^^^••o^.

I

- A

.MA*;

m

THE

W O R K S

OF THE

RIGHT REVEREND

WILLIAM WARBURTON,D.D

LORD BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER.

A NEW EDITION, IN TWELVE VOLUMES.

TO WHICH IS PREFIXED

A DISCOURSE BY WAY OF GENERAL PREFACED

CONTAINING

SOME ACCOUNT OF THE LIFE, WRITINGS, AND CHARACTER OF THE AUTHOR ;

BY RICHARD HURD, D,D. \

LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER. - rt \

VOLUME THE SIXT

H. M

Printed by ~Lul<c ftartsard c|- Sons, ntar Line obi's -Inn Pields,

FOR T. CADELL AND w. DAVIES, IN THE STRAND.

isn.

CONTENTS

\

OF

VOL. VI.

THE DIVINE LEGATION.

BOOK VI.

CONTAINS AN EXAMINATION OF ALL THE TEXTS BROUGHT FROM THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS TO PROVE A FUTURE STATE OF REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS DID MAKE PART QF THE MOSAIC

DISPENSATION :

• — continued — •

SECT. V. The agreement of the Proposition of no future State in the Mosaic Dispensation, with the Vllth Article pf the Church of England evinced. — That the Old Fathers looked for more than transitory Promises, illus trated in the famous case of ABRAHAM,— where it is proved that the command to offer Isaac was merely an information, in a representative Action instead of Words, of the Redemption of Mankind by the great Sacrifice of CHRIST.— — Siiewn how this Interpretation overturns all the infidel objections against the truth of this part of Abraham's history - pp. i— 46

SECT. VI. To support the foregoing Interpretation, The Original, Nature, and Use of TYPICAL RITES and' SE CONDARY SENSES in Prophecies are inquired into. — In the course of which Inquiry, the Principles of Mr. Coilins's book concerning the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion are examined and confuted, — and likewise the ixeasoning of Dr. Sykes against all Double Senses of Prophecies in his book intitled, The

Principles

IV CONTEXTS OF SIXTH VOLUME.

Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Peti- gion, £cr. — The Tsc and < importance of these Questions to the subject of The Divine Legation explained. — The CONCLUSION of the argument, — with a recapitulation ofit- PP- 4<5—i44 APPENDIX concerning the Book of JOB - pp. 145 i -4

to the Fifth and Sixth Sections - pp. 15- 2io

BOOK IX.

BEING AN ATTEMPT TO F.XPLAIN THE TRUE NATURE AND GENIUS OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION - p. 211

INTRODUCTION - pp. 213—232

CHAPS. I. to VI. pp. 233—348

PP- 349—399

INDEX to The Divine Legation - - pp. 401 446

AUTHORS, &c. quoted in The Divine Legation; which Quotations are not referred to in the Index, pp.447-—

THE

DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES

DEMONSTRATED.

BOOK VI.

CONTINUED.

SECT. V.

BUT though it appear that a future state of Re* wards and Punishments made no part of the Mosaic Dispensation, yet the LAW had certainly a SPIRITUAL meaning, to be understood when the fulness of time should come : And hence it received the nature, and afforded the efficacy, of PROPHECY. In the interim, the MYSTERY OF THE GOSPEL was occasionally revealed by GOD to his chosen Servants, the Fathers and Leaders of the Jewish Nation ; and the dawning of it was gra dually opened by the Prophets, to the People.

And which is exactly agreeable to what our excellent Church in its SEVENTH ARTICLE of Religion teacheth concerning this matter.

ARTICLE VII.

^fje <DlD Testament i* not contrary to tfje for botj in tfce dDlo anU ^eto tCegftammt, Hite ijs offered to apankma fc? Ctjrfet, \»t>o ft tlje onlp ^etitator betloecn dEfofc anD S^an. dllljertfocc tljep are not to be Ijearti, toljict) feiffn tljat tje flDlU $ atSergj tiiti look onlg for trangitorp ^rom^ejJ^

VOL. VI. B — The

2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BookVL.

— The Old Testament is not contrary to the New, is a proposition directed against the Manichean error, to which the opinions of some Sectaries of these later times seemed to approach. The Manicheans fancied there was a. Good and an Evil Principle; that the Old Dispensa tion was under the Evil, and that the New was the work of the Good. Now it hath been proved, that the Old Testament is so far from being contrary to the New, that it was the Foundation, Rudiments, and Preparation for it.

— For both in the Old and New Testament, everlasting life is offered to mankind by CHRIST, who is the only Mediator between G,od and Mcu\ That the Church could not mean by these words, that everlasting life was offered to mankind by CHRIST in the Old Testament in the SAME MANNER in which it is offered by the New, is evident from these considerations:

1. The Church, in the preceding words, only says, the Old Testament is NOT CONTRARY to the. New, but did she mean that everlasting life was offered by both, in the same manner, she would certainly have said, The Old Testament is THE SAME with the New. This farther appears from the inference drawn from the pro position concerning everlasting life — WHEREFORE they are not to be heard, which feign that the old FATHERS did look only for transitory promises. But was this pre tended sense the true, then the inference had been, That ALL THE ISRAELITES were instructed to look for more than transitory promises.

2. The Church could not mean, that everlasting life is offered in the Old and New Testament in the same manner, because we learn from St. Austin, that this was one of the old Pelagian heresies, condemned by the Catholics in the Synod of Diospolis, — QUOD LEX sic

Mi'! D REGNUM [cOELOBUMj QUEHADMODUM

ET EVAXGfcLIUM*.

*

• De Genie Pelagii, c, xi. $ 24.

WImt

Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3

What was meant therefore by the words — — both in the Old and New Testament, everlasting Life is offered to Mankind by CHRIST, was plainly this; " That the " offer of everlasting Life to Mankind by CHRIST in " the New Testament was SHADOWED OUT in the Old; " the SPIRITUAL meaning of the Law and the Pro- " phets referring to that life and immortality, which " was brought to light by JESUS CHRIST."

3. But lastly, Whatever meaning the Church had in. these words, it cannot at all affect our Proposition, that a future state was not taught by the Law of Mo .?; because by the Old Testamemt is ever meant both the Law and the Prophets. Now I hold that the Prophets gave strong intimations, though in figurative language borrowed from the Jewish Economy, of the everlasting life offered to mankind by JESUS CHRIST.

The concluding words of the Article which relate to this matter say, — Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the OLD FATHERS did look only for transitory promises ; and so say I : because JESUS him self is to be heard, before all such ; and he affirms the direct contrary of the Father of th& faithful in particular. Your father Abraham (says he to the unbelieving Jews) rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad*. A fact not only of the utmost certainty in itself, but of the highest importance to be rightly understood. That I may not therefore be suspected of prevarication, I chuse this instance (the noblest that ever was given of the HARMONY between the Old and New Testament) to illustrate this consistent truth.

I.

And I persuade myself that the learned Reader will be content to go along with me, while I take occasion, from these remarkable words of JES'US, to explain the liistory of the famous COMMAND TO ABRAHAM TO

* John viii. 56.

B 2 SITES

4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

OFFER UP HIS SON ; for to this History, I shall prove, the words refer ; and by their aid I shall be enabled to justify a revolting circumstance in it, which has been long the stumbling-block of Infidelity,

In the sense in which the History of the COMMAND hath been hitherto understood, the best apology for Abraham's behaviour (and it is hard we should be obliged, at this time of day, to make apologies for an action, which, we are told, had the greatest merit in the sight of God) seems to be this, that having had much intercourse with the GOD of Heaven, whose Revelations (not to say, his voice of Nature) spoke him a good and just Being, Abraham concluded that this command to sacrifice his son, conveyed to him like the rest, by the same strong and clear impression on the Sensory, came also from the same GOD. How rational soever this solution be, the Deist, perhaps, would be apt to tell us it was little better than Electra's answer to Orestes, who, staggering in his purpose to kill his Mother by the com mand of Apollo, says : But if, after all, this should be an evil Demon, who, bent ttpon mischief hath assumed the form of a God? She replies, JFhat, an evil Demon possess the sacred Tripod! It is not to be supposed*.

But the idea hitherto conceived of this important History has subjected it even to a worse abuse than that of Infidelity: Fanatics, carnally as well as spiritually licentious, have employed it to countenance and support the most abominable of their Doctrines and Practices. liimius in his Candid Narrative hath given us a strange passage from the writings of the Moravian Brethren, which the reader, from a note of his, will find trans cribed here below f,

However,

w. Eurip. Electra, ver, 979,

f " lie (tke Saviour) can dispose of life and soul; he can mak« *' the ceconomy of salvation, and change it every hour, that the hin- u dermost be the foremost ;.. He can make laws, and abrogate them ; " UK CAST MA.KB THAT TO JJB MORAL, WHICH is AGAINST NA-

'* TURE;

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 5

However, after saving and reserving to ourselves the benefit of all those arguments, which have been hitherto brought to support the history of the COMMAND; I beg leave to say, that the source of all the difficulty is the veiy •wrong idea men have been taught to entertain of it, while it was considered as given for a TRIAL ONLY of Abraham's faith ; and consequently as a Revelation unsought by him, and unrelated to any of those before vouchsafed unto him : Whereas, in truth, it was a Revelation AR DENTLY DESIRED, had the CLOSEST CONNEXION with, and was, indeed, the COMPLETION OF ALL THE FORE GOING ; which were all directed to one end ; as the gradual view of the orderly parts of one intire Dispen sation required : consequently, the principal purpose of the COMMAND was not to try Abraham's faith, although its nature was such, that in the very giving of it, God did, indeed, tempt or try Abraham *.

In plain terms, the Action was enjoined as the con veyance of information to the Actor, of something he had requested to know : This mode of information by Signs instead of Words being, as we have shewn, of common practice in those early Ages : And as the force of the following reasoning is founded on that ancient custom, I must request the Reader carefully to review what hath been said in an early part of the Fourth Volume, Book IV. Sect. 4. concerning the origin, progress, and various modes of personal converse ; where it is seen, how the conveying information, and giving directions, to Another, by Signs and Actions, instead of ft'ords9 came to be of general practice in the first rude Ages ; and how, in compliance therewith, GOD was pleased

frequently

" TURF, ; the greatest virtue to be the most villanons action* and '* the most virtuous thoughts to be the most criminal : He can in '* a quarter of an hour, make ABRAHAM willing to kill his Son, " which however is the most abominable thought a man can Count Zinzendurf 's Serm. in Rimius, p. 53,

* Gen. xxii. i.

6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

frequently to converse with the holy Patriarchs and Prophets in that very manner.

Laying down therefore what hath been said on this subject, in the place referred to, as a Postulatum; I undertake to prove the following Proposition :

I.

THAT WHEN GOD SAYS TO ABRAHAM, TAKE NOW THY SON, THINE ONLY SON ISAAC, $c * THE

COMMAND IS MERELY AN INFORMATION BY ACTION, INSTEAD OF WORDS, OF THE GREAT SACRIFICE OF CHRIST FOR THE REDEMPTION OF MANKIND, GIVEN AT THE EARNEST REQUEST OF ABRAHAM, WHO LONGED IMPATIENTLY TO SEE CHRIST'S DAY-, and is, in its nature, exactly the same as those informations to the Prophets, where to this Man, God says, Make thee bonds and yokes, and put them on thy neck f ; to another • — Go take unto thee a wife of whoredoms J, <§*c. and to a third — Prepare thee stuff for removing \ , S$c. that

is, AN INFORMATION OF HIS PURPOSE BY ACTION

INSTEAD OF WORDS ; in the first case, foretelling the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar over Edom, Moab, Am- mon, Tyre, and Sidon ; in the second, declaring his abhorrence of the idolatries of the House of Israel ; and in the third, the approaching Captivity of Zedekiah.

The foundation of my Thesis I lay in that scripture of St. John, where JESUS says to the unbelieving Jews,

YOUR FATHER ABRAHAM REJOICED TO SEE MY DAY ;. AND HE SAW IT, AND WAS GLAD||.

i. If we consider Abraham's personal character, together with the choice made of him for head and origin of that People which GOD would separate and make holy to himself; from whence was to arise the REDEEMER of Mankind, the ultimate end of that separation; we cannot but conclude it probable, that the knowledge

• Gen. xxii. a. f Jerem. xxvii. 2. J Ploseai. 2.

§ Ezek. xii. 3. jj Chap. viii. ver. 56.

Of

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 7

of this Redeemer would be revealed to him. Shall 1 hide from Abraham that thing which I do*? says GOD, in a matter that much less concerned the Father of the Faith ful. And here, in the words of JESUS, we have this probable truth arising from the nature of the thing, made certain and put out of all reasonable question — Abraham rejoiced, says JESUS, to see my DAY f, f5}vty*c'/>«» TW Iptv. Now when the figurative word day is used, not to express in general the period of any ones existence, but to denote his peculiar office and employment, it must needs signify that very circumstance in his life, which is characteristic of such office and employment. But JESUS is here speaking of his peculiar office arid-employ ment, as appears from the occasion of the debate, which was his saying, If any man keep my commandments, lie shall never taste of death, intimating thereby the virtue of his office of Redeemer. Therefore, by the word DAT must needs be meant that characteristic circumstance of his life ; But that circumstance was the laying down his life for the Redemption of Mankind. Consequently, by the word DAY is meant the great sacrifice of CHRIST I". Hence we may discover the real or affected ignorance of the Socinian Comment upon this place ; which would have day only to signify in general the life of CHRIST, or the period of his abode here on earth.

To reconcile the learned Reader to the propriety and elegance as well as to the truth of this sense of the word, Day, he may observe, that as Jesus entitles his great Work, in his state of humiliation, the Redemption of Mankind, by the name of HIS DAY ; so is he pleased to give the same appellation to his other great Work, in his triumphant state, the Judgment of J\ I unkind. " For as the lightning " (says he) that lightneth out of the one part° under " heaven, — so shall also the Son of man be in HIS ' DAY§." But this figure is indeed as usual in Scrip-

* Gen. xviii. 17. f John viii. 56,

| See Note [A] at the end of this Book, § Luke xvii, 34.

B 4 tare

8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

ture as it is natural in itself. Thus that signal catastrophe in the fortunes of the Jewish People, both temporal and spiritual, their Restoration, is called their DAY — Then shall the Children of Judah (says God by the Prophet Hosea) and the children of Israel) be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be THE DAY of Israel*.

2. But not only the matter, but the manner, likewise of this great Revelation, is delivered in the text — Abraham rejoiced to SEE my day: and he SAW it, and was glad. — 'lyy. IAH* TW vpig&v ^w Iptv' y^ i IAE — This evidently shews the Revelation to have been made, not by relation in words, but by REPRESENTATION in action. The verb ti$u is frequently used in the New Testament, in its proper signification, to see sensibly, but whether used literally or figuratively, it always denotes a lull intuition. That the expression was as strong in the Syrian langi; ?;e used by JESUS, as here in the Greek of his Historian, appears from the reply the Jews made to him — Thou cut not yet fifty years old, and hast thou SEEN Abra ham^? Plainly intimating that they understood the assertion of Abrahams seeing Christ's day to be a real beholding him in person. We must conclude therefore, from the words of the text, that the Redemption of Man kind was not only revealed to Abraham, but was revealed likewise by representation. A late Writer, extremely well skilled in the style of Scripture, was so sensible of the force of JESUS'S words, £hat, though he had no suspicion they related to any part of Abraham's recorded history, yet he saw plainly they implied an information by repre sentation — Thus also Abraham (says he) saw the day of CHRIST, and zvas glad. But this must be in a typical or prophetical vision J. — The excellent Dr. Scott is of the same opinion. lie supposes " the words reler to ' some peculiar discoveries, which the Spirit of God

* Chap i. ver. n. f John viii. 57.

J See Note [B] at the end of this Book.

" might

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 9

" might make to Abraham, for his own private conso- " lation, though not recorded in Scripture**?

So far, then, is clear, that Abraham had indeed this Revelation. The next question will be, whether we can reasonably expect to find it in the history of his life, recorded in the Old Testament? And that we may find it here, both the words of JESUS, and the nature of the thing, assure us.

i. We learn, by the history of CHRIST'S Ministry, that in his disputations with the Jew?, he never urged them with any circumstance of GOD'S Dispensations to their Forefathers, which they either were not, or might not be, well acquainted with by the study of their Scriptures. The reason is evident. His credentials were twofold, SCRIPTURE and MIRACLES. In the first way therefore of confirming his Mission, if, instead of appealing to the course of GOD'S Dispensation to his chosen People, as delivered in Scripture, he had given them an unknown history of that Dispensation, (as was one of the tricks of Mahomet in his Alcoran) such a method had been so far from supporting his Character, that it would have heightened the unfavourable prejudices of Unbelievers towards him : as looking like a confession that the known history was against him ; and that he was forced to invent a new one, to countenance his pretensions. He must, therefore, for the necessary support of his Character, appeal to some acknowleged Facts. These were all contained in SCRIPTURE and TRADITION. But, we know, he always studiously declined supporting himself on their Traditions, though they were full of circum stances favourable to the Religion he came to propagate, such as the doctrines of eternal Life, and the Resur rection of the Body: Nay, he took all occasions of decrying their TRADITIONS as impious corruptions, by which they had rendered the WRITTEN word of none effect. We conclude, therefore, from JESLJS'S own * Christian Life, Vol. V, p. 194.

words,

io THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

words, that the circumstance of Abraham's knowledge of his Day is certainly to be found in Abraham's history : Not in so clear a manner, indeed, as to be understood by a Carnal-minded Jew, nor even by a System-making Christian, for reasons hereafter to be explained; yet certainly There ; and certainly proved to be There, by the best rules of logic and criticism.

2. But though this did not (as it does) appear from the words of JESUS, yet it might be collected from the very nature of the thing. For, admit only the fact (as we now must) that Abraham did see CHRIST'S Day, and it is utterly incredible that so capital a circumstance should be omitted in his History, a sacred Record, pre ordained for one of the supports and evidences of CHRIST'S Religion. That it could not be delivered in the book of Genesis, in terms plainly to be understood by the People, during the first periods of a preparatory Dispensation, is very certain ; as will be seen hereafter : But then, this is far from being a reason why it should not be recorded at all : Great ends, such as supporting the truth of the future Dispensation, being to be gained by the delivery of it even in so obscure a manner.

Having thus far cleared our way, and shewn, that the doctrine of Redemption was revealed to Abraham; and that the history of that Revelation is recorded in Scrip ture ; we proceed to the proof of these two points :

I. That there is no place, in the whole history of Abra- liam, but this, where he is commanded to offer up his Son, which bears the least marks or resemblance of such a Revelation.

II. That this Command to offer up his Son, has all the marks of such a Revelation.

I. On the first head, it will be necessary to give a short abstract of Abraham's story : in which we find a regular account of the course and order of GOD'S Dispensations to him, from the time of his being called out of Chaldea,

2 tO

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 11

to the Command to offer up his Son Isaac ; the last of GOD'S Revelations to him, recorded in Scripture.

The first notice given us of this Patriarch is in the account of his Genealogy, Family, 'and Country*. We are then toldf, that God called him from his father's house to a Land which he should -shew him: And to ex*- cite his obedience, he promises to make of him a great Nation^: to have him in his peculiar protection, and to make all the Nations of the Earth blessed through hirn^. The last part of this promise is remarkable, as it con tains the proper end of GOD'S Choice and Separation of him and his Posterity; and so, very fitly made, by the sacred Writer, the foundation of the history of GOD'S Dispensations to him; and a mark to direct the reader to what, they are all ultimately to be referred. Which, by the way, exposes the extreme absurdity in Collins and Tindal, who would have the blessing here promised to be only an Eastern form of speech, honourable to the Father of the Faithful. — When Abraham, in obedience to this command, was come into the land of Canaan ||, GOD vouchsafed him a farther Revelation of his Will; and now told him, that this was the Land (which he had before said he would shew him) to be inherited by his Seed**. When he returned from Egypt, GOD revealed himself, still farther, and marked out the bounds^ of that Land, which he assured him should be to him and his Seed for ever J J. Which Seed should be as the dust of the earth for number§§. After all these gracious and re peated assurances, we may well suppose Abraham to be now grown uneasy at his Wife's barrenness, and his own want of issue to inherit the Promises. Accordingly,, we find him much disturbed with these apprehensions j|||; and that GOD, to remove them, appeared to him in a vision,

* Gen. xi. 27, & seq. -f- Chap. xii. ver. i. J Ver. 2,

§ Ver. 3. |j Ver. 5. ** Ver. 7.

tt Chap. xiii. ver. 14. J J Ver, 15. §§ Ver. 16.

|j|j Chap, xv, ver, i.

and

12 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL

and said, Fectr not, Abram? I am thy shield, and exceed ing great reward. Abraham, thus encouraged to tell his grief, confessed it to be for his want of issue, and for that he suspected the promised blessings were to be inherited Iby hrs adopted children, the sons of his servant Eliezer ef Damascus*. To ease him of this disquiet, GOD was now pleased to acquaint him, that his design was not, that an adopted son should inherit, but one out of his awn bowels^. And, for farther assurance, he instructs feira in the various fortunes of his Posterity — That his Seed should be a stranger in a Land that was not theirs, which Land should afflict them four hundred years, and that then he would judge that Nation, and afterwards, hrhig them out with great substance to inherit the Land of Canaan^. At the same time GOD more particu larly marks out the bounds of the Promised Land, and reckons up the several Nations which then inhabited it§. Tilings being in this train, and Abraham now satisfied that the Seed of his loins was to inherit the Promises ; Sarah, on account of her sterility, persuaded her Hus band to go in unto her Hand -maid Hagar, the Egyptian ||. In this she indulged her own vanity mid ambition; she would have a Son whom she might adopt; It may be (says she} that I may obtain children by ACT**; and she flattered herself with being, at the same time, an instru ment to promote the designs of Providence : Behold now (says she) the Lord hath restrained me from bearing. To this project Abraham consented. Hagar conceived, ami bare a Son, called Ishmael|'|;. The good Patriarch was now fully satisfied: He grew fond of Ishmael; and reckoned upon him for the inheritor of the promises. To correct this mistake, GOD vouchsafed him a new Reve lation ££; in \\hich he is told, that GOD would not only (as had been before promised) bless and multiply his

* Chap, xv.ver. 2, 3. f Ver. 4. J Ver. 13, 14*

^ Ver. i&. to trie end. [| Chap. xvi. ** Ver. 3.

