Religion. Nor was the great St. AUSTIN lefs allegorical (t) than ORIGEN in his Interpretations of Scripture; in which Method he greatly improved himself by studying Platonick Authors.

Many of the primitive Fathers, and Apologists for Christianity, who for the most Part wholly address themselves to Pagans, reason allegorically, not only from natural and artificial Things (proving; that CHRIST was to fuffer on the Cross, from Things (u) made after the Fashion of a Cross; that there must be (w) four Gofpels and no more, from the four Winds and four Corners of the Earth; and that CHRIST was to have (x) twelve Apostles, becaufe the Gospel was to be preach'd in the four Parts of the World, in the Name of the Trinity, three Times four making twelve; and because there were (y) twelve Bells, which hung at the Bottom of the Jewish high Priest's Garment) but from the Old Testament exactly in the fame Manner with the Apostles; which implies, that they look'd on Allegories to be proper Topicks for Pagans; and fome of them had particular Reason to do so from their own Experience, who, while they were Philofophers themselves, and before they (z) became Chriftians, were accuftom'd to it. It is alfo well

(1) Simon Hift. Crit. du V. T. f. 399.

(u) Justin Martyr, and Min. Felix. (w) Irenæus. (x) St. Auftin.

(3) Justin Martyris Opera. p. 260. See alfo MONTAGU Origines Ecclefiaftice, wherein there is a learned Differtation upon the Type TWELVE, p. 121, &c. Pars Pofterior.

(z) Wake's Prelim. to Genuine Epiftles of St. Clement, &c, F. 75.

known,

known, that (a) THEOPHILUS ANTIOCHENUS, CLEMENS of Alexandria, (who was the Disciple of PANTENUS) and ORIGEN, as well as the Gnofticks, allegorized, in their Explications and Commentaries, the Books of the New Teftament; which Commentaries may be justly supposed written for the Use of Pagans as well as Jews and Christians, in Order to give them all a more exalted Notion of Christianity and of the New Teftament.

In a Word, (b) this Method of writing in Matters of Religion, (practifed by Apostles, Companions of the Apostles, and most primitive Fathers) was generally used, not only among the Jews, but among the wifer and more philofophical Part of the Gentiles too; and from both came to be almost univerfally received among the primitive Chriftians; as fays our most learned and judicious Archbishop WAKE. And our learned (c) DoDWELL fays, that Oneirocriticks and Hieroglyphicks, and other Pagan myftical Arts of Concealment are of Ufe towards underftanding the prophetical Books of the Old Teftament (the (d) whole Indulgence of God in granting the Spirit of Prophecy to the Jews being plainly accommodated to the heathen Practice of Divination); and that (e) the Revelations of the Gofpel being made for the Sake of all Man-kind, its Reafonings, (which for the moft Part

(a) Simon Hift. des Comment. p. 3, 4, 5. c. 1.

(b) Wake, Ib. p. 71-75. See aljo L'enfant. Preface Gen. fur fon Nov. Teft. p. 3.

(d) Ib. p. 113.

(c) Dodwell's Letters of Advice, &c. p. 208.
(e) Dodwelli Prolegomena ad Stearn de Obftinatione.

are

are allegorical) were fuited to the Understanding of the Generality of the People of that Age (and by Confequence to the People of future Ages) and in particular to That of the Philofophers, who were the Leaders among the Gentiles. Wherefore the Arguments of the Apostles were fo far from being Arguments ad Hominem to the Jews, that they were then equally conclufive to great Numbers among the Gentiles; and the Prophefies cited from the Old in the New Testament, tho' (f) fhining in a dark Place, were a Light both to Jews and Gentiles.

And I add, that almost all modern Religionists, whether Chriftians, Pagans, or Mahometans, are as fond of Allegories, as the Antients were. Which feems to make allegorizing the most suitable Method of applying to the Understanding of Men. And therefore the allegorical Arguments of the Apostles were proper for all Sorts of religious Men, as well as Jews, and at prefent are more proper for others than Jews, (among whom there has been for a long Time a direct anti-allegorical Sect call'd Caraites) who, as they knew Nothing of the allegorical Method till long after the Captivity, and when they became (g) bellenized, fo they rejected that Method, as to all Prophefies and other Quotations taken from the Old Teftament by the Apostles, foon after the Rife of Christianity, and now contend for one fingle Sense against any allegorical

(f) 2 Pet. 1. 19.

(g) Clerici. Hift. Ecclef. p. 24, Meaning

Meaning of them, and argue against allegorical Interpretations as abfurd in themselves, no lefs than Atheists and Deifts, and Sadducees (who, as is before obferved, never received (b) the allegorical Interpretations of their Brethren-Jews) or fuch (rational) Chriftians as Mr. WHISTON; tho' herein the Jews feem to act a most inconfiftent Part; for unless they use the allegorical Method, (i) they will not be able to establish their own Belief of a MESSIAS to come, which yet is one of the fundamental Articles of their Religion. That Article, in the Judgment of the famous Rabbi (k)· ALBO, has no other Foundation than the Authority of Tradition. For, fays he, there is not any Prophecy, either in the Law, or the Prophets, that foretells his Coming by any neceffary Expofition of it, with Refpect to him, or which may not from the Circumstances of the Text be well explain'd otherwife. In a Word, a learned (1) Author maintains, "that the "Books of the Old Teftament are of little "Ufe for the Converfion of the Jews. For "almost all, which is faid to be spoken in "the Old Teftament of the MESSIAS must "be interpreted myftically, before it can appear to be spoken of him, and by Confequence very remotely from what the Words "do naturally fignify."

(b) Simon Bib. Crit. Vol. 4. p. 508.

(i) Simon Hift. Crit. du Nov. Teft. p. 246, 247.

(k) Albo Oratio 1. c. 1. apud Allix's Judgment of the Jewish Church against the Unitarians. p. 411.

(1) Smalcius apud Ib. p. 414.

G

3. Thirdly,

3. Thirdly, in Answer to the Objection I obferve, that Chriftianity is wholly (m) reveal'd in the Old Teftament, and has its divine Authority from thence; that it is not literally, but myftically or allegorically reveal'd therein and that therefore Christianity is the allegorical Senfe of the Old Teftament, and is not improperly call'd (n) mystical Judaism.

If therefore Christianity is grounded on Allegory, converted Gentiles must be convinced by Allegory, and become Allegorifts or myfical Fews, no less than converted Jews. For the Religion itself, to which they were to be converted, was Allegory or Christianity as taught allegorically in the Old Testament.

The Apostle PAUL in his firft Epistle to the Corinthians, Ift and 2d Chapters (0) (wherein it is to be obferved, that he argues against the Greeks, and the Philofophers, as well as the Jews) feems to disclaim all other Methods of arguing befides the allegorical, when he fays, that (p) the Wisdom he spoke was Wisdom among them that were perfect; That is, among them, who understood the fecret, mystical, and fpiritual Senfe of Things; that his Wisdom was the Wisdom of God, hidden from the World, which God had ordain'd before the World; That is, that it was the fecret, divine, and fpiritual Senfe of Judaism, which the World, that interpreted Judaism, literally

(m) Dodwel's Letters of Advice, &c. p. 169, &c.
(n) Ib. One Altar and one Priesthood. p. 236.
(o) See Whitby on both Chapters.

2. Ib. c. 2. v. 6, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 20, 21.

(p) 1 Cor. c.

knew