6

authority of the rabbins, by saying, The Jews, if we may venture to believe the rabbins, received no ⚫ proselytes but by baptisma,' &c. More generally in another place he says, 'The Jews seem to claim the privilege of cashiering their reason, and advance 'without any shame all the foolish whimsies in the 'world and would yet pass for men of very good 'sense.' And to the same purpose he frequently speaks on other occasions.

Mons. du Pin, when he would give a treatise he is speaking of, the worst character he can, says, 'It was writ by somebody who was wholly besotted 'with the dreaming enthusiasms of the rabbins and cabalists. Mr. Dodwell, speaking of the use of the Jewish writings, says, 'Considering the fabulousness and suspiciousness of these rabbinical records in any thing historical, I should be much better satisfied with any information from those more certainly ancient authors, which are extant in other tongues, such as Philo and Josephus, &c., and indeed shall not credit the rabbins any further than as they agree with such better attested monuments, or with the nature of things attested by them d'

6

Scaliger says of R. Ascher, who dwelt then at Amsterdam, that he was an ingenious man for a

a In Not. Gall. ad Matth. iii. 6. Les Juifs, si nous en croyons les rabbins, ne recevoient, &c.

b Bibliothèque Choisie, tom. xiii. p. 405. C'est là un privilége des Juifs, de ne faire presque aucun usage de leur raison, de débiter, sans honte, toutes sortes de rêveries, et de passer néanmoins pour habiles gens.

c Hist. Eccles. vol. i. p. 155. b. d Letter of Advice, &c. i. p. 33.

'Jew. And a little after,

It is very seldom

'that a Jew, who turns Christian, is good for any

thing; they are always bad. Nauclerus says of the Talmud, that though it be full of the most 'palpable lies, and contrary to all the laws of God, the Scriptures, and the light of nature, yet it is enjoined under pain of death that no one presume 'to deny any one thing written therein s.'

I have the testimony also of two unexceptionable judges in this matter; I mean the great Buxtorf, and our own incomparable Lightfoot; than whom none ever better understood, nor were more universally acquainted with the rabbins and their writings.

Buxtorf, after he has mentioned all the fine things which can be said to recommend the use and study of the Talmud, adds these words: Thus you see, 'reader, with what impudence and impiety this

e Scaligerana, p. 218. Qui estoit honneste homme pour un Juif.

f Ibid. p. 218, 219. Raro Judæus aliquis Christianus factus, fuit bonus, semper sunt nequam.

g Gener. 14. Licet plenus est inextricabilibus mendaciis, et contra omnem divinam legem, sacram Scripturæ sc. et naturæ legem conscriptus, sub pœna tamen capitis edictum est, nequis neget quicquam eorum quæ in eo dicuntur. [This quotation out of Nauclerus must have been taken somewhere at second-hand. The author's own words at this place (loosely) cited are: 'Circa hæc tempora [A.D. 400.] componitur Thalmud Judæorum, id 'est Judaica doctrina, a duobus Rabinis, s. Rabina et Rabasse ; liber major decem bibliis, in quo sunt inextricabilia mendacia 'contra omnem legem divinam, naturæ, ac Scripturam. Videntes ' enim legem suam in dies deficere, et fidem Christianam proficere in toto orbe, hos duos instigarunt rabbinos, prohibentes, sub pœna mortis, nequis aliquid negaret de his quæ in eo continentur. See Jo. Naucleri Chronica, fol. Coloniæ, 1579. vol. ii. Generat. 14. P. 553.]

'obstinate and blind people extol and magnify their

Talmud, and the authors of it: and can it seem 'strange that these neglect the law of God, to follow ⚫ the traditions of their fathersh?'

