from which themselves had derived their information. 2) They do not confine themselves to such matters as tended to the honour of their nation, but mention also those which were disgraceful and ignominious; nor do they ever excuse the errors and crimes of the most eminent men. 3) Lastly, they published their writings while the documents and public annals from which they had derived their materials were yet in existence, and might be consulted by their readers. Yet these readers so highly approved of their writings and so warmly recommended them to their posterity, that they were more carefully preserved than those older and contemporaneous documents, which in course of time were entirely lost.

Ezra and Nehemiah, 1) generally describe their own actions, and yet nowhere give reason to suspect their veracity: on the contrary, many tokens of a candid relation appear in their histories. 2) In their accounts of more ancient events, the manner of narration is different, which shows that those parts are taken from older writings. 3) Lastly, their productions were received and approved of by their contemporaries.

What the prophets relate of ancient history, has been taken from the records just mentioned. In their accounts of their own times, consisting generally of narratives of crimes and transgressions, they are coeval witnesses, and of the same country, who, in order to correct the morals of their countrymen, reprove their corruption and perversity, and denounce the divine chastisements, although they foresee that such conduct must produce hatred and persecution of themselves. No one ever bore false witness for such an end, with the prospect of such a reward.

Lastly, the contents of all the books of the Old Testament agree remarkably with the accounts of the most ancient profane writers who have said any thing concerning the same nations and countries. This agreement, notwithstanding the immense number of ancient writings that have perished, has afforded subject for continual remark in my Biblical Archæology, especially in the second part.[a] [b]

[a) It is often stated as an objection to the credibility of the sacred historians, that they were priests, and consequently disposed to misrepresent and form partial judgments of events concerning the priesthood, and especially of the kings, who were generally unfavourable to the

priesthood. If this were true, it would furnish no reason for doubting the correctness of their statement of facts, but would merely affect their judgment in relation to them, and to the characters of the kings. But it is not true that all the sacred historians were priests. For instance, along with the priest Ezra we find the layman Nehemiah. Who the authors of the ancient annals of the kingdom were, we do not know, therefore cannot maintain that they were priests: but we do know that these annals were first commenced by genealogists, and from many passages of the books of Chronicles, that they were continued by prophets, who were as often laymen as priests. After all, if the abstracts contained in Joshua, Judges, I. and II. Samuel, I. and II. Kings, and I. and II. Chronicles, were really made by priests, their representations and judgments of events are as much entitled to our confidence as if composed by laymen, since they agree perfectly with those of the prophets, whose repeated reproofs and exhortations to the priests prove that they had no prepossessions in favour of the priesthood.]

[6) On the confirmation of the sacred history by profane writers, see GRAY'S Connexion of Sacred and Profane Literature, Vol. I., and FABER'S Hora Mosaicæ, Vol. I. HORNE's treatment of this subject, Introd. Vol. I. Chap. III. Sect. II. § 1., is well worth perusal. Tr.]

§ 16. The miracles, accounts of which are contained in the Old Testament are true miracles.

If the books of the Old Testament are genuine and incorrupt, the many miracles which they relate, cannot possibly be supposed false, unless we are willing for the sake of getting rid of them to grant other things, which, in fact would amount to much greater miracles. For if Moses wrote the books which we have under his name in the same age in which the transactions recorded in them occurred * and read them or caused them to be read to the people, and yet forged the accounts of miracles contained in them; he must have falsely asserted in the face of myriads of his contemporaries 1) that in Egypt, at his command, all the waters had for some days assumed the appearance of blood; that darkness had covered the land for three days; and that a terrible tempest had destroyed every thing exposed to its fury and again ceased its ravages at his command: he must have falsely asserted to the vast multitude of the Hebrews, who at that time were any thing but credulous, 2) that at his command the Heroopolitan

* [Deut. xi. 2-7. xxix. 1-10, &c.]

branch of the Red sea had become dry, and that they themselves had passed it in safety and that the Egyptian army, attempting to follow them by the same road had been drowned by the returning waves: he must have falsely asserted to this numerous people, 3) that in Arabia Petræa twice in a scarcity of water a rock had after his previous annunciation upon the stroke of a wand, sent forth a quantity of water sufficient to quench the thirst of nearly two and a half millions of men beside an innumerable multitude of cattle and he must have needlessly added that at the second time he himself had somewhat doubted the effect of the attempt and that therefore he had been excluded from the long-expected land of promise; Num. xx. 7-13. Deut. i. 37. iii. 23-29. iv. 21. s. xxxi. 2. xxxii. 50-52. He must have falsely asserted 4) that the whole nation had during the greater part of forty years been principally sustained upon manna which is ordinarily of rare occurrence in those regions, and possessed it in such plenty as to have contemned it. (Num. xi. 4—10. Deut. viii. 3,) and yet it had never been found upon the Sabbath day, Ex. xvi. 13—29. Lastly, he must have falsely asserted 5) that according to his previous annunciation they themselves, at Mount Sinai in Arabia, (where during the summer season clouds are seldom seen, at the most being small and fleeting and disappearing early in the morning,) had seen in the month of July or August a terrible cloud with perpetual lightnings and thunderings and heard a divine voice which had published their laws; (Deut. iv. 32—37. v. 4. s., 32--27 ;) and that at other times they had seen above their tabernacle a remarkable cloud which had emitted a fiery splendour in the night.-All these things Moses must have falsely asserted. while all the people must have believed his fictions, and, moreover, reverenced as an ambassador of the Deity a man rendered infamous by so many and such open lies, and received from him the doctrine of the unity of the Godhead, and a burdensome law and rendered to him obedience: all this too, on account of those very miracles which they themselves must have known never to have taken place. To induce the Hebrews thus to believe all the falsehoods advanced by Moses, it would have been necessary by a continual series of miracles so to influence the minds of all and each of them, as to persuade them that they themselves had really seen and experienced all that was related concerning the passage of

