"That

Sesac was Sesostris, Osiris, and Bacchus.-Sesac, as I said before, I have no concern with. And as to Bacchus, it is agreed to be only a different name for Osiris. The thing I undertook to prove was, that Osiris and Sesostris were not one and the same person: But, in doing this, I did not mean to say that Osiris was not one of the names of Sesostris. This is a very different proposition; and the rather to be taken notice of, because I suspect a quibble in the words of the learned writer, which would confound the difference. Nor is this suspicion unreasonable. For I have met with some who have even ventured to say that Sir Isaac meant no more than that Sesostris was AN Osiris. But if he meant no more, I would allow him to mean any thing, and never to have his meaning disputed. I, for my part, and so I suppose the rest of the world, understood him to mean, "the old Osiris, famous amongst the Egyptians for legislation and the invention of the arts of life, was the very same man with Sesostris, who, those Egyptians say, was a different man, of a later age, and famous "for the conquest of the habitable world." This was the proposition I undertook to confute. Wherein I cndeavoured to shew "that there was a real Osiris, such as "the Egyptians represented him, much earlier than their "Sesostris." And now (to use this writer's words) the cause being brought before the Public, let the learned determine of it. As to the other point, that Sesostris went by the name of the earlier hero, this I not only allow, but contend for, as it opens to us one of the principal grounds of that confusion in their stories which hath produced a similitude of actions whereon Sir Isaac Newton layeth the foundation of their IDENTITY.

666

66

Section 4.

[See Divine Legation, Book vi. § 2.]

THE reverend and learned Dr. Richard Grey having lately epitomized the Commentary of one Albert Schultens on the Book of Job, hath thought fit, in the Preface to his Abstract, to criticise my Dissertation on the same Book in the following manner:-" Nor should we omit, in the "fourth place, the opinion of our countryman, Mr.; Warburton,

66

"Warburton, who, with great sharpness of wit and "many arguments sufficiently specious, endeavours to prove that the whole book of Job is dramatical and allegorical, yet founded in true history, and written by "Esdra in solace of the Jows, now returned from Babylon into their own country, and about to experience, "contrary to their expectations, an ordinary and unequal providence. Now in a matter very uncertain, and "which hitherto hath been made more uncertain by the "different opinions of learned men, hardly any hypo"thesis perhaps can be thought of which will satisfy in "all its parts *." Then having told us what Spanheim

said,

-Non autem prætermittenda est, quarto, sententia doctissimi viri Warburtoni nostri, qui magno ingenii acumine, multisque argumentis, satis quidem speciosis, probare nititur, Totum librum esse opus dramaticum & allegoricum, veræ tamen historia superstructum, ab Esdra conscriptum, in solatium Judæorum, qui e Babylone in suam patriam reversi, providentiam ordinariam & inæqualem, contra atque expectabant, jam erant experturi. In re, admodum sane incerta, & que eruditorum hominum dissensione incertior adhuc reddita est, vix ulla forsan hypothesis excogitari possit, quæ ex omni parte satisfaciat. Ut ad eorum itaque, sententiam accedo, qui librum Jobi omnium sacrorum codicum antiquissimum esse putant; ita a Moyse quidem ex authenticis nonumentis desumptum, poeticeque ornatum fuisse, nullus dubito.-Atque ex nostra hac opinione ratio satis idonea reddi potest omnium eorum textuum, siqui sint, in quibus sive ad legem, sive ad historiam Judaicam ante scriptum librum, allusum est, nou 'minus acsi ab Esdra eum scriptum fuisse concedatur, de quo viro diversa sentiunt eruditi. Quod vero ad eos locos, quos ad sequiorum temporum historias referre putat vir doctissimus, nempe ad Hezekiæ ægritudinem & convalescentiam, cap. xxxiii. 25. & exercitus Assyrii internecionem, cap. xxxiv, 20. ita eos intelligi ut nihil necesse est, ita commodius aliter accipi posse, ex notis, ad quas lectorem remitto, satis apparebit. Porro, opus esse drama. ticum, seu potius veram historiam forma dramatica, habituque poetico exornatam, semper existimavi; at vero subesse quoque allegoriam, persuaderi nequeo, siquidem non scriptoris tantum ætas, sed & libri scopus, quantum ego quidem video, ei sententiæ adversatur. Nam quod dicit vir clariss. id præcipue in hoc libro disceptari, nempe an bonis semper bona, malisque mala, an utrisque utraque promiscue obtingant: hanc autem quæstionem (a nobis quidem alienam, minusque ideo perpensam) nusquam alibi gentium præterquam in Judæa, nec apud ipsos Judæos alio quovis tempore, quam quod assignat, moveri potuisse, id omne ex veritate suæ hypotheseos pendet, et mea quidem sententia, longe aliter se habet. Nempe id unum voluisse mihi videtur sacer scriptor, ut piis omnibus, utcunque afflictis, humilitatis & patientiæ perpetuum extaret documentum ex contemplatione gemina, hinc infinitæ Dei perfectionis,

