that the Greek Hiftorians (and particu larly Herodotus) own, the Greeks received all their Theology, both their Gods and their Religious Ceremonies, from the Egyptians: And their most famous Philofophers all travelled to Egypt, and there learned thofe Notions, which they after propa gated in their own Countries. Now, fince the Greeks were not themselves the first pere Authors of thefe Opinions, but learn'd them of the Egyptians; and the Jews always beld a Correfpondence and Traffick with Egypt, and in feveral of their ancient Wars, bad Alliances with that State, as we are affured by the holy Text, nay, were themselves once Slaves there? It is abfurd to Suppofe, the Jews, during all fuch a various Intercourfe with this People, fhould have imbibed none of their Opinions, till they received them at Second-band from the Greek Philofophers.

Concerning this Objection, it is fuffici ent to have given this Hint. What I propofe to speak to here particularly, is the Fragment of Jofephus, printed in the

Ap

Appendix, which the Reverend and Learn ed Dr. Hickes, that great Encourager of the Study and Knowledge of Chriftian Antiquity, and whom therefore the late Excellent Dr Grabe, by his laft Will, empower'd to difpofe of, and print his Ma nuscripts for the Ufe of the Publick, was pleafed to give me leave to publish, at the fame time that he did advife and encourage me in the Publication of Athenagoras. Concerning this Fragment very little can be affirmed with Certainty: The most learned Photius takes notice of this as a confi derable Piece, and obferves it hath been imputed to several of the famous Chriftians; as Juftin Martyr, Irenæus, and others. (a) Hoefchelius alfo, in his Notes on Photius, published this Fragment, but different from the present Copy; and says, he thinks it must have been written by fome Chriftian. Photius mentions his feeing a Copy of it, and (b) attributed to one Caius, a certain Priest living at Rome :

(a) Hoefchelius, in Not. ad Phot. 1. 9.

(5) Εΰρον δε ἐν ἀραγραφαῖς, ὅτι ἐκ ἔσιν ὁ λόγΘ Ιωσήπο, ἀλλὰ Γαΐς τινὸς πρεσβυτέρῳ ἐν Ῥώμη διατείβον] Θ. But

66

But takes notice alfo, that the general Voice had given it to one Jofephus, who was either a Chriftian of that Name, or per-· haps Flavius Jofephus the great Hiftorian, notwithstanding that there is a plain Confeffion of Chrift contained in it. Thus the Great Photius: (c) He plainly 66 confeffes Chrift, who is truly GOD, in a most explicite Manner acknowledging the Name Chrift, and the un"conceivable Generation by His Father; " which gave occafion to fome to fufpect "whether this was a genuine Piece of Jofephus, although the Style is perfectly the fame with that in his other Writings.

66

(c) Περὶ μ * Xes * αληθινό Θεῖ ἡμῶν ὡς ἔγγισα θεολογεί, κλησίν τε αὐτὴν ἀναφθεγόμενο Χεις, καὶ ἐν Πατρὸς ἄφρασον γύησιν ἀμέμπλως ἀναγράφων ; ὁ τινὰς ἴσως καὶ ἀμφιδοξῶν ὡς Ἰωσήπε μὴ τὸ συντα[μάτιον ἀναπείσειεν, εδέν δε τὸ τ φράσεως αὐτῇ πρὸς τὰ ὑπόλοιπα 7 avdels amde. Phot. Biblioth. P. 3. 6.

Α

DISSERTATION

Concerning the

NOTIONS of the JEWS

About the

Refurrection of the Dead.

T

HE Notion of a Resurrection of the Dead is fo Noble and Auguft, that furely nothing but an immortal Spirit could have any Apprehension of it. And fuch is the Power of this one Truth, that, like the great Archimedes, it challenges only 78 5, where it may fet its Foot, where it may be received, and it will move the whole World. It hath apparently, above all other Notions that were ever advanced, the greatest Influence on the Conduct of Humane Life. Faith in other B Points,

Points, as well as in this, is neceffary to make us good Chriftians; but without believing this, or fomething equivalent, it is impoffible to be tolerable Heathens. We now stand in such a happy Period of Time, where Life and Immortality are brought to Light, the dark Curtain of the Jewish Ceremonial Law drawn away, and the miraculous Scene opened. We hear all the Prophets now fpeak History: Yet will it be ftill proper to enquire what were the Opinions of the Old Jewish Church, which had the true Oracles of Faith entrusted to it. And here Recourfe is to be had to the Jewish Authors themselves, both for the Explanation of the Texts of Scripture, on which they believed this Doctrine founded, and for a fuller Account of their own Traditionary Knowledge in this Point. If the Resurrection were to be difcourfed on from the New Testament, it would not be improper to turn our Eyes very often on them, because the Phrafeology of the New Testament is so perfectly different from the old pure Greek Style, fo full of Allusions to the Jewish and Eastern Popular Notions and Hiftorical Accidents, that it is difficult to have a full Knowledge of many Paffages in that Sacred Writ, without being generally acquainted with the Manners and Opinions of the Jewish Writers. It will be alfo not a little curious to obferve, what were the No-.