*H Ver. 15. }{ Chap. xvii.

Posterity

Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 13

Posterity in an extraordinary manner, but would sepa rate them from all other Nations, and he would be their GOD, and they should be his PEOPLE*. And this national adoption requiring a mutual Covenant, the rite of CIRCUMCISION is at the same time enjoined as the mark of the Covenantf- Lastly/ Abraham is shewn his foad mistake, and told, that it was not the Son of' tlie hond-u-oman, but of his Wife Sarah, who was ordained to be Heir of the Promises J. But Abraham had so long in dulged himself in his mistake, and consequently in Ms .affection for Ishmael, that he begs GOD would indulge it too — O that Ishmael might live -before thee\. And GOD, in compassion to his paternal fondness, graciously promises that the Posterity of Ishmael should become exceeding great and powerful j), but, that, nevertheless, his Covenant should be with Isaac, and with Jus &&d after him*§. However, this Revelation having been re ceived with some kind of doubt, as appears by the words of the historian * *, God wras pleased to repeat the pro mise of a Son by Sarah ff : and even to mark the time of his birth;); J ; according to which, Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a Son §§. After this, GOD revealed him self yet again to Abraham ||||, with a command to put away his Son Ishmael; and to assure him, that the CHOSEN POSTERITY should come from Isaac ; For Abraham was not yet weaned from his unreasonable partiality for Ishmael ; but still reckoned upon him as his Second hopes, in case of any disaster or misfortune, that should happen to Isaac. This appears from IshrnaeFs insolent behaviour^; from Abraham's great unwil lingness to dismiss him *f ; and from God's assuring him, m order to make him easy, That in Isaac his Seed should

* Ver. 7, & seq. f See note [C] at the end of this Book.

J Ver. 16. § Ver. 18. || Ver. 20, & seq.

1T Ver. 19. * * Ver. 17. f f Chap, xviii, ' -

JJ Ver. 10. 14. §§ Chap. xxi.ver2. ||jl Ver. 12*

ff Ver, 9. *f Ver. u-

14 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

be called*. We now come to the famous History of

the Command to offer up his Son Isaac — And it came to pass (says the sacred historian) AFTER THESE THINGS, that God did tempt Abraham, and said, Take now thy Son, THINE ONLY sox Isaac, whom thou loves t, and get thee unto the land of Moriah: and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. And Abraham arose f, &c. This was the last of God's Revelations to Abraham — And it came to pass after these things — And with this, the history of them is closed.

Here we see all these Revelations, except the last, are plain and clear, as referring to TEMPORAL Felicities to be conferred on^ Abraham and his Posterity after the flesh ; through* whom, some way or other, a BLESSING was to extend to all Mankind. Not one of these there fore can pretend to be that Revelation of the Redemption of the world. The last is the only dark and obscure one of the whole; which, if indeed a Revelation of this grand Mystery, must of necessity, as we shall shew, be darkly and obscurely recorded.

But to this perhaps it may be objected, that the famous Promise of GOD to Abraham, that in him should all the Families of the earth be blessed^., is that Revelation ; because St. Paul calls this the preaching of the Gospel unto him — And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Heathen through Faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed \. To this 1 reply, that the Apostle is here convincing the Galatians, that the Gospel of CHRIST is founded on the same PRINCIPLE \vith that which justified Abraham, namely, FAITH; — Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness ||. He then pursues his argument in this manner, Therefore, they which be of Faith> are blessed

* Chap. xxi. ver. ia. f Chap, xxii, ver. i, 2, 3.

J Chap. xii. ver. 3. § GaU iii, 8, jj Ver, 6.

with

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMON STRATED. 15

with faithful Abraham*. The reason he gives is from the promise in question, given in reward of Abraham's Faith, that in him should all Nat torn be blessed. This is the force of the argument ; and it is very finely managed But then the terms, Faith and Gospel, are here used, as they very often are in the apostolic writings f, not in their specific but generic sense, for confidence in any one, and glad tidings in general. For it is plain, Abraham's Faith here recommended, was not that Christian Faith in JESUS the MESSIAH, but, faith in GOD, who had promised to make his Posterity according to the flesh, as numerous as the stars of Heaven, when as yet he had no offspring £. In a like latitude of expression, St. Paul uses the word vptvaykxfypvu, to preach the Gospel be forehand ; not the tidings of the Messiah the Redeemer, but the effects of the Redemption wrought by him, a BLESSING on the whole race of mankind. Tidings which indeed referred to a future Dispensation: and, in this, differing from his use of the word Faith, which did not. But then, this is very far from his SEEING CHRIST'S DAY ; of which indeed he speaks in another place, as we shall see presently. It is true, this promised BLESS ING was the preparatory Revelation, by which, we were to estimate the ultimate end of all the following ; and on which, we must suppose them to be built: And so much we are concerned to prove it was. I conclude therefore, that when Jesus says, Abraham saw his Day; and when St. Paul says, that he had the, Gospel preached before unto him, they spoke of two different Revelations. We come, therefore,

II. To the second point : which is to shew, that the COMMAND to offer up Isaac was the very revelation of CHRIST'S DAY, or the Redemption of mankind, by his death and sufferings.

* Ver. 9.

t See what hath been said on this subject in the preceding dis course on the xith chapter to the Utbrei&s. | Gen, xy. 6.

i. We

x6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Bor>k VI.

1 . We may observe, from this short view of Abraham's history, that all GOD'S Revelations to him, even unto this last, open by degrees ; and relate, primarily indeed, to his Posterity according to the flesh, but ultimately, to the whole race of Mankind : as appears from that MY STICK Promise so early made to him as the foun dation of all the following, that in Him should all the Families of the earth be blessed. These are the two great coincident Truths, to which all these Revelations tend. But the last, the famous Command in question, which one would naturally expect to find the confirmation and completion of the rest, hath, if the common Inter preters understand it right, no kind of relation to them, but is entirely foreign to every thing that preceded. Hence we conclude, and surely not unreasonably, that there is something more in \he.Command than these Interpreters, resting in the outside relation, have yet discovered to us.

2. But this is not all. The Command \ as it hath been hitherto understood, is not only quite disjoined from the rest of Abraham's history, but likewise occu pies a place in it, which, according to our ideas of things, it hath certainly usurped. The Command is sup posed to be given as a Trial only*. Now when the great Searcher of hearts is pleased to try any of his Servants, either for example sake, or for some ether end favourable of his Dispensations to mankind ; as in this, he condescends to the manner of men, who cannot judge of the merits of their inferior Agents without Trial, so we may be assured, he would accommodate himself to their manner likewise, in that which is the material circum stance of a Trial : But, amongst men, the Agent is always tried before he be set on work, or' rewarded ; and not after : because the Trial is in order to know, or to make it known, whether he be fit for the work, or deserving of the Reward. When we come therefore to this place, and see a Command only to tempt or try

* See Note [D] at the end of this Book.

Abraham,

Sect. 5-] OP MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 17

Abraham, we naturally expect, on his answering to the Trial, to find him importantly employed or greatly re warded. On the contrary we are told, that this Trial was made after all his Work was done, and all his Reward received — And it came to pass after these things. Nay, what is still more strange, alter he had been once tried already. For the promise to him, when he was yet childless, his Wife barren, and both of them far advanced in years, that his seed should be as tlie stars of Heaven for multitude, was a Trial of his faith ; and his believing, against all probability in a natural way, the sacred Historian tells us, was accounted to him J or righteousness*. Such therefore being the method Loth of GOD and Men in this matter, we must needs con clude, that the Command was not, according to the common notion, a Trial only, because it comes ajter all GOD'S Dispensations f. Yet as the sacred text assures us it was a Trial, and as a Trial necessarily precedes the employment or reward of the person tr ied ; we must needs conclude, that as no employment, so some benefit followed this trial. Now, on our interpretation, & benefit, as we shall see, did follow : We have reason therefore to conclude that this interpretation is the true.

3. Having seen the difficulties arising from the com mon interpretation of the Command, let us view it now on the other .side ; in the new light in which we have adventured to place it. And here we shall find that every circumstance of the Story concurs to support our interpretation. From the view given of Abraham's his tory, we see, as was said before, how all GOD'S reve lations to him, to this last, ultimately related to that mystic fundamental promise made to him, on his first Vocation, that /// him sknildatl the families of the earth be blessed. GOD opens the scheme of his Dispensations by exact and regular steps ; and the Revelations follow one another gradually and in order. Abraham is first * Gen. xv. 6. | See Note [E] at the end of this Book.

VOL, VI. C commanded

i8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

commanded to go into a Land which should be shewn to him — then that Land, to be possessed by his numerous posterity, is exhibited before him — Its distinct boundaries are afterwards- marked out — He is next assured, while yet childless, that his posterity, to which so much was promised, should not be from an adapted son, but from one out of iiis own loins — He is then told that his son should be born of Sarah — which is- followed by a formal execution of the COVENANT confirmed by the seal of Circumcision — After all this, the birth of Isaac is pre dicted : — who being born at the appointed time, Ishmael is ordered to be sent away ; to design with more certainty the succession of the son by Sarah. Here we see through out, a gradual opening, and fit preparative for some farther Revelation ; which, in pursuance of this regular scheme of progressive Dispensations, could be no other than that of the REDEMPTION OF MANKIND BY THE MESSIAH, the completion of the whole Economy of Grare, as it only is the explanation of his first and fundamental Promise, that in Abraham should all the families of the earth be bkswd. But now, the sole remaining revelation of God's "Will to Abraham, recorded by the sacred Historian, is the Command to offer up his son Isaac. This CGMMANP, then, as there is no other that can pretend to be the revelation in question, and as ive have shewn it must be somewhere or other recorded in Abraham's story, is the very revelation we seek ; which perfects all the foregoing, and makes the whole series- complete and uniform. And the place in which we find it is its proper station ; for, being the completion of the reit, it must needs be the last in order.

Such, in the intention of the Holy Spirit, doth St. CHRYSOSTOM, in his comment on the place, understand

it to be — TW Je 'HMEPAN i^T«vla poi JW^r Xiyi^v Tr,]f TS

And ;h this he is joined or followed by ERASMUS, in his paraphrase. Hoc senigmate Jesus significavit, Abraham,

quuitv

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 19

quum pararet iminolare filium Isaac, per Prophetia? spi- ritum vidisse Dominum Jesum in mortem crucis a patre tradendum pro mundi salute. — But these excellent men, not reflecting on that ancient mode of information, where the Inquirer is answered by a significative action instead of speech, never conceived that this Command was an imparted information of that kind, but rather a typical representation unsought, and given in an enjoined Rite ; of whose import Abraham had then no knowledge*.

4. Again, We find the Revelation of the redemption of mankind in that very place, where, if considered only in itself, and not relatively, as the completion of the rest, we should, according to all the rules of plain sense, be disposed to seek it. We must know then that this Revelation, as shall be proved from the words of JESUS, Abraham rejoiced to see my day., and he saw it, ami was glad, was ardently desired and sought after by the Patriarch. Now the happiness or REDEMPTION of man kind promised, on Abraham's first Vocation, to come through him, could not but make him more and more inquisitive into the manner of its being brought about, in proportion as he found himself to be more and more personally concerned as the Instrument of so great a blessing. But every new Revelation would shew him still farther interested in this honour : Therefore, by the time Ishmael was ordered to be sent away, and the promised Seed fixed in Isaac, we must needs suppose him very impatient to understand the Mystery of Re demption ; and so, fitly prepared to receive this last and supreme Revelation. This, in the like caics, we find to be the disposition and state of n.ind in the holy nsen of old. Thus Daniel, by the study of the Prophecies of Jeremiah, understanding the approaching restoration of the Jews, applies himself by tasting and prayer for God's further information ; and the Angel Gabriel is sent unto him. So John, anxious and solicitous for the suffering * See note [F] at the end of this Book.

c 3 Churchj

20 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. VI.

Church, being in prayers on;the Lord's day, was favoured1 with all his glorious Revelations.

5. Again, The new light in. which this^ Command is placed, dispels all that perplexity in the common interpre tation (taken notice of above) arising from our ideas of a trial] where that which should in. use and reason go before some extraordinary favour, Is made to come after all. But now, according to our sense of the Com mand, the trial, as is meet, precedes the last and greatest- favour ever bestowed by God on Abraham.

6. To confirm all this, we may consider that this- interpretation of the Command is most easy and natural, fts being intirely agreeable to the ancient way ef com municating information. We have shewn •*" it to have been the general custom of Antiquity-, in personal con ferences, to instruct by actions instead of words ; a custom begun out of necessity, but continued out of choice, for the superior advantages it hath in: making an impression. Eor motion, naturally significative, which* enters at the eye, hath a much stronger effect than articulate sound? only arbitrarily significative, which enters at the ear. We have shewn likewise, by numerous examples, that God himself vouchsafed, in compliance to a general custom, to use this way of information, when he in structed the holy Patriarchs and- Prophets in- his Will.

7. Again, As the high importance of this Revelation: seemed to require its being given in the strong and forcible way of action |, so nothing can be conceived more apposite to convey the information required, than- this very action. Abraham desired earnestly to be let into the mystery of the REDEMPTION; and GOD, to instruct him (in the best manner humanity is capable of receiving- instruction) in the infinite extent of divine- goodness to mankind, who spared not his own Son^bufr delivered him up for us alt%, let Abraham feel, by exr

* See Book IV. § 4. f See aote [G] at. the end of this Book. J Iloca..viiL 32.

perience^

Sect 5.] OT MOSES DEMONSTRATED- -21

perience, what it was to lose a ibeloved Son ; — Take now <thy son, thine only son Isaac ; the Son born miraculously when Sarah was past -child-bearing, as Jesus was miracu lously born of a pure Virgin. The duration too of the -action was the same as that between CHRIST'S Death :-and Resurrection ; both which were designed to be re presented ?in it : and still farther, not only the final jarchiet ypical Sacrifice of the Son -of GO-D was figured in the command to offer Isaac, but the intermediate Typical sacrifice, m the Mosaic Economy, was repre sented, by the permitted sacrifice of the Ram offered up anstead of Isaac.

8. The last reason I shall offer in support of this .point, that the Command concerning Isaac was this Revelation of Christ's -.day, or the redemption of mai;i~ .kind by his death and sufferings, ig the allusion which Jesus makes (in these words, Abraham rejoiced to sac my day, $c.) to the folio w-ing words of Moses, ia the history of the command — And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh : as it is said to this day. In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.

To shew that Jesus alluded to these words of Moses, ,-and had them hi his eye, when he speaks of Abraham rejoicing to see his day, It will be proper .to -consider the {true force and meaning of either text. The words of .Jesus have been fully considered already *.

And, in the words of Moses-?- Abraham vailed the, mime of that place Jehovak-jireh : as it is mid to this /%, In the mount (f the Lord it shall be seen — we have the assertion of Jesus confirmed, that Abraham saw Christ's day, and KJ&S glad. \.Jehovah-jireh signifies, as several of the best interpreters agree, THE LORD .SHALL B:E SEENf. JBut with what propriety could this

name

* See p. 6. & seq.

t " Dominus videbitur, (says the learned Father Houbigant)

'_ i°, TSonvidetur, ne ab futuro verbi aberremus. 2°, Non videbit, non

* ,modo quia now adUi.tar quid sit Deus visurus, se4 etiara quia in tota

22 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

name be given to it by Abraham, if, in this transaction, he had not seen the representation oi the Lord's passion, which was to happen in a future age ? And if he did see it, how apposite was the name! The Historian goes on — as it Is said to this day. In the mount of the Lord it shall he sctu ; or more exactly to the Hebrew— ^/or he said, in the mount THE LORD SHALL BE SEEN. In the first part of the verse, the sacred Historian tells us that Abraham called the mount, The Lord shall be seen] and in the latter part he acquaints us with the manner how Abraham imposed that appellation, namely, by the use of a proverbial speech implying the reason of the name — To-day in the mount, the Lord shall be seen*. Proverbial speeches, before the general use of recording abstract names ond things by writing, being the best and safest conveyance of the memory of events to Posterity. Conformably to this interpretation of the text, the Histo rian on his entrance on the transaction calls the land of

Moriah,

*' ilia' visione, hominis est viderc, Domini, vidcri; propter quam " causciin Deus locum istum mox nomine •c-isionis insigniebat. Nimi- " rum Deus Abrabamo id ostendit, quod Abraham vidit 4' gavisus " est." The near relation of these words of Jesus to those of Moses, was too strongly marked to be overlooked by this very judi cious Critic, though he considered the transaction in no other light than as a, Type of the death and passion of Jesus.

* Atque hoc illud est (says Father Houbigant) quod memoriae sem- piternae Abraham consecrabat, cum ita subjungeret hodie in montey Domimts vidcbitur ; illud hodie sic accipiens, ut acccpit Paulus A p. illud }3avidis, hodie si vucem cjns aitdientis; quod hodie tamdiu durat, quamdiu biecuLi ilia durahunt, de quibus Apostolus donee hodie cogno- iniHctur. Propterea Abraham non dicit, hodie Dominus ridftur, Nam id spectaeuhim nuric solus videt Abraham, postea omnes visuri sunt, et ad omnes pertinebit istud, videbitur, generatim dictum, cum omnss Unigenitum in monte viderint generis humani victimamfactam. Kec aliain sententiair. series verborum patitur. Kx quaserie illi de viant, qui haec verba, dixit cnim hodie in •mon.tt d> minus — Mo&i sic Darranti attrtbuurit, propferea dicitur hodie /n monte Domini— quasi yeu -rfet Moysies usurpatum bua aetate provei bium. Naai si sic erit, non jumdoee r\\-, Luic loco nomen fecerit Duminiis ridebitur;

quam tainen iiomiuum n«tatioriem in sacris pagiius non omittunt ii, quicumque in-mina rebus imponunt. Quod contra plane aucebit Abi "c, eo Moysis sic narrat, vocai'it women, loci

isn'i;^.; nam dixit, in monte Dcus vi

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 23

Moriah, to which Abraham went with Isaac (according to Jerom's interpretation), the LAND OF VISION, which shews that the words of Jesus. Abraham SAW MY DAT, and KYW-GLAD, evidently allude to this extraordinary cir cumstance; namely, the disposition of Abraham's mind on the occasion, expressed in his memorial of a new name imposed on the scene of action; the ancient way of commemorating joyful and happy events. In a word, Jesus says, Abraham saw his day ; and Abraham, by the name he imposed upon the mount, d-eclares the same thing. But as the VISION was of a public, not of a private nature, he ex-presses himself in terms which signify what mankind in general shall see, not what he himself had seen — THE LORD SHALL BE SEEN". From a vague allusion, therefore, of the words of Jesus, to this history of the command in general, we have now fixed th^m to the very words of Moses, to which they more particularly refer.

