A vindication of the divine authority and inspiration of the writings of the Old and New Testament in answer to a treatise lately translated out of French, entituled, Five letters concerning the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures / by William Lowth ...

CHAP. V. Concerning the Inspiration of the Ca∣nonical Books of the Old Testament in General, and of the Historical and Poetical Books in Particular.

THe Two Preceding Chapters concerning Prophecy being a Digression with respect to the Book which I undertook to Answer, tho not with Respect to the General Design of this Treatise, which is to Vindicate the

Authority of the Scriptures: I re∣turn to Mr. N's Memorial, as 'tis Communicated by the Author of the Letters, and shall Examine in this Chapter the Exceptions which he makes against the Authority of the Old Testament Writings. Which are of two sorts, General and Particular: The General Ex∣ceptions are levell'd against the Authority of the Old Testament Ca∣non, which this Author supposesa to consist of all the Ancient Writings, whether Perfect or Imperfect, whe∣ther Inspir'd or not, which were remaining among the Jews at the time when this Collection was made. The Particular Exceptions relate to Particular Books, which he sup∣poses not to be Inspir'd, either because the matter of them is such as Men may know and faithfully re∣late without Inspiration, such as are the Historical Booksb: or else because they contain something in them which is Ʋnworthy of God being its Author, which Exception he advances against several Passages in the Psalms and the Proverbs, and

against the Intire Books of Job, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solo∣monc.

In Answer to these Twofold Ex∣ceptions, I shall

• I. Say something concerning the Au∣thority and Inspiration of the Old-Testament Canon in General.
• II. I shall make a Reply to his Ob∣jections against the Particular Books which are part of this Canon.

1. As to the First, it must be confess'd that we cannot give an Exact Account, by whose Autho∣rity the Canon of the Old Testa∣ment was setled, for we have no Writings extant that give us a History of that Affair. But 'tis very probable the Collection of the Canonical Books, was made in Ezra's time, or not long after: 1. Because the Scripture-History ends about that time. I know no∣thing of later date in it, than the mention of Jaddus by Nehe∣miahd who was Contemporary with Ezra, which Jaddus was High

Priest at the Beginning of Alexan∣der the Great's Reign. And what∣ever others may have objected to the contrary, the mentioning of this Jaddus, is very reconcileable with the time when Nehemiah writ, as a Great Prelate has lately made out with Incomparable Lear∣ning and Clearnesse. 2. Because Malachi the Prophet, that lived much about the same time, seems to Seal up the Vision and Prophecy a∣mong the Jews, by referring them to the Law of Moses as their stan∣ding Instructor, till the Gospel should be revealed: and pointing out to Elias the Forerunner of the Messiah, as the next great Prophet that was to be reveal'df. And indeed his Prophecy looks as if it were design'd to Con∣nect the Old and New Testament together, by putting a period to the Old Testament Revelati∣on, and directing men to the New for further Instruction. This Argument will appear more pro∣bable, if we consider 3^ly, That under the Maccabees, the Jews

look'd upon the Gift of Prophecy as wholly ceased, and were of Opini∣on it had been so for a considerable timeg. The same Opinion is con¦firm'd not long after by the Author of Ecclesiasticush. 4. If we suppose the LXX. Interpreters Translated all the Old Testament, which is an Opinion that Learned meni have brought good Reasons for, then 'tis plain the Canon must have been settled before the time when that Version was made, which was done under Ptolomee Philadelphus, and as 'tis very probable, at the Beginning of his Reignk. 5. How∣ever that be, yet 'tis certain that when the Book of Ecclesiasticus was writ, the Canon of the Old Te∣stament was settled: for he makes mention of the Twelve Prophets al∣togetherl, which is an Argument that the Smaller Prophets were then Collected, and Compil'd in∣to one Book, which Book was af∣terward call'd the Book of the Pro∣phetsm. Nay further, the Author of the Prologue to that Book, speaks of the Law, Prophets and

other Books of Scripture, as then Translated into Greek, which is an Undeniable Argument that the Canon was then Completed. And tho we suppose that Prologue to be made by the Grandchild of the principal Author Jesus the son of Syrach, which Younger Sy∣racides lived in the time of Euer∣getes II. commonly called Ptolomee Physcon: yet it appears by the Be∣ginning of that Prologue, that his Grandfather studied the same Ho∣ly Books, which he afterwards says were turn'd into Greek. And this Elder Siracides speaks of Simon the son of Onias the High Priest, as one whom he very well remem∣bredn: now that Simon was High Priest in the Beginning of Philopa∣tor's Reigno, who was next in Succession but one to Philadelphus. So that the Canon of Scripture will appear to be as old as Phila∣delphus's time, because 'tis evident from hence that 'twas Transla∣ted all into Greek in a little time after, tho we should not suppose the whole work performed by the

LXX. Lastly, to these Conside∣rations we may add the Concur∣ring Testimony of all the Ancient Writers, both Jewish and Christi∣an, who agree in supposing the Ca∣non of the Old Testament, to have been Compil'd in or about Ezra's time, and who probably had the Authority of some Ancient Wri∣ters for what they say, which now are lost. And if these Considera∣tions taken all together, have any Force in them to prove the Canon of the Old Testament, to have been settled in Ezra's time, or in the next Age; I say if it were settled so early, this very thing will add great Weight to its Au∣thority.

For 1. 'tis agreed on all hands that Ezra, who calls himself a Ready Scribe in the Law of Mo∣sesp, Revis'd the Holy Writings, Retriev'd them from the Corrup∣tions, which the Scarcity of Co∣pies, and the Disuse of the He∣brew Language during the Capti∣ty, had brought into them: sup∣plied and completed many of them,

and put them into Order and Me∣thod: And when a man of so great Authority as Ezra was, had done all this so lately, it cannot be imagin'd but that the Compi∣lers of the Canon, must have had a particular Regard to his Judg∣ment, and admitted no Books in∣to their Collection, but what were allow'd of by Ezra: or if they were of Later date than his time, the Writing of them must have been within the Memory of these Compilers, so that they were pro∣per Judges, whether a Book de∣serv'd to be esteem'd Sacred or not. So that from hence 'twill fol∣low, that the Authority of the main Body of the Canon, bot∣toms upon the Judgment and Au∣thority of Ezra: whom if we should grant to have been no Prophet, yet we canot think, but in a mat∣ter of such Moment, as the Revi∣sing and putting in order the Ho∣ly Writings, he would not only use the best Skill he had himself, but likewise consult with Haggai, Zechary or Malachi; (the last of

which must needs have been alive in his time, and possibly the other Two also) and do no∣thing without their Advice. For we find that at the first Re∣turn from the Captivity, in a mat∣ter of much less moment, viz. where some that pretended to the Priesthood could not prove their Pedigree, the Governour would determine nothing, but left the matter undecided, till a Priest should arise who had Ʋrim and Thummimq. And if any such Priest did arise afterward, as, if we be∣lieve Josephus, there did; for he tell us that that Oracle ceas'd but 200. years before his timer, 'tis ve∣ry probable that the Judgment of the Canonical Books was left to him, to determine which were such, as the Learned Mr. Dodwell has made appear in the Appendixs to his Lectures, now in the Press.

2. This Early date of the Ca∣non of the Old Testament, quite destroys that Fancy of our Au∣thorsx, that the Jews put together all the Fragments that remain'd of

their Ancient Books, so that the Ca∣non of Scripture was their whole Li∣brary. For in the First place 'tis plain, that the Chronicles are Ex∣tracts out of larger Records, which they often Refer to, and yet these Books were Compil'd after the Captivity, as appears by several passagesy in them: and 'tis not likely that the Originals which escaped the Destruction of Re∣cords, occasion'd by the Ruine of the Commonwealth and the Cap∣tivity which ensu'd, should be lost in so little a time as was between the Compiling the Chronicles, and making the Canon. Especially since Josephusz tells us, that the Genealogies of the High-Priests and their Succession, for above Two Thou∣sand years past, were preserved in the Publick Records, and remain'd to his own time.

Again, several Books which never were in the Canon, were Extant when the New Testament was writ, and are Cited there as Writings of Credit and Antiquity; such as are the Prophecy of Enoch,

and the Assumption of Moses, both referr'd to by St. Judea: as also several other Ancient Books, from whence both Christ and his Apo∣stles take many Passages concern∣ing Historical Matters, which are not Extant in the Canonical Wri∣tersb. And 'twas from such An∣cient Writings probably, that Jo∣sephus took some Stories which he relates of Mosesc, and of other Persons. Besides we find Apocry∣phals quoted by Barnabas in every Page of his Epistle almost; by Cle∣mens Alexandrinus and other An∣cient Writers in several places, many of which 'tis likely, were Written Originally in Hebrew, since by the Matters they Treat of, we may reasonably judge them to be as old as the Collection of the Canon: and were certainly lookt upon as Books of great Antiquity, or else they would not have been Cited by these Authors under the Venerable name of Scripture. From all which it appears, that the Com∣pilers of the Canon did not take in Promiscuously whatever Hebrew

Writings they could find; but used all possible diligence to distin∣guish Sacred Writings, and such as were design'd by God for the Use of the Church, from those which were not so. The Reasons which Confute this Opinion of our Au∣thor, concerning the Collection of the Canon of the Old Testa∣ment, I thought fit to represent all together, when I was upon this Subject, tho I am sensible that 'tis only the first of these Considera∣tions, which can be inferr'd as a Corollary from what has been said concerning the Early Date of the Old Testament Canon.

What I have hitherto said con∣cerning the Authority and Anti∣quity of the Old Testament Ca∣non, I cannot call Absolutely Cer∣tain or Demonstrative; but I may safely say thus much, that it car∣ries in it a greater Degree of Pro∣bability, than any thing the Ad∣versaries of the Canon have ad∣vanc'd to the Contrary. So that tho we should grant what our Au∣thor saysd, That there is no proof at

all that Esdras and the Great Sanhe∣drim of that time, among whom were Haggai, Zachary and Malachi, Com∣pil'd the Canon; yet still 'tis pro∣bable 'twas made by those that were so near their time, that they knew what their Sentiments were in this Matter, and made this Col∣lection accordingly.

