was mortal; that pleasure was to be regarded as the ultimate end of man; and that virtue was neither worthy of esteem nor of choice, but with a view to its attainment." The Academics asserted the impossibility of arriving at truth, and held it uncertain, "whether the gods existed or not; whether the soul was mortal or immortal; whether virtue ought to be preferred to vice, or vice to virtue " These two sects, though they struck at the foundations of all religion, were the most numerous of all at the birth of Christ, and were particularly encouraged by the liberality of the rich, and the protection of those who were in men among them, who were sensible of the error. XXII. We observed in the preceding section, that there was another kind of philosophy, in which religion was admitted, but which was, at the same time, deficient by the obscurity it cast upon truth. Under the philosophers of this class, may be reckoned the Platonists, the Stoics, and the followers of Aristotle, whose subtile disputations concerning God, religion, and the social duties, were of little solid use to mankind. The nature of God, as it is explained by Aristotle, resembles the principle that gives motion to a machine; it is a nature happy in the contemplation of itself, and entirely regardless of human affairs; and such a divinity, who differs but little from the god of Epicurus, cannot reasonably be the object either of love or fear. With respect to the doctrine of this philosopher concerning the human soul, it is uncertain, to say no more, XX. About the time of Christ's appearance upon earth, there were two kinds of philosophy which prevailed among the civilized nations. One was the philosophy of the Greeks, adopted also by the Romans; and the other, that of the orientals, which had a great number of votaries in Persia, Syria, Chaldea, Egypt, and even among the Jews. The former was distinguished by the simple title of philosophy. The latter was honoured with the more pompous appellation of science or knowledge, since those who embraced the latter sect pretended to be the restorers of the know-whether he believed its immortality or not.‡ ledge of God, which was lost in the world. The followers of both these systems, in consequence of vehement disputes and dissentions about several points, subdivided themselves into a variety of sects. It is, however, to be observed, that all the sects of the oriental phi-the mortality of the human soul? losophy deduced their various tenets from one fundamental principle, which they held in com- || mon; whereas the Greeks were much divided even about the first principles of science. As we shall have occasion hereafter to speak of the oriental philosophy, we shall confine ourselves here to the doctrines taught by the Grecian sages, and shall give some account of the various sects into which they were divided. XXI. Of the Grecian sects, some declared openly against all religion; and others, though they acknowledged a deity, and admitted a religion, yet cast a cloud over the truth, instead of exhibiting it in its genuine beauty and lustre. What then could be expected from such a philosophy? could any thing solid and satisfactory, in favour of piety and virtue, be hoped for from a system which excluded from the universe a divine Providence, and insinuated XXIII. The god of the Stoics has somewhat more majesty than the divinity of Aristotle; nor is he represented by those philosophers as sitting above the starry heavens in a supine indolence, and a perfect inattention to the affairs of the universe. Yet he is described as a corporeal being, united to matter by a necessary connexion, and subject to the determinations of an immutable fate, so that neither rewards nor punishments can properly *The ambiguity of this word has produced many disputes in the explication of the Epicurean system. If by pleasure be understood only sensual gratifications, the tenet here advanced is indisputably monstrous. But if it be taken in a larger sense, and extended to intellectual and moral objects, in what does the scheme of Epicurus, with respect to virtue, differ from the opinions of those Of the former kind were the Epicureans Christian philosophers, who maintain that self-love is the and Academics. The Epicureans maintained, only spring of all human affections and actions? "That the world arose from chance; that the of the two, as appears from the testimony of Cicero de The Epicurean sect was, however, the more numerous gods (whose existence they did not dare to Finibus, &c. lib. i. cap. vii. lib. ii. cap. xiv. Disput. Tusdeny) neither did nor could extend their provi-culan. lib. v. cap. x. Hence the complaint which Juvenal dential care to human affairs; that the soul makes in his xiiith Satire, of the atheism that prevailed at Rome, in those excellent words: * Tvois (gnosis) in the Greek signifies science or knowledge; and hence came the title of Gnostics, which this presumptuous sect claimed as due to their superior light and penetration in divine things. St. Paul mentions and condemns both these kinds of philosophy; the Greek, in the Epistle to the Colossians, i. 8., and the Oriental, or Gnosis, in the First Epistle to Timothy, vi. 20. "Sunt in fortunæ qui casibus omnia ponant, Et nullo credant mundum rectore moveri, Natura volvente vices et lucis et anni; Atque ideo intrepidi quæcunque altaria tangunt." See the Notes upon Cudworth's Intellectual System of the Universe, which Dr. Mosheim subjoined to his Latin translation of that learned work, vol. i. p. 66, 500; vol. ii. p. 1171. See also, upon the same subject, Mourgue's Plan Theologique du Pythagorisme, tom. i. proceed from him.