That men might be fatisfy'd then, as divines and others are now, notwithstanding the citations made by the apostles out of the Old Teftament are fo different from what we now find therein :

That it appears from almoft every part of the New Teftament, that the Jews and the apostles were perpetually difputing about the myftical fenfe of the Old Teftament; which, as it was the fole foundation of chriftianity, fo it was the fole fubject of difpute; tho' we know not how the Jews, who were not converted, anfwer'd the apostles:

That St. PAUL argues against fome Jews, as much concern'd for the letter of their law, in oppofition to the spirit of the law, which he contended for; and that his enemies and accufers (a) among the Jews were the Sadducees, who contended for the literal interpretation of the Old Teftament; the Pharifees, who contended for allegorical interpretations of the Old Testament, finding no evil in him:

That the first converts among the Jews to chriftianity were Pharifees, it not appearing that any (b) one Sadducee was ever concerted to the faith in the whole new TeAament:

That

(a) Acts 23. 8.

(b) Wotton's Mif. Difcourfe, Vol. 1. p. 95.

That the body of the Jews did reject JESUS, whom they knew not to be the CHRIST, and whom they rejected as pretending to be the CHRIST, in virtue of their interpretations (whether literal or allegorical) of the Old Testament, which they took to be perverted and mifapply'd in behalf of him :

That it would have been no wonder, if the Jews had not at first made objections to the apostles for their not citing, and reafoning from, the letter of the Old Teftament, when they had for a confiderable time before the days of Jesus and the apoftles, (c) neglected the literal fenfe of, and used to allegorize the bible:

That when the Jews did attack christianity by writings and books, they did cenfure the apostles and chriftians (d) for citing falfely, and for arguing falfely, because not literally from the Old Testament; and to expose them more effectually they caus'd other and more li. teral and faithful tranflations to be made, than the Septuagint, which was much used by the chriftians, and greatly receeded from the hebrew text by its additions, omiffions, and false tranflations:

t

That

(c) Simon Hift. Crit. du V. Teft. p. 97.

(d) See Juftin Martyr, Origen and Jerom, as cited in PEZRON Defense de l' Antiquite des tems, p. 136, 137; 174 337, 398, 400.

!

That (e) FESTUS, the Heathen, did, upon hearing St. PAUL declare his manner of arguing from the Old Teftament, and proving from thence, that Chrift should fuffer and rife from the dead, tell PAUL that he was befide bimfelf, and that much (Jewish) learning bad made him mad; wherein FESTUS has the fame thoughts of the manner of arguing of PAUL, which Mr. WHISTON has of the prefent, apparent, reafoning of the apostles from the Old Teftament: (f) and that AGRIPPA, who was expert in all cuftoms and questions among the Jews, and believ'd in the prophets, was almoft perfwaded to be a chriftian by that very way of reafoning whereby FESTUS Concluded St. PAUL mad:

That CELSUS, who seems the oldest heathen author, that has attack'd christianity, whereof we have any remains, did not only attack (g) chriftians for their allegorical interpretations of the Old Teftament, who, he faid, by a most astonishing folly, and a Stupidity without example, endeavour'd to find out relations between things, for which there was not the leaft foundation; but for their

(e) Acts 26. 6, 7, 22, 23, 24.

Le Clerc fur cet endroit.

(f) A&s, Ib. v..3, 27, 2

28.

(g) Origen contra Celf. p. 187, 196-198.

their application of the prophefies in the Old Teftament to JESUS, which, he (b) faid, agreed to a thousand other perfons with equal or more probability than to him, and were apply'd by forc'd interpretations; feveral of which prophefies ORIGEN (i) yields to CELSUS to be enigmatical and allegori cal, and to be fo apply'd by the christians: and that CELSUS, fpeaking of fome of the prophefies cited by the apoftles,` fays, (k) moft fatyrically, that they are unintelligible, enthufiaftical, and perfectly obfcure fayings, which no wife man can understand a tittle of but only occafion fools and jugglers to apply to their purposes:

That PORPHYRY, a moft acute pagan philofopher, wrote a voluminous work (now loft) against christianity, to which EUSEBIUS of Cefarea wrote, an answer (now loft); wherein the faid PORPHYRY thus charg'd the christians in general, and ORIGEN in particular (1) with allegorizing the Old Teftament. Some being refolv'd, fays he, to find out folutions for the difficulties which occur in the writings of the Jews, rather than reject them, have recourfe to inconfiftent

(b) Ib. p. 39, 44, 78.

(i) p. 39.

(k) Origen contra Celf. as cited and tranflated by Ni chols in his Conference with a Theift, Vol. 3. p. 10. (1) Apud Eufebii Hift. Ecclef. 1. 6. c. 19.

fiftent interpretations, nothing relating to what is written, and which are not fo much in defence of thofe ftrange doctrines, as in confirmation and praife of their own. -For vaunting in great words, that what MOSES Spoke with all imaginable plainnefs, are dark riddles, they enthufiaftically give them out as fo many divine oracles pregnant with hidden myfteries; and after confounding the judgment with this fublime language, they deliver their own explications. For an example of this folly, let us take ORIGEN, a perfon, with whom I bad fome acquaintance, when I was very young. He was then and still re-. mains in great efteem with the teachers of this doctrine, who loudly spread bis fame for the volumes be left behind him. As for bis opinions concerning the divinity and other things, he was a difciple of the greek philofophers, and endeavour'd by their principles to fupport the exotick fables of the Fews. Moreover the writings of PLATO were never out of his bands; nor those of NuMENIUS, CRONIUS, APOLLOPHANES, LONGINUS, MODERATUS ; ́ nor thofe of NICHOMACHUS, and the most celebrated pythagoreans. He read likewife the books of CHEREMON, the ftoick; and of CORNUTUS; of whom having learnt the allegorical method of explaining the gre

cian