But if this Proof be not thought Satisfactory, I should think any Christian ought to acquiesce in the Judgement of our Saviour: and 'tis plain he lookt upon the Jewish Canon, which was Undoubtedly the same in his time, which is now received in the Protestant Church∣es: I say, he lookt upon it as a Collection of Holy Writings de∣sign'd by God for the Instruction of his Church, and the Rule the Jews were to have recourse to, when they would inform them∣selves what was the Will of God. He bids theme Search the Scriptures, without distinguishing as our Au∣thor doesf, the Truly Inspir'd Books, from those which are not so: for in them, saith he, ye think,

and so far ye are in the right, that ye have Eternal Life. 'Tis strange our Saviour should not correct this Mistake of theirs, if some of the Books they had such a great Veneration for, favour'd such Dangerous Doctrines as our Au∣thor thinks the Book of Ecclesi∣astes doesg, and contain'd Expres∣sions very like Blasphemies, as he is pleas'd to speak concerning the Book of Jobh. For if this were true, 'twas certainly very dange∣rous for Men to Search, or be too much Conversant in these Books, especially since they came Recom∣mended under the Character of a Divine Inspiration. 'Tis strange our Saviouri should prove the Passion and Resurrection of the Messias, not only out of Moses and the Prophets, but also out of the Psalms; by which our Authork understands those Writings which the Jews call Chetubim, if these Books be of so little Authority, as he would perswade us they are, Mr. N. would fain Evade the Force of this Argument taken from

our Saviours Authority, by telling usl, that Christ never design'd to Criticize upon the Sacred Books, or to Correct those Errors of the Jews, which were of small Importance. But since our Saviour Criticiz'd so far upon the Sacred Books, as to Con∣fute the false Glossesm which the Scribes and Pharisees had made upon them, and to Reject the Traditionsn which they had E∣quall'd to the Word of God, and in some Cases Prefer'd before it: it seems as necessary for him to have distinguisht between the True Scriptures, and those Books which were Undeservedly esteem'd such. Especially if these Latter advance Doctrines, that do not well agree with the Former, as our Authoro indeavours to prove, concerning several places of the Proverbs, Ec∣clesiastes and Job: for then the Ad∣mitting the Authority of such Writings, is of as Ill Consequence as the Receiving the Traditions of the Pharisees could be. Nay with his leave, I think it an Error of more dangerous Consequence, to

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

Equal a Book that is not Inspir'd when it contains False Doctrine, with one that is truly Divine, than to Equal such Traditions as the Pharisees held, with an Inspir'd Writing. Because a Tradition will probably in time be forgotten, and so lose all its Authority, which we see has been the Fate of most of the Pharisaical Traditions; whereas a Book that has once been generally Reputed of Divine Au∣thority, 'tis likely will maintain that Character for ever. For its very Character will make Men careful to preserve it, and the Older it grows, the Stronger will the Plea of Prescription be for its Divine Original: and Consequent∣ly the More will be Impos'd upon by it, as we see hath Actually happen'd in the Case we are now speaking of, if our Author's Opi∣nion be true. For the whole Christian and Jewish Church hath time out of mind, lookt upon the Books contain'd in the Jewish Ca∣non to be Inspir'd, and have upon all Occasions appeal'd to their Au∣thority

as such. From whence it appears, that our Saviours taking notice of this Error, if it had been one, would have been much more beneficial to after Ages, than his Confuting an Unwritten Tradition could be.

But further, we find the Apo∣stles Judgment does evidently con∣cur with our Saviours in this mat∣ter. St. Paul saysa, that the Jews were intrustedb with the Oracles of God: but surely he would have told us that they were not True to their Trust, if he had thought they had mix'd Prophane Books with the Sacred ones. But that Text of the same Apostle,c All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God, is so clear a Proof of the A∣postles Judgment in this matter, that 'twill admit of no Evasion. For the Apostle tells Timothy in the foregoing Verse, that from a child he had known the Scriptures, by which he must mean the Body of Writings which the Jews look'd upon as such, for in that Religi∣on he had been Educated by the

Care of his mother, who was a Jewessd. Then it follows in this verse, All Scripture is given by In∣spiration of God: where the Apostle certainly understands the word Scripture in the same sense which he took it in the Verse before, viz. for that Collection of Writings which the Jews received as the Word of God. But pray let us hear our Authors Paraphrasee upon these two Verses, It is as if he had said to Timothy, that he ought to keep close as he had done hitherto, to the Study of the Old Testament, which would instruct him sufficiently in the way of Salvation, by joyning there∣unto Faith in Christ Jesus: because all Scripture Inspired, AS IS A GREAT PART OF THE OLD TESTA∣MENT, Is profitable for Instruction. I think I may appeal to any Indif∣ferent Man, whether those words of this Paraphrase, [As is a great part of the Old Testament] be not added meerly to serve the present Turn, without the least Intima∣tion of such a Restriction from the Text it self: and whether the Co∣herence

of these two Verses be not plainly this,

Continue in the Study of the Old Testament, be∣cause all the Books which that consists of are Divinely Inspir'd.

But I supposes he grounds this In∣terpretation of his upon that Read∣ing of the Text, for which Grotiusf vouches the Syriack and Vulgar Translations, Omms Scriptura Di∣vinitùs Inspirata utilis est. But if we should admit of this Reading, still the Sense will come all to one, and the Words as they lie then, tho they do not in Express terms assert, that all the Old Testament Writings are Divinely Inspir'd, yet they Imply it and take it for grant∣ed. For if we read the Greek thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will be an Ex∣plicative Epithet to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, just as if we add the Epithet Rationalis to Homo in such a Proposition as this, Homo Rationalis creatus est ad co∣lendum Deum. In which Proposi∣tion tho it be not expresly asserted that Homo is Rationalis, yet so much is Implied, and if it were

not true, 'twould make the whole Proposition false, as Monsieur Nicol has observed in his Ars Cogitandig. And just so in the Proposition we speak of, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies the Scrip∣tures of the Old Testament, in which sense the word is always taken in the New Testament, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is added for a fuller Ex∣plication of that term. I know Grotiush will needs have the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 taken here in its General Sense, and signify simply a Book or Writing. But I can't forbear saying, that this gloss is Unworthy of Grotius, and 'tis a sign of a Bad Cause, when so Great a Man is fain to betake himself to such Piti∣ful Sophistry, as is to be seen in the fore-cited Place. For he can't produce one Instance in all the New Testament, where the word is used in that Sense: and if he could, yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 added to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, suffi∣ciently Restrains the General sense of it, and makes one Complex Term, which must signify the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Verse before, both which Expressions signify the Old Testament, because 'tis a Col∣lection

of Inspir'd Writings: and consequently the Phrase it self as∣serts so much by way of Implica∣tion, or else it would be an Impro∣per Expression.

I think it appears from what has been said, what was the Judge∣ment of Christ and his Apostles concerning the Canon of the Old Testament: and since 'tis certain that they approved the Canon of the Old Testament, as it was received by the Jewish Church of their own time, I can't guess what evidence of Reason can be suffi∣cient to perswade a Christian to Oppose such an Authority. And therefore I can't be of our Author's mind, when he tell usi, He knows not why we may not doubt of the Books of the Old Testament, as well as of some of the New, the Authority of several of the Latter having been question'd. But there is a visible Difference between the Authorities that confirm the Old Testament Canon, and those which give Testimony to the New. To the Former Christ and his Apostles bear Witness, whereas the Credit

of the Latter depends upon the Consent and Testimony of much the Greater part of the Church in the Ages succeeding that of the Apostles: which tho it be suffi∣cient for any Wise and Unpreju∣dic'd Man to ground his assent upon, yet it hath not that Sacred∣ness and Infallibility in it which the other hath. For those Ages made use only of Humane Means for settling the New Testament Canon, which was sufficient for that purpose, considering the Near∣ness of those times to the Writing of the Books to which they give Testimony.

Nor does the name of Chetubim, which the Jews give to those Wri∣tings of the Old Testament, which Mr. N. calls in question, at all ju∣stify his Opinion. He fanciesk they were call'd Chetubim, i. e. Simply Writings, as he Interprets it, to signify that they were like other Humane Writings, and had no∣thing at all of Inspiration in them. But the Jewish Writers say not one Syllable to confirm this Opinion,

that I can find. On the contrary, by their placing Daniel among the Chetubim, it appears that they look upon the Writers of that Class to have been Inspir'd, for the Jews all agree that Daniel had really the Gift of Prophecy, tho they fancy it to be in a lower Degree. Fur∣ther Maimonides saith expreslyl that they are called Chetubim, quia scripta sunt per Spiritum Sanctum. And tho he reckons that Impulse which he calls Spiritus Sanctus, in∣feriour to the Degree of Inspira∣tion which Isaiah and the other Prophets properly so call'd, had: yet 'tis plain that he looks upon it as a proper kind of Inspiration, for the instances he gives of it are, by his own Confession, real Inspi∣rationsm. So that I do not see how Maimonides, take his Expli∣cation altogether, gives any Ad∣vantage to this Opinion, tho Gro∣tiusn quote him for it. The Jews do indeed acknowledge a Diffe∣rence between the Inspiration of the Hagiographa and the Propheti∣cal Writings, but this doth not

prove them to be no part of the Scripture: for I think there is no body that considers the manner of the Spirit's Operation upon the Minds of Inspir'd Persons, but will readily acknowledge that there's no need of the same De∣gree of Inspiration, to write a Hi∣story or a Book of Morality, as is requisite to make a Prophet. But concerning the different De∣grees of Inspiration, I have dis∣cours'd already in several places of this Treatise, and shall have Occasion to speak of it hereafter.

But if the Jewish Division of the Old Testament favour'd Mr. N's Opinion never so much, I do not see any Force at all in the Ar∣gument taken from thence: for that Division is not of so early a Date, as to be able to vye with the much Ancienter Opinion con∣cerning the Inspiration of the whole Jewish Canon. St. Jerom is the first that I find takes notice of this Divisiono: the placing the Prophet Daniel among the Chetu∣bim in this Division, besides that

there is no shadow of Reason for it, except it be that the Jews bear him a Spight for Prophecying so plainly of our Saviour, discovers that 'tis of no long standing, since 'tis contrary to the Sense of the Ancient Jews. For Josephus often calls Daniel a Prophetp, nay one of the greatestq Prophets. And agree∣ably to the Received Opinion, our Saviour gives him the same Titler. But further, the same Jo∣sephuss makes use of another Di∣vision of the Old Testament Wri∣tings, viz. into the Books of Moses, the Prophetical, (under which he comprehends the Historical, be∣cause they were writ by Prophets, as he with very good Reason sup∣poses) and the Poetical Books, as they are commonly call'd, or those which contain Hymns to God, and Precepts of good Life. Which Di∣vision agrees much better with that mention'd by our Saviourt, viz. into the Books of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms, than the other which the Jews have since that time Invented.

