"woman] is put too, AS THEY SAY, in Deuteronomy, for a virgin*."

On this you remark as follows, "What is this "as they fay? Was it unknown to the compiler of "the Hexapla, what the reading of the Hebrew "text, in his own time, was? If he knew that it "was what he would have it thought to be, why "does he seem to affert upon hearsay only? If he "knew not, why did he not inform himself, that he "might either affert with confidence what he had "found upon enquiry to be true, or not affert "what could not be maintained? EGO HUIC TESTI, 66 ETIAMSI JURATO, QUI TAM MANIFESTO FUMOS VENDIT, ME NON CREDITURUM ESSE CONFIRMO."

I am aftonished that any man could think this ftate of the cafe probable. The question between Origen and the Jews was not what was the word in the Hebrew, but what was the meaning of it in a particular place. But even, admitting that the dif pute was about the true reading in the original, what great matter was there in Origen's faying the Jews faid fo, when he knew that what they said was

* Εαν δε Ικδαίος ευρεσιλόγων, το ιδε η παρθενος μη γεγράφθαι λέγει αλλ' απο αυτα τους η νέα τις φήσομεν προς αυτόν, ότι μεν η μεν λέξις η azpacz 18 di pasu sõdopormola põskaçarı apos the magdact coòn de s την γέννα, χείλει ως βασι και εν τω δευτεγονομία επι παρθενε έως εχεται Lib.i. p. 27

true?

true? Is this a foundation on which to affirm that you would not take a man's evidence upon his oath. What an appetite must a man have for calumny, who can feize upon fuch a circumstance as this to gratify it?

Fænum habet in cornu, hunc tu, Romane, caveto.

I am, &c.

LETTER

II.

General Obfervations relating to the fuppofed orthodox church of Jewish chriftians at Jerufalem, after the time of Adrian.

REV. SIR,

HAVING fully confidered what you have

alleged in fupport of your extraordinary charge of wilful falfehood in Origen, because the fuppofition of his being an honeft man was inconfiftent with the existence of your church of orthodox Jewish christians at Jerufalem after the time of Adrian, I shall proceed to confider the pofitive evi dence that you have produced for the actual existence

of

of fuch a church. But I fhall, in the first place, mention fome obfervations of a general nature relating to the fubject.

That there was a chriftian church at Jerufalem after the time of Adrian, we all acknowledge; but you fay, p. 41, "the point in difpute between us is, "of what members the church of Elia was com"pofed.

He fays of converts of Gentile ex"traction, I fay, of Hebrews, of the very fame

perfons, in the greater part, who were members. "of the ancient Hebrew church at the time when "the Jews were fubdued by Adrian."

1. Now that the members of this church were not Jews, but Greeks, I think indifputable from this plain confideration, that after the time of Adrian the bishops of that church were Greeks, and that the language in which the public offices were performed was Greek; whereas immediately before the bishops had been Hebrews, and the public offices had been in the Hebrew tongue.

2. If there was any confiderable body of orthodox Jewish christians, it is extraordinary that no particular mention fhould be made of them by any ancient writer. Jerom fpeaks of his acquaintance with learned Ebionites by whom he was taught the Hebrew tongue. Living as he did in the country, he might as eafily, on your idea, have found learned orthodox Jewish chriftians, with whom it would have been more agreeable to him to affociate, unless

you

you suppose that the learned Ebionites were heretics, and the unlearned orthodox.

3. As fo many writers fpeak of Ebionites, or heterodox Nazarenes, it would furely have been natural for fome of them to have added, that they were not the great body, or at least not the whole, of the Jewish chriftians. The mention of the one would naturally have drawn after it, on fome occafion, the mention of the other. And yet no ancient writer fpeaks of them.

4. As to a whole church of orthodox Jewish chriftians at Jerufalem, or elsewhere, we hear of no intercourse between any fuch church and other orthodox churches. None of their bishops, or deputies from them, appear at any council; no appeals are ever made to them; which would have been natural, as to the mother of all the churches. This is eafily accounted for on the fuppofition that all the remains of the Jewish chriftians were the poor and despised unitarian Ebionites, refiding chiefly beyond the fea of Galilee, whofe numbers likewife were inconfiderable; but hard to be supposed, if there were any churches of orthodox Jewish chriftians, refiding at Jerufalem, or elsewhere.

5. If there was any confiderable body of orthodox Jewish chriftians, why do we never hear of any Hebrew gofpels befides that of Matthew? If they held the doctrine of the orthodox gentile churches concerning the perfon of Chrift, it is probable that

C

they

they would have had the fame refpect for the other gofpels, and the other books of the New Teftament, and yet it is almoft certain, that they made little ufe of them.

By way of apology for your additions to the fcanty accounts of the ancients, concerning the conqueft of Jerufalem by Adrian, you fay, p. 38, "The

ecclefiaftical hiftory of thofe times is fo very ge"neral and imperfect, that whoever attempts to "make out a confiftent ftory from any ancient "writers which are come down to us, will find "himself under the neceffity of helping out their "broken accounts by his own conjectures.'

But certainly, Sir, the contradi&ting of an ancient writer, is not the way to help out his account of things. Now Eufebius, the oldeft writer who mentions the fact, fays, that after the taking of the city by Adrian, the whole nation of the Jews (war, which excludes all diftinction with respect to religion) were forbidden even to fee the defolation of their metropolis at a distance*. To help out this broken account, because it does not contain all that you wish it to do (though I fee nothing broken in it) you fay that the Jews were allowed to remain in the place, and enjoy the privileges of the Ælian colony, on

δίκην, το

* Και τι της απονοίας αύλοις αίλις την αξίαν εκλισαν παν εθνΘ- εξ εκείνα και της περι τα Ιεροσόλυμα γης παμπαν επιβαίνειν ειργεται, νομέ δογμαῖι και διαίαξεσιν Αδριανα ως αν μηδ' εξ αποπίε θεωροιεν το παίωον εδαφο εγκελευσάμενο. Hift. Lib. iv. cap. 6.

condition