Mr. Blount's oracles of reason examined and answered in nine sections in which his many heterodox opinions are refuted, the Holy Scriptures and revealed religion are asserted against deism & atheism / by Josiah King ...

AN Appendix To the ANSWER.

I Have some reason to fear, that the Rea∣der of this Discourse may think, that I have been too brief in my Preface; wherefore I have thought fit to annex this Appendix.

I have already acquainted the Reader, that I have pretermitted the Examination of some things in these ORACLES OF REASON; viz. Things purely Philo∣sophical, and which may be problematically disputed on either side.

What those other things are which I have pretermitted, I think it reasonable to ac∣quaint my Reader with, least he may conje∣cture that I have passed over some Material Difficulties; I shall therefore give in this Ap∣pendix a particular Account.

I have not examined, nor any ways con∣cerned my self, with those things that are purely Political; as when our Deist, in the Letter directed to Sir W. L. G. to be left in the Speaker's Chamber (p. 137.) calls the Regulators of Corporations, and the Surren∣derers of Charters, Impudent, if without Blushing, they call themselvrs Protestants: As also, when (p. 174.) he says,

If the Church of England can be supported by such ill Men, the Lord have Mercy on her:

And (p. 174)

Of how great Importance an Honest, Impartial, and duly Elected House of Commons is to this Nation, every body knows, and the ill Effects of the con∣trary, I think, is unknown to no body: my old Lord Burleigh used to say, we can never be throughly ruined but by a Parlia∣ment— And in the same Page he writes, I confess, I cannot but couple these Regu∣lators and Surrenderers together, with those Judges, and other Ge••tlemen of the long Robe, who were for the Annihilating or Dispencing Power—

I have not con∣cerned my self with these Political Matters; because I have not been conversant in that

sort of Learning, and because they are without my Sphear, and proposed De∣sign.

Neither have I concerned my self in dis∣covering those Errors which are obvious to every Man; viz. His illogical Inferences; or his great Confidence in abusing good Au∣thors.

We have an Example of the first (p. 196.) where, when he is to prove the Minor of his first Syllogism, viz. That no Rule of Re∣vealed Religion, ever was, or could be made known to all Men, he only proves that the large Continent of America was not disco∣vered till within these Two hundred Years, a Matter of Fact incontrovertible. Where∣as, unless he had proved that Revealed Re∣ligion never was, nor never could be disco∣vered to America, he hath not proved his Minor.

In like manner, when (p. 224.) he is to prove rhat there were divers othor Authors who wrote before Moses; he thinks it suffi∣cient to follow an Annotator on Dr. Browne, who cites a Passage out of Apuleius, (whom the Pagans opposed to our Lord, as they did Apollonius) which proves nothing, but that there were some Men before Moses: But as for Writings, we find not one Syllable in that place of Apuleius; which was the thing to be proved. As also, when (p. 219.) he was obliged by the Procedure of the Sub∣ject

insisted on, to compare the Jews with the Egyptians, Chaldees, and Phaenicians, in point of Antiquity; or to compare the Writings of those respective Nations with each other; he changeth the Terms of the Comparison, and compares the Nation of the Jews with the Writings of the Egypti∣ans, Chaldeans, and Phaenicians: This is that which Aristotle justly condemns in Argumentations and Comparisons, and calls it the passing from one Genus to ano∣ther.

If this Method had been used and allow∣ed of in the well known Controversie be∣tween the Scythians and the Egyptians, the Scythians would have been vanquished, and the generally received Opinion of the Scy∣thians Antiquity would upon no good Grounds, have been banished out of the World.

I have taken no notice of these, or of such like weak Sophisms in the foregoing Discourse; because they are in themselves very Childish, and are easily to be observed by a considering Reader.

I have also pretermitted his palpable abu∣sing good Authors, if the Abuse be very ob∣vious; an Example of which I shall here produce.

[Pag. 219. He thus writes; What Jose∣phus speaks of the Greeks, and other Nations, may with the same reason be applied to Moses and the Jews, viz. That all Founders and E∣stablishers of new Estates, have each of them supposed in their own behalf, that whosoever was of theirs, he was the first of the World, Contra Apionem, lib. 1.

Now howover Josephus boasts so much of the Antiquity of his Country-men the Jews, yet he himself confesses, that he, nevertheless, durst not presume to compare the Nation of the Jews, with the Antiquity of the most Ancient and Infallible Writings of the Egy∣ptians, Chaldeans, and Phaenicians, who dwell in such Countries as are not subject to the Cor∣ruption of Air; and are carefully provided, that whatsoever has been done by them, should not sleep in Obscurity, but be kept in Memory, in the publick Writings of the most learned Men, Con∣tra Apionem, lib. 1.

And Pag. 220. Which is as if Josephus had said, forasmuch as no other Nations but the Egyptians, Phaenicians, and Chaldeans, have certain Records of their Original, there∣fore will I pretend my own Nation of the Jews to be ancienter then them, who cannot disprove me; but because the Egyptians,

Phaenicians, and Chaldees, have more ancient Re∣cords of their Country in being; therefor to pre∣vent being confuted, I think it more convenient to yeild to them in Antiquity. And this is the Secret meaning of what Josephus says].

