lmi!'\'.r''';i •!'':!
r ,
^1
l,'o, ijjJ (■
.,' S> « , i^
^RV0FPRI/VC£^
^i^OGICALSE^^^
BR 75 .B36 1828 v 3 ~^
Barrington, John Shute
Barrington, 16 78-1734.
The theological works of the
first viscount Barrington
THE
THEOLOGICAL WORKS
OF
THE FIRST
VISCOUNT BARRINGTON,
INCLUDING
THE MISCELLANEA SACRA,
THE ESSAY ON THE DISPENSATIONS,
AND
HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH DR. LARDNER,
NEVER BEFORE PUBLISHED.
TO WHICH ARE PREFIXED,
A LIFE OF THE AUTHOR,
WITH
A BRIEF MEMOIR OF HIS SON, SHUTE BARRINGTON,
THE LATE BISHOP OF DURIJAM,
BY THE REV. GEO. TOWNSEND, M.A.
PREBENDARY OF DURHAM, AND VICAR OF NORTHALLERTON.
IN THREE VOLUMES.
VOL. III.
LONDON :
C. AND J. RIVINGTON, ST. PAUL'S CHURCH- YARD,
AND WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL.
1828.
rniNTEn by a. j. valpv, riEC mon counx, fll/jt street.
CONTENTS OF VOL. III.
Dissertations illustrative of the Essay on the Dis-
pensations.
I. On the Temptation, the Fall, and the Sentence
which God pronounced on the Serpent, the
Woman, and the Man 1
II. Concerning God's visible Presence and Appearance,
Face and Glory, as they occur in Scripture . 1 9
Exposition of 1 Peter iii. 1/ — 22 53
Exposition of several Portions of the Book of Genesis 6l
Dissertation on Galatians iii. l6 gg
Dissertation on Hebrews xii. 22 — 25. . . .Ill
Letters between Lord Barrington and Dr. Lardner . 139
Texts of Scripture explained, paraphrased, or other-
wise illustrated 357
Index 359
' E TON
IG&L
DISSERTATIONS
ILLUSTBATITB OF THE
ESSAY ON THE DISPENSATIONS.
DISSERTATION THE FIRST.
ON THE TEMPTATION, THE FALL, AND THE
SENTENCE WHICH GOD PRONOUNCED ON THE
SERPENT, THE WOMAN, AND THE MAN; IN A
LARGE PARAPHRASE ON THE THIRD CHAP-
TER OF GENESIS.
I CONSIDER the third chapter of Genesis to be
the real history of the fall, and to be inserted by
Moses as the history of the origin of moral and
natural evil, between the history of the creation,
in the first and second chapters, and the peopling
the world, the rise of arts and sciences, and other
the most early and remarkable occurrences, to
the flood, in the fourth and following chapters.
I can by no means consider it as a parable.
The insertion of a parable in the middle of
a history, without giving us any notice of its
being a parable, would not have been by any
VOL. III. A
2 The Mosaic account ofthefaU
means worthy of so accurate an historian, as the
writer of this history will, upon strict observa-
tion, appear to be. Nor can the accounts,
which the patrons of this opinion give us of it as
a parable, induce a reasonable man to come to
such conclusion. I do not see that they make
any thing of it as a parable, though some of them
have been men of the finest imagination. Nor
can I suppose it to be a history of small account.
On the contrary, I consider it to be of the great-
est consequence towards understanding the true
sense of Revelation : being an account of the
origin of natural and moral evil, which is ev«r
supposed, and very often expressly referred to,
from one end of the Bible to the other.
But though I interpret it as a history, yet it
is written after the Eastern manner. That alone
has made some interpret it as a parable. And,
as I take it to be an history of so much conse-
quence, I will endeavour, by a proper paraphrase,
to represent the whole of it together in such a
manner, as to remove, if possible, all the objec-
tions which have been made to its being a real
history.
But the account must first be taken in that
the sacred historian gives us of the circumstan-
ces in which the man and the woman were placed
when the temptation began. It is shortly this:
Jehovah God had put the man in the garden
which he had planted in Eden. By Jehovah God,
to he literally interpreted, 3
Moses means the Logos.' He had made the
ground of the garden to produce every tree which
was pleasant to the sight, or good for food ;
and, among other trees, the tree of Hfe in the
midst of the garden; and by it also the tree of
knowledge of good and evil, or the tree of death.
He had told him, he might eat of all the other
trees ; but that he must not so much as touch
the tree of death, much less eat of it ; for that in
the day he did eat thereof he should surely die.
Moreover, He had ordered the man to dress,
prune, and keep the garden, as an agreeable
exercise and recreation. He had given him do-
minion over the animals ; and, in token of their
subjection. He had brought them to him, to
receive names from him : but not for that end
only, but also that He might let him see, by
their coming in pairs, that a help-mate for him
was yet wanting ; and yet that it could not be
found among the creatures which he had sur-
veyed. God had framed him an help-mate
from one of his own ribs, and had brought her
to him ; from whence Adam either discovered
the law of matrimony, or had it immediately
revealed to him. Finally, He had clothed
both the man and the woman with a garment or
covering of dignity, betokening their being chil-
dren of God, and heirs of the blessing, though
they had been naked at the first.
' See the Dissertation, No. II.
4 Probable manner in which the
After God had placed them in these blissful
circumstances, the devil, or Satan, the head of
the fallen angels, envying this happy pair this
state of blessedness, resolved to try to tempt
them to eat of the forbidden tree; on which sin,
misery, and death at last, must ensue : whereby,
instead of retaining the image of God, in which
they had been created, they would become like
their tempter, who had lost it, and was in every
respect the reverse of it. This temptation the
devil carried on in the following manner :
Finding the woman alone, he takes the shape
and tigure of a serpent. This he did, because
the woman knew, from the name which Adam
had given the serpent, that the serpent w^as a
beast of the field, of greater subtlety and saga-
city than any other ; and was therefore the fittest
to raise the woman's attention to what should
follow. He also took the shape of this animal for
another reason ; namely, because the serpent was
probably then of an erect figure, and made a
glistering and shining appearance ; designing
presently by that means to transform himself, as
it were, into a flaming seraph, or an angel of light,
and a messenger from heaven.' In this figure, we
may suppose, after first playing some wily and
artful tricks, like a serpent, before her, he at
last plucked of the fruit of the tree of death, and
' Soe 2 Cor. xi. 3. Gal. i. 8.
Serpent tempted our first Parents, 6
did eat of it ; and then, putting on a more sera-
phic or angelical appearance, bespoke the wo-
man after this manner : " You see how the
fruit of this tree has exalted me ; so that from
a beast of the field I am become a glorious se-
raph, and endued not only with speech, but
with the knowledge of the Divine will, which
has not yet been fully opened to you by God
himself. Can God possibly, do you think, have
really intended, that you should not eat of the
fruit of every tree of the garden, and of this in
particular, which He Himself has made and
planted there? What did He make and place
it there for, then ?" To which the woman replied :
** God has kindly permitted us to eat of any of
the other trees of the garden, besides that which
grows in the midst of the garden; but that He
has absolutely forbidden us to eat of, or even so
much as to touch it, because its fruit is deadly,
and will certainly kill us." To which the ser-
pent replied : '* No ; you are greatly mistaken ;
