learned Patron. He afferts, that types and fecondary prophecies were intended for a veil or cover of the doctrines conveyed under them; and he also makes a future ftate one of thefe doctrines ". On a late occafion he afks, "Why will thefe Gentlemen write against me, whilft they give up the very "points which govern the whole question ?" If he gains any thing on this question, it must be given him; for we have long feen how unable he is to do any thing for himself. But when he afferts these two propofitions, 1. That Types and fecondary Prophecies were a cover to the Doctrines conveyed under them; of which Doctrines, life and immortality was one; and 2. That life and immortality was a popular doctrine amongst the ancient Jews, Does not he give up both himself and his point? Himself by a contradiction; and his point by one half of it, which owns that life and immortality was hid under the cover of Types and fecondary Prophefies. For what can the author of the D. L. defire more? Yet Dr. Stebbing still continues to write against him; and with the fame virulence and rancour with which he fet out". " See argument of the D. L. p. 125-143. It is remarkable that Dr. Leland, in his account of Dr. Dr. Stebbing tells us, that a future ftate was always neceffary to be known, as being the grounds and Reafons*, fays very little of types and fecondary prophecies. However, he agrees with Bishop Chandler, that they were intended for a veil or cover †. His declining this topic is the less extraordinary, as Dr. Stebbing has given thofe in the common fyftem no great encouragement to revive this part of the difpute. For he has fhewn, that a rational and confiftent account of types and fecondary prophecies, will ferve only to expofe the nakedness and deformity of that system. But the very little Dr. Leland has faid on this fubject, will probably be deemed too much. For why did he fay, that types were appointed for a veil, as this will neceffarily lead a reafoner to conclude, that the doctrine of a future ftate was fecreted at that time? He should not in his first volume have paved the way for fuch an inference, fince he was difposed to affert, against Lord Bolingbroke, in his fecond, that this was a popular and common doctrine amongst the ancient Jews; and he closely follows Dr. Stebbing, both in maintaining that Types were appointed for a veil, and that one of the principal doctrines, delivered under them, was revealed and taught to every body. Does he not therefore affign the Jews the knowledge of a future ftate at the expence of types? And does he not defend the ufe and propriety of types on fuch principles, as will oblige him to acknowledge, that the doctrine of a future ftate was not known? How little Lord Bolingbroke had to apprehend from fuch Reafon has been fhewn in another place §. The learned Doctor observes," that the mosaical dif"penfation was really and effentially the fame Religion, "for fubftance, which was practifed in the ancient pa"triarchal times.' And he fuppofes that the ancient patriarchal Religion was the fame with the chriftian. P. 113. *View of deiftical writers, Vol. i. the the very vital and fundamental part of all Religion. Upon this it is natural for the followers of Lord Bolingbroke to afk, Why then was it not discovered to the ancient Jews? The Doctor replies, that it was delivered to them under the cover and veil of types, i. e. was fecreted and concealed from them. They might poffibly fay, in the language of their Mafter, that fuch reafoning was even beneath contempt: that the Lamas, Talapoins, and Bonzes, would have blushed at such a system. The Dr. fays, the Jewish Religion would have been unworthy of God, if it did not teach the doctrine of a future ftate. It must therefore have been unworthy of him, if it fecreted this Doctrine. If fo, the Doctor has Thus the Patriarchal, the Jewish, and the Chriftian religions were all really and essentially the fame, for fubftance; and confequently were all established on the fame promife of life and immortality. Types, therefore, would have been as ufelefs and impertinent in the Law as in the Gospel, or, indeed, would have been useless and impertinent at all times, fince it never could be seasonable to hide and cover what was always feasonable to open and reveal, viz. the fubftantial and effential principles of Religion. The learned perfon will do great honour to the Jewish Religion, if he can prove that it was all along known to be effentially and fubftantially the fame with the Gofpel. But it will leffen the merit of his fervice, if we reflect, that he at the fame time convicts the Gospel of falfhood and imposture, for affuming and arrogating to itself difcoveries which had been made fo long before by the Law. done done his best to overthrow its pretence to a divine original, by affirming that it delivered this doctrine under the cover and veil of types. According to Him, the principle of redemption and a future ftate was the whole fubftance of the religion of those times: and yet this very doctrine was funk and buried under the cover and veil of types. Thus the Law was given, and God interpofed in a very fingular and extraordinary manner, not to relume and restore the principal and important doctrines of Religion, but to cover and hide them from his favourite and chofen people °. • No writer more zealously maintains the existence of types than the Author of the Remarks on ecclefiaftical hiftory. Vol. i. p. 183 to 188.202 to 228. - As he afferts that they were appointed to caft a veil or fhade over the doctrines conveyed under them, and afferts alfo that a future ftate was one of thefe doctrines; he muft, to be confiftent with himself, deny the knowledge of it to the ancient Jews. If he supposes it to have been a part of their Religion, he must suppose that Mofes was commiffioned to hide the principal article of their Religion from them. However he affirms, in his Differtations (p. 233.) that it was revealed at the beginning of the world, and handed down to the Jews by tradition. It may feem ftrange Mofes fhould be employed to throw a veil or fhade over a doctrine, which had been difcovered and brought to light in one of the primeval Revelations. It may feem ftranger ftill, that he should attempt to hide a doctrine under types and figures, which his people He He supposes that this principle had been revealed near the beginning of the world, already had by tradition. For there could have been no harmony and good correfpondence between the traditional and written fyftems, if the grand doctrine taught openly by the one, was fecreted and concealed by the other "What sense is there in fuppofing, that he "would attempt to hide a doctrine, with which his peo"ple, at the fame time, were perfectly acquainted. "Had there been nothing delivered in types at all, and "had there been a virtual as well as actual filence con"cerning a future ftate in the Law of Mofes, this "might perhaps be reconcileable to his traditional Reli"gion. But a tradition to difcover it, and at the fame "time types to hide it, is fuch a mode of divine difpenfa << tion &c. If the doctrine was neceffary to maintain the Religion of the ancient Jews, the conduct of Mofes must have been perfectly unaccountable. For he must have been not only deftitute of infpiration, but even of common fenfe, if he caft a veil and fhade over a doctrine, which he deemed requifite to fupport the Faith and Religion of those times. If he did not put out the eyes of his people, he endeavoured to render them of no ufe, by placing the most interesting object where they were leaft likely to fee it. Lord Bolingbroke objects, 1. That the Jews had not the doctrine of a future ftate. 2. That their Religion abounds with types and figures. In oppofition to his first objection, the learned Doctor contends, that they had this principle. In oppofition to the fecond, he maintains, that types were neceffary as a carnal cover of the fpiritual doctrines, conveyed under them; and adds also, that a future ftate was one of these. But would not the noble writer have thought himself treated with rather too much infolence, if required to Argument of the D. L. p. 126. for |