ページの画像
PDF
ePub

Let. more absurdity in the paffage, than xv. there would be in the following speech,

if such had been addressed to the So-
vereign by one of his Commanders
returned from America -“ By the
“ blessing of God upon your Ma-
“ jesty's arms, we overcame general
“ Greene in the field; but we could
“ not attack general Washington, be-
“ cause he was too strongly intrenched
“ in his camp." There is no reason,
therefore, for supposing, that “the
" Jews considered the God of Israel
6 their protector as a local divinity;
“ who was in some instances more,
“ and in others less powerful, than
o the gods of their enemies."*
· Nor is it altogether " THUS that
“ David in many places compares the
" Lord with other Gods:" since he

* P. 19.

com.

compares him with them, only to set LET. him above them; as sufficiently ap. XV. pears by the paffage quoted " The “ Lord is a great God, and a great “ king above all gods.”* In the heathen world there were “ gods many, " and lords many." An Israelite acknowleged one only God, the maker of heaven and earth, and of all the supposed deities that were therein. All the gods of the hea6. then (so stiled by them) are but “ idols; but it is the Lord that made 6 the heavens.”

Such, as an Ifraelite, must have been the sentiments of Jephthah, as well as David ; and therefore the citation from his address to the king of the Ammonites will avail nothing to the purpose for which it is adduced

* P. 19.

L ET

ху.

LET. _“ Wilt thou not possess that, which xv. “ Chemoth thy god giveth thee to

“ possess ? So whomsoever the Lord
“ our God shall drive out from be.
“ fore us, them will we possess.” *
It cannot seriously be thought, that
Jephthah, a judge in Israel, intended
to acknowlege the real divinity of the
Ammonicish idol, Chemolh. No: the
argument is evidently of the kind
which logicians style argumentum ad bo-
minem, an argument formed upon the
principles of the adversaries, and there-
fore conclusive to them.-" You deem
“ yourselves entitled to any possession,
“ acquired, as you imagine, by the
“ assistance of him whom you call
“ your god, and cannot reasonably
" expect us to yield that, which we
know the Lord our God has awarded
Judg. X1. 24.

“ to us.” Jephthah, in a negotiation LET. with the Ammonites, had no occasion XV. to discuss the subject of their idolatry, or tell them what he thought of Chemoth ; ' but states the matter according to their own ideas, supposing them, for a moment, to be true, though he believed them to be false; as is done every day.

Voltaire has amused himself much with this text, and between one and another of his manifold publications, kept it up like a shuttle-cock. He struggles hard for it -- but in vain. “ The words of Scripture (says he ) “ are not, Thou thinkest thou hajt a right " to pojefs, &c. but expressly, Thou haft a right to possess, &c. for that .." is the true interpretation af the He“ brew words, otho thirafch.* Ay, *vaining Treatise on Toleration, Chap: x11.

my

LET. my little man, so it is, according to XV. the Vulgate " Tibi jure debentur.”

But any modern schoolboy would have informed thee better, and cold thee, that the words, in very deed, denote neither more nor lefs than, " Thou wilt poffefs it." - Are we to give up our Bible, and pin our faith upon the sleeve of such a man as this?

After Balaam's Ass, the Canaanites, and Chemosh, one naturally expects -and lo, she is at hand

THE WITCH OF ENDOR. It was not unusual among us here in England some years ago, for an old woman, if she had the misfortune to live at the corner of a common, to be suspected of witchcraft, and tossed into a horsepond, to see whether she would sink, or swim. To put an end to such ridiculous barbarities, as well as

some

« 前へ次へ »