tion of this country for above two hundred years back:' as if Jeroboam's idolatry was the cause of his success. But all that can be gathered from Jeroboam's prosperity and success, which had been plainly foretold by the prophet Jonah, 2 Kings xiv. 25, is, that as the Israelites had been afflicted for their sins through the just judgment of God, so now it pleased him in his great mercy to give them a respite from their calamities, and to try what influence his goodness and indulgence would have upon them; to which it is expressly ascribed, ver. 26, 27. But they made a wrong use of their prosperity and it appears from the lively admonitions of the prophets, who lived at that time, that all manner of vice and wickedness abounded among them. And this their abusing the divine goodness, and being neither reclaimed by his mercies nor judgments to repentance, at last ended in their utter ruin. As to what this author remarks, that Jeroboam had restored the observation of all the sacrifices and festivals of Egypt;' there is nothing of this in the account given us of his reign. It is probable indeed that he continued the feasts which the first Jeroboam had appointed. But these seem only in imitation of those instituted in the law of Moses with a small variation. See 1 Kings xii. 32, 33. Accordingly it appears from the prophet Hosea, who prophesied in the days of Jeroboam the Second, that in Israel at that time they had their new moons and sabbath, and solemn feasts. He speaks of their wine-offerings and sacrifices to the Lord Jehovah; and of the feast of the Lord, and solemn day as celebrated among them, Hos. ii. 4, 5, 11. And Amos, who prophesied at the same time, talks of their tithes and free-will offerings, their feast days, and solemn assemblies, Amos iv. 4, 5. I shall not examine the way our author takes to account for Jeroboam's victories over the Syrians: nor his chronology that within five or six years after this king's death, the Assyrians destroyed Damascus, whereas it might be plainly shown that it was above forty years after his death that this happened. The confusions and civil wars that followed the death of Jeroboam, he would gladly attribute to the intrigues of the prophets, though there is not one word or circumstance in the history that can afford the least pretence for such a suspicion.

After having laid the ruin and captivity of Israel to the charge of the prophets, though if the Israelites had complied with their advice and exhortations their ruin had been prevented; he next takes notice of the bloody war between Israel and Judah, which he tells us lasted two hundred and sixty years, that is, during the whole time that the kingdom of Israel subsisted. And this also he represents as he had done all the rest, as a war carried on upon the account of religion, and endeavours to interest the prophets in it, whom he represents as doing all they could to restore the kingdom to the house of David, pp. 320, 321. But all that he here offereth is one continued misrepresentation. The war between Israel and Judah. was so far from being perpetual and uninterrupted as he would have us to believe, that we have no account of any war between them from the days of Baasha and Asa to the time of Amaziah and

Nor was

Joash, which was the space of above an hundred years. there any war again between them from that time till the reign of Ahaz, which was above fourscore years more. And whereas he represents the kings of Judah, or the house of David, as all along aggressors in the war, and as 'taking a merciless and outrageous method with Israel after the revolt, the very contrary is true. For though Rehoboam at first levied a great army with a design. to reduce Israel to his obedience, he desisted from it upon the representation made to him by the prophet Shemaiah, 2 Chron. xi. 4. And it is therefore probable that the war which was afterwards carried on between Jeroboam and him, and his son Abijah after him, was owing to Jeroboam's own ambition, who thought, as being much more powerful, to have wrested Judah out of the hands of the house of David. Baasha was the aggressor in the war between him and Asa, out of the jealousy he conceived against him, because many of the Israelites went up to Jerusalem to worship. The same may be observed concerning the war carried on between Israel and Judah in the days of Ahaz. Pekab king of Israel was the aggressor, and joined forces with the king of Syria. Vast numbers of the people of Judah were then taken captive, and used in the most merciless manner, till upon the lively representations made to the chief men of Israel by the prophet Oded, they dismissed them, and treated them with great humanity. See 2 Chron. xxviii. 9-15. From whence it appears how falsely he represents the prophets as all along fomenting the war between Israel and Judah. For as the prophets declared against Rehoboam's warring against Israel, so afterwards they equally declared against the cruelty the Israelites used against their brethren in Judah and thus showed themselves true friends to both. And whereas he represents the kings of Judah at the instigation of the prophets as entering into an alliance first with the Syrians or Aramites, and then with the Assyrians in order to bring back the revolted tribes, and force them to a compliance, or else to root them out of the land;' it happens, that in both those cases the kings of Judah made those alliances, not to obtain dominion over Israel, but to defend themselves when invaded by Israel; as appears from the account given of Asa's alliance with the Syrians, 1 Kings xv. 17-19. And of Ahaz's alliance with the Assyrians, 2 Kings xvi. 5-9. And if those alliances, as he tells us, ended in the ruin both of Israel and Judah, the prophets are not chargeable with this, since they did not approve those alliances. And here, by the way, we may observe the great consistency of this writer, who p. 303, brings it as a charge against the prophets, that they weakened and destroyed their country by causing the kings that hearkened to their counsels to break all their alliances with the neighbouring nations, as not thinking it lawful to maintain any peace or friendship with idolaters and yet pp. 321, 322, represents it as owing to the counsels of the prophets that the kings of Judah entered into alliances with the Syrians and Assyrians; and that these politics of the prophets occasioned the destruction of Israel and

