is ſuch a horrid Repreſentation of the Beſt of Beings, as ſhocks human nature to conſider; and far outdoes all the ſtories of Scythian Sacrifices, and Buſiris his Altars. And yet greater Monſters of Abſurdities do appear, when we conſider, That this ſuffering Perſon was the ſupreme God himſelf, who by this Scheme is ſuppoſed to have took upon him all the Infirmities of an Human Body, was hungry and thirſty, and at laſt, was crucified, and died. Now this does imply a ſort of a Paſſibility in the Deity, which of all Heterodoxies is the moſt groſs and abſurd.

I have not time now to enter with you into the nice diſputes of the Socinian Controverſy upon this Subject.What is meant by ſatisfaction. But however I do not ſee any thing in the general notion of Chriſt's ſatisfaction, which does reflect at all upon the Goodneſs of the Divine Nature. Indeed the word ſatisfaction is not found in Scripture, but the whole ſubſtance of what the word imports, is; and this and all other words which are uſed to expreſs any of the divine actions, or nature, muſt be uſed Metaphorically, and not be taken in ſo ſtrict a ſenſe, as when they are uſed properly, and according to their original application. Now the ſatisfaction which is here meant, is not ſuch a ſatisfaction as an angry Man requires, but a Judicial or Forenſical ſatisfaction, which a Governour requires of an Offender, upon the violation of his Laws. Now whereas the whole Oeconomy of our Salvation is delivered in Scripture in Forenſical Terms, as when God is repreſented as a Judge, Man as an Offender or Criminal; God's word as the Law by which he is Condemned, Death as the Puniſhment, Chriſt as a Mediator and Surety, his Death as an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Price of Redemption; now I think it not at all improper to call that which Chriſt did to free us from the obligation we were under to the Divine Juſtice, upon account of our Sins, by the name of Satisfaction. For this is no bloody revengeful ſatisfaction, which impotent and paſſionate Minds are wont to call for; but only ſuch a juſt debt as ought to be pay'd to the Juſtice of God, conſidered as the Governour of the World. I am not inſenſible, that ſome Calviniſtical Writers have carried this matter a little too far, by leaving no room at all for the Mercy of God to exert it ſelf in this wonderful diſpenſation, and making the divine Juſtice to require a ſatisfaction to be made, by the ſame ſpecifick Infinite Puniſhments which we had deſerved, in the Sufferings of our Saviour; ſo as to think that no ſatisfaction could be, unleſs Chriſt actually ſuffered upon the Croſs all the Eternal Torments of the Damned intenſivè, as they ſpeak, though not extenſivè; ſo that our Saviour in his Agony and Crucifixion, muſt ſuffer Torments as much infinitely greater than Damned Souls, as their Eternity of Suffering is longer than the hours of our Saviour's Paſſion. But this has no foundation in Scripture, and ſeems horrid to Chriſtian Ears. It is enough to ſay, That the Mercy of God diſpoſed him to accept of the Temporal Sufferings of Chriſt for our Sins in lieu of the Eternal puniſhments, which we had deſerved. And ſo the infinite dignity of the perſon ſuffering was a ſufficient ſatisfaction to the Divine Juſtice offended, and unſpeakable mercy was ſhewn to offending Mankind by being free from that puniſhment which otherways they muſt have undergone themſelves. So that Infidel and Socinian ſcoffers do very ill to arraign the Mercy of God, and to tax him with Revenge and Implacability in demanding ſuch a Legal ſatisfaction; for by the ſame Rules they might expoſe all the Legiſlative Authority in the World when Criminals ſuffer by their ſanctions. For there is no other way to maintain the L • giſlatours honour, and to engage Men to obſerve his Laws but by inflicting an Exemplary puniſhment on offenders: for otherways their Laws would be but Cobwebs, and their Authority the May-game of Licencious Tranſgreſſours. But in this vicarious puniſhment of Chriſt for us, God is far from ſhewing himſelf an Angry or Implacable Governour; but does rather manifeſt the greateſt Tenderneſs and Compaſſion in being willing that all the World ſhould eſcape their deſerved puniſhment, and Chriſt only ſuffer for them all; and in accepting the Temporal Pains of his Croſs for thoſe of Eternal Death which they had deſerved.

AVicarious puniſhment not unjuſt. Gen. 9.25. 2 Sam. 21.8. 2 Sam. 24.15. Joſ. 7.14. 1 King. 21.29.2. Neither is it unjuſt that Chriſt ſhould undergo a vicarious puniſhment for us. For that vicarious puniſhments are not in themſelves abſolutely unjuſt, may be proved not only from Scripture Inſtances where Children are puniſhed for their Parents, and Subjects for their Princes; but by the notion which the moſt civilized Nations have always had of the lawfulneſs of puniſhing ſureties for the Parties they were engaged for, by their denying the publick honours to the Children of notorious Offenders, by Decimations in their Armies, and by killing the innocent Hoſtages when the Articles were not performed. Now if the Greeks and Romans, who of all other Nations pretend to the exacteſt Rules of the aequum bonumque, could ſee no obliquity in theſe vicarious puniſhments; there is certainly a far leſs pretence of injuſtice to be laid to God's charge in ordering Chriſt to ſuffer for the Sins of the World. Now it is impoſſible here that there ſhould be any injuſtice, or injury. Here was no injuſtice done to Chriſt, for he was pleaſed voluntarily to lay down his Life for us. Neither was it any injuſtice done to God, for God Authorized him to do it, by a mutual ſtipulation betwixt the Father and the Son. And our Saviour ſays expreſly, Joh. 10.18. I have Power or Authority, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to lay down my Life. So that there is no more injuſtice committed in our Saviour's laying down his Life in a voluntary Suffering for us; than there is in his laying it down according to Socinus his Notion, for a Teſtimony of his Doctrine. And I am ſure I could prove it as equally unjuſt for God to put him upon preaching a Doctrine that would coſt him his Life; as to let him lay down his Life to ſave a World.

