καὶ τὰς Δαίμονας θεραπεύειν ὅτι οὐκ οἷόνε δελεύειν τὸν αὐτὸν πλείοσι κυρίοις. Τέτο δ ̓, ὡς οἴεται ΣΤΑΣΕΩΣ εἶναι ΦΩΝΗΝ, τῶν ὡς αὐτὸς ὠνόμασεν) αποτειχιζόντων ἑαυ]ὲς καὶ ἀποῤῥηγνύντων ἀπὸ τῶν λοιπῶν ἀνθρώπων. Orig. cont Cels. p. 380.

Δεν

P. 129. [K] In his Tract against Apion he has these remarkable words: It is becoming Men of prudence and moderation carefully to observe their own Country Laws concerning Religious matters, and to avoid calumniating the customs of others. But this Man [Apion] abandoned his own Religion, and has since employed himself in inventing lies of ours. γὰρ τὰς εὐφρονᾶνας τοῖς μὲν οἰκείοις νόμοις περὶ τὴν εὐσέβειαν ἀκριβῶς ἐμμένειν, τὲς δὲ τῶν ἄλλων μὴ λοιδορεῖν· ὁ δὲ τέτες μὲν ἔφυγε, τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ κατεψεύσατο. Vol. ii. p. 480. This was carrying his complaisance to the Gentiles extremely far. But the necessity was pressing; and he misses no opportunity of conciliating their goodwill. Thus in his Antiquities, a work, as we observed, entirely apologetical, he tells the Reader, 1. iii. c. 6. that the seven branches of the golden Candlestick signified the seven Planets. But in his Wars of the Jews, 1. vii. c. 5. § 5. he assures us they signify the Reverence in which the Jews held the Number Seven. But, Allegory for Allegory, he thought, I suppose, one as good as the other, and therefore might be allowed to use what best served his occasions.

P. 129. [L] The Jews succeeded in their endeavours to distinguish Their case from the Christians. So that while the storm fell upon the latter, the other enjoyed a calm. As we may fully understand by that passage in St. Paul to the Galatians; As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised, only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. c.vi. ver. 12. Ön which Limborch observes very justly,-Qui non zelo pietatis, aut pro lege Mosis, moti id urgebant; sed tantum ut .. placerent

placerent Judæis; quia nempe videbant persecutiones quotidie magis magisque Christianis a Gentibus inferri, Judæos autem ab illis esse immunes, hac ratione eas, tanquam ipsi essent Judæi, studuerunt declinare. Amic. Collatio, p.164.

66

P. 130. [M] "There is, amongst many other

things that Josephus's copy appears to want, one "omission of so important a nature--the heinous "Sin of the golden Calf.-What makes it stranger is "this, that Josephus's account is not only negative, by a bare omission, but positive, by affording an exact coherence without it, nay such a coherence as "is plainly inconsistent with it. And what still "makes it more surprising is, that Josephus frequently professes, neither to add to nor to take away from "the sacred Books." Dissert. II. p. xlv. Some other Liberties, which Josephus took with Scripture for the end above explained, made this learned Writer conclude that the Historian had an earlier and more uncorrupt copy of the Old Testament than any we now have: for that his accounts are more exact, consistent, and agreeable with Chronology, with natural Religion, and with one another. p. xxxv. Yet, after all, the fatal omission of the golden Calf brings him to confess, that Josephus's copy appears to WANT many things which are in ours. p. xlv. Thus sorely distressed is this good man in the support of a wild extravagant hypothesis; while every one else secs that all the omissions and alterations (which sometimes make his copy good, sometimes bed) were designeɖ deviations from the sacred Volumes to conciliate the good-will of his masters.

P. 135. [N] Here Dr. Sykes appears again upon the stage. "The Scripture representation of the "Theocracy, as Mr. Warburton (says he) assures us, was, 1. Over the State in general: and 2. Over private Men in particular. I have no doubts about

66

$ 2

"the

"the former of these cases: For where a law was

given by God, and he condescended to become

King of a Nation, and a solemn Covenant was en"tered into by the People and by God, as their King, "and where blessings were solemnly promised upon "obedience to the Law, or curses were denounced

66

upon disobedience: and this by one who was able "to execute whatever he engaged; no doubt can be "about the reciprocal obligations, or about God's performing his part of the obligation, since it is his property not to lie nor deceive. Temporal Re"wards and Punishments being then the sanction of "the Jewish Law, these must be dispensed by God "so as to make the State happy and flourishing if

66

46

they keep the Law, or else miserable if they dis"obeyed it. The Blessings and Curses were general "and national, agrecable to the character of a King, " and a legal Administration: such as related to them as a People; and not to particular persons." [Exam. of Mr.W.'s Account, &c. pp. 186, 187.]