said, and what his author Schultens says, which are nothing to the matter in hand, he goes on thus: "Therefore,

66

perfectionis, sapientiæ ac potentiæ; illine humanæ, quæ in sanctissimis quoque viris inest, corruptionis, imbecillitatis, & ignorantiæ. Quamvis enim in sermonibus, qui in eo habentur, de religione, de virtute, de providentia, Deique in mundo gubernando sapientia, justitia, sanctitate, de uno rerum omnium principio, aliisque gravissimis veritatibus dissertetur, hunc tamen quem dixi unicum esse libri scopum, tam ex initio & fine, quam ex universa ejus œconomia cuivis opinor manifestum erit. Ea enim, ut rem omnem summatim complectar, Jobum exhibet, primo quidem querentem, expostulantem, effræni luctui indulgentem; mox (quum, ut sacri dramatis natura postulabat, amicorum contradictione sinistrisque suspicionibus magis magisque irritatus & lacessitus esset) imprudentius Deum provocantem, atque in justitia sua gloriantem; ad debitam tandem summissionem suique cognitionem revocatum, tum demum, nec antea, integritatis suæ tam præmium, quam testimonium a Deo reportantem. Ex his, inquam, apparet, non primario agi in hoc libro de providentia, sive quali, sive inæqualî, sed de personali Jobi integritate. Hanc enim (quod omnino observandum est) in dubium vocaverant amici, non ideo tantum quod afflictus esset, sed quod afflictus impatientius se gereret, Deique justitiæ obmurmuraret: & qui strenuus videlicit aliorum hortator fuerat ad fortitudinem & constantiam, quum ipse tentaretur, victus labasceret. Quum accesserat sanctissimi viri malis hæc gravissima omnium tentatio, ut tanquam improbus & hypo, crita ab amicis damnaretur, & quod unicum ei supererat, conscientiæ suæ testimonio ac solatio, quantum ipsi potuerunt, privandus foret, quid misero faciendum erat? Amicos perfidia & crudelitatis arguit: Deum integritatis sua testem vindicemque appellat; quum autem nec Deus interveniret, ad innocentiam ejus vindicandam, nec remitterent quicquam amici de acerbis suis censuris, injustisque criminationibus, ad supremum illud judiciumi provocat in quo redemptorem sibi affuturum, Deumque a suis partibus staturum, sumina cum fiducia se novisse affirmat. Jam vero si cardo controversiæ fuisset, utrum, salva Dei justitia, sancti in hac vita adfligi possent, hæc ipsa declaratio litem finire debuerat, Sin autem de personali Jobi innocentia disceptetur, nil mirum quod vetereni canere cantilenam, Jobumque ut fecerant, condempare pergerent socii, quum Dei solius erat, qui corda hominum explorat, pro certo scire, an jure merito sibi Jobus hoc solamen áttribueret, an falsam sibi fiduciam vanus arrogaret. Hac igitur difficultate sublata, nempe cur non statim obmutuerunt amici, quum de futuro judicio tam solenniter magnificeque dixisset Jobus, nil obstat quo minus celebrem illum contextum cap. xix. non de temporali in integrum restitutione, sed de resurrectione ad vitam æternam, intelligere possis. Quod si argumentis a commentatore Hostro allatis, ea quoque adjeceris quæ vir omni laude major, jan episcopus Sarisburiensis, in dissertatione sua, De sententia veterum de circumstantiis & conscquentiis lapsus humani pulcherrime con texuit, nil ultra, credo, desideraris, vel ad libri antiquitatem, vel ad vexatissimi hujus loci sensum, confirmandum. Præf. pp, x—xv,