Thus far I have shew'd that Mr. N. by rejecting some of the Re∣ceiv'd Books of the Jewish Canon, rejects the Authority of the whole Jewish and Christian Church, nay and of Christ and his Apostles too. What Reasons he has for this we shall see by and by, but at pre∣sent let us examine what Autho∣rity he has to oppose to such a Powerful one, as all these join'd together amount to. And I can find no body that stands by him in this Opinion but Grotius, and him he calls in to his Assistance at every Turn. But tho I have a great value for Grotius's Judgment, yet I think if it be laid in the Ba∣lance to counterpoise that of Christ and his Apostles, 'twill be found too Light. That Great man's Ex∣traordinary Learning and Merits, and particularly his having so well deserv'd of several Parts of Scri∣pture, and given such Light into their true Sense and Design, makes me willing to pass over his Fai∣lures, and not be severe upon his Memory for those False Glosses,

and some of them deserve a Har∣der Name, which he has made upon other Books of it. Only I can't but observe, that this Opi∣nion of his, concerning the Old Testament Canon, is very Incon∣sistent with the Main Design of his Votum pro Pace, and those other Treatises where he has asserted it. For the Great Design of those Projects for Peace, is to magnify Antiquity, Tradition, and the Au∣thority of the Church, and to shew that Catholick Unity is never to be restor'd, but by submitting all Controversies to the Decision of these three, as so many Arbitra∣tors or Umpires between the dif∣ferent Parties. And yet at the same time when he Pleads for the Authority of the Church, of An∣tiquity and Tradition, he Rejects those Books which have all the Au∣thority that the Universal Church, Uninterrupted Tradition, and the Consent of all the Ancients, both Jews and Christians can give them.

II. I come now in the Second Place to consider the Exceptions which our Author makes, against Par∣ticular Books of the Old Testament: and the Books he Excepts against are either Historical, or those they commonly call Poetical.

As to the Historical Writings I agree with him thus far, that the Sacred Historians were not usually Inspir'd with the things themselves which they relate, nor with the Words by which they Express the things. But I think I have prov'd in the First Chapteru of this Treatise, that a Book may be written by God's Direction, and yet not without the Use of Humane means. And as there is no Reason to think, that God Inspir'd the Evan∣gelists with the Knowledge of those Passages of our Saviour's Life, which they themselves were Eye∣witnesses of, or might easily learn from those that were so: so 'tis every whit as groundless to sup∣pose, that God Reveal'd those Par∣ticulars to the Writers of the Old Testament History, which they

could come to the Knowledge of by Consulting the Records and Ancient Monuments, in which these Matters were related. But notwithstanding this, 'twill appear that these Books were writ by God's Direction, and Design'd by him for the Use of the Church, if we consider what Mr. N. himself grantsx, That they were not writ meerly to satisfy our Curiosity, but to be a standing proof of a Providence to after Ages, to shew us the Care that God always takes of Good Peo∣ple, and the Punishments he inflicts upon the Wicked: to give us Examples of Piety and Vertue, and lastly to inform us of several Matters of Fact, which tend very much to confirm our Faith, as containing many Types and Predictions of our Saviour. To which we may add, that setting aside the Squabbles between F. Simon and his Adversaries, about the Scribes and Keepers of the Pub∣lick Registers of the Jews, 'tis highly probable, that the Prophets usually writ the Histories of their Kings, and those Books which are so

often quoted under the name of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah and Israel, and were Annals from whence the Substance of the Books of Kings and Chronicles are taken. For we find a Considerable part of the History of Hezekiah Incorporated into Isaiah's Pro∣phecya, which is a Strong Pre∣sumption that the whole History of that King's Reign, was Recor∣ded by the same Hand. And in∣deed so much is expresly asserted 2 Chron. 32.32. So the Acts of Da∣vid were Recorded by Samuel the Seer, by Nathan the Prophet, and by Gad the Seerb. The Acts of So∣lomon were written in the Book of Nathan the Prophet, in the Pro∣phecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the Visions of Iddo the Seerc. The History of Rehoboam's Reign was written by Shemaiah the Pro∣phet, and by Iddo the Seer in his Genealogiesd: the last of these Re∣corded likewise the Acts of Abijah Rehoboam's Sone. Jehu the Son of Hanani who was a Prophetf, writ the History of Jehoshaphatg. The Acts

of Ʋzziah were Recorded by the Prophet Isaiahh: and those of Manasses among the sayings of the Seersi. To the same purpose I think we may most probably In∣terpret those words of Josephusk, which have been so often quoted of late upon this Subject, where he tells us, that the Histories of the Jewish Nation were writ only by Pro∣phets, and therefore they look upon none of them as Authentick, which were writ after Artaxerxe's time, because there was no Clear and Ʋn∣doubted Succession of Prophets in the following Ages. Nor is Huetius's Objectionl against this Passage of Josephus of any Weight, who af∣firms that Josephus Contradicts what he had said but just before, viz. That the Chief Priests as well as the Prophets, had the Care of Writing the Publick Histories committed to them. But that Learned Man seems not to have attended to the whole Scope and Design of Josephus in that place. For that Historian does not say, that the Writing of the Publick Histories, was committed

to the Chief Priests as well as the Prophets, but that the Care of the Publick Records was committed to them. And if we take an In∣tire view of that Section, we shall find that Josephus speaks, not only of the manner how the Hi∣stories of Former times were writ∣ten, but likewise how they were Preserved after they are writ. The Care of writing them was com∣mitted to the Prophets, as the other Passage assures us, not Excluding those Priests who had the Gift of Prophecy: the Preserving them he here tells us, was particularly the Business of the Priests, who likewise exactly Preserved the Ge∣nealogies of their Nation, and re∣newed them when the Copies were Impair'd, and in danger to be all lost by Wars and other Accidents, and therefore were lookt upon as the Keepers of the Publick Records. Whence is it that the same Author usually calls the Holy Writings, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉m, The Books laid up in the Temple un∣der the Custody of the Priests.

Which was agreeable to the Cu∣stoms of the Neighbouring Coun∣tries: for so Philo Bybliusn says of Sanchuniathon, that he Collected the Phenician Antiquities, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, out of the Re∣cords laid up in their Temples.

But to return to our Subject, From those many Instances I have given, which shew 'twas a Custom among the Jews for the Prophets to be their Historians, we may con∣clude that the Historical Books of the Old Testament were writ by Men who had the Gift of Prophecy and Inspiration: and tho we sup∣pose them to be but Abridgements of the larger Commentaries of the Prophets, yet they are really of as much Authority as those very An∣nals would be which were writ by the Prophets themselves, if they were extant. For if an Epitome be faithfully made (and I suppose Mr. N. does not question the Fidelity of the Sacred Historians) whatever is contained in it, hath the same Au∣thority and Credibility with the Original Writing. So that if we lay

all these things together, the Cha∣racter of the Compilers of these Historical Books, the Matter and Design of them, the Authority of the Jewish Canon, and above all that of Christ and his Apostles, these are sufficient Inducements to believe these Books to be Writ∣ten by God's Direction for the Benefit of the Church. And this I think is enough to give Divine Authority to an Historical Book, tho neither the Matter nor Words of it be indited by Inspiration.

As for the History of Esther Mr. N. has taken much painso, and shewed a great deal of Skill in the Rules of Dramatick Poesy, and all to prove that this Book looks like a Fiction and a piece of Tragi-Come∣dy. He indeed tells us, that he affirms nothing in this matter, and does not intend to make himself a Par∣ty in the Dispute. But a man would hardly take so much pains to make anothers Opinion look probable, if he did not think it so himself. But whatever his own Sentiments be, to shew himself Impartial, and

that he is resolv'd not to conceal any thing that may be said on the other side, he Critically remarksp that one Condition, necessary to be observ'd in Dramatick Wri∣tings, is wanting, viz. Ʋnity of Time and Place, which must needs seem a considerable Objection to so nice a Judge. But besides this, there's another Objection which I confess has more Weight with me, and seems quite to turn the Scales, and make his Remarks appear meer Fancy and Fiction, viz. that the Feast of Purim was really ob∣served by the Jews, in memory of the Deliverance recorded in this Book. And 'twill be a hard mat∣ter to make me believe that a whole Nation should keep an An∣niversary Feast, as 'tis certain they didq, without some real Ground for it. And if this was not the true Occasion of it, as he seems to insinuater, I desire either he would prove the Feast to be as very a Fiction, as he supposes the History is, or else inform us how the whole Nation of the Jews

came to be so far impos'd upon, as to observe it: for till he does one of these two things, I shall still be of opinion, that the one was a Real Feast, and the other a True History.

But tho this Play does not suc∣ceed, he is resolved not to give over, but try his Skill upon ano∣ther Subject, and turn the Book of Job into a Tragi-Comedys. And I confess this Book is made ac∣cording to the Rules of Poetry, and with all the Beauties of it too, as an Ordinary Reader may ea∣sily discover under all the Dis∣advantages of a Translation. And therefore methinks our Author, who understands the Rules and Decorums of Poetry so well, should not be offended with those Pathe∣tic Strains, that are in the third Chapter, and some other places of that Book: for tho we should grant that they would not become a grave Philosophical Discourse, yet I believe he might have found se∣veral Speeches in the Old Tragedies written with as much Vehemence

and Warmth. And yet the seve∣rest Philosophers commended those Writings, and look'd upon them as containing very useful Instru∣ctions of Life. And I see no Rea∣son why God might not in this as well as other things, suffer the Holy Writers to comply so far with their own Genius, and the Humour which then prevail'd a∣mong the grave Sages of the World, as to deliver Great and Weighty Truths in Poetical num∣bers and Expressions, both to re∣commend them to the more Curi∣ous and Nice Readers, and to con∣vince the Wise men of the World, who are apt to despise the Plainness of the Scriptures, that there are to be found as Elevated Thoughts, and as Noble Expressions in the Holy Writings, as any Greece or Rome can boast of: and therefore when they use a plain popular Style, 'tis not out of Necessity but Choice, and because they rather aim at the Instruction of the ig∣norant, than to gain Applause from the Learnedt. But still men

perhaps will be ready to say, that these Expressions may do well in a Profane Poem, but are not so proper for a Sacred one, and do not become the mouth of a Per∣son eminent for Piety and Pa∣tience. In answer to which, I would desire the Objectors in the first place to consider that the Substance of the 3^d Chapter of this Book, which so much offends Mr. N.u when 'tis taken in its Plain Sense, without those Stroaks of Passion which are meerly Poetical Ornaments, is no more but this,

That 'tis better never to have been Born than to live in a great deal of Misery, and that there is this Benefit in Death, that it puts an End to the Troubles which are incident to Humane Life.

And this seems not unfit to be spoken by a Wise and Good man. In the next place I would desire them to reflect up∣on those many Excellent Sayings in this Book, which are most De∣vout Expressions of Jobs Patience, Submission, and Resignation to

the Will of Godx, and of his Trust and Confidence in himy in the midst of Afflictions, grounded upon the Testimony of a Good Conscience and the Sense of his own Integrityz. And if they rea∣dily acknowledge that upon these Accounts Job's Behaviour is wor∣thy to be recorded for an Example of Integrity, of Sufferings, and of Pa∣tience, let them withal consider that the other parts of the Book which seem more liable to Excep∣tion, are of use to teach us, that the best of men are subject to the Passions and Infirmities to which Humane Nature is obnoxious, and are not able to bear up against the First Assaults of Afflictions, and the sudden and sharp Twinges of Pain, till they have recollected their Strength, arm'd themselves with new Vigour and Resolution, and have incourag'd themselves in God, and call'd in the Divine As∣sistance. Thus we find the Spirit of the Psalmist stir'd in him at the Consideration of the Prosperity of the Wickeda, and tempted to that

Degree of Impatience, as to begin to say, 'Twas in vain to serve Godb: but he presently checks such thoughts as unbecoming a Religi∣ous manc. And I question not but God was pleas'd that those Ex∣pressions of Job in which he seems to forget his Character, should be Recorded as well as the Infirmities of other his eminent Servants, on purpose to shew us that they had the Heavenly Treasure of Grace in Earthen Vessels, and thereby teach us to cease from valuing Man, for wherein is he to be accounted of? and to give God the Glory, and Mag∣nify the Power of his Grace, whose Strength is made perfect in Weakness, and more eminently seen in the midst of Humane Infirmities.

