into captivity together. But I am aware, that the fame vocable, beyond controverfy, denotes the idol of the Ammonites, 2 Kings, xxiii. 13. and is interpreted the fame way by many persons of good learning, in this place of the prophet,

6

Why, however, does he deduce an inference both from Jephtha's and Jeremiah's words, which they will not authorize? Jephtha's application to the Ammonites, is no more than an argumentum ad homines,' as logicians call it; it being as if he had said, "You believe you have a right to hold whatever Che'mosh your god beftows upon you; in like manner, we think we are entitled to occupy and retain, "whatever Jehovah our God gives us.' To this pose speak two commentators § of very oppofite characters, whose words I place below, the rather that our author fometimes appeals to them: nor can Jephtha be reasonably understood in a different manner, fince it was altogether inconfiftent with the principles

pur

Le Clerc in loc. Hinc liquet Chamofum Ammonitarum numen, " de quo ad, Num. xxii. 18. diximus. Haec autem ratiocinatio Jephthis eft ejufmodi argumentum ad hominem quod dicitur, in quo ex dogmatibus adverfarii, non ex noftris ratiocinamur. Alioquin ho'mini Hebraeo non licuit ita de diis gentium loqui, quafi Divinae Pro'videntiae partem, rerumque humanarum ullam administrationem iis tribuerit.'

Calmet again on the place fays, Jephtha reafons according to the idea of the Ammonites, or rather Moabites, in faying that Chamos 'their god, had given them this country; he believed not in this god, but by a figure of fpeech, which is called Conceffion, he is willing to suppose that which his enemies pretended.' And then says, ' Cha'mos is every where spoken of as the god of the Moabites in Scripture.' Numb. xxi. 29. 1 Kings, xi. 7, 33. 2 Kings, xxiii. 13. Jerem, xlviii. 13, 46. Sq he.

of a Jew, to allow any of the gods of the nations a fhare in the difpofal of human affairs.

Mr. Voltaire insists I own, in his Treatife on Toleration*, that Jephtha's declaration, who was infpired by God, is, at leaft, an evident proof, that God permitted the worship of Chemofh. For the words of Holy Scripture are not, "Thou thinkeft "thou haft a right to poffefs that which thy god "Chemofh giveth thee to poffefs," but exprefsly "Thou haft a right to poffefs," &c. For that is the true interpretation of the Hebrew words, "otho "thirafch."

But we do not read of any infpiration of Jephtha, till after he had fent this meffage to the king of the Ammonites; where probably alfo the expreffion,

The spirit of the Lord came upon him,' Judg. xi. 29. denotes only that he felt a ftrong impulfe from heaven to fight against these oppreffors of the country, and was endowed with requifite fkill and bravery, for the fuccefsful performance of the work.Besides, our author falls here into a very grofs miftake in making 'otho thirasch' fignify, thou hast $ a right to poffefs;' every perfon of moderate acquaintance with the Hebrew tongue knows, that these words in that language, denote no more than 'thou wilt poffefs it,' the verb W iarafch, whose future tenfe occurs in the phrafe, being indifferently applied to poffeffion by unlawful force and vi

# Page 172, 173.

Perhaps this was owing to a too fecure reliance on the Vulgate verfion, which hath Tibi jure debentur.'

Of its being used concerning ufurpation or unjust possession, Judges, xix. 15. 1 Kings, xxi. 19. are inftances.

'

olence, and to poffeffion by rightful title or just claim. Further, fuppofing that Jephtha had enjoyed inspiration in the fenfe that Mr. Voltaire intends, and that the meaning of the original expreffions was fuch as he reprefents, it would still remain to be proved, that Jephtha could not reafon with the idolatrous prince whom he addreffed, according to his falfe notions about Chemofh, unless he himself had also believed his divinity, which I fancy would be no eafy task.†

