metaphors commonly used in the languages of the Eaft,"cities walled to heaven." But fo far were the Ifraelites from furpaffing their enemies in number, that they bore no proportion to them in this refpect.

66

It has been foolishly faid, that "we read in the "books afcribed to Mofes, Jofhua, &c. that the "Ifraelites came by ftealth upon whole nations of people." But nothing of this nature is faid in any of these books. Nor was it poffible that "whole nations of people" could have been overcome by the Ifraelites in this manner. Had they fucceeded in fubduing one city or one nation by ftealth, the reft would undoubtedly have taken the alarm, and prepared to defend themselves.

As it thus appears that the Ifraelites could not be indebted, for their conqueft of Canaan, to fuperiority in military prowefs, or in numbers, or to any fuccessful ftratagem; and that they have ftill afcribed it to the power of God; it follows that the account given in Scripture of this conqueft cannot be reasonably rejected. We have formerly confidered the prefervation of the Gibeonites to a late period in the Jewish hiftory, as a ftanding teftimony of the truth of thofe wonderful facts which are recorded in the books of Mofes and Jofhua. Their prefervation may particularly be viewed as a ftriking proof that the Ifraelites acted by the authority of God in destroying the Canaanites; as they formed a part of one of the feven nations faid to be devoted to deftruction.

x Age of Reafon, Part II. p. 2.

Before

Before particularly entering on the confideration of the objections made to this part of the Sacred History, I fhall premife a few things, which may tend to rescue this injunction from the false and invidious light in which it has been exhibited.

Firft, This deftruction was amply merited. The crimes of the devoted nations were very heinous. Adultery, inceft, fodomy, and beftiality prevailed among them. They not only worshipped a great multitude of ftrange gods, but offered human facrifices. In the blindefs and cruelty of their idolatry, they facrificed their own children. Their crimes were highly aggravated. It would seem that they had rapidly corrupted themselves. So late as the period of Abraham's fojourning in Canaan, many of its inhabitants appear to have worfhipped the true God. Among these we may reckon, not only Melchizedek king of Salem, but Abimelech king of Gerar. It is natural to think that their people adhered to the fame worfhip. They had enjoyed many mercies. Abraham, Lot, Ifaac and Jacob fojourned among them. They had the benefit of their example, inftructions and reproofs. Thefe patriarchs frequently changed their fituation. This might be ordered in Providence, not merely to remind themfelves that they were only pilgrims, but that the benefit already mentioned might be more extenfively diffufed among the inhabitants of that country. But

y Lev. xviii. 3. 6.-24.

z Gen. xx. 4. 9.

But they defpifed their mercy. Nor did they take warning from the awful punishment of the cities of the plain, although this punishment was inflicted for the commiffion of a crime common among themselves. God exercifed his long-fuffering towards fome of thefe nations for more than four centuries, after they were greatly corrupted. He would not caft them out of Canaan, till their iniquity was full, not even to make way for the feed of Abraham ".

Secondly, This deftruction was limited. The Ifraelites had no authority to deftroy any of the heathen nations, except thofe feven particularly mentioned. They were to offer peace to others, and could only make them tributaries b. The inoffenfive conduct of the Ifraelites, indeed, to feveral other nations, affords a ftrong collateral proof that they acted under a divine command in what they did to the feven nations of Canaan. Can it be accounted for on natural principles, that they fhould have quietly paffed by other nations, whom they could as eafily have conquered, as far as natural ftrength was concerned, nay more eafily; nations, for whom they had no partiality; from whom indeed they had received fuch provocation, as is generally reckoned a fufficient reafon for hoftility; whereas the Canaanites had done them no injury whatfoever? Were the Ifraelites fo bloody a race; and how did they fpare the Moabites and Ammonites, who not only refused them a paffage through their land, but hired Balaam

a Gen. xv. 16.

b Deut. xx. 10, II.

Je Judg. xi. 17.

Balaam to curfe them? Whence did they difcover no inclination to avenge themselves on the children of Edom, although the latter would not fuffer them to pafs through their territories, where they offered to pay for every thing they needed; and even came out against them in a hostile mannere? These circumftances are totally irreconcilable, not merely with the character given to the Ifraelites by the enemies of religion, but with their conduct towards the Canaanites; unless we receive the folution given in their own fcriptures, that they acted under the influence of a prohibition in the one cafe, and obeyed an exprefs command in the other. No provocation could give them a warrant to injure thefe nations. For God had faid; " Diftrefs not the Moabites, neither "contend with them in battle: for I will not

66

give thee of their land for a poffeffion, because "I have given Ar unto the children of Lot for a "poffeffion.-Thou art to pafs through Ar, the "coaft of Moab this day. And when thou co"meft nigh over against the children of Ammon, "diftrefs them not, nor meddle with them: for I

will not give thee of the land of the children "of Ammon any poffeffion, because I have given "it unto the children of Lot for a poffeflion f." They had received fimilar inftructions with refpect to Edom. The Lord faid to Mofes, "Com"mand thou the people, faying, Ye are to pafs

through the coaft of your brethren the children "of Efau, which dwell in Seir, and they fhall be "afraid

d Deut. xxiii. 4. e Numb. xx. 14 ---21.

f Deut ii. 9. 17.---19.

"afraid of you: take ye good heed unto your"felves therefore. Meddle not with them; for "I will not give you of their land, no not fo "much as a foot-breadth, becaufe I have given "Mount Seir unto Efau for a poffeflion. Ye shall "buy meat of them for money, that ye may eat; "and ye fhall alfo buy water of them for money, "that ye may drink s." Whence the difference of their conduct to Sihon king of the Amorites? They fent the fame meffage to him, when on their way to Canaan, which they had fent to the kings of Moab and Edom. Sihon did nothing more than these other kings had done. He refufed to fuffer the Ifraelites to pafs through his land, and came out against them to battle. He even did less than the king of Moab. He ufed no divinations against them. But he and all his people were deftroyed. We can account for this difference no other way, than by believing that the Ifraelites were reftrained by a divine prohibition in the one cafe, but not in the other.

Thirdly, This deftruction was to be gradual. Hence Mofes faid to the Ifraelites, concerning the devoted nations; "The LORD thy God will put "out those nations before thee, by little and lit"tle thou mayeft not confume them at once, "left the beafts of the field increafe upon thee h." Here we obferve a trait of mercy not merely to the Ifraelites, but to the Canaanites. Thus, an opportunity was left them to flee out of the land, if they chose. For it would feem that the threatVOL. II. ened

g Deut. ii. 4.-6. `

L

h Dent. vii. 22.