The argument of the 'Divine Legation' is stated thus by Warburton himself in syllogistic form:-- 'I. Whatsoever Religion and Society have no future state for their support, must be supported by an extraordinary Providence. 'The Jewish Religion and Society had no future state for their support. 'Therefore, the Jewish Religion and Society was supported by an extraordinary Providence. 'II. It was universally believed by the ancients on their common principles of legislation and wisdom, that whatsoever Religion and Society have no future state for their support, must be supported by an extraordinary Providence. 'Moses, skilled in all that legislation and wisdom, instituted the Jewish Religion and Society without a future state for its support. 'Therefore,--Moses, who taught, believed likewise that _this_ Religion and Society was supported by an extraordinary Providence.' The work is a colossal monument of the author's learning and industry: the range of subjects which it embraces is enormous; and those who cannot agree with his conclusions either on the main argument, or on the many collateral points raised, must still admire the vast research and varied knowledge which the writer displays. It is, however, a book more talked about than read at the present day. Indeed, human life is too short to enable the general reader to do more than skim cursorily over a work of such proportions. Warburton's theory was novel and startling; and perhaps few even of the Deistical writers themselves evoked more criticism and opposition from the orthodox than this doughty champion of orthodoxy. But Warburton was in his element when engaged in controversy. He was quite ready to meet combatants from whatever side they might come; and, wielding his bludgeon with a vigorous hand, he dealt his blows now on the orthodox, now on the heterodox, with unsparing and impartial force. Judged, however, from a literary point of view, 'The Divine Legation' is too elaborate and too discursive a work to be effective for the purpose for which it was written;[164] and most readers will be inclined to agree with Bentley's verdict, that the writer was 'a man of monstrous appetite but bad digestion.'