The sum then of the Argument is this — JESUS ex pressly says that Abraham saw, and rejoiced to ee, his day, or the great Sacrifice for the sins of mankind by representation — The records of sacred History must needs verify his assertion — But there is no place in Scripture which presents the least traces of this Revela tion, except the history of the Command to offer Isaac. This history not only easily and naturally admits of such a sense, but even demands it— And reciprocally, this sense gives all imaginable light to the History ; and re moves the greatest difficulties attending the common in terpretation of it. Hence, we conclude with certainty, that the command to Abraham to offer up his son was only ^an INFORMATION IN ACTION, which, ^. Abraham's earnest request, God was graciously pleased to give him of the great sacrifice of Christ for the Redemption of mankind. The thing to be proved. Two great ends seem to be gained by this interpretation : The one, to free the Command from a supposed violation of natural

c 4 Law;

24 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL

Law; The other, to support the connexion and d '-'pen dency between the two Revelations ; for this interpre tation makes the history of the Command a DIRECT Prophesy of Christ as Redeemer of the world ; whereas the common brings it, at most, but to a TYPICAL inti mation. Now the Defenders * of the common inter pretation confess, that " the evidence of direct Prophecies is superior to that of Types.*9

The only plausible Objection which can be made to my explanation, I conceive to be the following ~" That what " is here supposed the principal and proper reason of the " Command, is not at all mentioned by the sacred Histo- " rian ; but another, of a different nature ; namely, the " Trial of Abraham's faith and obedience — And it came " to pass after these things, God did tempt Abraham, *' ai id said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac — And " when the affair is over, the same reason is again in- " sinuated : — By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, "for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not " withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing f " mil bless thcrf" <§T.

i. To the first part of the Objection I answer, That the knowledge of God's future dispensation in the re demption of mankind by the death of his Son, revealed, as a singular grace, to the Father of the Faithful, was what could by no means be communicated to the Hebrew People, when Moses wrote this History for their use ; because they being then to continue long under a carnal Economy, this knowledge, of the END OF THE LAW, would have greatly indisposed them to a Dispensation, with which (as a Schoolmaster, that was to bring them by degrees, through a harsh and rugged discipline, to the easy yoke of CHRIST) GOD, in his infinite wisdom, thought fit to exercise them J. But he who does not see, from the plain reason of the thing, the necessity of the

* Dr. Stebbing, f Gen. xxii. 16, 17.

J See note [11] at the end of this Book.

Historian's

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 25

Historian's silence, is referred, for farther satisfaction, to what hath been already, and will be hereafter said, to evince the necessity of such a conduct, in other momen tous points relating to that future Dispensation,

In the mean time, I give him St. Paul's word for this conduct of Moses, who expressly tells us, that he pb- scuiTcl soine parts of his history, or put a veil over his face, that the Israelites wight not see to the end of that Law which was to be abolished. And what was that end, if not the Redemption of mankind by the death and sacri fice of Christ? — J/oi'&y (says he) put a veil over hisface^ that the Children of Israel could 'not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished. But their minds . were blinded: Jor until this day rtmalneth the same red untaken away, in the reading of the Old Testament-, which veil is done away in CHRIST*.

But it may be asked, perhaps, " If such Revelations' could not be clearly recorded, why were they recorded at all?" For a very plain as well as weighty reason; that when the fulness of time should come, they might rise up in Evidence against Infidelity, for the real relation and dependency between the two Dispensations of Moses and of Christ^ ; when from this, and divers the like instances it should appear, that the Jirst Dispensation could be but very imperfectly understood without a re ference to the latter.

But had not the sacred Writer designedly obscured this illustrious Revelation, by an omission ef the atten dant circumstances, yet the narrative of such a converse by action was not in its nature so intelligible or obvious, as that where God is shewn conversing by action, to the Prophets, in the several instances formerly given J, And the reason is this. Those informations, as they are ^given to the Prophets for the instruction of the People, have necessarily, in the course of the history, their ex-

* 2 Cor. iii. 13, 14. And see note [I] at the end of this Book. f See note [K] at the end of this Book. % See Bouk IV. § 4.

planations

26 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL

planations annexed. But .the information to Abraham being solely for his own private consolation (as Dr. Scott expresses it above) there was no room for that formal explanation, which made the commanded actions to the Prophets so clear and intelligible. — Yet, as if I had never said this, Dr. Slabbing tells the world, I make this action of Abraham's parallel to those of the Prophets; whereas (says he) it differ* from them all in a very ma terial circumstance, as they had their several explana tions annexed, and this had not. But to shew by example, as well as comparison, that obscurity is naturally atten dant on the relation of converse by action, where the in formation is for the sake of the Actor only, I shall instance in a case where no obscurity was affected by the Historian. It is the relation of Jacob's wrestling with the Angel*. The Patriarch, on his return from Haran to his native Country, hearing of his brother Esau's power, and dreading his resentment for the defrauded Birthright, addresses himself for protection in this dis tress to the GOD of his Fathers, with all humility and confidence. GOD hears his prayer; and is pleased to inform him of the happy issue of the adventure, by a significative action ; The following night, he has a struggle with an Angel, with whom he is suffered to make his part so good, that from thence he collected GOD had granted his petition. This is the circumstance in Jacob's history, which affords such mirth to our illiterate Liber tines: For this information by action concerning only the Actor, who little needed to be told the meaning of a mode of Instruction, at that time in vulgar use, hath now an obscurity which the Scripture-relations of the siunc mode of information to the Prophets are free from, by reason of their being given for the use of the People, to whom they were explained.

But it may perhaps be asked, " Why, when the fulness of time was come, Scripture did not break its long silence,

* Gen. xxii. -74, etc,

aod

Sect. 5.] OP MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 27

and instruct us in the principal and proper reason of tlie Command to offer Isaac?" I answer, that it has done so. The words of Jesus are a convincing proou Nay, I might up farther, and say that this is not the only place when1 the true reason of the Command is plainly hinted at. The Author of the Epistle to rise Hebrews, speaking of this very Command, says— By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up haac — accounting chat God was able to raise him up even Jrom the dead, from whence also he received him IN A FIGURE*; EN HA- PABOAHt, in a Parable: a mode of information either by words or actions, which consists inputting one thing for another. Now, in a Writer who regarded this com manded action as a. representative information of the Redemption of mankind, nothing could be more fine or easy than this expression. For, though Abraham did not indeed receive Isaac restored to life after a real dissoiu-^ tion, yet the Son being in this action to represent CHRIST suffering death for the sins of the world, when the Father brought him safe from mount Moriah after three days, (during which the Son was in a state of condemnation to death) the Father plainly i ceived him, under the cha racter of CHRIST'S Representative, as restored trotn the dead. For, as his being brought to the mount, there bound, and laid upon the Altar, figured the death and sufferings of CHRIST, so his being taken from thence alive, as properly figured CHRIST'S Resurrection from the dead. With the highest propriety therefore and ele gance of speech, might Abraham be said to receive Isaac from the dead in a parable, or in representation f. But the nature of the command not being understood, these words of the epistle have been hitherto interpreted, to signify only that Isaac was a type of Christ, in the same sense thai- the old Tabernacle, in this epistle |, is called a type- frnff IIAPABOAH, that is, a thing designed by the

* Chap. xi. ver. 17—19. f gee note [L] at the end.

| Chs-p. ix. ver. 9,

Holy

2S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

Holy Spirit to have both a present significancy and a future. Which amounts but just to this, That Abraham receiving Isaac safe from mount Moriah, in the manner related by Scripture, he thereby became a Type. An ancient Interpretation, as appears from the reading of the vulgar Latin— Unde turn <$ IN PAUA.BOLAAI accepit, for In parabola, as it ought to :have been translated con formably to the Greek. However, I desire it may be observed, in car ro bora tion of my -sense <of the Command, that the resemblance to Christ's sacrifice in all the cir cumstances of the story was so strong, that Interpreters could never overlook the resemblance, i« their comments on ihe passage.

12. To the second part of the Objection, I answer thus ; It is the office of History to assign the Causes of the facts related. In those facts therefore, which have several Causes, of which the principal -cannot be con veniently told, the inferior come in properly to take its $)lace. Thus, in the case before us ; though it be made,, I presume, very evident that the principal design of the Command was to reveal to Abraham, by action instead of words, the Redemption of mankind ; yet as this was a favour of a very high nature, and conferred on Abraham at his earnest request, it was but fit he should approve him* self worthy of it by some proportionable Trial ; agreeably to what we find in Scripture to be GOD'S way of dealing \vith his favoured Servants. On this account, therefore, GOD was pleased, by the very manner in which this Mystery was revealed, to tempt or try Abraham. Where the making the favour itself the trial of his deserving it, hath all that superior, elegance and beauty which is to be conceived in the Dispensations of divine Wisdom only. Now, as the principal reason of the Command could not be conveniently told by the Historian, this inferior one of the Trial is assigned with great truth and propriety — And it came to pass after these things, God did tempt Abraham, and said, Take now thy son, §c. And it is to 6 e

Sect. 5 J OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 2$

he observed, that the very manner of recording this reason shews it to be indeed what we suppose it; an in ferior one. For it is not said that God gave this Com mand in order to try Abraham, which expresses a principal reason ; but that, m> giving the Co'mmandv God did try him, which at most only implies an inferior one. We have said, that a Trial, when approved, im plied a following reward. Now as there may be inorer- icasons than one for giving a Command r so there may be* more rewards than one attendant on a Trial. Thus it was in the case before us. And it is remarkable, that the sacred Historian has observed the same pule with regard t-o the reward of the Trial as to the reason of She Com* marrd. The principal and peculiar reward of Abraham^ Trial here was the revelation of the mystery of Redemp tion : this the Historian could not mention, for the reasons given above : but besides this, GOD rewarded him with a repetition of all the former Promises. This the Historian could, and, in pursuance of the rules of History, does mention :.; — By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because than hast done this thing? and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing I will bless, thce, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars af Heaven, and as the sand which is Uipon the. sea sJiore ; and thy seed shall possess the gate &f his enemies ; and in thy seed shall all the nations ef the. earth be blessed, becausQ thou hast obeyed my voice *,

On the whole, This Objection to the interpretation, the only one I can think of, is so far from obscuring, and weakening, that it adds great light and strength unto it For, admitting the sense here proposed, to be indeed the true, we see the Story must of necessity have been told in the very manner \ve find it to be recorded f.

Before I conclude this part of the Discourse, I shall, but just take notice how strongly this interpretation of the

* Gen. xxii. ver. 16, & seq.

t S^e note [M] at the end of this Book.

Command

30 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

Command concludes against the SOCINIANS, for the real sacrifice of CHRIST, and the proper Redemption of man kind. For if the Command was an information by action instead of words > the proof conveyed in it is decisive ; there being here no room for their evasion of its Iteing a • figurative expression, since the figurative action, the original of such expression, denotes either a real sacrifice^ or nothing at all.

II.

I come now to the other part of this Discourse, viz. to shew, that the interpretation here given intirely dissi pates all those blustering objections which Infidelity hath raised up against the historic truth of the relation.

They say, " GOD could not give such a Command to Abraham, because it would throw him into inextricable doubts concerning the Author of it, as Whether it pro ceeded from a good or an evil Being. Or if not so, but that he might be satisfied it came from GOD, it would then mislead him in his notions of the divine Attributes, and of the fundamental principles of Morality. Because,, though the revocation of the Command prevented the homicide, yet the species of the action commanded not being condemned when it was revoked, Abraham and his Family must needs have thought HUMAN SACRIFICES grateful to the Almighty: forasimple revi/King was not con demning ; but would be more naturally thought a peculiar indulgence for a ready obedience. Thus, the pagan fable of Diana's substituting a Hind in the place of Iphigenia, did not make Idolaters believe that she therefore abhorred Human Sacrifices, they having before been persuaded of the contrary, from the Command of that Idol to offer up the daughter of Agamemnon." — This is the substance, only set in a clearer light, of all their dull cloudy dis sertations on the case of Abraham *.

i. Let us see then how this case stood : GOD had been pleased to reveal to him his eternal purpose of * See mote [N] at the tnd of this Book.

making

Sect. 5.3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 31

making all mankind blessed through him : and likewise to confirm this promise, in a regular course of successive Revelations, each fuller and more explicit than the other. By this time we cannot but suppose the Father of the- Faithful must, from the nature of the thing, be become very desirous of knowing the manner how this Blessing was to be brought about : A Mystery, if we will believe the Author of our Faith, that engaged the attention of other holy men, less immediately concerned than Abraham, and consequently less stimulated and excited by their curiosity : — And JESUS turned to his Disciples -, and said privately, Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see. For I tell you that -many Prophets and Kings have DESIRED to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them, and to hear those things which ye hear, and have net heard them *. But we are assured, by the same authority, that Abraham had, in fact, this very desire highly raised in him ; Abraham rejoiced to see my- day (says JESUS), and he saw it, and was glad] or rather, He rejoiced THAT HE MIGHT SEE, INA IAH«; which implies, that the period of his joy was in the space between the promise made, anil the actual performance of it by the delivery of the Command ; consequently, that it was granted at his earnest request f. In the second place, we shall .shew from the same words, that Abraham, at the time when the Command was given, KXEW it to be that Revelation he had so earnestly re quested. This is of the highest importance for the? understanding the true nature of the Command. — Your Father Abraham rejoiced to see my Day, and he saw it,

and Was glad. *A£p«a,a, « -a'^o vpw ?JyaAAi«W!o INA

IAH* T»JV vipsgu* THV Pjpip!' >^ t*$tj «! *Xf*g9» We have observed that TV a, i'oV, in strict propriety, signifies that be might see. The English phrase, — to see} is equivocal

* Luke x. 23, 24.

t Thus all the Eastern Versions understand it : Syr. Cupidus fuit

videndi. — Pcrs. Cupidus erat ut videret. — Arab. Exoptavit videre.

opt Desidgravit, gavisus est ut Videret.

and

32 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

and ambiguous, and means either the present time, that he then did see ; or the future, that he was promised he should see: but the original 5W 1%, has only the latter sense. So that the text plainly distinguishes two different periods of Joy ; the first, when it wax promised he should see] the second, when he actually saw : And it is to be observed* that, according to the exact use oi the words, in ayaAAtao^a* is implied the tumultuous pleasure which the certain expectation of an approaching blessing, under stood only in the gross, occasions ; and, in x^w that calm and settled joy which arises from our knowledge, in the possession of it. But the Translators, perhaps, not ap prehending that there was any time between the Grant to see, and the actual seeing, turned it, he rejoiced to see ; as if it had been the Paraphrase of the Poet Nonnus,

jJVn/ y y a A XB jo •S't/y/.w.

whereas this History of Abraham hath plainly three distinct periods. The first contains GOD'S promise to grant Abraham's request, when he rejoiced that he should see ; this, for reasons given above, was wisely omitted by the Historian : Within the second period was the de livery of the Command, with which Moses's account begins : And Abraham's Obedience, through which he saw CI-IUIST'S day and was glad, includes the third f. Thus the Patriarch, we find, had a promise that big- request should be granted ; and, in regard to that pro mise, an action is commanded, which, at that time, was a common mode of information ; Abraham therefore mu t needs know it was the very information so much requested, so graciously promised, and so impatiently expected. We conclude then, on the whole, that this, Command being only the Grant of an earnest request, and known by Abraham, at the time of imposing, to be such Grant, he could not possibly have any doubt con cerning the Author of it. He was soliciting the God

* See n te [O] at the end of this Book. -\ See note [P] at the end of this

of

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 33

of Heaven to reveal to him the Mystery of Man's" Re demption, and lie received the information, in a Com mand to offer Isaac ; a Revelation, that had the closest connexion with, and was the fullest completion of, the whole series of the preceding Revelations.

2. For, (as we shall now shew, in answer to the second part of the objection) the Command could occasion no mis takes concerning the divine Attributes; it being, as was said, only the conveyance of an information by action instead of words, in conformity to the common mode of converse in the more early times. This action therefore being mere scenery, had NO MORA L IMPORT ; that is, it conveyed or implied none of those Intentions in him who commanded it, and in him who obeyed the Command, which go along with actions that have a moral import*. Consequently the injunction and obedience, in an action which hath no such import, can no way afreet the moral character of the per sons concerned : and consequently, this Command could occasion no mistakes concerning the divine Attributes, with regard to GOD'S delighting in human sacrifices. On the contrary, the very information conveyed by it, was the highest assurance to the person informed, of God's good- Mill towards man. Hence we see there was not the least occasion, when GOD remitted the offering of Isaac> that he should formally condemn human sacrifices, to prevent Abraham or his family's falling into an opinion, that such Sacrifices were not displeasing to hiinf, any more than for the Prophet Ahijah J, when he had rent

* See note [Q] at the end of this Book. f See note [li] at the end of this Book.

I " And it came to pass at that time, when Jeroboam went out of " Jerusalem, that the Prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the " way : and he had clad himself with a new garment: and they two <* were alone in the field. And Ahijah caught the new garment that " was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces. And he said to Jero- " boam, Take thee ten pieces; for thus saith the Lord the God of " Israel, Behold, I will rend the. kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, " and will give ten tribes to thee." i Kings xi. 29 — 31. 'I he circum stance of the 7iew garment was not insignificant : It was to denote the Power of the kingdom at that time in its full strength and lustre.

VOL, VI. D Jeroboam's

34 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI;

Jeroboam's garment into twelve pieces to denote the en suing division in the tribes of Israel, to deliver a moral precept against the sin of despoiling, and insulting our neighbour : For the command having no moral import , as being only an information by action, where one thing stood for the representative of another, all the conse quence that could be deduced from it was only this, that the Son of GOD should be offered up for the sins of mankind: therefore the conceptions they had of HUMAN SACRIFICES, after the command, must needs be just the same with those they had before; and therefore, instruc tion, concerning the execrable nature of this Rite, was not only needless, but altogethei; beside the question.

But this assertion that A SCENICAL REPRESENTATION HAS NO MORAL IMPORT, having been misunderstood by many, and misrepresented by more (though nothing, as I then thought, could be clearer to men versed in moral matters) I shall beg leave to explain myself. — He who affirms that a scenical representation has no moral import, cannot possibly be understood to mean (if inter preted on the ordinary rules of Logic and Common sense) any thing else than that the representation or the feigned aetion has none of that specific morality which is in the real action. He can never be supposed to mean that such a representation could never, even by accident, give birth to a moral entity, of a different species; though it kept within, much less if it trans gressed the bounds, of its scenical nature. Give me leave to explain this by an instance or two. The Tragic scene we will suppose to exhibit a Pagan story, in which a lewd Sacrifice to Venus is represented. Now I say this scenical representation has no moral import. But do I mean by this, that there was no immorality or any kind in the scene? Far from it. I only mean that that specific immorality was absent, which would have existed there, had the action been real and not feigned; I mean idolatry. Again, another set of Tragedians represent the

Conspiracy

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 35

Conspiracy against Julius Caesar in the Senate-house., This, I say, has no moral import: for neither could the followers of Caesar's Cause call these fictitious Conspi rators, enemies to their country; nor could the warmest lovers of liberty call them patriots. But if in this repre sentation, the Actors, instead of exhibiting an imaginary assassination, should commit a real one, on the body of the personated Caesar, Who ever supposed that such a dramatic representation continued still to have no moral import ? The men who committed the action dropt their personated, and assumed their real character, being in stigated by interest, malice, or revenge; and only waited a fit opportunity to perpetrate their designs under the cover of a drama. Here indeed, the parallel ceases. The feigned Conspirators transgressed the bounds of a repre sentation : while the real death of Isaac must be supposed to make part of the scenical representation, in the Com mand to Abraham. But it should have been considered, and was not, that I employed the principle of a feigned representations having no moral import, to free t ,e Command from the infidel objection that it -as an enjoined sacrifice •; not from the objection of its being an enjoined death, simply : For a huimn Sacrifice com manded was supposed to discredit Revelation, as giving too much countenance and encouragement to that horrid

o

superstition ; whereas, with regard to a simple death com manded, to justify this, I was ready to confide in the common argument of Divines, taken from God's sovereign right over his creatures : Whose power could instantane ously repair the loss, or whose goodness would abundantly reward the act of obedience. Yet the fair and candid Dr. Rutherforth represents my position of a sctnical re presentations having no moral import, to be the same with saying, that though an act ion be ever so vile in itself, yet, if it be done to represent somewhat else, it loses its nature and becomes an indifferent one. — Had I the pre sumption to believe, that any thing I could say would

D 2 better

36 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

better his heart or mend his head, I should recommend what hath been here said to his serious consideration.

3. And now we see the weakness of the third and last part of the Objection, which supposes this Command capable of affording a temptation to transgress the funda mental principles of the Law of Nature: one of which obliges us to cherish and protect our Offspring; and ano ther, not to injure our Neighbour. For as, by the Com mand, Abraham understood the nature of man's Redemp tion; so, by the nature of that Redemption, he must know how the scenical representation was to end. Isaac, he saw, was made the person or representative of Christ dying for us: The Son of GOD, he knew, could not possibly lie under the dominion of the grave. Hence he must needs conclude one of these two things, either that GOD would stop his hand when he came to give the sacri ficing stroke: or that, if trie Revelation of this mystery was to be represented throughout in action, that then his Son, sacrificed under the person of CHRIST, was, under the same person, soon to be restored to lite : accounting (as he well might) that God was able to raise him up even from the dead, as the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews*, who seems to have been full of the idea here explained, assures us he did believe.

