315 THE REASONABLENESS and CERTAINTY OF THE Christian Religion. PART III. That there is no other Divine Revelation, but that contain'd in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament. Т. HAT there is no other Institution of Religi on, besides that deliver'd in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, which has all things neceffary to a Divine Revelation, may be fhewn in the feveral Particulars neceffary to a Divine Revelation, as that no other Religion ever was of like Antiquity, or had equal Promulgation; that no other ever had fufficient Evidence of Miracles and Prophecies in proof of it; and lastly, that there never was any other, which did not teach many DoArines that are unworthy of God, and contrary to the Divine Attributes, and therefore impoffible to come from Heaven. This I fhall prove, first, of the Religions of the Heathens; fecondly, of the Mahometan Religion. CHAP. CHAP. I. The Novelty of the Heathen Religions. •THE HE Novelty of the Religions amongst the Heathens (whom we have any certain Account of from their Writings) in refpect of the Scriptures, is fo notorious, having been fo often proved by learned Men, and is fo generally acknowledg'd, that it is needless to infift much upon it. The Heathens generally were Strangers to every thing of Antiquity, and therefore must be unable to give any Proof of the Antiquity of their Religions. a The Pretences which the Egyptians made to Antiquity, fo much beyond the times recorded in the Scriptures, proceeded from their reckoning by Lunar Years, or Months; or from reckoning the Dynasties in Succeffion, which were contemporary. For Herodotus mentions Twelve Ægyptian Kings reigning at once. But they had fo different Accounts, however, of Chronology, that, as Diodorus Siculus fays, fome of them computed about thirteen thousand years more than others, from the Original of their Dynafties, to the time of Alexander the Great. And the Solar Year, in ufe among the Egyptians, who were most famous for Aftronomy, was fo imperfect, that they said the Sun had feveral times changed his Courfe, fince the Beginning of their Dynafties; imputing the Defect of their own Computation, for want of intercalary Days, to the Sun's Variation; or lfe affecting to fpeak fomething wonderful and extravagant. An Author, whofe main Design seems to have been, to fay с Diodor. Sic. I. i. Plutarch. in Numa. Var. apud Lactant, de Orig. Error. lib. ii. c. b Lib. 2. cap. 151. Herod. 1. 2. C. 142. all, d all, that could with any colour of probability be faid, to the advantage both of the Learning and the Antiquity of the Egyptians; found, that he could give no tolerable account of their Chronology, but by cafting it into four concurrent Dynafties, and placing Menes, whom he fuppofes to be Cham, and who is agreed by all, to have been the firft King of Agypt, at the Head of each Dynasty, and inserting the Kings in fucceffion from him, out of Eratofthenes, Manetho, and Syncellus. Yet this learned and laborious Advocate of the Egyptians acknowledges, that till the DCCCCLXth Year of his Egyptian Ara, which falls about xxx after the death of Joshua, the Egyptian Year confifted of CCCLX Days only, and that for this Reason, they had no certainty in their Aftronomy. But he obferves farther, that in the Sepulchre of Ofymandyas, a Theban King, who lived in the Sixteenth Century of his Ægyptian Ara, a Golden Cycle was found, of the thickness of one Cubit, and CCCLXV Cubits in compass, having the Days of the Year written diftinctly in the feveral Cubits, with the Rifings and Settings of the Stars, and Aftrological Obfervations upon them. Here he fays, that fince the additional Hours are not in this Cycle, it might be doubted, whether they were taken into the Egyptian Year, till after that Age: but to this he answers, that the Rifings and Settings of the Stars could not be rightly affigned without them. But how could he know, that they were rightly affigned? He farther proves, that even after it was known that an Intercalation was neceffary every fourth Year, yet the Egyptian Priests refused to use