tion any later writers. To dispute the real age of Daniel, and the genuineness of his book, is arbitrary and unreasonable; as if a man should deny that Virgil and Horace lived in the time of Augustus, or wrote those works which with general consent are ascribed to them, and received as theirs. The book of Daniel is as genuine as any of those histories which Porphyry made use of in his work against the christians.

3. Porphyry, as we have seen in Jerom, said, that the book of Daniel could not be genuine, because it was written in Greek; this he argued from some Greek words in the history of Susanna, and other spurious things added to the book of Daniel.

Upon this argument I must say, first, that it is a very weak argument, because those stories of Susanna, Bel, and the Dragon, never were received by the Jews, nor by learned men among christians. If Porphyry did not know this, it shows great ignorance. But, secondly, I imagine he did know this, and that, according to the tradition of Jews and christians before his time, the book of Daniel was written in Hebrew, excepting some parts of it in Chaldee; cousequently this argument was unfair, and was owing to want of candour; and formed only to impose upon ignorant and uninstructed men; this indeed I take to be the case.

d

4. By the queen, mentioned, Dan. v. 10, Porphyry, as we learn from Jerom, understood the wife of Belshazzar; which must be a mistake, as is now allowed by all learned men in general, and was shown by Jerom himself. Says Prideaux : The queen that entered the banqueting-house to direct the king to call for Daniel, could not be his wife; for all his wives and concubines, the text tells us, sat with him 'at the feast. [Ver. 2.] And therefore it must have been Nitocris, the queen-mother, a lady famous for her wisdom, who had the chief management of public affairs, and is 'called the queen by way of eminence.' Nitocris, as it seems, was a lady of too much gravity, and too much engaged about public affairs, to take part in that entertain

ment.

This then is an error at the best; but I do not think it to be an innocent error; I rather think it to have been a designed and wilful misrepresentation. "When the queen came into the banquet-house, she said to Belshazzar; O king, live for ever. Let not thy thoughts trouble thee There is a man in thy kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the

a Connexion, P. i. B. 2. vol. i. p. 122. year before Christ, 539. See likewise Grotius, and Lowth upon the place.

holy gods; and in the days of thy father [or grandfather] light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods, was found in him -and what follows, ver. 10

12. This did not please Porphyry; it afforded an argument for the real age, and peculiar wisdom, and prophetic character of Daniel. The real truth, therefore, did. not suit Porphyry. This therefore I consider as an unfair argument, and another instance of want of candour. We may be the more confirmed in this supposition, in that, as Jerom says, Porphyry ridiculed the queen for pretending 'to know more than her husband.' There is no foundation for ridicule in the history itself.

5. Ch. ii. ver. 48, " Then the king made Daniel a great man, and gave him many great gifts." Here, as we before learned from Jerom, Porphyry took upon him to blame Daniel for not refusing those gifts, and for readily accept'ing Babylonish honours.' But there is no ground for such a censure; Daniel was guilty of no mean compliances; he ascribed all his wisdom to God; and upon every occasion preserved his integrity without blemish, and openly professed his zeal for true religion, and the worship of God according to the directions of the law of Moses. It was not decent for him to refuse the honours bestowed by a great king, when no sinful compliances were exacted; and when he might, in the high station to which he was advanced, both promote the interest of true religion, and the welfare of his people in a strange country. Daniel does not appear to have been fond of worldly honours. When Belshazzar made him great promises, he answered: "Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards to another," ch. v. 17. That remark, therefore, I consider as an instance of Porphyry's malignant temper toward Daniel, and in him toward christians.

6. I shall add no more observations here. I have again and again acknowledged, that Porphyry's work against the christians was a work of great labour, in which he showed great learning; and it might have been of some use to us now if it had been preserved. At the same time it appears to me very probable, that there were in it many mistakes, and many instances of want of candour; and I make no doubt, but that, if it were still extant, it would appear to us very provoking and offensive, as it did to the christians in former times, who saw and read it.

7. Dan. xi. 38, "But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces, or munitions.'

In his commentary upon the 30th chapter of Isaiah,

Jerome blames Porphyry for rendering this the god of the town of Modim,' ineaning the god who was worshipped there. However, curious readers should consult Grotius, as well as Lowth, upon that text.

8. Jerom seems to say elsewhere, that Porphyry had written largely about Daniel's seventy weeks; if he intends any thing beside what I have already taken notice of, I know nothing of it.