And notwithstanding these Ex∣pressions, 'tis no such unaccountable thing as our Author supposesd, that the Writer of this Book should bring in God Almighty approving what Job had said, and condemning the Assertions of his Friendse. For we find that just beforef Job had begg'd Pardon for his Rash

Speeches in a most Submissive man∣ner. And as to the main of the Dispute, Job certainly was in the Right: for the Design of the Book, as our Authorg himself confesses, is to shew by Job's Example, that God oftentimes Afflicts Good People, not to punish them for any particular Sin, as if they had deserv'd Afflictions more than others; but simply to try them, and give them Occasion to shew their Vertue. And this is what Job maintaines throughout the Dis∣pute, and wherein he perfectly a∣grees with what our Saviour saith, on purpose to check Men's Rash∣ness in taking upon them to In∣terpret God's Judgments,b Suppose ye that these Galileans, whose Blood Pilate mingled with their Sacrifices, were sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffer'd these things? I tell you Nay. Whereas Job's Friends all along go upon this Principle, that Good Men are always Pros∣perous, and none are Miserable but the Wicked: and to prove this they Appeal to Experience, the Histories of Former Agesc, and

the Examples which their own Times furnisht them withd. From all which they don't only conclude, as our Author Imperfectly Repre∣sents it,e that Job was afflicted for his sins, for if this had been all they had maintain'd, Job would never have contested the matter with them, for he freely acknowledges his sins, and owns that they de∣serve Punishmentf. But that which they contend for is, that Job must needs be a Grievous Sin∣ner, and Greater than other Men, however he had made a Shift to conceal his Wickedness from the Eyes of the World, or else he had never been so terribly Afflicted. Nay, Eliphaz is so confident that it must be some Extraordinary Wickedness that had brought down these heavy Judgements upon him, that at last he ventures to give a Catalogue of Job's Sinsg, for which God had thus Afflicted him. 'Twas this Uncharitable Behaviour of theirs provoked Job to Impatience, more than all the rest of his Af∣flictions: 'twas upon this account

he tells them, that they had Re∣proached him ten times, had vext his soul, and broke him in pieces with wordsh: this makes him so often protest his Innocency, and appeal to God to Judge him, according to the Integrity that was in himi. And here I think Job's Friends were very faulty, not only in pro∣nouncing so rashly concerning the Reasons of Providence and of God's Judgements, but likewise in passing such Unkind and Uncha∣ritable Censures upon their Friend, whereas they ought to have had pity upon him, as he tells themk, since the Hand of God had toucht him, and not persecute him as God, and add Affliction to the Afflicted. And this their Confidence in taking upon them to be Interpreters of God's Judgements, together with their Uncharitable and Inhumane Behaviour toward a Man in Affli∣ction, might justly provoke God's Wrath against them for what they had said, when at the same time he pardon'd the Impatient and Undecent Expressions of Job, be∣cause

he could plead the Infirmity of Humane Nature in his own be∣half, which is easily provok'd to be Impatient under violent Affli∣ctions, especially where Men per∣secute those whom God has smitten: whereas Job's Friends had no such excuse to alledge for themselves.

But still it may be Demanded, Upon what account we Reckon this Book to be Inspir'd? In An∣swer to which Question, I shall crave leave to deliver my Opinion Freely, but with all due Submissi∣on to Better Judgements. I sup∣pose therefore that this Book is not to be reckon'd Inspir'd, upon the account of the Persons who main∣tain the Dispute in it: and tho I question not, but that they were Extraordinary Men for Piety and Vertue, yet I see no Reason to be∣lieve that either Job or his Friends spoke every thing which they say, by Inspiration. As to the Latter, the Case is plain, for God himself says, that they had not spo∣ken of him the thing that is rightl. And even Job himself, tho he main∣tain'd

the Right side in the Con∣troversy, yet now and then is guilty of too vehement Expostu∣lationsm with God Almighty, he stands too much upon his own Justification,n and Vindication of his Innocency, and takes upon him to Censure the Methods of Pro∣vidence too freelyo; for which Faults we find afterwards he ear∣nestly begs God's Pardon, andp Re∣pents of them in Dust and Ashes. I willingly acknowledge what the Jews themselves allowq, (tho they are very Jealous of giving this Ho∣nour to any that are not of their own Nation) that Job and his Friends were Prophets among the Gen∣tiles. And indeed there's reason to grant this: for we find Eliphaz him∣self professes, that he had a Night-visionr, which was not altogethers unusual in those days. But Job had the Gift of Prophecy in a more Eminent manner, as appears, not only from that Famous Passage of hist, I know that my Redeemer lives, &c. which St. Jeromu justly calls, a Prophecy of the Resurrection; but

also because God spakex to him by a Voice from Heaven, and 'tis probable he saw a Shekinahy, or Visible Appearance of the Divine Glory. But allowing all this, I see no proof that the Discourses set down in this Book, ought to be lookt upon as spoken by the Spirit of Prophecy: and therefore the In∣spiration of the Book it self, seems to me to consist in this, viz. As 'tis an Historical account of Job's Behaviour before, and under his Afflictions, and of his happy Issue out of them all, together with his re∣flections and the discourses he had with his Friends upon that Occasi∣on, written by God's Direction for the Use of his Church, to be an Ex∣ample of Patience under Sufferings, and a Vindication of God's Pro∣vidence in permitting the Righte∣ous to be Afflicted. And since by Reason of the Antiquity of the Book, the Author is not certainly known, and Consequently we can∣not Argue that 'tis Inspired, from the Character of its Author; the Evidence for its being Inspired, or

Written by God's Direction for the Use of the Church, must be Resolved into the Authority of the Jewish Canon, as that is con∣firmed to us by Christ and his A∣postles, and this Book particularly Recommended by St. Jamesz, to the Use of Christians: especially since the Design of it does exactly Answer the Character which St. Paula gives of the Old Testament Writings in General, viz. That they were written for our Instruction, that we thro Patience and Comfort of the Scriptures might have Hope.

And thus much I think may suf∣fice, in Answer to Mr. N's Obje∣ctions against the Book of Job. I shall only add, that besides the Powerful Comforts this Book af∣fords to the Afflicted, and the sub∣mission it teaches us to yield to God's Will, and to Adore the Un∣searchableness of his Judgements, which are the principal and obvi∣ous Designs of this Book, 'tis like∣wise of excellent Use upon ano∣ther account, viz. as it gives us a True Idea of Natural Religionb,

when it was in its Prime, and as it was practis'd in those early Ages, before the Tradition of the Creation was lost, or the World quite overrun with Ido∣latry.

I proceed in the next place to consider what our Author alledges against the Book of Psalms: His Opinion concerning these in ge∣neral is,b

That there was no need of Inspiration, but only of Piety and Zeal for the composing them:

and he further says,

That any Devout man may easily now-a-days praise God in that manner.

But all the Pious men that ever were in the Christian Church have been of another mind, and never look'd upon their own Composures as Equal to the Psalms: whereas if the Authors of the Psalms were assisted only with an Ordinary De∣gree of Piety and Devotion, I can not see why the members of the Christian Church should not think themselves as well qualified to make Hymns to God, as any of the Jewish that were no more

than Pious and Devout men. But saith Mr. N.c David never saith, Thus saith the Lord, as the Pro∣phets who speak by God's Autho∣rity use to do. Now tho it be false that David never uses this Expres∣sion, for in several places he uses those very Words, or such as are Equivalentd: yet if 'twere true, I do not see what Service 'twould do Mr. N. unless he can prove that Praising God by Inspiration, is the same as Delivering a Message from him and Instructing the people in his Name, which is the only pro∣per occasion to usher in what is said with, Thus saith the Lorde. Sure Mr. N. thinks that because we grant Prophecy to be the Highest Degree of Inspiration, therefore there can be really no other sort. But I am much mistaken if St. Paul was not of another mind, when he said with Relation to the Diversity of Spiritual Gifts, Are all Apostles, are all Prophetsf? And If the foot shall say, because I am not the hand I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the bodyg? And

we may easily apply the Apostles Reasoning to our present Case on this manner,

If Mr. N. shall say, Because Composing of Psalms and Hymns is not Prophecying, nor bringing a Message from God 'tis not Inspiration, is it therefore not Inspiration?

On the contrary 'tis plain that the Holy Writers look'd upon Praising God by Spiritual Songs, when 'twas perform'd by Gifted Persons as a Real and Distinct sort of Inspira∣tion, and therefore call'd it Pro∣phesyingh, as that word is taken in a large Sense for Inspiration in General.