it, that their Festivals might not always fall on the fame Days, but might run thro' the Year; and that their Epopta took an Oath, never to make any Intercalation either of Months or Days. He d Marsh, Chron. Can. p. 235, 237, 295. Gemini Elementa Aftronom, c. 6. fhews thews likewise from Cenforinus, that in their Civil as well as in their Sacred Year, they had no Intercalation: yet their Natural Year, he fays, had the Intercalary Day. But to what end did this Natural Year ferve, if it were used neither in their Sacred, nor in their Civil Affairs? It feems, that the Intercalation was not taken into the Ægyptian Year, but was only in Notion and Idea among the Aftronomers; as the Old Style is to all purposes used among us, tho' our Aftronomers very well understand the defects of it. But the cafe was very different with the Egyptians from what it is with us; for in the space of MCCCCLXI Years, the variation there was not of a few Days, but of a whole Year: And where there was a continual change of the Days and Months, there must needs have been great confufion in the Calculations of Chronology. The Ægyptians, fays the fame Learned Author, have tranfmitted nothing befides the Names of their Kings, and their vaft Pyramids, to Posterity, more ancient than Sefoftris or Sifhack, who facked Jerufalem in the Fifth Year of Rehoboham's Reign, 1 Kings xiv. 21. And Caffini has found the Account of Eclipfes, at the beginning of Diogenes Laertius, to be falfe; which is a farther confutation of the fabulous pretences of the Ægyptians to Antiquity. The earliest Aftronomical Obfervations to be met with, which were made in Egypt, are thofe performed by the Greeks of Alexandria, lefs than ccc Years before Chrift, as Mr. Halley has obferved. The 1Chaldeans, according to Berofus, fuppofed the Moon to be a luminous Body, and therefore could have no great skill in Aftronomy; befides, they wanted Inftruments to make exact Obfervations. m Diodorus Siculus writes, that the Chaldeans fuppofed the Moon's Chron. Can. p. 352. i Loubere du Royaume de Siam. Tom. 2. p. 399. * Mr. Wotton's Reflections upon ancient and modern Learning, c. 23.. Vitruv. lib. ix. c. 4. m L. 11. c. 8. De Die Natal. c. 18. Light to be from the Sun; but he says, that they had various Opinions concerning the Sun's Eclipfe, and could not determine any thing about it, nor foretel when it was to be. All we have of them, fays the fame Learned Aftronomer, is only feven Eclipfes of the Moon, and even those but very courfely fet ' down, and the oldest not much above DCC Years before Chrift; fo that after all the Fame of these Chaldeans, we may be fure, they had not gone far • in this Science: And though Callifthenes be faid by Porphyry, to have brought from Babylon to Greece • Obfervations above MDCCcc Years older than Alexander; yet the proper Authors making no men⚫tion or use of any fuch, renders it justly fufpected for a Fable. This agrees with the Account that has been given of the Chaldaick Philofophy, by a very Learned and Accurate Author; from whence we likewife understand, how little credit is to be allowed to these Obfervations, which Porphyry (as he is cited by P Simplicius) fays, that Calisthenes fent to Ariftotle from Babylon, fince there is nothing extant in the Chaldaick Aftrology more ancient than the Era of Nabonaffar, which begins but DCCXLVII Years before Chrift. By this Ara, the Chaldeans computed their Aftronomical Obfervations, the first of which falls about the Twenty feventh Year of Nabonaffar; and if there had been any more ancient, Ptolemy would not have omitted them. So little ground is there for us to depend upon the Accounts of Time, and the vain Boafts of Antiquity which these Nations have made. The Greeks had their Aftronomy from Babylon, and the 'Athenians had but CCCLX Days in their Year, in the time of Demetrius Phalereus; yet Mr. Halley farther Obferves, that the Greeks were the firft Pra • Mr. Stanley's Chaldaick Ptol. 1. 4. c. 6, 7. "In Mr. Wotton's Reflections. Ib. Philof. c. I. P Simplic. de Cœlo, 1. 2. 1 Herodot. 1. 2. C. 199. Plin. 1. 34. C. 6. • &tical |