by the doctrines of fallible men; and imbibe new notions of facrifice as unfcriptural, and wide of truth, as the old one, which we have been compelled to refign.

In the courfe of the following criticism, upon the works of thefe two Authors which treat of this fubject, I have, I think, made it evident, that the notions of the fymbolical nature of facrifices, exhibited by them, are utterly unSupported by Scripture-evidence, and both of them chargeable with abfurditys and ill confequences; and, particularly, that the one, which is advanced by the Author of the essay on the nature, defign, and origin of facrifices, is fuch, as can, by no means, be brought to any agreement with the manner of the oblation and difpofal of piacular facrifices.

To my criticism upon Dr. Taylor's notion of the meaning and defign of Jewish-facrifices, I have fubjoined an examination of his fentiments about the facrifice of our Lord Jefus Chrift; which appear to me to be no lefs uncommon, than unsupported by Scripture-evidence.

In the execution of this whole work, I have ufed all juft freedom: and have, every where, Audied to express my fentiments in a plain, intelligible, and unartful manner; and to

Say

Jay nothing but what is pertinent, and neceffary to fet the fubject in a just and clear light. I have, likewife, been particularly careful to give a fair and just representation of the fentiments of my Authors, in their own words; and to guard against every of fence against good manners. How far I have fucceeded in my defign, I leave to be determined by thofe who have a capacity for judging in the affair.

If it should be objected here, what end can the being at fo much pains and labour, in pulling down falfe Schemes, answer? Had it not been much better to have favoured the world with the true one? To this I anfwer, that falfe Schemes, plaufibly and artfully erected, blind the human mind; and, therefore, must be demolished and removed out of the way, before the truth, fymmetry, and beauty of that which is the true one, can be properly attended to, and duely perceived. The rubbish which covers any old foundation, must be removed, before the foundation itself can be seen, or any building erected upon it with fafety and firmness: and the greater the quantity of rubbish is, the more labour, in proportion, must there be beflowed in clearing it away, or the builder cannot proceed wifely, and with any rational prospect of fuccefs. The more avenues to error and falfe

bood

hood are fhut up, the more quickly and readily doth that, which leads to truth, difcover itfelf.

But it may be faid, the common, popular notion of facrifice has, it feems, been difcovered to be a cheat; and the new ones, which have been offered to fupply its place, are deemed to be a lie; what then must men do in the mean time? How are they to regulate their faith, with regard to facrifice?

ANSW. The Scriptures are the alone repofitory of revealed truth, and of all true, religious faith: for which reafon, men ought to fearch them carefully and diligently, untill they have discovered, from them, what they are to believe in this affair. In these facred volumes alone, a declaration is made, and a defcription given, of the true end, defign, and use of facrifice. And whofoever applieth himself, with due care, and a fair and boneft mind, to the study of them, and is fo happy as to be led, by them, into a right train of thoughts, will, most certainly, difcover the true end, defign, and ufe of Jacrifice. And when he has once got the true fcripture-notion of thefe, he will find it to be a notion that is abundantly Supported by evidence, and will endure the fevereft fcrutinys of right reafon; a notion which carries no abfurdity in it, nor draws any

ill

ill confequence after it; a notion which, if I mistake not, will plainly point out the reafon of the inftitution of piacular facrifice, and of the continuance and use of it under all difpenfations of religion, ever fince the lapfe of Adam; and, at the fame time, Shew, that this fpecies of facrifice doth, at prefent anfwer, and bas, always anfwered, its real end and defign, notwithstanding men's ignorance of, and many mistakes about the nature of it.

I affirm these things with the greater affur ance, because the fcripture-doctrine about the nature and defign of facrifices has been my particular fudy for many years, not only fince, but before, the two pieces, which are the fubject of this criticism, were made public. About the time that Dr. Taylor published his fcripturedoctrine of atonement examined, I had fome thoughts of publishing my fentiments on that Subject: but, upon hearing that the Dr. was then about to communicate his thoughts upon it to the public, Igave up all thoughts of carrying my defign into execution, even though I bad collected many materials for the work; as not doubting, but the world and myself would receive full fatisfaction in this affair from fuch an able hand. But, being fully fatisfied, that the Dr. has not only failed in

the

the execution of his defign, but even given us a wrong and unfcriptural idea of the meaning, defign, and end of facrifices, I intend, if life and health are continued, to refume that work, put the materials of it in order, and make it public likewife, provided I find the world in any difpofition to receive and encourage it.

ΑΝ