And methinks without Descant∣ing so Nicely upon the several Degrees of Divine Inspiration, and Weighing God's Gifts in a Balance, to try it they can be found Wanting, as our Author does; this might be sufficient to convince Men, that God Design'd the Book of Psalms for the Perpetual Use of the Church, viz. That the Psalms have been one of the most considerable parts of the Publick Worship, both

in the Jewish and Christian Church ever since they were madei: they were always us'd at the time of offering the Sacrifices, which was the most solemn part of the Jewish Worshipk. Ezra restored this Service assoon as the Foundation of the Second Temple was laidl. The Evangelists tell usm, that our Saviour and his Disciples Sung a Hymn after the Paschal Supper, which Learned Men suppose to have been the same Collection of Psalms, which the Jews used upon that Solemnity. St. Paul Exhorts the Colossians that the Word of God should dwell richly in them, and espe∣cially recommends the Psalms to their usen. The Visions in the Revelations, where Saints and An∣gels are represented Worshipping and Praising God, do certainly in many things allude to the Cu∣stomso which the Jewish and Christian Church at that time used in their Publick Service; which two Churches then differ'd very little in the manner of their Ex∣ternal Worship. And in these we

find the Heavenly Devotions con∣sist altogether of Hymns, and Songs of Praisep, which is a good Ar∣gument to prove, that the Singing of Psalms was the most conside∣rable part of the Christian Wor∣ship in that Early Ageq, as it had formerly been of the Jewish. I deny not but in that Inspir'd Age they used several Hymns of their own Composingr; yet 'tis certain from the Testimony of many An∣cient Writerss, that David's Psalms still were most in use, and in high∣est esteem. And this is one Ar∣gument of it, viz. because all the Hymns Compos'd by the Ancient Christians have been lost time out of mind, except very few, which can be attributed to nothing so probably, as to the Difuse of them, by reason of the more Frequent and Constant Use of the Book of Psalms. And 'tis not likely the Christian Church would have been beholding to the Jewish Temple for their Forms of Worship, (espe∣cially when we consider how much more Noble a Subject for Praises

and Hymns the Christians had, by the Clear Revelation of the Gos∣pel) if they had not been per∣swaded that God design'd the Book of Psalms for the perpetual Use of the Church, to be both a Pat∣tern and Treasure of Devotions, at once to Enlighten our Minds, and Warm our Affections, and teach us to Pray and Praise God with the Spirit, and with the under∣standing also. And if what I have said, prove that this was God's In∣tent in stirring up Holy Men to make these Excellent Pieces of Devotion, I think 'twill be suf∣ficient to satisfy any Reasonable Man, that the Book of Psalms de∣serves a place among the Inspir'd Writers, without Nicely determi∣ning how great a share the Holy Spirit had in making these Com∣posures, and how much is to be ascribed to the Authors own Study and Meditation. Since 'tis very hard in any Case, to Define the manner how God's Grace does Cooperate with Man's Indeavours, and the Spirit, like the Wind to

which our Saviour compares itt, does sufficiently discover it self by its effects, tho we can't Compre∣hend the Manner of its Operation. And 'tis no wonder that should not be easily Intelligible by us, who are Ignorant how our own Soul acts within us, and after what manner Outward Objects make an Impression upon it.

But saith Mr. N.z the Impreca∣tions which are found in many of the Psalms, can't proceed from the Good and Merciful Spirit of God, and con∣sequently the Authors of those Psalms could not be Inspir'd.

This being the only Conside∣rable Objection against the Psalms, to take off all Prejudice against the Use of so Excellent a Book, I shall indeavour to give a distinct An∣swer to it, in these Three parti∣culars.

1. In the First place therefore, I desire it may be Observed, that many of those Expressions which seems at first Sight to import Wishing Mis∣chief and Destruction to others, do really wish no more harm to them, than

that they may be Disappointed in their Enterprises and Ʋndertakings. For ex∣ample, that Expressiona, Let them beb Ashamed [or Blush] andc Confound∣ed, that seek after my Soul, means no more but this,

Let them be fill'd with that shame and Con∣fusion of Face which follows a Disappointment.

Now since 'tis lawful to Oppose the Designs of our Enemies, and to use all ho∣nest means to prevent their bring∣ing them to pass; it can be no harm to wish and pray that they may be Unsuccessful in their At∣tempts against us. And in this Sense are all those Imprecations in the 35th. Psalm to be understood.

2. Secondly, let it be consider∣ed, that all those Expressions which are commonly Translated by way of Imprecation, may be as fitly rendred by way of Prediction: and we may Read, They shall be Ashamed, in∣stead of Let them be Ashamed. Nay this way of Interpretation is more agreeable to the Letter of the He∣brew, where the words are not in the Imperative but in the Future.

And if we take these Expressions in this Sense, then they imply no more than a Denouncing God's Judgements against Wicked Men, if they still persist in their Wicked∣ness. And thus to Denounce the Terrors of the Lord against Sinners, is so far from being a piece of Un∣charitableness, that 'tis the highest Act of Charity we can shew to them, and the most effectual means to awaken them to a sense of their Condition, and what they are to Expect except they Repent. And if this Interpretation be true, as nothing hinders but it may, then all Mr. N's Objectionsc against the 109th. Psalm vanish immedi∣ately; for according to this Inter∣pretation, it only contains a Pre∣diction of the Miseries that were to befall the Person, whoever he was, under whom Judas was Re∣presented. And the Denunciati∣on of the Psalmist against his Fa∣mily, will be liable to no other Exceptions than that Prophecy of Isaiah against Babylon,d Their chil∣dren shall be dash'd in pieces before

their eyes, their houses shall be spoil∣ed, and their wives ravished. And St. Peter himself seems to have un∣derstood this Psalm in no other sense, for he tells use that the Holy Ghost [in this Psalm] spoke be∣fore or PROPHESIEDf by the mouth of David concerning Judas. But be∣sides this, it was an Usual way of Speech among the Jews, to threa∣ten or denounce Evils in the form of Imprecation. So the Commi∣nations against those that broke the Law, were utter'd by way of Imprecation, Cursed be he thatg, &c. In like manner Excommunication was denounc'd in the Form of Im∣precation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: from whence the Apostle took that Expression, Let him be Anathemah. In the same sense we are to understand that Expression of St. Pauls concern∣ing Alexander the Coppersmith,i The Lord reward him according to his works. The Reason of all which Expressions is to be taken from the promiscuous use of the Impe∣rative and Future in the Hebrew, and a very little Acquaintance

with that Language, will furnish a man with several Examples of this kind.

3. But Thirdly, if we under∣stand these Expressions according to their common Acceptation and the Sense that is usually given of them, and suppose them to imply Wishing evil to the Persons of whom they are spoken, I cannot see but 'tis Lawful, nay our Duty in several Cases to pray to God a∣gainst our Enemies, and desire him to execute his Vengeance upon them: the Lawfulness of this I shall prove in these following Instances.

1. Where 'tis not a Private Quar∣rel, but one of a Publick Nature, between two different Nations, whe∣ther upon a Civil or Religious Account. For in this Case, as it is lawful for the Injur'd Party to indeavour to Right themselves by War, so they may certainly Pray to God that he would give them Success, and overthrow their E∣nemies: especially if their Attempts be levell'd against the True Reli∣gion, for then beside the Reaso∣nableness

of Praying to God to maintain his own Cause, we may Pray that the Enemies of it may meet with a Remarkable Disap∣pointment, upon another Account too: because it will be a power∣ful Argument for their Conversi∣on, and to bring them to the Ac∣knowledgment of the Truth. To which purpose the Psalmist prays,k Fill their faces with shame, O Lord, that they may seek thy Name. And accordingly those Psalms which were compos'd against the Ene∣mies of the Jewish Church and Nation, may now lawfully be u∣sed against the Enemies of the True Religion, and of those that pro∣fess it: and we find they have all along been applied so in the Chri∣stian Church.

2. 'Tis lawful to pray against our Enemies, when they are the Distur∣bers of the Publick Peace. For cer∣tainly the Charity which we owe to the Community lays upon us a Precedent and a higher Oliga∣tion than that which we owe to Private Persons, and therefore

where these two interfere, the First Obligation must take place, and 'tis not only lawful but our Duty to shew no Kindness to Par∣ticular persons, where we cannot do it without Prejudice to the Publick. Or else I do not see how it would be consistent with Chri∣stian Charity to punish Malefa∣ctors: and sure Wishing Evil is not more contrary to the Rules of Charity than Inflicting it. Now many of the Imprecations which we find in the Psalms, are against the Disturbers of the Publick Peace, for they were not the Enemies of a Private man, but of David a King, and one of God's own Ap∣pointment too. And certainly in such Cases where men are bound to the utmost of their Ability, to bring Offenders to Condign Pu∣nishment, they may every whit as lawfully leave them to God's Judg∣ment, and desire him to take the matter into his own Hand, and Reward them according to their Works. Especially if we consider that in David's Case, where a So∣vereign

Authority was Oppress'd and Injur'd by Wicked men, there no Court upon Earth could do him Right, for he that was ap∣pointed by God to be an Avenger and to execute Wrath upon them that do Evil, had this Power taken from him: so that in this Case 'twas ve∣ry fit and just for him to Appeal to God, and desire that he would execute Judgment upon obstinate Offenders, who else would escape the Hand of Justice.

3. Tis lawful to pray to God to send down Judgments upon our Ene∣mies, when 'tis not likely they will be Reform'd by Gentler Methods. Sin∣ners often despise the Patience and Long-suffering of God, and take Incouragement from his Forbea∣rance to go on in their Sins: and when nothing will work upon them but Judgment and Fiery Indignation, 'tis a piece of Charity to pray to God to correct them and bring them under the Rod, till they know that the most High rules over the Children of men. Thus the Psal∣mist prays to God against Harde∣ned

Sinners,l Consume them in thy wrath that they may not be: and let them know that God rules in Jacob, and unto the Ends of the Earth. This severe dealing with such persons will force them at last to Glorifie God, and others warn'd by their Examples, will be the more care∣ful not to offend in such a man∣ner.

And this leads me to the 4^th and Last Instance I shall mention, wherein 'tis lawful to pray against our Enemies, and that is, When Offenders are in all appearance In∣corrigible and past Repentance. When men have made themselves Unca∣pable of God's Mercy, 'tis fit that God should be Glorified in them by making them Remarkable In∣stances of his Justice: and 'tis the Duty of every one that is Zealous of God's Glory, to desire and pray that he may get Honour by the De∣struction of Hardned and Incorri∣gible Sinners, as he did by the Overthrow of Pharaohm: and like∣wise they ought to Rejoyce when they see it accomplish'd, And surely

when Charity has done her work, when Patience and Kindness can∣not soften our Enemies, nor Pray∣ers for their Conversion do any Good upon them, it seems very agreeable to the Doctrine of the Scriptures, that then we may pray God to execute his Vengeance up∣on them: as some of the Christi∣ans when they saw Julian the A∣postate's Implacable Rage and In∣veterate Malice against the Chri∣stian Religion, believing him to have Sinn'd the Sin unto Death, pray'd to God for his Destru∣ction, that all the Kingdoms of the Earth might know that Jesus whom Julian had reproched, was Lord and Christn. For the Scrip∣tures when they teach us to be Patient and Forgive those that injure us, inforce this Duty upon us by this Argument, that Venge∣ance belongs to God, and he will re∣payo in due time, and do us Ju∣stice. Which shews that after we have done what we can to reclaim our Enemies, and have indea∣vour'd to win them by Kindness,

if they still continue Implacable, we may lawfully expectp that God will plead our Cause, and tho we may not Right our selves, yet we mayq desire him to Interpose, and put a stop to the Successes of Wic∣ked men, who grow outragious and intolerable by Impunity: and we ought to commit our Cause to him, and rest satisfied with this Consideration, That God will in his due time judge us according to our Righteousnessr. And that pas∣sage, which the Apostle in the place above-mention'd quotes out of the Proverbs as a proof of what he says, does imply as much,s If thine Enemy hunger feed him, if he thirst give him drink, for in so doing thou shalt heap Coals of Fire upon his head: i. e.

If thy Kind∣ness does not reclaim him and make him thy Friend, but he still persist in his Enmity, God

himself will avenge thy quarrel, and punish him so much the more severely.