3.Chriſt tho' God might ſuffer. And as for your Tragical Exclamations againſt the Orthodox Doctrines which makes the Eternal Son of God, who is himſelf God bleſſed for ever; to be incarnate, and to ſuffer for the Sins of the World; this does by no means render the Deity paſſible, a Notion which all Chriſtians abhor. But by reaſon of the Union of the Deity with Fleſh or Humanity which was Patible, Chriſt was then in a poſſibility of ſuffering, and thoſe ſufferings which were proper only to one Nature are attributed to the whole perſon by reaſon of the intimate Union of the two Natures. Nay the Scripture it ſelf attributes the properties of the inferiour Nature, viz. the Humanity, to the Divinity the ſuperior one. As when it is ſaid, that we are redeemed by the blood of God; we muſt not think as if God could bleed or die, but that That Perſon who was both God and Man, who by vertue of his Humanity, was capable of ſuffering, laid down his Life for us, to redeem us. Now here is nothing in this of Abſurdity but only adorable myſtery, and admirable Wiſdom, which the Thoughts of Man could never have reached to, and no human Counſel could ever have contrived: To find out ſuch a way to ſave the Souls of Loſt Mankind, and to ſecure God's honour, and the Authority of his Laws.

I have one thing more to objects to you upon this head, and that is the Chriſtian Doctrine which you teach about Chriſt's Interceſſion, and that is ſo odd and groſs a notion, as no rational Man can aſſent to. For you make Chriſt continually at his Prayers in Heaven to God the Father, to pardon the Sins of Mankind upon their Repentance, and to beſtow his Benefits upon them; which God in his own nature is inclined to do, without this buſtle of Interceſſion. Beſides, it looks like a piece of Pageantry (as your Doctors explain it) to have Chriſt continually exhibiting the wounds of his Crucified Body to the Father, to move him to compaſſion, and to put him in mind of the Sacrifice he was made for Mans Sins, which it is impoſſible that an Omnipotent Knowledge could be unmindful of. Methinks this looks like a Piece of Homerick Divinity, when the Poet deſcribes Heaven acording to all the formalities and ſillineſſes which are ſeen in human nature.

There is nothing in the Chriſtian Doctrine of Interceſſion but what is agreeable to good ſenſe and reaſon:No Incongruity in the Dostrine of Chriſt's Interceſſion. and all expreſſions which do ſeem to imply any ſuch groſsneſs in them, as you imagine, muſt only be underſtood Figuratively. To what ſtate of Bliſs the Glorified Body of our Bleſſed Saviour is exalted, whilſt we poor Chriſtians live in this Vale of Miſery and Tears, we are not able to imagine; or with what divine actions his humanity is employ'd. All that we can be certain of is what the Scripture tells us, that we have an Advocate with the Father Jeſus Chriſt the righteous, 1 Joh. 2.1. that he is ſaid to intercede for us at the right hand of God, Rom. 8.34. that he is entered into Heaven it ſelf now to appear in the preſence of God for us, Heb. 9.24. that he is a Prieſt continually, and his blood ſpeaks better things than that of Abel, that he offers his own Sacrifice for ſin for ever, Heb. 9.25. and the like. Now there is no need to aſſert that all theſe Expreſſions are taken literally, when it is plain that many of them are Metaphors taken from the Levitical Law, from the Piacular Sacrifices, from the Interceſſion of the High-Prieſt fo • the People, from his entring into the Sanctum Sanctorum, &c. Now St. Pa • makes uſe of theſe ritual Phraſes, the better to explain to the Jewiſh Converts th • Nature and Efficacy of Chriſt's Death, from thoſe outward Ceremonies of the Moſaical Law, which they were well acquainted with. And I doubt not but the Unbelievers themſelves do think theſe Expreſſions are Metaphorical; but only they have a mind to be picking up ſomething to be flinging at Religion though they are at the ſame time ſure 〈◊〉 will do no harm.

Pardon, me, Sir, for t • is, and I will not at preſent trouble you with any more Infidel Objections; and f •• the reſt of the Time that you will honour me with your Company, I will endeavour to entertain you with more inoffenſive Diſcourſe. Though I ca • not but acknowledge that I wiſh I wa • fully perſwaded of the Truth of you • Religion; which ſeems indeed, upo further conſideration, to be a Rational Inſtitution, and well laid together, which lays down the Laws of Morality more exactly and fully, than the ordinary Reaſon of Mankind; which gives an account of the grand Periods and Revolu • ions of the World, and God's Providential Diſpenſations, beyond common • hiloſophy, and the light of Nature; and 〈◊〉 I could get rid of ſome other doubts, which I beg you will, at your leaſure ſatisfy; then I hope you will make a thorough Convert of me.