66

66

66

"he) their opinions are directly opposite: the Egyptians set up "and adore a number of animals and graven images; the Jews "conceive the Divinity as one, and to be understood only by "the mind: they deem those profane, who form any images of "the gods, of perishable materials, and after the likeness of men the Divinity they describe as supreme, eternal, unchangeable, imperishable; hence there are no images in their "cities or their temples: with these they would not flatter 'kings, or honour Cæsars." How illustrious this testimony; how strange that this sagacious historian could not perceive how grossly he contradicted himself, when, notwithstanding this, he countenanced the vulgar calumny of an ass's head having been found in the most holy place; and when afterwards, comparing the Jewish rites with those of Bacchus, he speaks of these as festive and cheerful, while he brands the religion of the Jews as sordid and absurd. Thus necessary was the authority of an acknowledged Revelation to give the truths of religion, even amongst the most enlightened heathens, their due weight and practical influence. Thus decided was the contrast between not only the general principles of Judaism and idolatry, but also the particular rites of each-a contrast by which the Jewish Ritual so effectually contributed to the end for which it was originally designed, even to serve as a partition-wall to separate the chosen people of God from the surrounding nations, and form a barrier against the corruptions of heathenism—a purpose with which the supposition, that it borrowed and consecrated many of these rites and practices, appears to be entirely inconsistent.

The evidence on which this supposition is founded, has been proved to be as inconclusive as the supposition itself appears to e improbable. Witsius* has shown, with a clearness which renders it altogether unnecessary to discuss the subject afresh, that the authors on whose testimony the superior antiquity of the Egyptian religion has been maintained, and who have asserted or supposed that the Mosaic Law derived from this source many of its principles and rites, lived so long after the facts,

• Witsii Ægyptiaca, Lib. III. cap. i.; this examines the credibility of the authors relied upon by Spencer, cap. ii iii. iv. and v.; adduces the testimony of antiquity in proof that Heathenism borrowed from Judaism, not Judaism from Heathenism; which he establishes in a variety of instances, and by very strong Proofs

were so grossly ignorant of the Jewish history and system, so rash or so prejudiced, that their testimony can have no authority to obtain credit, not merely, as he expresses it, with a strict in vestigator of antiquity, but "even with any man of plain sense " and moderate erudition."* In truth, the fancied resemblance between the rites of Judaism and idolatry amounts to little more than this, that in both were priests, temples, altars, sacrifices, festivals, calculated to catch the attention, captivate the senses, and engage the imaginations of the worshippers by their splendour or their solemnity. But we have sufficiently proved that these were all directed to opposite objects of worship—the former to the one supreme God, the latter to the basest idols. And as the objects of worship, so the rites employed, we have seen, were designedly contrasted: and, so far from imitating idolatrous practices, that any thing similar to such was strictly forbidden, even in particulars of themselves clearly innocent; as in wor shipping in groves or on high places.

Should it be asked, why should an inspired Lawgiver, instead of a simple and purely spiritual worship, adopt a Ritual, thus, in the variety and the splendour attending it, bearing even a remote resemblance to the more gross inventions of idolatry? it may be answered; that the Jewish Ritual, with its temple, its festivals, its priests, its sacrifices, its distinctions of food, its purifications, &c. &c. not only served as a barrier against ido latry, but contributed to give the true religion dignity and at *raction in the estimation both of strangers and of the Jews themselves. It marked out the Hebrew nation as a holy people, a nation of priests to Jehovah their God and King: it attached them to their religion by the habitual association of festive rites, of national exaltation and prosperity; it engaged their imagination and their senses, made them feel the necessity of circumspection and purity when they approached the presence of God, and by all these means formed some counterpoise to the seductions of idolatry. On this subject Josephus well observes,† "All our actions and studies, and all our words, in Moses's set"tlement, have a reference to piety towards God; for he hath "left none of these things in suspense or undetermined. For "there are two sorts of ways of coming at any kind of learn Witsius, Lib. III. cap. i. sect. 2.

Joseph. contra Apion. Lib. II. sect. 17 and 18.