This is the sense of that place, as appears by com∣paring the Expression of Coals of Fire, with the sense of it in other places of Scripture, where it al∣ways signifies God's Vengeancet. 'Tis the voice of Nature, that Sin ought to be punish'd, and they who do evil should suffer evil. Nay 'tis the Voice of God himself, whom our Saviour proposes to us as the Pattern of Love and Kind∣ness which we ought to imitateu: and yet the Scripture often repre∣sents him as taking Pleasure and Satisfaction in the Destruction of Incorrigible Sinners, and rejoycing at their Calamitiesx. In Imitation of which Example the Righteous are said to Rejoyce when they see God's Vengeance upon Sinners, and wash their Feet in the Blood of the Ʋngodly, [as it were trampling upon their Carcases in a Trium∣phant manner] and to glorifie God upon such occasions, saying, Veri∣ly there is a Reward for the Righteous,

doubtless there is a God that judgeth in the Earthy. In like manner, when the Enemies of God's peo∣ple have fill'd up the measure of their Iniquities, and sinn'd beyond a possibility of obtaining Pardon, the Prophets denounce God's Jud∣gments against them in a trium∣phant Style, and at the same time exhort all his Servants to rejoyce and praise God for making his Ju∣stice manifest. So we find the Pro∣phet Isaiah breaking forth into Joy upon such an occasion,z O Lord, thou art my God, I will exalt thee, I will praise thy Name. —For thou hast made of a City a Heap, &c. And to the same purpose he speaks a little aftera. So Jeremy when he foretells the Destruction of Baby∣lon, says,b The Heavens and Earth and all that is therein shall sing for joy: and exhorts God's people par∣ticularly, to declare in Zion the works of the Lord their Godc. And when Mystical Babylon falls in the Revelations, the Apostles and Pro∣phets are exhorted to Rejoyce over herd: and the heavenly Host are repre∣sented

as giving Solemn Thanks and Praise to God for Executing his Judgments upon here. And al∣though in such general Judgments, Children which are Innocent usu∣ally suffer as well as the Guilty, yet since God has a Right to take away their Lives when and in what manner he thinks fit, with∣out the Imputation of Injustice or Cruelty; and the involving Great and Small, Old and Young in the same common Destruction, adds much to the Dreadfulness and Severity of the Judgment, and consequently makes it more Ex∣emplary, upon this account 'tis lawful to wish with the Psalmistf, that God's Judgments may come upon the Children of Notorious and Implacable Enemies: and this not out of a principle of Hatred and Revenge, but only out of a Desire to see his Judgments made more manifest hereby to the World. And as for the Psalmists pronouncing the Executioners of this Decree of God's Blessedg, at which Mr. N. is so much offen∣dedh,

there are many Expressions like this in the Prophets: where they incourage and commend, and promise a Reward to those men who are to be Executioners of God's Judgmentsi, and pronounce a Cursek upon those who will not joyn in bringing his Will and Pur∣poses to pass. And where the Pro∣phets exhort and incourage men to fulfill God's Judgments, the De∣sign of such Expressions is only to set forth in a Pathetical and Ve∣hement manner, how desirous the Holy Writers are that such a Work should be accomplish'd, that will so much tend to the Illustrating God's Glory.

I think there is no sort of Impre∣cations used in the Psalms, but something which has been offer'd in these Three Considerations will reach to, and will be a sufficient Defence and Justification of. On∣ly I will add one brief Remark, for the sake of those who do not converse with the Originals or the Ancient Versions of the Bible, and that is this; That the wordl which

is sometimes Translated Hell in the Psalms, and in several other places of the Old Testament, signifies on∣ly the Grave, and ought to have been always Translated so, to pre∣vent the Misunderstanding of these places. So that when the Psalmist says,m Let Death come hastily upon them, and let them go down quick in∣to Hell, the Expression sounds harsh to a Vulgar ear, and taking it in the most obvious sense of the words can hardly be defended, but it really means no more but this,

Let them suddenly go down into the Grave, before they have time to accomplish their Wicked Designs:

the later words being the same sense with the former, only differently express'd.

Next in order to the Psalms are the Proverbs, and therefore I shall in the next place consider the Ob∣jections which our Author advan∣ces against them. One would think that the Character which the Sa∣cred Historyn and all ages have given to Solomon, of being indow∣ed by God with an Extraordinary

Degree of Wisdom above all other men: together with what he says of himself, that he imploy'd this Talent to the Instruction of the people, and gather'd together many Proverbso to that end: and besides all this, the Authority of the Jew∣ish Canon, especially when 'tis con∣firm'd by a Greater than Solomon, our Saviour CHRIST, and several Passages of this very Book dire∣ctly quoted by his Apostlesp, and other places plainly alludedq to by them: I say, one would be apt to conclude that all these Considera∣tions added to the Intrinsecal Worth of the Book it self, might be a sufficient Inducement to look upon it as a Book compos'd by God's Appointment for the Bene∣fit of the Church.

But before I proceed any fur∣ther upon this Sebject, I cannot but reflect by the way upon a Pas∣sage of our Author, which the ob∣serving that this Book is quoted by the Apostles puts me in mind of, and that is this: He tells usr That the Apostles never cite the

works of Solomon or the Book of Job. What he says touching the for∣mer, I have just now shewed to be manifestly False, and there is as little truth in the later part of his words: for the Book of Job is as formally quoted by St. Pauls, as any Book of the Old Testament, The Wisdom of the world is Foolishness with God, FOR IT IS WRITTEN, He taketh the Wise in their own Craftiness. Which Citation, as 'tis certainly taken out of Jobt, so it shews withal a great Deference given by the A∣postle to the Authority of the Book from whence 'tis taken. I thought fit just to observe this Mi∣stake of Mr. N.'s, tho it be of no great consequence, on purpose to take down the Confidence of this Gentleman a little, and shew him that he is not so exactly vers'd in the Scripture, as a man that undertakes to Criticize upon it with so much Capriciousness, and so little Reverence and Regard to its Authority, ought to be.

But to return to the Matter in hand. The Sum of the General Charge which our Author has ad∣vanc'd against the Divine Autho∣rity of the Book of Proverbs isa, That they are Moral Sentences which a Good Man may pronounce without Inspiration. As if no Book could be writ by God's Direction, but where the matter is such as exceeds the reach of Humane Invention, and cannot be the Product of our Rational Faculties. And then by the same Reason no work must be ascribed to God, but what ex∣ceeds the Power of Natural Agents; and so God must be accounted the Author of nothing that happens in the World, but what is purely Miraculous. Now this Argument if it prove any thing at all, it proves not only that this Book is not written by Divine Inspiration, but farther, that no Book of Moral Instructions can be. For Morality is nothing but the Law of Right Rea∣son, instructing us how to govern our Actions; and I suppose the Law of Reason contains nothing in it a∣bove

Reason, and Consequently nothing which is above the Capa∣city of a Wise and Good Man to think or speak: from all which it will follow, by our Au∣thors Principles, that whatever Book contains nothing in it but what is deducible from the Prin∣ciples of meer Reason, must be purely Humane, and can have no∣thing Divine, or of the Hand of God in it. But is not Mr. N. sen∣sible that the Corruption of Hu∣mane Nature, the Degeneracy of the World, the Uncertainty of Humane Reasoning, and especially the Imperfect Knowledge we have of the Nature of God and our own Souls, have so far Obscur'd a great many branches of this Law of Na∣ture or Reason, that there was need of a more than Ordinary Il∣lumination, to recover some Truths which were in a manner lost to the World, and to set them in a True Light, so as to Convince o∣thers of their Certainty and Ex∣cellency? Sure our Author will grant, that the Unity of the God∣head

is a Truth that is Adequate to Humane Reason, nay a Truth so Evident, that one would won∣der that Men of Searching Heads could miss of it; and yet we find there were very few among the Heathens that had their Reason so throughly purg'd from the pre∣judices which Education and the Establisht Religion of the World had infected it with, as to assent to this Truth. And I think this is a sufficient Proof that Men may stand in need of a Teacher Di∣vinely Inlightned to Discover such Truths to them, as may indeed be deduced from the Principles of Reason when 'tis in its true perfe∣ction, but yet are such as few Men's Reason hath arrived to, because of the Degeneracy and corruption to which 'tis obnoxious. And many such Truths are to be found in this Book, which tho they are so reasonable that Men can't but assent to them assoon as they hear them, yet 'tis in vain to search for them in the Writings of the Best and Acutest Philosophers. For

Instance, we may challenge them to shew such a Wise Instruction in any of their Books as Solomon lays down for the foundation of Mo∣rality,b The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom: or this,c Trust in the Lord with all thy Heart and lean not to thy own Ʋnderstanding, In all thy ways acknowledge him. And in∣deed thro the whole Book the Duties of Morality are inforc'd upon Men from Religious Con∣siderations, and by Arguments taken from the Duty we owe to God, and the Rewards and Punish∣ments we must expect from him, according as we behave our selves. Which makes this Book differ ve∣ry much from the Moral Writings of the Philosophers, where we shall find little or nothing said concern∣ing our Duty to God, his Autho∣rity over us, our Dependance up∣on him, and the Submission we owe to him, the Methods of Pro∣vidence, and the Rewards or Pu∣nishments of another Life, all which are often insisted upon in this Book. For this is a visible

Defect in the Writings of the Phi∣losophers, that as they never in∣force our Duty by Arguments which are taken from the Prin∣ciples of Religion: so their dis∣swasives from Vice are taken from these Topicks, viz. That 'tis be∣low the Dignity of Humane Na∣ture, and a Contradiction to Rea∣son, rather than from this Consi∣deration, That 'tis displeasing to God, a Breach of his Law, and an Act of Disobedience which he will Punish. I Confess some Phi∣losophers that lived since the Ap∣pearance of Christianity, especially the Emperor Antoninus, have very Excellent Sayings concerning God's Providence, and the Submission we owe to him. But I am apt to think, that as the Light of the Gospel Diffus'd it self over the World, it in some measure Inlight∣ned the minds even of those who Refus'd to imbrace it, as the Sun gives Light before it reaches our Hemisphere. My meaning is, that the very Account which Inqui∣sitive Men received of the Prin∣ciples

of Christianity helped to Clear up their minds, and gave them more distinct Apprehensi∣ons of the Principles of Natural Religon than they had before.