the Red sea, the miraculous supply of water, the manna ate for so long a time even to satiety, &c., although, in fact, it was all false. If therefore, the miracles of Moses had been false, still greater and more numerous miracles must have been perpetually wrought upon the minds of the Hebrews. to induce them to believe things true, which they knew to be entirely unfounded.[a]

(a) Many have undertaken to show that the miraculous histories in the Old Testament were merely natural events, and that they admitted of easy explanations on known principles of philosophy. With relation to some of them this undoubtedly is the case. Still there are others which have never yet been explained without the most forced constructions, and it is but labour lost to attempt the explanation of some of them on any natural principles known to man. Allowing, however, that it were possible to account for all the Mosaic miracles on mere natural principles with perfect ease, their supernatural character would still remain. For being confessedly extraordinary, however natural, it must have been utterly out of the power of any one beside the Creator and Governor of the world to foresee the time and circumstances of their occurrence. The fact that these were exactly predicted by Moses is a sufficient proof of the supernatural agency in the events in question.]

& 17. The books of the Old Testament contain true prophecies.

If the books of the Old Testament were written about the times to which they are ascribed, and have remained incorrupt. it is impossible that the several prophecies contained in them should not be divine. For particular contingent events are definitely predicted at so remote a period that either their efficient causes did not then exist, or they were so far beyond the scrutiny of the most sagacious of mankind, that no one, unless assisted by superior illumination, could have predicted what was to come to pass. A few examples shall be produced.

I. The propagation of the knowledge of the one God, and of true religion, among all nations, by the agency of the Hebrews, was announced twenty-two centuries before Christ to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Gen. xii. 3. xviii. 18. s. xxii. 18. xxvi. 4. xxviii. 14., and was afterwards plainly predicted by the prophets with the addition of many of the circumstances of the event; Mic. iv. 1-7. vii. 20. Isa. ii. 2-4. xi. 1—11. lii. 13-liii. lxvi 19-23.

Amos ix. 11. s. lxxxvii. &c. &c. can testify.

Ps.

Ezek. xvii. 22. ss. Jer. iii. 17. xvi. 19-21.
That these predictions have been fulfilled, we all

II. That the tribe of Judah should always have the principality is foretold in Gen. xlix. 8-10, comp. Ps. lx. 7. cviii. 8. I. Chr. xxviii. 4, and has been so literally accomplished in all the course of history, that at last all the Israelites are denominated Jews from the tribe of Judah.

III. The prediction that the Messiah should spring from the tribe of Judah, and from the family of David, so often announced with different accompanying circumstances, and even at times when there seemed to be not the least hope of its fulfilment, was at last accom plished by the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. II. Sam. vii. 1. ss., especially 12-17, comp. Ps. lxxxix. 36-40. Isa. xi. 1–10. lii. 13—liii. 12. Hos. iii. 4. s. Amos ix. 11. Mic. v. 1-3. Jer. xxiii. 1—8. xxx. 4-11. Ezek. xvii. 22. ss. xxi. 29–32. (24—27.) xxxiv. 22—30. Xxxvii. 24-28. Dan. ix. 1-27. Zech. ix. 9. s. Mal. iii. 1. s. comp. Ps. cx. 1. ss.

IV. That the Hebrews for the chastisement of their idolatry and the wickedness of their lives, should suffer captivity among a distant people, and that they should, in consequence of this captivity, turn to the true God, and be brought back to Palestine, and recover their existence as a nation, was predicted as early as the time of Moses, Deut. xxviii. 49-63. xxix. 21-27. xxx. 1-10. xxxi. 16-22, and was afterwards frequently declared with greater minuteness by later prophets. All these things are foretold of the ten tribes by Hosea, c. i. 4-11. ii. 10–23. xi. 5—11. xiv. 1—8; by Amos, c. v. 27. ix. 1-15; by Micah, c. i. 12-16; and by Isaiah, c. viii. 1—x. 24. Of the kingdom of Judah they were predicted by Micah, c. iii. 12. iv. 8-11; by Isaiah, c. xxxix; by Jeremiah, who even mentioned 70 years as the duration of the captivity, c. xxv. 11. ss. xxix. 10-14. xlvi. 27. s. l. 19—23, 34; and by Ezekiel, c. xxviii. 25. s. xxxvi. xxxvii. Zechariah speaks plainly of their condition after their return, ix. 1-8, 11-17. x. vi. 9-15.

V. The prophecy of Jeremiah, c. 1. and li. concerning the overthrow of Babylon, comprising all the circumstances of the event, and yet not fully accomplished until a thousand years after the