The perfecutions, therefore, of the different fects and parties of Christians against one another, could never be the neceffary effect of these words of Jesus; nor indeed were they in any fenfe the effect of them at all, because we do not find they ever concluded thence, that it was lawful to kill every person who trefpaffed against them, in the manner Mr. Voltaire reprefents. Even Mr. Chubb could not fee here the church's power of excommunication. For, having contended, that Chrift hath given no power to pastors to excommunicate wicked Chriftians, or those who appear fuch, but rather expressly forbid it, left they fhould root up good grain with tares, or through ignorance, mistake, intereft, and paffion, hurt truly faithful and pious perfons, he explains these words under courts with! fince the Jews, both in the country of Judea, and in these provinces of the empire where they lived, had councils and magiftrates of their own, vefted with fufficient power and authority to chastife fuch wrongs as did not merit capital punishment, by the leffer penalties of imprisoning, fcourging, &c.---Moreover, Christ could only in agreeableness to his rules Matt. v. 38---41. give advice or permiffion to profecute in civil courts fuch as had committed more intolerable injuries. Accordingly, Mr. Bourn himself, finds it neceffary to throw in a limitation or qualification, about the importance of injuries; If

the injury be fuch, that it appear requifite to your own safety, or the ⚫ ends of public justice, to make an example of him, or reduce him to ⚫ reafon by compulfion, religion by no means forbids you from fecuring yourselves, or executing justice upon him, by carrying your cause " before the Roman magistrate.' And how neceffary fuch a limitation, when seeking redrefs of wrongs sustained from Christian brethren before heathen judges, was ready to give them ill impreffions of Christianity, and to create prejudices in their minds against religion, thereby hurting its cause and intereft! See 1 Cor. vi. 1.---8.

* See his two Letters, the first of which contains an inquiry concerning church-difcipline. But that the church is required to ex

our confideration, thus, 'If any one does not behave fuitably to the principles of Christianity, (by whatever name his fault may be called,) and, after be ing admonished at different times by his neigh bour, and at laft by the church, i. e. the Christian fociety of which he is a member, does not amend or ' reform, he ought to be no more regarded as a mem⚫ber of that society, but as a wicked man.' And then adds, "This is all the excommunication which Jefus 'Chrift hath authorized. Every individual ought to a• void intercourse with the man who continues in his 'vices; but the Christian society hath no right to ex'clude him from its body, by a formal and judicial act.' How ftrange therefore our author fhould have discovered here a precept of Chrift to his followers, to destroy the lives of all who differed in opinion from them, though they should also own Jefus as their master, and his gospel as the rule of their faith and manners! This hath been left to be found out by his fagacity and penetration alone. Chrift's words, however, continue ftill a very sensible and wholesome prescription in the cafe of injuries between man and man, after all his attempt to burlesque and ridicule them.

But it is time to finish the fecond Part of this Treatife. A fufficient number * of instances hath, I

clude from communion all vifibly wicked and flagitious members, is evident from the apostle's reproofs and orders, with relation to the incestuous Chriftian, to the church of Corinth, 1 Cor. v. throughout, and 2 Cor. ii. 11. and in reality, it is only exercising such power as is fit, for its own credit and honour, and for promoting regularity of manners among its members.

* If other misreprefantations of Scripture are remarked in his works, it is to be observed, I only propofed to animadvert on fome of them,

I think, been produced to verify the charge against Mr. Voltaire, of mifreprefenting Scripture fometimes, upon the mere authority of the Vulgate tranflation, but far oftener without any fhadow of fupport from that or any other verfion at all; and if the reader fhall also be of opinion, that the accufation is made good, muft it not follow, that he ought to be perused with suspicion and distrust, instead of implicit faith, where he profeffes to give an account of what is contained in the Sacred Books? nay, that he is deferving of our displeasure, whatever may be his fine talents and eminent abilities in some respects, because he discards that ingenuous probity, and strict regard to truth, which is the most effential of all qualifications in one, who profeffes to write with an intention to lead us into the knowledge of antient principles and facts? Muft not alfo, by confequence, our veneration and efteem for the facred oracles be restored and juftified, in fo far as his false recitals thereof, and falfe comments upon them, have tended to diminish and impair the fame, or to expofe it to the world as weak and injudicious?

as a fpecimen of his difregard to fairness and veracity. As to cavils against the truth of this or that particular fact, and the propriety of this or that law enjoined the Jews, and charges of contradiction in the nar ratives of the writers, which have any real foundation in the Sacred Books as they now ftand, they did not fall within my plan in this work; I have hinted the principles, by one or other of which such objections may be in a great measure folved, in the note at the beginning of this fecond part, page 49. and answers to them may be met with, perhaps univerfally, in good commentators, or in apologies for Christianity against Tindal, Morgan, and others. Yet perhaps it would be no fmall fervice to the caufe of religion, for fome perfon of learning and leisure to confider them in the form in which Mr Voltaire hath propofed them.

O F

MR. VOLTAIRE'S'

FALSE REFLECTIONS

ON SOME OF THE

SACRED BOOK S.

M

R. VOLTAIRE hath not fatisfied himself with giving unfair representations of particular paffages of Scripture; He hath even thrown out injurious affertions, with regard to feveral of the books that compofe our facred volume. To the confideration, therefore, of some of them at least, in pursuance of the scheme propofed, I now proceed; and they chiefly relate to their genuineness or authenticity.

SECTION I

Of his faying, that fome thought the first book of Samuel a compofition fo late as the monarchy of the Greeks, in his Philofophy of History.

I BEGIN with his remark, in the thirty-fifth chapter of his * Philofophy of Hiftory, The Pythonefs ' of Endor, says he, who raised the ghost of Samuel, is very well known. It is true there is fomething

• Page 165.

ftrange, that the word Python, which is Greek, 'fhould be known to the Jews, in the time of Saul. Many learned men have concluded from hence, that this history was not written, till the Jews 'traded with the Greeks, after the time of Alexan'der. But this is not the point in question here.'

Very fine! I wish he had favoured us with a lift of his many learned men, who have judged that book of fo recent a date, upon the reason he mentions. For my part, I do not remember to have heard or read of one; and I fhould be much surprised, if any who merited the character, ever entertained the most flight suspicion of this kind, on that account. For how does the cafe ftand? The woman whom Saul wished to confult about the event of his approaching battle with the army of the Philistines, is denominated once and again in the Vulgate verfion, A+woman having a Python,' in our tranflation, 'A woman having a familiar spirit;' and when, upon information from his fervants about the place of her refidence, he came to her house, he is said to have defired fatisfaction from her in the matter which raised his anxiety, thus, I pray thee divine to me by the Python,' in our version, Divine to me by the familiar fpirit;' therefore Mr. Voltaire infers,

+1 Sam. xxviii. 7. Mulier habens Pythonem'. This is very much the description of the maid at Philippi, who brought great gain to her owners by divination, Acts, xvi. 16. for fhe is also stiled in the Vulgate verfion, Puella habens spiritum pythonem;' and there indeed the Greek runs, παιδίσκη έχεσα πνευμα Πυθωνος, which laft word is, according to Hefychius and Suidas, equivalent to aquoris Harrix, a prophefying Daemon.

Ibid. v. 8. Divina mihi in Pythone.'