Moreover, this fame Matthew is not lefs a blundering geographer, than an unfaithful hiftorian; for he relates, Matthew ii. 22. when he,' Jofeph, had 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.' Now any man, converfant with ancient geography, could have informed him, that in, coming out of Egypt, a man cannot turn afide into Galilee, but must traverse the whole length of Palestine, from fouth to north, and confequently pafs through Judea, before he can arrive at Galilee. This therefore is an additional inftance of the ingenuity of the compiler of this part, at leaft, of Matthew's Gospel, in turning afide his readers from the truth.

Laftly, to complete my conviction of him as an impoftor, I affert, that in Matthew, ii. 23. he,' Jofeph, came and dwelled in a city, called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he,' Jefus, fhall be called a Nazarene,' the fuppofed Matthew reprefents Nazareth as a city, which Jofeph came

to,

to, and dwelled in, par accident, in confequence of his turning afide into the parts of Galilee, and thereby contradicts Luke, who, (Luke ii. 39.) describes Joseph and Mary as returning, with their child Jesus, from Bethlehem, without the intervention of a journey to and from Egypt, into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth,' that is, their fixed refidence, if not native place.

Here it will not be amiss to remark, that profane history, fo far down as the fifth century, obferves a profound filence, with refpect to Herod's maffacre of the infants, at Bethlehem; from which impending danger to rescue the young child, is the reason affigned for Jofeph's fabulous flight, with him and his mother, in confequence of a dream, into Egypt. In the fifth century indeed, Macrobius mentions it in his Saturnalia, lib. 2, cap. 4; but it is probable he drew his account from the fufpicious fecond chapter of Matthew's Gospel. This almost profound filence then affords, furely, a strong prefumptive argument, that the maffacre of the infants is equally fabulous, which is corroborated by a pofitive proof,

that

that the prophecy cited in Matthew ii. 18. from Jeremiah, xxxi. 15. in fupport of the maffacre, relates to a very different event, as any one may be fatisfied, who will take the pains to examine the prophecy. It introduces, in a beautiful metaphor, Rachel,' the great progenitrix, of two of the tribes of Ifrael,weeping for her children,' &c. because they were not,' that is, not in their own land, but taken captive and difperfed. Herod, it is admitted, was a monster in cruelty, as his murther of his beloved wife, Mariamne, of his fons by her, and of his uncle Jofeph, &c. &c. abundantly teftifies: But, according to the trite proverb, we must 'give' that non-entity, the devil, his due,' and not make even Herod more black, than his own enormous crimes make him.

Moreover, in affirming, that he,' Jofeph, came and dwelled in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the prophets, 'He,' Jesus, • shall be called a Nazarene,' the pretended Matthew dreams of the fulfilment of a prophecy, which never exifted but in his own creative fancy. Search the prophecies from

the

the first of Ifaiah to the last of Malachi, both inclufive, and you will find, that I affert a matter of fact. In short, the first and fecond chapters of Matthew's Gofpel, feem to confift of little more, (the genealogy and this forged prophecy excepted) than a list of dreams, and a string of mifapplied promises. Difgraceful then is it for thinking and pains-taking Chriftians, to level themselves with inconfiderate, indolent, and implicit believers, and to retain that stupid, blind reverence for every word contained, in what are stiled the canonical books of the New Teftament, which excites them to attempt to reconcile paffages palpably contradictory.

What is it but operam perdere, to labor to establish an harmony between truth and falfhood, which can never be brought into contact with each other? Being opposite in their natures, they muft ever, like two parallel lines, keep the fame distance, and can never meet. I therefore earnestly intreat the former honorable clafs of Chriftians, or rather, in the genuine apoftolic ftile, befeech them by the mercies of God, in Chrift Jefus,' to employ thofe excellent

talents,

talents, with which God has intrufted them for the investigation of the truth, in a manner truly beneficial to mankind, and fatisfactory to themselves, by expofing anti-evangelic impofture, and vindicating Gospel truth. If it be afked by what criterion shall I distinguish the one from the other? I answer, by repeatedly referring them to your prophecies; which, reprefenting the future Meffiah as the glorious branch from the root of Jeffe,' and as the fon, or a lineal defcendent from the loins of David, favor not the nonfenfical hypothefes of Athanafians, Arians, and Socinians. The word preached by Paul was, that Jefus crucified and rifen again' corresponded to the predicted Meffiah. Accordingly, the confequence of an examination of the prophecies is a conviction, that Paul truly reafoned out of the Scriptures,' the books of Mofes, the prophecies, and the pfalms, opening, and alledging that Chrift muft needs have fuffered, and rifen again from the dead; and that this Jefus,' adds he, whom I preach unto you, is Chrift,' Acts xvii. 2, 3. Luke, therefore, in his two treatifes, which conin an account of the Gospel, and of

the