V. Having made such large extracts out of Jerom's Commentary on the book of Daniel, for showing the nature of that part of Porphyry's work, I now proceed to other things.

In the first book of his Evangelical Preparation, Eusebius exposing the absurdity of the heathen polytheism, which had long prevailed in the world; which, as he says, having been first introduced among the Phoenicians and Egyptians, had been propagated among the Greeks and other nations: This, he says, he will show, beginning with the Phoenicians.

Their affairs are written by Sanchoniathon, an ancient author, older, as is said, than the Trojan times; who, they say, has written the Phoenician history, with great exactness and fidelity. Philo, not the Jew, but Biblius, has 'translated the whole work into Greek out of the Phoeni'cian language. He is quoted by that person, who in our time wrote against us, in the fourth book of his work, in these very words. "Sanchoniathon of Berytus writes the history of the Jews very exactly, and mentions times and places; taking his accounts from the Memoirs of Jerombal,

6

6

e Hoc annotavimus, ut quod in Danielis extremâ legimus Visione Deum Maozim, non ut Porphyrius somniat Deum viculi Modim,' sed robustum Deum et fortem intelligamus. In Is. cap. xxx. T. iii. p. 252. m.

Sin autem supradictos viros magistros ecclesiæ nominavi, illud intelligant, me non omnium probare fidem, qui certe inter se contrarii sunt; sed et distinctionem Josephi, Porphyriique dixisse, qui de hac quæstione plurima disputârunt. Præf. in libr. xi. Comment. in Is. T. iii. p. 283.

8 Pr. Ev. 1. i. cap. 9. p. 30, 31.

h Μεμνηται τετων ὁ καθ ̓ ἡμας των καθ ̓ ἡμων πεποιημένος συσκευήν, εν τεταρτῳ τῳ προς ήμας υποθέσεως ωδε τώ ανδρι μαρτυρων προς λέξιν. Ισορει δε τα περι Ιεδαιων αληθέςατα, ότι και τοις τόποις και τοις ονομασιν αυτων τα συμφωνότατα, Σαγχονιαθων ὁ Βηρυτιος, ειληφως τα υπομνήματα παρα Ιερομβαλε τε ἱερεως θες τε Ιευω· ὃς Αβιβαλῳ τῳ βασιλει Βηρυτιων την ἱσοριαν αναθεῖς ὑπ' εκεινε και των κατ' αυτόν εξεταστων της αληθειας παρεδέχθη. Οἱ δε τετων χρονοι και προ των Τροϊκων πιπτεσι χρονων, και σχεδον τοις Μωσεως πλησιάζεσιν ὡς αἱ των Φοινικης βασιλεων μηνυεσι διαδοχαι. Σαγχονιαθων δε κατα την Φονικων διαλεκτον, φιλαλήθως την παλαιαν ίσοριαν εκ των κατα πολιν ὑπομνημάτων, και των εν τοις ἱεροις αναγραφων συναγαγων και συγγράψας, επι Σεμιράμεως γεγονε της Ασσυρίων βασιλίδος, ἡ προ των Ιλιακων, η κατ' αυτές γε χρονες γενεσθαι αναγεγραπται. κ. λ. Praep. Ev. 1. i. p. 30, 31.

१

priest of the god Jevo; who dedicated his history to Abibal king of Berytus, by whom, as well as by others his contemporaries, capable judges of the truth, it was • approved. Their age was before the Trojan times, and approaches near to the times of Moses, as is evident from 4 the succession of the kings of Phoenicia. Sanchoniathon, 'who with great fidelity wrote their ancient history in the Phoenician language, collecting it partly from the registers • of cities, and partly from the records kept in temples, lived in the time of Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians, 'who is computed to have reigned before the times of Troy, or about them. The work of Sauchoniathon was translated into Greek by Philo Biblius." So writes that per'son, bearing testimony to the veracity and antiquity of that • historian.'

i

But, as Eusebius adds: That ancient writer, in the progress of his work, does not recommend the worship of • God who is over all, nor of the heavenly bodies, but of ' mortal men and women; who, so far from being respectable 'for the probity of their manners, or the excellence of their 'virtues, or their great wisdom, which might recommend 'them to esteem and imitation, that their characters are 'blemished with the most foul and flagitious vices; and they appear to be the very same that are now worshipped as gods in all cities and countries.'

The same passage of Porphyry is quoted again by Eusebius, in the ninth chapter of the tenth book of the same work, the Evangelical Preparation. He there introduceth it, and argueth from it after this manner.