* The learned also know that, in the philosophy of this sect, the existence of the soul was confined to a certain period. Now it is manifest, that these tenets remove, at once, the strongest motives to virtue, and the most powerful restraints, upon vice; and, therefore, the Stoical system may be considered as a body of specious and pompous doctrine, but, at the same time, as a body without nerves, or any principles of consistency and vigour. XXIV. Plato is generally looked upon as superior to all the other philosophers in wisdom; and this eminent rank does not seem to have been undeservedly conferred upon him. He taught that the universe was governed by a Being, glorious in power and wisdom, and possessing perfect liberty and independence. He extended also the views of mortals beyond the grave, and showed them, in futurity, prospects adapted to excite their hopes, and to work upon their fears. His doctrine, however,|| besides the weakness of the foundations on which it rests, and the obscurity with which it is often expressed, has other considerable defects. It represents the Supreme Creator of the world as destitute of many perfections, and confined to a certain determinate portion of space. Its decisions, with respect to the soul and dæmons, seem calculated to beget and nourish superstition. Nor will the moral philosophy of Plato appear worthy of such a high degree of admiration, if we attentively examine and compare its various parts, and reduce them to their principles.‡ to abandon and reject the rest. This gave rise to a new form of philosophy in Egypt, and principally at Alexandria, which was called the Eclectic, whose founder, according to some, was Potamon, an Alexandrian, though this opinion not without its difficulties. It manifestly appears from the testimony of Philo, the Jew, who was himself one of this sect, that this philosophy was in a flourishing state at Alexandria, when our Saviour was upon the earth. The Eclectics held Plato in the highest esteem, though they made no scruple to join, with his doctrines, whatever they thought conformable to reason in the tenets and opinions of the other philosophers.* XXVI. The attentive reader will easily conclude, from the short view which we have here given of the miserable state of the world at the birth of Christ, that mankind, in this period of darkness and corruption, stood highly in need of some divine teacher to convey to the mind true and certain principles of religion and wisdom, and to recall wandering mortals to the sublime paths of piety and virtue. The consideration of this wretched condition of mankind will be also singularly useful to those who are not sufficiently acquainted with the advantages, the comforts, and the support which the sublime doctrines of Christianity are so proper to administer in every state, relation, and circumstance of life. A set of miserable and unthinking creatures treat with negligence, and sometimes with contempt, the religion of Jesus, not considering that they are indebted to it for all the good things which they so ungratefully enjoy. CHAPTER II. Concerning the Civil and Religious State of the I. THE state of the Jews was not much better than that of the other nations at the time of Christ's appearance in the world. They were governed by Herod, who was himself a tributary to the Roman people. This prince was surnamed the Great, surely from no other circumstance than the greatness of his vices; and his government was a yoke of the most vexatious and oppressive kind. By a cruel, sus XXV. As then, by these different sects, there were many things maintained that were highly unreasonable and absurd, and as a contentious spirit of opposition and dispute prevailed among them all, some men of true discernment, and of moderate characters, were of opinion, that none of these sects ought to be adhered to in all points, but that it was rather wise to choose and extract out of each of them such tenets and doctrines as were good and reasonable, and || *Thus is the Stoical doctrine of fute generally represented, but not more generally than unjustly. Their fatum, when carefully and attentively examined, seems to have signified no more in the intention of the wisest of that sect, than the plan of government formed originally in the divine mind, a plan all-wise and perfect, and from which, of consequence, the Supreme Being, morally speak-picious, and overbearing temper, he drew upon ing, can never depart; so that, when Jupiter is said by the himself the aversion of all, not excepting those Stoics to be subject to immutable fate, this means no more who lived upon his bounty. By a mad luxury than that he is subject to the