« PreviousContinue »
the seventh day at least to the æra of the deluge. Without dwelling on these circumstances in which the account of Tacitus agrees with those already considered, I shall only further observe, that in what he says concerning the people being in danger of perishing by thirst, and the means. by which they obtained relief, we may trace several of the facts recorded in Scripture, but blended together and mingled with fiction. Here there is an obvious allufion to what we are told concerning the Israelites travelling three days before they found water, as well as to their murmuring and dejection on this account. In the story concerning the rock shaded with wood, we have evidently a mixture of the circumstances related in Scripture, concerning the rock which was smitten by Moses, and the twelve fountains of Elim, where there were threescore and ten palm-trees a' resin
The names of none of the Egyptian magicians are mentioned in the Pentateuch. But, from what the Apostle Paul says concerning “ Jannes and Jam"", bres withstanding Moses b," there is no reason to doubt, that the names of these persons, as being the chief of the magicians, and some other particulars concerning them, not recorded in Scripture, had been preserved among the Jews by tradition. Their names indeed are found in the Chaldee paraphrase of the Pentateuch. Jonathan thus renders Exod. vii. Ti. “ Jannes and 4. Jambres, Egyptian magicians, also did in like manner, by the inuttering of their inchant* ments.” The names of these magicians are also mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud, in the book of Zohar, in Schalscheleth, and in Tanchuma a. time so well, that Pharaoh, following their example, perished in the attempt. . This writer informs us, the priests of Heliopolis adopted the former opinion, and those of Memphis the lattera.
«ments.!! # Exod. xv. 27.
b 2 Tim. iii, &.", i "
But it deferves our particular attention, that these magicians seem to have been nearly as well known to 'heathen writers. , Eusebius quotes a passage from Numenius, an ancient Pythagorean philosopher, which not only attests the scriptural account concerning the opposition of these magicians, but plainly shews' a general belief, that Egypt, by the instrumentality of Moses, had been visited with severe plagues. “Jannes and Jam• bres,” he says, “scribes of the religion of Egypt; " at the time that the Jews were expelled from " that country, were universally deemed inferior " to none in acquaintance with magical arts. “ They were therefore both chosen, by the com* mon consent of the Egyptians, to oppose them“ selves to Musæus," for thus Moses is sometimes called by the Greeks ", " the leader of the Jews, “ a man whose prayers were remarkably preva“ lent with God. These persons were reckoned " able to remove the calamities which Mufæus " had brought upon Egypt.c". Eusebius gives a fimilar testimony from Artapanus, who calls them “ priests above Memphis,” relating, that the king " threatened them with death, if they did not $6, perform things equal to those done by Moses d.” Pliny, whose information has been less distinct,
mentions a Vid. Fabric. Cod. Apoc. V. T. p. 816.819. Buxtorf. Lex. Talm. P 945. b Movranos. cApud. Euseb. Præpar. lib. viii. c. 9. (Fabr. Cod. Apoc. V. T. vol. j. p. 817.)
d Id. lib. ix. c. 27.
mentions Moses and Jamnes as Jewish magicians a. 'Apuleius also introduces Joannes, who is generally allowed to be the same as Jannes, among the chief magicians b.
Artapanus, already mentioned, in his work concerning the fews, gives the following relation: “ Moses was fhuť up in prison by Nechephres, “ the king of the Egyptians, because he demand“ ed the liberation of the Israelites. By night, “ the prison being opened by the will of God, he “ went forth, entered into the royal palace, stood “ before the sleeping monarch, and awaked him. “He, being astonished at what had taken place, $ commanded Moses to tell him the name of that “ God who had fent him.' Mofes, approaching “ the ear of the king, told him this name. Upon 66. hearing it, the king was struck dumb; but, “ when Mofes laid hold of him, he revived c." The leading circumstances here mentioned are entirely different from thole recorded in the sacred history. There seems indeed to be an allufion to what was done by Moses, in declaring to Pharaoh the name of, JEHOVAH, as the “ God of " the Hebrews d;" and to Dharaoh's calling for Moses and Aaron by night e, But what especially deserves our notice, is, that the passage affords' a satisfactory proof of a general tradition among the heathen, that Moses had wrought miracles in the presence of the king of Egypt, and even such as particularly affected himself.
a Hist. Nat. lib. xxx. C. 1. andrin. Strom. lib. i. p. 252.
b Apolog. II.' . cAp. Clem. Alex. d Exod. v. I. 3 e Exod. xii. 31.
The learned Allix has observed, that the memory of the destruction of the first-born was preferved among the Egyptians till after the birth of Christ. “For till then,” he says, “ they used “ to mark with red their sheep, their trees, their “ houses and lands, the day before the paflover, “ as one may see in Epiphanius; which custom
could proceed from no other cause, than from " the Egyptians fear of the like plague and mor“ tality, that was once inflicted upon their fore
fathers; and from the hope of preventing it “ by such a kind of talisman, whereby they “ thought Moses had formerly saved the Ifrael“ ites harmless from that great plague, only by “ sprinkling the blood of the lamb of the pafl" over on the upper door-post of their houses a.”
Allix does not quote the place, and I have not been able to find it in Epiphanius. But, at any rate, I would not lay much stress on this testi mony, as it does not so properly belong to the present argument, being that of a Christian wri. ter. Nor does it appear, that his evidence is supported by that of any other witness.
I proceed, therefore, to subjoin the teftimony of two heathen writers, with respect to the miraculous passage of the Red Sea. Artapanus, as quo. ted by the celebrated Alexander Polyhistor, says, that the Egyptian priests were not agreed, whether the sea was divided by a supernatural power, or whether Moses and the Ifraelites only crossed over a small nook of it at low water, hitting the E 3 i
time a Reflections on the Books of Scripture, vol. i.p. 157, 156.. .
According to Diodorus Siculus, a heathen hi- . storian of great character, the Ichthyophagi, who dwelt along the coasts of the Red Sea, towards the farther end of it, had a constant tradition, that that sea had been formerly divided by a strong wind ; and that the waves being parted into two heaps, the bottom, which was left naked, had appeared full of verdure b. . .
Thus it appears, both from the internal evidence of the facred books, and from collateral testimony, that there is no reason to doubt the truth of those miraculous events, which are' recorded concerning the Israelites, in the first period of their history as a nation. I have formerly observed, that there is as little reason to doubt the scriptural account of those prior events, which more immediately concern mankind in general. We may justly infer the truth of the one from that of the other. As it appears unquestionable, that the religion contained in the books of Moses was given by God, being attested by those wonderful works which we have already considered; the truth of the sacred history, as far as it respects events of an earlier date, follows as a natural and necessary consequence. It is incredible, that God
' 'Thould a Euseb. Prepar. lib. iv. cap. 27. ':"? i'b Lib. iii. c. 3..