*

Judah; when the truth is, neither of these is fairly represented. For on the one hand, the prophets never advised or approved the alliances he speaks of with the Syrians and Assyrians; and on the other hand, they never absolutely condemned all alliances with foreign nations, nor urged them to break their alliances with them under pretence that they were idolaters. See in what strong terms the prophet Ezekiel represents the great guilt of king Zedekiah in breaking the oath and covenant he had made with the king of Babylon, and the judgments he denounces against him for it, Ezek. xvii. 12; see also 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13.

Thus have I gone through the author's long invective, the design of which is to represent the prophets as the great disturbers of their country, and the principal authors of all its miseries, and of its final ruin; and which for a mixture of false history, and malicious calumny, can hardly be paralleled.

CHAPTER XI.

His charge against the prophets that lived before the Assyrian captivity, that they de claimed only against idolatry, and not against the other vices and immoralities of the people. The falsehood of this shown. The excellent scheme of religion and morals taught by the ancient prophets. His pretence that the whole nation of the Jews from the time of Moses to Ezra were Sadducees or Deistical Materialists; and that they received the first notions of a future state from the Persian magi, examined. His account of the change introduced into the Jewish religion at that time shown to be groundless and absurd. A future state implied in the law, and all along believed among the people, and clearly intimated in the writings of the prophets. This proved from several passages.

THE remaining charges our pretended moral philosopher brings against the prophets will admit of an easy discussion. Though he represents it as the design of the prophetical institution to 'preach up moral righteousness,' and 'keep the people to the moral law,' yet he saith, that from David's rebellions,' as he calls it, to the Assyrian captivity, for the space of above three hundred and fifty years, it is wonderful to observe how little these ancient prophets declaimed against the vices and immoralities of the people.' And after having mentioned several heinous crimes and vices, he observes, that these are scarce taken notice of, and in the mean while, nothing in a manner is declared against but idolatry, and the necessity of fire and sword [urged] as the most proper and only effec

* See concerning this what hath been observed above, p. 84.

tual means of rooting it out.' He is pleased indeed to add, that 'after the Assyrian captivity the few prophets that were left talked in another strain; and urged the necessity of not only abstaining from idolatry, but of a true national repentance and a strict regard to the moral law, and no reliance upon sacrifices and priestly absolutions. See pp. 323, 324.