But to return; Beside the Pre∣cepts I have already mention'd, there are many Excellent Advices given in the Proverbs to all sorts and Degrees of Men, from Princes and Magistrates to the meanest of their Subjects. And 'tis meer Cavilling in this Author to sayd, That the Directions about Good Husbandry and House-keeping, Coun∣try People know without Inspiration: as if it were below the Wisdom of an Inspired Teacher, to admo∣nish the meanest of their Duty; (as certainly 'tis every Man's to be Diligent in his Calling) and in∣courage them to attend upon ite: or as if People had not need to be put in mind of their Duty, altho they knew it before. As little weight is there in what he saithf concerning the Caution which this Book so often gives Men a∣gainst Suretiship, or being Bound for

others, as if it amounted to a total forbidding Men the Exercise of this sort of Charity. I grant him this may be in some Cases a very good Act of Charity; but if we con∣sider it as 'tis generally practis'd, (and Proverbial Sayings are to be understood only to hold true in Most cases) we shall find such ill Ef∣fects of it, that 'tis not only Wise but Religious Advice to warn men against it. Experience tells us that men are often Bound for more than they are able to pay, which is the very Case Solomon speaks ofg in some of those places Mr. N. re∣fers to, and so injure the Credi∣tor as well as undo themselves and intail Misery upon their Fa∣milies, which a man is bound in Justice as well as Charity to pro∣vide for in the first place. And Suretiship when it brings men to Beggary, at the same time expo∣ses them to those dangerous Tem∣ptations to sin, which always ac∣company extreme Want. Upon these accounts Suretiship is oftner the occasion of a great deal of

Injustice and other Wickedness, than the Exercise of Charity. And since these are the usual Conse∣quences of it, 'tis very good Ad∣vice to warn men against it, and as proper for this Book as any whatsoever, since the Rules of it, as I observ'd just now, are design'd only for Wise Observations grounded upon Experience, which are general∣ly True, but are not to be taken so strictly and rigorously as if they never fail'd in any one In∣stanceh.

As to what Mr. N. objectsi a∣gainst the Collection of Proverbs ascribed to Agurk, if I should grant him that they have nothing of Inspiration in them, I do not see how it prejudices the Autho∣rity of Solomon's Proverbs at all. For Solomon's Character will go a great way to Intitle his Proverbs to Inspiration, whereas these are the Sayings of an Unknown Au∣thor, who does not pretend to have been bred up in the Schools of the Prophetsl, which were look'd upon as the Nurseries of Inspir'd

Writers. I know some Learned Men fancy both this and the 31st. Chapter to be Sayings of Solomon, as well as the foregoing; but as they bring no Proof for what they say, so 'tis altogether unaccount∣able why Solomon should disgiuse himself under two such different Names, neither of which have the least Affinity with his own. Now supposing the two last Chapters of the Proverbs to have been writ by Uncertain Authors, and added to Solomon's by some Private hand, and afterward to have been con∣tinued by those that Copied the Holy Writings, as we see Additions have been made to Daniel and Esther in the Greek Bibles, and as 'tis probable the Hellenists join'd these and the other Apocryphal Writings with the Canonical as early as our Saviour's time: upon this Hypo∣thesis, Mr. N.'s Objections against this part of the Proverbs fall short of the Mark, and do not pre∣judice the Authority of Solomon's Proverbs at all. And this Sup∣position I think has nothing of

Absurdity in it, nor can any Con∣sequences be drawn from hence to weaken the Authority of the Jewish Canon. For if we should suppose these two Chapters to be Apocryphal, it will neither follow that we cannot tell what is Cano∣nical and what not, nor that there may have been Additions made to Books which are all of a piece and go all under one and the same Au∣thor's name. We can conclude no∣thing from hence but this, that wherever we find a Writing, bear∣ing the name of an Unknown Au∣thor added to a Book whose Au∣thor is known, without any ne∣cessary Dependance upon, or Con∣nexion with the Book that goes before or that comes after, in such a Case only, 'twill follow from this Hypothesis, that we have no Reason to think both those Wri∣tings to be of an Equal Authority. And since this is the only In∣stance that can be given in all the Old Testament, of a small Wri∣ting made an Appendix to a greater meerly because of the Affinity of

the Subject, whatever Hypothe∣sis we admit concerning these Two Chapters, it can be no Prejudice to any other part of the Old Testa∣ment Canon, because there's no In∣stance can be given of a like nature.

But whatever I have said upon this Point, I propose only by way of Supposition, and meerly out of a Design to shew that whatever Ob∣jections Mr. N. thinks he can make against these Additions to the Proverbs, they do not at all diminish the Authority of Solo∣mon's Writings. For indeed the Authority of the Jewish Canon weighs so much with me, and the Jews seem to have been so scrupu∣lous of admitting any Writing in∣to their Canon, without due Exa∣mining whether it deserv'd to be receiv'd into it or not, that I must confess I cannot easily bring my self to think there are any Apo∣cryphals among the Hebrew Wri∣tings of the Old Testament. As for the Greek Writings and Tran∣slations, we know that the Helle∣nists were much more Easie and

Remiss as to this matter, and al∣lowed great Liberty to Transcri∣bers and Commentators to make such Additions to the Text, which in their Opinion did tend to Il∣lustrate it. But the Jews being Scrupulous of Adding to, or Di∣minishing from the Text, even to Superstition, I think it Unjust to conclude that any part of their Canon is of doubtful Authority, from one single Instance which some may fancy looks suspicious. And therefore taking this Prophecy or Collectiona of Agur's to have the same External Authority with the rest of the Jewish Canon, I can∣not see that the Internal Matter of it affords any Reason to the Con∣trary. For there are many wise Observations and a great deal of good Advice contain'd in it, and his Prayer to God for a Competencyb is a very Excellent one, and is so much the more to be valued, be∣cause all the Heathen Philosophers were puzzl'd how to advise others about the matter of their Prayersc, what Blessings 'twas proper to ask

of God, and the Vulgar put up very Absurd and Ridiculous Peti∣ons to their Godsd. And for those places of this Chapter which are more liable to Exception, if Mr. N. would have consulted what Learned Commentators have said upon them, he would not have thought them so Useless and Tri∣fling as he pretends. But our Au∣thor himself seems to be at a loss for Objections, since he is willing to take Advantage of Agur's mo∣dest Confession of his own Ignorancee. and concludes from thence that he can be a man of no Authori∣ty. But I believe Mr. N. is the first that ever thought a man's Mo∣desty a sign that he wanted Wis∣dom, or that Humility made a man Unqualified for Receiving the Influences of God's Spirit.

Our Author objects nothing a∣gainst Ecclesiastes and the Canticles, but what has been Objected seve∣ral times before, and as often An∣swered: for which reason I shall be more Brief in Refuting him.

'Tis certain that the Design of

Ecclesiastes is to set forth the Va∣nity of Humane Life, which So∣lomon does by shewing how Empty and Unsatisfactory all those Ends are which men usually propose to themselves, as the greatest Hap∣piness this World can afford: such as are Knowledgef, Pleasureg, Ho∣nour and Authorityh, and lastly Richesi. Further, he takes no∣tice how men's Ignorance, and the Obscurity in which the Great and Weighty Points concerning the Immortality of the Soul, a Future State, and the Methods of Provi∣dence are Involved, do occasion a great deal of Misery and Trouble to Mankind. Whilst Ill men take advantage of the Difficulties which may be objected against these Truths, and from thence conclude that there's no Providence nor Fu∣ture Judgment, and thereby har∣den themselves ink Wickedness, or give themselves up to Sensuality, and say, Let us eat and drink, for to morrow we shall diel. And even good men are now and then in a great Perplexity about these things,

by reason of the Obscurity and Difficulties with which they are be∣set, and begin to doubt and stag∣ger in their Faithm. If men would therefore view the Scope and De∣sign of the whole Book, and not take it by Piece-meal or examine each Sentence apart, they might easily see, that when the Author propo∣ses Doubts concerning Providence and a Future State, he does not speak his own Sense: for in seve∣ral places he plainly asserts God's Ordering and Disposing of all thingsn, and speaks of another Life and a Future Judgment, with the greatest Clearness and Assu∣rance of any of the Canonical Wri∣ters of the Old Testamento. And therefore the Design of those other places which seem at first to contradict these, is only to shew that the Obscurity of these Great Articles of Faith, had often fill'd his own and o∣ther good Men's minds with Per∣plexing thoughts, and that the Generality of Men took Incou∣ragement from thence to mind

only Sensual Pleasures, and make no Conscience of Injuring and Oppressing others. So that the uncertainty and Imperfection of Humane Knowledge as to these things, was a great Ingredient in the Vanities of Life: and one of those sore Travels which God hath given to the Sons of Men, to be ex∣ercised therewithp. And we may observe, that when he mentions the Doubts concerning the Immor∣tality of the Soul, he Introduces them with this Preface,q I said in my Heart 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which may very properly be ren∣dred, According to the words or way of speaking used among the Generality of Men: and 'tis the very same Phrase as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which St. Paul usesr in a like Case, where he does not speak his own Sense, but sets down an Inference which Wicked Men would be apt to make from what he had said.

But if any desire further satis∣faction concerning this Book or the Song of Solomon, I must refer them to that Excellent Commentary

which the Reverend and Learned Bishop Patrick has Publish'd upon these two Books, where he has with great Clearness explain'd the Sense and Design of them both, and particularly as to the Latter, has sheweds, how fitly the Mysti∣cal Ʋnion between Christ and his Church, is Represented in it under the Persons of a Bridegroom and Bride: that Allegory being agree∣able to the Notions of all the Pro∣phetical Writers of the Old Testa∣ment, who constantly express God's being in Covenant with the Jews by his being Married, and a Husbandt to them; and in pur∣suance of the same Metaphor, re∣prove their Idolatry under the names of Adulteryu, Fornication, and going a Whoring after other Gods: and the same Metaphor is alluded to by Christ and his Apostles in the New Testamentx. All which is made out by that Reverend and Excellent Author with so much Learning and Exactness, and does so fully Vindicate this Book, from the Rash Censures of those who

have doubted of its Authority, and from the Profane Interpreta∣tions which some Wanton Fancies have applied to it, that 'twould be Unpardonable Presumption for me to think I can add any thing upon this Subject, to that Great Man's Judicious and Accomplisht Labours.

