enjoy in his Paradifaical State. And that this Rite, with all its Circumftances, was enjoin'd by God himself, and explain'd to our first Parent, is more than probable, even from the short account we have of thofe Times; fince we find his two Sons bringing their Offerings to a certain place, and well apprised (by fome visible tokens no doubt ‡) when they were accepted; as that of Punishment. -[Taylor Script. Doct. of Attonement, p. 20. Forbes Thoughts on Religion, p. 124. Essay on the Nature and Defign, &c. p. 32, &c.] Some as a Federal Rite between God and him, or a Form of entering into Friendship with his Maker: [ib. paffum] and obtaining future Favours from him: yet there were others that feem to have had a higher view, [or fuch view might be joined with fome of those others abovementioned] denoting fomewhat properly vicarious, at least in Suffering, though not in Punishment, and in a more fpecial manner defcribing the Terms of that great Covenant, original Grant, or Promife, whereby Man was to be delivered from the effects of the first breach; which, as fuch, was in each Difpenfation thought proper to be particularly diftinguished. All which Appointments, Grants or Covenants, may likewife be understood (not in their literal, ftrict Senfe, or as in themselves abfolutely neceffary, but) as fo many gracious Schemes of Government, or convenient Methods of Divine Oeconomy; treating Mankind, (not like Philofophers, but) as the generality of them always were to be treated; and leading them gradually to as juft and worthy Notions of God and themfelves, as they became capable of receiving. But to afcribe fuch an Inftitution, as this of facrificing Animals, wholly to the invention of Men, especially the Men of thofe times, feems very unnatural: of which more in the following Notes. That this had actually fuch an effect upon the Jews, as we laft mentioned; that they were led to expect an expiatory Sacrifice from the Meffiah, and commonly thought and spoke of him in that capacity, feems probable from John's account of Chrift at his very first appearance. Job.1.29. [See Le Clerc or Lightfoot Harm. 529.] and again v. 36. from Isaiah 53·7· Comp. Acts 8. 32. and Rev. 5. 12. See ABp King's Note 81. p.466, &c. 3d Edit, or Mr. Bate on the Fall. Gen.4.3, 4. animal animal Sacrifice was rather than the other: and most likely accepted for that very reason, because it had been appointed by God himself, and was perform'd agreeably to his Command.a The Time of their Worthip, seems likewise to have had the fame Origin; as well from God's bleffing, and fanctifying the Seventh day; + and the ancient method of reckoning by Weeks; || [a Heb. 11.4. v. Interp. et Grot. in Gen. 4. Comp. Judg. 6. 21. 13. 23. and Lev.7.21. a See Bp. Sherlock's Ufe and Intent of Prophesy, p. 73, &c. or Rymer's Reprefent. p. 30. Ridley's Chriftian Pallover, &c. This one Article of the Diftinction made between Abel's Offering, and that of Cain, which according to the Hiftory, was so notorious as to deject and irritate the latter, and which cannot, I think, be accounted for otherwife than by the Interpofition of God; nor that remarkable Interpofition folved on other Principles, than Cain's prefuming to omit the prefcribed Victim, through his want of Faith, Heb. 11.4. (otherwife his Portion of the Fruits of the Ground, might well appear to be as juft and natural a Tribute of Devotion from one in his province, as fome part of the Flock was from his Brother; as we have not the leaft intimation of any other difference in the fincerity of their Difpofitions, whereon to ground the above Distinction between them) this, I fay, feems a fufficient proof, that Sacrifice was of Divine Inftitution, and is but ill refolved by Spencer L. 3. c. 4. S. 2. The fame thing is inferred, with a good deal of probability, from the mention of thofe Coats of Skins which the Lord made for Adam and his Wife, Gen. 3.21. which feem most likely to have been of thofe Beafts that were offered in facrifice, and might perhaps be in fome measure of the fame intendment with that Sacrifice; for the difcovery of which, rather difficult and difagreeable way of Worship, one would think they should stand in need of God's particular direction, as much, at least, as for that other, more easy and obvious one, of cloathing themselves. Concerning the ufe and propriety of this kind of cloathing at that time, fee Leland's Antw. to Chriffianity as old, &c, P. 503, &c. Gen. 2. 3. Exod. 16. 25, 26. Gen. 8. 10, 12. 39.27. Ecclus, 22.12. method method much more ancient than the obfervation b Jofeph. contra Ap. L. 2. Exod. 16. Philo de Op. Mund. Selden de Jur. N. L.3. c. 10.11. &c. Eufeb. Evang. Præp. 13. 12. Grot. de Ver. L.1.c. 16. and Allix's Reflections, B.1.c.7. See Rymer's Represent. of Rev. Rel. c. 2. or Ridley's Chriftian Paffover. And the fame may be faid of Tithes. Jenkin, V.1. p.102. Authors on each of thefe points may be seen in Dr. Waterland's firft Charge, p. 41. &c. On Sacrifices in particular, Carpzov. Introd. p.118. and Budde Hift. Eccl. Part 1. S.1. 30. ** .p.115. The Diftinction that we meet with after wards [Gen. 7. 2. 8. &c.] between clean and unclean Beasts, which manifeftly relates to Sacrifice, [v. Patrick, ib.] fhews likewife the continuance of that kind of Worship; and feems to prove that it was not owing to any human eftablishment, any more than this direction itfelf could be. And that the Men of thefe, as well as after Ages, had both fufficient authority, and inftruction to use the Flefh of the former fort of Beafts for Food, as well as clothe or fhelter themselves with their Skins, appears to me as plain, as that the tending and taking care of fuch was their chief bufinefs, and occupation. Nor can I comprehend what merit there could be at any time in their making Offerings unto the Lord their God of that which coft them nothing, of that which they could not eat; or how they came to diftinguish [which they did very early] between Fat and Lean; between the good choice pieces, and others; unless they had tafted them themselves: [v. Cleric. in Lev. 1. 