Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

66

66

[ocr errors]

"idolatrous superstitions, we do behold among the Jews, and for a "succession, not of years, but of centuries, a portion of intellect, "irradiated no doubt by the Supreme Intelligence, continually at work "to prove the being, and to preserve the awful consciousness of ONE ONLY FIRST CAUSE: this seems to prove, that the Jews were to be "instrumental in promoting some beneficent plans of the moral Gover << nor of the world, in a way which no other people were." This is certainly a candid admission of very important truth; and I again most seriously request these critics to consider, how utterly inconsistent this fact is with the hypothesis of Mr. De Wette, which they also appear to adopt, that the books ascribed to Moses, which contain that system of laws and institutions by which the Jews were rendered instrumental in preserving the knowledge of the ONLY TRUE GOD, "are tracts between which there is neither harmony nor connexion; that the narra"tion of facts in these books proves itself (in many most important "points) untrue, by its ambiguity and equivocation. That there are 66 parts of the old Jewish fabric, which have nothing to do with Chris"tianity, but are clumsy and superfluous out-buildings; that the cere"monial part of the law is a fugitive contrivance, the work of human "artifice, or little more-the prophecies ambiguous oracles or equivo“cal predictions," &c. &c. It were indeed most wonderful and astonishing if these were the means which Providence employed to preserve the knowledge of the ONE TRUE GOD, in the midst of an idolatrous world. Our critics will, I trust, reconsider these points, and hereafter adapt their opinions with somewhat more care to the truth of history, the analogy of nature, and the harmony of the divine dispensations. At all events the reasoning and serious part of their readers will learn what degree of credit they ought to attach to such opinions, and such criticism, on the most important subject that can occupy the human mind—the examination of the divine word, the discovery of the divine will, and the development of the divine dispensations; and I submit the admonition of the learned, candid, and pious Doddridge to the consideration of the Critical Reviewers; it occurs in his 143d Lecture, Sect. 18. "We may certainly infer, that for any one to pre"tend to exalt the character of Christ and of Paul. as divine teachers, “while at the same time they pour contempt upon the Jewish institu“tions as a foolish and impious forgery, is a notorious contradiction “and absurdity; and common sense will teach us, that such authors, "whatever they may profess, do equally intend the subversion of the "Old Testament and the New."

465

SECTION II.

Remarks on some circumstances which have occasioned doubts as to the reality of some of the Mosaic miracles-General remarks on the improbability of objections which affect only some one miracle, not the entire series-Miracles in which the magicians appeared to imitate Moses; Mr. Farmer's opinion on this subject, and the arguments by which he supports it-The passage of the Red Sea attempted to be accounted for without a miracle, from a passage of Josephus-true import of this passage-supplies no evidence against the miracle—it is represented by Moses, and was believed by the Jews to be clearly miraculous—inference from thence—improbability of the Jews being able to escape by an extraordinary ebb of the sea-Dr. Geddes's observations on this subject—The pillar of cloud and fire which accompanied the Israelites-attempted to be accounted for without a miracle-account entirely inconsistent with the circumstances of the history, and with probability-Objection, from Moses's application to Hobab-inconclusive-Miraculous preservation of the raiment of the Jews in the wilderness-objected to—why necessary-Review of the mode in which Dr. Geddes accounts for the whole series of Mosaic miracles, without admitting any supernatural interposition-his account unphilosophic and incredible.

In the preceding Work, Part I. Lect VI. I have adduced such arguments as appear to me to prove satisfactorily, that the whole series of the Mosaic miracles is established by the clearest evidence; and if these arguments are conclusive, it may seem unnecessary to enter into any refutation of such objections as are raised, not against the reality of the entire series of miraculous interpositions, or the general truth of the history of the Mosaic miracles, but against some minute circumstances of them, some individual instances of supernatural interference; for, admitting any miraculous power to have clearly manifested itself on the occasion, and for the purposes recorded by Moses, the exercise of that power on the particular instances alluded to, becomes perfectly credible. In this case, the remark which Bishop Butler makes as to our Saviour, is strictly applicable to Moses. "Supposing it," says he, " acknowledged, that our Saviour, (or that the Jewish lawgiver) spent some years in a course of working miracles: there is no more pre"sumption, worth mentioning, against his having exerted this miracu"lous power, in a certain degree greater, than in a certain degree less; " in one or two more instances, than in one or two fewer; in this, than "in another manner."* Nay, I may add, that the supposition of some particular facts, recorded as miraculous, being frauds and delusions, becomes improbable, in proportion as it is improbable either

[ocr errors]

* Analogy, Part II. Ch. II. p. 242.

that fraud should be practised to effect some parts of a system, by a messenger empowered to establish the remaining parts of it by miracles; or that delusion and error should be permitted to blend with and debase (even at its first introduction) a scheme evidently supported by a divine interference.

