A. M. 1657. A. C. 2347; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii. 20. TO THE END OF CH. ix.

in the east, namely, the worship of demons, whose food, as they imagined, was blood; and therefore they who adored them, had communion with them by eating the same food. Good reason, therefore, say they, had God in the gospel, as well as the law, to prevent a practice, which he could not but foresee would be attended with such pernicious effects.

For the apostolic decree, as they argue farther, did not relate to one sect of people only, the proselytes of the gate, who were lately converted to Christianity; nor was it directed to some particular places only, and with a design to answer some particular ends, the prevention of offence, or the reconciliation of contending parties; to subsist for a determinate time, and then to lose all its obligation: but it concerned all Christians, in all nations, and in all future ages of the church, was enacted for a general use and intent, and has never since been repealed. And to support these assertions, they proceed in this method :

| city them that preach him, being read in the synagogue every Sabbath-day.'

My sentence (says the apostle) is, that ye write unto the Gentile converts upon these points; For Moses has those of old in every city that preach him,' that is, there is no necessity of writing to any Jewish convert, or any proselyte convert to Christianity, to abstain from these things, because all that are admitted into synagogues (as the proselytes were) know all these things sufficiently already. And accordingly, upon this sentence of St James, the decree was founded and directed (according to the nature of the thing) to those whom it was fitting and necessary to inform in these points, that is, to those who were unacquainted with the writings of Moses.

The letter, indeed, which contained the decree, was directed to the brethren at Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia; but it would be shocking and unchristian to think, that the precepts of an apostolic epistle were obligatory to those only to whom the epistle was directed. The purport of it concerned all. It was to apprise the heathen converts to Christianity, that they were exempted from the observance of the law of Moses, except in four instances laid down in that canon; and as it was of general concern for all converts to know, the apostles, we may presume, left copies of it in all the churches: for so we are told expressly of St Paul and his companions, that, as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees to keep, which were ordained of the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem; and so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.'

4 6

Before the passing of this decree, say they, St Paul preached Christianity to the whole body of the Gentiles at Antioch. For he had not long preached in the synagogues, before the Gentiles 1 besought him, that he would preach to them the same words, that is, the doctrine of Jesus Christ, on the next Sabbath-day; and accordingly we are told, that, on the Sabbath-day, came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God;' which certainly implies a concourse of people, more than the proselytes of the gate, nay more than the whole body of the Jews, who were but a handful in comparison of the rest of the inhabitants of that great city; and that this large company was chiefly made up of Gentiles, the sequel of the history informs us. For when the 2 Jews saw The apostles, say they, out of Christian prudence, the multitude they were filled with envy, and spake might do many things to prevent offences, and to accomagainst those things which were spoken by Paul, contra-modate matters to the people's good liking: but certainly dicting and blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, it was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you, but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldst be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed; and the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.'

Now this transaction at Antioch, say they, happened seven years before the decree against blood and things strangled was passed at Jerusalem; and therefore as the (rentiles, not in Antioch only, but in all the region round about, were no strangers to the doctrine of Jesus Christ, there is reason to suppose that this decree, when passed, was not confined to one particular set of men, but directed to all Gentile converts at large. For hear what the president of the council says upon this occasion; Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, who from among the Gentiles are turned to God; but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood: for Moses of old time hath in every

3

Acts xiii, 42, &c. 2 Acts xiii. 45, &c. Acts xv. 19-22.

it looks below the dignity of a synod to meet, and debate, and determine a question with the greatest solemnity, merely to serve a present exigence; to leave upon record a decree which they knew would be but of temporary obligation; and yet could not but foresee would occasion endless scruples and disputes in all future ages of the church. If it was to be of so short a continuance, why was not the repeal notified, and why were not so many poor ignorant people saved, as died martyrs in the attestation of it? But, above all, how can we suppose it consistent with the honour and justice of the apostles, to impose things as necessary, which were but of transient and momentary duration?

Observe the words of the decree, cry they, 'It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things, namely, that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.' If these abstinences were only intended to be enjoined for a season, could they properly be enjoined under the denomination of necessary things? Is that the appellation for duties of a transient and temporary observation? Did neither the apostles nor the Holy Ghost know the distinction between necessary and expedient? Or, suppose it not convenient to make the distinction at that time, how come things of a temporary, and those of an

Acts xvi. 4, 5.