Notes

• a

  Fr. p. 279. En. p 106.
• b

  Fr. p. 233. En. p. 31.
• c

  Fr. p. 271, &c Eng. p. 93, &c.
• d

  Neh. 12.10, 22.
• e

  Letter to Dr. Sherlock about a passage in Josephus, &c.
• f

  Mal. 4.4, 5.
• g

  See 1 Macc. 4.46.-9.27.-14.41.
• h

  Ecclus. 36.14, 15, 16.
• i

  Wal∣ton. Pro∣legom. 9. in Bibl. Polygl. n. 11. Vales. in Eus. H.E. l. 5. c. 8.
• k

  Vales. ibid.
• l

  Ecclus. 49.10.
• m

  See Act. 7.42. Justin M. c. Tryph. p. 45.50.57. (Ed. Steph.) Cyprian. Epist. 59. Ed. Oxon.
• n

  c. 50. 1, &c.
• o

  See 3 Macc. 2.1. com. with c. 1.1.
• p

  Ezr 7.6.
• q

  Ezr. 2.62, 63.
• r

  Antiq. Jud. l. 3. c. 9. p. 90. C. Ed. Gen.
• s

  Sect. 9.
• x

  Fr. p. 279. Eng p. 106.
• y

  1 Chr. 3.17. 〈…〉〈…〉 &c.
• z

  L. 1. c. App. p. 136. D.
• a

  Jude 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 14.
• b

  ••ee Matth. 23.3••. Luk. 4.25. Jam. 5.17. Act. 7.22, 52. Heb. 11.37.-12.21. 2 Tim. 3.8. V. Orig. Epist and African.
• c

  Antiq. l. 2. c. 5.
• d

  Fr. p. 276. Eng. p. 102.
• e

  J••h. 5.39.
• f

  Fr. p. 277, 279, 285. Eng p. 10••, 106, 116.
• g

  Fr. p. 272. Eng. p. 96.
• h

  Fr. p. 275. Eng. p. 101.
• i

  Luk. 24.44.
• k

  Fr. p. 277. Eng. p. 123.
• l

  Fr. p. 278. Eng. p. 104, 105.
• m

  Matt. 5. c. 23.
• n

  c. 15.1.
• o

  Fr. p. 272, &c. Eng p. 95, &c.
• a

  Rom. 3.2.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• c

  2 Tim. 3.16.
• d

  Act. 16.1.
• e

  Eng. p. 192. Fr. p. 270.
• f

  In lo∣cum. & contr. Rivetum.
• g

  Pars 2. c. 5.
• h

  Votum pro Pace, prout citatur. Fr. p. 270. Fn. p. 193.
• i

  Eng. p. 188. Fr. p. 267.
• k

  Fr. p. 276. En. p. 102.
• l

  More Nevoch. p. 2. c. 45.
• m

  See Mr. Smiths Discourse of Pro∣phecy. c. 7.
• n

  Votum pro pace, prout ci∣tatur, Fr. p. 231. Eng. p. 141.
• o

  Prolog. Galeat. Praef. in Daniel.
• p

  Antiq. l. 10. c. 12.
• q

  Ib. p. 353. G. Ed. Ge∣nev.
• r

  Matth. 24.15.
• s

  L. 1. c. App. p. 1036. G.
• t

  Luke 24.44.
• u

  P. 37.
• x

  Fr. p. 231. En. p. 28.
• a

  Is. c. 36, 37, 38, 39.
• b

  1 Chr. 29.29.
• c

  2 Chr. 9.29.
• d

  2 Chr. 12.15.
• e

  Chap. 13.22.
• f

  1 King. 16.1. 2 Chron. 19.2.
• g

  2 Chr. 20.34.
• h

  Ch. 26.22.
• i

  Ch. 33.19.
• k

  Joseph. c. Appion. l. 1. p. 1036. Ed. Genev.
• l

  Demon. Evangel. p. 161.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• m

  Antiq. p. 73. G. p. 140. A. p. 176. G.
• n

  Ap. Eu∣seb. Praep. Evang. l. 1
• o

  Fr. p. 164, &c. Eng. p. 249.
• p

  Eng. p. 169. Fr. p. 252.
• q

  2 Mac•• 15.36.
• r

  Eng. p 170. Fr. p. 253.
• s

  Fr. p. ••••4. Eng. p. 99.
• t

  V. Orig. c. Cels. p. 275, 371, 372. Ed. Cant.
• u

  Fr. p. 275. Eng. p. 100
• x

  Job. 1.21.-2.10. c. 9.2, 3, 15. c. 40.4, 5. c. 42.3, &c.
• y

  Ib. c. 13. 15. -14. 13, 14, 15, -19. 25, 26, 27.
• z

  c 23. 3, &c. c. 29. 31. per tot. -27. 3, &c.
• a

  Ps. 73.2, 3.
• b

  Ib v. 13. 14.
• c

  Ib. v. 15.
• d

  Fr. p. ••75. En. p. 161.
• e

  Job 42.7.
• f

  Ib ver. 3, 6.
• g

  Fr. p. 275. Eng. p. 100.
• b

  Luke 13.2.
• c

  Job 8.8. c. 15.10, 18.-20.4, &c.—22.15, 16.
• d

  c. 4.7, 8, 9, 10, 11.
• e

  Fr. p. 275. En. p. 101.
• f

  Job 7.2••, 21.-9.14, 15.
• g

  Job 22.5, &c.
• h

  Job 19.2, 3.
• i

  c. 16.17, 21. c. 27.5, 6. c. 31. per tot. c. 23.3, &c.
• k

  c. 19.21, 22.
• l

  Job 42.8.
• m

  c. 7.11, &c. -10.2.
• n

  c. 9.17.-10.7.-16.17.-13.23. See c. 33.9, 10, 11.-34.5, 6.
• o

  c. 9.22, 23.-19.7.-23.13.
• p

  c. 42.3, &c.
• q

  See Bp. Patrick's Appen∣dix to his Para∣phrase.
• r

  Job 4.13.
• s

  See c. 33.15, 16.
• t

  Job 19.25, 26, 27
• u

  In lo∣cum.
• x

  Job 31.8.
• y

  c. 42.5.
• z

  James 5.11.
• a

  Rom. 15.4.
• b

  See c. 31.
• b

  Fr. p. 230. Eng. p. 27.
• c

  Ubi sup. & Fr. p. 277. Eng. p. 104.
• d

  1 Sam. 23.2. Psal. 2.7.110.1.
• e

  see Mr. Smith of Prophe∣cy, c. 7.
• f

  1 Cor. 12.29.
• g

  Ib. v. 15.
• h

  1 Sam. 10.5. 1 Chr. 25.1. 1 Cor. 11.5. Exod. 15.20. See Mr. Smith of Prophe∣cy, ch. 7. and 8 And Dr. Ham∣mond up on St. Luke 1.67.
• i

  See 1 Chr. 6.31.
• k

  1 Chr. 16.40, 41. Ecclus. 50.16, 17, 18.
• l

  Ezr. 3.11.
• m

  Matt. 26.30. Mark 14.26.
• n

  Coloss. 3.16.
• o

  See Rev. 4. ver. 4, 5, 6, 7. -c. 5, 8.-8.1.-11. 19
• p

  Rev. 5.9.-14.3.-15.3.
• q

  V. Cl. Dodwel. c. Grot. c. 4.
• r

  1 Cor. 14.26. Euseb. H.E. l. 5. c. 28. & l. 7. c. 30.
• s

  See Dr. Hamm. Preface to his Paraphr. upon the Psalms.
• t

  John 3.8.
• z

  Fr. p. 228. En. p. 23.
• a

  Psal. 70.2.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• c

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is Synony∣mous with the Former, and ren∣dred by the LXX. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. &c. all which words signify Shame
• c

  Ub. supr.
• d

  Isaiah 13.16.
• e

  Acts 1.16.
• f

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• g

  Deut. 27.
• h

  Gal. 1.8. 1. Cor. 16.20.
• i

  2 Tim. 4.14.
• k

  Psal. 83.16.
• l

  Psal. 59.13.
• m

  Exod. 14.17.
• n

  Greg. Naz. 2. Invect. in Jul. p. 123, 124. & Orat. Funebr. in Patr. p. 308.
• o

  Rom. 12.19.
• p

  Tertul. c. Marci∣on. l. 4. c. 16. Cum dicit, Mi∣hi vindi∣ctam, & ego vin∣dicabo, Patien∣tiam do∣cet Vin∣dictae ex∣pectatri∣cem. -Ul∣tionem mihi per∣misisse debuerat, si ipse non praestat, aut si mi∣hi non permit∣tebat, ip∣se praesta∣ret. Quo∣nium & discipli∣nae inter∣est in∣juriam vindicari: metu enim Ultionis omnis iniqui∣tas refraenatur.
• q

  2 Chron. 24.22.
• r

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Secundi Presbyteri jam morituri verba ap. Athanas. Epist. ad Solitar. p. 660.
• s

  Prov. 25.21, 22.
• t

  See Ps. 18.8, 13.-120.4.-140.11.
• u

  Matth 5.45
• x

  Deut. 28.63. Pro. 1.26. Is. 1.24. Ezek 5.13.
• y

  Ps. 58.10, 11.
• z

  Is. 25.1, 2.
• a

  Is. 26.5, 6, 11.
• b

  Jer. 51.48.
• c

  Ver. 10.
• d

  Rev. 18.20.
• e

  Rev. 19.1, &c. See c. 11.16, 17, 18.-15. 2, 3, 4.-16.5,
• f

  Ps. 109. 9, &c. -137.9.
• g

  Ps. 137.9.
• h

  Fr. p. 229. Eng. p. 25.
• i

  Jer. 25.9.-27.6, 7.8.-43.10.-50.14, 21, 26, 29. Ezek. 29.19.
• k

  Jer. 48.10.
• l

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• m

  Psal. 55.15.
• n

  1 Kin. 3.12.
• o

  Eccles. 12.9.
• p

  Rom. 12.20. Hebr. 12.5, 6. Jam. 4.6. 1 Pet. 5.5.
• q

  2 Cor. 8.21. 1 Pet. 4.18.
• r

  Fr. p. 278. Eng. p. 105
• s

  1 Cor. 3.19.
• t

  c. 5. 13.
• a

  Fr. p. 271. En. p. 94.
• b

  Prov. 1.7.
• c

  Prov. 3.5, 6
• d

  Ubi supr.
• e

  See Tit. 3.14. where the Apo∣stle gives the same sort of Advice:
• f

  Ubi sup.
• g

  Prov. 22.26, 27.
• h

  v. Grot. in Matth. 12.30.
• i

  Ubi supra.
• k

  Prov. 30.
• l

  See Bp. Patrick's Paraph. upon Pro. 30.3.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• b

  Prov 3.••.8, 9.
• c

  See Platon. Alcibiad. 2. Juve∣nal. Sat. 10.
• d

  Pers. Sat. 2. Horat. l. 2. Sat. 3. Epist 16. l. 1.
• e

  Prov. 30.2.
• f

  Eccles. 1.
• g

  Ch. 2.
• h

  Ch. 3. and 4.
• i

  Ch. 5. and 6.
• k

  Ch. 8. 11, 14. ch. 9. 3.
• l

  Ch. 3. 18, &c.
• m

  Ch. 1. 13.-8. 16, 17.
• n

  Ch. 3. 11, 14.-7. 13.-9. 1.-11. 5.
• o

  Ch. 3. 17.-11. 9.-12. 7. 14.
• p

  Eccles. 1.13.
• q

  c. 3. 18.
• r

  Rom. 3.5.
• s

  Preface
• t

  Ps. 45. Is. 54.5.-62 4.5. Jer. 3.14.-31.32. Hos. 2.2.7.16. Ezek. 16.8.
• u

  Is. 57.7.8. Jer. 3.1. &c. Ezek. 16.15, &c. •• c. 23. Hos. c. 1. & 2.
• x

  Matt. 22.2. Joh 3 28, 29. 2 Cor. 1.2. Eph. 5.31, 32 Rev. 19.7.-14.4.