6

But Dr. Lightfoot's words are, if possible, fuller yet than any, and may serve for a compendium of all I have been hitherto saying. There are some,' says the doctor, who believe the holy Bible was pointed by the wise men of Tiberias. I do not wonder at 'the impudence of the Jews who invented the story; 'but I wonder at the credulity of Christians who I applaud it. Recollect, I beseech you, the names of the rabbins of Tiberias, from the first situation ' of the university there, to the time that it expired; ' and what, at length, do you find, but a kind of men 'mad with Pharisaism, bewitching with traditions, ' and bewitched, blind, guileful, doting, they must ' pardon me if I say, magical and monstrous? Men, 'how unfit, how unable, how foolish, for the under'taking so divine a work! Read over the Jerusalem Talmud, and see there how R. Judah, R. Chaninah, &c., and the rest of the grand doctors among the 'rabbins of Tiberias behave themselves; how earnestly they do nothing; how childishly they handle serious matters; how much of sophistry, froth, poison, smoke, nothing at all, there is in their disputes! And if you can believe the Bible was pointed in 'such a school, believe also all that the Talmudists ' write '.'

b Abbreviat. &c. p. 241. Vides, lector, obstinatissimæ et obcæcatissimæ gentis, de suo Talmud et ejus compilatoribus, impudentissima et impia elogia. An ergo mirum, quod Dei verbum reliquerunt, et patrum traditiones secuti sunt?

i Vol. ii. p. 73.

LETTER X.

ARRIAN, from whom Mr. Wall next argues, too late to determine the matter-He may perhaps only speak of the purifications for pollutions-The Pagans frequently confounded the Jews and Christians together, as appears from Themistius; from Arrian himself; from Lucian; from Tacitus; from Suetonius -And Rigaltius understands Arrian's words so too-As do also Petavius, Lipsius, and Barthius-Mr. Wall's argument from Gregory Nazianzen, examined-This Father lived too late to determine our dispute; and does not speak of an initiatory baptism-The Scripture makes no mention of any initiatory baptism in use among the Jews-Exod. xix. 10. makes nothing to the purpose-Maimonides, his rule of interpretation false―The rabbins very bad interpreters-Sanctify does not necessarily imply washing-Nothing in the words which so much as intimates the body was to be washedThere is no mention of an initiatory baptism in any authentic ancient history; even though they had the fairest occasions, and ought not to have omitted it, if there had been any such usage-This illustrated by some instances from Josephus and Ganz-It is on many accounts very improbable that the Jews had any such ceremony-Proved from St. Paul's words; from Gregory Nazianzen; from St. Peter-Several authors of reputation, and especially the ancients, do in effect deny they knew of any initiatory baptism among the Jews-Thus St. Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, St. Cyril of Jerusalem-Many writers say our baptism came instead (not of baptism among the Jews, but) of sacrifices; as the recognitions-Or of the washings for pollutions, as the Apostolical Constitutions pretend-And Mr. Hill speaks to this purpose -Others more commonly say, it succeeds in the place of circumcision-The conclusion from these observations-Though the Jews could be proved to have baptized their proselytes, this does no service to that cause of pædobaptism.-For, 1. It does not appear that infants were so admitted.-2. If the Jews had such a baptism as is pretended, it is no rule to Christians; otherwise the Socinians, &c., have a good handle to lay aside the use of baptism-And there is no manner of

analogy between the pretended Jewish, and the Christian pædobaptism-3. We need only go back to the baptism of St. John; which there is more reason to think was the pattern of Christ's, than a Jewish ceremony-St. John, Christ, and his apostles, baptized no infants-A passage of Josephus to this purpose-Another from Origen-Another of St. Paul-4. At best this supposed baptism of the Jews is only a traditionary ceremony from the rabbins-Their quoting texts for it no proof of its divine institution-The rabbins do not pretend to find an initiatory baptism in the Scriptures; but confess it is only a tradition of their elders-This proved from the words of the Talmud-Which are explained by some rules of Maimonides-Exod. xix. 10. cited only by way of accommodation-It is therefore great presumption to draw a rabbinical tradition into a precedent for the Christian church- These things applied to the present dispute-The Conclusion.

SIR,

HAVING shewn that the citations from the Jewish writers prove nothing at all, and do our adversaries no service; I proceed now to Mr. Wall's other arguments, which are brought to prove, that the Jews before, and at our Saviour's time, were wont to initiate proselytes and their children by baptism.

He insists upon some words of Arrian, the philosopher of Nicomedia.

1. But first, this philosopher lived not till about one hundred and fifty years after Christ, and therefore at best will not prove that custom to have been more ancient; for he only speaks of his own time, without any reference to the past.

2. Or secondly, he may, for what appears to the contrary, allude not to any initiatory washing, but

a Euseb. Chron. p. 213.