the fruit is not deadly, nor will it kill you, any
more than it has me. Alas ! all that God meant,
by saying it would destroy you, was, that it
would change and transform you. But so far
will it be from making you cease to be, that in
the day you eat of it, it will open and enlighten
your eyes, as it has mine ; and as it has raised
me from a serpent to a seraph, endued with
speech, and with knowledge of the Divine coun-
6 Paraphrase of the account of the fall.
sels concerning you, so it shall likewise raise
you from being mortals to be gods ; and, instead
of bringing death on you, make you immortal,
like the great Creator Himself; giving you the
same kind of knowledge of good and evil that
He has. You shall then know the way to pos-
sess all the good yon enjoy indefeasibly and
independently, as He does ; and you shall know
how to avoid death, the threatened evil,- which
would for ever put an end to all your bliss and
felicity. Even disobedience itself will not then
be able to bring it upon you. In fine, you will
find this tree to have the like power to improve
and raise your minds, as the tree of life has to
preserve your bodies." The woman, upon this,
looking wishfully upon the fruit, and being then
strongly and wickedly prejudiced by the insinu-
ations of the devil ; and observing that it was
a tree bearing a fruit that looked to be good for
food, as well as the rest of the trees of the gar-
den, and of a most exquisite shape and hue ;
and, above all, desirable for the attaining this
impious knowledge, which the serpent had ab-
surdly and maliciously flattered her with ; from
seeing him so much improved, as it should
seem, by it ; and being then, from this foolish
lust of low and mean appetite, and of an high
and presumptuous ambition, willing to believe
him a glorious seraph, and a messenger from
heaven, against her own strong reasoning before,
Immediate effects of the fall. 7
she took of the fruit of the tree, and did eat ;
and gave also to her husband (now) with her,
adding many fond persuasive arts to that pur-
pose, and he took of it from her, and did also
eat.
As soon as they had both eaten of it, so far
were these vain and delusive hopes, that the
serpent had given them, from being made good,
that they presently found that they had forfeited
all the blessedness which God had given to them.
The first thing was that they were stript of
the robe of dignity and felicity that God had
covered them with, as the badge of the high
relation they bore to Him, and of that inheri-
tance of which they were possessed ; and that
they were now as naked as they had been at the
first : and though they foolishly endeavoured to
supply the defect of this glorious covering, by a
kind of garment or covering of fig-leaves, or fig-
branches, yet they still found they had the same
reason to be afraid of Him (notwithstanding
that He had been their kind and indulgent Fa-
ther, while they continued His obedient offspring)
as they had had before they had made them-
selves this new covering ; since they could not
but still see that He was now become their
justly incensed Judge ; and that the coverings
they had made themselves could not possibly
prevent His seeing that they were stript of the
8 The sentence pronounced upon Adam,
glorious garment, that was to be theirs as long
as they continued obedient to His commands.
Jehovah God calls Adam before Him, who
tells Him, ** That hearing His voice in the gar-
den, and finding himself stript of the garment
which God had given him, as a son of God, and
consequently deprived of the relation he stood
in to Him, he was afraid, and had hid himself.'*
Whereupon Jehovah God said to him, '' Who
told you that you was naked? I, indeed, told
you, when I gave you that garment, that you
should be immediately deprived of it, if ever
you did eat of the forbidden tree. What then,
have you eat of that forl)idden tree? It is' that
then which has made you naked." Adam re-
plies, ** The woman, whom Thou gavest me,
gave me to eat." And the woman said, it was
the serpent that beguiled her, and she did eat.
Whereupon Jehovah God calls the serpent,
or satan, the devil, in the shape of a serpent ;
and first pronounces sentence upon him. This
was according to the rules of strict justice (he
being, with the utmost malice and wickedness,
the original deceiver) ; and it was also accord-
ing to rules of equity and mercy towards the
man and the woman, in order to raise some
hopes in them, from passing a sentence on the
devil before He passed any on them, who had
circumstances that might plead for the Divine
The sentence pronounced upon the Serpent. 9
patience, and a farther space to repent. The
sentence, that Moses relates God to have passed
on the devil, is, as becomes a good historian,
suited to the appearance which the devil made ;
namely, that of a serpent ; as he calls angels
men, when they appeared in the shape of men.
And God said unto the devil, " O proud and
wicked spirit, because thou hast thus wickedly
and arrogantly tempted and deceived the woman,,
by the means of the shape of the serpent, pre-
tending as if thou thyself wast a being that could
acquire a felicity independent of me, and impart
the like to the woman, in direct contradiction to
my commands ; cursed, therefore, shalt thou be
above all cattle, and all the beasts of the field ;
my power shall immediately deprive thee of that
erect and bright figure, by the means of which
thou hast made these arrogant and wicked
pretensions, and lay thee at the foot of the
woman whom thou hast deceived. On thy
breast shalt thou go ; and instead of being able
to pluck the fruit of any tree, thou thyself,
whilst thou actuatest that form, shalt be able
only to grovel in the dust, and eat what is
mingled with it. And the very species, whose
form thou hast taken, shall be cursed in like
manner; for they also shall be reduced from a
beautiful beast of the field to the state of a
deformed and naean reptile, as a memorial of
10 Paraphrase of the sentence
this thy arrogant and presumptuous malice, as
a perpetual caution and warning to mankind
against thee, aad as a farther security to them
against thee for ever, by depriving thee of having
so fit an instrument, as a serpent is in its pre-
sent figure and form, to pursue thy temptations
by, through putting on the appearance of an
angel of light. So little reason will I leave the
woman to believe thy arrogant and false pre-
tences for the future ; and thereby will I facili-
tate her returning to the obedience due to me,
and prevent her listening again, so easily, to thy
wicked and artful insinuations. Moreover, I
will not only put enmity between the woman
and thee, by shewing her all the baneful conse-
quences of thy temptation, but between all thy
imitators, the wicked viperous race of Cain (who
will be a liar, and a murderer, like thee, and
slay his righteous brother) ; and between Seth,
the true successor of righteous Abel, and his
descendants, who shall go by the name of The
Children of God. And one from this righteous
seed, namely, Jesus, shall bruise thy head, and
destroy all this wicked design and contrivance
of thine, by overcoming and destroying death
itself, which thou hast brought on the human
race; and thou shalt never be able to defeat
this His kind and gracious intention towards
mankind ; though, through my permission, thou
pronounced upon the Serpent, 1 1
wilt be able to afflict Him, and bring Him to die,
and even on a tree, as thou hast by a tree
brought death on the world. But by His death
I will destroy thee, who hast, through my per-
mission, had the power thus to introduce death
on the first pair, and on all their race."
To the woman, whom the serpent had deceiv-
ed, God said, '' Though thou mayst learn from the
sentence that I have pronounced on thy tempter
and enemy, that the fruit thou hast eaten shall not
bring death immediately upon thee, but only
operate like a slow poison in thy blood ; on
which, however, death will infallibly ere long
ensue : and though thou mayst learn from this
sentence too, that I design to preserve thee, for
some time, as the mother of a future race; yet a
curse shall attend thy fruitful ness, instead of the
blessing that I first pronounced upon thee ; for
I will greatly multiply thy sorrow in breeding
children, and in bringing them forth, beyond
other creatures ; and instead of that indepen-
dent state of happiness, which the serpent (whom
thou now ocest groveling at thy feet, in virtue of
my curse, notwithstanding his new boasted
acquisition) has vainly flattered thee with, if
thou wouldst eat the forbidden fruit ; and which
thou, through the fondness which thy husband
had for thee, hast prevailed on him to eat of, as
thou hadst done thyself before; from hence-
forth thy fond desire shall be to him, and
1 2 Sentence pronounced upon A dam .
thereby be sball rule over tbee, and bave tbee in
subjection ; for wbicb there could bave been no
room, if thou badst preserved thy virtue and
innocence." And to Adam he said : ** Since,
from a foohsh fondness for thy wife, thou hast
hearkened unto her voice, and bast eaten of the
tree, of which I commanded tbee, saying, Thou
shalt not eat of it, when I had made the ground
of the garden to produce every tree for thee that
is pleasant to the sight, or good for food,' there-
fore, cursed is the ground for thy sake. In
vexation and sorrow, for the frequent disap-
pointments of thy care and toil about it, shalt
thou eat the produce of it, all the days of thy
life ; for it shall not any more yield unto thee,
of itself, trees bearing fruit, but thorns and
thistles ; and it shall only bring forth of its own
accord the herb of the field, a part of thy food,
common to thee and the beasts of the field, who
are not able to provide food for themselves ;
but bread, the other part of thy food, the great
staff and necessary support of life, shall the
ground not yield to thee, but in virtue of thy
labour, and the sweat of thy brow, till thou
return to it, out of which thou wast taken.
