Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

PART III.

LECTURE III.

SECT. I.

Objections against the Mosaic Law, from its employing temporal sanctions-And visiting the iniquities of the fathers on the children—WARBURTON's opinion on this subject— His work incomplete-His reasoning not perfectly conclusive-How far I agree with, and how far I differ from his opinion-Two conclusions seem true: first, that Moses employed temporal sanctions in his Law: second, the history of the Old Testament shews he believed a future state, and contains a gradual developement of it--Moses employs temporal sanctions, both nationally and individually-This accounted for-From the nature of the Jewish theocracy-Reality of the extraordinary providence exercised over the Jews proved in this work, without resorting to Warburton's Medium-Temporal sanctions sufficientNecessary to confute idolatry-Adapted to the intellectual and moral character of the Jews-Best mode of introducing the doctrine of a future state with effect—A necessary part of the theocracy—Exemplified to man the principles of God's moral government.

PART III.

LECT. III.

SECT. I.

DEUTERONOMY, xxx. 15, 16.

"See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and

"death and evil; in that I command thee this day to "love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways and to keep "his commandments, and his statutes, and his judgments, "that thou mayest live and multiply; and the Lord thy "God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to 66 possess it."

IN reviewing the system of religion and policy established by the Jewish Lawgiver, two circumstances claim particular attention: one, that the rewards and punishments of a future life were not inculcated by Moses as sanctions of his Laws; and the other, that he has employed as a sanction, the declaration, that * “ God would visit the iniquity

[blocks in formation]

* Exod. xx. 5 and 6. brought forward by a number of infidel writers.

These objections have been

Vide their

arguments

The

"of the fathers upon the children, to the "third and fourth generation of them that "hate him, and shew mercy unto the thou"sandth generation of them who should "love him and keep his commandments." Both these circumstances have been the subject of long and warm discussion. former has been objected to as an omission of necessary truth, which no genuine revelation could overlook; while the latter has been represented as a violation of natural justice, which God cannot be supposed to perpetrate or authorize. While, on the other side, the defenders of Revelation contend, that both these circumstances naturally arise from the peculiar character and views of the Jewish Law, and are closely connected with the reality of that extraordinary Providence by which the Jewish scheme was introduced and supported; and therefore, far from being inconsistent with the divine ori

ginal

arguments collected and answered by Warburton, Div. Leg. Vol. IV. in the Appendix to his Fifth Book, hé refutes those of Bolingbroke. Vide also Leland's View of the Deistical Writers, Vol. II. Letters xxv. xxvii. xxx. and xxxiii. Vide also Leland's Answer to Morgan, ch. xi. Vide also Calmet's Dissertation sur la Nature de l'Ame. Tom. xxvi. P. 196.

« VorigeDoorgaan »