wisdom of his own counsels, and an affectation of magnificence far above and ever acts in conformity with his supreme perfections. The following remarkable passage of Seneca, drawn from his fortune, together with the most profuse and the 5th chapter of his book de Providentia, is sufficient to immoderate largesses, he exhausted the treaconfirm the explication we have here given of the Stoical sures of that miserable nation. Under his adfate. Ille ipse omnium conditor et rector scripsit qui-ministration, and by his means, the Roman dem fata, sed sequitur. Semper paret, semel jussit." This accusation seems to be carried too far by Dr. Mosheim. It is not strictly true, that the doctrine of Plato represents the Supreme Being as destitute of many perfections. On the contrary, all the divine perfections are frequently acknowledged by that philosopher. What probably gave occasion to this animadversion of our learned author, was the erroneous notion of Plato, concerning the invincible malignity and corruption of matter, which the divine power had not been sufficient to reduce entirely to order. Though this notion is, indeed, injurious to the omnipotence of God, it is not sufficient to justify the censure now under consideration. There is an ample account of the defects of the Platonic philosophy in a work entitled Defense des Peres accuses de Platonisme, par Franc. Baltus; but there is more learning than accuracy in that performance luxury was received in Palestine, accompanied with the worst vices of that licentious people.t In a word, Judea, governed by Herod, groaned under all that corruption, which might be expected from the authority and the example of *See Godof. Olearius de Philosophia Eclectica, Jac. Brucker, and others. See, on this subject, Christ. Noldii Historia Idumæa, which is annexed to Havercamp's edition of Josephus, vol. ii. p. 333. See also Basnage, Histoire Des Juifs, tom. i. part i.-Noris, Cenotaph. Pisan.-Prideaux, History of the Jews. Cellarius, Historia Herodum, in the first part of his Academical Dissertations, and, above all, Josephus the Jewish historian. a prince, who, though a Jew in outward pro- || extortions, armed against them both the jusfession, was in point of morals and practice, a tice of God and the vengeance of men. contemner of all laws, divine and human. II. After the death of this tyrant, the Romans divided the government of Palestine among his sons. In this division, one half of Judea was given to Archelaus, with the title of exarch; and the other was divided between his brothers, Antipas and Philip. Archelaus was a corrupt and wicked prince, and followed the example of his father's crimes in such a man-pect. Errors of a very pernicious kind had inner, that the Jews, weary of his iniquitous administration, laid their complaints and grievances before Augustus, who delivered them from their oppressor, by banishing him from his dominions, about ten years after the death of Herod the Great. The kingdom of this dethroned prince was reduced to the form of a province, and added to the jurisdiction of the governor of Syria, to the great detriment of the Jews, whose heaviest calamities arose from this change, and whose final destruction was its undoubted effect in the appointment of Providence. V. Two religions flourished at this time in Palestine, viz. the Jewish and the Samaritan, whose respective followers beheld those of the opposite sect with the utmost aversion. The Jewish religion stands exposed to our view in the books of the Old Testament; but, at the time of Christ's appearance, it had lost much of its original nature and of its primitive asfected the whole body of the people, and the more learned part of the nation were divided upon points of the highest consequence. All looked for a deliverer, but not for such a one as God had promised. Instead of a meek and spiritual Saviour, they expected a formidable and warlike prince, to break off their chains, and set them at liberty from the Roman yoke. All regarded the whole of religion, as consisting in the rites appointed by Moses, and in the performance of some external acts of duty towards the Gentiles. They were all horribly unanimous in excluding from the hopes of III. However severe was the authority which eternal life all the other nations of the world; the Romans exercised over the Jews, it did not and, as a consequence of this odious system, extend to the entire suppression of their civil they treated them with the utmost rigour and and religious privileges.