Now where was the temptation to violate any Prin ciple of Morality in all this? The Law of Nature com mands us to cherish and protect our offspring : Was that transgressed in giving a stroke whose hurt was pre sently to be repaired ? Surely no more than if the stroke had been in vision. The Law of Nature forbids all in jury to our Fellow-creature: And was he injured, who, by being thus highly honoured, in becoming the repre sentative of the Son of God, was to share with his Father Abraham in the rewards of his obedience? But though, as we see, Abraham could have no struggles with himself, from any doubts that he might violate Morality in paying

* Chap. xi. ver. 19.

obedience

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 37

obedience to the Command ; yet did the merit of that obedience, where the natural feelings were -so alarmed, deserve all the encomiums bestowed upon it in Holy Writ. For, in expressing his extreme readiness to obey, he declared a full confidence in the promises of GOD. From hence we may deduce these two corollaries.

1 . That tiic noble Author of the Characteristics hath shewn as much ignorance as malevolence, when he sup posed that Abraham's shewing no extreme surprise on this trying Revelation was from the favourable notion he had of Human Sacrifices, so common amongst the inha bitants of Palestine and othtr neighbouring Nations*. For we see the reason, why Abraham, instead of being under any extreme surprise, was (as JESUS assures us) under an extreme joy, was because he understood the Command to be a communication of that Mystery in which he had so earnestly requested to participate; and, consequently, that Isaac must needs, at length, come safe and unhurt from that scenical representation, in which he bore the principal part.

2. That Sir John Marsham's suspicion of Abraham's being struck by a superstitious imagination | is as ground less, as it is injurious to the holy Patriarch, Kay, the. very examples he gives might have shewn, him the folly of such insinuations: For, according to his inferences, Human Sacrifices were never offered but in cases of great distress : Now Abraham was at this time in a full state of peace, security, and affluence.

Tims, we presume, it appears that this Command was a mere information by action : and that, when regarded

* See note [S] at the end of this Book.

t — Ex istis satius est colligtre hanc Alrahami tcntationcm non fitisse x«x_a»yt»£J»3^,£v>jy <8r£«4>v5 actionem in not- u tain ; non rccens excogita- tarn, scd ad pristinos Canant&mt* mores dcsignatam. Horrcndi sacri- Jicii usum apud Phanicesfreqitentem indicat Porphyries : " Phoenices, " inqttit, in magnis periculis ex bello, fame, pestilentia, clarissimorum " aliquem ad id suffragiis publicis delectum, sacrificabant Saturno. " Et victimarum talium plena est Sanchoniathonis historia Phceni- " cice scripta, quam Philo Biblius Grsece interpretatus est libfis *' octo," Canon. Chron. p. 79.

P 3 iu

38 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

in this view, all the objections against GOD'S giving it to Abraham are absolutely enervated and overthrown.

For thus stands the case. If the trial of Abraham's faith and obedience were the commanding a real sacrifice, then was Abraham an Agent, and not a bare Instrument ; and then it might be pretended that God commanded an human agent to act against humanity. And his right over his Creatures cannot solve the difficulty, as it may when he employs a mere instrument to perform his \Vill upon them. But if the trial were only the commanding a scenical representation, the command had no moral import ; and consequently Abraham was not put upon any thing morally wrong; as is the offering up a human sacrifice.

I have transcribed into the notes, as I have gone along, some of the most considerable Objections my Adversaries have been able to oppose to this interpretation of the COMMAND TO ABRAHAM : which, I presume, when fairly considered, will be no light confirmation of it. But,, as I have no notions to advance, not founded in a sincere clesire to find out, and do honour to, Truth, I would by no means take advantage of an Adversary's weakness to recommend them to the public favour. I hold it not honest, therefore, to conceal the force of an Objection which I myself L;:ve to offer, by far more plausible than any that these learned Divines have urged against it. The objec tion is this, " That it is difficult to conceive why a CIR CUMSTANCE of such importance to Revelation, which removes one of the strongest arguments against its truth, and at ti: same time manifests a REAL CONNEXION between the tv.o Dispensations of it, should never be directly and minutely explained and insisted on by the Writers ot the New Testament, though Abraham's His torian might have had his reasons for concealing it." Now, to my own Objection, I suppose, I may have leave to reply, That many truths of great importance, for the support of iteli&ioD, against Infidelity, were taught by

Jesus

Sect. 5-]. OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 39

Jesus to his Disciples (amongst which, I reckon this In terpretation to be one) which never came down, by their conveyance, to the Church. But being, by the assistance of God's Holy Spirit, discoverable by those who devote themselves to the study of the Scriptures with a pure mind, have, for the wise ends of Providence (many of which are inscrutable to us) been left for the industry of men to find out: that, as occasion required, every Age might supply new evidence of God's Truth, to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men : and in proportion as the powers of Darkness prevailed, so might the Gospel- light break out again with fresh splendor to curb and repress them. In support of what is here said, I beg the Reader to reflect on what is told us by the Evangelist, of the conversation between JESUS (after his Resurrec tion) and the two Disciples journeying to Emmaus; where their Master says unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken! Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory ? And beginning at MOSES and all the Prophets, HE EXPOUNDED UXTO THEM the things concerning himself*. Now, who can doubt but that many things were at this time revealed, which, had they been delivered clown to Posterity, in Writing, would have greatly contributed to the improvement of Eusebius's Evangelical Demonstration ? Yet hath Providence thought fit to order matters otherwise. But, that the Apostles used, and made a good use too, of those EXPO SITIONS, long since forgotten and lost, wre have great reason to believe from their amazing success in the con version of the wrorld, by such an application of Moses and the Prophets, to Christ. And if I be not much de ceived, amongst the Truths thus inforced, that, which I presume to have discovered in the Command to Abraham, held no inferior place. Let the unprejudiced Reader judge. St. PAUL, making his Apology before king * Luke xxiv. 25, 26, 27,

D 4 Agrippa,

40 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI:

Agrippa, concludes his Defence in these words : Having therefore obtained help cf Gcd, I continue unto this day witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the Prophets and MOSES DID SAY SHOULD COME: that C n R, i s T should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead*. The G-reek is rather stronger, in predicating this circumstance of Moses,— £» rs ol wp^Jrai ixc&xwzv ft£\Xovruv y»W0«t, KAI MHIHS. Now where, let me ask, in all his Writings, but in the Command to Abraham, is there the least trace of any such circumstance, as that Christ should suffer, and thai he should be thejirst that should rise from the dead? Nor is it to be found there, unless the Command be understood in the sense J have given to it.— —

But this is the state in which it hath pleased Provi dence to place the Church of Christ: With abundant evidence in hand, to support itself against the attacks of Infidelity ; yet much of this divine Treasure left sealed up, to exercise our Faith, and (in time of need) to excite our Industry : for it was not the intent of Pro vidence that one of these virtues should thrive at the expence of the other; but that Industry should as well be rewarded by a successful search, as Faith, by peace in believing. Therefore when my learned Adversary!, in order, I will believe, to advance the Christian Faith, would discourage. Christian Industry, by calumniating, and rendering suspected what he is pleased to call EXPERIMENTS in Religion, it is, I am afraid, at best but a Zeal without know led ge. Indeed, M. Pascal ascribes this contempt of experiments to a different cause — u Ceux qui sont capable** de in venter soht jrares," says he. " Ceux qui n'inventent point sont en plus grand nombre, £ par consequent, les plus fortes ; et voila pourquoi, lors que les Inventeurs cherchent la, * Acts xxvi. 22, 23 ; and to the same purpose, xiii. 31,

f Dr. Slabbing.

Sect. 5,3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 41

gloire qinls meritent, tout ce qu'ils y gagnent, c'est qu'on les traite de VISIONNAIRES." It is true, if men will coine to the study ot Scripture with unwashen hands, that is, without a due reverence for the dignity of those sacred Volumes, or, which is as ill, with unpurged heads, that is, heads stuffed with bigot systems, or made giddy with cahalistic flights, they will deserve that title which Pascal observes is so unjustly given to those who deserve best of the Pubiic.

But to return to those with whom I have principal concern. I make no question but my Freethinking Adversaries, to whose temper and talents I am no stranger, will be ready to object,

I. " That tiie giving a solution of a difficulty in the Old Testament by tiie assistance of the New, considered together as making up one intire Dispensation, is an unfair way of arguing against an Unbeliever : who sup posing both the Jewish and Christian Religions to be false, of consequence supposes them to be independent on one another ; and that this pretended relation was a contrivance of the Authors of the later imposture to give it strength, by ingrafting the young shoot into the trunk of an old flourishing Superstition. Therefore, will they say, if we would argue with success against them, we must seek a solution of their difficulties in that Religion alone, from which they arise." — Thus 1 may suppose them to argue. And I apprehend they will have no reason to say I have put worse arguments into their mouths than they are accustomed to employ against Revelation.

I reply then, that it will admit of no dispute, but that, if they may have the liberty of turning JUDAISM and CHRISTIANITY into two Phantoms of their own devising, they will have a very easy victory over Both. This is an old trick, and has been often tried with success. By this slight-of-hand conveyance TIN DAL hath juggled fools out of their Religion. For, in a well-known book written by him against Revelation, he hath taken ad vantage

42 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

vantage of the indiscretion of some late Divines to lay it down as a Principle, that Christianity is ONLY a re- publication of the Religion of Nature : The consequence of which is, that CHRISTIANITY and JUDAISM are independent Institutions, But sure the Deist is not to obtrude his own Inventions, in the place of those Re ligions lie endeavours to overthrow. Much less is he

o

to beg the question of their falsity ; as the laying it down that the Jewish and Christian are two independent Religions, certainly is : because Christianity claims many of its numerous Titles to divinity from and under Judaism, if therefore Deists will not, yet Christians of necessity must take their Religion as they find it. And if they will remove objections to either Economy, they must reason on the Principle of Dependency. And while tfoey do so, their reasonings will not only be fair and logical, but every solution, on such a Principle, will, besides its determination on the particular point in question, be a new proof of the divinity of Both, in general ; because such a relation, connexion, and de pendency between two Religions of so distant times, could not come about by chance, or by human con trivance, but must needs be the effect of Divine pre vision. For a Deist, therefore, to bid us remove his objections on the principle of independency, is to bid us prove our religion true on a principle that implies its fukchood ; the New Testament giving us no other idea of Christianity than as of a Religion dependent on, con nected with, and the completion of Judaism.

But now suppose us to be in this excess of complaisance for our Adversaries ; and then see whether the ingenuity of their acceptance \vould not equal the reasonableness of their demand. Without doubt, wrere we once so foolish to swallow their Chimeras for the heavenly Manna of Revelation, we should have them amongst the first to cry out upon the prevarication. I speak not this at random. The fact hath already happened. Cer tain

Sect 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 43

tain advocates of Religion, unable to reconcile to their notions of logic, the sense of some Prophecies in the Old Testament, as explained in the applications of the Writers of the New, thought it best to throw aside the care of the JEWISH RELIGION, (a burden which they could as ill bear as the rebellious Israelites themselves) and try to support the CHRISTIAN, by proving its divine Origi nal, independently and from itself alone. Upon this Mr. COLLINS (for I have chosen to instance in these two general dealers in Free th inking ; the small retailers of it vanishing as fast as they appear ; for who now talks of B fount or Coward? or who hereafter will talk of Strutt or Morgan ? *) that the world may see how little they agreed about their own principles, or rather how little regard they paid to any principles at all ; Mr. Collins, I say, wrote a book to exclaim against our ill faith ; and to remind us of, and to prove to us, the inseparable con nexion between the Old and New Testament. This was no unseasonable reproof, howsoever intended, for so egregious a folly. I will endeavour to profit by it; and manage this Controversy on their own terms. For what ever prevarication appeared in the Objectors, I conceived they had demanded no more than what they might rea sonably expect. But the advantages arising to us from this management soon made them draw back, and retract what they had demanded ; and now they chicane xvith us for calling in the assistance of the New Testa ment to repel their attacks upon the Oldf ; while, at the same time, they think themselves at liberty to use the assistance of the Old to overthrow the New. Let the Friends of Revelation, howrever, constantly and uniformly hold the inseparable connexion between the two Dispen sations ; and then, let our Enemies, if they will, as they fairly may, take all the advantages they fancy they have pgainst us, from the necessity we lie under of so doing.

* See note [T] at tb* end of this Book. t See pot* [UJ at the end of this Book,

In

44 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

In a word, We give them Judaism and Christianity as Religions equally from Heaven ; with that reciprocal dependence on each other, which arises between two things bearing the mutual relation of foundation and superstructure. They have it in their choice to oppose our pretensions, either by disputing with us that depen dency, or raising difficulties on the foot of it. But while they only suppose it visionary ; and then argue against each Religion on that supposition, they only beg the question. And while they do that, we keep within the rules of good logic, when we remove their objections on that principle of dependency laid down in Scripture. This restrictive rule of interpretation being however still observed. That, in explaining any difficulty in the Old Testament, we never, on pretence of such dependency, forsake the genius and manners of the times in question, and serve ourselves of those of the later Christian period, as Collins (whether truly or no, let Them look to, who are concerned in it) upbraids some defenders of Christi anity for doing. This rule is here, I presume, observed with sufficient exactness ; the foundation of my interpre tation of the Command being that ancient mode of converse, so much at that time in use, of conversing by

II. Hut the Adversaries of Revelation, how easily soever they may be confuted, are not so easily silenced. They are ready to object, that we fly to the old exploded refuge of a TYPE, which the Author of the Grounds and Reasons of ihe Christian Religion hath shewn to be visionary and senseless.; the mere illogical whimsy of Cabalistic Jews. To this I answer,

i. They are doubly mistaken. This interpretation is not founded in any typical sense whatsoever ; the person of Isaac on the Mount being no more a Type of Christ than the six letters that compose the name are a Type of him ; but only an arbitrary mark to stand for the idea of Christ, as that word does. So that their cry against

Types,

Sect's-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 45

Types, whatever force it may have, does not at all affect this interpretation.

2. But, secondly, I say, A TYPE is neither visionary, nor senseless, notwithstanding the disgrace which this mode of information hath undergone by the mad abuses of Fanaticism and Superstition. On the contrary, I hold it to be a just and reasonable manner of denoting one tiling by another : not the creature of the imagination, made out of nothing to serve a turn ; but as natural and apposite a figure as any employed in human converse. For Types arose from that original mode of communi cation, the conversing by actions : the difference there is between these t\vo mod; s of information being only this, that, where the action is simply significative, it has no moral import: For example, when Ezekiel is bid to shave his beard, to weigh the hair in balances, to divide it into three parts, to burn one, to strike another with a knife, and to scatter the third part in the wind*, this action having no moral import is merely significative of infor mation given. But when the Israelites are commanded to take a male lamb without blemish, and the, whole assem bly of the congregation to hill it, and to sprinkle the blood upon the door-posts "\, this action having a moral import as being a religious Rite, and, at the same time, representative of something future, is properly, typical. Jleuce arose the mistake of the Interpreters of the Command to offer Isaac. These men supposing the action commanded to have a moral import, as being only for a trial of Abraham's faith ; and, at the same time, seeing in it the most exact resemblance of the death oi CHRIST, very wrongly concluded that action to be typical which was merely significative : and by this means, Reaving in the action a moral import, subjected it to all those cavils of infidelity, which, by taking away ail moral import, as not belonging to it, are here entirely evaded.

* Ezek. v, 1,2. f Exod. xii. 5, 6, 7.

46 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,

But it being of the highest importance to Revelation in general, and not a little conducive to the support of our arguments for the Divine Legation of Moses in par ticular, to shew the logical truth and propriety of Types in action, and Secondary senses in speech, I shall take the present opportunity to sift this matter to the bottom. For having occasionally shewn, in several parts of the pre ceding Discourse, that the references in the LAW to the GOSPEL are in typical representations, and secondary senses ; and the truth of Christianity depending on the real relation (which is to be discovered by such refe rences) between the two Dispensations, it will be incum bent on me to prove the logical truth and propriety of TYPES in action, and SECONDARY SENSES in speech.

And I enter on this subject with the greater pleasure, as one of the most plausible books ever written, or likely to be written, against Christianity, is intirely levelled at them. In this enquiry I shall pursue the same method I have hitherto taken with unbelieving Writers; examine only the grounds and principles on which they go ; and having removed and overthrown these, in as few words

O 7

as I am able, leave the superstructure to support itself, as it may.

SECT. VI.

THE book I speak of is entitled, " A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion," written, as is generally supposed, by Mr. Collins ; a Writer, whose dexterity in the arts of Controversy was so remarkably contrasted by his abilities in reasoning and literature, as to be ever putting one in mind of what travellers tell us of the genius of the proper Indians, who, although the veriest bunglers in all the fine arts of manual operation, yet excel every body in slight of hand and the delusive feats of activity.

The purpose of his book is to prove that JESUS was

an impostor: and his grand argument stands thus,—

12 " JESUS

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 47

" JESUS (as he shews) claims under the promised Mes siah of the Jews; and proposes himself as the Deliverer prophesied of in their sacred Books ; yet (as he attempts to shew) none of these Prophesies can be understood of JESUS but in a secondary sense only; now a secondary sense (as he pretends) is fanatical, chimerical, and con trary to all scholastic rules of interpretation: Conse quently, JESUS not being prophesied of in the Jewish Writings, his pretensions are false and groundless."— His conclusion, the reader sees, stands on the joint sup port of these two Propositions, That there is no Jewish Prophecy which relates to JESUS in a primary sense; and That a secondary sense is enthusiastical and unscho*- lastic. If either of these fail, his phantom of a conclu sion sinks again into nothing.

Though I shall not omit occasionally to confute the firs^ yet it is the falsehood of the second I am principally con cerned to expose — That there are Jewish prophecies which relate to JESUS in their direct and primary sense, hath been proved with much force of reason and learning ; But, that secondary Prophecies are riot enthusiastical and umcho- lastic, hath not been shewn and insisted on, by the Writers on this Question, with the same advantage. The truth is, the nature of a DOUBLE SENSE in Prophecies hath been so little seen or enquired into, that some Divines, who agree in nothing else, have yet agreed to second this assertion of Mr. Collins, and with the same frankness and confidence to pronounce that a double sense is indeed enthusiastical and unscholastic. To put a stop therefore to this growing evil, sown first by SOCINUS, and since become so pestilent to Revelation, is not amongst the last purposes of the following dis course.

I. It hath been shewn, that one of the most ancient and simple Modes of human converse was communicating the conceptions by an expressive ACTION. As this was of familiar use in Civil matters, it was natural to carry

it

48 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

it into Religious. Hence, we see God giving his instruc tions to the Prophet, and the Prophet delivering God's commands to the People, in this very manner. Thus far the nature of the action, both in civil and religious matters, is exactly the same.

But in Religion it sometimes happens that a STAND ING Information is necessary, and there the Action must be continually repeated : This is done by holding out the particular Truth (thus to be preserved) in a reli gious Rite. Here then the Action begins to change its nature; and, from a mere significative mark, of only arbi trary import like words or letters, becomes an action of moral import, and acquires the new name of TYPE. Thus GOD, intending to record the future sacrifice of CHRIST in Action, did it by the periodic Sacrifice of a lamb without blemixh. This was not merely and so DIRECTLY significative of CIIUIST (like the Command to Abraham); but being a religious Rite, and so having a moral import, it was typical, though NOT DIRECTLY significative, of him. The very same may be said of the Temporal rewards of the Law ; they were properly typical of the Spiritual rewards of the Gospel, and had a moral import of their own, as being the real sanction of the Law.

Again, It hath been shewn*, how, in the gradual cul tivation of Speech, the expression by Action was im proved and refined into an ALLEGORY or Parable] in which the words carry a double meaning; having, besides their obvious sense which serves only for the Envelope, one more material, and hidden. With this figure of speech all the moral writings of Antiquity abound. But when this figure is transferred from Civil use to Religious, and employed in the writings of inspired Men, to convey information of particular circumstances in two distinct Dispensations, to a people who had an equal concern in both, it is then what we call a DOUBLE SENSE; and

• In the preceding volume.

undergoes

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 49

undergoes the very same change of its nature that an expressive action underwent when converted into a Type; that is, both the meanings, in the DOUBLE SENSE, are of moral import ; whereas in the Allegory ', one only of the meanings is so : And this (which arises out of the' very nature of their conversion, from Civil to Religious matters) is the only difference between expressive ac tions and TYPES; and between allegories and DOUBLE

SENSES.

