notion of the symbolical nature and defign of facrifice, in order to give it a proper fenfe and juft force. For neither in the text, nor in the context, is there any mention made, or hint given, that the god, or gods, to whom the facrifice was made, did eat or drink with the offerers of it; or that their eating and drinking together was a fymbol of friendship, or a foederal rite by which they engaged in a covenant of amity with one another. All that is faid, whatever be made of it, is, that the offerers of facrifice did drink of the cup, and partake of the table of thofe gods to whom they offered facrifice: and it is affirmed, that the thus partaking of the table and cup of the one true God, and of the table and cup of idol-gods, were inconfiftent and incompatible actions, because it is impoffible, that one should be a worshipper of the one only God, and, at the fame time, a worshipper of falfe and fictitious gods. Taking then this along with us, St. Paul's words may, without having any recourse to the Author's myftical notion of the fymbolical nature and defign of facrifices, be well explained in the following manner, viz. the apostle had been exhorting the Corinthians to flee from idolatry; and was fhewing them, that, if they did eat of thofe facrifices which were offered to idols, they did, by that act, commit idolatry, and make it evident, that

they were worshippers of thofe idols. The Jews, by eating of thofe facrifices of peaceofferings, which were offered to the one true God, partook of his altar and table ; and, by this act of religious worship, appointed by the one true God, they fhewed that they were worshippers of him, and not idolaters. In like manner, the Gentiles, by eating of the facrifices, or partaking of the table of dæmons, or idol-gods, made it manifeft, by this act of idolatrous worship, that they were idolaters, or worshippers of thofe dæmons, and not of the one only true. God. Now, as the apoftle argues, 'tis im'poffible, that chriftians fhould drink of the Lord's cup, and of the cup of dæmons, and partake of the table of both; that is, be worshippers of the one only true God, and, at the fame time, worshippers of idol-gods, without acting a moft abfurd and inconfiftent part, fince no person can be accounted, or really be, a worshipper of the one true God, as fuch, who, by acts of worship, performed to other gods befides him, acknowledgeth their divinity, and, confequently, more gods than one. This I take to be the true fenfe of St. Paul's words. And I can perceive nothing in it, that is, in the leaft, favourable to our Author's myftical notion of the meaning and defign of facrifices, as being fymbols of friendship and fœderal rites.

The

The Author, as a further confirmation of his notion of the fymbolical nature and defign of facrifices, fays, "Sometimes this "manner of engaging in friendship was ex

preffed by nothing more than drinking, "without any eating together. The prophet Jeremiah fays, The Chaldeans, which fight against this city, fhall come and fet fire on this city, and burn it with the houses upon whole roofs they have offered incenfe unto Baal, and poured out drink-offerings to other gods, to provoke me to anger, Chap. "xxxii. 29. In another place, he fpeaks of "the people of Jerufalem, as having burnt "incenfe unto all the host of heaven, and having poured out drink-offerings to other gods, Chap. xix. 13. His meaning is, they, by this, (i. e. by pouring out drink-offerings) engaged themfelves in friendship with, and obliged themfelves to ferve the hoft of heaven, or Baal, or "whatever god they worshipped, juft as if they had entered into an exprefs covenant "with them

The two places, which our Author here quotes, are produced, in order to prove, that the manner of engaging in friendship and entering into covenant with God, or the gods, is fometimes expreffed by nothing more than drinking without any eating toR 2 gether.

gether. But it is plain, that they prove no fuch thing: for there is not one word to be found in them about drinking together, or about any friendship or covenant that was entered into by this rite. So far from this, that they only mention the burning of incenfe, and the pouring out drink-offerings to Baal, or other gods, and the host of heaven, as acts of idolatrous worship which had been practifed by the Ifraelites. The Author, indeed, fays, "His (i. e. the pro

cr

phets) meaning is, they by this (the pouring out drink-offerings) engaged "themselves in friendship with, and obliged themselves to serve the host of heaven, or Baal, or whatever god they worshipped, just as if they had entered into "an exprefs covenant with them." But this interpretation is pure fancy and imagination, without any fupport from the common and natural fignification of the words, or from any thing that is affirmed or hinted either in the text, or context, or, indeed, from common fenfe. Withal, if the Ifraelites did really engage in covenant or friendship with those idol-gods by pouring out drink-offerings to them, they must have done the fame by burning incense to them; for both are mentioned as being their fin, and, confequently, as being the means by which they engaged in covenant with those idols, if, indeed, they did engage in cove

nant

nant with them. Wherefore the Author, if he intends to make any thing out of these texts that is for his purpose, will have more work his hands than he was aware of; upon for it will be incumbent on him to prove, not that drinking together, but that the pouring out of drink-offerings, and the burning of incenfe, both of them; and the one as much as the other, were fymbols of friendship, and fœderal rites. I fhall fay nothing further here, but only that an Author, who is thus forced to produce texts, in which nothing is faid about drinking together, to prove that drinking together was a fymbol of friendship and a fœderal rite, in the affair of facrifices, appears to be much puzzled to find out any proper evidence, and exposes the weakness of his own caufe.

The Author next fays, that to conceive of drinking together to have been a fymbol of friendship, and a foederal rite, " will help us to understand a paffage in Isaiah, Chap. xxx. 1. which we translate, to cover with a covering, but not of my Spirit." but which, he fays, may be tranflated, "that pour out a libation, but not after my "mind." And thinks, that the pouring out this libation to the gods of Egypt was a fœderal rite, and a manner of engaging in friendship and covenant with them.

R 3

ANSW.

* Page 64, 65.