cious in observing, and feems to rejoice in his Obfervation, that our best Writers are not agreed in their Paraphrafes on it; not confidering that this Difference muft neceffarily happen, while fallible. Men are the Interpreters of the lively Oracles, the infallible Word of God; that fuch a Difference in the explaining of a Fact no ways deftroys the Certainty or the Teftimony of the Fact it felf; these Interpretations every Man is at liberty to embrace or reject at his pleasure; but the Fact it felf, when revealed by God, tho' it should be attended with difficulties, ought not to meet with the fame Ufage, fince to believe whatever he fays, is as much our duty as to do whatever he commands; and fo long as God is what he is, and we are what we are, the fame reverential Regard must be paid to his Truth, as to any other of his Attributes.

Again, which of his rational Apologists inform'd him, (1) That an Afs or a Dove must needs have been a fitter Engine for Satan to have infinuated his Poifon by: But the Devil, 'tis plain, wanted no Directions, making use of such an Engine which effectually accomplished his Defign; however tho' the Devil would take no Notice of thofe Emblems of Folly and Innocence, as he ftiles them, 'tis pity that this Author did not pay fome more prudent Regard to them, and while they were under his Eye, have taken care, that his own Arguments fhould have favoured more of the Laft, and lefs of the First.

The next thing to be confidered is, whether there is any thing in the (m) History of the Fall contradictory to our Reason, and the Notions we have of God?

Is it at all agreeable to our Reason and to the Notions which we have of God, that Man came out of his Hands fuch a motly Creature as he now is,

(1) Letter, p. 14.

(m) Defence, P. 15.

with that proneness to Evil which he feels within himself? Or that the Law in his Members warring against the Law of his mind, and bringing him into Captivity to the Law of Sin, was implanted in him by God? An Affertion far more repugnant to the Notions we have of God and his Attributes, than any thing in this Literal History can be; and if a Fall fome way or other muft neceffarily be fuppofed, what more rational and fatisfactory Account can be given of it, than Mofes has done? In which, if it had been false, he might have been fo eafily con futed; for tho' he lived fome hundreds of Years af ter it, yet the true Account of it could not well be forgotten or unknown, fince it required the Lives of but a very few Persons to convey the Truth to the Men of his Generation: Methuselah living with Adam, and Shem with Methuselah, Ifaac with Shem, and Amram the Father of Mofes living with the Patriarchs, the Sons of Jacob, the Hiftory of the Creation, and of the Manifeftations which God had been pleas'd to make of himself to their Forefathers could not be unknown to that Age. Jenkins's Reasonableness &c. Vol. I. Part II. ch. 1.

Befides, it has been observed before, that no Spiritual Being can ever converfe with men but under fome bodily Shape; but the Devil could not affume an Humane Shape, with any probability of Success, there being none of them in the World befides the first created Pair; and why might not the Serpent be as fit an Engine as any other for the Devil to infinuate his Poifon by? Or why might not Eve imagine that the Serpent had acquired this Sagacity from his having tafted the forbidden Fruit, and therefore recommended it to her from his own Experience? This Suppofition gives a rational Account for the Arguments he then used, God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, your Eyes shall be opened, i. e. fome great improvement of your Faculties

B

culties will follow it, Ye shall be as Gods knowing good and evil; or is it contrary to our Reafon, or to the Notions which we have of God, to believe, that after they had broke his Laws, he would inflict the Punishment which he had threaten'd, and by the Severity of that, if it can be called fevere, make them fenfible of the Folly of their Choice, and of the Heinoufnefs of their Sin? Where then can be that abfolute Neceffity of having recourse to Allegory, which (n) this Author infifts upon?" If, (fays a good Writer*) it is abfurd to fuppofe, that "fuch a thing fhould have been in the beginning of "the World, why is it not as absurd, that such a "thing fhould be reprefented to thofe, who lived "at the beginning of the World, as if it had been? "It can't be conceived that the moft remarkable "thing that has befallen Mankind (except the Re"demption of the World by Chrift) fhould fo come "to pafs as not to be told to Pofterity, but in an "Allegory: Did the Children of Ifrael know the “Historical Truth of the Fall, or did they not know "it? If they did, why fhould Mofes difguise it un"der an Allegory? If they did not, how could it "be forgot in fo few Generations of Men, fuppo"fing it once to be ever known to Adam's Posteri?If it was never known, but the Relation of it was always conveyed down in Allegory, the ❝reafon must be, because that manner of delivering "it, was moft fuitable to that Age, and moft cre"dible, and every way moft proper; and if it was "moft fitting, that it fhould be thought to have "happened fo, this is a good Argument, that it "did really happen fo, fince there is nothing hin"ders, but it might fo have happened". These are Arguments, not raised upon the Mifquotations,