From hence it appears, that as TYPES are only reli gious expressive Actions, and DOUBLE SENSES only re ligious Allegories, and neither receive any change but what the very manner of bringing those Civil figures into Religion necessarily induces, they must needs have, in this their tralatitious state, the same LOGICAL FITNESS they had in their natural*. Therefore as expressive actions, and Allegories, in Civil discourses, are esteemed proper and reasonable modes of information, so must TYPES and DOUBLE SENSES in Religious ; for the end of both is the same, namely, COMMUNICATION OF KNOWLEDGE. The consequence of this is, that Mr. Collins's proposition, that a secondary or double sense is enthusiastical and unscholastic (the necessary support of his grand Argument) is entirely overthrown.

This is the true and simple origin of TYPES and DOUBLE SENSES; which our adversaries, through igno rance of the rise and progress of Speech, and unacquain- tance with ancient Manners, have insolently treated as the issue of distempered brains, and the fondlings of Visionaries and Enthusiasts.

II. Having thus shewn their logical propriety, or that they are rational Modes of information, I come now to vindicate their Religious use, and to shew that they are well suited to that Religion in which we find them em ployed. An Objection which, I conceive, may be made to this use, will lead us naturally into our Argument. * See note [X] at the end of this Book,

'VOL. VI. E The

50 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

The objection is this: " It hath been shewn*, that these oblique Modes of converse, though at first invented out of necessity > for general information, were employed, at length, to a mysterious secretion of knowledge ; which though it might be expedient, useful, and even neces sary both in CIVIL MATTERS and in FALSE RELIGION, could never be so in MORAL MATTERS, and in THE RELIGION ; for this having nothing to hide from of its followers, Types and Double senses (the same mysterious conveyance of knowledge in Sacred matters, which Allegoric words or Actions are in Civil) were alto gether unfit to be employed in it."

To this I answer, The JEWISH RELIGIOX, in which these Types and Sec-cndary .senses are to be found, was given to one single People only ; just as the CHRISTIAN is offered to all Mankind : Now the Christian, as Mr. Collins | himself labours to prove, professes to bo grounded on the Jewish. If therefore Christianity was not only professedly, but really grounded on Judaism (and the supposition is strictly logical in a defence of Types find Double semes, whose reality depends on the reality of that relation) then Judaism was preparatory to Christianity, and Christianity the ultimate end of Judaism : But it is not to be supposed that there should be an intire silence concerning this ultimate Religion during the preparatory, when the notice of it was not only highly proper, but very expedient : i . First, to draw

* In the preceding volume.

f " Christianity is founded on Judgum, and the New Testament " on the Old; and JESUS is the person said in the New Testament " to be promised in the Old, under the character of the MESSIAH of " the Jews, who, as such only, claims the obedience and submission " of the world. Accordingly it is the design of the authors of the " New, to prove all the parts of Christianity from the Old Testament, " which is said to contain the words of eternal life, and to represent *l JESUS and his apostles as fulfilling by their mission, doctrines, and " works, the predic lions of the Prophets, the historical parts of the " Old Testament, and the Jewish Law ; which last is expressly said " to prophesy of, or testify Christianity/' Grounds and Reasons, &c. pp. 4> 5-

those

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 51

those under the preparatory Religion, by just degrees to the ultimate; a provision the more necessary, as the nature and genius of the two Religions were different, the one carnal, the other spiritual : 2. Secondly, to afford convincing evidence to future Ages, of the truth of that Ultimate Religion; which evidence, a circumstantial pre diction of its advent and nature so long beforehand, effectually does afford *. The Ultimate Religion there fore must have had some notice given of it, in the Pre paratory: and nothing was better fitted for this purpose than the hyperbolical genius of the Eastern Speech. Thus, when Isaiah says, Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder : And his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, Mr. Collins observes, it is the eastern hyperbole which prevents our seeing that a Jewish Monarch is literally and directly spoken of. Should we allow this, yet we still see, that such a lan guage was admirably fitted to connect together i\\ejirst and second Senses : the hyperbole becoming a simple speech, when transferred from a Jewish Monarch to the monarch of the world.

Our next inquiry will be, in what manner this notice must needs be given. Now the nature of the thing shews us it could not be directly and openly; so as to be un derstood by the People, at the time of giving: because this would have defeated GOD'S intermediate purpose; which was to train them, by a long discipline, under his preparatory Dispensation. For, this being a Religion founded only on temporal Sanctions, and burdened with .a minute and tiresome Ritual, had the People known it -to be only preparatory to another, founded on better Promises and easier Observances, they would never have born the yoke of the Law, but would have shaken off •their subjection to Moses before the fulness of Time had * See note [Y] at the end of this Book.

£ 2 brought

52 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

brought their spiritual Deliverer amongst them; as, with out this knowledge, they were but too apt to do, on every imaginary prospect of advantage. But St. CHRYSOSTOM will inforce this observation with more advantage. " Had " the Jews (says he) been taught from the beginning " that their Law was temporary and to have an end, " they would have certainly despised it. On this ac- " count, it seemed good to the divine Wisdom to throw " a veil of obscurity over the Prophecies which related " to the Christian Dispensation *." This information, therefore, was to be delivered with caution ; and con veyed under the covert language of their present Eco nomy. Hence arose the fit and necessary use of TYPES and SECONDARY SENSES. For the only safe and lasting means of conveyance were their PUBLIC RITUAL, and the WRITINGS OF THE PROPHETS. And a Speaking action, and an Allegoric speech, when thus employed, had all the secrecy that the occasion required. We • have observed, that in the simpler use of speaking by Action j the Action itself hath no moral import : and so, the information having but one moral meaning, that which it conveys is clear and intelligible. But where a Rite of Religion is used for this Speaking action, there the a£tion hath a moral import ; and so the information having two moral meanings, that which it conveys is more obscure and mysterious. Hence it appears that this mode of speaking by action, called a TYPE, is exactly fitted for the information in question. Just so it is again with the SECONDARY SENSE ; In the mere allegory, the representing image has no moral import : in the secondary seme, for a contrary reason (which the very term imports), the representing image hath a moral import ; and so, acquires the ^me fitting obscurity with information by Types. For the typical Ritual, and the double Prophecy, had each its obvious sense in the present nature and future fortune of the Jewish Religion * Jiomilia prima, De propbetarum obscuritate.

and

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 53

and Republic. And here we are easily led into the essential difference (so much to the honour of Revela tion) between the Pagan Oracles or Prophecies, and the Jewish. The obscurity of the Pagan arose from the ambiguity, equivocation or jargon OF EXPRESSION ; the obscurity of the Jewish from the figurative represen tation OF THINGS. The First (independent of any other Religion) proceeded from ignorance of futurity ; the Latter, dependent on the Christian, proceeded from the necessity that those to whom the Prophecies were delivered should not have too full a knowledge of them.

Dr. Middleton, indeed, would fain persuade us, that the Oracles, or, as he chuses to call them, the Prophecies of the Pythian Apollo, were neither better nor worse, but exactly of the same absurd construction with the Script tire Prophecies. He would hardly venture to controvert what I have said of their logical fitness and propriety, as a mode of information in the abstract, because this would shew him ignorant of the nature and progress of human converse. Much less, I suppose, would he say, that this mode of informatiqn was not suited to the genius of the Jewish Religion ; since he owns that to be only a preparatory System calculated to open and to prepare the way for one more perfect; and consequently, that it must be so contrived as to connect, and at the same time to hide from the vulgar eye, the two parts of the Dispensation, and the relation they have to one another. Now there is no conceivable way of doing this but by types and secondary senses. What then occasioned this insult upon them ? That which sup ports all our free Writers in their contemptuous treat ment of Religion, their mistaking the ABUSE of the tiling for the thing ITSELF ; and giving the interpretations of men, or the Doctrines of Churches, for Articles of faith or Scripture history. What hath been here said will shew the extreme weakness of this ingenious man's parallel between the Scripture Prophecies and the Oracles

K 3 °f

54 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

of the Pythian Apollo. — " The PROPHECIES of the Py- " thian Apollo (says he) were indeed obscure, equivocal " and ambiguous, admitting not only different but con- " trary senses ; so that the character here given of the " Scripture Prophecies was undoubtedly true of them, " that no event could restrain them to one determinate " sense, when they ivere. originally capable of many. For " if the obvious sense failed, as it often did, to the ruin " of those who acted upon it, there was another always " in reserve, to secure the veracity of the Oracle : till " this very character of its ambiguous and senigmatical " senses, confirmed by constant observation, gradually " sunk its credit, and finally detected the imposture*." The Prophecies of the Pythian Apollo were obscure, equivocal arid ambiguous. And this (says he) was the character of the Scripture Prophecies. Just otherwise, as is seen above. Scripture Prophecies were obscure] but the obscurity arose neither from equivocation nor ambiguity (which two qualities proceed from the EX PRESSION) but from the figurative representation of THINGS. So that the obscurity, which the Pythian Oracle and the Scripture Prophecies had in common,, arising from the most different grounds, the character given of the Oracles, that no event could restrain them to one determinate sense when they were originally capa ble of many, by no means belongs to the Scripture Pro phecies, whatever the men he writes against (who appear to know as little of the DOUBLE SENSE of Prophecies as himself) might imagine. For though equivocal and am biguous EXPRESSION may make a speech or writing, •where the objects are unconfined, capable of many senses, yet a figurative representation of THINGS can give no more senses than two to the obscurest Prophecy. Hence it will follow, that while the expedient in support ing the Pythian Oracles, by having a sense always in

* Examination of tfie Bishop of London's Discourses on Pro phecy, &c. pp. 8g, yo.

reserve

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 55 reserve to satisfy the inquirer, would gradually sink their credit, and finally detect the imposture; the discovery of a SECONDARY 5EXSE of Prophecy, relative to the completory Dispensation, will necessarily tend to confirm and establish the divine origin of Scripture Prophecy.

Such was the wonderful economy of divine Wisdom, in connecting together two dependent Religions, the parts of one grand Dispensation : by this means, making one preparatory of the other ; and each mutually to reflect light upon the other. Hence we see the desperate humour of that learned man, though very zealous Chris tian *, who, because most of the prophecies relating to JESUS, in the Old Testament, are of the nature described above, took it into his head that the Bible was corrupted by the enemies of JESUS. Whereas, on the very supposi tion of a mediate and an ultimate Religion, which this good man held, the main body of Prophecies in the Old Testament relating to the New must, according to all our ideas of fitness and expediency, needs be prophecies with a DOUBLE SENSE. l>ut it is the usual support of folly to throw its distresses upon knavery. And thus, as we observed, the Mahometan likewise, who pretends to claim under the Jewish religion, not iinding the doctrine of & future state of rewards ami punishments in the Law, is as positive that the Jews have corrupted their own scriptures in pure spite to his great Prophet f.

III. Having thus shewn the reasonable use and great expediency of these modes of sacred information, under the Jewish Economy ; the next question is, Whether they be indeecf there. This we shall endeavour to shew. — And that none of the common prejudices may lie against our reasoning, the example given shall be of TYPES and DOUBLE SENSES employed even in subjects relating to the Jewish dispensation only.

i. The whole ordinance of the paw over was a TYPE of the redemption from Egypt. The striking the blood

* Mr. Whision. f See B0te [z] at tlie ea<i of this Book.

E 4 oa

56 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,

on the side-posts, the eating flesh with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, and in a posture of departure and ex pedition, were all significative of their bondage and deliverance. This will admit of no doubt, because the Institutor himself has thus explained the Type — And thou shalt shew thy son (says he) in that day, say ing, This is done because of that which the Lord did unto me when 1 came forth out of Egypt. And it shall be for a sign untothee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes ; that the Lord's law may be in thy mouth : for with a strong hand hath the Lord brought thee out of Egypt. Thou shalt therefore keep this ordi nance in his season from year to year *. As therefore it was of the genius of these holy Rites to be Typical or significative of God's past, present, and future dispen sations to his people, we cannot in the least doubt, but that Moses, had he not been restrained by those im portant considerations explained above, would have told them that the sacrifice of the lamb without blemish was a Type, a sign or memorial of THE DEATH OF CHRIST.

2. With regard to DOUBLE SENSES, take this instance from Joel : who, in his prediction of an approaching ravage by Locusts, foretells likewise, in the same words, a succeeding desolation by the Assyrian army. For we are to observe that this was GOD'S method both in warning and in punishing a sinful people. Thus, when the seven nations for their exceeding wickedness were to be exterminated, GOD promises his chosen people to send hornets before them, which should drhe out the Hivite, the Canaa trite, and the Hittite from before them f. Now Joel, under one and the same Prophecy,

contained

* Exod. xiii. 8, & seq.

f Exod. xxiii. '23. This, the author of the book called the " Wisdom of Solomon" admirably paraphrases:—" For it was " thy will to destroy by the hands of our fathers both those old " inhabitants of thy holy land, whom thou hatedst for doing most " odious works of witchcrafts, and wicked sacrifices; and also those

merciless murderers of children, and devourers of man's flesh,

« and

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 57

contained in the first and second Chapters of his book, foretells, as we say, both these plagues ; the locusts in the primary sense, and the Assyrian army in the secondary — "Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl " all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine, for it " is cut off from your mouth. For a nation is come up " upon my land, strong, and without number, whose " teeth are the teeth of a lion, and he hath the cheek- " teeth of a great lion. He hath laid my vine waste, "• and barked my fig-tree : he hath made it clean bare, " and cast it away : the branches thereof are made " white. . .The field is wasted, the land mourneth; for " the corn is wasted : the new wine is dried up, the " oil languisheth. Be ye ashamed, O ye husbandmen ; " howl, O ye vine-dressers, for the wheat and for the " barley ; because the harvest of the field is perished*. — " Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in " my holy mountain : Let all the inhabitants of the " land tremble : for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is " nigh at hand ; A day of darkness and of gloominess, " a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning " spread upon the mountains : a great people and a " strong ; there hath not been ever the like — A fire de- " voureth before them, and behind them a flame burneth : " the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and " behind them a desolate wilderness ; yea, and nothing

" shall

" and the feasts of blood, with their priests out of the midst of their

" idolatrous crew, and the parents that killed, with their own hands,

" souls destitute of help : That the land winch thou esteemedst

" above all other might receive a worthy colony of GOD'S children.

tl Nevertheless even those thou sparedstas men, and didst send wasps,

(t forerunners of thine host, to destroy them by little and little. Not

" that thou wast unable to bring the ungodly under the hand of the

u righteous in battle, or to destroy them at once with cruel beastst

" or with one rough word: But executing thy judgments upon them

" by little and little, thou gavest them place of repentance, riot

" being ignorant that they were a naughty generation, and that

u their malice was bred in them, and that their cogitation would

f never be changed/' Chap, xii. ver. 3, & seq.

* Chap. i. ver. 5, £ seq.

5$ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

" shall escape them. The appearance of them is as " the appearance of horses ; and as horsemen, so shall " they run. Like the noise of chariots on the tops of u mountains shall they leap, like the noise of a flame " of fire that devoureth the stubbie, as a strong people " set in battle array. Before their face the people shall " be much pained : all faces shall gather blackness. " They shall run like mighty men, they shall climb the " wall like men of war; and they shall march every one " on his ways, and they shall not break their ranks. " Neither shall one thrust another, they shall walk every " one in his path : and when they fall upon the sword, " they shall not be wounded. They shall run to and * fro in the city ; they shall run upon the wall, they " shall climb up upon the houses ; they shall enter in at ** the windows like a thief. The earth shall quake before '-' them, the heavens shall tremble; the sun and the " moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their " shining*."

The fine conversion of the subjects is remarkable. The prophecy is delivered in the first chapter, — Awake,. 1/e drunkards, &c. and repeated in the second — Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, Sic. In the first chapter, the LOCUSTS are described as a people ;—For a nation is come np upon nn* land, strong and without number. But, that we may not be mistaken in the PRIMARY sense, namely the plague of locusts, the ravages described are the ravages of insects : They lay waste the vine, they bark the Jig-tree, make the branches clean bare, and wither the corn and fruit-trees. In the second chapter, the hostile PEOPLE are described as locusts: — AS THE

MORNING SPREAD UPON THE MOUNTAINS. The Op-

pearance of them is AS the appearance af horses, and AS horsemen so shall they run, AS a strong people set in battle array. They shall run LIKE mighty men, they shall climb the wall LIKE men of war. But that we may

* Chap. ii. ver. i to 10.

not

Sect. 6.) OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 59

not mistake the SECONDARY sense, namely the invasion of a foreign enemy, they are compared, we see, to a mighty army. This art, in the contexture of the Pro phecy, is truly divine ; and renders all chicane to evade a double sense ineffectual. For in some places of this Prophecy, dearth by insects must needs be understood ; in others, desolation by war. So that both senses are of necessity to be admitted. And here let me observe, that had the Commentators on this Prophecy but attended to the nature of the double sense, they would not have suffered themselves to be so embarrassed ; nor have spent so much time in freeing the Prophet from an imaginary embarras (though at the expence of the context) on account of the same Prophecy's having in one part that signification primary -, which, in another, is secondary. A circumstance so far from making an inaccuracy, that it gives the highest elegance to the discourse ; and joins the tico senses so closely as to obviate all pretence for a division, to the in jury of the Holy Spirit. Here then we have a DOUBLE SENSE, not arising from the interpretation of a single verse, and so obnoxious to mistake, but of a whole and very large descriptive Prophecy.

But as this species of double prophecy, when confined to the events of one single Dispensation, takes off the most plausible objection to primary and secondary senses in general, it may not be improper to give another in stance of it, which shall be taken from a Time when one would least expect to find a double prophecy employed, I mean, under the Gospel Dispensation. I have observed, somewhere or other, that the ECONOMY OF GRACE having little or nothing to hide or to shadow out, like the LAW, it had small occasion for typical Rites or Cele brations, or for Prophecies with a double sense; and that therefore they are not to be expected, nor indeed are they to be found, under the Gospel.

Yet the example I am about to give is an illustrious

exception to this general truth. The explanation of this

2 example

60 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL

example will rectify a great deal of embarras and mistake concerning it, and, at the same time, support the general Truth. The Prophecy I mean, is that in which Jesus foretels his FIRST and SECOND COMING IN JUDGMENT, not only under the same ideas, but in one and the same Prediction, as it is recorded, in nearly the same terms, by Matthew, Mark, and Luke; though omitted by St. John, for the reason hereafter to be given.

But to comprehend the full import of this Prophecy, it will be proper to consider the occasion of it. Jesus, after having warmly upbraided the Scribes and Pharisees whom he found in the Temple, with their superstitious abuses of the Law ; with their aversion to be reformed ; — and their obstinate rejection of their promised Messiah ; left them with a dreadful denunciation of the ruin* then banging over their Civil and Religious Policy. His Dis ciples, who followed him through the Temple, greatly .affected with these threats, and yet possessed with the national prejudice of the Eternity of the Law, pointed as he passed along, at the Temple Buildings, and desired him to observe the stupendous solidity and magnificence of the Work. As much as to say, " Here are no marks of that speedy destruction which you have just now pre dicted : on the contrary, this mighty Mass seems calcu lated to endure till the general dissolution of all things." To which, Jesus, understanding their thoughts, replied, that in a very little time there should not be left one stone upon another, of all the wonders they saw before them. And from thence takes occasion to prophesy of the speedy destruction of the Jewish Nation. But as the bare pre diction of the ruin of that splendid Economy would be likely to scandalize these carnal-minded men, while they saw notiiing erected in its stead, by their Messiah and Deliverer, it seemed good to divine Wisdom to repre sent this destruction under the image of their Messiah's coming to execute judgment on the devoted City, and of

* Matt. 3»xiii. Mark xii. 34, Luke xvi. 25.

his

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 61

his raising a new Economy on its ruin ; as was done by the establishment of the Christian Policy *.

But yet, as this was to be unattended with the circum stances of exterior grandeur, He relieves the picture of the Church-militant, erected on his coming TO JUDGE JERUSALEM, 'with all the splendours of the Church- triumphant, which were to be displayed at his second coming TO JUDGE THE WORLD. Arid this, which was so proper for the ornament, and useful for the dignity of the Scene, was necessary for the completion of the Sub ject, which was a full and entire view of the Dispensation of Grace. Thus, as JOEL in one and the same descrip tion had combined the previous ravages of the Locusts with the succeeding devastations of the Assyrians, so here, JESUS hath embroidered into one Piece the inter mediate judgment of the Jews, and the finat judgment of mankind f .

Let us now see what there was in the notions and lan guage of the Jewish People, that facilitated the easy in troduction of the secondary sense ; and gave the style, which was proper to that sense, an expressive elegance when applied to the primary.

