淑

THE

REASONABLENESS and CERTAINTY

OF THE

Christian Religion.

PART III.

That there is no other Divine Revelation, but that contain'd in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament.

HAT there is no other Inftitution of Religion, befides that deliver'd in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament, which has all things neceffary to a Divine Revelation, may be fhewn in the feveral Particulars neceffary to a Divine Revelation, as that no other Religion ever was of like Antiquity, or had equal Promulgation; that no other ever had fufficient Evidence of Miracles and Prophecies in proof of it; and laftly, that there never was any other, which did not teach many Doctrines that are unworthy of God, and contrary to the Divine Attributes, and therefore impoffible to come from Heaven. This I fhall prove, firft, of the Religions of the Heathen; fecondly, of the Mahometan Religion.

CHAP. I.

The Novelty of the Heathen Religions.

TH

HE Novelty of the Religions amongst the Heathen (of whom we have any certain Account from their Writings) in refpect of the Scriptures, is fo notorious, having been fo often proved by learned Men, and is fo generally acknowledg'd, that it is needlefs to infift much upon it. The Heathen generally were Strangers to every thing of Antiquity, and therefore must be unable to give any Proof of the Antiquity of their Religions.

2

The Pretences which the Ægyptians made to Antiquity, fo much beyond the times recorded in the Scriptures, proceeded from their reckoning by Lunar Years, or a Months; or from reckoning the Dynafties in Succeffion, which were contemporary. For b Herodotus mentions Twelve Ægyptian Kings reigning at once. But they had fo different Accounts, however, of Chronology, that, as Diodorus Siculus fays, fome of them computed about thirteen thousand years more than others, from the Original of their Dynafties, to the time of Alexander the Great.. And the Solar Year, in ufe among the Egyptians, who were most famous for Aftronomy, was fo imperfect, that they faid the Sun had several times changed his Course, fince the Beginning of their Dynafties; imputing the Defect of their own Computation, for want of intercalary Days, to the Sun's Variation; or else affecting to fpeak fomething wonderful and extravagant. An Author, whofe main Design seems to have been, to fay

с

a Diodor. Sic. 1. i. Plutarch. in Numa. Var. apud Lactant, de Orig. Error. lib. ii. c. 12.

b Lib. 2. cap. 151.

Herod. 1. 2, C. 142.

all,

all, that could with any colour of probability be said, to the advantage both of the Learning and the Antiquity of the Egyptians; found, that he could give no tolerable account of their Chronology, but by cafting it into four concurrent Dynafties, and placing Menes, whom he fuppofes to be Cham, and who is agreed by all, to have been the firft King of Egypt, at the Head of each Dynafty, and inferting the Kings in fucceffion from him, out of Eratofthenes and Manetho, from Eufebius and Syncellus. Yet this learned and laborious Advocate of the Egyptians acknowledges, that d 'till the DCCCCLXth Year of his Ægyptian Æra, which falls about xxx after the death of Joshua, the Egyp tian Year confifted of CCCLX Days only; and that for this reason, they had no certainty in their Aftronomy. But he obferves farther, that in the Sepulchre of e Ofymandyas a Theban King, who lived in the fixteenth Century of his Egyptian Era, a Golden Cycle was found, of the thickness of one Cubit, and CCCLXV Cubits in compafs, having the Days of the Year written diftinctly in the feveral Cubits, with the Rifings and Settings of the Stars, and Aftrological Obfervations upon them. Here he fays, that fince the additional Hours are not in this Cycle, it might be doubted, whether they were taken into the Ægyptian Year, 'till after that Age: But to this he answers, that the Rifings and Settings of the Stars could not be rightly affigned without them. But how could he know that they were rightly affign'd? He farther proves, that even after it was known that an Intercalation was neceffary every fourth Year, yet the fÆgyptian Priests refused to ufe it, that their Festivals might not always fall on the fame Days, but might run through the Year; and that their Epopta took an Oath, never to make any Intercalation either of Months or Days. He

d Marfh. Chron. Can. p. 235, 237, 295. c Diodor. Sic. 1. 1.

f Gemini Elementa Aftronom. c. 6.

fhews

fhews likewife from 8 Cenforinus, that in their Civil. as well as in their Sacred Year, they had no Intercalation; yet their Natural Year, he fays, had the Intercalary Day. But to what end did this Natural Year ferve, if it were used neither in their Sacred, nor in their Civil Affairs? It seems, that the Intercalation was not taken into the Ægyptian Year, but was only in Notion and Idea among the Aftronomers; as the Old Stile is to all purposes used among us, though our Aftronomers very well understand the Defects of it. But the cafe was very different with the Ægyp tians, from what it is with us; for in the space of MCCCCLXI Years, the variation there was not of a few Days, but of a whole Year: And where there was a continual change of the Days and Months, there must needs have been great confufion in the Calculations of Chronology. The Egyptians, fay the fame learned h Author, have tranfmitted nothing befides the Names of their Kings, and their vaft Pyramids, to Pofterity, more ancient than Sefoftris or Sifback, who fack'd Jerufalem in the fifth Year of Rehoboam's Reign, 1 Kings xvi. 25. And i Caffini has found the Account of Eclipfes, at the beginning of Diogenes Laertius, to be falfe; which is a farther confutation of the fabulous pretences of the Egyptians to Antiquity. The earliest Aftronomical Observations to be met with, which were made in Ægypt, are thofe performed by the Greeks of Alexandria, lefs than ccc Years before Chrift, as * Mr. Halley has obferved. The 1 Chaldeans, according to Berofus, fuppofed the Moon to be a luminous Body, and therefore could have no great skill in Aftronomy; befides, they wanted Inftruments to make exact Obfervations. m Diodorus Siculus writes, that the Chaldaans fuppofed the Moon's

g De Die Natal. c. 18.

h Chron. Can. p. 352.

i Loubere du Royaume de Siam, Tom. 2. p. 399. k Mr. Wotton's Reflexions upon Ancient and Modern Learning, c. 23. 1 Vitruv. lib. ix. c. 4. m Lib. II. c. 8.

Light to be from the Sun; but he says, that they had various Opinions concerning the Sun's Eclipfe, and could not determine any thing about it, nor foretel when it was to be. "All we have of them, fays the "fame learned Aftronomer, is only feven Eclipfes "of the Moon, and even thofe but very coarfely fet "down, and the oldeft not above DCC Years be"fore Chrift; fo that after all the Fame of these "Chaldeans, we may be fure they had not gone far " in this Science: And tho' Callifthenes be faid, by "Porphyry, to have brought from Babylin to Greece "Obfervations above MDCCCC Years older than "Alexander; yet the proper Authors making no men❝tion or use of any fuch, renders it justly fufpected " for a Fable. This agrees with the Account that has been given of the Chaldaick Philofophy, by a very learned and accurate Author; from whence we likewise understand, how little credit is to be allowed to thefe Obfervations, which Porphyry (as he is cited by P Symplicius) fays, that Callifthenes fent to Ariftotle from Babylon; fince there is nothing extant in the Chal daick Aftrology more ancient than the Era of Nabonaffar, which begins but DCCXLVII Years before Chrift. By this Era, the Chaldeans computed their Aftronomical Observations, 9 the first of which falls about the twenty feventh Year of Nabonaffar; and if there had been any more ancient, Ptolemy would not have omitted them. So little ground is there for us to depend upon the Accounts of Time, and the vain Boafts of Antiquity which thefe Nations have made. The Greeks had their Aftronomy from Babylon; and the Athenians had but CCCLX Days in their Year, in the time of Demetrius Phalereus; yet Mr. Halley far_ ther obferves, "that the Greeks were the first pra