A. M. 1657. A. C. 2347; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii. 20. TO THE END OF CH. ix. eternal obligation, to be placed upon the same foot of | abstain from certain meats, as an infringement upon our necessity in the same decree? Or, were fornication and idol-pollutions to be abstained from only for a season, in compliment to the infirmity of the Jews; or in order to make up a breach between some newly initiated con- | verts? These are absurdities, say they, which cannot be avoided, when men will assert the temporary obligation of this decree.

Some general declarations in Scripture, especially in St Paul's epistles, seem indeed like a repeal of it; but then, if we consider the scope and occasion of these declarations, we shall soon perceive that they were intended to be taken in a limited sense; otherwise they are not consistent with the decree itself. Our blessed Saviour, for instance, tells the people, that not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, but that which cometh out of it.' But now, if this declaration of his destroys the validity of the apostolic decree, it will follow, 1st, That this decree was repealed just twenty years before it was made, which is a supposition somewhat extraordinary; and, 2dly, That the whole body of the apostles did, after full debate, make a most solemn decree, and that under the influence of the Spirit of God, in direct contradiction to the express declaration of their Lord and Master, which is a little too contiguous to blasphemy; and therefore let us consider the occasion of our Saviour's words.

Christian liberty, and a branch of the doctrine of devils ; the meats which they forbade must be supposed to be lawful in their kind, and under no divine prohibition; otherwise we bring the apostles, who inhibited the use of blood, under the like imputation.

It cannot be denied, indeed, that St Paul allows Christians to eat things offered to idols, which may seem to invalidate this apostolic decree. But, the answer to this, is-2 That the plain intention of the council at Jerusalem, in commanding to abstain from meats offered to idols, was to keep Christians from idolatry, or, as St James expresses it,' from pollutions of idols :' and the true way to effect this, they knew, was by prohibiting all communion with idols and idolaters in their feasts, which were instituted in honour of their idols, and were always kept in their temples. But how is this command defeated by St Paul's permitting the Corinthians to eat any part of a creature sold in the shambles, or set before them in private houses, (though that creature might chance to have been slain in honour to an idol,) since the Christian, who ate it in this manner, did not eat it in honour to the idol, but merely as common food?

To illustrate this by a parallel instance. Suppose that the apostolic decree had commanded Christians to abstain from things stolen. Would not any one conceive that the design of this command was to prohibit theft, and all communion with thieves in their villany? Yes, surely. Suppose then that any one of the council should, after this, tell the people whom he preached to, that they

The Pharisees, it seems, were offended at his disciples for sitting down to meat before they had washed their hands, as being a violation of one of their traditional precepts. Whereupon our Saviour tells the company, Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man-might buy any meat publicly sold in the shambles, or set never meaning to give them a permission to eat any thing prohibited by the law, but only to instruct them in this, That there was not all that religion, or profanation of religion, which the Pharisees pretended, in observing, or not observing the tradition of the elders, by eating with washed or unwashed hands; that the thing itself was of an indifferent nature; nor could a little soil taken in at the mouth, by eating with dirty hands, defile the man, because nothing of that kind could properly be called a pollution.

St Paul himself, was one of the council of Jerusalem when the prohibition of blood was ratified by the Spirit of God, and imposed on the Gentiles, who were converted to the Christian faith; and therefore we can hardly think that, in his epistles, which were written not many years after, he should go about to abolish the observation of those precepts, which, after mature deliberation, were enacted by a general assembly of the church; and therefore, when he tells us that the kingdom of God, that is, the Christian religion, consisteth not of meat and drink, and that meat commendeth us not unto God,' he must be understood in a comparative sense, namely, that it neither consists in, nor commendeth us so much, as holiness and purity of life. When he declares, 'that every creature of God is good, that nothing is unclean of itself, and that to the pure all things are pure,' &c., he must necessarily be understood with this restraining clause-In case there be no particular statute to the contrary; for where there is one, all the sanctity in the world will not give a man a toleration to break it: and when he complains of some men's commanding us to

before them in private houses, asking no questions for conscience sake, though possibly the butcher or the host might have stolen the meat; would any one think that this permission was intended to invalidate the decree of abstaining from things stolen? And if such a construction would be absurd in the one case, why should it not be deemed so in another? Especially when St Paul himself so expressly, so solemnly, deters Christians from | all participation in idolatrous feasts. The things which the Gentiles sacrifice,' says he, they sacrifice to devils, not to God; and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and of devils, ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and of devils.'

