fubject of thefe prophecies. That Jefus, coming to them as their Meffiah, should come under a character totally different from that in which they expected him; should deviate from the general perfuafion, and deviate into pretenfions abfolutely fingular and original, appears to be inconfiftent with the inpu tation of enthusiasm or imposture, both which, by their nature, I fhould expect, would, and both which, throughout the experience which this very fubject furnishes, in fact have followed, the opinions that obtained at the time.

If it be faid, that Jefus, having tried the other plan, turned at length to this; I anfwer, that the thing is faid without evidence; against evidence; that it was competent to the rest to have done the fame, yet that nothing of this fort was thought of by any.

CHAP. VI.

ONE argument, which has been much relied upon, (but not

more than its juft weight deferves) is the conformity of the facts, occafionally mentioned or referred to in feripture, with the state of things in thofe times, as reprefented by foreign and independent accounts. Which conformity proves, that the writers of the New Teftament poffeffed a fpecies of local knowledge, which could only belong to an inhabitant of that country, and to one living in that age. This argument, if well made out by examples, is very little fhort of proving the abfolute genuineness of the writings. It carries them up to the age of the reputed authors, to an age, in which it must have been dif ficult to impofe upon the Chriftian public forgeries in the names of of thofe authors, and in which there is no evidence that any forgeries were attempted. It proves at leaft, that the books, whoever were the authors of them, were compofed by perfons living in the time and country in which these things were tranfacted, and, confequently, capable, by their situation, of being well informed of the facts which they relate. And the argument is. ftronger, when applied to the New Teftament, than it is in the cafe of almost any other writings, by reafon of the mixed nature of the allufions which this book contains. The fcene of action is not confined to a fingle country, but difplayed in the greatest cities of the Roman empire. Allufions are made to the manners and

principles of the Greeks, the Romans, and the Jews. This variety renders a forgery proportionably more difficult, especially to writers of a posterior age. A Greek or Roman Chriftian, who lived in the fecond or third century, would have been wanting in Jewish literature; a Jewish convert in those ages would have been equally deficient in the knowledge of Greece and Rome."

This, however, is an argument which depends entirely upon an induction of particulars; and as, confequently, it carries with it little force, without a view of the inftances upon which it is built, I have to request the reader's attention to a detail of examples, diftinctly and articulately propofed. In collecting thefe examples, I have done no more than to epitomize the first volume of the first part of Dr. Lardner's credibility of the gofpel hiftory. And I have brought the argument within its prefent compafs, firft, by paffing over fome of his fections in which the accordancy appeared to me lefs certain, or upon fubjects not fufficiently appropriate or circumftantial; fecondly, by contracting every fection into the feweft words poffible, contenting myself for the most part with a mere appofition of paffages; and, thirdly, by omitting many difquifitions, which, though learned and accurate, are not abfolutely neceffary to the understanding or verification of the argument.

The writer, principally made ufe of in the inquiry, is Jofephus. Jofephus was born at Jerufalem four years after Christ's afcenfion. He wrote his hiftory of the Jewish war some time after the deftruction of Jerufalem, which happened in the year of our Lord feventy, that is, thirty-feven years after the afcen-fion; and his history of the Jews he finifhed in the year nine-ty-three, that is, fixty years after the afcenfion.

At the head of each article, I have referred,. by figures included in brackets, to the page of Dr. Lardner's volume where: the fection, from which the abridgment is made, begins. The edition ufed is that of 1741.

I. (p. 14) Mat. xi. 22. "When he (Jofeph) heard that Archelaus did reign in Judea, in the room of his father Herod,. he was afraid to go thither; notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned afide into the parts of Galilee."

In this paffage it is afferted, that Archelaus fucceeded Herod in Judea; and it is implied, that his power did not extend to a Michaelis's Introduction to the New Teftament, (Marfh's tranflation) c. ii, fec. xi,

Galilee. Now we learn from Jofephus, that Herod the Great,. whofe dominion included all the land of Ifrael, appointed Archelaus his fucceffor in Judea, and affigned the reft of his do-minions to other fons; and that this difpofition was ratified, as to the main parts of it, by the Roman emperor.

a

St. Matthew fays, that Archelaus reigned, was king in Judea. Agreeably to this, we are informed by Jofephus, not only that Herod appointed Archelaus his fucceffor in Judea, but that he also appointed him with the title of king; and the verb (Bariλsvei); which the evangelift ufes to denote the government and rank of Archelaus, is used likewife by Jofephus.b

The cruelty of Archelaus's character, which is not obfcurely intimated by the evangelift, agrees with divers particulars in his hiftory, perferved by Jofephus. "In the tenth year of his gov. ernment, the chief of the Jews and Samaritans, not being able to endure his cruelty and tyranny, prefented complaints against him to Cæfar."

II. (p. 19.) Luke iii. 1. In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæfar-Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea, and of the region of Trach onitis-the word of God came unto John.".

