were made for perfons by facrifice; a careful obfervation of every hint that is given in these paffages, and in their contexts, concerning the nature and sense of atonement; and, laftly, a careful putting of all these hints together, and a judicious comparing of them with one another; I fay, if the Dr. by comparing the paffages in which atonement is faid to be made for perfons by Levitical facrifices, means this way of comparing and examining them, is it not very poffible, to make a discovery, by this method of investigation, of the true fenfe which the word atonement bears in them, even though it should have but one uniform fenfe in them all? In this way of proceeding, the uniformity of the fense of the word can be no hinderance to the discovery of it, because it is not fuppofed to be one of those means by which the fense of it is to be difcovered.-In truth, it is by the means which have been mentioned, fewer or more of them, that we difcover the fense of ambiguous words in all paffages, wherever we meet with them: nor is it poffible to conceive of any means, befides thefe, whereby to investigate, and find out, the true fenfe of a word of doubtful fignification in any particular paffage of a book, or writing. By the help of a dictionary, or verbal information, we may, indeed, learn the various fignifications of an ambiguous.

word;

word; but, without a due use of the rules of criticism mentioned, 'tis impoffible to discover in which of these fignifications it is used in any particular paffage of a book, the fenfe of it, in fuch a paffage, being naturally incapable of being investigated by any other means. In order to discover the fenfe of fuch a word, in fome particular paffage of a book, we may, if we please, purfue the fame measures which the Dr. has taken to find out the fenfe of the word atonement in these places where it is used levitically. We may read over the whole book; mark down all the paffages where the word occurs; investigate the sense in which it is used in each of them; (which, by the bye, cannot be done, but in a due ufe of fewer or more of the before-mentioned rules of criticism;) bring all these fenfes of the word together, and compare them with one another; fort the paffages, in which the word occurs, into diverse claffes, according to its various fignifications: but when all this tedious work has been difpatched, the following queftions will ftill recur, in which of these fenfes is the word to be understocd in this particular paffage? And, whether may not the word. bear a fenfe in it, different from all these which it hath in other places? Questions, which cannot be folved by any thing that H

has

has

yet been done; nor fatisfactorily cleared up, but in a due use of the rules of criticism before-mentioned. Recourse, therefore, must be had to these rules of criticism, before these questions can be folved, or any thing done towards the discovery of the fenfe of the word in the paffage under confideration. And fince recourse must be had to them at laft, and before any thing can be done to purpose, would it not be much better to have recourfe to them at the beginning, than to go fuch a long and tedious round of fpeculation, that can give no light into the fubject of inquiry? To conclude, what has been faid is fufficient, I think, to shew that the Dr's inference, under confideration, is both drawn from a wrong obfervation, and has no truth in it; yea, and that it is an inference of bad confequence, as having a tendency to fet inquifitive minds upon a false scent, and into a wrong road, in their fearches after truth.

§. 37. In the other paffage, which I have quoted, the Dr. fuggefts, that, in these places of the Levitical law, where atonement is faid to be made for perfons by facrifice, the fenfe of the word atonement, or rather of the Hebrew word which is rendered atonement, may be discovered, and can only be discovered, by examining and finding out the sense which it bears in these places

places where it is used extra-levitically, or with no relation to facrifices.

§. 38. ANSW. What hath been already faid, in answer to the Dr's laft paffage, fhews, that it is impoffible to discover the fense of the word atonement in these paffages of the levitical law, by the Dr's method. And, therefore, if the fense of this word, in these places, is not found out in a different way, even by these rules of fober and juft criticism, which have been mentioned, I am pretty fure, that it never will be discovered. This may serve as an answer to the Dr's hint concerning the poffibility of an impoffible thing. But I add, ex abundanti, that the Dr. himself has actually tried this method of his, in order to discover the fense of the word atonement, in these places of the Levitical law, where atonement is faid to be made for perfons by facrifice. But what has he gained by making this experiment? Juft nothing. He has not been able to produce one fingle text, relating to extra-levitical atonements, which contains or implies his own notion of Levitical atonements; or which affords one fingle hint, or fuggeftion, from which it can be fairly and justly inferred. So far from this, that he hath not ventured to affirm, that any one text, of this class, contains fuch a hint, or to draw a fingle inference from any of them H 2

con,

concerning the nature of Levitical atonements; as I have fhewn in the course of my examination of his book. All, therefore, that the Dr. has done, in making this experiment, is vain and loft labour. And after all that he has faid, and explained, and proved, about the nature of extra-levitical atonements, we are left as much in the dark as ever, about the nature of Levitical atonements and facrifices.

§. 39. HAVING now examined all the fcripture-evidence which the Dr. has produced in fupport of his notion of the fymbolical nature of Jewish facrifices, and his method of proceeding in the proof of this point; I fhall, here, conclude this part of my work, with a few reflections upon the Dr's notion of the meaning and nature of Jewish, piacular facrifices, as being symbols of penitent difpofition, and penitent address to God.

§. 40. I obferve in general, that could the Dr's notion of piacular facrifices be really proved to be the fcripture notion of them, instead of serving to fet the doctrines of revelation about this fpecies of facrifices in a rational light, it would only furnish people of fceptical minds, with unanfwerable objections against them. For

Firft. In many cases, piacular facrifices were appointed to be offered when no fin,

or