صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

SECT. I.-Objection against the reality of the Mosaic miracles de-

rived from the frequent idolatries of the Jews, invalid-These

idolatries did not prove any doubt of the divine original of the

Mosaic Law-First species of idolatry by forbidden symbols,

&c. Whence so frequent-Implied acknowledgment of Jeho-

vah-Second species of idolatrous worship, in forbidden places,

and with idolatrous rites, implied the same-Third species, wor-

ship of idols with Jehovah-Whence-Fourth, worship of idols

without God-Yet not an absolute denial of God, or rejection

of his worship-Defects and apostasies of the Jews confirm the

certainty of a divine interposition, rather than weaken it-Ob-

jection against the divine economy, from the temptations they

were exposed to, unreasonable Residence of Jews in Egypt

considered-And the temptations from the surrounding Canaan-

ites-Degree and duration of the divine interposition suited to

the analogy of nature-Mr. Gibbon accuses the Jews, falsely,

of being indifferent spectators of the most amazing miracles.

SECT. II. The conduct of the Jews, subsequent to the death of

Joshua, is not inconsistent with the divine original of the Mosaic

Law-Situation of the Jews under their judges, adapted to the

purposes of the divine economy-Expediency of placing them

in this situation-Severity of the punishment inflicted by Pro-

vidence for their offences, no valid objection-Establishment of

the kingly government a confirmation of the authenticity of the

Pentateuch-Why desired by the people-Why permitted by

God-Theocracy preserved under the kings-Illustrates the na-

ture of the divine control over the Jews-And of the Jewish

character-Both shew the credibility of the Jewish idolatries,

notwithstanding the divine original of the Mosaic Law-Sepa-

ration of the ten tribes an apparent objection-Its origin-Ido-

latry of Solomon-Inference from it as to the idolatries of the

Jews-Separation of the two kingdoms, why expedient-How

SECT. I. Objections against the Mosaic Law, from its employing

temporal sanctions-And visiting the iniquities of the fathers on

the children-WARBURTON'S opinion on this subject-His work

incomplete his reasoning not perfectly conclusive-How far I

agree with, and how far I differ from, his opinion-Two conclu-

sions seem true: first, that Moses employed temporal sanctions

in his Law; second, the history of the Old Testament shews

he believed a future state, and contains a gradual development

of it-Moses employed temporal sanctions, both nationally and

individually-This accounted for-From the nature of the Jew-

ish theocracy-Reality of the extraordinary providence exercised

over the Jews proved in this work, without resorting to War-

burton's medium-Temporal sanctions sufficient-Necessary to

confute idolatry-Adapted to the intellectual and moral charac-

ter of the Jews-Best mode of introducing the doctrine of a

future state, with effect-A necessary part of the theocracy—

Exemplified to man the principles of God's moral government. 264

SECT. II.-Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children-In

what sense to be understood-Not unjust-Necessary in a the-

ocracy, as far as relates to temporal and national punishments-

Chiefly denounced against idolatry-In this case not only just,

but merciful-Human tribunals not permitted by the Mosaic

Law, to act upon this principle-Why-Analogous to God's

general providence-A dispensation of mercy rather than seve-

rity-Limited in its extent and application.

KNOWLEDGE OF A FUTURE LIFE AMONG THE JEWS.

« السابقةمتابعة »