For dust thou art ; and now, that I am go-
ing to drive thee out of paradise, and from the
tree of life, which alone would have preserved
' Gei). li. 9.
On the name given to Eve, 13
such a moulderins: frame and constitution as
thine to immortality, to dust thou shalt re-
turn." Thus Jehovah God passed sentence
severally upon the three parties in this trans-
gression ; inflicting a punishment on each of
them the most properly suited to their respective
crimes.
Upon this mild sentence, Adam perceiving,
with great joy and thankfulness, that he and liis
vi'ife were to be continued alive to people the
world ; he, I say, who before had named her
Woman,' now named her Eve ; as much as to
say, '' the mother of all living." And though
Jehovah God had thus justly expressed His
resentment against them ; yet, as the man and
the woman had lost their garment of glory and
dignity ; and, as their fig-leaves or branches
were not a proper covering for them, Jehovah
God, as a farther mark of favour to them, shewed
them how to make coats of the skins of beasts,
which he had appointed them to offer in sacrifice
to Him, for their apparel ; thereby, at the same
time, holding forth to them this sad moral ; that
by having indulged their appetites and passions,
they had, from children of God, reduced them-
selves, as it were, to a level with the beasts
which perish : but withal encouraging them
hereby to hope, that through faith in His mercy,
* Gen. ii. 23.
14 Adam banished from Paradise.
as the most powerful spring of repentance, they
might not only escape death at present, but re-
cover from it. And when Jehovah God had
provided this clothing for a pair who had too
little experience to know how to provide what
was fit for themselves ; as He had given them a
language, and directed them to food and matri-
mony before ; then He, as the great Angel of
God's presence and council, said to some other
of the angels, His fellows,' '' Behold, the man
has separated himself from us, the faithful sons
and ministers of God, by eating of the tree of
knowledge of good and evil ; and now, lest
after the hurt he has justly received thereby, he
should put forth his hand to take also of the
tree of life, and thereby be healed, and live for
ever ; therefore I will send him out of this gar-
den, where the ground brought forth trees and
fruit spontaneously, to till with toil and hard
labour that more barren unparadisaical ground,
out of which he was taken. The tree of life he
must not eat of; and since he must not, toil
and labour will be the best means to preserve
his life, as long as it will be fit that it should
be continued to him :" So He drove out the
man. And He placed at the east of the garden
of Eden, cherubims with a glory, or flame, that
darted every way (called "a flaming sword," or
' Heb. i.9.
Objections to the literal account. 15
the flame of a sword), to keep the entrance to
the garden, and to the tree of life, against all
men in this mortal state ; but thereby leaving
them hopes, that since God did not destroy
paradise and the tree of life, but only barred the
entrance of them against mortal men before
death, that if they became imitators of God,
and should no longer be the children of the
devil, God, as their gracious and forgiving Fa-
ther, would adopt them to the inheritance of
Eden again, and would after death put them
into the possession of it; as He took Adam,
and put him in it before he had disobeyed His
just and reasonable commands ; and as He after-
wards took Enoch, and put him there, without
tasting death, when he had scarce attained half
the age of man in that period of the world, on
his walking with God, as Adam had done be-
fore the fall.
The great objections that have been made
against the third chapter of Genesis being a
literal history, are, that the skill of managing
the temptation seems to be attributed to the
subtlety of the serpent ; that a serpent should
speak, reason, and design (which is thought to
have too much of the marvellous for any thing
but a parable) ; and that God should sentence a
beast of the field with the man and the woman,
two beings subject to moral government. I hope
this paraphrastical account that I have now
16 On the subtlety of the Seiye^it.
given of Moses's history of the fall, will obviate
the first and second of these objections. For
suppose the expression, *' Now the serpent was
more subtle than any beast of the field," to be
elliptical, then supply it thus, and the objection
will vanish : '' And therefore the devil made
use of the shape and figure of a serpent, to
awaken the woman's attention to him ; she
having been informed by the name which Adam
had given the serpent (Nachash), signifying his
subtlety, that he was an animal of greater sa-
gacity than any other beast of the field." And
as to the last objection, I think the account I
have given of the sentence will shew, that it is a
sentence on the devil only ; and that the re-
ducing the serpent from a beast to a reptile was
only in mercy to mankind, in order to shew our
first parents, how incapable the serpent was of
giving them an independent happiness ; and to
prevent a serpent being instrumental to the like
mischievous designs of the devil for the future.
And as to the middle objection, it appears by
the paraphrase, that it is not the serpent that
speaks, but the devil, called '' the serpent," from
his putting on the appearance of that beast of
the field. If this shall be still thought to have
too much of the marvellous for a literal history,
I must take the liberty to say, that, if we will
receive nothing of the marvellous, we must not
only renounce a great many parts of revelation,
Object of a Revelation. 17
but all miracles, and all other attestations of the
Spirit (how well soever attested), which are the
great external evidence on which all revelation
in fact is, and in reason must be, built ; whereas
nothing of the marvellous, either considered as
a part of revelation, or as the evidence of it, can
be thought at all strange and improper, when it
is duly considered. It is, indeed, what was to
be expected : whereas, on the other hand, if
there had been nothing of the marvellous in a
revelation from God, that itself would have
been the most astonishing thing that could have
happened ; since God would then be supposed
to have given us a revelation, without any thing
to raise our attention, or to give it a proper
attestation.
In fine ; I believe, if the state of things be
carefully considered, and we would but put
ourselves, as precisely as may be, into the cir-
cumstances of our first parents in Eden, we
should soon see, that the account Moses gives
us of the temptation and the fall, considered as
a literal history, was as likely and as natural a
way for the great enemy of God and mankind
to have seduced the first man and woman by,
as any we can now possibly devise.
VOL. III.
DISSERTATION THE SECOND.
CONCERNING GOD'S VISIBLE PRESENCE AND
APPEARANCE, FACE AND GLORY, AS THEY
OCCUR IN SCRIPTURE, ESPECIALLY IN THE
OLD TESTAMENT.
We read of '' God's Presence," Gen. iv. 16 ;
and that it was visible is certain ; because Abel
and Cain ''brought their offerings to it;" which
signifies the presenting them to a Being that
had a visible residence.' And that this Pre-
' *' Brought their offerings to it :" — which signifies the pre-
senting them to a Being that had a visible residence. That
this is the meaning of Cain and Abel's bringing their offering,
besides what is said above, may farther appear from hence ;
that the bringing an offering to God, in Moses's style, after
the giving the law, is bringing an offering to the Glory of
God, which visibly resided among men. For the offering
was brought to the door of the tabernacle, or to the temple,
where God dwelt. Nor do I believe, if it be well considered,
that there are any instances, from the offering of Cain and
Abel to the destruction of the first temple, of an offering's
being made to God, but where the Being that represented
him visibly resided ; except the extraordinary case of David,
J Chron. xxi. 14—30, and of Elijah, 1 Kings xviii. Sec
Mai. i. 8, where the same word, namely, offering, is used.
20 A Dissertation on
sence of God was visible, does not only follow
from the expression itself, which cannot well
be supposed to have any other meaning, but
from this Presence of God's visibly accepting
Abel's offering, and rejecting Cain's. For
God's accepting an offering, is sending a flame
from Himself to devour it ; Lev. ix. 24. Judges
xiii. 20—23. Psal. xx. 2, 3. 1 Kings xviii. 36—40.