The Jews, besotted with their fancied Eternity of the Law, had entertained a notion that the destruction of Jerusalem was to be immediately followed with the de* struction of the World. This made the closeness in the connexion between the primary and secondary sense of the descriptive prophecy, easy and natural ; and as-it made the two destructions scarce dividual, so it left no room to distinguish, in any formal manner, between the Jirst and second coming in Judgment. f » r.

The old prophetic language was of equal use and ad vantage to interweave the two senses into one another, which the, not ion here mentioned had drawn together an^i combined. The change of Magistracy, the fall of King-

* See Julian, or a Discourse concerning his attempt to rebuild the Temple.

f Matt. xxiv. Mark xiii.' Luke xxi.

doms,

62 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

doms, and the revolutions of States, are described, in the old language of inspiration, by disasters in the Heavens, by the fall of Stars, and by eclipses of the greater Lumi naries. This admirably served the purpose of conveying both events under the same set of images ; indeed, under one and the same description ; namely, the destruction of Jerusalem in the FIGURATIVE sense; and the de struction of the world in the LITERAL. — The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light : and the stars of heaven shall foil, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. And they shall see the Son of man coming in the Clouds with great power and glory*.

So that we see, the representation of a double seme in this Prophecy hath all the ease, and strength, and art, which we can conceive possible to enter into a sacred in formation of this nature. And the close contexture of its parts is so far from obscuring any thing in the two great correlative pictures, portrayed upon it, that it serves to render each more distinct, and better defined. Diffe rent indeed in this from most of the Jewish Prophecies of the same kind : And the reason of the difference is obvious. In the Jewish Prophecies, the secondary sense, relating to matters in another Dispensation, was of neces sity to be left obscure, as unsuitable to the knowledge of the time in which the Prophecy was delivered. Whereas the first and secondary senses of the Prophecy before us, were equally objective to the contemplation of Christ's Disciples ; as the two capital parts of the Dispensation to which they were now become subject.

But it will be said, u Tiiat before all this pains had been taken to explain the beauties of the double sense, we should have proved the existence of it ; since, accord ing to our own account of the matter, the magnificent terms employed, which are the principal mark of a SECONDARY sense, are the common prophetic Language to express the subject of the PRIMARY : And because,

* Mark xiii. 24—26. Matt, xxiv, 29, 30.

when

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 63

when Jesus, in few words, repeats the substance of this Prophecy to the High- Priest, on the like occasion for which he delivered it at large to his Disciples, he de scribes the destruction of Jerusalem in those high terms from whence the SECONDARY sense is inferred: for when Jesus was accused of threatening, or of designing to destroy the Temple, and was urged by the High- Priest to make his defence, he says — -Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven* ; which words the con text necessarily confines to his coming in judgement on Jerusalem,"

To this I answer, That it was not for fear of being put to the proof, that it was taken for granted that this Pro phecy had a double seme, a primary and a secondary ; because it is only quoting a passage or two in it, to $hew that it must necessarily be confessed to have both.

1. That Jesus prophesies of the destruction of Jeru salem, appears from the concluding words recorded by all the three Evangelists — Verily, I say unto you, that THUS GENERATION shall not pass away till ALL these things be done or fulfilled^. Hence, by the way, let me observe, that this fulfilling in the primary sense being termed the

fulfilling all, seems to be the reason why St. John, who •wrote his Gospel after the destruction of Jerusalem, hath omitted to record this Prophecy of his Master.

2. That Jesus at the same time speaks of the destruc tion of the World, at his coming to judge it, appears likewise from his own words recorded by the same Evangelists — But of that day ami hourknwveth no man; m not the Angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father^. For if the Whole be to be understood only of one single event, then do these two texts expressly contradict one another; the first telling us that the event should come to pass near the close of that very genera*

' Matt xxvi, 64. Mark xiv, 62, Luke xxii. 6y. t Mattxxiv. 34. Mark xiii. 30. Jjalte xxi, 32,

Mark xiii,

tion;

64 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

tion ; the latter telling us that the time is unknown to all men, nay even to the Angels and to the Son himself: — - then does the last quoted text expressly contradict the Prophecy of Daniel *, that very Prophecy to which Jesus all the. way refers; for in that prophecy, the day and hour, that is, the precise time of the destruction of Jerusalem, is minutely foretold.

Hence it follows that this famous Prophecy hath indeed a DOUBLE SENSE, the one primary, and the other secondary.

It is true, the infant-Church saw the destruction of the world so plainly foretold in this Prophecy, as to suffer an error to creep into it, of the speedy and instant con summation of all things. This, St. Paul found necessary to correct — Now I beseech you, says he, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or troubled, as that the day of Christ is at hand, &c.| And it was on this account, I suppose, that St. Luke, who wrote the latest of the three Evangelists, records this Prophecy in much lower terms than the other two, and entirely omits the words in the text quoted above, which fixes the secondary sense of the Prophecy — of that day and hour, Sec.

If St. Paul exhorted his followers not to be shaken in mind on this account ; his fellow-labourer St. Peter, when he had in like manner reproved the scoffers, who said, where is the promise of his coming ? went still further, and, to shew his followers that the Church was to be of long continuance here on earth, explains to them the nature of that evidence which future times were to have of the truth of the Gospel ; an evidence even superior to that which the primitive times enjoyed of MIRACLES J; We have also a more sure word of PROPHECY ; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light which shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts^. This

* Chap. viii. ver. 13, 14. f 2- Thess. ii. i. & seq,

J 2 Peter, i. 17. § Ver. 19.

evidence

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 65

evidence of PROPHECY is justly qualified a more sure word*, when compared to MIRACLES, whose demon strative evidence is confined to that age in which the power of them was bestowed upon the Church : whereas the prophecies here meant, namely, those of St. Paul and St. Johnf, concerning the GREAT APOSTASY, were always fulfilling even to the last consummation of all things ; and so, affording this demonstrative evidence to the men of all generations.

However, if from this prophecy the first Christians drew a wrong conclusion, it was not hy the fault cf the Divine Prophet, but their own. Jewish Tradition might at first mislead the followers of Jesus to believe that the destruction of the World was very soon to follow the destruction of Jerusalem : But these men soon put off Tradition, with the Law : And Scripture, which was then recommended to them as their only study, with the DOUBLE SENSES with which it abounds, might easily have led them to a distinction of times in this Prophecy, a Prophecy formed, as they must needs see, upon the ancient models.

But as Providence is always educing good out of evil (though neither for this, nor any other reason, is evil ever connived at by the disciples of Christ, as appears from the conduct of St. Paul, just mentioned above) this error was fruitful of much service to truth. It nourished and increased a spirit of piety, seriousness, and chanty, which wonderfully contributed to the speedy propagation of the Gospel.

Before I conclude, let me just observe (what I have always principally in view), that this explanation of the Prophecy obviates all those impious and absurd insinu ations of licentious men, as if Jesus was led either by craft or enthusiasm, either by the gloominess of his own

* Bt&MPTffefr, more -firm, constant, *nd durable.

f See Sir Isaac Newton on the Prophecies, c. i. of his Observations upon the Apocalypse of St. John.

VOL. VI. ' F ideas,

66 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

ideas, or by his knowledge of the advantage of inspiring such into his Followers, to prophesy of the speedy 'destruction of the World.

— But by strange ill fortune even some Believers, as we havfc observed, are come at length to deny the very existence of double semex and secondary prophecies. A late writer hath employed some pages to proclaim his utter disbelief of all such fancies. I shall .take the liberty to examine this bold rectifier of prejudices : not for any thing he hath opposed to the Principles here laid down ; for I dare say these were never in his thoughts ; but only to shew, that all he hath written is wide of the purpose; 'though, to say the truth, no wider than the notions of those whom lie opposes ; men who contend for Types and Secondary senses in as extravagant a way as lie argues against them; that is, such who take a handle from the doctrine of double senses to give a loose to the extravagancies of a vague imagination : consequently his arguments, which are aimed against their very being and use, hold only against their abuse. And that abuse, which others indeed have urged as a proof against the uxt, he sets himself to* confute: a mighty undertaking! ;and then 'mistakes his reasoning tor a confutation of the use.

His Argument against double semes in Prophecies, as -for as I understand it, may be divided into two parts, \. Replies to the reasoning of others for double, senses. -2. liis GWQ reasoning against them. — With his Replies I have nothing to do (except where something of argu- 'meat -against the reality of double senses is contained) because they arc replies to no reasonings of mine, nor to any that I approve. I have only therefore to consider 'what he hath to say against the thing itself.

\. His first argument against more senses than one, is as follows — " Supposing that the opinion or judgment

Tlui Principles and Conn^xiruj of Natural and Revealed Religion, considered, p, 421* by Dr. Svkes.

" of

Sect. 6.} OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 67

" of the Prophet or Apostle is not to be considered in " matters of Prophecy more than the judgment of a " mere amanuensis is, — and that the point is not what " the opinion of the amanuensis was, but what the inditcr " intended to express; yet it must be granted, that if " God had any views to some remoter events, at the, " same time that the words which were used were u equally applicable to, and designed to express, nearer " events : those remoter events, as well as the nearer, " were in the intention of GOD : And if both the nearer " and remoter events were equally intended by God in " any Proposition, then the LITERAL SENSE OF THEM

" IS NOT THE ONE NOR THE OTHER SI> GLY AND

" APART. BUT BOTH TOGETHER must be the full mean- " ing of such passages." p. 219.

-~-Tlien the literal sense of them is not the one nor the other singly and apart, but both of them together, £e. i. e. if both together make up but one literal sense, then tnere is neither a secondary nor a double sense : and so there is an end of the controversy. A formidable Adversary truly ! He threatens to overthrow the thing, and gives us an argument against the propriety of the name. Let him but allow his adversaries that a nearer and a remoter event are both the subjects of one and the same Predic tion, and, I suppose, it will be in different to them whether he call it, \\ith them, a Prophecy of a double and figura-* tive sense, or they call it, with him, a Prophecy of a single literal sense : And he may be thankful for so much com plaisance ; for it is plain, they have the better of him even in the propriety.} of the name. It is confessed that GOD, in these prediction?, might have views to nearer and remoter events : now those nearer and remoter events were events under two different Dispensations, the Jewish and the Christian. The Prediction is ad dressed to the Jews, who had not only a more immediate concern with the first, but, at the time of giving the Prophecy, were not to be let into the secrets of the

F 2 other:

68 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

other : Hence th^ prediction of the nearer event was properly the literal or primary sense, as given for the present infoimation of GOD'S Servants; and the more remote event for their future information, and so was as properly the secondary sense, called with great propriety Jig lira tree, because conveyed under the terms which predicted the nearer event. But I hope a jirst and a second, a literal and a jigurative, may both together at least make up a DOUBLE SENSE. SELDEN understood this matter better, when he said, " The Scripture may " have more senses besides the literal, because GOD u understands all things at once ; but a man's writing " has but one true sense, which is that which the author <c meant when he writ it*."

2. His second argument runs thus, — " WORDS are <c the signs of our thoughts, and therefore stand for the " ideas in the mind of him that uses them. If then '•* words arc made use of to signify two or more things " at the same time, their significancy is really lost, and " it is impossible to understand the real certain intention (' of him that uses them. Were GOD therefore to dis- " cover any thing to mankind by any written Revelation, " and were he to make use of such TERMS as stand <: for ideas in men's minds, he must speak to them so as " to be understood by them. They must have in their u minds the ideas which God intended to excite in them, " or else it would be in vain to attempt to make dis- {{ coveries of his Will ; and the TERMS made use of must <; be such as were wont to raise such certain ideas, or •" else there could be no. written Revelation. The true " sense therefore of ANY PASSAGE of Scripture can be " but ONE; or if it be said to contain more senses than " one, if such multiplicity be not revealed, the Revelation " becomes useless, because .unintelligible." pp. 222, 223.

Men may talk what they please of the obscurity of Writers who iiave two wnses, but it has been my fortune * Table Talk.

tot,

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATE!). 6$

to meet with it much oftener in those who have none. Our Reasoner has here mistaken the very Question, which is, whether a Scripture PROPOSITION (for all Prophecies are reducible to Propositions) he capable of two senses ; and, to support the negative, he labours to prove that WORDS OR TERMS can have but one. — //' then WORDS arc made use of to signify two or more THINGS at the same time, their rigtftfaa&fjf is really lost — such TERMS as stand for ideas in mens minds — TERMS made use of must be such aft are wont to raise such certain ideas — All this is readily allowed ; but how wide of the purpose, may be seen by this instance : Jacob says, I will go down into Sheol unto my son mourn ing. Now if SHEOL signify in the ancient Hebrew, only the Grave, it would be abusing the TERM to make it signify likewise, with . the vulgar Latin, in infernuuiy because if WORDS (as he says) be made to signify two or more things at the same time, their signijicancy is lost. — But when this PROPOSITION of the Psalmist comes to be interpreted, Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell [SiiEoi] neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption ; though it literally signifies security from the curse of the Law, upon tra-nsgressors, viz. immature death, yet it is very reasonable to understand it in a spiritual sense, of the resurrection of CHRIST from the dead ; in which, the words or terms translated Soul and Hell, arc left in the meaning they bear in the Hebrew tongue, of Body and Grave.

But let us suppose our Reasoner to mean that a PROPOSITION is not capable of fico senses, as perhaps he did in his confusion of ideas, for notwithstanding his express words to the contrary, before he conies to the end of his argument, he talks of the true sense of ANY PASSAGE being but one ; and then his assertion must be, That if one Proposition have two Senses, its sigrujicancy is really lost ; and that it is impossible to understand :the real certain intention \ of him that use* them; co; -

F 3 sequentiy

70 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

sequent ly Revelation will become useless, because unhi* tclligible.

Now this I will take the liberty to deny. In the fol lowing instances, a single Proposition was intended by the writers and speakers to have a double sense. The poet Virgil says,

— " Talia, per clypetim Volcani, dona parentis " Miratur : rerumque ignarus, imagine gatidet, " ATTOLLENS HUMERO FAMAMQUE ET FATA NEPO-

" TUM* "

The last line has these two senses : First, that JEneas bore on his shoulders a shield, on which was engraved a prophetic picture of the fame and fortunes of his posterity: Secondly, that under the protection of that piece of armour he established their fame and fortunes, and was enabled to make a settlement in Latium, which proved the foundation of the Roman empire f.

Here then is a double sense, which, I believe, none who have any taste of Virgil will deny. The preceding verse introduces it with great art,

" Miratur, rerumque ignarus imagine gaudet :" and prepares us for something mysterious, and hid behind the letter.

On Peter's refusing to eat of elean and unclean meats promiscuously, in the vision presented to him, the Holy Spirit says, What Gad hath cleansed, that call not thou common J. The single proposition is, That which God hath cleansed is not common or impure', but no one who reads this story can doubt of its having this double sense : i . That the distinction between clean and unclean meats icas to be abolished. 2. And That the Gentiles were to be called into the Church of CHRIST. Here then the true sense of these PASSAGES is not one, but two: and yet the intention or meaning is not, on this

* yEneid. lib. viii. in fin. • t See Note [AA] at the eiid of this Book, I Acts x. 15.

account.

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 71

account, the least obscured or lost, or rendered doubtful or unintelligible.

He will say, perhaps, " that the very nature of the subject, in both cases, determines the two senses here ex- , plained." And does he think, we will not say the same of double senses in the Prophecies ? But he seems to take it for granted, tiiat Judaism and Christianity have no kind of relation to one another: Why else would he bring, in discredit of a double sense, th< se t vo verses of Virgil; " Hi motus animorum, atque haec certaimna tanta . " Pulveris exigui jactu composta quiescunt." On which he thus descants — The words are determi nate and clear* — Suppose new a man having occasion to speak of intermitting Jtroers and the ruffle of a mans spirits, and the easy cure of the disorder by pulverized bark, §c. p. 225. — To make this pertinent, we must suppose no more relation between the fortunes of the Jjewish Church and the Christian, than between a battle of Bees9 and the tumult of the animal Spirits: if this were not his meaning, it will be hard to know what was, wnkss to shew his happy talent at a parody.

But as he seems to delight in classical authorities, I will give him one not quite so absurd; where he himself shall confess that a double meaning does in fact run through one of the finest Odes of Antiquity. Horace thus ad dresses a crazy ship in which his friends had embarked for the yEgean sea:

O navis, referent in mare te noyi Pluctus! 6 quid agis ? fortiter pccupa Portum: nonne vides ut

Nudum remigio latus*, &c.

In the first and primary sense, he describes the dangers of his friends in a weak unmanned vessel, and in a tem pestuous sea: in the secondary,, the dangers of the Re public in entering into a new civil war, after all the losses and disasters of the old. As to the secondary sense,

* Hor. Od. lib.i. Od. 14,

r 4 which

72 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,

which is ever the most questionable and obscure, we have the testimony of early Antiquity delivered by Quintilian: As to the primary seme, the following will r;ot suffer us to doubt of it:

Nuper sollicitum quae mini tedium,

Nunc desiderium, curaque non levis, Interfusa nitentes

Vites aequora Cycladas.

But there being, as we have shewn above, two kinds of allegories; (the first, viz. the proper allegory; which hath but one real sense, because the literal meaning, serving only for the envelope, and without a moral Import*, is not to be reckoned ; the second, the improper, which hath two, because the literal meaning is of moral import; and of this nature are Prophecies with a double sense) the Critics on Horace, not apprehending the different natures of these two kinds, have engaged in very warm contests. The one side seeing some parts of the Ode to have a necessary relation with a real ship, contend for its being purely historical; at the head of these is Tanaquil Faber, who first started this criticism, after fifteen centuries peaceable possession of the Allegory : the other side, on the authority of Quintilian, who' gives the ode as an ex ample of this figure, will have it to be purely allegoricaL Whereas it is evidently both one and the other ; of the nature of the second kind of allegories, which have a double, sense; and this double sense, which does not in the least obscure the meaning, the learned reader may see, adds infinite beauty to the whole turn of the Apostrophe. Had it been purely historical, nothing had been more cold or trifling; had it been purely allegorical, nothing less natural or gracious, on account of the enormous length into which it is drawn. — Ezekiel has an allegory of that sort uhich Quintilian supposes this to. be, (namely, a proper allegory with only one real sense) and ho manages it with that brevity and expedition which ^proper

See the beuinniim of this volume.

o

allegory

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 73

allegory demands, when used in the place of a metaphor. vS peaking of Tyre under the image of a Ship, he says, 77?j/ Rowers have brought thee into great waters : the east wind hath broken tliee in the midst of the Seas-** But suppose the Ode to be both historical and allego rical, and that, under his immediate concern for his Friends, he conveyed his more distant apprehensions for the Republic ; and then there appears so much ease, and art, and dignity, in every period, as make us justly ^esteem it the most finished composition of Antiquity.

What is it then which makes the double seme so ridi culous and absurd in, Hi motus animorum, 8$c. and so noble and rational in, O Navis referent, 8$c. but this, That, in the latter case, the subject of the two senses had a close connexion in the INTERESTS OF THE WRITER; in the former, none at all ? Now that which makes two senses reasonable, does, at the same time, always make them intelligible and obvious. But if this be true, then a double sense in Prophecies must be both reasonable and intelligible: For I think no Believer will deny that there was the closest connexion between the Jewish and Christian systems, in the Dispensations of the Holy Spirit. — This will shew us, with what know ledge of his subject the late Lord Bolingbroke was en dowed, when he endeavoured to discredit Types and Figures by this wise observation, " That Scripture Types " and Figures have NO MORE RELATION TO the things " said to be typified, than to any thing that passes now " in France f."

3. His next argument runs thus—" If GOD is dis- " posed to reveal to mankind any truths — he must con- " vey them in such a manner that they may be under- ". stood — if he speaks to men, he must condescend to. " their infirmities and capacities — Now if he were to c contrive a Proposition in such a manner— that the " same Proposition should relate to several events; the

* Chap.xxvii. ver. 26, f Works, vol. iii. p. 306.

" consequence

74 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VL

" consequence would be, that as often as events happened " which agreed to any Proposition, so often would the " Revelation be accomplished. But this would only " serve to increase the confusion of men's minds, aiui " never to clear up any Prophecy : No man could say " what was intended by the Spirit of GOD: And if *c MANY events were intended, it would be the same " thing as if NO event was intended at all/* p. 226,

I all along suspected he was talking against what he did not understand. He proposed to prove the absurdity of a double -or secondary sense (p. 221) of Prophecies; and now he tells us of MANY senses; and endeavours to shew how this would make Prophecy useless. But sure he should have known, what the very phrase itself intimates, that no prophetic proposition is pretended to have more than TWO senses : And farther, that the subject of each i» supposed to relate to two connected arid successive Dis pensations : which is so far from creating any confu&'wtt in men's minds, or mailing a Prophecy useless, that it cannot but strengthen and confirm our belief of, and give double evidence to, the divinity of the Prediction. Ou the contrary, he appears to think that what orthodox Divines mean by a second sense, is the same with what the Scotch Prophets mean by a second sight ; the seeing one thing alter another as long as the imagination will liold out.