In a word, say they, whatever the sense of certain passages in St Paul's writings may seem to be, they cannot be supposed to contradict the decree at Jerusalem: a decree to which himself consented, nay, which he himself principally occasioned, and which he himself actually carried about, and deposited with the several churches. For to imagine that, with his own hands, he deposited the decree in one church, under the sanction of a canon ratified by the Spirit of God, and then immediately went to another, and preached against that very canon, and decried it as inconsistent with Christian liberty, is to charge the apostle with such an inconsistency of behaviour, folly, and prevarication, as but badly comports with the character of an ambassador of Jesus

SECT. II.

CHAP. I. Of the Confusion of Languages.

THE HISTORY.

A. M. 1757. A. C. 2247; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2857. A. C. 2554. GEN. CH. xi. TO VER. 10. Christ: and, therefore, unless we are minded to impair the authority, and sap the foundation of revealed religion, we must allow the decree to be still in force; and the command, which prohibits the eating of blood, still chargeable upon every man's conscience. A command given by God himself to Noah, repeated to Moses, and ratified by the apostles of Jesus Christ; given immediately after the flood, when the world, as it were, began anew, and the only one given on that occasion; repeated with awful solemnity to the people whom God had separated from the rest of the world to be his own; repeated with dreadful denunciations of Divine vengeance upon those who should dare to transgress it; and ratified by the most solemn and sacred council that was ever assembled upon earth, acting under the immediate influence of the Spirit of God; transmitted from that sacred assembly to the several churches of the neighbouring nations by the hands of no meaner messengers than two bishops and two apostles; asserted by the best writers and most philosophic spirits of their age, the Christian apologists, and sealed with the blood of the best men, the Christian martyrs; confirmed by the unanimous consent of the fathers, and reverenced by the practice of the whole Christian church for above 300 years, and of the eastern church even to this very day.

These are some of the chief arguments on both sides of the question: and, to form a judgment hereupon, we may observe―That, though this prohibition of eating blood can hardly be deemed a commandment of moral obligation, yet is it a positive precept which cannot but be thought of more weight and importance, for being so oft, and so solemnly enjoined; that though the reasons alleged for its injunction are not always so convincing, yet the prevention of cruelty and murder, which is immediately mentioned after it, will, in all ages, be ever esteemed a good one; and though the liberty granted in the gospel seems to be great, yet it can hardly be understood without some restriction.

Ir is reasonable to believe, that, for some years after the flood, Noah and his family lived in the neighbourhood of the mountains of Armenia, where the ark rested; thence removed into the countries of Syria; then crossing the Tigris into Mesopotamia, and so shaping their course eastward, came at length to the pleasant plain of Babylon, on the banks of the river Euphrates. The fertility of the soil, the delightfulness of the place, and the commodiousness of its situation, made them resolve to settle there; and to build a city which should be the metropolis of the whole earth, and in it a vast high tower, which should be the wonder of the world; for the present use, a kind of pharos, or landmark, and, to future ages, a monument of their great tower and might. “

a

By this project they promised themselves mighty matters; but that which chiefly ran in their heads, was their keeping together in one body, that, by their united strength and counsels, as the world increased, they might bring others under their subjection, and make themselves universal lords: but one great discouragement to this, their project, was—' -That in the place, which they had chosen for the scene of all their greatness, there was no stone to build with. Perceiving, however, that there was clay enough in the country whereof to make bricks, and plenty of a pitchy substance called bitumen,

b

a It is the opinion of many eminent critics, that the whole of Noah's descendants were not engaged in the rebellious project of building the tower of Babel-but only the descendants of Ham, or a portion of them; and this they ground chiefly on the opinion, that it is not likely the whole family of Noah would leave the fertile regions of Armenia, but that portions of them It seemed once good to the Holy Ghost, among other would emigrate as their number increased. During the life of necessary things, to prescribe an abstinence from blood; that patriarch, and the lives of his sons, Dr Hales is of opinion and when it seemed otherwise to him, we are nowhere, themselves gradually into the adjacent fertile and pleasant that the whole of his descendants occupied Armenia, extending that I know of, instructed. Could it be made appear, regions of Assyria, Mesopotamia, and Media. The same indeed, that this prescription was temporary and occa- learned chronologer is likewise of opinion that the regions sional, designed to bind one set of men only, or calcu- destined for the respective possessions of the families of Shem, lated for the infant-state of the church, the question before his death, in that famous prophecy relative to the curse upon Ham, and Japheth, were pointed out by Noah himself a little would be then at an end: but since there are no proper Canaan, that he should be a servant to Shem (spoken by Noah marks in the apostles' decree to show the temporary on awakening from his disgraceful sleep) which has been already duration of it; and the notion of proselytes of the gate, considered; and he supports this opinion by apostolical authority. to whom alone it is said to be directed, (how commodi-division of the earth among the sons of Noah was not made at "We learn," says he, "from St Paul, (Acts xvii. 26,) that the ous soever it may be to solve all difficulties,) upon random," but that God made of one blood all nations of men, examination is found to be groundless or uncertain, the to dwell upon the whole face of the earth, having ordained the obligation, I fear, lies upon every good Christian still. predetermined seasons, and the boundaries of their respective But as this is not every one's sentiment; as one settlements." This important event took place, according to believeth that he may eat all things, and another thinketh Noah, and about 29 years after the death of Shem, when Japheth the same author, B. C. 2614, about 191 years after the death of it the safe side of his duty to abstain; so let not him that and Ham were probably dead likewise.—ED. eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth; but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother's way. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.'

