She lay defolate, fhe kept Sabbath, to fulfill threefcore and ten years. Upon these words Mr. L. hath thus commented,

Here 'tis exprefly faid that during the time of the Jews Servitude to Nebuchadnezzar, and his fons in Babylon, after that they were carried thither upon their Temple being burnt, the land kept Sabbath, that is, lay defolate, and untilled feventy years, herein accomplishing Jeremiah's Prophecy.

Thus Mr. L. hath giv'n us his sense of these Texts, with a remarkable Introduction that his faid fenfe of them, as here it stands, is EXPRESSLY faid in them.

But that it is really no otherwise said in them, than as he hath fo made it by his own improper glofs on the words, it will be evident by confidering these texts, and by fhewing that in truth nothing more can, or ought to be inferr'd from them, than what is of a certainty confiftent with the sense of the Prophet Jeremiah in the places here referr'd to, as direct reference is made to that Prophet in them. For Ezra the fuppofed Author of the book of Chronicles could doubtlefs have no other meaning in these texts of the Prophet here referr'd to, than that Prophet himself had in those Texts. But Ezra could I think refer to no other than the places of Jeremiah which have been already here confider'd, and that place especially to which Mr. L. hath confin'd the reference of the Prophet Daniel: but with what foundation, and fuccefs we have lately feen.

And as to the WORD of the Lord by the Prophet Jeremiah which is immediately, and expreflly referr'd to, by the Author of the book of Chronicles in the verses now before us (a), that as to the determined time thereof of feventy years, as I have before thewn upon the words (b) of that Prophet, cannot be referred to the WHOLE land's lying defolate; or refting from tillage all that time, (because the Prophet hath not faid it;) but only to the Captivity of the Jews; of which, and which only he hath faid it exprefly, that they should fo long ferve the King of Babylon. And fuch in fact was the duration of the Captivity, and of the Defolations of Jerufalem (as I have obferv'd, and as I fhall undeniably prove anon) but not fo of the land's lying WHOLLY defolate; as the former certainly began from the 4th of Jehoiakim, but the latter at fooneft only from the 11th of Zedekiah, eighteen years after: as at pleasure it may be feen in the Table annexed.

Ás therefore we are thus determined as to the sense of the Prophet's words before us, fo we must neceffarily be determin'd as to the fenfe of the Author of the book of Chronicles in the place before us, where the Prophet is quoted..

And fo we may very well understand that Author's meaning here, as taking the words to fulfill threescore and ten years, and thofe only, as they certainly are the words of Jeremiah, but all the fore

(a) 2 Chron. xxxvi. 20, 21. (b) viz. Jer. xxv. 11.

going

going from the word Jeremiah downward, viz. [Until the land had enjoied her Sabbaths, for fo long as he lay defolate, he kept Sabbath] as being the words of the Author of the book of Chronicles, as they certainly are, but not as I can any where find, the Word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah.

Therefore I prefume that those words may moft properly be read, as I have here included them in a Parenthesis, as being an excellent obfervation of that Author, moft probably of Ezra, who a Scribe learned in the Law might therefore thus moft fignificantly, and truly note here with immediate refpect to a notorious tranfgreffion of it among the Jews in this particular, that whereas they had gone into Captivity for their manifold, and repeated tranfgref fions of duty, and of this among others, and whereas that Captivity was of feventy years determined continuance, for it was the very word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah (a) who predicted it, fo in fuch determined duration of it, it would not confequently be at an end, until the land had, of course, enjoied her Sabbaths; [that is, thofe Sabbaths of which by the Jews tranfgreffion of duty, as they kept them not, fhe had been formerly depriv'd:] for adds that accurate Scribe, fo long, [or fo many years of the Captivity] as he lay defolate, he kept Sabbath. So long without all difpute the did fo. She certainly kept Sabbath fo long as he lay WHOLLY defolate. But as certainly alfo fhe could keep Sabbath no longer than the actually did lye wholly defolate. But he did not lye thus defolate all the years of the Captivity. She lay at the moft fo, as I fhall evidently prove it, but fifty two years. Therefore it is impoffible that the Author of the book of Chronicles fhould have applied, or extended the feventy years of Jeremiah to the Defolations of the WHOLE land, or of the land's being WHOLLY defolate, equally as to the Defolations of Jerufalem, or the Vaffalage, and Captivity of the Fews (b).