4. His last argument is — " Nor is it any ground for ^ such a supposition, that the Prophets being FULL or ;" THE IDEAS of the Messiah, and his glorious kingdom, " MADE USE OF IMAGES taken from thence, to express *' the- points upon which they had occasion to speak. " From whencesoeverthey took their ideas, yet when they i: spoke of present facts, it was present facts only that i; were to be understood. Common language, and the " figures of it, and the manner of expression; themeta- " ffhors, the kyperbelcf, and all the usual forms of speech, " are to be considered : And if the occasions of the

" expression

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED: 75.,

" expression are taken from a future state, yet still the •" Proposition is to be interpreted of that one thing to ". which it is particularly applied." p. 227.

Orthodox Divines have supported the reasonableness and probability of double semes by this material Obser vation, that the inspired Writers were full of the ideas of the Christian Dispensation. That is, there being a close relation between the Christian and the Jewish, of which the Christian was the completion, whenever the Prophets spoke of any of the remarkable fortunes of the, one, they interwove with it those of the other. A truth., which no man could be so hardy to deny, who believes, 1. That there is that relation between the two Religions : . and, 2. That these inspired men were let into the nature and future fortunes of both. See now in what manner our Author represents this observation. It is no ground, says he, for a double sense, that the Prophets were full of the ideas of a Messiah and his glorious kingdom, and made use of images taken from thence ; [that is, that they ennobled their style by their habitual contemplation of magnificent ideas.] For (continues he) whencesocccr they took their ideas, when they spoke of present facts, present facts alone were to be understood. Common- language and the figures of it, &c. — \Vithout doubt, from such KJulness oj ideas, as only raised and ennobled their style, it could be no more concluded that they meant future facts, when they speak of present, than that Virgil, because he was lull of the magnificent ideas of the Roman grandeur, where he says, Priami Lnperlum— Divum Domus, Ilium, 8$ Ingens gloria Teucrorum^ meant Rome as well as Troy, But what is all this to the purpose? Orthodox Divines talk of a fulness of ideas arising from the Holy Spirits revealing the mutual de pendency and future fortunes of the two Dispensations; and revealing them for the information, solace, and support of the Christian Church: And Dr. Sykes talks of. a fulness of ideas got nobody knows how, and used nobody

knows

7<S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. VI.

knows why, — to raise (I think he says) their style and ennoble their images. Let him give some good account of this representation, and then we may be able to de termine, if it be worth the trouble, whether he here put the change upon himself or his readers. To all this Dr. Sykes replies, " It was no answer, to shew that " there are allegories and allegorical interpretation^ ** for these were never by me denied/' Exam. p. 363. Why does he tell us of his never denying allegories, when he is called upon for denying secondary semes f Does he take these things to be different ? If he does, his answer is nothing to the purpose, for he is only charged, in express words, with denying secondary semes, Does he take them to be the same f He must then allow secondary senses ; and so give up the question ; that is, retract the passages here quoted from him. He is reduced to this dilemma, either to acknowledge that he first writ, or that he now answers, to no purpose *.

From hence, to the end of the chapter, he goes on to examine particular texts urged against his opinion ; with which I have at present nothing to do : first* because the proper subject of this section is the general nature only of types and double senses : and secondly, because what room I have to spare, on this head, is for a much welcomer Guest, whom I am now returning to, the original author of these profound reasonings, Mr. COLLINS himself.

II.

We have shewn that types and secondary senses are rational, logical, and scholastic modes of information: that they were expedient and highly useful under the Jewish Economy : and that they are indeed to be found in the Institutes of the Law and the Prophets. But now it will be objected, cf that, as far as relates to the Jewish Economy, a double seme may be allowed ; because the.' future affairs of that Dispensation may be well supposed * See note [BBJ at the end of this Book.

to

Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 77

to occupy the thoughts of the Prophet; but it is un reasonable to make one of the senses relate to a different and remote Dispensation, never surely in his thoughts. For the hooks of the. Old Testament (Mr. Collins tells us) seem the wast plain of all ancient writings, and wherein there appears not the hast trace of a Typical or Allegori- .cal intention in the Authors, or in any other Jews of their time *."

I reply, that was it even as our adversaries suggest, that ail the Prophecies, which, we say, relate to JESUS, relate to him only in a secondary sense ; and that there were no other intimations of the New Dispensation but what such Prophecies convey ; it would not follow that such sense was false or groundless. And this I have clearly shewn in the account of their nature, original, and use. Thus much I confess, that without miracles, in confirmation of such sense, somef of them would with difficulty be proved to have it ; because we have shewn, that a com m odious and designed obscurity attends both their nature and their use. But then, This let me add, and these Pretenders to superior reason would do well to consider it, that the authority of divine Wisdom as rationally forces tlie assent to a determined meaning of an obscure and doubtful Proposition, as any other kind of logical evidence whatsoever.

But this which is here put, is by no means the case. For we say, i. That some of the Prophecies relate to JESUS in & primary sense. 2. That besides these, there are in tlie prophetic Writings the most clear and certain intimations of the Gospel Economy, which are alone .sufficient to ascertain the reality of the secondary.

L That SOME Prophecies relate to the MESSIAH in a primary sense, hath been invincibly proved by many learned men before me : I shall mention therefore but px E ; and that, only because Mr. Collins hath made some- remarks upon it, which will afford occasion for a

-* (ground*, p,82, f See note [CC] at the end of this Book.

farther

78 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI

farther illustration of the subject JESUS declares, of John the Baptist — This is the ELI AS that was for to come. " Wherein (says the Author of the Grounds, &c.) " he is supposed to refer to these words of Malachi, " Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the " coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord; " which, according to their LITERAL sense, are a Pro- " phesy that Elijah or Ellas was to come in person, and •" therefore not LITERALLY but MYSTICALLY fulfilled " in John the Baptist" pp. 47, 48. And again, in his Scheme of literal Prophecy considered, speaking of this passage of Malachi, he says, " But to cut off all pretence " for a literal Prophecy, I observe, first, That the literal " interpretation of this place is, that Ellas, the real " Ellas, was to come. And is it not a MOST PLEASANT " literal interpretation to make Ellas not signify Ellas, " but somebody who resembled him in qualities? — " Secondly I observe, that the Septuagint Translators " render it, Ellas the Tishblte, — and that the Jews, '* since CHRIST'S time, have generally understood, from " the passage before us, that Elias is to come in person. — " But John Baptist himself, who must be supposed to " know who he was himself, when the question was " asked him, whether he icas Elias, denied himself to he " Ellas ; and when asked who he was, said, he was the " voice of one crying in the Wilderness, Sfc. which is $ " passage taken from Isaiah" p. 127.

i . The first thing observable in these curious remarks is, that this great Advocate of Infidelity did not so much as understand the terms of the question. The words, says he, according to their literal sense, are a Prophesy that Elijah teas to come in person, and therefore- not literally but mystically fit IjiUed in John the Baptist. lie did not so much as know the meaning of a primary and secondary sense, about which he makes all this stir. •A secondary sense indeed implies o, figurative interpre tation ; a primary implies a literal: But yet. this primary

SEXSJE

><-et.&] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. ?<j

SE\TSE does not exclitfte^ftgtfiwti&e TEIIMS. The primary or literal sense of the Prophecy in question is, that, ?>eibre the great and terrible day of the Lord, a messen ger should be sent, resembling in character the Prophet Elijah ; this messenger, by & figure, is called the Prophet Elijah. A figure too of the mast easy and natural im port ; and of especial use amongst the Hebrews, -who were accustomed to denote any character or action bv that of the kind vvhich was hecbrfie most known or celebrated. Thus the Prophet Isaiah : ** And the Lord *' shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea? " and with his mighty win-d shall he shake his hand over " the river, and shall smite it in the scxeu slwams *V Here, a second passage through the Red Sea is promised in literal terms : But who thereibre will say that this is the literal waubig ? The literal meaning, though the prophecy be \i\Jigurative terms, is simply redemption from bondage. For EGYPT, in the Hebrew phrase, signified a place of bondage. So again Jeremiah says ; " A voice was heard in llamah, lamentation and bitter " weeping: RACHEL weeping ibr lier children refused <v' to be comforted because they were not f.'r The primary sense of these words, according to Grotius. is a prediction of the weeping of the Jewish matrons for their children can led captive to Babylon by Nabuzaradan, Will he say therefore that this Prophecy was not literally fulfilled, because Rachel was dead many ages before, and did not, that we read ot\ return to life on this occa sion ? Does not he see that, by the most common and easy figure, the Matrons of the tribe of Benjamin were called by the name of this their great Parent? As the Israelites, in Scripture, are called Jacob, and the posterity of the son of Jesse by the name of David: So a^aih, Isaiah says, " Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of " SODOM ; give ear unto the Law oi our GOD, ye people " of GojuoititAirj;." Will he say, the people of Sodom

' Jb, xi. ver. 15, f Ch. xjpi ver. 15, * Ch. i. ver. 10.

ani

8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

and Gomorrah are here addressed to in \he primary sense, and the people of the Jews only in the secondary ? But the preceding words, which shew the people of Sodom and Gomorrah could not now be addressed to, because there were none left, shew likewise that it is the Jewish Nation which is called by these names. Except the Lord of Hosts had left us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah'*. Would not he be thought an admirable interpreter of Virgil, who should criticise the Roman Poet in the same manner?' — Virgil seems the most plain of all ancient writings : And lie says,

" Jain redit & Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna."

Which, according to its literal meaning, is, that the Virgin returns, and old Saturn reigns again, in person ; and therefore not LITERALLY, but MYSTICALLY fid- Jilled in the justice and felicity of Augustus's reign. And it is a MOST PLEASANT literal interpretation, to make the Virgin and Saturn not signify the Virgin and Saturn, but somebody who resembled them in qualities. Such reasoning on a Classic, would be called nonsense in every language. But Freethinking sanctifies all sorts of im pertinence. Let me observe further, that this was a kind of compound blunder : LITERAL, in common speech, being opposed both to figurative, and to spiritual ; and MYSTICAL signifying both Jiguratire and spiritual; he fairly confounded the distinct and different meanings both of LITERAL and of MYSTICAL.

He goes on — / observe, that the Septuagint Trans lators render it Elias the Tishbite — and that the Jews since CHRIST'S time have generally understood from this passage,, that Elias 'is to come in person. And John Baptist himself, who must be supposed to know who he was himself, when the question was asked, him, denied himself to be Elias. — Why does lie say, Since CHRIST'S thne, and not before, when it appears to be before as well

* Chap, i. ver. 9, Q

Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 81

as since, from his own account of the translation of the Septuagint? For a good reason. We should then have seen why John the Baptist, when asked, denied himself to be Ellas ; which j it was not Mr. Collins's design we should see; if indeed we do not ascribe too much to his knowledge in this matter. The case stood thus : At the time of the SeptuRgint translation, and from thence to the time of CHRIST, the doctrine of a Transmigration, and of a Resurrection of the body, to repossess the Land of Judea, were national opinions ; which occa sioned the Jews by degrees to understand all these sorts of figurative expressions literally. Hence, amongst their many visions, this was one, that Elias should come again in person. Which shews what it was the Jews- asked John the Baptist ; and what it was he answered, when he denied himself to be Elias : Not that he was not the Messenger prophesied of by Malachi (for his pre tending to be that Messenger evidently occasioned the question) but that he was not, nor did the prophecy imply that the Messenger should be, Elias in person.

But to set his reasoning in the fullest light, Let us consider a similar prophecy of Amos : Behold the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a FAMINE in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water but of hearing the words of the Lord*. I would ask, is this a Prophecy of a famine of the word in a literal, or in a mystical sense? Without doubt the Deist will own, (if ever he expects we should appeal again to Iris ingenuity) in a literal. But now strike out the expla nation [not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water] and what is it then ? Is it not still a famine of the word in a literal sense ? Mystical, if you will, in the meaning of metaphorically obscure, but not in the meaning; of spiritual. But mystical in this latter signification onlv, is opposed to literal, in the question about secondary senses. It appears then, that a want of preaching th$ * Chap. viii. ver. 11.

VOL. VI. G

82 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book

tcord is still the literal mean ing of the Prophecy, whether the explanation be in or out, though the Jfgu- rathe, term [famine] be used to express that meaning. And the reason vrhy the Prophet explains the term,, was not, because it was .a harsh or unnatural Jigtixe, to denote want of preaching, any more than the term Elijah to denote a similar character, which Malachi does not explain ; but because the Prophecy of Amos might have been for ever mistaken, and tliejigicrafhc. term un derstood literally ; the People being at that time, oiler* punished for their sins by •& famine of bread . But this abusive cavil at figurative terms will re mm A us of his observations en the following Prophecy of Isaiah — " Even them will I bring to my holy mountain^ " and make them joyful in my house of prayer : their " burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted " upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an " house of Prayer FOR ALL PEOPLE*."' This, he says, must needs relate to Jewish, not to Ghristiarn times.. Why? Because sacrifices are mentioned. But how could this truth be told the Jewish People, that all nations should be gathered to the. true GOD, otherwise than by MS ing terms taken from Rites familiar to them ; unless the nature of the Christian Dispensation had been pre viously explained r A matter evidently irjfit for their in formation, when they were yet to live so long under the Jewish. For though the Prophets speak of the little, value of, and small regard due to, the ceremonial Law ^ they always mean (and always make their meaning un derstood) when the ceremonial Law is supcrstitionslyr 'observed, and observed to a neglect of the moral \ which last they describe in the purity and perfection of the* Gospel. So admirable was this conduct! that while ifc hid the future Dispensation, it prepared men for it.

Thus then stands the argument of this mighty Reasoncr.. There arc no Prophecies, he says, which: relate to JLSU&

* Chap..!vi. ver. 7,

but

Sect CJ OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 83

but in a secondary sense.' Now a secondary sense h unscholastic and enthusiasticaL To this we answer, that the Prophecy of Malachi about Elijah, and of Isaiah about bringing ail people to his holy mountain, relate to JESUS in a primary sense. He replies, No, but in a mystical, only. Here he begins to quibble, the sure sign of an expiring argument: Mystical signifies as well secondary asjigwativt. In the sense of secondary, the interpretation of these Prophecies to JESUS is nettoystieafy in the sense of Jiguratrct it is. But is the use of a figurative term enthusiastical or unschclastic, when the end is only to convey information concerning a less known thing in the terms of one more known ? Now whether we are to charge this to ill faith or a worse understanding, his Followers shall determine for me.

2. But we will suppose all that an ingenuous Adver sary can ask— " That most of the Prophecies in question relate to JESUS in a secondary sense only ; the rest in a primary, but expressed m figurative terms ; which, till their completion, threw a shade over their meaning, and kept them in a certain degree of obscurity." Now, to shew how all this came about, will add still farther light to this very perplexed question.

We have seen, from the nature and long duration of the Jewish economy, that the Prophecies which relate to JES u s, must needs be darkly and enigmatically delivered: We have seen how the allegoric Mode of speech, then much in use, furnished the means, by what we call a double sense in Prophecies, of doing this with all the requisite obscurity. But as some of these Prophecies by their proper light alone, without the confirmation of miracles, could hardly have their subiimer sense so well ascer tained; to render all opposers of the Gospel without ex cuse, it pleased the Holy Spirit, under the last race of the Prophets, to give credentials to the mission of JESUS by predictions of him in a primary and literal sense. Yet the Jewish Economy being to continue long, there

G a §till

S* THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VII.

still remained the same necessity of a covert and myste rious conveyance. That figurative expression therefore, which was before employed in the proposition, was* IKJW used in the terms* Hence, the Prophecies of a swiglts&ui* come to be in highly figurative wo*ds •:.. as> before, the earlier prophecies of a double sense (which- had a primary .meaning in the affairs of the Jewish Stater and, for the present information of ttiat People) were delivered in a much simpler phrase.

The Jewish Doctors, whose obstinate adherence, not? to the letter of the Law, as this Writer ignorantly or fraudulently suggests, but to the mystical interpretation s« of the CaJmla, prevents their seeing -the -true cause of Uiis difference in the LANGUAGE, between the earlier and later Prophets; the Jewish Doctors, I say, are extremely- perplexed to give a tolerable account of this matter. What they best agree in is, that the Jig it rat ire enigmatic' style of the later Prophets (which however they make- infinitely more obscure by cabalistic meanings, . than it really is, in order to evade the relation which the Pre dictions have to. JESUS) is owing to the declining state of Srophecy. Every Prophtt^ says- the famous Rabbi, Joseph Albo, that is of 'a strong, .wguciinM, ami piercing* •itnderstaudingy.wili apprehend the thing nakedly without any similitude;, who we it comes to paw that alt hi* .say-* rugs are distinct and clear, and j^ee from all obscurity, having a literal truth in them : But u Prophet of an ''•:jerior wink or degree, his words axe obscure, cmcrapped. in riddle* ami parable* \~ and therefore, lurcc not a literal but allegorical truth contained in them*. And indeed* insr fictitious RabbLseeaas to have had as little knowledge! of this matter as the* other; for in answer to what Mr. "WhSston, who, extravagant as he was in rejecting all 'double saw*, yet knew the difference between a secondary* and enigmatic prophecy, which, we- shall see, Mr. Collins^ did not, in answer, I say, to Mr. Whiston, who observed* * Smith's Select Discourses, p. .180.

. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. -85

4hat the Prophetic* [meaning the primary] which *-relate •to Christianity arc cowred, --mystical and enigmatical, re- tpiies, This is exactly equal mysticism \cith, and just ait remote from the real literal seme, as-ihe -mysticism GJ the \Allegorists [i.c the -Contenders fer a double sense] and is altogether as OV>SCVIIY. to the understanding*. Ilk argument against secondary senses -is, that they are umcho- lastic and €Kthtt$ia$tie&L Mr. Whiston, to humour him, ^presents him with direct and primary Prophecies, buttelk; him at the same time, they ate expressed 'in covered, mystical, and enigmatic terms. This will not satisfy \hiin; it is no better than the mysticism of the Allegoristn. Jiow- so : We may think perhaps, that he would pretend to prove, because his argument requires he should prove, that enigmatical egressions are as iinscholastic and en- thusiastical as secondary senses. "No such matter. All \he says is, that they are as OBSGUKE to. the understanding. But obscurity is not his quarrel with secondary seines. lie objects to them as i<nscliolastic-and,.en£hii>sia$ticaL But .liere lay the difficulty; no man, w!Ao pretended to any •language, could affirm this, oi figurative enigmatical ex pressions ; he was forced therefore to .have recourse to his usual refuse. OBSCURITY.

o • 7

It is true, he says, -these wi/st icdl ciii gmaiic Prophet »- (as Air. Whiston -calls them) arc equally remote from the real literal sense, as the mysticis/n of the Allegorists. .But this is only a repetition of the blunder exposed above, where he could not distinguish between the literal sense .of a Term, and the literal sense of a Proposition. And how gross that ignorance is we may see by the follouing "instance. Isaiah says, The Wolf also shall diccil icith tie Lamb, and the Leopard shall, lie down icith tlie Kid', and 'the Calf, and the young Lion, and the Falling together, and a little Child shall lead thaw]:. 'Now I will take it .'for granted that his Followers understand this, as Grotius aloes, of the profound peace which was to follow after *. The Grounds, &c. p. 242. -j Chap. xi. vcr 6.

G 3 ths

86 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

the times of Seuacberib, under Hczckiah : but though the terms be mystical, yet sure they call this the literal sense of liic prophecy: .For Grotius makes the ntjsticfil sense to refer to the Gospel. Mr. Whiston, I suppose, denies that this has any thing to do w ith the times of Hezekiah, but that it refers to those of CHRIST only. Is not his interpretation therefore literal as well as that of Grotius? unless it i in mediately becomes oddly typical, uns.ciiotastic, and entJtusia&tica^ as soon as ever JESUS comes into the question.