His subject in that place is the antiquity of Moses and the Jewish prophets. He first refers to his Chronical Canons, where he had already showed the same thing. Now, says he, to what was then said, I would add here the testimony of the most bitter enemy to the Jews and us that

k

† Ὁ δε προϊων 8 τον επι παντων Θεον, εδε μην τες κατ' ερανον, θνητες δε ανδρας και γυναικας, εδε τον τροπον αςειες οἱες δι' αρετην αξιον ειναι αποδεξασθαι, η ζηλωσαι της φιλοσοφίας, φαυλότητος δε και μοχθηρίας άπασης κακιαν περιβεβλημένες θεολογει. Και μαρτυρεί γε τετες αυτές εκείνες είναι, τες εισέτι νυν θεες παρα τοις πασι νενομισμένες κατά τε τας πόλεις και τας χωρας. Ib. p. 31.

k Ταυτα μεν εν αποδεικτικώς εν τοις πονηθεισιν ἡμιν χρονικοις κανοσιν έτως έχοντα συνεση. Επι δε το παροντος, προς τοις ειρημένοις, μαρτυρι της Μωσεως αρχαιότητος χρησομαι τῳ παντων δυσμηνεςατῳ και πολεμιωτατῳ Εβραιων τε και ήμων· φημι δε τῷ καθ ̓ ἡμας φιλοσοφῳ, ὃς την καθ' ἡμων συσκευην ὑπερβολή μισες προβεβλημένος, 8 μονες ήμας, αλλα και ̔Εβραιος, αυτον τε Μωσέα, και τες μετ' αυτόν προφητας ταις ίσαις υπηγάγετο βλασφημίαις. Δια γαρ της των εχθρων ὁμολογιας αναμφήρι ως ἡγουμαι την επαγγελιαν πιςωσεσθαι. Ρι Ev. 1. x. p. 484, 485.

6

ever was; I mean that philosopher of our time, who, in the • abundance of his enmity against us, published a work, in 'which he reviles not us only; but also the Jews, and Moses, and the prophets after him, and all in the like manner; for the confession of enemies is always reckoned credible. Porphyry then, in the fourth book of his work against us, says in these very words: "Sanchoniathon of Berytus writes the history of the Jews very exactly." So quoting the passage before transcribed by me at length. After which Eusebius proceeds: Upon which we may argue in this manner. If Sanchoniathon flourished in the • time of Semiramis, and she lived long before the times of Troy, it follows, that Sanchoniathon was older than the same times. But he is said to have taken his memoirs 'from others, who were before his times; and who were not contemporaries with Moses, but only lived near his times. It follows, that Sanchoniathon is still so much later than Moses, as he is later than those of greater antiquity, who only lived near the times of Moses.'

6

6

.

This passage of Porphyry is also cited by m Theodoret in his books against the gentiles, and as from his work written against us. He likewise quotes it in proof of the antiquity of Moses, and that he lived before the times of Troy.

6

And Eusebius, in his introduction to the second book of his Chronical Canon, as we now have it in Jerom's Latin translation, says: The antiquity of Moses is asserted by ' many of our own writers, and among the Jews by Josephus and Justus; and among the Greeks [or Gentiles], the impious Porphyry in the fourth book of his work, which 'with fruitless labour he composed against us, affirms, that Moses was older than Semiramis.'

6

VI. Severian, bishop of Gatala in Syria, at the beginning of the fifth century, in his sixth homily upon the Creation of the World, having quoted Gen. iii. 5, " For God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil," goes on: Many say, and especi ally they who follow that enemy of God, Porphyry, who wrote against the christians, and has perverted many from the truth; Why did God forbid the knowledge of good

6

1 Ib. p. 485.

n

cantes.

m Gr. Aff. L. ii. T. iv. p. 493.

ex Judæis Josephus et Justus veteris historiæ monumenta repliEx ethnicis vero impius ille Porphyrius, in quarto Operis sui libro, quod adversum nos casso labore contexuit, post Moysem Semiramim fuisse affirmat. Chr. Can. p. 54.

Λεγουσι πολλοι, και μαλιτα οἱ τῳ Θεοςυγει Πορφυριῳ ακολουθήσαντες, τῳ κατα χρισιανων συγγραψαντι, και τε θεις δογματος πολλους αποτησαντι. κ. λ. Sever. de Mundi Chr. hom. ap. Chrys. T. vi. p. 498