As my lords the bishops have kindly taken so much pains to bring the infidels into a good way of spending their Sunday evenings at home, I think it would not be amiss, if they were, now and then, at such times, to read a sermon, Let me, therefore, recommend to them four Discourses, by the present Dean of Canterbury, on the Creation of Man, the Garden of Eden, the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge. It may appear, perhaps, that the Mosaic history is not necessarily so pregnant with absurdities as they are apt to suppose; but that a rational account may be given of man's primeval state, as there described, and of that trial to which he was subjected by his Maker. In another part of the pamphlet, p. 39, it is objected to us, "that Adam was threatened with death on the day of his transgression, but lived at least 800 years afterwards." The execution of the sentence, then, was respited, in consideration of his repentance, agreeably to the proceedings of God with his descendants, both individuals and communities, in numberless instances upon record, Transgression rendered him mortal, and his life from thenceforward was a gradual progress, through Jabour, pain, and sorrow, towards death. OBSERVATIONS ON THE FALL. TO THE EDITORS OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE. IT GENTLEMEN, T was my intention, immediately after my former Observations on the Fall, to have shewn, as I have already done in the case of the Serpent, that the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which form a distinguishing part in the primeval history of man, are, in like manner, not to be taken in a mythological sense, but, according to the strict and literal acceptation of the words, as trees which had once a real and positive existence. Unforeseen engagements have hitherto prevented me from prosecuting my design. I have now, however, ventured to resume the subject, and I trust that I shall be found more regular and punctual in my future communications. 1 Certain opinions have, I find, been lately obtruded upon the public, in a periodical work to which it's attention has been repeatedly and earnestly solicited, which strongly militate against the credibility of Moses as an historian. Previous, therefore, to any discussion respecting the two trees of Paradise, I have thought it necessary to offer a few additional remarks, on the authenticity of that most early and most eventful part of his history, emphatically termed, THE FALL. Speaking Speaking of the "concise account which the Scriptures give us of the origin of the human race," it has been pointedly remarked, "but this account, even if we allow Moses to be the writer of it, was not compiled till about 2300 years after the creation, and in the opinion of many, it is either wholly, or in part, so blended with allegory, that it is not easy to give a satisfactory explanation of every circumstance to which it alludes *" In the few foregoing lines, several of the principal objections usually urged by infidel writers against the truth of the Mosaic history, have been insidiously presented to the view of the reader, under the delusive form of a cautious and deliberative scepticism. Doubts are entertained, in the first place, in regard to Moses, as the writer of it. Then, supposing him to have undertaken only the office of a mere compiler, from the period in which he lived being so very remote from the æra in which his history commences, a suspicion is induced that the facts which he has commemorated may have wanted the confirmation of respectable and well-grounded authority; and, lastly, if it be considered either wholly, or in part, in no other light than as an ingenious apologue, no greater degree of credit is to be attached to it, than what is usually given to this species of composition. Before, however, the validity of the claim of Moses, as the writer of the three first chapters of Genesis, be disallowed, it is peculiarly incumbent upon those who oppose it, to shew us who the real author was. Clear and decisive proofs must, at the same time, be adduced, ere we can be prevailed upon to set aside the concurrent testimony of preceding ages, of poets, historians, and philosophers, from the remotest periods of antiquity, together with the unanimous and uniform assent of a whole nation, under various trying and afflictive circumstances, from its first establishment, about 3300 years ago, until the present moment.Let them do this, and they will then command our attention. Aware that any attempt of this nature would be attended with insuperable difficulties, they have hitherto studiously declined it unwilling to expose themselves, and the cause which they are most anxious to promote, by an ignominious failure in the prosecution of it. Had any historical documents of known and genuine worth fallen, at any time, into their hands, by which the credit of Moses, as the writer of this account, could have been made to appear questionable, they would, long ago, have been brought forward with the utmost parade and consequence, and the triumph of infidelity would, for a while, have seemed to be complete. But, unfortunately for them, and contrary to their most sanguine expectations, it has so happened, that the disco *See Dr. Rees's New Cyclopædia, now publishing in weekly numbers, quarto, under the article ADAM. veries which have been recently made amongst the fragments of ancient literature in the eastern world, have added considerably to the ponderous mass of evidence of which we were already possessed in favour of Moses as the writer, by which their views have been entirely frustrated. It is not, therefore, by a direct and open avowal of their principles, but by an artfully disguised method, that the enemies of revealed religion now seek to accomplish their aim. Under the semblance of a liberal and impartial investigation of the truth, every seeming difficulty which occurs in the Scriptures is industriously magnified. and animadverted upon, in the multifarious publications in which they are respectively concerned. Profici ents in the art of addressing themselves to the prejudices and passions of men, they endeavour, by plausible conjectures, and doubts subtlely insinuated, in conjunction with a declamatory and assumptive mode of reasoning, to impose upon the too credulous and incautious reader, so as to awaken his suspicion respecting the reality of facts, of which he had never before entertained a doubt. And thus a disbelief of the Bible, as containing the pure and infallible word of God, is sometimes unhappily engendered. After this manner have the seeds of infidelity been scattered abroad in the world, which, but for the seasonable efforts of pious and learned men, who, by a long and diligent application to the study of the Scriptures, have acquired a competent knowledge of the subject, might otherwise have germinated and grown up to maturity; the baneful fruits of which would soon have become visible amongst us, by a general falling off from