By the will of Herod the Great, and the decree of Auguf tus thereupon, his two fons were appointed, one (Herod Anti-pas) tetrarchi of Galilee and Peræa, and the other (Philip) tetrarch of Trachonitis and the neighbouring countrics. We have therefore thefe two perfons in the fituations in which St. Luke places them; and alfo, that they were in these situations in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, in other words, that they continued in poffeffion of their territories and titles until that time, and afterwards, appears from a paffage of Jofephus, which relates of Herod, "that he was removed by Caligula, the fucceffor of Tiberius ; and of Philip, that he died in the twentieth year of Tiberius, when he had governed Trachonitis and. Bata-nea and Gaulanitis thirty-feven years.f

III. (p. 20.) Mark v 17.8 Herod had fent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prifon, for Herodias's fake, his brother Philip's wife; for he had married her."

a Ant. lib. 17. c. 8. fec. I.. b De Bell. lib. I. c. 33. fec. 7.
c Ant..lib.. 17. c. 13. fec. 1.

Ant. lib. 17. c. 8. fec. 1.

e Ant. lib. 13. c. 8. fec. 2.

f Ant. lib. 18. c. 5. fec. 6.

g Sec alfo Mat. xiv. 1-13. Luke iii. 19

"He

With this compare Jof. Ant. I. 18. c. 6. fec. 1. (Herod the tetrarch) made a vifit to Herod his brotherHere, falling in love with Herodias, the wife of the faid Herod, he ventured to make her proposals of marriage."a

Again, Mark vi. 22. "And when the daughter of the faid

Herodias came in and danced."

"Hero

With this alfo compare Jof. Ant. 1. 18. c. 6. fec. 4. dias was married to Herod, fon of Herod the Great. They had a daughter, whofe name was Salome; after whofe birth, Herodias, in utter violation of the laws of her country, left her husband then living, and married Herod the tetrarch of Galilee, her husband's brother by the father's fide."

IV. (p. 29.) Acts xii. 1. "Now, about that time, Herod the king ftretched forth his hands, to vex certain of the church." In the conclufion of the fame chapter, Herod's death is reprefented to have taken place, foon after this perfecution. The accuracy of our historian, or, rather, the unmeditated coincidence, which truth of its own accord produces, is in this inftance remarkable. There was no portion of time, for thirty years before, nor ever afterwards, in which there was a king at Jerufalem, a perfon exercifing that authority in Judea, or to whom that title could be applied, except the three last years of this Herod's life, within which period, the tranfaction recorded in the Acts is stated to have taken place. This prince was the grandson of Herod the Great. In the Acts he appears under his family name of Herod; by Jofephus he is called Agrippa. For proof that he was a king, properly fo called, we have the teftimony of Jofephus in full and direct terms :-" Sending for him to his palace, Caligula put a crown upon his head, and appointed him king of the tetrarchie of Philip, intending also to

a The affinity of the two accounts is unquestionable; but there is a difference in the name of Herodias's first husband, which, in the cvangelift, is Philip, in Jofephus, Herod. The difficulty, however, will not appear confiderable, when we recollect how common it was in thofe times, for the fame perfon to bear two names: Simon, which is called Peter; Lebbeus, whose firname is Thaddeus; Thomas, which is called Didymus; Simeon, who was called Niger; Saul, who was also called Paul." The folution is likewife rendered easier in the present cafe, by the confideration, that Herod the Great had children by fev ven or eight wives; that Jofephus mentions three of his fons under the name of Herod; that it is nevertheless highly probable, that the brothers bore fome additional name, by which they were diftinguished from one another. Lard. vol. II. p. 897.

give him the tetrarchie of Lyfanias." And that Judea was at laft, but not until the laft, included in his dominions, appears by a fubfequent paffage of the fame Jofephus, wherein he tells us, that Claudius by a decree confirmed to Agrippa the dominion which Caligula had given him, adding alfo Judea and Samaria, in the utmoft extent, as poffeffed by his grandfather Herod. V. (p. 32.) Acts xii. 19, 23. "And he (Herod) went down from Judea to Cæfarea, and there abode. And upon a fet day, Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, fat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them; and the people gave a fhout, faying, It is the voice of a god and not of a man; and immediately the angel of the Lord fmote him, because he gave not God the glory; and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost."

Jof. Ant. lib. xix. c. 8. fec. 2. "He went to the city Cæfarea. Here he celebrated fhows in honour of Cæfar. On the fecond day of the fhows, early in the morning, he came into the theatre, dreffed in a robe of filver, of most curious workmanship. The rays of the rifing fun, reflected from fo fplendid a garb, gave him a majestic and awful appearance. They called him a god, and entreated him to be propitious to them, faying, Hitherto, we have refpected you as a man, but now we ac knowledge you to be more than mortal. The king neither reproved thefe perfons, nor rejected the impious flattery. Imme diately after this, he was feized with pains in his bowels, extremely violent at the very first. He was carried therefore with all hafte to his palace. These pains continually torment, ing him, he expired in five days time."

The reader will perceive the accordancy of these accounts in various particulars. The place, (Cæfarca) the fet day, the gorgeous drefs, the acclamations of the affembly, the peculiar turn of the flattery, the reception of it, the fudden and critical incursion of the disease, are circumftances noticed in both narratives. The worms mentioned by St. Luke are not remarked by Jofephus, but the appearance of thefe is a symptom, not unufually, I believe, attending the disease, which Jofephus defcribes, viz. violent affections of the bowels..

VI. (p. 41.) Acts xxiv. 24. "And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drufilla, which was a Jewels,. he fent for Paul..

a. Ant. xviii. c. vii. fec. 10.

b Ib. xix. c. v. fec. I..