But whereas, after all, Mr. L. hath maintain'd the fact, viz. that the land did lye WHOLLY defolate, or refted from tillage during the WHOLE time of the Captivity of the Jews, and whereas his Expofition of the text before us, and his affign'd OCCASION of the Jeventy Years Captivity, and indeed his whole Hypothefis is entirely depending upon the mistaken FACT: And yet forafmuch as we ought not to suppose but that Mr. L. thought that he had evident,

and

(a) Jer. xxv. 11. (b) Nor hath the faid Author any where confin'd the 70 years of Jerufalem's Defolations to their taking date from the 11th of Zedekiah. He fpake laft indeed of King Zedekiah, ver. 20; but there ends the Hiftory of thofe times in the Jews accomplished Defolations; Which were however begun 18 years before, and which according to this facred Hiftorian here lafted until the reign of the Kingdom of Perfia. Then this Writer throws in a general Obfervation upon the whole with refpect to all the great Evils brought upon the Jews by Nebuchadnezzar, of which he had been before giving a relation in this Chapter from verfe 6th downward that they were, as in ver. 21, to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, even to fulfill 70 years; even those 70 Years of which this Prophet had prophefied in the 4th of Jehoiakim, and in the first of Nebuchadnezzar (the Son) King of Babylon [Jer. xxv. 1.] In which the Defolations of Jerufalem began: As it will evidently appear hereafter.

and fufficient proofs of the fact, I fhall therefore beg leave now to look into the fuppofed fact, as he hath giv'n it us; that so it may appear, how far forth he hath made it out, or fall'n fhort of it.

The fact it felf, viz. the fact as fuppos'd by Mr. L. of the Land of Judea's lying WHOLLY defolate, or refting from tillage 70 Years, is founded in its taking equal date with the Captivity of the Jews. Therefore the Captivity is by Mr. L. fixed to the 11th year of the reign of Zedekiah, when Jerufalem was deftroyed, the Temple was burnt by Nebuchadnezzar, and the Jews carried captive into Babylon; whence indeed the land's lying WHOLLY defolate (a) may take its date, but then at the fooneft: but not fo the Captivity; because the true 11th year of the reign of Zedekiab in no wife admits of it, as the fame is truly according to our (b) most learned Chronologers but at 52 years distance from the release, and return of the Jews into their own Land in the first year of the reign of Cyrus King of Perfia (c).

Therefore Mr. L. to help his Hypothefis here hath giv'n the faid 11th of Zedekiah a 20 years lift, and in fuch rife thereof he hath placed the fame at the exact distance of 70 years from the taking of Babylon by Cyrus, where he ends the Captivity (d). And in fuch raifed 11th of Zedekiah Mr. L. hath of course made the fame to correfpond with the 19th of Nabopollafar, or Nebuchadnezzar the first, or the father, which in truth, that is according to the holy Scriptures, and even Jofephus also, as I thall make it to appear, can poffibly be correfponding only with the 19th of Nabocollalar, or Nebu chadnezzar the Great, or the Son (e).

However thus is produced by Mr. L. an Hypothesis of the land of Judah its lying defolate, WHOLLY defolate 70 years equal to the Captivity of the Jews from the 11th of Zedekiah to the taking of Babylon by Cyrus.

And thefe Proceedings Mr. L. hath endeavour'd to justifie, First, from Scripture, Secondly, from Berofus, and fofephus (ƒ). But how truly it will appear from the following Enquiry.

First, Into the Scripture Account of these matters.

And

(a) The words of Jeremia, [Ch. xxv. 11.] are, This WHOLE Land shall be a Defoiation. Which words were in the greatest measure fulfill'd, when the Temple and City of Jerufalem being destroyed, the WHOLE Land of Judah alfo was brought in a manner to utter Defolation. But if the words be to be taken in the stricteft fenfe of the WHOLE Land's lying defolate, and being without fo much as an Inhabitant, [fer. xliv. 2.] and fo queftionless WHOLLY refting from tillage, then the words were not fo fulfill'd in fuch ftrict fenfe of them, 'till 4 years after.the 11th of Zedekiah, viz. in the true year thereof before A.D. 584, in the 23d of Nebuchadnezzar [the Son] when Nebuzaradan coming again into the Land of Ifrael feiz'd upon all of that race that he could meet with, and made them all Prisoners, and fent them to Babylon: the number whereof was but 745 Perfons. Fer. lii. 30. And this ftill cuts off from Mr. L's fuppofed number of neglected Sabbatical Years among the Jews. (b) A. Pp. Ufher; Bp. Lloyd; Dr. Prideaux. (c) Ezra i. 1. (d) Two years fhort of the true Scripture firft of Cyrus, as we hall thew anon. (e) For thus it feems the fews diftinguifhed the two Nebuchadnezzars. D. Ganz. 2 Chron, 1. ii. n. 285. Marsh. Chron. p. 535. Prid. Con. Hift. Vol. I. P. 49. (f) p. 14, 15. of Mr.L's book.