66

Here, he assures us, he has no doubts about the extraordinary Providence over the State in general. And he tells us his reason, Because the Law was given by God, and he condescended to become the KING of the Nation, by a solemn Covenant made with the People. Now if this very reason be found to hold equally strong for an extraordinary Providence over PARTICULARS, the point will be soon decided between us. Let me ask him, then, what those reasons are whereby he infers that, from God's becoming King of a Nation, he must administer an extraordinary Providence over the State in general, which do not equally conclude for God's administering it over Particulars? Is not bis inference founded upon this, That where God condescends to assume a civil character, he condescends to administer it in a civil manner? which is done by extending his care over the whole. If our Doctor should say, his inference is not thus founded; I must then beg leave to tell

him, that he has no foundation at all to conclude from God's being King, that there was an extraordinary Providence exerted over the State in general. If he confesses that it is thus founded; then I infer, upon the same grounds, an extraordinary Providence over Particulars. For the justice of the Regal office is equally pledged to extend its care to Particulars as well as to the general. It may be asked then, what hindered our Doctor from seeing so self-evident a truth? I reply, the mistake with which he first set out; and which yet sticks to him. I have observed before, what confusion he ran into by not being able to distinguish between the Form of Government and the Administration of it. Here again he makes the same blind work, from not seeing the difference between a LEGISLATOR and a KING.-For where a LAW (says he) was given by God, and he condescended to become the KING of a Nation, &c. implying that in his opinion, the giving a Law, and the becoming a King, was one and the same thing. Hence it was, that as the Legislative power, in the institution of good Laws, extends its providence only over the State in general, he concluded, that the executive power, in the administration of those Laws, does no more. Which brings him to a conclusion altogether worthy both of himself and his premises.-The Blessings and Curses (says he) were general and national, agreeable to the character of a King and a legal Administration.— What! Is it only agreeable to the character of a King and a legal Administration to take care of the State in general, and not of Particulars? So, according to this new system of Policy, it is agreeable to the Constitution of England to fit out fleets, to protect the public from insults, and to enact Laws to encourage commerce; but not to erect Courts of Equity, or to send about itinerant Judges.

What

makes his ignorance in this matter the more inexcusable is, that I had pointed out to him this distinction, in the following passage; the former part of which

he has quoted, but dropt the latter, as if determined

that neither himself nor his reader should be the better for it. My words are these: It [the extraordinary Providence] is represented as administered, 1. Over the State in general. 2. Over private men in particular. And such a representation we should expect to find from the nature of the Republic; BECAUSE AS AN EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE OVER THE STATE NECESSARILY FOLLOWS GOD'S BEING THEIR TUTELARY DEITY [in which capacity he gave them Laws], SO AN EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE TO PAR

TICULARS FOLLOWS AS NECESSARILY FROM HIS

BEING THEIR SUPREME MAGISTRATE capacity he administered them].

[in which

P. 136. [O] To this it has been objected, "That "Solomon here prays for scarce so much in behalf of "his own People, as he doth, ver. 32, for every "stranger that shal! come and worship in the Tem"ple." But the Objector should have observed that there is this difference,--the prayer for the Israelites was founded on a Covenant; the prayer for the Stranger, on no Covenant. That for the Israelites begins thus, O Lord God of Israel, there is no God like thee, which KEEPETH COVENANT--and as he proceeds, the reason of his petition all along goes upon their being possessors of the promised Land, the great object of the Covenant, ver. 25-27-31. But the prayer for the Stranger, ver. 32, is founded altogether on another principle, namely, for the sake of God's glory amongst the heathen. Moreover concerning the Stranger [words implying a new consideration] if they come and pray in this house, then hear from the Heavens-THAT ALL PEOPLE OF THE EARTH MAY KNOW THY NAME AND FEAR THEE.

P. 136. [P] But the whole book of Psalms is one continued declaration of the administration of an extraordinary Providence to particulars, in the exact distribution