The same phrase, namely, '' God's Presence," is
used by Moses, when he prays, that God, and
not an angel, may continue with his people, and
lead them to Canaan ; thereby to distinguish
them from other nations, who were supposed
to have angels for their governors or presidents.
See Deut. xxxii. 8, 9, according to the LXX,
Dan.x. 13.20, 21. *' If Thy Presence," says
Moses, " go not with us, carry us not up hence/'
Exod. xxxiii. 14 — 17. Finally, this Presence
is called " God's face," in Gen. iv. 14. From
whence too, as something that was visible, Cain
says^ upon his sentence of banishment, that
*Mie shall be hid." The Presence of God
therefore with men is His visible and fixed re-
sidence among them, in contradistinction to
of presenting a thing to a governor. And indeed, how could
they possibly have brought their offering, if they had not
known where they were to bring it ? And how could they
have known where they were to bring it, if they had not
known where the Being resided, to whom they were to bring
it I
God^s visible presence. 21
His appearances, which were but occasional,
and of a short continuance. In this sense we
are to understand God's '* Presence or Face,'"
2 Kings xxiv. 20. Jer. vii. 15. lii. 3. Psal. li.
11. It signifies His visible residence in the
temple, in all those places.
The first period of this visible and fixed re-
sidence was from the creation till a little after
the flood (when He retired) ; ' and then again
(after an interval of about a thousand years)
from the giving of the law to the destruction of
the first temple.
His occasional appearances were to the
builders of Babel, in wrath and displeasure ;
and to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses at
the bush, in kindness and favour ; so that the
period of these occasional appearances was the
interval between the two periods of His visible
and fixed residence.
* " The time of His fixed residence >Vas from the creation
till a little after the flood, when He retired."— That God
resided visibly in the world during this period seems to fol-
low from hence ; that till the flood, or rather till just after
Noah's coming out of the ark, Moses never introduces God
as coming down from heaven, or as appearing, in order to
introduce Him speaking to men. And yet, after that time,
Moses always introduces God as coming down from heaven,
or as appearing, when he would introduce Him as speaking
to them. See Gen. xi. 5. xii. 7. xvii. 1. xviii. 21. xxvi. 2.
XXXV. 7. 9* This plainly shews, that Moses considered God
as visibly residing in the first period, and not in the second.
22 A Dissertation on
The place of His visible and fixed residence
seems to have been at the entrance of Eden,
from the fall to the flood (for which I have given
my reasons, in the preceding Essay); in the ark
during the iiood ; * and in the tabernacle and
the first temple, after the long interval just now
mentioned.
** God's face" is His becoming visible, as a
brightness covered with a cloud, in a human
shape, or in the similitude of a man ; and parti-
* ** In the ark during the flood." — That He resided in the
ark during the flood, appears by His saying to Noah, "Come
thou, &c. into the ark," Gen. vii. 1, and chap. viii. l6;
and, *• Go thou out of the ark :" neither of which could have
been said, if this Being had not been in the ark. And that
He was in the ark during the flood, may be farther inferred
from Noah's sacrificing to Him (as representing God), as
soon as he came out of the ark ; since, as we have just ob-
served, no sacrifices were ever ofl*ered to God, but when He
had a certain visible residence ; and not when He occasionally
appeared : as is plain by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob's not
sacrificing, unless in the case of the ram ofl'ered instead of
Isaac. But that was pointed out to be done by a particular
providence, speaking as plainly as if God had expressly
commanded it. Gen. xxii. 13, 14, and which must conse-
quently be considered as an extraordinary and an excepted
case; as must also the case of Elijah, 1 Kings xviii. ip — 41.
See the Third Corollary to this Dissertation. From God's
being in the ark, we may understand the meaning of that
diflficult and hitherto mistaken place, 1 Pet. iii. 18 — 22, the
full meaning of which text may be seen in Dissertation
No. HI.
God's visible presence. it
cularly with the similitude of an human face :
and then it is said, that " God, or Jehovah, was
present, or appeared ;" and He is then said to be
" a Man," Gen. xviii. 2. xxxii. 24—31. '* God's
glory" is His becoming visible, as a great bright-
ness covered with a cloud, without any human
shape, or any other shape or similitude at all.
This I take to be the general meaning of these
phrases in Scripture, namely, of '* God's pre-
sence and appearance. His face and glory,"
particularly in the Old Testament, where they
more generally occur. But it is necessary to be
more particular, and to prove this more fully
from the history of the Bible.
However, it will be fit to premise beforehand,
that as the Supreme Being is immense, it is
impossible that, properly speaking, He should
ever be more present or more absent from us at
one time than another. It is in Him that " we
all live, move, and exist." As the Supreme
Being is immense, He is also incorporeal, un-
changeable, and invisible ; and therefore cannot
have any face or other bodily parts at any time ;
or be any thing but what He always is ; or any
thing, at all times, but that Being, " whom no
man hath seen, or can see," 1 Tim. vi. 16. See
John i. 18. V. 37. 1 John iv. 12. By God's
presence, therefore, and appearance, by His
face and glory, we must understand the Being,
who was afterwards permanently incarnate,
24 A Dissertation on
who appeared as a brightness in a cloud, either
in the similitude of a man, or without any
similitude at all, to represent and personate the
Supreme Being, under the character of the
Father of His family, or of the King of His
people; and always speaking in the name of
the Supreme Being, or as the Supreme Being ;
as, " Behold, I have given thee," &c. Gen. i. 29 ;
or, *' I am Jehovah thy God," Exod. xx. 12 :
while all other Divine messengers, as prophets,
angels, or the Word Himself in flesh, speak as
from the Supreme Being ; as, " Thus saith the
Lord;" or, "This is the will of God." This
Being, thus personating God the Father, is to be
understood by the term God, whenever He is
said to be visible : and was so understood by the
Israelites.' More particularly, I take this Being,
* That the Israelites did not think this visible Being to be
God the Father, may be justly concluded from this, that
the light of nature would teach them, that the invisible God
could not be visible ; that the incorporeal God could not
have a body ; that He that is immense could not be confined
to a place ; nor He that is unchangeable vary His posture,
shape, or appearance. It may also be concluded from
hence, that the Being, who is called " God's Presence,"
Exod. xxxiii. 14, 15, is called " God's Angel," Exod. xxiii.
23; "the Angel in whom God had put His name," Exod,
xxiii. 21 ; ** the Angel," Acts vii. 35. 38 ; and, " the Angel of
God's presence," Isa. Ixiii. 9. These different appellations
of the same Being shew plainly, that the Israelites did not
take this Being that visibly appeared, to be God the Father,
God's visible preseme, 25
that thus personated and represented the first,
to have been the second Being, Iv /xo^
^i i
age. aciioD. that thou art ; namely,
125. the everlasting posses-
multiply thee ;" without quoting the rest of the 17th and 18th
verse. It is as if he had quoted it thus : " surely blessing T will
bless thee," &c. I think there is another instance of such an
et ccetera quotation by St. Paul, Acts xiii. 25, from Luke iii. 16 :
" And as John fulfilled his course, he said, Whom think ye that
lam? lam not He; but behold there cometh One after me,
w hose shoes of His feet I am not worthy to loose :" he stops
there, without quoting the rest of the verse, namely, " He shall
baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire;" though these
last words seem to have been chiefly intended by St. Paul in
that quotation.
And that seed in the promise made to Abraham, Gen. xii. 18,
to Isaac, Gen. xxvi. 4, and to Jacob, Gen. xxviii. 14, signifies
imitators, and not descendants; or even Jesus Christ, one of
them, may be seen, Dissertation No. IV.