2. 3. 3. and 4. 17.] though 'tis upon this chimerical fuppofition, that the ufe of Animal Food was not included in the original Grant of abfolute Dominion, given to Mankind over all the Creatures, [fome of which could be of no other fervice to them] that the great Grotius, and others, founded their attempt to explain away all Animal Sacrifice, before the Deluge. Eadem pecudes, quæ ad efum, etiam ad facrificia a Noacho adhibitæ ; fcil. mundæ quotquot erant Gen. 8. 20. Hic facrificiorum ufus cûm Diluvio fit antiquior, idem de pecudum efu nobis perfuafum, contra quam multi fentiunt. And that in those days they had frequent intercourfe with the Deity, and were made fenfible of his peculiar prefence in fome places, appears farther, from his Difcourfe with Cain, both before and after the Murther of his Brother; as alfo from Cain's. Complaint of being hid from his Face; and his going out from the prefence of fentiunt. Neque enim Abel in facrificium id obtuliffet Deo, quo vefci nefas credidiffet, et fruftra paviffet agnos quibus non licuiffet uti. Quin ipfa diftinctio animalium in munda * et immunda docet alia permiffa fuiffe, alia prohibita. Neque enim in animalibus naturâ fuâ quicquam immundum. Sed immundum id eft ex lege, cujus efus interdicitur. Itaque illud, Gen. 1.29. Vobis erit in cibum, non folum ad plantas referimus, fed etiam ad Animalia, de quibus præcedenti • verfu actum fuerat.' Bochart. Hieroz. p. 11. edit.4. Comp. Heidegger. Differt. 15. de Cibo Antediluviano. Bp. Clayton's Anfw. to Dr. Delaney, in the blood-eating Controverfy; or Effay on Sacrifices, p. 165, &c. I am forry to find here, that I have been differing from the ingenious Author of Philemon to Hydafpes, who in his fifth Part, is fo far from allowing any kind of Sacrifices to be a Divine Institution, that he declares the general Notion of the thing itself to be in every view of it fo glaring an Abfurdity, that he is amazed that it fhould ever enter into the head of any Rational Creature.' p. 1o. I fhall therefore add a few words more, in confidering fome of the Reasons offered to fupport this Declaration. Firit, The very Idea of a Divine Being implies in it fuch a fuperior Excellency of Nature as to be wholly out of the reach of our good Offices. 'He neither wants nor can receive Benefit from them.' ib. Nor, Secondly, can we fuppofe that the Gods fhould ever be pleafed with the mere waste of their own Productions,' p. 13. Thirdly, It gives one a very degrading Idea of their Goodnefs to confider them as entering into a kind of Merchandize with Mankind, in the matter of their Favours," P. 14. And p. 20, The Demand of the Life of a perfectly ⚫ innocent Creature, to be offered up in Sacrifice to God, ⚫ could give but fmall encouragement to hope that God in• tended to favour a guilty one." Gen.4.6, 9. tv.14. the Lord. Nor is it at all likely that Adam, who seemed to be fo well acquainted with the Voice of God in the Garden,* upon his Fall, should never have heard it there before, on other occafions. In these times therefore God was pleas'd to manifeft himself to the Senfes of men, and visibly But I cannot apprehend that fuch an Intercourfe as was kept up between God and Mankind, by the forementioned Offerings, muft neceffarily be taken in either the First, or Third of thefe Views; fince the like Intercourfe is not always fo understood, even among Men; fome of whom are too far exalted above others to receive any advantage from them, yet nevertheless expect fome dutiful Acknowledgement of the Benefits which they confer on others, and require frequent Teftimonies of their Love: and why fhould not we imagine a fincerely devout Sacrificer to the Deity, able to interpret his Devotion in the fame fenfe? or if led to a more grofs interpretation of it, why may we not even fuppofe the Deity condefcending in that cafe to fet him right, by fome fuch kind expoftulation as the following? Will I eat the Flesh of Bulls, or drink the Blood of Goats? If I were hungry I would not tell thee; for the World is mine and the fulness thereof. Offer unto God Thanksgiving, and pay thy Vows unto the moft High. And call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me. Nor does there feem to be any more Merchandize in any fort of Sacrifical Offerings, than in those other of Vows, Prayers, Praifes, and Thanksgivings, which ftill make up an effential part of our Religion; from their relation to which, the former always derived all their value, [v. Efay, p. 19, &c.] and were perhaps only a ftrong, lively manner of expreffing them; [Qui facrificat id idem fignificat actione & geftu, quod qui precatur ore fuo profitetur. Vitringa Diff. V.1. p. 289. Comp. Patrick on 1 Sam.13.12.] nor probably more ftrong, and explicit, than might be neceffary for the times; nor likely to convey any more degrad ing Gen. 4. 16. Gen. 3.8. 10. The curious Reader may be entertain'd with fome ingenious conjectures concerning a full Syftem of Religion and Morality communicated to Adam about this time, which Mr. Peters grounds on Job 28. 26. &c, and which he terms a Record of fomething spoken by God to the firft Man, not to be met with in the Book of Genefis. V. Crit. Diff. Sect. 16. p.456. |