may be clearly proved from the very prophecy you there quote, viz. Isaiah, xi, 10, 11. In both which verfes, it fays, " In that day." Now if there is any meaning in language, in that day certainly means at that time; i. e. the time of the Meffiah. Nay, I may say, even before the coming of the Meffiah, as will be fhewn in the fequel: fo that it will take place inftantaneously, because, that is the principal office of Elijah, the forerunner of the Meffiah. But you are obliged to acknowledge, Ibid. that "The doctrine of Jefus hath "not yet produced all the effects which the pro"phets predicted." What in almoft EIGHTEEN HUNDRED YEARS hath the doctrine of Jefus not produced all the effects, which the prophets have predicted to be fulfilled in the perfon of the Mefsiah! Why then, I think, it is a prefumptive proof, that he cannot be the Meffiah fo predicted by the prophets. This will be more fully evinced from the words of Jefus himfelf. Matth. x. 34. "Think

not that I am come to fend peace on earth;, I came not to fend peace, but a fword. For I "am come to fet a man at variance against his father, and the daughter againft her mother, "and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in"law; and a man's foes fhall be they of his own

houfehold." In Luke, xii. 51, he fays, "Sup"pofe ye that I am come to give peace on earth? "I tell you, nay, but rather divifion. For from

ес

henceforth there fhall be five in one houfe di*vided, three against two, and two against three. "The

«The father fhall be divided against the son, and the fon against the father; the mother against "the daughter, and the daughter against the mor "ther; the mother-in-law against her daughter"in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mo

ther-in-law." Now, what can these words of Jefus mean but this? You, fays he, speaking to his difciples, &c. fuppofe, according to the prophets, that the Meffiah's kingdom is to be a peaceable one, (as they actually did, as is clear from feveral parts of the New Testament) as confifting of univerfal peace; of courfe, you fuppofe that I am come to give this peace. But this I tell you, you must not expect of me, for I am fo far from giving peace, that on the contrary, I am come to give a fword, divifion, &c. Can this, now, Sir, be the Meffiah foretold by the prophets? for he has given a description of himself, that is as diametrically oppofite to the character of the Meffiah, as allowed on all hands to be foretold by the prophets, as light is to darkness. Confider, I befeech you, Sir, your own words, page 86, "A "meffenger whom all the Jewish nation took for " a prophet announced his approach." This, I suppose, you found on Matth. xi. 14. "Elias which was for to come." Now, this expreffion of Matthew is founded on the prophecy of Malach. iv. 5, 6. "Behold, I will fend you Eli

"This is

jah the prophet, &c. And he fhall turn the "heart of the fathers to the children, and the "heart of the children to their fathers, left I come

" and

"fmite the earth with a curfe." And, agreeable to this prophecy, the Evangelift endeavours to imprefs on our mind the idea of John's being the Elias fo foretold, and who was to effect this univerfal peace and unanimity among mankind: for Luke, chap. i. 17. fays, "And he shall go before "him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn "the hearts of the fathers to the children," &c. But, whoever seriously confiders the words of Jefus above cited, must be fully convinced, that John could not be the Elias foretold by the prophet, nor Jefus the Meffiah; because the character of Jefus, as given by himfelf, fo flatly contradicted the words of the prophet. That the Almighty God, the God of our fathers, Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, may be pleased to lead you into the path of truth, is the fincere wish of,

Sir,

Your true friend, and

Humble fervant,

D. LEV I.

A LETTER

LETTER

то

DR. KRAUTER,

OCCASIONED BY HIS

Examination of Mr. David Levi's Objections,

IN HIS

LETTERS TO DR. PRIESTLEY.

BY DAVID LEVI,

AUTHOR OF LINGUA SACRA, THE CEREMONIES OF THE JEWS, &c.

I Have read your examination of my objections in

my Letters to Dr. Priestley, concerning which I fhall at prefent fay a few words. As to your examination of the 1ft, 2d, 3d, and 6th of my objections, I must inform you, that you will find them anfwered in my prefent Letters to Dr. Priestley, in the preceding part of this pamphlet: I fhall therefore, in this letter, only take notice of your 4th objection, viz. the fending of the devils into the herd of fwine, by which they ran into the fea and were deftroyed.

Before I proceed to confider your examination of this objection, I must first remark, that I have already obferved, (page 43) that the exorcifing or cafting out devils, was no proof of a divine miffion; because, as I have there fhewn, the heathens, &c. also laid claim to the working of fuch miracles; and in fuch a manner, that Chriftians themselves were not able to deny, or detect it. This being premifed, it will be proper to inquire, whether (as you observe, page 40,) Jefus did “actually "fend the devils into the herd of fwine, and fo "caufe-them to run into the fea and perifh !"I do not mean that part of the argument you make use of, viz. the diftinction between permit

ting