' Rom. xiv. 2, 3, 13, 19.

b The word which our translators make slime, is in Hebrew

hemar, in Greek sparos, in Latin bitumen; and that this plain did very much abound with it, which was of two kinds, liquid and solid; that liquid bitumen here swam upon the waters; that there was a cave and fountain which was continually casting it out; and that this famous tower, at this time, and the no less famous walls of Babylon were afterwards built with this kind of cement, is confirmed by the testimony of several profane authors. For thus Strabo tells us, "In Babylonia much bitumen abounds; there are two kinds of it," says Eratosthenes,

A. M. 1757. A. C. 2247; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2857. A. C. 2554. GEN. CH. xi. TO VER. 10. which would serve instead of mortar, with one consent language; by which means it came to pass, they went to work, and, in a short time, every hand was employed in making bricks, building the city, and laying the foundation of a prodigious pile, which they purposed to have carried up to an immense height, and had already made a considerable progress in the work, when God, dissatisfied with their proceedings, thought proper to interpose, and, at the expense of a miracle, quashed all their project at once, insomuch, that this first attempt of their vanity and ambition became the monument of their folly and weakness.

that though

their tongues still retained the faculty of speech, yet, having lost the pronunciation of their native language, on a sudden they were so changed and modified to the expression of another, (which was of a sound quite different,) that the next stander-by could not comprehend what his neighbour meant, and this, in a short time, ran them into the utmost disorder and confusion: for these different dialects produced different ideas in the minds of the builders, which, for want of understanding one another, they employed to improper objects, and so were obliged to desist from their enterprise; and, not only that, but being by this means deprived of the pleasure and comfort of mutual society, except with such as spake the same language, all those who were of one dialect joined themselves together, and leaving the devoted place, (as they then thought it,) departed in tribes, as their choice or their chance led them, to seek out fresh habitations. Thus God not only defeated their design,

The blessing which God had given Noah and his sons, to increase and multiply, and replenish the earth, had now, for above an hundred years, (according to Hales, 540 years,) exerted itself to good purpose; but, though the number of their descendants was very large, yet the language which they all spake was but one, the same which had descended to them a from their great progenitor, Adam, and very probably was pronounced in the same common manner. To frustrate their undertaking, there-but likewise accomplished his own, of having the world fore, God determined with himself to confound their

more generally, and more speedily peopled, than it otherwise would have been. And, to perpetuate the "a liquid and a solid-the liquid kind is called Naphtha, and memory of such a miraculous event, the place, which was arises in the plain of Susa, but the solid, which also has the pro-first called Babel, and, with small variation, afterwards perty of growing hard, is found in Babylonia, in a fountain nigh to the Naphtha," b. 16. Thus Justin, speaking of Semiramis, Babylon, from this confusion of languages, received its says, "She built Babylon, and covered over the wall of the city denomination. with bricks, instead of sand, bitumen being used the latter

substance in several parts of that country arises out of the earth,"

"In

b. 1. And thus Vitruvius, who is elder than either, says, Babylon there is a place of vast magnitude, having liquid bitumen swimming on its surface, with that bitumen and bricks Semiramis surrounded the wall of Babylon which she built," b. 8. To these we may add some modern testimonies, which tell us that these springs of bitumen are called oyum Hit, the fountains of Hit; and that they are much celebrated by the Persians and Arabs. All modern travellers, except Rauwolf, who went to Persia and the Indies by the way of Euphrates, before the discovery of the Cape of Good Hope, mention these fountains as a very strange and wonderful thing.-See Biblioth. Bib. vol. i. p. 281.; Heidegger's Hist. Patr. Essay 21, and Univers. Hist. b. i.