Thus far Mr. Blount.

To whom I return this ANSWER.

He that will but take some pains to read over the two Books, which Josephus wrote for the sake of his Epaphroditus, and for such as he was, lovers of Truth, in opposition to Apion of Alexandria, will soon perceive the perverseness of our Author, to exceed that of this malapert, and petulant Gram∣marian.

The design of Josephus in these two Books was to show, that Apion's Negative Argu∣ment, from the silence of the Greek Au∣thors (with respect to the Jews) was of no moment; forasmuch as the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and Phaenecians, who had anci∣enter and more sure Histories; and had better ways and means of Writing, then the Greeks make mention of his Country-men the Jews: And this in effect, is the Sum of all that

Josephus writes on this Matter, in his Books against Apion.

Josephus seems to make an Apology for the bragging Greeks in point of Antiquity, when He says, that all their Greek Writers sup∣posed in their own behalf, that whosoever was of theirs, was the first of the World; but Josephus also adds (what our Deist omits, and alters the case) that this was for want of letters; the ancient use of which came to the Greeks from the Phaenicians and Cadmus; and that at that time the Greeks had no cer∣tain Records: That Homer's Poem was the an∣cientest Book which they had, and this was written after the Trojan War: Nay, that this Poem was not at first written, but was preserved by Tradition, and the People's Songs. And that this was the cause of that great Dissonancy and Difference which appeared in Original Copies, when it was first committed to Writing. It was for want of Letrers they had no ancient Histo∣ries; and that their Cadmus Milesius, and their Acusilaus Argivus, did not long preceed the Expedition of the Persians against the Greeks.

Whereas nothing is, nor can be more e∣vident to him that reads Josephus, than this, that the same Prejudice doth not affect

Moses; and therefore our Author hath with great Incogitancy affirmed, that what Jose∣phus speaks of the Greeks, and other Nati∣ons, may with the same reason be applied to Moses and the Jews.

Our Author by this Assertion, over∣throws his own Supposition; for if A∣dam and Eve were the first Man and Wo∣man in the World, according to Moses; or at least must be supposed to be such, accor∣ding to our Author's Method in this place; then there could not be two Creations, one in the first, and another in the se∣cond Chapter of Genesis; there could be no Praeadamites, as is pretended; and Adam and Eve were created in the first Chapter of Genesis: Which yet Mr. Blount can by no means allow of, without being repugnant to himself, and contrary to his own Method in another place.

Josephus no where affirms, that the Egy∣ptians, Chaldeans, and Phenicians, had more ancient Records than the Jews: He no where affirms, That he dares not compare the Writ∣ings of Moses (so it ought to have been writ∣ten, and not the Nation of the Jews, as I observed in another place) with the most an∣cient and infallible Writings (I use our Au∣thor's words) of the foresaid Nations. Jo∣sephus

indeed says, He will not enumerate the Jews with those Barbarous Nations, with respect to the advantages of writing History; but then he determines the advantage on the behalf of the Jews: For in that Book he plainly asserts, That Moses was the most an∣cient of all Legislators; and that the Jews had a more certain way of transmitting their Memoirs to Posterity, than the Egyptians Chaldeans, or Phoenicians.

That Moses was a more ancient Historian than Berosus the Chaldean, or Manetho the Egyptian, or Sanchoniathon the Phenician, is an unquestioned Truth, among all such as know any thing of these matters: nothing being more evident than this, That Berosus and Manetho lived after the time of Alexan∣der the Great; and that Sanchoniathon wrote after the Trojan War.

Josephus no where affirms, That the Writ∣ings of the forenamed Historians are infal∣lible; he only prefers them before the Greeks in point of Verity and Antiquity: as for In∣fallibility, he allows it to no Historian but Moses, whom alone he makes to be divinely inspired. As to the point of Antiquity, we appeal to our Author himself, who (not∣withstanding what he hath here written of this matter) page 224. confesses, That we have

no Writer extant at this time more ancient than Moses, unless it be Ocellus.—His exception of Ocellus is of no moment, as we have proved in the foregoing Discourse.

After all my Search, I can no where find Josephus absolutely affirming, That the Egy∣ptians, Chaldeans, and Phenicians had any cer∣tain Records of their Original; but only Comparatively with the Greeks: He no where affirms, directly, or indirectly, that the fore∣named Nation, had more ancient Records of their Country to refute him; and that therefore he thinks more convenient, to yield to them in Antiquity: and therefore our Deist is forc'd to use this Device,—This is the secret meaning of what Josephus says.

What Josephus says is clear and perspi∣cuous: there is no colour for so slanderous an Insinuation; and I think I may affirm witout any Calumny, or Controversy, That not Josephus, but our Deist had a Secret mean∣ing, to impose on credulous Readers, by abu∣sing good Authors.

We may bid Farewell to all Evidence in Matters of Fact, if Secret meanings be allow'd of: but perhaps our Deist had herein a re∣gard to Himself; hoping that at a dead lift, This Secret meaning might gloss, and varnish over some of his monstrous, and incredible

Tenents. I am sure that by this Hocus-pocus Trick, he might have cited The Hind and Panther (which he quotes pag. 150.) for the Antiquities of his Chaldeans, Egyptians, Phenicians; and have quoted Josephus for the Frauds and Imposings of the Priest.

