was peculiarly qualified by his extensive and intimate acquaintance with the works extant amongst the Egyptians and Arabians on the subject of the Zabian idolatry; his profound knowledge of the Talmudical and Rabbinical writings; his opportunities of investigating the idolatries of Egypt during his residence in that country; and his uncommon acuteness and energy of mind, joined to his patience in research and soundness in judgment. "Maimonides," observes Mr. Townsend, "was the first who endeavoured to solve the mysteries which had so long perplexed the world. He perused, he tells us, with great attention, all the ancient authors on the rise and progress of idolatry. He did this, to explain the reasons of the enactment of those ordinances and rites of the Jewish Law which appear to have no meaning, unless they are considered in connexion with the idolatrous customs of the surrounding nations."*-The result of these investigations is comprised in the following treatise, which, with every allowance for Jewish prejudices, presents one of the best compendiums of expository remarks on many of the Mosaic Precepts, with which we are acquainted, and fully justifies the eulogiums which have been passed upon him by the learned of different ages and countries.

Classical Journal, No. XLII. June, 1820, p. 322.

DISSERTATION III.

ON

THE ORIGINALITY

OF THE

INSTITUTIONS OF MOSES.

IT has been justly remarked by an ingenious writer, that

they who suppose Moses himself to have been "the author of the institutions civil or religious that bear his name; and that in framing them he borrowed much from the Egyptians or other ancient nations, must never have compared them togther, otherwise they could not but have perceived many circumstances in which they differed most essentially from them all."-That a correspondence subsisted between some of the Mosaic ordinances and the customs of other people, is granted, but that they were derived from the practices of idolatrous nations appears inconsistent and absurd. The true source of the similarity is to be traced to those primitive revelations and patriarchal examples retained by the Israelites and corrupted by the Gentiles;-whilst the striking and radical opposition discoverable between the most important parts of their respective systems of worship and religious service, mark, with indubitable evidence, the design of the Deity to separate the one from the other. It is only necessary to give to the following instances of the dissimilarity betwixt the Laws and Institutions of Moses and those of other nations, the consideration they merit, to be fully convinced, that the Mosaic ritual was vastly

ORIGINALITY OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF MOSES. 49

superior to every other, and formed with too much contrariety to other systems ever to have been borrowed from them.

1. No heathen ever conceived an idea of so great an Object as that of the Institutions of Moses, which appears to have been nothing less than the instruction of all mankind in the great doctrine of the Unity and Moral Government of God, as the Creator of the world, and the common Parent of all the human race, in opposition to the polytheism and idolatry which then prevailed, which, besides being grossly absurd in its principles and leading to endless superstitions, threatened the world with a deluge of vice and misery.-For this purpose the Hebrew nation was placed in the most conspicuous situation, among all the great civilized nations of the earth, which were universally addicted to idolatry of the grossest kind, to divinations, necromancy, and other superstitions of a similar nature, and practised as acts of religion; some of their rites abominably licentious, and others most horribly cruel, yet enjoined as the necessary means of recommending the persons that performed them to the various objects of their worship.

As all mankind imagined that their outward prosperity depended upon the observance of their respective religions, that of the Hebrew nation was made to do so in the most conspicuous manner as a visible lesson to all the world. They were to prosper beyond all other nations while they adhered to their religion, and to suffer in a manner equally exemplary and conspicuous in consequnce of their departure from it. Of this, all mankind might easily judge.

These great ideas occur in the sacred books of the Hebrews, and no where else. They are all distinctly advanced by Moses, and more fully unfolded in the writings of the later prophets. But certainly nothing so great and sublime could have been suggested to Moses, from any thing that he saw in Egypt, or could have heard of in other countries.

2. In no system of Religion, besides that of Moses, was purity of Morals any part of it. All the heathen religions were systems of mere ceremonies, and the sole business of the Priests was to attend to those rites, which were so far from being favourable to morals, that they were of the most impure and abominable nature.

The contrary to this appears, not only in the Ten Commandments, but in all the Writings of Moses. The purest morality, the most favourable to private and public happiness, was the principal and ultimate object of the whole system. Sacrifices, and ceremonial observances of every kind, are always represented as of no signification without morals. Such precepts as these, "Be ye holy, for I am holy;”—and, “What does the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"-could never have been borrowed from any heathen system of Religion. The Writings of Moses, and of the Prophets that succeeded him, are in these respects a great Original.

3. No where in all the heathen world could Moses have heard of such a sublime Worship, as that which he introduced. The Hebrews alone had one single object of their worship, one altar, one precise ritual, one only place for the meeting of the whole nation at the great public festivals. In no other country in the world were the public festivals instituted in commemoration of such great events, respecting their history and the divine origin of their religion. It is also peculiar to this nation, that directions for the celebration of them were reduced to writing at the time of their institution, so that there never could be any uncertainty about the origin or the reasons of them. These festivals were three, the Passover, on their deliverance from their state of servitude in Egypt, when the first-born of all the Egyptians were destroyed, and all theirs preserved; the Pentecost, on the giving of the Law from Mount Sinai;

and the Feast of Tabernacles, in commemoration of their living in tents or booths during their travels through the Wilderness.

No heathen festivals were so well adapted to important events as these. The festivals of the heathens were numerous and perplexing. More than sixty were celebrated by the Athenians; the origin and reasons of their institution were uncertain, and none of them were to answer any important moral purpose. The heathen festivals were also in general celebrated in a manner the most disgusting to modesty and common sense. Even the wise Athenians celebrated the festival of Cotytto with such rites, as demonstrated that the object of their worship delighted in nothing so much as lewdness and debauchery.Potter's Antiquities of Greece, p. 409.

It would be easy to multiply examples of the indecency and absurdity of the festivals of the heathen, and those of Greece were chiefly borrowed from Egypt. Why did not Moses the same? Such arts would no doubt have been acceptable to his people, naturally prone to sin like others; and this is evident from his own history of the Israelites joining in the worship of Baal-Peor. So far, however, was the Jewish legislator from yielding to such compromising suggestions, that in the place of the infamous rites and orgies inseparable from Egyptian festivals, the Jewish festivals were united with inviolable principles of morality, which were constituted solemn acts of religion, and, in their purport and manner of observation, perfectly distinguished the Israelitish congregations from the other families of mankind.

4. In no other country was the Place, and other circumstances of the public worship, so well calculated to inspire a profound respect for the object of it, as among the Hebrews. No heathen temple could be compared with the Temple of Solomon, or even the tabernacle of Moses, erected in the wilderness, designed only for temporary use,