c. 2.

a That the children of Noah did speak the same language with Adam is very manifest; because Methuselah, the grandfather of Noah, lived a considerable time with him, and questionless spake the same language: and that this language was no other than the Hebrew is very probable from this argument-that Shem, the son of Noah, was for some time contemporary with Abraham, who descended from him, and whose family continued the same language that they both spake until the time of Moses, who recorded the history of his own nation in his native language; so that, what we have now in the Pentateuch, according to the opinion of all Hebrew, and most Christian writers, is the very same with what God taught Adam, and Adam his posterity. Patrick's Commentary. It is, however, very doubtful whether Shem was contemporary with Abraham-according to the chronology of Hales, he was not.-ED.

This confusion of tongues, if not dispersion of the people, is supposed by most chronologers to have fallen 101 years after the flood; for Peleg, the son of Eber, who was great grandson to Shem, was certainly born in that year, and is said to have had the name Peleg given him, because that in his time the earth was divided.—To this short period, between the deluge and the confusion of tongues, however, no countenance is given in Sacred Scripture. It is not said that the earth was divided at Peleg's birth, but in his time, or days. Now if, as our author reasonably supposes in the succeeding chapter, that the confusion of tongues, and the consequent dispersion of the people, did not take place till Peleg was 100 years old, there was abundance of time, even according to the Hebrew chronology, for such a multiplication of mankind, as an attempt like that of the building of Babel seems to imply. Dr Hales, however, born till 401 years after the deluge, and that the division seems to have sufficiently proved that Peleg was not did not take place till he was 140 years old. Consequently there was a period of 541 years, from the deluge till the confusion of tongues and the dispersion of mankind.-ED.

CHAP. II.-Objections answered and Difficulties explained.

THOSE, who have undertaken to settle the geography of the Holy Scriptures, tell us that the land of Shinar was

b Some commentators, from the word confound, are ready to infer, that God did not make some of these builders speak new different languages, only that they had such a confused remembrance of the original language they spake before, as made them speak it in quite a different manner: so that, by the various inflections, terminations, and pronunciations of divers dialects, they could no more understand one another, than those who understand Latin can comprehend those who speak French, Italian, or Spanish, though these languages do certainly arise from it. But this we conceive to be a great mistake-not only c The dispersion of Noah's sons was so ordered, that cach because it makes all languages extant to be no more than so many family and each nation dwelt by itself; which could not well be different dialects of the same original, and, consequently redu-done (as Mr Mede observes) but by directing an orderly division, cible to it; but because, upon examination, it will appear that there are certain languages in the world, so entirely different from each other, that they agree in no one essential property whatever, and must, therefore, at this time, have been of immediate infusion.

either by casting of lots, or choosing according to their birth right, after that portions of the earth were set out, according to the number of their nations and families; otherwise, some would not have been content to go so far north as Magog did, whilst others were suffered to enjoy more pleasant countries.

8

66

5

A. M. 1757. A. C. 2247; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2857. A. C. 2554. GEN. CH. xi. TO VER. 10. all that valley, which the river Tygris runs along, from the mountains of Armenia northwards to the Persian Gulf, or at least to the southern division of the common channel of the Tygris and Euphrates. So that the country of Eden was part of the land of Shinar: and as Eden was probably situate on both sides of the aforementioned channel, so it is not unlikely, that the valley of Shinar did extend itself on both sides (but on the western side, without all doubt) of the river Tygris. Now the mountains of Armenia, according to the account of most geographers, lie north, and not east from Shinar and Assyria; but then it may be supposed, * either that Moses, in this place, followed the geographical style of the Assyrians, who called all that lay beyond the Tygris, the east country, though a great part of it, towards, Armenia, was really northward; or (as 3 some others will have it) that as mankind multiplied, they spread themselves in the country eastward of Ararat; and so making small removes from the time of their descent from the mount, to the time of their journeying into the land of Shinar, they might properly enough be said to have begun their progress from the east. But, without the help of these solutions, and taking Moses in a literal sense, he is far from being mistaken. Most geographers indeed have drawn the mountain of Ararat a good way out of its place, and historians and commentators, taking the thing for fact, have been much perplexed to reconcile this situation with its description in Scripture: whereas, by the accounts of all travellers, for some years past, the mountain which now goes under the name of Ararat, lies about two degrees more east, than the city of Shinar or Senjar, from whence the plain, in all probability takes its name; and therefore, if the sons of Noah entered it on the north side, they must of necessity have journeyed from the east, or, which is the same thing, have travelled westward from the place, where they set out, in order to arrive at the plain of Babylon. a