“fore as I am of their opinion who think the book of "Job the oldest in the canon, so I am fully persuaded that "it was written by Moses himself, who took it from "authentic records, and put it into the dress of poetry. And, on this our opinion, a good account may be given "of all those texts, if any such there be, wherein allusion is made to the Jewish law or history before the book was "written, no less than if we should allow it to have been "written by Esdras, of whom the learned think diffe

86

k

rently. And as to those places which, in the opinion "of the Author of The Divine Legation, refer to his"tories of later times, such as the sickness and recovery "of Hezekiah, cap. xxxiii. 25. and the destruction of the Assyrian army, cap. xxxiv. 20. it will sufficiently appear by the notes, to which I refer the reader, that there is no need to understand them in this sense, and that they "are more commodiously understood otherwise. Fur"ther, that the work is dramatical, or, to speak more properly, a true history in the form of a drama, and adorned with a poetic dress, was always my opinion : "but that any allegory lies under it I can by no means "persuade myself to believe; because not only the age "of the writer, but the very scope of the book (as far as "I can see) leads us to conclude otherwise. For as to "what this writer says, that the main question handled "in the book of Job is whether good happens to the good, "and evil to evil men, or whether both happen not "promiscuously to both: and that this question (a very "foreign one to us, and therefore the less attended to) "could never be the subject of disputation any where "but in the land of Judea, nor there neither at any other time than that which he assigns: all this, I "depends on the truth of his hypothesis; and is, in my opinion, far otherwise. For the sole For the sole purpose of the "sacred writer seems to me to be this, to compose a "work that should remain a perpetual document of humility and patience to all good men in affliction, from "this two-fold consideration, as on the one hand, of the "infinite perfection, power, and wisdom of God; so on "the other, of human corruption, imbecility, and igno66 rance, discoverable even in the best of men. For although in the speeches that occur there be much talk

66

say,

"of

"of religion, virtue, and Providence; of God's wisdom, "justice, and holiness, in the government of the world; "of one principle of all things, and other most important truths; yet that this, which I have assigned, is the "only scope of the book, will appear inanifest to every one, as well from the beginning and the end, as from "the economy of the whole. For to say all in a word, "it first presents Job complaining, expostulating, and "indulging himself in an ungovernable grief, but soon "after (when, as the nature of the sacred Drama required, by the contradiction of his friends and their "sinister suspicions he became more and more teased "and irritated) rashly challenging God, and glorying in "his own integrity; yet at length brought back to a due ❝ submission and knowledge of himself; and then, at last, “and not before, receiving from God both the reward " and testimony of his uprightness. From all this, I say, "it appears that the personal integrity of Job, and not "the question concerning an equal or unequal provi"dence, is the principal subject of the book. For that "it was (and there our attention should be fixed), which "his friends doubted of; not so much on account of his "affliction, as for the not bearing his affliction with

patience, but complaining of the justice of God. And "that he who was an able adviser of others to fortitude "and constancy, should, when his own trial came, sink under the stroke of his disasters. See cap. iv. ver. 12.

34. Now when the most grievous trial of all was "added to the other evils of this holy person, to be con"demned by his friends as a profligate and a hypocrite, "and to be deprived, as much as in them lay, of his only remaining support, the testimony of a good conscience, "what was left for the unhappy man to do? He accuses his friends of perfidy and cruelty; he calls upon God as the witness and avenger of his integrity: but when "neither God interposed to vindicate his innocence, nor "his friends forbore to urge their harsh censures and "unjust accusations, he appeals to that last judgment, in

which, with the utmost confidence, he affirms that he "knew, his Redeemer would be present to him, and that "God would declare in his favour. But now. if the hinge of the controversy had turned on this, Whether VOL. XI.

S

"or