ness, and treadeth upon the high places of the earth, The LORD "GOD of Hosts is his name."

66

Nahum with equal sublimity, describes the vengeance of God in terms applicable only to the general judgment on all the inhabitants of the earth. "He rebuketh the sea, and maketh it "dry, and drieth up all the rivers: Bashan languisheth, and "Carmel, and the flower of Lebanon languisheth. The moun"tains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burnt "at his presence; yea, the world, and all that dwell therein. "Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in "the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, "and the rocks are thrown down by him. The Lord is good"a strong hold in the day of trouble; and he knoweth them that "trust in him. But with an overrunning flood he will make an "utter end of the place thereof, and darkness shall pursue his "enemies."*

Finally, I close this series of prophetical denunciations of the great day of final retribution, with the distinct and awful description of it by the Prophet Daniel.

"I beheld," says the Prophet, "till the thrones were cast "down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was "white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool; "his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning "fire. A fiery stream issued, and came forth from before him; "thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand "times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, "and the books were opened." And again, "I saw in the night "visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the "clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they "brought him near before him. And there was given him do“minion and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting "dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that "which shall not be abolished."+

And at the conclusion of this wonderful and solemn prophecy, in the last chapter of Daniel; "And at that time shall Michael "stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people and there shall be a time of trouble, such as was 66 never since there was a nation, even to that time: and at that

66

:

* Nahum, i. 4-8

Dan. vii. 9, 10, and 13, 14.

"time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be "found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in "the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and "some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be "wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they "that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.”* Thus clearly do the Jewish Prophets promulgate that truth, so plainly declared by another inspired writer, who probably did not live under the Jewish dispensation, and who, at a much earlier period, proclaimed the same awful doctrine, even the Patriarch Job, who, with all the solemnity which its importance required, demands for it the attention of mankind, when he exclaims, "O that my words were now written, that they were printed in a book! that they were graven with an iron 66 pen and lead, in the rock for ever! For I know that my "Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth. And though after my skin worms destroy

66

66

Ibid. xii. 1-3.

† Job, xix. 23-27. That this passage of Job really means the redemption of the just at the last day, has been abundantly proved by many writers, in opposition not only to Warburton, but to Grotius and Le Clerc. Vide particularly the notes of the very learned Schultens, and of Peters. The ancient origin of the book has also, as appears to me, been abundantly proved by many writers, but by none more ably than by my learned friend Dr Magee, in his work on Atonement and Sacrifice. I think it unnecessary to dwell longer on this subject, the argument on which has already swelled far beyond my original intention. I would only remark, that notwithstanding his laboured dissertation, Warburton appears to have entertained some doubt, as to the validity of the proofs he had given of the modern date of this book. Since if this was certain, it was unnecessary for him to maintain, that this passage was to be understood only of a future temporal deliverance of the Jews. For nothing could justify such a forced interpretation, but the supposition that the author lived at a period when the idea of a future life had never been entertained, if such a period can be assigned. If, on the contrary, Job was written about the close of the Babylonish Captivity, as Warburton contends, it is quite certain, and even admitted by himself, that the ideas of a future life and retribution were then familiar to the Jews; and there would remain no possible reason for suspecting they were not familiar to and plainly expressed by the supposed author of the Book of Job.

Our translation introduces the word "worms" in this verse unnecessarily; it may be more closely and clearly translated, "And that even I, after my skin is "consumed, shall in my flesh behold my God." This is Houbigant's version, with which Schultens and Peters nearly agree.

I have been much gratified at finding that a very learned writer confirms the exposition I had given § of the expressions used by the Jewish lawgiver, in the Vile supra, p. 291.

"this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: whom I shall see "for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; "though my reins be consumed within me."

We have now traced the gradual promulgation of the great doctrine of a future retribution, from the first gracious intimation of final deliverance from the power of Satan, vouchsafed at the fall, to its full disclosure by David and Solomon, and its

history of the Creation, when he declared that God said, "Let us make man in our "own image, after our likeness: and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, "and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth." After clearly proving that this image included reason, which qualified man for that dominion with which he was vested, he proceeds to observe: "But now the substance in which "the faculty of reason resides, could not be a material substance, as the best philosophy " evinceth. Man, therefore, must needs consist of an immaterial substance, joined "to a material: or, in other words, he must be a compound of soul and body. And "this seems to be intimated, and not obscurely neither, by the words of the text: 'The "Lord God formed MAN of the DUST OF THE GROUND, and breathed into his nostrils "THE BREATH OF LIFE, and man became A LIVING SOUL.' By the words the breath "of life, and a living soul, which discriminate LIFE in man from LIFE in brutes, we "are not to understand immateriality simply; since all animals, as we say, have this "in common; but the CONTINUANCE of LIFE after the separation of the compound, in "virtue of man's rationality, which making him responsible for his actions, may, ac"cording to the different parts in God's moral economy, require that separate exis"tence."