One would wonder with what front this writer could pretend to advance such an assertion as this: since it is impossible to look into the prophetical writings, and not be convinced that the same spirit every where appears in all the prophets that lived before and after the Assyrian captivity, the same zeal against vice and wickedness, the same concern for the honour of God, and the interest of true religion and moral goodness. Hosea, Amos, and Micah incontestably lived and prophesied before the destruction of Samaria, and the carrying away Israel captive by the Assyrians; and they all expressly foretold that destruction and captivity, and that as a punishment, not only for their idolatry, but for their other immoralities and wickedness. They particularly mention swearing, lying, injustice, cruelty, bribery, covetousness, oppression of the poor, luxury, drunkenness, whoredom, adultery, &c. for which they reprove them with a noble zeal and impartial freedom, without respect of persons, or flattering the great men more than the meanest of the people. And it is observable that they inveigh more frequently against their other vices and crimes than against their idolatry itself, particularly the prophets Amos and Micah do so. And they urge them in the most pathetical manner to the practice of universal righteousness, justice, mercy, &c. and let them know that without this their sacrifices would be of no avail, and expressly declare the preference of moral duties to mere ritual observances.* Nor do they once insist upon that which he represents as the only thing they urged, viz. the necessity of fire and sword as the only proper and effectual means of rooting out idolatry. That eminent prophet Isaiah prophesied many years before the Assyrian captivity, though he also continued to prophesy after it, and the same spirit every where appears in all his prophecies. Every where doth he strongly reprove sins and vices of all kinds, and exhorteth to real repentance, and universal righteousness and true holiness in the most noble, and solemn, and pathetical manner. This sufficiently shows with how little regard to truth or decency this writer ventures to charge the prophets that lived before the Assyrian captivity, as declaring against nothing but idolatry. I shall not mention the phets that lived after that time, particularly Jeremiah and Ezekiel, because the author himself owns, that they urged the necessity of a true national repentance, and a strict regard to the moral law. And indeed it is impossible there should be stronger declarations to this purpose, than are to be frequently met with in those pro

*

pro

* See for all this, Hos. iv. 1-3, 11; vi. 6, 8; vii. 1, 4, 5; x. 12; xii. 6. Amos ii. 6-8; iii. 10; iv. 1, 10—12; v. 14, 15, 21-24; vi. 5-6: viii. 4-8. Micah ii. 1, 2; iii. 2-4, 9—12; vi. 6-8, 10-13; vii. 2-6.

phetical writings. And yet afterwards, in the very same page where he seems to acquit the latter prophets of the charge he had advanced against the former, he really involves all the prophets in general in the same accusation. For he hath the confidence to tell us, that the principal cause of the great corruption of manners among the Jews after their return from the Babylonish captivity. was owing to this, that they had never been told before of any thing but idolatry, as the cause of all their miseries and calamities hitherto; and that all manner of vices and moral wickedness had been approved and justified in David their great pattern and exemplar,' p. 328. An assertion as false as any thing in his whole book, and I think I need say no worse of it.

It is in the same spirit of calumny that he represents the prophets as requiring only an external obedience to the moral law, without regarding the principle from which it proceeded, or whether it was free or forced,' p. 334. To this I need only oppose what he himself acknowledgeth, that it may be proved from innumerable testimonies out of the law and the prophets, that an inward spiritual principle of obedience as necessary to a state of true religion and virtue, was all along understood and insisted on during the legal economy,' p. 34. And whereas in the passage above cited he goes on to tell us, that mortification and self-denial, and a faith which can support men under adversity and above the world, an inward purity of the heart and affections, and the practice of universal benevolence and charity, moral truth, righteousness and peace with all men, from the prospect of immortality and a future state of spiritual happiness to be enjoyed with God and the angels; this is a religion which those holy men the Naioth prophets never understood or taught:' it is certain that no where is the necessity of an inward purity of the heart and affections, or of moral truth and righteousness more strongly inculcated than in those admirable writings, no where can be found nobler expressions of a lively faith and trust in God, even under the greatest afflictions and adversities, and of holy love to him, and zeal for his glory. A merciful, a kind and charitable disposition of mind towards our neighbour, is there also frequently urged as absolutely necessary to the character of a good man, and as an essential part of true religion. And when all people and nations are so often called upon to bless and praise the Lord, and to rejoice in him when so earnest a desire is frequently expressed, that God's way might be known upon earth, and his salvation unto all nations; when the happiness of the Messiah's kingdom is so often described by its being a state of universal benevolence and peace, and mutual good will among mankind, and Gentiles as well as Jews are represented as sharing in the glorious benefits of it; I cannot but think this discovers in the prophets, a spirit of extensive benevolence,

See the whole Iviii. chapter of Isaiah, Psal. xxxvii. 21, 26; cxii. 4; Hos. vi. 6; Mic. vi. 8; Dan. iv. 27; Zech. vii. 9.