As soon as Moses has brought the three sons of Noah out of the ark, he takes care to inform us that of them was the whole earth overspread :' after he has given us the names of their descendants, at the time of their dispersion, he subjoins, and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood:' and then proceeding to give us an account of this memorable transaction, he tells us, that the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech,' and that as they, namely, the whole earth, journeyed from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and dwelt there, &c., so that, from the beginning to the end of this transaction, the connexion between the antecedent and relative is so well preserved, that there is no room to suppose, that any less than all mankind, were gathered together on the plain of Shinar, and assisted in the building of Babel: nor seems it improbable that Moses has made these unusual repetitions, to inculcate the certainty of that fact, and to take away all ground for supposing that any other branch of Noah's posterity was in any other part of the earth, at that time.

Historians, indeed, as well as commentators, have generally given in to the common opinion, that Shem and his family were not concerned in this expedition, but for what reason we cannot conceive, since there is no fact in all the Mosaic account more firmly established than this-That the whole race of mankind then in being were actually engaged in it.

'Wells' Geography, vol. 1. p. 210. 'Bochart's Phaleg. b. 1. c. 7.

Kercher's Turris Babel, p. 12.

4 Universal History, b. 1. c. 2. a The Chaldean historian Berosus, informs us, that "they proded circuitously to Babylonia." And Mr Penn (Remarks on the Eastern origination of mankind, Oriental Collect, vol. ii. Nos, 1 and 2,) guided only by a geographical view of the country, happily conjectures, that they followed the course of the great river Euphrates; which rising in the mountains of Armenia, Ears at first in a westerly direction; then it turns to the south, and at length bending eastward, it reaches Babylon from the north-west. Its progress therefore is circuitous; and as the approach to Shinar would be most easily and naturally effected by Swing its winding course; so, in that case, the route of the Emigrants would minutely correspond with Berosus and with Scripture, which represent them as travelling from the original settlement, eastward of the springs of the Euphrates, whose ciruitous course, according to the ingenious remarks of Faber, is described in the Sanscrit word Uratta, pronounced Urat, and signifying a circle, so nearly analogous to the Hebrew name of the river Phrat.-Hales's Analysis, vol. 1. p. 358, second edition.-ED.

The time indeed when this transaction happened, is very differently computed by chronologers, according as they follow the LXX interpreters, who make it 531, or, as rectified by Dr Hales, 541; the Samaritan copy, which makes it 396; or the Hebrew, which allows it to be no more than 101 years from the flood, to the confusion of tongues, and less, we may suppose, to the first beginning to build the tower. If we take either of the former computations, the thing answers itself: upon a moderate multiplication, there will be workmen more than enough, even without the posterity of Shem: but if we submit to the Hebrew account of time, we shall find ourselves straitened, if we part with one third part of our complement, in so laborious a work. There is no necessity, however, to suppose, 10 with some, that every one of these progenitors, as soon as married, (which was very early) had every year twins by his wife, which, according to arithmetic progression, would amount to no less than 1,554,420 males and females, in the shortest period given. Half the number would be sufficient to be employed on this occasion, and half the number will be no unreasonable supposition,considering the strength of constitution men had then, and the additional blessing which God bestowed upon them, and whereby he interested his peculiar providence, that for the increase of the human race, for the restoration of a desolated world, there should be some peculiar fruitfulness granted to man; that even to boys, breaking the appointed laws of nature, power

5 Gen. ix. 19

Gen. x. 32. Gen. xi. 1. s Ibid. ver. 2.
Universal History, b. 1. c. 2.

10 Temporarius in Demonst. Chronol. b. 2.
"Usher's Chron. Sacra, p. 27.

b If we adhere to the Hebrew chronology, then this reasoning of our author cannot be admitted as conclusive; for, according to that chronology, not only Shem, Ham, and Japheth, but even Noah himself, were alive at this time; and it is surely impossible to believe that they could join in such a rebellious project, while the recollection of the deluge must have been fresh in their minds. The chronology of the Septuagint, which Dr Hales thinks correct, removes this difficulty, by dating the confusion of tongues at 541 years after the flood, but at this time mankind would be so much increased, that it is doubtful whether they could be all assembled on the plain of Shinar.-See previous note, page 109. -ED.