66

66

66

66

66

ing, and a moral conduct of life: the one is by instruction in "words, the other by practical exercises." He then observes, "the Lacedæmonians and Cretans taught by practical exercise, "and not by words; that the Athenians and the other Grecians "made laws, but had no regard to exercising them in practice. "But for our legislator (says he) he very carefully joined these "two methods of instruction together, for he neither left these practical exercises to go on without verbal instruction, nor did "he permit the hearing of the Law to proceed without the ex"ercise for practice; but beginning immediately from the ear"liest infancy, and the appointment of every one's diet, he left "nothing of the smallest consequence to be done at the pleasure "and disposal of the person himself. Accordingly he made a "fixed rule of Law, what sorts of food they should abstain from, and what they should make use of; as also, what com"munion they should have with others, what great diligence they should use in their occupations, and what times of rest "should be interposed, &c. And he demonstrated the Law to "be the best and the most necessary instruction of all others, permitting the people to leave off their other employments, "and to assemble together for the hearing of the Law, and learning it exactly; and this not once or twice, or oftener, "but every week; which thing all the other legislators seem to "have neglected." It is further to be remarked, that the appointment of the tabernacles first, and of the temple afterwards, as the sanctuary where Jehovah the God and King of Israel would manifest his presence by a visible display of his glory, and give answers to the public and solemn applications, made through the high-priest, to discover the will of this the supreme Sovereign of the Hebrew nation, gave rise to many peculiarities of the Jewish Ritual. Hence the solemn worship of the whole church was to be directed to that place where Jehovah dwelt: and it was therefore declared unlawful, by this Ritual, to have any altar, or to offer any sacrifice, but before this presence, in honour of which the Ritual appoints the magnificence of the temple, of the holy and most holy place, and the religious respect with which they were to be approached. For the same reason the Ritual appoints so many priests as servants to attend on the presence, and to minister before the Lord Jehovah, who were to be invested in their sacred office by many solemn rites

66

of consecration, and distinguished by a peculiar and splendid dress. This honour, continues Lowman, which ought to distinguish Jehovah as above all gods, in the perfections of his nature and supreme authority, is further well expressed by the whole ceremonial of the sacrificial rites: whether we consider the things that were to be offered, or the persons who were to offer them,—the several kinds of sacrifices, whole burnt-offerings, peace-offerings, sin and trespass-offerings, which were to honour God as the supreme governor of the world, as forgiving iniquities, transgressions, and sins, as the author of all blessings, spiritual and temporal. These are plainly designed to give unto Jehovah, as their God, the glory due unto his name. Thus all the ritual holiness is manifestly designed for the same end, that 'they might be an holy people, as their God was an holy God."+ Hence the Ritual distinctions of unclean foods and of several pollutions, as well as the ritual purifications after legal uncleanness, expressed a due honour to the presence of Jehovah; constantly representing how fit, how becoming it was, for those who were honoured with the nearest approach to this presence, to keep themselves pure, purged from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, that they might honourably serve so pure and so holy a God.

I will close my remarks on this subject, by removing a very ill-grounded prejudice, too frequently entertained, against the Jewish Ritual as a system intolerably burthensome. I observe, with Lowman, that it is the ritual of a national, and not a personal worship. The whole worship of the Hebrew church, in their sacrifices and festivals, was fixed to the one temple and one altar, at the place where Jehovah dwelt; and it was absolutely forbid upon any pretence to offer any sacrifice on any occasion, but before the Divine Presence or the Shechinah. It was not, then, directed as personal, or as a family worship, or as more public in their towns or cities, throughout their whole land. So great reason there is, to distinguish between their synagogue and their temple worship. As to the general form of devotion, it seems to have been provided for by dispersing the Levites through every part of the Hebrew territory, in order to "teach * Vide Lowman on the Hebrew Worship, p. 253.

+ Vide Levit. xi. 44 and 45; and many other passages Lowman on the Hebrew Worship, p. 203

Jacob the judgments, and Israel the law of their God;"* by setting apart the Sabbath for a day of holy rest, when they might receive public instruction, and meet for the purposes of public prayer; and when both in public and in private they would have leisure to fulfil the strict injunction of their God, not only to keep his laws in their heart, but-" thou shalt teach them dili"gently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou "sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and "when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." But the particular mode of doing this, the methods of diffusing religious knowledge, as well as for prayers and praises in their synagogues, seem to have been left to the ancient customs of the patriarchal religion, and to be directed by the common rules of reason and discretion. For the Ritual gave no other directions about them, than those general ones above stated; and we know that the mode of worship adopted in the Jewish synagogues, subsequent to the captivity, differed but little from the present worship of Christian assemblies, for it consisted of three parts, reading the Scriptures, prayers, and preaching. But the ritual of the temple worship was only to be used personally, when the Jews were to appear before the presence of Jehovah. In this view, all objections against the Jewish Ritual as personally burthensome, tedious, or expensive, evidently appears to be wholly founded in ignorance and error. While as a system of national worship, it was most wisely adapted to the great designs of the Jewish economy, even to preserve the Law, and the worship of the great Jehovah, in the Jewish race, and to prepare the way for the promised MESSIAH, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed.

• Deut. xxxiii. 10.

† Ib. vi. 7.