These considerations might, I conceive, justify me in omitting to notice the objections and doubts raised as to some particulars of the Mosaic miracles; but as this might seem to cut the knot, rather than to untie it, I will proceed to consider such as appear to be of any serious importance. They regard, as far as I can find, the miracles of Moses which the Egyptian magicians appeared to imitate the passage of the Red Sea-the pillar of the cloud and fire that accompanied and directed the Israelites in their journeyings-and, the preservation of the raiment of the Jews during their abode in the wilderness, recorded Deut. viii. 4. On each of them I shall beg leave to offer a few remarks.

The circumstance of the magicians of Egypt having appeared to imitate some of the miracles performed by Moses-has by some writers been considered such as to discredit the entire history of the Mosaic miracles; Dr. Geddes, amongst others, observes, "We are now come “ to the famous plagues of Egypt, the prelude to which, in my opinion, warns us to beware of implicit credulity, and greatly weakens the "literal credibility of all that follows."* Let us consider how justly.

66

On this subject, after the best consideration I can give it, I cannot avoid adopting the opinion of the able and learned Mr. Hugh Farmer, in his Treatise on Miracles. + I do not believe that any real miracle, or such an exertion of power or foresight, more than human, and producing effects different from or contrary to the established course of nature, was ever performed, but by the direct interposition of God, or of such beings as act by his immediate power and commission. And I am also with him persuaded, that the magicians did not perform works really supernatural, nor were assisted by any superior invincible being; but were merely impostors attempting to imitate the real miracles of Moses by secret sleights or jugglings; which to a certain degree, and in a small extent, they succeeded in doing, so as to deceive the spectators, until at length, unable any longer to imitate the effects of divine power, and feeling in their own persons its chastisement, they were compelled to confess, "this is the finger of God;" and thus to give glory to God before Pharaoh and his servants, and to evince the futility of their own boasted magical arts, and the impotence of those base idols, and those invisible spirits or demons, on whose aid they relied, more clearly and convincingly than if they had never entered into the competition, or had not been permitted to succeed to such a degree, as proved that they had exercised freely and fully whatever arts or power they possessed, and had carried them to their greatest extent; but yet were baffled and overcome by the resistless power of Jehovah, their impos

* Critical Remarks on Exod. vii. 5. p. 131.

+ Vide Farmer's Dissertation on Miracles, ch. iv. sect. 1, p. 409.

ture detected, and their impious arrogance chastised. So that we can thus assign a probable account for the Deity's having selected such a kind of miracle, in the first instance, as might encourage the magicians to attempt its imitation, and for his permitting them to succeed in that, and even in a second or third attempt, because thus the Divine Power was ultimately more clearly manifested, and the imposture of magic, as well as the absurdity of idolatry more decidedly exposed.

Such appears to me to be the true account of this transaction; the distinct parts of which the able writer to whom I have referred has, as I conceive, fully established. I will exhibit his most important observations in as brief a form as is consistent with being intelligible, referring my more curious readers to the work itself, the perusal of which will, I think, amply recompense them, by the learning and judgment it displays, and the truths which it developes. I think it unnecessary to detail the various hypotheses employed by different commentators and divines to explain this part of Scripture history, as they have been fairly weighed, and, as I think, confuted by this able writer, whose opinion I adopt.*

[ocr errors]

"To this account," says Farmer,† "it may be objected, that Moses "describes the works of the magicians in the very same language as he "does his own, and therefore that there is reason to conclude that they were equally miraculous. To which I answer, that if this were so, "yet nothing is more common than to speak of professed jugglers, as "doing what they pretend and appear to do, and that this language "never misleads, when we reflect what sort of men are spoken of, namely, mere imposers on the sight; why might not Moses then use "the common popular language when speaking of the magicians, with"out any danger of misconstruction, inasmuch as the subject he was "treating, all the circumstances of the narrative, and the opinion "which the historian was known to entertain of the inefficacy and "imposture of magic, did all concur to prevent mistakes?