ty

(n) Defence, p. 15.

Jenkins's Reafenableness, &c. Vol. II. c. 13. p. 257.

or

or false Representations of any Authors, and therefore whoever pleads against the Literal History of the Fall, ought to confider and answer them in a rational way.

His grand Argument for the neceffity of an Allegory in this case is, (0) the Authority of the Primitive Writers, and that in former Ages to flight the Allegorical way, was lookt upon as Heretical.

'Tis hard that a little Truth cannot drop from his Pen, but fomething very different from it must be disguised and conveyed under it: So far 'tis true, that many Primitive Writers were great Allegorists; but can it be from thence inferr'd, that they denied the Truth of the literal Facts? Not in the leaft: Even Philo himself, whofe Allegory he has twice entertained us with on this Occafion, records the minutest Circumftance of the History of the Fall, thereby establishing and confirming it, before he raises any Allegory upon it: Nay, 'tis impoffible he could do otherwife; we may as well fuppofe that in Natural Causes and Effects a Shadow can be made, where there is no Subftance of which it is to be the Shadow or Reprefentation, as that an Allegory can be produced by the most fruitful Genius, where there is nothing to be allegorized; this is what the very Definition of it, the true (p) Etymology of the word requires : Such Men must read the Primitive Writers with a very ill Design, or with little Judgment, who can find nothing to admire in, or copy from them, but their Spots and Blemishes; and if it was in former Ages beretical to flight the allegorical Way, then Origen was as great an Heretick in this way, as he was an Allegorift; who feems never to fpeak with greater fincerity, than when he wishes, (q) that what

(0) Defence, p. 15. (γ) Αλληγορείν eft rem fub aliis Verbis fignificare. (g) Utinam & hæc ipfa quæ diximus, non videamur temere & periculofe dixiffe, Matt, cap. 23. Hom. 25.

he has faid that way, has not been delivered with too much rafbness and danger; and he (r) pronounces Salvation to thofe, who flick to the Letter of the Scriptures; for the plain Hiftory of that alone is fufficient for Salvation: Since then we have the Determination of one of the greatest Allegorists in this material Point; fince Salvation in his Judgment is to be had by adhering to the Letter of the Scriptures; fince there is nothing in the Literal History of the Fall contrary to our Reasons and the Notions we ought to have of God, this Learned Writer may plume himself with his allegorical Feathers, and drudge on, as long as he pleases, in the contrary Road; and who, but Fools, will follow him?

II.

The Original of Circumcifion.

This he (s) determines to be from the Egyptians ; tho' he is very angry with the Reply for charging him with fuch a Thought; (t) Pray, Sir, where have I declared, that I think fo? But pray, Sir, where have you not declared it? If to affert, (u) that Herodotus, Diodorus, and Strabo, are of all the Writers, that touch this Queftion, the only ones in Antiquity, that can be called unprejudiced; if to (x) examine carefully on which fide the Probability lies, and after a strict Examination to (y) determine pofitively on the Cafe; if to pronounce that (z) Mo fes's Account is against all Fact and Teftimony, and that They, who affirm Circumcifion to be of Hebrew Ori

() Literam autem Evangelii qui fequuntur, id eft, fimplicem narrationem ipfius, falvantur; quoniam & ipfa fola Evangelii narratio fimplex fufficit ad falutem. Matt. cap. 23. Hom. 26. (s) Letter, p. 30. (t) Defence, p. 18, 19. (u) Letter, (x) lb. p. 28. (y) Ib. p. 29, 30. (z) Defence, p. 25.

P, 26.