These two covenants are often referred to separately and
jointly. The temporal covenant is referred to separately,
1 Chron. xvi. 19—23. Nehem. ix. 8. Acts vii. 5—8. The ever-
lasting covenant is referred to separately, 1 Chron. xvi. 15 — 19.
Acts vii. first part of the 81h verse, Rom. iv. 13, 14. Gal. iii. 14.
18, 19. 22. 29. iv. 28. Heb. vi. 17. xi. 39; and both together
come under the name of the promises, Heb. xi. 13, compared
with verse 39, or of the " covenants of promise," Eph. ii. 12, or
of the "covenants," Rom. ix. 4. In this place St. Paul says,
'^ who are Israelites," not Abramites, because Abram had Ish-
mael, as well as Isaac; not Isaacites, because Isaac had Esau
as well as Israel ; but Israelites, because Israel had no sons, that
were not reckoned for the seed. St. Paul goes on, "to whom
pertaineth the adoption ;" for the Israelites, as descended from
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are sons of God, Exod. iv. 22, *' and
the glory;" for when God had long retired from the world soon
after the flood, for its wickedness. He (the God of glory) " ap-
peared unto Abraham," Acts vii. 2, as also to Isaac and to Jacob ;
and at last dwelt among the Israelites in the tabernacle and
temple ; " and the covenants ;" that is, the covenant of the
temporary possession of " earthly Canaan" to the carnal seed of
Abraham in the fourth generation, in the xvth of Genesis; " and
the giving the law," namely, at Sinai, about four hundred and
thirty years after the covenants ; " and the service" (Aarpe/o,)
namely, all the ritual service that was enjoined after the idolatry
of the golden calf, though, as it should seem, not intended be-
fore ; '• and the promises ;" that is, all the promises made in con-
firmation of cither of these covenants, from the time of Moses to
the days of Malachi ; particularly the promises made to David
and his royal race. IJy the place that St. Paul gives the cove-
several portions of Genesis.
07
TEXT.
19 So Abra-
ham returned to
liis young men,
and they rose up
and went to
Beersheba; and
Abraham dwelt
in Beersheba.
PARAPHRASE.
sion of Canaan, at the
times of the restitution
of all tl)ings to their
original blessed state;
and at the times of re-
spiration, when thou and
they shall be capable of
enjoying it.
19. After the Angel
had said this, Abraham
returned to his young
men, whom he had bid
to wait at a distance till
he and Isaac went far-
ther and worshipped, ver.
5, and they all returned
to Beersheba, from
whence they had set out
towards Mount Moriah,
and where Abraham still
continued to dwell.
Year of Place of
Abraham's the trans-
age, action.
125.
uants here, namely, after the adoption, and the glory ; and before
" the giving of the law, the service, and the promises ;" it is plain,
that " the covenants'' here must signify the covenant of the xvth
of Genesis, and the covenant of the xviiith; and no other cove-
nants whatsoever : for tliese are the only covenants that God
made with Abraham or his seed, after the appearing of the ^lory,
since its recess; and before the giving of the law at Mount
Sinai.
VOL. lii.
No. VI.
A DISSERTATION
TO SHEW
THAT THE EXPRESSION, Gal. hi. 16, " BUT TO
SEED, AS OF ONE, WHICH IS CHRIST," DOES
NOT SIGNIFY JESUS CHRIST; BUT THE *'ONE
SEED," BOTH OF THE LAW AND OF FAITH,
"ANOINTED BY THAT SPIRIT," WHICH WAS
PROMISED TO ABRAHAM, AND IMPARTED TO
JEWISH AND GENTILE BELIEVERS UNDER THE
GOSPEL.
I WILL now endeavour to shew, (as I undertook
vol. ii. p. 516.) that the promise which God made
to Abraham, Gen. xiii. 3. xxii. 18, "in thee, or
in thy seed, shall all the nations of the earth be
blessed," (as it is quoted and argued by St.
Paul, Gal. iii. 8,) does not mean, that in or by
one of thy descendants, namely, Jesus Christ, I
will bless all the nations of the earth ; but that
it means, that I will bless all that shall become
thy spiritual seed, or that shall imitate thee.
In order to it, you must give me leave to
premise,
100 A Dissertation on
1. That, in my way of understanding the
iid and iiid of the Galatians, these several ex-
pressions, ** justification," (chap. ii. ver. 16.
chap. iii. 18.) or ** accounting for righteousness/'
(ver. 6.) '' the Spirit," (ver. 2. 5. 14.) or " the
blessing of Abraham," (ver. 8, 9. 14.) ''gospel,"
(ver. 8.) *Mife," (ver. 21.) and ''inheritance,"
(ver. 18.) are with St. Paul in effect the same
thing, and are promiscuously used by him in
this chapter, as any one of these terms will best
suit the other expressions he has occasion to use
in the several parts of it. I cannot but think,
that the promiscuous use of these terms may be
very well accounted for in this manner : justifi-
cation is God's final acquittal of a man from a
charge ; which, if it had been adjudged to be
true, must have ended in death; but which
being adjudged to be false, brings on the sen-
tence of everlasting life. This acquittal, or
justification, is, in other words, being " accounted
righteous ;" or " having faith (that is, *' fide-
lity," or " sincere obedience") accounted for
righteousness." The Spirit is to raise us up to
eternal life, and was, in the mean time, the
earnest of that resurrection to the Galatians.
Blessing signifies the removal of the curse, and
the restoring the original blessing ; namely, bliss
and immortality. '' The blessing of Abra-
ham" is the blessing promised to Abraham;
namely, that which was promised in general
Gal. iii. 16. 101
terms to him, Gen. xiii. 3. " In thee (that is,
in blessing thee) shall all the families (or
nations who imitate thee) be blessed ;" and
which came to be more particularly explained,
Gen. xvii. 7, 8, that God would bless Abraham
and all his seed (or his pious imitators), with
that everlasting ** possession of Canaan," cal-
led, therefore, an '* inheritance," Gal. iii. 18,
and which God afterwards confirms by an oath ;
'^ that in his seed all the nations of the earth
should be blessed," Gen. xxii. 18. So that 8t.
Paul makes no difference between any of these
three promises, the second being but an expli-
cation of the first ; and the third but a confir-
mation of the first and second, by the oath of
God. Yet the first promise is more generally
referred to by St. Paul in this chapter ; par-
ticularly ver. 17, as plainly appears by the note
of time that he adds ; for it is four hundred and
thirty years before the giving of the law, that
God said to Abraham, (Gen. xiii. 3,) *' In thee
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."
Life is everlasting life ; inheritance is the right
we have to it ; and the gospel is the good
news, either of the title, or of the actual inheri-
tance of it.
I must premise, 2. That St. Paul uses pro-
mise and covenant promiscuously ; both of them
signifying the promise or covenant, that God
would give ''justification, righteousness, the
102 A Dissertation on
Spirit, blessing," or ^* the blessing of Abraham,
inheritance," or *' life," or glad tidings, to
Abraham, and to his seed.
I must premise, 3. That seed, or one seed, in
this chapter, signifies Abraham's one believing
seed of all nations ; particularly of Jews and
Gentiles, now made one, by being baptized into
Jesus Christ, and putting on Christ, ver. 27, (as
Christians used to do new clothes after baptism,)
whereby, without any manner of distinction
" of Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or
female," we all become one seed ; whereas, he
that was not of Abraham's family, or that was
an hired servant in it, or a female, could not
be circumcised. And as the apostle adds,
'* if we be one seed in Christ Jesus (as the
Glermont copy reads it, and as the true read-
ing certainly is), then are we Abraham's seed
(or one seed), and heirs according to the pro-
mise ;" that is to say more generally, heirs of
the blessing of Abraham, that was promised.
Gen. xiii. 3, or, more particularly, heirs of the
everlasting possession of Canaan, promised.
