abolished, and that the temple, the Jewish polity, facred and civil, as connected with the city of Jerufalem, were fo deftroyed as never to be again restored, is more than we are warranted by the fcripture to affirm.

6

6

Again, in a note, p. 45. our Author reafons in the following manner: The facrifices appointed by the law of Mofes, and the whole Levitical Jaw, were appropriated to the tabernacle and temple, and the deftruction of the latter was the end of all, this obliged the Jews to invent a third temple, and to apply the prophecies that had been accomplished by the fecond temple to a future temple; and to affert, that the plan laid down by Ezekiel was not followed by Zerubbabel, but is to be executed in fome future age. The Chriftians have fuffered themfelves to be impofed upon by the Jews, and the apocryphal writers, who were Montanifts, and many of the Fathers, have almoft made the impofition facred. But how wild and groundlefs the conceit! Are we to fuppofe then that a plan was given for a third temple to be built at the end of the world, and no notice taken of that which was to be built in about forty years? Are not the times particularly connected with the captivity by the Prophet, and the peo

6

ple called upon now to put away their idolatry? • Ezek. xi. 1.-xliii. 7-12. Are we to expe&t priefts of the offspring of Zadock? Ezek. xliii. 19. Are burnt-offerings, with all other Mofaic rites and ceremonies, to be restored? And if • facrifices

K 3

⚫ facrifices are to be revived, what ufe or pur

pofe, civil, moral, or religious, are they in that age to ferve? What are they then as types to prefigure? May we be permitted to call them antetypes, or imagine them to be prefigurative • emblems of fervices in the heavenly Jerufalem? Is this the method of converting the Jews? Is this the new covenant made with the house of Ifrael and Judah? And are we to fee the old covenant, which St. Paul declared, even in his days, to be decayed, waxen old, and ready to vanish away, restored again? Heb. viii. 13. Are the able minifters of the new covenant to be obliged to exchange the miniftration of the fpirit of righteousnefs, of life, and of glory, for the miniftration of condemnation and death? No furely; the letter which killeth, should never be preferred to the fpirit which giveth life, C 2 Cor. iii. 6-11. Is this the word which God fent unto the children of Ifrael, preaching peace by Jefus Chrift? Ats x. 36. The difference between the second temple and that described by Ezekiel, is rather made than proved by modern Jews, who can have no good authority for their affertions in a matter of fuch remote antiquity; nor will the figurative use and application of prophetic language by St. John in the Revelations, fupport the Montanift in his absurd conceffions.'

That the facrifices appointed by the law of Mofes, tho' not the whole Levitical laws, were appropriated to the tabernacle and the temple, is allowed;

allowed; but it does not follow from hence that the destruction of the latter was the end of all, if by this expreffion our author means, as he had before afferted, that the Jewish polity, facred and civil, as connected with the city of Jerusalem, all were destroyed in one general ruin, fo as never to be again restored. That the facrifices cannot be reftored, confiftently with the law of Mofes, whilft the temple continues defolate, is true; but that the temple itself must always continue fo, by no means follows.

That a third temple is an invention of the Jews, does not appear from any arguments that our Author has made use of, but the future exiftence of fuch a temple may be fairly inferred from feveral prophecies in the Old Teftament; neither have these prophecies been accomplished by the erecting of the fecond temple. That the plan laid down by Ezekiel was followed by Zerubbabel does by no means appear, nor can the prophecies relating to Ezekiel's temple be applied to Zerubbabel's, upon account of the different circumftances which they foretel fhall happen at the time of its eftablishment: For first, the Shecinah, or Divine Prefence, was to return, as appears from Ezek. xliii. 2. And the glory of the Lord came into the boufe by the way of the gate, whose prospect was toward the eaft: So the Spirit took me up and brought me into the inner court, and beboid the glory of the Lord filled the boufe; and I heard him speaking unto me out of the boufe, and the man ftood by me: And be faid unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne,

and the place of the foles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name fhall the boufe of Ifrael no more defile, neither they nor their kings, &c. Now this great honour and advantage that attended the temple of Solomon, is allowed by all authors to have been wanting in the fecond temple; and therefore the temple of Zerubbabel cannot be the temple intended by Ezekiel.

2dly, The extent and form of the city then to be rebuilt, was to be very different from that of the city rebuilt by Zerubbabel, or enlarged by any of his fucceffors, even to the time of its deftruc tion; for, as it appears by Ezek. xlviii. 30. & seq. each fide of the city was to be four thousand and five hundred measures; and the gates of the city were to be after the names of the tribes of Ifrael; three gates northward, one gate of Reuben, one gate of Judah, one gate of Levi; three gates eastward, of Jofeph, Benjamin, and Dan; three at the fouth fide, of Simeon, Ifachar, and Zebulon; and three at the weft fide, one of Gad, one of Afher, and one of Naphtali: It was round about eighteen thousand measures: And the name of the city from that day fhall be-THE LORD

IS THERE.

Now, neither the dimenfions and form of the city, nor the names and number of the gates, rebuilt after the Babylonish captivity, do at all agree with this defcription of Ezekiel. From all which, I think it demonftrable, that the temple prophecied of by Ezekiel, could not be the temple built by Zerubbabel, and afterward rebuilt by Herod.

But

But, (fays our Author) are we to fuppofe then that a plan was given for a third temple 6 to be built at the end of the world, and no notice taken of that which was to be built in a bout forty years? Are not the times particularly connected with the captivity by the Prophets, and the people called upon Now to put away their idolatry. ?' Ezek. xi. 1. xliii. 7-12. To which I answer, that the return of the Jews, and the rebuilding of Jerufalem, and of the fecond. temple, was taken notice of by the Prophets, and foretold, though a particular plan for the building of it was not given; and the reafon might be, that as this temple was greatly to fall fhort of that built by Solomon, fo that those who had feen the former fhould weep aloud at the fight of this, and was likewife to be totally deftroyed again in a few centuries, it might not upon these accounts be thought fo worthy of a divine pattern or direction, as that of Solomon's, or the future one of Ezekiel; and more especially as it was not to be honoured by the Shecinah or Divine Prefence.

As to the times being particularly connected with the captivity by the Prophet, &c. the firft text, Ezek. xi. 1. fpeaks plainly of the temple of Solomon then ftanding at the time of the vifion, faazaniah and Pelatiah there mentioned being then in Jerufalem, about fix years before the deftruction of it by Nebuchadnezzar; fo that this prophecy has no relation to the second temple. The other text, Ezek. xliii. 7-12. is indeed con

nected