[fn64 That Grotius would sometimes prevaricate to serve a turn is certain. There is an anecdote on record, contained in the notes to Gibbon's account of Mohammed in his Roman History, which proves this. In Grotius' famous book on the truth of the Christian Religion, there is a story that Mohammed had a tame pidgeon which he taught to come and peck in his ear, in order to make his followers believe that the bird was the organ by whom he received revelations from God. This story is not believed, nor was ever heard of among the Musselmen. On the publication of Grotius' book, a friend learned in Oriental Literature, came to him and asked him for his authority for this story, Grotius frankly owned that he had none, in other words that the story was a pious fraud in order to stigmatize Mohammedanism. "This story" Gibbon says, "was accordingly left out of the Arabic version of Grotius' Book, intended to circulate among the-Musselmen, for fear that they should laugh at such a piece of ignorance or effrontery: but it still maintains an edifying place in those copies printed for the perusal of Christians."! I quote from memory.
It is really a pity that the Protestant Church, which like a Magdalen professes to repent other errors committed during her former connection with "the mother of abominations," should yet retain so many of the bad habits contracted during their past intimacy. Some folks have even pretended to have observed, that notwithstanding their old quarrel, they seem to have recommenced a "nodding acquaintance." I hope the report is untrue.]
[fn65 Mr. Everett will probably say, that he made these deadly stabs at my character upon the same principle that the New England Cobbler killed the Indian Hogan Mogan. "Not out of malice, but mere zeal Because he was an infidel.">[
[fn66 I have a right to believe so, for Mr. Everett quotes Priestley's notes, p. 339 of his work. Dr. Priestley united in his character, the rare concurrence of a keen controversial writer, with great fairness and candour. He seems always to have been willingly disposed to resign an untenable opinion, when convinced by the arguments of his opponent. His conduct in regard to the question between the Jews and Christians, may be considered as a proof of this. He wrote letters to the Jews in defence of Christianity, which were replied to by Levi. In this controversy Levi had evidently the better of Priestley. Priestley seems to have been sensible of this, which occasioned him to examine the question more minutely. The result of his examination led him to avow, in a Dissertation in the Theological Repository published in England, I believe in the very one which Mr. Everett refers to [Theol. Rep. vol. 5.] that the prophets clearly justify the Jews for expecting as their Messiah, a glorious monarch of the house and name of David, who should reign over them and all the human race; but he also maintained as I think in the same Dissertation, that Jesus Christ is nevertheless predicted by the 53d. of Isaiah. Several years afterwards, when Priestley resided in America, he published his notes on Scripture, wherein he abandons the Christian interpretation, of the 53d. of Isaiah, and applies it as I do to the Jewish nation.]
[fn67 If all that Mr. Everett has said upon this subject were true, it would amount after all only to an argument ad prejudicium, for the Jews of past times, who believed the dreams of the Rabbies, but is of no weight whatever with those who reject them, as do all the Biblical critics of the present day.]
[fn68 There occurs to me an instance of carelessness or something worse on the part of Mr. Everett in p. 342 of his work. I had said in my first publication, that "there is in the speech of James, Arts xv. a quotation from Amos in which, to make it fit the subject, (which after all it does not fit) is the substitution of the words "the remnant of men," for "the remnant of Edom," as it is in the original." On this Mr. Everett remarks with astonishing' composure, "There are few of my readers to whom I need say, that the same Hebrew word means 'men,' and 'Edom,' according' as it is pronounced, and St. James has as fair a right to pronounce it men,' as Mr. English has to pronounce it 'Edom.'" The only way by which Mr. Everett can escape the charge of fraud in this affair, is by allowing that he did not take the trouble to look at the passage quoted from Amos, ix. 12. in the Hebrew Bible, from which it will appear that neither St. James, nor any other Saint, has a right to read the passage "the remnant of men" (or Adam;) because the Hebrew word contains a letter (vau,) which the word Adam does not contain, and which limits its signification to Edom.
I would observe by the. way, that the passage in Amos "that they, (i. e. Israel,) may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen (or nations) which are called by my name, appears to contain an allusion to the Christians and Mohammedans, who are the only nations besides the Jews who invoke, the name of Jehovah, and profess faith in his prophets. There are not a few passages in the prophets, which have a significance at present, which they could not have had at the time the predictions were uttered.]
[fn69 for "sun" read "been">[
[fn70 for "simple" read "single">[
[fn71 In the beginning of the 9th. ch. of Daniel, the prophet says; "I Daniel, understood by books the number of years whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications with fasting, sackcloth and ashes." It appears from his prayer, that he supposed the Babylonish captivity of seventy years, would terminate the chastisement of his nation. Upon which the angel Gabriel was sent to "give him skill and understanding," and to inform him, that their chastisement would not be terminated by the captivity of seventy years, but by one of "seventy times seven," i. e. a long and undefined period. The words "seven," and "seventy," were frequently used by the Hebrews to signify an indefinite number, and "seventy times seven" is a Hebreism used to signify a great and indefinite number. Thus one of the disciples of Jesus is represented as asking him, "Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him; until seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, until seven times, but until seventy times seven." Mat. ch. xviii. 21, 22.]