Gen. xvii. 7, 8, and confirmed by an oath to
his seed, or to those that should be his imita-
tors. Gen. xxii. 18. This seed, or one seed,
stands with St. Paul in opposition to seeds, or
two sorts of seed, namely, " those that are of
faith" (Ix, wla-TEwg), ver. 7, and those that are
** of the works of the law" (e| e/jywv vo/xou), ver.
GaL iii. 16. 103
10. St. Paul speaks of these two sorts of seeds,
Rom. iv. 13 — 18, and ix. 6 — 9, only he varies
the expression in the last place, calling the
two seeds, *' the seed of (or according to) the
flesh ;" and ** the seed of (or according to)
the promise." St. Peter, in a similar man-
ner. Acts iii. 25, 26, " ye are the children of
the covenant, which God made with our fathers,
saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all
the kindreds of the earth be blessed :" and
therefore adds, ** unto you Jews," as part of
that seed, "first (God having raised up His
Son Jesus) sent Him to bless you, in turning
every one of you from his iniquities :" in con-
sequence of which they would certainly become
righteous in the sight of God, and of course
obtain justification to everlasting life, which is
expressed by St. Peter, ver. 19. 21, by "their
sins being blotted out, when the times of refresh-
ing (or respiration, amy^v^scos) should come
from the presence of the Lord (who will be
revealed against the wicked in flaming fire)," and
by " the restitution of all things," namely, to
their paradisaical state. By all this (I think)
it appears, that the blessing promised to Abra-
ham, in these words, *' in thee, or in thy seed,
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed "
(as the words stand in Genesis, and accordin*'
to the interpretation of all the New Testament
writers that quote them), signifies the good news
104 A Dissertation on
of everlasting life, or of the Spirit (who is to
raise ns up to everlasting life), and not Jesus
Christ; notwithstanding that He was of the
seed of Abraham according to the flesh. But
this will appear more fully by what follows.
I must premise, 4. That St. Paul gives this
one seed a name in the singular number, to suit
it the better, namely. Christ, ver. 16, 17 ; that is,
** the anointed" (namely, seed) ; this one seed
which had received the promise of the Spirit,
or the Spirit that had been promised (which is
our unction, 2 Cor. i. 21, 22. 1 John ii. 20.
27), ver. 14. The believing Jews received it
first after Christ's ascension ; and the Gentiles
afterwards, both the idolatrous and the devout.
Christ has this signification, Psal. cv. 15,
(" Touch not mine anointed," Xpia-Tohg, accord-
ing to the LXX,) and Heb. xi. 26.
Now having premised these things, that I
may make it appear the more plainly, that the
seed (or the one seed), ver. 16, signifies all those
of the works of the law, and of faith, who are
made one, by being anointed with one Spirit, or
by being baptized into one Spirit, as the one
Spirit of the one Lord (Mediator) and of one
God, even the Father, and not Jesus Christ; I
will consider the thread of St. Paul's argument
in part of the second and third chapters of the
Galatians. His argument is to prove that the
Galatians, as well as all other believing Gentiles,
Gal. iii. 16. 105
and even the Jews, were justified by faith, and
not by the works of the law, chap. ii. ver. 16.
And the sum of his argument to support this
assertion is, that '' they received the Spirit (the
earnest of their resurrection, and by wliich they
should at last be raised from the dead) by be-
lieving the word, which they had heard from
Paul ; and not by the works of the law, ver. 2,
just as he (Paul) that ministered the Spirit to
them, and wrought miracles among them (the
special miracles of an apostle), did it by the
faith of that word of the gospel, which he had
heard from Christ, and which he preached to
them, and not by the works of the law, ver. 5,
and just as Abraham was justified by believing,
ver. 6. He therefore adds, that men only be-
came the children (or seed) of Abraham, by
believing God, as Abraham did, or by imitating
his faith, ver. 7. And God foreseeing that He
would (in His due time) justify the heathen (or
all nations) to everlasting life, through faith,
preached the good news beforehand to Abra-
ham, in the promise He made to him, Gen. xii.
3, " In thee shall all nations be blessed," ver.
8. So that it follows, that " all they which be
of faith" (or of the seed of faith, Ix TrlcTsuys)
are (now, and were then) blessed (along)
with faithful Abraham," ver. 9, whereas, on
the contrary, that seed of Abraham, who were
e| epycov vofjLouy must be under the curse of the
106 A Dissertation on
law, instead of the blessing (or justification to
everlasting life), according to the doctrine of the
Old Testament itself; Habakkuk having as-
serted, " that the just (or righteous) shall live
by faith" (that is, everlastingly) ; whereas in
truth Christ has died to redeem us Jews from
the curse, that we were under by the law, being
made a curse for us ; and to impart the blessing
of Abraham to the Gentiles, through their faith
in the word, which they had heard from St.
Paul, ver. 10 — 15. Now St. Paul adds, a
covenant among men is a thing that cannot be
altered by any, but the parties themselves ; it is
unalterable by every one else, ver. 15. But
(the covenants, or) the promises that God made
to Abraham, He made to Abraham, and to his
seed, ver. 16; so they run. Gen. xii. 3. xvii. 7,
8. xxii. 18 ; then it cannot be to seeds; for seed
is but one sort of seed, and not two or more
sorts of seed. Now, says he, that one seed is
Christ, or the two different sorts of people con-
sidered as one, or being anointed with the one
Spirit ; and therefore the promises of blessing
belong to you, who are of the one seed of faith,
and have by it received the Spirit, as well as the
Jews. And, as he adds, if any should suggest
to you, that the law has disannulled the pro-
mise, that '* in thy seed shall all nations be
blessed," which God had confirmed (by an
oath, Gen. xxii. 18) to Christ (j\g Xpia-Tov, that
Gal. iii. 16. 107
is, to the anointed people) ; I answer, that it is
impossible ; because the first promise of that
kind, made Gen. xii. 3, explained and confirmed
by the promise, Gen. xvii. 7, 8, and xxii. 18,
was four hundred and thirty years before the
law, ver. 17 ; whereas, on the contrary, if the in-
heritance of blessing to Abraham had been given
him by the law, it could not have been given by
promise, as it most certainly was ; as may be
plainly seen, Gen. xii. 3. xvii. 7, 8. xxii. 28.
And if it should still be said, why then was the
law added ? St. Paul answers, it was added,
to shew the Israelites the punishment due to
every transgression of the law of nature, by
giving them such a number of more precepts
than there were in the law of nature, and by
making death the penalty of the breach of a
great many of them ; that so the Jews, seeing
themselves so manifestly *' concluded under
sin," both by frequent breaches of the numerous
laws they were under, and by death, that often
followed, might be led by the law to the gospel ;
where they would see, that they might obtain
righteousness and life. But this law was only
added, till that " one seed" should come, to
whom the promise of life and blessedness is
made ; which one seed is made up of a body of
Jews and Gentiles, by one faith in one God,
through one Lord, and by one Spirit. This law
was ordained by angels in the hands of a me-
108 A Dissertation on
diator; namely, Moses, ver. 19. But still, says
he, this very thought suggests another, that may
farther serve to shew, that the law could not
vacate the promise made to Abraham and his
seed ; because Moses (as the incomparable Mr.
