nate the fkin golden, through the energy 
proceeding“trom it.”—-This Dionyfius, 
as Fabricius fhews, lived femewhat prior 
to Cicero. 
Again, Manetho in the 4th book of 
his Apotelefmatica, p. 66, has the fol- 
lowing lines : 
Kas woven Kudegere CUR “LAW QasSark 
Pexlness Kevoroso, xzab Tydoryevo 1g eAeDavlos 
Eeyoworous deinvuct. 
i. e. ¢€ Venus alone, in conjunction with 
the beautiful Phaeton, (the Sun) points 
out MAKERS OF GOLD, and workers of 
Indian Ivory.”” This Manetho lived in 
the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, to 
whom alfo he dedicates this work. ~ 
Your's, &c. THOMAS TAYLOR. 
Maznor-Place, Yalwoerth. 
eee See 
Yo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
". STR, : 
OUR literary’ friend’s. Walpoliana 
have certainly afforded much amufe- 
ment to the readers of your valuable Ma- 
gazine. Some of them, however, may 
perhaps think the anecdotes fhould have 
been {elected with greater care; for fome 
are ftale, others not quite decent; and 
ene in your laft, No. 94, reflects on 
the memory of a moft amiable man, to 
whofe induftry, judgment, and candour, 
the world of letters is under the higheft 
ebligation, and who is not now capable 
of telling his part of the ftory. My pre- 
Sent object, however, is to offer a remark 
on No. 97, in which Lord Orford charges 
Fontenelle’s Plurality of Worlds with 
having made him an infidel. If his Lord- 
fhip means, that the Idea of a Supreme 
Creator and Governor of the Univerfe 
leaving the direétion of the vaft machine 
of fyfems upon {vftems, to fave, as he 
exprefled it, “¢ the hundredth part of the 
hundredth part of a fra€tion” of a 
fiagle clafs of the inhabitants of this little 
point in creation, is ridiculous and ab- 
jurd, we will readily agree with him. 
But the queition is, whether this be 
Chriftianity ; which will not, perhaps, 
be fo readily allowed. Surely a man of 
Lord Orford’s opportunities of informa- 
tion might have been more honourably, 
ufefully, and wifely employed; in this 
important enquiry, than in tollowing the 
example of thofe who rejeSt chriftianity 
withoutexamination. If he had weighed 
the evidence for the chriftian fcriptures 
with half the patience of inveftigation 
which he applied to the genuinene{s or 
date of a picture or a coin, he would pro- 
bably have found reafon, with the vener- 
able Lardner, to have admitted their-au- 
thenticity : and if, after having fettled 
Defence of Chriftianity againf# Lord Orford. 
[Sept. 
the value of thefe original records, he had 
proceeded to take his ideas from them, 
and not from the creed of his nurfe, or the 
catechiim of his morher- church, it is pro- 
bable that the fame liberal {pirit of enquiry 
which directed his refearches into the hif- 
tory of Richard III. would have led him 
- to difcover that chriftianity alfe had been 
grofly mifreprefented by interefted men. 
‘¢ ATHEISM’? his Lordfhip juftly 
diflikes, as a gloomy, uncomfortable 
fyftem ;" and as ‘* requiring more 
credulity t sn ¢he belief that there are 
marks of intelligence in this fair crea- 
tion.’ But if this be the cafe, why it 
‘¢ irreconcileable with a plurality of 
worlds,” or what greater ftretch of 
credulity is required, to believe”’ that 
the fame gracious Being, of whofe wif- 
dom and goodnefs fo many marks appear 
in-this earth which we inhabit, inconfi- 
€¢ 
€¢ 
cé 
ee 
€¢ 
is 
(a4 
Sec 
- derable as it is when compared with the 
univerfe, obferving the miftakes and errors 
of his creatures (and that there are mif- 
takes and errors among'them, Losd Orford, 
T fuppofe, will allow) fhould raife up an 
excellent perfon among themfelves, and 
invelt him with extraordinary powers, 
to corre&t their errors, to inftruct them im 
important truths, to exemplify thefe 
truths in a holy and unblameable con- 
du&t, and at length to lay down his life 
in their fupport ; and, finally, to fupply 
his followers with the moft powerful mo- 
tive to obedience, by afcertaining, in-the 
fast of his own refurre&tion, the future 
-yefurrection of all men to a ftate corref> 
pondent to their proficiency in virtue. 
This is the view of Chriftianity which 
has been adopted, after ferious and deli- 
befate enquiry, by Locke, Newton, 
Haynes, Lardner, Lindfey, and the train 
of excellent men who have followed the 
daft moft amiable and worthy confeffor in 
-a ftri€t compliance with the condition 
which Lord Orford has himfelf preferibed 
as the qualification of impartial judg- 
ment, by ‘* laying down their prefer- 
ments.”> <“* Self-intereftednefs?? then, 
‘«¢ and wealth,’ have nothing to do with 
their Chriftianity; the “ arguments,” 
therefore, of fuich men, ought, by his own 
rule, to have been of fome ‘‘ avail,” even 
with fuch “ wife > men as his Lardfhip ; 
who, if he had afforded them an attention 
in any degree proportioned to their im- - 
portance, would probably haye been con- 
vinced that their religion is founded upon 
a rock, againft which neither ridicule, 
nor ferious oppofition, can ultimately 
prevail ; whatever may, in the mean 
time, become of ayy fyftems which may 
be built upon “ fame, reward, or emolu- 
ment.” VF. 