-The Jews were, in inhumanity, when any occasion was offered. some measure, governed by their own laws; And, besides these corrupt and vicious princiand they were tolerated in the enjoyment of ples, there prevailed among them several abthe religion they had received from the glori-surd and superstitious notions concerning the ous founder of their church and state. The administration of religious ceremonies was committed, as before, to the high priest, and to the sanhedrim, to the former of whom the priests and Levites were in the usual subordination;|| and the form of outward worship, except in a very few points, had suffered no visible change. But, on the other hand, it is impossible to express the inquietude and disgust, the calamities and vexations, which this unhappy nation suffered from the presence of the Romans, whom their religion obliged them to look upon as a polluted and idolatrous people, and in a more particular manner, from the avarice and cruel-sects, three in a great measure eclipsed the ty of the prætors and the frauds and extortions rest, both by the number of their adherents, of the publicans, so that, all things considered, and also by the weight and authority which the condition of those who lived under the go- they acquired. These were the Pharisees, the vernment of the other sons of Herod, was much Sadducees, and the Essenes.* There is fremore supportable than the state of those who quent mention made of the two former in the were immediately subject to the Roman juris- sacred writings; but the knowledge of the rites diction. and doctrines of the last, is to be derived from Josephus, Philo, and other historians. These three illustrious sects agreed in the fundamental principles of the Jewish religion, and, at the same time, were involved in endless disputes upon points of the highest importance, and about matters in which the salvation of mankind was directly concerned; and their controversies could not but be highly detrimental to the rude and illiterate multitude, as every one must easily perceive. divine nature, invisible powers, magic, &c. which they had partly brought with them from the Babylonian captivity, and partly derived from the Egyptians, Syrians, and Arabians, who lived in their neighbourhood. VI. Religion had not a better fate among the learned than among the multitude. The supercilious doctors, who vaunted their profound knowledge of the law, and their deep science in spiritual and divine things, were constantly showing their fallibility and their ignorance by their religious differences, and were divided into a great variety of sects. Of these IV. It was not, however, from the Romans alone, that the calamities of this miserable people proceeded. Their own rulers multiplied their vexations, and hindered them from enjoying any little comforts that were left to them by the Roman magistrates. The leaders of the people, and the chief priests, were, according to the account of Josephus, profligate wretches, who had purchased their places by bribes, or by acts of iniquity, and who maintained their ill acquired authority by the most flagitious and abominable crimes. The subordinate and inferior members were infected with the corruption of the head; the priests, and those who possessed any shadow of authority, were disso- ral of inferior note, which prevailed among the Jews at lute and abandoned to the highest degree; the time of Christ's appearance. The Herodians_are while the people, seduced by these corrupt exmentioned by the sacred writers, the Gaulonites by Joseamples, ran headlong into every sort of iniqui-bius; and we cannot reasonably look upon all these sects phus, and others by Epiphanius and Hegesippus in Eusety, and by their endless seditions, robberies, and ll as fictitious. VII. It may not be improper to mention here some of the principal matters that were Besides these more illustrious sects, there were seve debated among these famous sects. A main point of controversy was, whether the written law alone was of divine authority. The Pharisees added to this law another, which had been received by oral tradition. This the Sadducees and Essenes rejected as of no authority, and adhered to the written law as the only divine rule of obedience. They differed also in their opinions concerning the true sense of the law. For, while the Pharisees attributed to the sacred text a double sense, one of which was obvious, regarding only the words, and another mysterious, relating to the intimate nature of the things expressed; and while the Sadducees maintained that nothing farther was delivered by the law, than that which was contained in the signification of the words; the Essenes, at least the greatest part of that sect, entertained an opinion different from both of these. They asserted, in their jargon, that the words of the law were absolutely void of all power, and that the things expressed by them, were the images of holy and celestial objects. These litigious subtilties and unintelligible wranglings, about the nature and sense of the divine word, were succeeded by a controversy of the greatest moment, concerning the rewards and punishments of the law, particularly with respect to their extent. The Pharisees were of opinion, that these rewards and punishments extended both to the soul and body, and that their duration was prolonged beyond the limits of this transitory state. The Sadducees assigned to them the same period that concludes this mortal life. The Essenes differed from both, and maintained that future rewards and punishments extended to the soul alone, and not to the body, which they considered as a mass of malignant matter, and as the prison of the immortal spirit. activity, which is required both in the search and in the defence of truth. IX. The Essenes had little occasion to quarrel with the other sects, as they dwelt generally in rural solitude, far removed from the view and commerce of men.