Locke first observed), who was the mediator
at the giving' of the law at Sinai, was only a
mediator of a covenant, where but one of the
parties concurred, that concurred to Abraham's
covenant ; for Abraham's covenant was a cove-
nant between God and Abraham, and his one
seed of faith : now Moses was only a mediator
between God (one of the parties indeed), but
was not a mediator between God and Abraham,
and the one seed of faith, the other party to
Abraham's covenant; for Abraham and the
Gentiles of all nations, who were part of that'
one seed of faith, were not there ; whereas, if
Moses had been a mediator of such a covenant
at Sinai, as could have vacated the covenant
with Abraham and his seed ; he should have
been a mediator of a covenant between both
those parties (namely, God, Abraham, and his
spiritual seed of all nations), and not of a cove-
nant between one of those parties only ; name-
ly, God, and quite another party (the carnal
seed of Abraham, by Isaac, and Jacob), which
was the case at Mount Sinai, ver. 20. St. Paul
then intersperses some thoughts to prove, that
the law, instead of being intended to be against
Gal. iii. 16. 109
the promises, which God made to Abraham, or
to vacate them, by giving righteousness and life
(which was alone to be had by faith in the
promise), was only intended to bring us to the
faith of Christ ; by which alone the body of the
Gentiles come to be children of God, and one
with the believing Jews, ver. 25. He then
brings his last argument to shew, that we become
one seed by faith in God (through the word of
God preached by Christ and His apostles), from
the significant rite of initiation ; by which we
are baptized into one body and one Spirit ; and
then concludes, ver. ult., that if '* w^e are one
(seed) in" (by faith in God) through '' Christ
Jesus, then are we Abraham's (one) seed"
to whom the promise was made, Gen. xii. 3,
as explained xvii. 7, 8, and confirmed, xxii.
18, *' and (consequently) heirs according to
that promise."
If it should be objected against the sense I
have given to the word Christ, ver. 16, and 17,
(namely, anointed, meaning the seed anointed
by the Spirit,) that it cannot be thought to be
the true sense of it, but that Jesus Christ must
be denoted by it, whom St, Paul denotes by
the name Christ, ver. 13th, 24th, 27th, and
29th ; I answer, that it is not an uncommon
thing to find St. Paul keep his term, and vary
his sense. But I must observe, that it is not
likely that he has done so in this chapter. He
110 A Dissertation on Gal. iii. 16.
here varies his term and his sense together ; for
there are very good copies that give us other
readings in those verses : ver. i3th, some copies
read Kdpiog ; ver. 24th, some copies read Xpia-rov
'Jijo-ouv; ver. 27th, some copies read as ver.
24th; and ver. 29th is read with the same
addition. I prefer these readings to Stephens',
v^^hich our translators followed ; because I find,
that whenever St. Paul designed to denote
Christ's person by the name Christ in every
other verse of this chapter, he adds Jesus to
it ; an addition that he does not always make
elsewhere ; as if he designed to reserve the word
Xpia-Tos, to denote this one seed anointed by the
Spirit, whether Jews or Gentiles ; and so added
Jesus to Christ every where else in the chapter,
to prevent mistakes.
No. VII.
A DISSERTATION
ON
HEBREWS XII. 22 25.
This place of Scripture being one of the most
difficult in the New Testament, it will be neces-
sary to take in all the aids towards clearing the
sense of it, that we can possibly get. We must
therefore, in the first place, carefully endeavour
to trace the connexion it has with the fore-
going part of the epistle. The immediate con-
nexion of these four verses is evidently with the
four verses that immediately precede them;
namely, the 18 — 22: but to see how all the
eight verses, from the 18th to the 25th, stand
immediately connected with what goes before,
we must look as far back as the xth chapter ;
otherwise we shall be apt to think, that this
portion of Scripture comes in altogether abrupt-
ly, and that it is a part of the epistle detached
from the rest. It may at the same time be of
112 A Dissertatmi on
use to shew, how all these verses, together with
that part of the epistle with which they are
immediately connected, stand related to the
whole. Those Commentators, who have con-
sidered this text apart from its true connexion,
have left great scope to their own fancies and
imaginations in interpreting it. But a just
regard to the connexion will in all probability
tie us down to its precise meaning.
I. It is plain, that the view the apostle had
in writing this epistle, was to keep the believing
Hebrews from apostatising to Judaism, not-
withstanding the persecutions they actually un-
derwent, or apprehended, from their continuing
to profess the Christian religion. This he had
done from the very beginning of the epistle ; by
shewing them, that Christianity is infinitely
preferable to Judaism, in every point in which
they differ: Christianity having Jesus for its
Author, who is higher than the angels, both in
His relation to God, chap, i., and in dominion,
chap. ii. ; superior to Moses, chap. iii. ; of a
more excellent order of high priesthood than
Aaron, chap. iv. — ^x. ; and having, by the once
offering of Himself to God in the heavens, for
ever perfected them that believe, chap. x.
1—18.
The apostle, from all this, exhorts the Chris-
tian Hebrews, *'to hold fast their profession
without wavering," chap. x. 23, *' and not to
Heb. xii. 22—25. 113
cast away their confidence, which had a great
recompense of reward," ver. 35 ; but withal tells
them, that the only way to hold fast their pro-
fession, and not to cast away their confidence,
is "the full assurance of faith," ver. 19 — 23,
'' and to live by it," ver. 35—39. He then de-
scribes what that faith is, chap. xi. 1 ; and
shews, how such a faith, as is there described,
had carried Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to
wait with patience, under many difficulties and
trials, for the performance of the promise of
an heavenly city in an heavenly country, ver.
0, 10 (the promise, ;«aT l^o^fi^)- This heaven-
ly country was promised to Abraham, Gen.
xvii. 8,9, under the expression of "the ever-
lasting possession of Canaan." Nothing less
than an heavenly, paradisaical country, can
become an everlasting possession. And we
may well suppose, that an heavenly city either
was couched under the expression, of an ever-
lasting possession of Canaan, or accouipanied
it; since the apostle here says, that *' God
would have been ashamed to have been called
their God (as He first called Himself, when
He made the promise, Gen. xvii. 8, 9), if He
had not prepared for them a city ;" and which
He likewise must have promised to them, since
we find that they expected it, chap. xi. The
apostle afterwards says, that all these three
VOL. III. H
114 A Dissertation on
patriarchs, " fellow-heirs of the same promise,"'
ver. 9, (of the promise, xar l^oyr^v,) ** died in
faith ; not having received the promises ;" that
is, the things promised, or either of them :
namely, either the thing promised, Gen. xv.
18 — 21, which was the reversionary inheritance
of the earthly Canaan in the fourth generation ;
or the thing promised, kolt £|o;^^i/, namely. Gen.
xvii. 8, 9 ; which w as the heavenly country,
under the terms of Canaan for an everlasting
possession, and, as may well be inferred, the
heavenly city in it. To shew the faith of those
three patriarchs in this last promise, and the
high value they had for it (though they only saw
it afar off; not so near as the second, third, or
fourth generations, as they saw the earthly
Canaan, which w^as the thing promised, Gen.
XV. 18 — 22), they chose to live in tents, in this
very country, where they had no possession,
rather than return to the possessions of their
* Isaac and Jacob are called here '* fellow-heirs {avyKX-ri-
po^'of/ot) of the same promise;" because the same promise
was made to them of Canaan as an everlasting possession, as
had been made to Abraham, and because they were the only
persons to whom the promise was made. See Gen. xxvi. 5,
and xxviii. 3 — 5, where the meaning of the promise, that
"In thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed," is,
that in imitating thee, they shall have the blessing of the
everlasting possession as well as thyself. See Rom. iv.