II. Eut now, besides the literal primary prophecies concerning the PERSON of JESUS, we say, in the second place, that there are other, which give a primary and direct intimation of the CHAXGE OF THE DISPENSA TION". Isaiah foretels great mercies to the Jewish People, in a future Age; which, though represented by such metaphors as bore analogy to the blessings peculiar to the Jewish economy, yet, to shew that they were in deed different from what faz figurative terms alluded to, the Prophet at the same time adds, My thoughts are not as your thoughts, neither are your ways my 'ways, smth the Lord*. This surely implies a different DISPENSA TION. That the change was from carnal to spiritual, is elegantly intimated in the subjoining words, — For as the HEAVENS are higher than the EARTH, so are my tvays higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts '\. But tliis higher and more excellent Dispen sation is more plainly revealed in the following tigure : Instead of the thorn shall come up the jir-irce, and instead of the brier shall mm up the myrtle-tree'^^ i. e. the -new Religion shall as far excel the old, as the fir-tree docs the thorn, or the myrtle the brier. In a following Prophecy he shews the EXTENT of this new Religion, as here he had shewn its NATURE; that it was to spread beyond Judea, and to take in the whole race of mankind, — The GENTILES shall come to thy light., and * Chap.lv. ver. 8. t Ver. 9. '; Ver. 13.

king*

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 87

:kbi<rs to 'the brightness of thy rising*, &c. Which idea the Prophet Zephaniah expresses in so strong a manner, -as to lea.vc no room for evasion : The Lord will be terrible -unto them, for he rev'// .FAMISH all the GODS- aOF THE EARTH; and men shall worship him .ever?/ one i-Mieii IMS PLACE, .even all the isles of the G EX TILES f.- The expression 'is noble, and alludes to the popular 'Superstitions of Paganism, which conceived that their Gods were nourished by -the steam of sacrifices. But, when were the Pagan Gods thus famished, but in the first ages of Christianity? — Every one from his place* that is, they were not to go up to JERUSALEM to worship. — Even all the isles of the Gentiles: but when <lid these worship the God of Israel every one from his place, before the ;p reaching of the Apostles? Then indeed their speedy and general conversion distinguished them >frorn the rest of the nations. This he expresses yet more •plainly in another place. " In that day shall there be an " altar to the Lord in the midst of the Land of u Egypt $ ;" i. e. the Temple-service shall be abolished; ,and .the God of Israel worshipped with the most solemn rites, even in the most abhorred and unsanctified places, such as the Jews esteemed Egypt. Which Malachi thus diversifies in -the expression, And ui every place incense, diatt he offered wito my name, and a PURE OFFERING^; A. e. it shall not be the Jess acceptable for not being at the Temple.

But Isaiah, as he proceeds, is still more explicit, and declares, in direct terms, that the Dispensation should be changed, Behold 1 create XEW HEAVEXS^/AY/ a NEW EARTH; and tke former thai! not be remembered nor come into ?nhul\\. . This, m the prophetic style, means a NEW IIELIGIOX and a XEW LAW; the metaphors, as \ve have shewn elsewhere, being taken from hieroglyphicai ex pression. He speaks in another place, of the consequence of this ctoftjige; namely, the transferring the benefits of

•* Ch. Ix. ver. 3. f Ch, Ji. ver. 11.. J Cli. xix. ver. 19.

[ § ,See poie £D Dj at the end of this Book. j| Isai. Ixv. 17.

G '4 lleiigiou

88 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

Religion from the Jewish to the Christian Dispensation. Is it not yet a very little while, " and Lebanon [the " isles of the Gentiles] .shall be turned into a fruitful " field, and the fruitful field [the land of Judea] shall " be esteemed as a forest * ? " To make it yet more clear, I observe farther, that the Prophet goes on to declare the change of the SANCTION ; and this was a necessary consequence of the change of the Dispensation. — There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath -not Jilted Ids days : For the cliild diall die. an hundred years old, but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed | ; /. c. the SANCTION OF

TEMPORAL REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS shall be 11O

longer administered in an extraordinary manner; for we must remember, that long life for obedience, and sudden and untimely death for transgressions, bore an eminent part in the Sanction of the Jewish Law. Now these arc expressly said to be abrogated in the Dispensation pro mised, it being declared that the Virtuous, though dying immaturely, should be as if they had lived an hundred years ; and sinners, though living to an hundred years, as if they had died immaturely.

The very same prophecy in Jeremiah, delivered in less figurative terms, supports this interpretation beyond all possibility of cavil : " Behold the days come, saith the " Lord, that I will make a NEW COVENANT with the " house of Israel, and with the house of Jitdah; not " according to the Covenant that I made with their fa- " thers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring "' them out of the land of tigypt. — But this shall be the " Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, 4i After those days, saith the Lord, / will put my Law "in their INWARD PA UTS, and write it in their

HEARTS;!:.'

What Isaiah figuratively names a new Heaven and a new Hearth, Jeremiah simply and literally calls a m\v * Ch. xxix. ver. 1 7. t Cli. Ixv, ver. -20 J Ch. xxxi. ver. 3 1 .

Covenant.

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 89

Covenant. And what kind of Covenant ? Not such an one as was made with their Fathers. This was declara tive enough of its nature ; yet, to prevent mistakes, he £*ives as well a ppsitjve as a negative description of it: This shall be the Covenant, I icill put my Law in their inward parts, fyc. i. e. this Law shall be spiritual, as the other given to their Fathers was carnal: For the Cere monial Law did not scrutinize tiie heart, but rested in ex ternal obedience and observances.

Lastly, to crown the whole, we may observe, that Jeremiah too, like Isaiah, fixes the true, nature of the Dispensation by declaring the CHANGE of the SANCTION: *' In those days they shall say no more, the fathers have tc eaten a sour grape, and the child rens" teeth are set on " edge. But every one shall die lor his own iniquity; " every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be tc set on edge*." For it was part of the Sanction of the Jewish Law, that children should bear the iniquity of their fathers, §c. a mode of punishing vvhich hath been already explained and justified. Yet all these Prophecies of the GOSPEL being delivered in terms appropriate to the LAW, the Jews of that time uould naturally, as they in fact did, undeis'and them- as speaking of the extension and completion of the OLD Dispensation, rather than the perfection of it by the introduction of a NEW. And thus .jtlieir reverence tor the present System, under which they were yet to continue, was preserved. 'I he necessity of this proceeding, for the present time;— the effects it would afterwards produce through the perversity ot the super-* stitious followers of the Law; — and the divine ^oodnesa as well as wisdom manifested in this proceeding are all

finely' touched in the following passage of Isaiah f

" Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he

' make to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned

• •" from the milk, and .drawn from the breasts']:. For

*• Ver. <20. f Chap, xxviii. 9, & seq.

t i. e. Those who were most free from the prejudices of the Etfrjiitu of t^e LUYV.

" precept

*>© THE DIV1XE LEGATION [BookVL

*s precept must be [or hath beai] upon precept, precept " upon precept, line upon line, line upon line *, here a *' little and there a little. For with stammering lips and " another tongue will he speak to this People j\ To " whom he said, This is the rest, and this is the refresh-

*l H1£'t> yo£ *k°y would not hear. But the word of the *' Lord was unto them, precept upon precept, precept *' upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a *' little and the- re a little ; that they might go and fall *' backward, and he broken and snared and taken §."

Notwithstanding all this, if you will believe our Ad versary, The books of the Old Testament seem the most PLAIN" of ail ancient writings, and wherein there appears NOT THE LEAST TRACE OF TYPICAL OR ALLEGORICAL INTENTION* hi the Authors, or in any ether Jews of their trincs^.. Ife that answers a Free thinker will find employment enough. — Not the leclst trace of a typical or allegorical intention! lie might, a-s well have said there is not the least trace of poetry in Virgil, or of eloquence in Cicero. But there is none, he says, cither in the Authors, or in any other Jews of tin-! r times. Of both which Assertions, this single Text of Ezckiel will be an abundant confutation — Ah, Lord,

TIIF.T SAV OF ME, LOTH TIE NOT SPEAK PARABLES^"?

The Prophet con j plains that his ineffectual Mission proceeded from his speaking, and from the People's conceiving him to sp^ak, of things mysteriously, and in a mode of delivery not understood by them. The Author

recluplicuiion of the jtln-use was to add force and energy to the sense.

t i.e. Gospel truths delivered in the language of the Law. £ i.e. The glad tidings of the Gospel.

§ i.e. This gradual yet re j» o^ted instruction, wliich was given with so much iiK-rey and iiidnlgenre, to lead them by slow and gentle 6t«»ps from t}ie Law to the. Gospel, being abused so as to defeat tlie ft f,d, God in punishment made it the occasion of blinding their eyes £nd hardfuing their hearts.

|j Grounds, &c. p. 8-2. J Chap, xx. -ver. 49*

of

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 91

of the book of Ecclesiasticus, who is reasonably supposed to have been contemporary with Antiochus Epiphanes, represents holy Scripture as fully fraught with typical and allegoric wisdom : " lie that jilveth his mind to the 46 Law of the Most High, and is occupied in the medita- " tion thereof, will seek out the wisdom of the Ancients, " AND BE OCCUPIED IN PKOPHF.CIES. He will keep " the sayings of the renowned men ; and where SUBTILE " PARABLES are, he will be there also. lie will seek <k' out the SECRETS OF cu'AVE SENTENCES, and be " conversant in DARK PARABLES*." Hence it appears that -the Jewish Prophecies were not so plain as our Adversary represents them; and that their obscurity arose from their having TyfifCffl or Allegorical intentions ; which figures too related not to the present, but to a future Dispensation, as is farther seen from what Ezekiel says . in another place — Son of man, behold they of titc house of Israel say, THE VISION THAT HE SKETII is

FOR MANY DAYS TO COME, AND HE PROPII ESI ETH OF THE TIM ES THAT ARE FAR OFF'|~. So that tilCSG People tO

whom the Prophecies were so plain, and who understood them to respect their own times dvAy,&ithwt any Typical or sll/egvric lii&dningi complaia of obscurities in them, and consider them as referring to very rernote times'. But I am ashamed of being longer serious with so idle a Caviller. The English Bible lies open to every FREE- TILT XKER of Great Britain ; -Where they may read it that will, and understand it that can.

As for such Writers as the Author of the Grounds and Reasons, To say the truth, one would never wish to see them otherwise employed : But when so great and so good a man as GROTIUS hath unwarily contributed to support the dotages of Infidelity, this is such a mbad-r venture as one cannot but lament.

ay*j-ca^a*I«t« Ch. xxxix. vc;f 1, ;2, 3.

mp. xii.'ver.^j,

'- This

*)C THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

This excellent Person (for it as not to br d^uised) 3iath made it his constant endeavour throughout his whole KJornment x>n the Prophets, to find a double sense even iin those <&Vee£ Prophecies which relate to JESUS ; and to £urn the tinman/ sense upon the affairs of the Jewish Dispensation; only permitting them to relate to JLSU& .in a -secondary : .and by that affected strain of interpre tation, hath done alaiost as much harm to Revelation as -his other writings have done it service: not ivom any strength there is in his Criticisms (for this, and his •Comment on the Apocalypse, are the opprobrium of his -great learning), but /jnly from the name ;tliey .carry witk

The Principle which Grotlus went upon, in com- ancnting the Bible, was, that it should be interpreted OH ihe same rules of Criticism that men use in the study <of all other ancient Writings. Nothing could be more ^reasonable than his Principle : but unluckily he deceived Jiimseif in the application of it. These .rules teach us ,<that the GEXIUS, PURPOSE, and .AUTIIUIU/IV of the Writer should be carefully studied. Under the head »of his authority t it is.to.be considered, whether he be a .incre huxuin or an inspired Writer, Thus far Grotius Tvent right : he examined that authority ; and pronounced •the Writers to bejnffiwd, and .the Prophecies divine: Jkit when he came to apply these premisses, he utterly •dorgot his conclusion ; and interpreted the Prophecies by rules very diiTv'ivut from vv hat the confession of their •divine original required : for seeing them pronounced by Jewish Proph-.ls, occupied Jn Jewish Af^iirs, he con- dudcni lUcir >olc Object was Jewish; and consequently

i the proper <cii:%j of the Prophecies referred to these .only. liut t.his \vas faliiiig back irom one of the grounds lie weut upon, That the Wriicrs were inspired : for his futerpretation was only reasonable oji the supposition that i se Writers prophesied in the very manner which the Pagans understood their Prophets sometimes to have .6 .done,

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED: g$

done, by a natural sagacity : For, on the allowance off a real inspiration, it was GOD, and not the Writer, who was the proper Author of the Prophecy; mid to under stand his- purpose -, which the rules of interpretation^ require us to seek, we must examine the nature, reason, and end- of that Religion which he gave to the Jews. For on these, common sense assures us, the meaning1 of the Prophesies must be intirely regulated. Now ify (»n enquiry, it should be found, that this whieh Grotius- admitted for a divine Dispensation, was only preparatory of another more perfect, it would then appear not to l>e improbable that some of these -Prophecies might relate, in them literal,, primary, and immediate sense, to that? more perfect Dispensation. And whether they did so* or not was to be determined by the joint evidence of the* context, and of the nature of GOD'S whole Dispensation' to mankind, so far forth as it is discoverable to us. But Grotius, instead of making the matter thus reasonably problematical) and to- be determined by evidence, deter mined first, andTaid it down as a kind of Principle, that t?he Prophecies related directly and properly to Jewish' affairs : and into this system he wiredrew all his. ex planations. This, as- w-c say, was falsely applying a true rule of interpretation. lie went on this reasonable- ground, that the Prophecies should he interpreted like all other ancient. Writings :, and, OH-.' examining their authority^ he found them to be truly divine. Vv lien he had gone thus far, he then preposterously went back, again, and commented as it they were confessed to be- merely human : The consequence was, that- several of his criticisms, to speak of them eoly as the performance' of a man of learning, are so forced, unnatural, and absurd, so opposed to the rational canon of interpretation, that I will venture to affirm they are, in all respects, the worst that ever came, from the hand of an. acute and: able. Critic,.

m,

•

94 - THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

( . III.

. Having now proved that the Principles which J,Ir. Collins went upon are in themselves false and extravagant, one has little reason to regard how he employed them. But as this extraordinary Writer was as great a Freethinker in Logic as in Divinity, it may not he improper to shew the fashionable World what sort of man they have chosen for their Guide, to lead them from their Religion, when they would no longer bear with any to direct them in it.

His argument against what he calls typical, allegorical, but properly, secondary senses, stands thus : — " Christi anity pretends to derive itself from Judaism. JESUS appeals to the religious hooks of the Jews as prophesying of his Mission. None of these Prophecies can be undertood of him but in a typical allegoric sense. Now that sense is absurd, and contrary to all scholastic rules of interpretation. Christianity, therefore, not being i:eally predicted of in the Jewish Writings, is conse quently false." — The contestabie Proposition, on which the whole argument rests, is, That a typical or allegoric sense is absurd, and contrary to ail scholastic rules of interpretation.

Would 'the Reader now believe that Mr. Collins has himself, i;i this very book, given a thorough confutation of his own capital Proposition ? Yet so it is ; and, con trary too to his usual way 0J< reasoning, h(> has done it in a very clear and convincing manner ; by shewing that the typical and allegorical way of writing was uni versally practised by Antiquity. — "Allegory (says he) •' '-was much in use amongst the Pagans, being culti- " vated by many of the Philosophers themselves as well " as Theologers. By SOME, AS THE METHOD OF DELI- " VERING DOCTRINES ; but bv most, as the method of " explaining away what, according to the letter, appeared s" ub^urd in the ancient fables or histories of their Gods.

"

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, $$

M Religion itself was deemed a mysterious tiling amongst. *• tlic Pagans, and not to be publicly and plainly " declared. Wherefore it vvas never simply represented " to the People, but was most obscurely deliverer, ** and vaii'd under Allegories, or Parables,, or liiero- " glyphics ; and especially amongst the Egyptians, " Chaldeans, and the Oriental Nations. — They allege- " rized many things of nature, and particularly the- " heavenly bodies — They allegorized all their ancient " fables and stories, and pretended to discover in them, " the secrets of Natural Philosophy, Medicine, Politics, " and iu a word all Arts and Sciences. Tlae works- " of Homer in particular have furnished infinite materials " for all soits of allegorical Commentators to work " upon. — The ancient Greek Poets were reputed to " involve divine, and natural, and historical notions of " their Gods under mystical and parabolical expres- " sions — The Pythagorean Philosophy was wholly de- K livered in mystical language, the signification whereof " was entirely unkown to the world abroad— The &ici& " Piiiicsophers are particularly iamous for allegorkkig; " the whole heathen Theology — Vv'e have se^-eral " treatises of heathen Philosophers on the subject oif " allegorical interpretation *."'

If now this kind of allegorizing, which involved the:. Proposition in a double XCMW, was ia use amongst the- Pagan Oraclea, Divines, PlJIo^ophers and I5oets? is not the understiiixling aneient wiiLings Qllegoyioattyt or in a double .ycvwe, agreeab-Se to all rational, scholastic rules of interpretation ? Surely, as much so as the. understand ing mere mcliiphwical expressions in .a tropical sig- niiicaticMi ; whose propriety no one ever yet called in question. For the- sense of Propositions is .imposed as arbitrarily as the sense of wonts. And if men, ..in the communication of their thoughts, agree to give, on some occasions, a double sense to Propositions, as well as. on * Grounds, &c. pp. 8^. 84, 85, 86.

others

g6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI,

others, a single, the interpreting the first in two meanings is as agreeable to all scholastic rules, as interpreting the other in one: And Proposition*, with a double and single sense, are as easily distinguishable from each other, by the help of the context, as Word* \vith a literal and figurative meaning. But this great Philosopher seems to have imagined, that the single .sense of a Proposition was imposed by Nature ; and that therefore, pi vino them a double meaning, was the same offence against Reason as the deviating from the unity of pure Theism into Polytheism : and, consequently, that the universal lapse into ALLEGORY and IDOLATRY rendered neither the one nor other of them the less absurd *.

I say, he seems to think so. More one cannot say of such a Writer. Besides, he seems to think otherwise, where, in another place, as if aware that Use would rescue a double -sense from his irrational and untcholastic censure, he endeavours to prove, that the Jews, during the prophetic period, did not use this allegoric way of expression. Now if we be right in this last conjecture about his meaning, he abuses the terms he employs, under a miserable quibble ; and, by 'Scholastic and un- scholastic rules, only means interpreting in a single or a double sense.

The Header perhaps will be curious to know how it happened, that this great Rcasoner should, ail at once, overthrow what he had been so long labouring to build. This fatal issue of his two books of the GROUNDS, &c* and SCHEME, &c. had these causes:

i. lie had a pressing and immediate objection to re move. And, as he had no great stock of argument, and but small forecast, any tiling at a plunge, would be received, which came, to his relief.

The objection was this — " That the allegorical inter- * pretations of the Apostles were not designed for " absolute proofs of Christianity, but for arguments ad

* Se«note [EBJ at the end of this Book.

" homines

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 97

" homines only to the Jews, who were accustomed to iC that way of reasoning," p. 79. — Thus, he himself tells us, some Divines are accustomed to talk. He gives them indeed a solid answer ; but he dreams not of the consequence. He says, this allegoric reasoning was common to all mankind. Was it so ? Then the grand Proposition on which his whole Work supports itself is entirely overthrown. For if all mankind used it, the method must needs be rational and scholastic. But this he was not aware of. What kept him in the dark, was his never being able to distinguish between the USE and the ABUSE of this mode of information. These two things he perpetually confounds, The Pagan Oracles delivered themselves in allegories ; — this was the use : Their later Divines turned all their Religion into allegory ; — this was the abuse. The elder Pythagoreans gave their Precepts in allegory, — this was the use: The later Stoics allegorized every thing; — this was the' abuse. Homer had some allegories ; — this was the use : His Commentators turned all to allegory ; — and this again was the abuse. But though he has talked so much of these things, yet he knew no more of them than old JOHN BUNYAN ; whose honester ignorance, joined to a good meaning, disposed him to admire that which the malig nity of our Author's folly inclined him to decry : and each in the like ridiculous extreme.

2. But the other cause of this subversion of his own system was the delight he took to blacken the splendour of Religion. He supposed, we may be sure, it would prove an effectual discredit to Revelation, to have it seen, that there was this conformity between the Pagan and Jewish method of delivering Religion and Morality. His attempt hath been already exposed as it deserves *. But in this instance it labours under much additional folly. For the different reasons which induced the Propagators of Paganism, and the Author of Judaism, * See Bock iv. § i. at the end,

VOL. VI, ,11 to

•98 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book VI.

to employ the same method of information, are obvious- to the meanest capacity, if advanced but so far in the knowledge of nature to know, that different ends are vei-y commonly prosecuted by the same means. The Pagans allegorized in order to hide the wetness ami absurdities of their national Religions ; the Author of Judaism allegorized in order to prepare li/s •follovversi/or£/*e recep tion, of ft wore per fccf Dh-pcmaticMy founded pn-Judai$my which was preparatory of it ; and, at the same time, to prevent their premature rejection of Judaism, under which they were still to he long exercised;

Thus we sec how this formidable Ertemy of our Faith has himself overturned hh> whole Argument by an unwary answer to