1

in Genesis, and the like number of generations from the writers of the Chaldean cosmogonies, reference may again be had to the New Researches, of the antediluvian personages; and it is stated, the "analogies which we have seen succeed each other after the deluge, can be continued beyond it, and ascend to the first origin called the Creation. Ancient christian writers have all made the remark, and also complain of the alteration, that is, of the difference of names and ages, assigned by the Chaldean books to the antediluvian personages, by us called Patriarchs, and by the Chaldeans, Kings. Kings. Syncellus has done us the service to preserve a list of them, copied from Alexander Polyhistor, or Abydenus, who themselves copied Berosus."

There exist therefore unequivocal data and demonstrated facts, that the Chaldean cosmogonies were the true originals and bases of the Jewish theology; and they are consequently alike the basis of Christianity, agreeably to the elucidations given in the twenty-first chapter of the "Ruins."

This brings us to Mr. Hails's sixth chapter, containing "Remarks on Volney's attempt to shew, that if Judaism was of Divine appointment, Christianity cannot be true.'

1 Chapter xv, vol. 1, part 1.

CHAPTER V.

ATTEMPTED REFUTATION OF MR. HAILS'S EXPOSITIONS OF THE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS CREEDS OR SYSTEMS, REVIEWED IN THE 21st CHAPTER OF THE RUINS; INCLUDING OBSERVATIONS ON THE PROPHECIES IN GENESIS, RELATIVE TO THE COMING OF THE SHILOH, WHICH IS DEMONSTRATED TO BE A PERVERSION OF THE ORIGINAL, IN THE SENSE GIVEN IT IN THE REMARKS.

In an examination of the chapter entitled "Problem of religious contradictions," the author of the Remarks commences his sixth chapter, with a brief enumeration of some of the more prominent elucidations given in the twenty-first chapter of the Ruins, comprising insulated or detached portions, relative to the doctrines of Judaism and Christianity; and consequently the most palpable feature apparent in his criticisms, is that of a decidedly limited and partial view of the general diversity of dogmas of the different religious sys

tems, exhibited in the chapter of the Ruins now under consideration.

By assuming, à priori, the genuineness or truth of Christianity, our Critic clearly places himself in the situation of the Christian, who says to the Jewish rabbi1"Your law is of God, as 'typical and preparative, not as final and absolute; 'you are but the image, of which we are the 'reality."" To which the Rabbi replies, "we are 'not ignorant that such are your pretensions, but they are perfectly suppostitious and false. Your system rests entirely on mystical, visionary, and 'allegorical interpretations. You pervert the 'letter of our books, substitute continually for 'the true sense of a passage, the most chimeri'cal ideas, and find in them whatever is agreeable 'to your fancy, just as a roving imagination dis'covers figures in the clouds.""

In proof of our assumption, that the Author of the Remarks places himself precisely in the situation of the Christian who replies to the Jewish Rabbi, that the Jewish law was but as typical and preparative;' the following statements occur: "We have the authority of the New Testament writers for asserting the typical nature of the Jewish ceremonies; and we have shewn, 1 Ruins, chap. xxi.

2

2 Remarks, chap. vi, p. 82.

from their nature, that they could not be intendea to form a system of religious observances for men in general. We therefore contend, both on the authority of the New Testament writers, and from the nature of the case, that the Jewish ceremonial was not intended to be of perpetual obligation, indeed it could not be so, without excluding, in a great measure, the rest of mankind from every benefit that can arise from the knowledge of God, and of his will concerning men; that if we do not understand it as restricted to the Jews, during the existence of their peculiar polity, we make the Hebrew books falsify themselves; (this however, viz. a falsification and contradiction of their own authorities, with respect to the Hebrew books, admits of demonstration ;) as it is impossible, from the nature of things, that the promise of God to Abraham, In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed,' could ever have been verified by any other method than that enlarged and explanatory system of Judaism, in which the shadows were done away in Christ, and all nations invited to worship the Father in spirit and truth; no longer to make their approach to the Deity in this mountain, or at Jerusalem'; no longer to be restricted to one earthly tabernacle, to use the ceremonies of a veiled religion, and the blood of slain beasts.

We are sure that the blood of bulls and of goats,' and the other legal ceremonies were, in their nature, totally inadequate to purge the sins of the people, and that they were only typical of a real change to be wrought in the soul of man, by the power of God, after a manner in some respects analogous to the shadow of good things contained in these ceremonial observances."

We have opposed to such sentiments as these, the address of the Mussulmans,' to Volney's legislators," since you have rejected our doctrine 'as containing things incredible, can you possibly 'admit that of the Christians, which is still more 'contrary to justice and common sense? An im' material and infinite God to transform himself 'into a man! To have a son as old as himself! 'This God-man to become bread, which is eaten ' and undergoes digestion! What absurdities have 'we equal to these? Is it to these men belong the 'exclusive right of exacting a blind obedience? ' And will you accord to them privileges of faith, 'to our detriment?

In continuation of the representation given in the Ruins, the following is adduced :

"Some savage tribes having advanced :

1 Ruins, chapter xxi.

2 The Legislators of "A free and legislative people;' before whom a general assembly of the world is convened. Ruins, c. 19.