-This singular sect, which was spread abroad through Syria, Egypt, and the neighbouring countries, maintained, that religion consisted wholly in contemplation and silence.-By a rigorous abstinence also, and a variety of penitential exercises and mortifications, which they seem to have borrowed from the Egyptians,* they endeavoured to arrive at still higher degrees of excellence in virtue. There prevailed, however, among the members of this sect, a considerable difference both in point of opinion and discipline.-Some passed their lives in a state of celibacy, and employed their time in educating the children of others. Some embraced the state of matrimony, which they considered as lawful; when contracted with the sole view of propagating the species, and not to satisfy the demands of lust. Those of the Essenes who dwelt in Syria, held the possibility of appeasing the Deity by sacrifices, though in a manner quite different from that of the Jews; by which, however, it appears that they had not utterly rejected the literal sense of the Mosaic law. But those who wandered in the deserts of Egypt were of very different sentiments; they maintained, that no offering was acceptable to God but that of a serene and composed mind, intent on the contemplation of divine things; and hence it is manifest that they looked upon the law of Moses as an allegorical system of spiritual and mysterious truths, and renounced in its explication all regard to the outward letter.f VIII. These differences, in matters of such X. The Therapeuta, of whom Philo the high importance, among the three famous Jew makes particular mention in his treatise sects above mentioned, produced none of those concerning contemplative life, are supposed to injurious and malignant effects which are too have been a branch of this sect. From this often seen to arise from religious controver- notion arose the division of the Essenes into sies. But such as have any acquaintance with theoretical and practical. The former of these the history of these times, will not be so far were wholly devoted to contemplation, and deceived by this specious appearance of mode- are the same with the Therapeutæ, while the ration, as to attribute it to noble or generous latter employed a part of their time in the perprinciples. They will look through the fair||formance of the duties of active life. Whether outside, and see that mutual fears were the latent cause of this apparent charity and reciprocal forbearance. The Sadducees enjoyed the favour and protection of the great: the Pharisees, on the other hand, were exceedingly high in the esteem of the multitude; and hence they were both secured against the attempts of each other, and lived in peace, notwithstanding the diversity of their religious sentiments. The government of the Romans contributed also to the maintenance of this mutual toleration and tranquillity, as they were ever ready to suppress and punish whatever had the appearance of tumult and sedition. We may add to all this, that the Sadducean principles rendered that sect naturally averse to altercation and tumult. Libertinism has for its objects ease and pleasure, and chooses rather to slumber in the arms of a fallacious security, than to expose itself to the painful this division be accurate or not, is a point which I will not pretend to determine. But I see nothing in the laws or manners of the Therapeutæ, that should lead us to consider them as a branch of the Essenes; nor, indeed, has Philo asserted any such thing. There may have been, surely, many other fanatical tribes among the Jews, besides that of the Essenes; nor should a resemblance of principles always induce us to make a coalition of sects. It is, however, certain, that the Therapeute were neither Christians nor Egyptians, as some have erroneously imagined. They were undoubtedly Jews: they gloried in that title, and styled themselves, with particular affectation, * See the Annotations of Holstenius upon Porphyry's Life of Pythagoras, p. 11. of Kuster's edition. ten by the learned Cudworth, concerning the true notion See Mosheim's observations on a small treatise, writof the Lord's Supper. the true disciples of Moses, though their man- tament, and from the ancient history of the ner of life was equally repugnant to the insti- Christian church,* and it is also certain, that tutions of that great lawgiver and to the dic-many of the Gnostic sects were founded by tates of right reason, and showed them to be a tribe of melancholy and wrong-headed enthusiasts.