And the holy Writ is in truth fo far from having giv'n any_the least countenance to Mr. L. in his beginning the 70 Years of the Captivity of Judah in the 11th of Zedekiah in his mistaken rife thereof correfponding with the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar the father, or in his ending them in the taking of Babylon by Cyrus, that according to it, the faid Captivity neceffarily began in the 4th year of the reign of Jehoiakim coincident with the 19th of the faid Nebuchadnezzar, and coincident with the first (a) of his Son Nebuchad. reigning in conjunction with him; And therefore according to Scripture also the faid Captivity had not its ending 'till the actual release, and return of the Jews in the first of Cyrus two years after his taking of Babylon for his Uncle Darius (b). First, as touching the Scripture Account of the feventy Years Captivity of Judah in the Beginning thereof. That I affirm of a certainty to be in the 4th year of Jehoiakim, (and not in the 11th of Zedekiah) as coincident with the 19th of NebuchadnezZar the father: And that because, as by all the following accounts it will appear beyond contradiction, and as it may be seen in the Table annexed, the faid 4th of Jehoiakim is truly correfponding with the 19th of the faid Nebuchadnezzar at 70 years diftance from Cyrus's Succeffion in the whole Empire upon the death of Darius (c): Whereas the 11th of Zedekiah (which was at 18 years distance lower from the faid 4th of Jehoiakim) can therefore be corresponding only with the Scripture 19th of Nebuchadnezzar the Son; and not poffibly fo with the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar the father, as Mr. L. hath made it for the fake of his Hypothefis, in evident inconsistency, and utter irreconcileablenefs with the Scripture Account of the Beginning of the feventy Years Captivity of Judah, as the following Inftances will clearly, and fully demonstrate.

First, Mr. L's rais'd 11th of Zedekiah as coincident with the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar the father is utterly inconfiftent, and repugnant with the Scripture Account of the Captivity of Feconiah, even in Mr. L's own account of the time thereof.

For the King of Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar the Son) took him in the eighth year of his reign. 2 Kings xxiv. 12, &c. Now if this be made the 8th year not of the Son, but of the father, as Mr. L. hath made it, then of course it falls in with the year of the 7. P. 4096 (d). And Mr. L. hath made it to fall in with that year. But from this Year to the year of the taking of Babylon by Cyrus there are full fourscore Years. And thus neceffarily all this while they of Feconiah's Captivity ftill remained in Captivity. But even the preceding Captivity of Judah in the 4th of Jehoiakim was to be a Captivity but of 70 years continuance. It was the exprefs word of the Lord by the Prophet Jeremiah (e).

(a) Fer. xxv. 1.

But

(b) At 70 years distance from the 4th of Jehoiakim, as it may be feen in the Table annexed. (c) Which was therefore the true Scripture firft of Cyrus, as we fhall fully fhew hereafter. (d) Or which is the moft ufeful way of reckoning to us Chriftians, in the Year before A. D. 618. (c) Fer. xxix. 10.

But if the Captivity of Judah did not begin, as according to Mr. L. it did not, 'till the 11th of Zedekiah, coincident with the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar the father, that Captivity alone being of 70 Years duration, then on the other hand the Captivity of Jeconiah which began with the first of Zedekiah, and thus must have preceded the Captivity of Judah, must in this case be said by Mr. L. to be no Captivity, or if allowed to have been one, it thus neceffarily becomes a fourscore Years Captivity. And thus alfo the truly preceding Captivity of Judah will be proportionably increasing. The great abfurdity of which Confequences, and their downright Contradiction to the account of the holy Scriptures in these matters, is evident at fight. And they will be made much more fo, if it be confider'd

Secondly, that the exprefs word of God by the Prophet Jeremiah in his letter to all the Captives at Babylon was not, could not poffibly be fulfill'd in this Mr. L's unaccountable rife of the Eleventh of Zedekiah as made coincident with the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar the father. For it was in the beginning of Zedekiah's reign (a), viz. Soon after that Jeconiah, and the captive Court were departed from Jerufalem (b) for Babylon, that upon the falfely predicted return after two Years, of Jeconiah, and all the Captives of Judah (c), the Prophet Jeremiah in a folemn letter by God's immediate appointment written in general to ALL the Captives at Babylon (d), viz. to those who had been captivated in the 4th of Jehoiakim, as well as to those of Feconiah's Captivity, gave them All pofitive affurances from God (e), that AFTER LXX Years were accomplished at Babylon, He would vifit them, and perform his good word to them, in causing them to return to their place. Now here were we to fuppofe that the Prophet's Letter was writ, and the Promise of God in it was made only to them of Feconiah's Captivity, yet the promise even in this fingle view of it was in no wife made good in Mr. L's rais'd 11th of Zedekiah. Nor could it poffibly have been in fuch mistaken Hypothefis.

For there being 70 Years according to Mr. L. between his rais'd 11th of Zedekiah, and the downfal of Babylon in the taking thereof by Cyrus, (Mr. L's Year of the ending of the Captivity,) it of course follows that the Captivity of those who had been carried away captive with Feconiah must neceffarily become a Captivity of 80 Years, as Feconiah and they who were captivated with him (f) had been now full ten years in Captivity in the 11th of Zedekiah.

But this is directly contrary to God's exprefs, and especial Promise to his people by his Prophet, of delivering them after that LXX Tears were accomplished, &c. as above. Alafs, what a strange way is this of evidencing God's faithfulness to his people ?------ Efpecially if we confider farther how much more flagrant the Abfurdity, and Inconfiftency before us doth yet become, when we look upon the Prophet's

(a) Ch. xxviii. 1. (b) Ch. xxix. 2. (c) Ch. xxviii. 3, 4. (d) Ch. xxix. 1. ALL the people whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerufalem to Babylon, (e) ver, 10. (f) 2 Kings xxiv. 14.