We may here obferve the contradiction CHAP. of which Tacitus is guilty. In a subse- III.

be the God of the Jews, and the creator of heaven and earth. This deity is faid by them to have appeared to Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, and to have been eventually the cause of his death. The story is thus told by Epiphanius.

"Infinite in number are the lies broached by the Gnof"tics. To give a fingle instance among many others, they produce the following narrative, to account for the death " of Zechariah in the temple. A phantom appeared to him, "and deprived him of the power of fpeech, finding that "through fear he was about to defcribe his form to the "people. For he had seen, say they, at the hour of incenfe, "a man standing in the figure of an afs; and when he wished "to go out, and proclaim to the Jews the baseness of their "idolatry in paying religious adoration to fuch a being, he "was ftruck dumb by the apparition. Afterwards, when "his fpeech was reftored to him, he revealed the whole af"fair, and was flain by the enraged populace. Such, according to them, was the occafion of the death of Zecha"riah. And they add, that on this account Mofes com"manded the High Prieft to wear bells upon his garment, "that, as often as he entered into the holy of holies by vir"tue of his office, the deity, whom they worshipped, hearing "the found of the bells, might have time to withdraw, lest "the contemptibleness of his figure fhould be detected." Epiph. adv. Hæref. lib. i. Croius fupposes, that this notion arofe out of a perverfion of the incarnate Deity's riding into Jerufalem upon an afs. Spec. Conject. in Orig. Iren. &c. According to Celfus, one of the seven regents of the spheres, whom the Gnoftics conceived to be the creator of the world and the God of the Jews, is faid to have the face of an ass. ORIG. contra Celf. lib. vi.

VOL. I.

U

quent

SECT. quent chapter he tells us, that "the Jews "believe only in one God, and worship him

II.

intellectually, confidering those as profare, who represent him by images; inafmuch as he is a being fupreme and "eternal, immutable and unperishable; "therefore there are no images either in "their cities or in their temples'." But how can this be reconciled with his former affertion, that they confecrated the image of an afs, even within the walls of the holy of holies? It may perhaps be faid, that the Hiftorian would intimate, that it was placed there only out of gratitude, and not as an object of worship: this, however, is little to the purpose; for let it be confecrated in what fense it might, it certainly was, according to his account, placed in the temple. Nor does he contradict himself once only; in the course of a very few pages he informs us, that "Pompey was the first Roman who fubdued "the Jews, and who, claiming the right " of a conqueror, entered into the temple. "Hence a report was spread abroad, that "the fanctuary was found entirely empty,

Tacit. Hift. lib. v. c. 5.

• The word which he uses is penetrali.

" and

and without any image of the Gods." CHAP, Nay, the fame Author even tells us, that III. rather than they would fubmit to place a ftatue of Cefar in the temple, they took up arms". Thus we may judge of the probability of his former affertion, that they voluntarily placed the image of an afs there.

Another of the grofs falfehoods maintained by Tacitus is, that the Jews reached their own country in fix days; from which circumftance he afterwards infinuates, that they reverenced the feventh as a day of reft. Their abstinence from the flesh of swine he attributes to the liability of that animal to the diforder, on account of which they were expelled from Egypt".

t Tacit. Hift. c. ix.

In this affertion, however, the Roman Hiftorian is perfectly accurate; for, as it may be inferred from the writings of Philo and Jofephus, the fanctuary of the second temple was literally empty; the use of the cherubic emblems, which formed fo confpicuous a part of the furniture of the first, having been totally discontinued after the return from the Babylonian captivity. See Lord Pref. Forbes's Works, vol. i.

p. 190.

"Tacit. Hift. c. ix.

* Ibid. c. iii, and iv.

y Ibid. c. iv.

U 2

Thefe

SECT.

II.

These remarks may perhaps be fufficient to fhew, that there is no reason, why Tacitus fhould be permitted to bear triumphantly away the palm of authenticity from Mofes. The refult of the whole is, that as the miracles, which the Jewish Legiflator is faid to have wrought, could be neither a deception of the imagination ; nor trifies exaggerated; nor the operation of an evil fpirit; they must have been produced by the divine agency: and if fuch was their origin, Mofes, as a delegate of heaven, could not have had any intention to dedeceive his followers.

CHAP.

CHA P. IV.

APPLICATION OF THE THIRD RULE. 111. THE DOCUMENTS, WHICH CONTAIN THE LAW, ARE AUTHENTIC, AND WERE WRITTEN ABOUT THE TIME, WHEN THE FACTS THERE RELATED HAPPENED. I. IF THEY WERE NOT WRITTEN BY MOSES, BUT BY SOME OTHER PERSON, THEY MUST EITHER HAVE BEEN BUILT UPON SOME HISTORY UNIVERSALLY RECEIVED AS AUTHENTIC, OR 2. UPON SOME TRADITION UNIVERSALLY CONSIDERED AS FABULOUS, OR 3. THEY MUST HAVE BEEN ENTIRELY THE INVENTION OF AN IMPÓSTOR. HOW FAR A CORRUPTION OF THE TEXT, SO AS TO ALTER THE NARRATIVE OF FACTS, IS PROBABLE.

THE argument has hitherto been carried on merely hypothetically. Suppofing the Scripture-account to be true, and arguing from it, as from any other history, Mofes neither could have been deceived himself, nor could he have had any defign to deceive others. It will now be neceffary to fhew, that fuch account is true, or in other words, that the Mofaical difpenfation

U 3