you fuppofe that the learned Ebionites were heretics, and the unlearned orthodox.

3. As fo many writers fpeak of Ebionites, or heterodox Nazarenes, it would furely have been natural for some of them to have added, that they were not the great body, or at least not the whole, of the Jewish chriftians. The mention of the one would naturally have drawn after it, on fome occafion, the mention of the other. And yet no ancient writer fpeaks of them.

4. As to a whole church of orthodox Jewish christians at Jerufalem, or elsewhere, we hear of no intercourse between any fuch church and other orthodox churches. None of their bishops, or deputies from them, appear at any council; no appeals are ever made to them; which would have been natural, as to the mother of all the churches. This is eafily accounted for on the fuppofition that all the remains of the Jewish chriftians were the poor and despised unitarian Ebionites, refiding chiefly beyond the fea of Galilee, whofe numbers likewife were inconfiderable; but hard to be fuppofed, if there were any churches of orthodox Jewish chriftians, refiding at Jerufalem, or elsewhere.

5. If there was any confiderable body of orthodox Jewish chriftians, why do we never hear of any Hebrew gospels befides that of Matthew? If they held the doctrine of the orthodox gentile churches concerning the perfon of Chrift, it is probable that C

they

they would have had the fame refpect for the other gofpels, and the other books of the New Teftament, and yet it is almoft certain, that they inade little ufe of them.

By way of apology for your additions to the fcanty accounts of the ancients, concerning the conqueft of Jerufalem by Adrian, you fay, p. 38, "The "ecclefiaftical hiftory of thofe times is fo very ge"neral and imperfect, that whoever attempts to "make out a confiftent ftory from any ancient "writers which are come down to us, will find "himself under the neceffity of helping out their "broken accounts by his own conjectures."

But certainly, Sir, the contradicting of an ancient writer, is not the way to help out his account of things. Now Eufebius, the oldeft writer who mentions the fact, fays, that after the taking of the city by Adrian, the whole nation of the Jews (wat, which excludes all diftinction with respect to religion) were forbidden even to fee the defolation of their metropolis at a distance *. To help out this broken account, because it does not contain all that you with it to do (though I fee nothing broken in it) you fay that the Jews were allowed to remain in the place, and enjoy the privileges of the Ælian colony, on

δίκην, τα

* Και τι της απονοίας αύλοις αλια την αξίαν εκπισαν παν εθνθ εξ εκείνες και της περι τα Ιεροσολυμα της παμπαν επιβαινέ εἰργείαι, νομε δογμαλι και διατάξεσιν Ανδριανός ως αν μηδ' εξ αποτελε Temporer To Walwov sda eynenevaayers. Hift. Lib. iv. cap. 6.

condition

condition of their becoming chriftians. To help out this addition, I would farther add, that another of the terms of the capitulation was, that they should from that time speak Greek, as without this, they could have derived no benefit from the offices of a Greek church.

Sulpicius fays, that by this severity to the inhabitants of Jerufalem, Adrian thought to destroy the christian faith. But to this you oppose the authority of Orofius (calling it, however, p. 43, but a feather in the fcale) that when the Jews were excluded, the chriftians were allowed to remain. If your liberty of helping out a broken story may be exercised here, I fhould fay, that in the idea even of this writer, the Greek chriftians might remain, but the Jewish not. If any regard is to be paid to Eufebius, the oldest historian, or to Sulpicius, who is much more circumftantial than Orofius, and on that account better entitled to credit, no Jews, chriftians or others, were allowed to remain in the place.

To make your account the more probable, you fay, p. 44, "It is a notorious fact that Adrian was "not unfavourable to the chriftians, and that the "church in his reign obtained a refpite from per"fecution." But how far did this favour to chriftians extend? You fay, "the fury of their perfe

cutors was reftrained by the imperial refcripts to the provincial governors, who were directed not to proceed against the christians, except by way of regular trial, upon the allegation of fome certain "crime,

C 2

"crime, and when nothing more was alleged that "the bare name of chriftianity, to punish the in"former as a fycophant." That is, as the historyof thofe times enables us to interpret it, they were not to be punished as chriftians till they were proved to be so, which was the cafe in the reign of Trajan; but does not amount to a toleration of the Jews at Jerufalem, on condition of their embracing chriftianity.

Your favourite Mofheim fays (Hift. vol. i. p. 128) that what was done by Adrian (in whofe reign the perfecution of chriftians had raged with peculiar violence) was a folemn renewal of the law of Trajan. In the reign of Antoninus Pius, but not before, it was ordered that a man being proved to be a chriftian, fhould not be deemed fufficient for his condemnation, unless he was also proved to have been guilty of fome crime against the state. There is, therefore, little reafon to think that Adrian was fo well difpofed towards chriftianity, as to permit the rebellious Jews to remain in Jerufalem on condition of their embracing it.

I am, &c.

LETTER

LETTER III.

Of the Teftimony of Epiphanius to the Existence of a Church of Orthodox Jewish Chriftians at Jerufalem after the time of Adrian.

A

REV. SIR,

FTER the preliminary obfervations contained in the preceding letter, I fhall now confider the teftimony that you have produced from Epiphanius.

You fay. p. 46, that "the fact (viz. of the return of the Jews from Pella to Jerufalem, after the wars of Adrian) of which Dr. Priestley has done me "the honour to make me the inventor, is afferted

by Epiphanius.-The confidence," you add, "with which he mentions this, as a fact forged by me, is only one inftance, out of a great "number, of his own fhameless intrepidity in " affertion."

66

If, Sir, you wish to reclaim a perfon, you should never deprive him of all character, but should leave him a little, a fmall root, from which more may afterwards fpring. Having now no character to lofe, being capable of afferting any thing,

C 3

true