And now I am making towards a Conclu∣sion; I hope I may do a thing grateful to the Reader, and be not thought to deviate from my Subject, if I here present him with the great Aversion that our Church hath for Deism.

The Church of England (Article 18.) declares in these words,

They are also to be had accursed, that presume to say, that every Man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his Life according to that Law, and the Light of Nature; for Holy Scripture doth set out unto us, only in the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby Men must be saved.

This Article plainly declares (as Mr. Ro∣gers on the Articles, p. 87. collects) that the Profession of every Religion cannot save a Man, live he never so vertuously. It also follows from this Article, That no Man ever was, or shall be saved, but only by the Faith and Name of JESƲS CHRIST.

The Opinion of the Deist is diametrically opposite hereunto: For (pag. 199. and 200.) he affirms, That Natural and Unrevealed Re∣ligion, is sufficient to make us happy in a future State. And he affirms (p. 201.) That this his Opinion is Charitable; forasmuch as it doth not exclude any Dissenters from Eter∣nal Happiness; and that God may be pleased with different Worships.

St. Austin in his Book of Heresies (cap. 72.) reckons that of the Rhetorians to be one: For∣asmuch as they believe, that all hereticks hold the Truth, and walk uprightly. Which He∣resy St. Austin calls a Heresy of wonderful vanity, and such as seems to him incredible: my own part I cannot perceive any great dif∣ference between the Rhetorians and the Deists.

And whereas our Deist seems to value his Opinion upon the pretended Charitableness thereof, and thinks that a Recommendation:

He is much mistaken; for this Opinion is ra∣ther Turkish than Charitable.

We read in Busbequius (Epist. 3.) that Ru∣stan, the Prime Vizier, perswaded that ex∣cellent Embassadour to turn Musselman; and that if he would do so, he should receive great Honours and Rewards, from Solyman his Lord and Emperour: To whom Busbe∣quins makes this Reply.

Mihi certum est manere in ea Religione, in qua natus essem quamque Dominus meus profite∣tur. Pulchre, inquit Rustanus, sed tamen de anima quid fiet? Et de Anima, inquam, bene spero. Tum ille cum paulisper intercogitasset, ita est profecto: neque ego ab hac absum sen∣tentia, aternae beatitudinis consortes fore, qui sancte innocenterque hanc vitam traduxerint quamcunque illi Religionem secuti sunt. —

I am resolved, says Busbequius, to continue in that Religion in which I were born, and which my Lord professes: Very well, says Rustan, but what will become of your Soul in another World? I am, says Busbequius, very confident of its welfare. Then Rustan, after some pause, makes this Answer, I am of your Mind; this is my Opinion, That all Persons shall be eternally happy, that lead an innocent life,

notwithstanding their differences in Religion.

The Prime Vizier's Opinion seems to me to be the same with Mr. Blount's; it is al∣together so charitable: And if our Deist had been present at that Interview, 'tis ap∣parent enough with whom he would have sided: And if the same Offers had been made to him (which were made to that incompa∣rable Embassadour, 'tis plain enough what he would have done. So that if I should assert, That Deism is a direct Road to Turcism, I think I should not be mistaken.

Our Deist must have more Confidence, and (all things considered) better luck than Polus had in Erasmus his Exorcisms, if he can perswade any Persons who seriously consult their own Salvation, To behold any Happiness in his Heaven.

It's worth our observation, in what dete∣station and abhorrence our Church of England hath the Opinion of the Deists; for it affixes an Accurse to it: which I think is not very usual for Provincial Councils.

Mr. Pool indeed, in his Appendix to the Nullity of the Romish Faith (pag. 240.) 〈◊〉〈◊〉

these words: —

If we look into the Re∣cords of Councils, we shall find, That this Practice of Anathematizing was not only in use in general, but also in particular, and Provincial Councils.

I doubt not but this Learned Man had good grounds for his As∣sertion: Yet I must confess for my own part, I have not observed this Method in Particu∣lar Councils; if we except that Orthodox Council held at Gangra, in Paphlagonia, about the Year of our Lord 324. in every one of whose Canons, about twenty in number, we find an Accurse affix'd: a sufficient Instance In Antiquity to justify our Church's Method.

And since we have had an occasion to mention this Synod, and that we live in an Age, in which Atheism and Deism abounds to that degree, that the Churches set apart for GOD's Service, and our Religious Assem∣blies, are slighted and contemned: I shall conclude with the Judment of that Pious Sy∣nod (Can. 5) Si quis docet domum Dei contem∣ptibilem esse ut conventus qui in ea celebrantur, Anathema sit.

How nearly this concerns our Deists, and other despisers of GOD's Publick Worship, who frequently abuse GOD's Ministers,

and make no Religion of traducing and ri∣diculing them, is very plain and palpable: and there is here NO SECRET MEANING.

EXEQUIAS DEISTAE, QUI∣BUS IRE COMMODUM EST JAM TEMPUS EST.

FINIS.