religion. Great reason then have we to be thankful that the insidious artifices which have long been practised in this country to undermine the foundation of our faith, have hitherto proved abortive; and that the various cavils and objections, which the ingenuity and industry of deistical writers have, from time to time, framed for the sole purpose of subtracting from the credit due to the Hebrew historian, have always received an immediate and satisfactory answer. So long, therefore, as we are permitted, by the Divine blessing, to retain the faculty of distinguishing right from wrong, truth from falsehood, religion will have nothing to dread from the severest attacks of its enemies. Conjecture will, in no wise, be allowed to usurp the place of argument, declamation of reasoning; nor will unauthorised assumptions ever be admitted as proofs. And to the friends of religion it must be highly gratifying to know, that the genuineness and authenticity of that early part of the Mosaic history which first opens to our view the glorious prospect of man's future redemption and restoration, rests upon upon the firm and sure basis of incontrovertible testimony; for there does not exist a single fact or circumstance of ancient date, which has been so repeatedly and so powerfully attested, as that of Moses's being the original writer of the Books which are called by his name. In short, all the evidence that can be derived from human testimony, unites in confirming this as an indisputable truth. It is established by the universal consent of nations, the express acknowledgments of the most ancient authors, and by the very admission of the professed enemies of Christianity in the earlier periods of its reception +. It is only by the authority of human testimony, that we are now enabled to attach any degree of credibility to the facts which we find recorded in ancient and modern history. That Moses was the writer of the whole of the Pentateuch has been, at all times, admitted as a fact of singular notoriety; and which, having "been related by historians of credit, and contradicted by no one writer of respectable authority, a man cannot avoid believing it, and can as little doubt of it as he does of the being and action of his own acquaintance, wherein he himself is a witness t." In this, and in similar cases, therefore, "the testimony of man will stand as the ground of infallible assurance §.” Great, then, indeed, must be the presumption of modern sceptics, in attempting to induce a contrary persuasion, knowing, as they well do, that the testimony which they would have others to reject, under the plea of insufficiency, is as full and Josephus (cont. Appion. I. 1. sect. 26. 32.) quotes Menetho, a priest of Heliopolis, and the author of an history of Egypt, in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 360 years prior to the Christian æra, together with Cheremon, Apollonius, and Lysimachus, as asserting Mofes to have been the leader and legislator of the Jews. Eusebius (1. ix. c. 26.) introduces Eupolemus, as calling him, 70V TOUTOV pov, the first wise man. Strabo (Geog. l. xvi.) expressly refers to that law of Moses which prohibits images, &c. Justin (1. xxx. 6. c. 11.) considers him as the institutor of the Sabbath. Pliny (Nat. Hist. 1. xxx. c. 1.) ranks him amongst the most eminent magicians. Tacitus (Hist. l. v. c. iii. iv. v.) declares him to have been the conductor and lawgiver of the Jews. Juvenal (Sat. xiv. ver. 102.) alludes to the Pentateuch in these words: Tradidit arcano quodcunque volumine Moses. Longia mus (de Sub. sect. 9.) cites a passage from him, and styles him, oux Turwx avry, ne ordinary man. The saying of Numenius, a Pythagorean philosopher of Apamea, in Syria, What is Plato, but Moses in Greek? is recorded by Suidas, Clement of Alexandria, and Eusebius. See Lardner's Works, Vol. viii. 168. Diodorus Siculus likewise says, that Moses received his laws from the God Jao, a corruption, no doubt, of the word Jehovah. See Gale's Court of the Gentiles, Part I. 1. iii. sect. 2. which may be added, a long enumeration of Authors, by Justin Martyr, (vid. Paren.) amongst whom we find Polemon, Appion, Ptolemy Mondosius, Hellanicus, Philocorus, Castor. Thallus, and Alexander Polyhistor, who have spoken of Moses as the leader of the Jews and the framer of their laws, concerning whom, he remarks, that they derived not their information from the Jews, but from certain Egyptian priests. Vid. etiam Huetii Demonstrat. Evang. Prop. iv. cap. 11. Julian, Porphyry, and Celsus. See Locke's Essay on Hum. Understand. book iv. chap. xvi. sect. 8. Τα complete complete as, in such a case, can possibly be produced, and to which they themselves, in any other instance, would be ready to yield a willing and unqualified assent. The unreasonableness of the doubts which have been insinuated against Moses, as the writer of the account which the Bible gives of the primeval state of man, has now, I trust, been made sufficiently apparent. But when, again, it is considered, that this account is essential to our forming just and rational conceptions of religion; that without it we should be wholly unable to assign any adequate cause for the present lapsed state of human nature, and the kind purpose of the Deity in the various administrations of his providence; another, and that a sensible proof, drawn from the corruption and depravity of mankind, which we have daily before our eyes, and which it is impossible to deny, is hereby afforded us of its authenticity; whilst, at the same time, it shews the inconsistency of those who pertinaceously insist upon an allegorical construction; and that no other person than Moses could have been the author of it is farther demonstrable, from the perfect unity of design which is seen to pervade every department of his history; insomuch, that were we ignorant of the peculiar dispensation under which our first parents were originally placed, many passages in the subsequent parts of it would be altogether inexplicable, and a deep shade of ambiguity would, consequently, be cast over the whole of the Scriptures. Dec. 20th, 1802.. CEPHAS LINCOLNIENSIS. [To be continued.] ERRATA.-Vol. II. p. 260. 1. 13. for fertility read futility. DAUBENEY's DISCOURSES, (Concluded from page 371.) DOCTOR CAMPBELL having asserted that the charge of one bishop was originally confined to one congregation, or to the whole community of churches; "the plural number Churches, being invariably used when more congregations than one are spoken of, unless the subject be of the whole commonwealth of Christ he infers from hence, that "the bishop's inspection was at first only over one parish." In reply to which, our learned author well observes, "that before this part of the doctor's foundation can stand firm, it must be proved that the word repamiz, at the period of which the doctor was speaking, and the English word Parish, in its modern acceptation mean the same thing;" the point Vol. III. Churchm. Mag. 1803, Sup. 3 H for |