The learned author afterward remarks, that "the place which points out this differ'ence, is made to serve for an introduction to the history of the free gift of immorta"lity. And a better cannot be conceived than that which teacheth us, that the "subject on whom this gift was bestowed, is by the immateriality of his physical "nature, capable of enjoying it; and, by the freedom of his reasonable nature, ac"countable for the abuse of it. So much is observed in honour of that exquisite "knowledge with which the sacred writer was endowed." The reader will perhaps be surprised as much as I was, at discovering that the learned writer now quoted is no other than WARBURTON HIMSELF; the identical Warburton who had so strenuously maintained that in all the writings of Moses not so much as an intelligible hint of a future state was to be found. The passage now quoted occurs in the ninth book of the Divine Legation, written many years after the first six, and which though printed, so far as it goes, by the author, was left unfinished, and not published until after his death. It is, however, not unfair to conclude, that hints of a future state which were unintelligible to him, while he saw only through the medium of his own system, became intelligible, as they must, I think, be to all others, when that mist was gradually removed. But while I make this remark, I am fully conscious of the possibility that variations and inconsistencies may be found in my own pages; though I sincerely hope truth is the great object of my pursuit. I therefore impute not to Warburton any deliberate neglect of that sacred principle, I would rather claim

Alluding to Clarke and Baxter.

+ Vide Vol. III. pp. 620 and 621 of Warburton's Works, in seven volumes 4to. printed 1788.

solemn enforcement and impressive description by the last prophets. And we are thus, I trust, fully prepared to receive and admit the clear truth and full force of our divine Lord's declaration, that the Jews derived the knowledge of this truth from the Scriptures of the Old Testament; when appealing to them for the prophetic attestation of his own divine mission, he calls on his hearers, "Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have "eternal life and they are they which testify of me." And though the disquisition which this inquiry has produced, has swelled to an unexpected length, I trust this will be excused, from its obvious tendency to vindicate the truth and illustrate the connexion of both revelations.

for him, as well as for myself, the old privilege of authors-"Opere in longo fas est "obrepere somnum."

I have not judged it necessary in this argument to notice particularly the different texts which Warburton brings to show, "That his conclusion may be proved, not only "from the silence of the sacred writers, but from their positive declarations; in which "they plainly discover, that there was no popular expectation of a future state or a "resurrection."* If the numerous passages alleged in this work to prove the contrary, are fairly interpreted, these positive declarations showing the expectation of a future state, cannot be done away by any texts from the same authors, which speak of death as the period of existence, or the grave as the land of forgetfulness, &c. &c.; for these all may be obviously and easily interpreted as meaning no more than that death closes our present state of existence, puts an end to our present projects, prevents us from declaring in the present world the faithfulness of God, &c. &c. ; or at the utmost, that so long as the state of death continues, until men are raised from the dead and called to judgment, they remain insensible,† an opinion held by many Christians. And in some instances these texts seem to be opinions which the sacred writers suppose pronounced by irreligious or atheistical objectors, and which they afterwards expressly refute; or vehement exclamations of recent sorrow reducing the mind almost to despair. It is worthy of remark, that the Sadducees‡ alleged the same texts to prove the same conclusion, yet our Lord charges them with not knowing the Scriptures; an assertion which surely should warn us against arguing from the Scriptures, in the same manner which they did. Nor is the declaration of St Paul less express, as to what he conceived to be the real tenor of the Law and the Prophets on this subject. "This," says he to Felix, "I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, worship I the "God of my fathers; believing all things which are written in the Law and the Pro"phets: and have hope towards God, which they themselves also allow, that there "shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. And herein do I "exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence both toward God and "toward men." Acts, xxiv. 14-16.

* Vide Div. Leg. Book v. Sect. v. Vol. iv. p. 353.

+ Vide the Appendix to Bishop Law's Theory of Religion.

* Vide Menasse Ben Israel, as quoted by the learned David Humphreys, in his Essay on the Notions of the Jews concerning the Resurrection, p. 89; in which the texts adduced by the Sadducees are quoted and considered.

LECTURE V.

EFFECTS OF JUDAISM ON THE GENTILES.

SECT. I. Objection to Judaism-First, from its being confined to a single nation— Secondly, from its implying mutability in God, as being opposed to Christianity. Answer to the first—Judaism not confined in its effects to one nation—but intended, through the instrumentality of the Jews, to enlighten mankind. This effect foreseen and attended to in the Jewish scheme. Various instances to show this. Solomon's prayer at the consecration of the temple establishes the same inference. The miracles wrought for the Jews made a strong impression on the Egyptians-On the Canaanites -On the Philistines-On the Heathens in the reign of Solomon-But counteracted by the principles of Idolatry-instanced in the history of the Samaritans-Who were however prepared by Judaism for Christianity. Effects produced by Judaism on the Heathens during the Captivity—Instanced in the history of Jeremiah-Of Daniel-Of his three friends-Of Belshazzar-Of Cyrus. These facts publicly attestedImportance of such attestations. Traces of these effects in the East. Traces of the same effects in the religion of Zoroaster-Of Mahomet. Recapitulation—Universal reformation not to be expected at that period of the world—Objection derived from partial effects of Judaism, erroneous in its statement of facts-Inconclusive in reasoning--d revelation not being universal, implies no injustice in God.

EXODUS, ix. 16.

"Aud in very deed for this cause have 1 raised thee up, for to show in thee my power; and that "my name may be declared throughout all the earth."

Ir yet remains to observe, that the Jewish system has been objected to, on grounds distinct from its immediate doctrines, or its direct effects upon the Jews themselves. First, as being partial;—wholly confined to one obscure and insignificant nation, and therefore unworthy of a divine interposition, and inadequate to that stupendous apparatus of miracles by which it is supposed to have been introduced. Secondly, as indicating a capricious mutability on the part of God, who (as those objectors affirm) first promulgated the Mosaic Law as of eternal obligation; and yet afterwards is supposed to have abrogated it, and introduced the different and even opposite system of Christianity.