With relation to the paffage in Jeremiah again, if Melcom, the idol of the Ammonites, and not their king, be there defigned, Jehovah is indeed introduced fpeaking about their invafion and feizure of the diftrict which belonged to the tribe of Gad, after it fhould become defolate through Ifrael's captivity by the Affyrians, as if they had been without descendants who could occupy it, in the fame manner in which thefe blinded Ammonites themselves would think and talk concerning it, That their god inhe rited the land of Gad.' But how abfurd to interpret this, though it were the true fenfe, to be an ac

I cannot but remark, that Mr. Voltaire feems inconsistent with himself upon this fubject. In his Philofophical Dictionary, page 310. he fays, The Jews and Moabites had auted the natives with no other right than force, and one fays to the other, Thy god hath fup'ported thee in thy ufurpation, allow my god likewise to support 'mine;' yet we have seen, in his Philofophy of History, he speaks of the Moabites or Ammonites, as he calls them, their poffeffing lawfully what Chamos gave them, or their holding it by right. And he must allow the fame about the Jewish poffeffion of the conquests which their God gave them, upon his own interpretation of WV iarasch, because this word is also used with regard to their acquifitions. But could their poffeffion be at once lawful and unlawful, just and unjust ?

knowledgement by Jehovah or his prophet, of his real power and Godhead, when the vanity and infignificance of the idols of the heathen, among which this was one, is every where declared by them; and here also it is afferted, that this Melcom, to whom they attributed their poffeffion of that territory,would fhare the fame calamities and diftreffes with them, unable to deliver himself more than his worshippers? For it follows, verse 3. 'Melcom fhall go into cap'tivity, with his priests and his princes together.'

*

Our author then, has mifrepresented Jephtha's address, and argued ill both from his words, and thofe of the prophet, while he imputes to the Jews an opinion, that every nation was protected by the god they had chofen. So far were they from entertaining this principle, and from believing in a multitude of deities, in pursuance of it, as they did who held the existence of local gods, of circumfcribed dominion, and confined power, and limited prefence, each prefiding over his own province or territory, that they represent their God as the alone God of the universe, whose presence was without bounds, whose strength was uncontrollable, and from whofe empire and fovereignty, no creature was exempt; as may be obferved, Pf. cxxxix. 1,-12, 1 Kings, viii. 13, 27. 2 Kings, xviii. 34, 35. xix. 16,-19, &c. Morea

*So, however, he does alfo in his Philofophical Dictionary, article Religion, page 310. for after quoting the words from Jeremiah and Amos, above-recited, he adds, Thefe paffages fhew that antiqui⚫ty attributed a guardian god to every country.' Yea,' fays he, page 349, article Toleration, the Jews worshipped their God, but never were offended at, or so much as thought it strange, that every nation ' had its own deity,' What grofs mifrepresentation is this? and how impoffible to be reconciled with candour and ingenuity?

yer, they speak every where with scorn and contempt of the gods of the nations, and cenfure their votaries on all occafions for extreme folly and stupidity, Pí, xcvi. 5. cxv. 3,-8. cxxxv. 5,-18. Ifaiah, xlv. 8, 25. xlvi. 5,-10. Jerem. x. 1, 16.

Of his afferting there and elsewhere, that the Jews, for forty years in the defert, worshipped no other God than idol deities.

6

IN the next paragraph of the fame chapter, fays Mr. Voltaire, Jeremiah, Amos, and St. Stephen, affure ⚫ us that the Jews, for forty years in the desert, ac'knowledged no other God than Moloc, Remphan, and Kicim; that they made no facrifice, and pre'fented no offering to the lord Adonai, whom they afterwards adored. It is true that the Pentateuch fpeaks of nothing but the golden calf, which no prophet mentions: but this is not the place to clear up this great difficulty: it is fufficient, they equally revered Jeremiah, Amos, and St. Stephen, who feem to contradict one another, and yet are reconciled.' This is a favourite topic with him, wherefore he touches it again in the thirty-fourth chapter; †' We have already seen, that when the Jews inhabited the eastern deferts of the lake Afphaltides, they carried the tabernacle of the god Rempham, of the god Moloc, of the god Kiam, according to Jeremiah, Amos, and St. Stephen.' And before the publication of this piece, in his Treatise on ToleraPhil. of Hift. page 17. ↑ Page 169.