* Jews. Those among that degenerate people, who adopted this chimerical philosophy, must have widely differed from the rest in their opinions concerning the God of the Old Testament, the origin of the world, the character and doctrine of Moses, and the nature and ministry of the Messiah, since they maintained that the creator of this world was a being different from the Supreme God, and that his dominion over the human race was to be destroyed by the Messiah. Every one must see that this enormous system was fruitful of errors, destructive of the very foundations of Judaism. XI. None of these sects, indeed, seemed to have the interests of real and true piety at heart; nor were their principles and discipline at all adapted to the advancement of pure and substantial virtue. The Pharisees courted popular applause by a vain ostentation of pretended sanctity, and an austere method of living, while, in reality, they were strangers to true holiness, and were inwardly defiled with the most criminal dispositions, with which our Saviour frequently reproaches them. They also treated with greater veneration the com- XIV. If any part of the Jewish religion was mandments and traditions of men, than the less disfigured and corrupted than the rest, it sacred precepts and laws of God. The Sad-was, certainly, the form of external worship, ducees, by denying a future state of rewards which was established by the law of Moses. and punishments, removed, at once, the most And yet many learned men have observed, that powerful incentives to virtue, and the most a great variety of rites were introduced into effectual restraints upon vice, and thus gave the service of the temple, of which no traces new vigour to every sinful passion, and a full are to be found in the sacred writings. These encouragement to the indulgence of every ir- additional ceremonies manifestly proceeded regular desire. As to the Essenes, they were from those changes and revolutions which rena fanatical and superstitious tribe, who placed dered the Jews more conversant with the religion in a certain sort of seraphic indolence, neighbouring nations, than they had formerly and looking upon piety to God as incompati- been; for, when they saw the sacred rites of ble with any social attachment to men, dis- the Greeks and Romans, they were pleased solved, by this pernicious doctrine, all the with several of the ceremonies that were used great bonds of human society. in the worship of the heathen deities, and did not hesitate to adopt them in the service of the true God, and add them as ornaments to the rites which they had received by divine appointment.† XII. While such darkness, such errors and dissensions, prevailed among those who assumed the character and authority of persons distinguished by their superior sanctity and wisdom, it will not be difficult to imagine, how XV. But whence arose such enormous detotally corrupt the religion and morals of the grees of corruption in that very nation which multitude must have been. They were, ac- God had, in a peculiar manner, separated from cordingly, sunk in the most deplorable igno- an idolatrous world to be the depository of dirance of God and of divine things, and had vine truth? Various causes may be assigned, no notion of any other way of rendering them-in order to give a satisfactory account of this selves acceptable to the Supreme Being, than by sacrifices, ablutions, and the other external ceremonies of the Mosiac law. Hence proceeded that laxity of manners, and that profligate wickedness, which prevailed among the Jews during Christ's ministry upon earth; and hence the Divine Saviour compares that people to a flock of sheep which wandered without a shepherd, and their doctors to men who, though deprived of sight, yet pretended to show the way to others.t matter. In the first place, it is certain, that the ancestors of those Jews, who lived in the time of our Saviour, had brought, from Chaldea and the neighbouring countries, many extravagant and idle fancies, which were utterly unknown to the original founders of the nation. The conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great, was also an event from which we may date a new accession of errors to the Jewish system, since, in consequence of that revolution, the manners and opinions of the Greeks began to spread themselves among the Persians, Syrians, Arabians, and likewise among the Jews, who before that period, were entirely unacquainted with letters and philoso XIII. To all these corruptions, both in point of doctrine and practice, which reigned among the Jews at the time of Christ's coming, we may add the attachment which many of them discovered to the tenets of the oriental philosophy. phy concerning the origin of the world, and to the doctrine of the Cabbala, which was undoubtedly derived from that system. That We may, farther, rank among the causes that contributed to corrupt the religion and manners of the Jews, their voyages into the adjacent countries, especially Egypt and considerable numbers of the Jews had imbibed * The principal writers, who have given accounts of the Therapeutæ, are mentioned by Jo. Albert Fabricius, In the fourth chapter of his Lux Salutaris Evangelii toto orbe exoriens. + Matt. xxiii. 13-30. Matt. x. 6;. xv. 24. John ix. 39. * See Joh. Chr. Wolf. Biblioth. Ebraica, vol. ii. lib. † See the learned work of Spencer, De Legibus Hebræorum, in the fourth book of which he treats expressly of those Hebrew rites which were borrowed from the Gentile worship. See Gale's observations on Jamblichus, de Mysteriis Egyptiorum, p. 206. Josephus acknowledges the same thing in his Jewish Antiquities, book iii. chap. vii. sect. 2. |