[ocr errors]

"But, secondly, Moses did not affirm that there was a perfect con"formity between his works and those of the magicians; he does not "close the respective relations of his own particular miracles, with "saying the magicians did that thing,|| or, according to what he did so "did they,§ a form of speech used on this occasion no less than three "times in one chapter, to describe the exact correspondence between "the orders of God, and the behaviour of his servants; but makes "choice of a word of great latitude, such as does not necessarily express any thing more than a general similitude, such as is consistent "with a difference in many important respects, they did so or in like manner as he had.-That a perfect imitation could not be designed

66

*Farmer, from page 409 to 449.

Ibid. page 449.

"When Moses describes what the magicians pretended, and seemed to perform, by saying they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents, and they brought up frogs upon the land of "Egypt; he only uses the same language as Apuleius (Metam. I. 1.) where, describing a person who "merely played juggling tricks-Circulatorem aspexi equestrem spatham præacutam Mucrone infesto "devorasse ac mox eundem venatoriam lanceam-in ima viscera condidisse."

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

by this word, is evident from its being applied to cases in which such an imitation was absolutely impracticable; for, when Aaron had "converted all the waters of Egypt into blood, we are told the magi. "cians did so, that is, something in like sort. Nor can it be sup "posed that they covered the land of Egypt with frogs, this had been "done already; they could only appear to bring them over some small space cleared for the purpose. But what is more decisive, the word "imports nothing more than their attempting some imitation of Moses, "for it is used when they FAILED IN THEIR ATTEMPT: They did so "to bring forth lice, but they could not.+

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

Thirdly. But further, so far is Moses from ascribing the tricks "of the magicians to the invocation and power of demons, or to any superior beings whatever, that he does most expressly refer all they "did or attempted in imitation of himself, to mere human artifice and imposture. The original words, which are translated ‡ enchantments, are entirely different from that rendered enchantments in other passages of Scripture, and do not carry in them any sort of reference to sorcery or magic, or the interposition of any spiritual agents; they "import deception and concealment, and ought to have been rendered "secret sleights or jugglings, and are thus translated even by those "who adopt the common hypothesis with regard to the magicians. § "These secret sleights and jugglings are expressly referred to the magicians, not to the devil, who is not so much as mentioned in the history. Should we therefore be asked, || How it came to pass, in case the works of the magicians were performed by sleight of hand, "that Moses has given no hint thereof? we answer, He has not con"tented himself with a hint of this kind, but, at the same time that "he ascribes his own miracles to Jehovah, he has in the most direct "terms resolved every thing done in imitation of them entirely to the "fraudulent contrivances of his opposers, to legerdemain or sleight of "hand, in contradiction from magical incantations. Moses, therefore,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"Vide in Exod. vii. 20 and 22."

+"Exod. viii. 18. Le Clerc observes, Nec raro Hebræi ad conatum notandum verbisutuntur quæ rem effectam significant Gen. xxxvii. 21, Consult him likewise on Exod. vii. 18. ch. 12, 48. p. 66,2." "The original word used Exod. vii. 11, is 'n belah atehem; and that which occurs “ch. vii. 22. and ch. viii. 7, 18, is a belatehem; the former is probably derived from

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

lahat, which signifies to burn, and the substantive a flame or shining sword-blade, and is "applied to the flaming sword which guarded the tree of life, Gen. iii. 24. Those who formerly used "legerdemain, dazzled and deceived the sight of spectators by the art of brandishing their swords, "and sometimes seemed to eat them and to thrust them into their bodies; and the expression seems "to intimate, that the magicians appearing to turn their rods into serpents, was owing to their " eluding the eyes of the spectators by a dextrous management of their swords. In the preceding “instances they made use of some different contrivance, for the latter word, belatehem, comes from U or to cover or hide (which some think the former word also does) and therefore fitly expresses any secret artifices or methods of deception whereby false appearances are imposed upon the spectator."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"Bishop Kidder on Exod. vii. 11."

"As we are by Dr, Macknight, in his Truth of the Gospel History, p. 372."

« ZurückWeiter »