13— -16. Gal.iii. l6— 29-
Heb. xii. 22—25. 115
own, or build a city in this land of their
pilgrimage, ver. 9, 10. 13. 16. The apostle
then goes on to other worthies of their nation,
Gideon, Barak, Sampson, David, Samuel, the
prophets, and even down so low as the seven
sons in the Maccabees ; and of all these he
affirms, that they, "through faith, obtained a
good report" (as well as the elders, ver. 2), but
'* received not the promise ;" that is, the thing
promised (or the thing promised, xar e|o;t^J'),
namely, the heavenly city in the heavenly
country, promised to Abraham and his fellow-
heirs, Gen. xvii. 8, 9. It is said, they received
not the p?'omise ; that is, the thing promised (but
it is not said of these last, as it was of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, that they received not the
promises ; that is, the things promised ; because
these last had received one of them; namely,
that of the earthly Canaan). The apostle then
adds the reason why they had not received the
thing promised, tcolt e^o^riv ; or the heavenly
Canaan ; " God having provided some better
thing (namely, heaven, or the third heavens)
for us (namely. Christians, both Jews and Gen-
tiles, far better than this heavenly city in the
heavenly country), that (so) they (Jews) without
us (Christians) should (or might) not be made
perfect," ver. 32 — 40.
He then goes on to give them the example of
Jesus, the Director and Finisher of tlie Christian
116 A Dissertation on
race (oipx^yov xa) rsT^eiwTriu)^ chap. xii. ver. 1 — 4,
and tells the Christian Hebrews, that though
God, as a Father, " had chastened them," yet
He had not *' called them to resist unto blood,"
as He had Jesus, the High-priest of their pro-
fession, and many of the heroes of the Jewish
nation, mentioned in the former chapter, ver.
4 — 15, who yet died in the faith of the promised
reward and inheritance.
He finally sets before them an example of
another nature; namely, of Esau, a profane
person ; who despised this heavenly inheritance,
and that earthly inheritance or birthright, which
was a pledge of it ; and who, after he had once
thoroughly despised, could never recover it, ver.
15—18.
After saying all this to them, he now comes
to tell them more particularly what this in-
heritance is, which their ancestors had lived
and died in the faith of, the better to animate
these Christian Hebrews to persevere in their
open profiession of Christianity, through the
hope of the inheritance. To this purpose, he
compares some circumstances of the state in
which they were to expect their heavenly in-
heritance, with the circumstances of the greatest
pomp and majesty, that occurred at the giving
of the law ; of which they made their boasts,
and to which they were too willing to return :
shewing them, that the circumstances of pomp
Heb. xii. 22—25. 1 17
and majesty that would attend that state, which
all their pious ancestors expected as their re-
ward and inheritance ; and which would be
theirs too, if they held fast their profession
without wavering; would be far greater than
those which attended the giving of the law :
putting them also in mind of the circumstances
of great terror, that had accompanied all that
grandeur and majesty which appeared at the
giving of the law, ver. 18 — 22, and at the same
time intimating, that there would be no such
terror attending the majestic disposition of
things in that state, in which, in case they
persevered, they would have their recompense
of reward. He also takes care to let them
know, that they were ''come" to this heavenly
inheritance ; whereas Abraham, Isaac, and Ja-
cob only *'&aw it afar off." The meaning of
their being come to the particulars mentioned, is,
that this inheritance was not only more fully
opened and described, but was much better
secured to them, by the farther promise, that
Christ and His apostles had made of it, by the
resurrection of Christ from the dead, by the
promise of their resurrection to it ; and by all
the farther assurances of their resurrection to it,
which they had obtained through Christ's being
the Christian Sacrifice and High-priest ; than it
had been to any of their ancestors. All these
particularities and assurances of this inheritance
118 A Dissertation on
being so much greater than the particularities
and assurances that had been given to the
patriarchs, and other good men of that nation,
before Christ; the Hebrew Christians might
well be said to come to it, in comparison of any
that had gone before them. The figure here
used is the same which runs through several
other expressions of the New Testament ; as
Christians being "quickened or raised, justified,
saved, and seated with Christ Jesus in heavenly
places :" expressions peculiar to Christians, and
made use of to shew, how much securer Chris-
tians might be of their resurrection, justification,
salvation, and sitting with Christ in heaven, than
the patriarchs and other good men of the Jewish
nation could be of their resurrection, final ac-
quittal, and salvation, before Christianity ap-
peared in the world.
II. This I think is the connexion. As to
the meaning of all the particulars that are here
mentioned, from ver. 22 — 25, and to which the
Christian Hebrews are said to be come; I appre-
hend it is in general a description of "the
heavenly city in the heavenly country ;" or, "the
rest that remained for the people of God," chap,
iv.; or, of "the city which hath foundations,
whose Maker and Builder is God," which the
patriarchs " saw afar oflT," chap. xi. 10. 15, 16,
" the continuing city," which he exhorts them
to seek, chap. xii. 13. And as to the distinct
Heb. xii. 22—25. 119
meaning of each of these particulars, I will
endeavour to explain it, as each stands in the
text.
" You are come unto Mount Sion, and the city
of the living God :" that is, to a beautiful moun-
tain, secured by a city, in a cultivated and plea-
sant country, defended by its natural situation,
Psal. Ixviii. 2— 14. cxxv. 2. xlviii. 1—3. 12, 13,
from whence God mildly and graciously shone
forth ; as an emblem and pledge of his favour, in
pardoning sins, hearing prayers, and bestowing
blessings, Psal. xxi. See also Rev. xi. 19. xxi. 5.
All this is fairly implied of Mount Sion, as Mount
Sion is described in the Old Testament ; and as
it stands opposed to Mount Sinai ; a vast
mountain, in an open and defenceless, howling
wilderness ; see Exod. xvii. 8 ; terrible in itself;
'more terrible from God's breaking forth out of
the fire and thick darkness that covered the top
of it, out of the earthquake that shook it, and
out of the tempest, the thunder, and lightning,
that were about it, in a voice of words, which
they that heard, desired they might never hear
any more : but most terrible of all, by its being
not to be touched, but upon pain of death :
though it was a mountain as tangible in its own
nature as any other, ver. 18 — 20, and for that
reason styled " the mount that might be touch-
ed." Other cities were the cities of idols; that
is, of dead heroes, or of mortal princes; but
120 A Dissertation on
this only was the city '' of the living God," or
'* of the great King," Matt. v. 35.
'* The heavenly Jerusalem." This is added
still to shew more expressly what the city of the
living God here meant is : a city indeed of
*' righteousness and peace/' Heb. vii. 2. Rev.
xxi. 27. Psal. cxlvii. 14, whence the earthly
Jerusalem had its name: but not the earthly
Jerusalem itself, the ** uncontinuing city," which
they knew, and which he exhorts them to leave,
chap. xiii. 13, and of which many of their an-
cestors had been citizens ; but the heavenly one,
or the Jerusalem coming down from heaven,
Rev. xxi. 2, which, He says, " we seek as a
city to come," Heb. xii. 14, where the ttox/-
Tsy/xa of believing Jews and Gentiles is, Phil,
iii. 20. And by St. John's describing this city,
as he does, Rev. xxi. 1, we may see, it is the
very same that was foretold by the prophets,
and expected by the Jewish nation ; namely,
** a city of sapphires and precious stones," Isai.
liv. 12. Tob. xiii. 16. Heb. xi. 10. Nor is this
heavenly city to be built on any spot of this
present earth ; but in an heavenly country, or a
country from heaven ; namely, Canaan, become
the garden of God, according to the predictions
of the prophets ; where ** instead of the thorn
shall come up the fir-tree, and instead of the
brier shall come up the myrtle- tree," Isai. Iv.
13, " and when even the desert shall rejoice and
Heb, xii. 22—25. 121
Mossom as a rose ; when it shall blossom abun-
dantly, and rejoice with singing ; and when
the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the
excellency of Carmel and Sharon ; when they
shall see the glory of the Lord, and the excel-
lency of our God," chap. xxxv. 1,2,*' and
when there shall be no hurting or destroying in
all His holy mountain," chap. vi. 10, Ixv. 25.
This is the city, and this the country, which
will take place at ** the restitution (or reno-
vation) of all things" (to their original blessed
state), and of which " God hath spoken, by
the mouth of all His holy prophets, ever since
the world began," Acts iii. 21. See Rev. xxi.
5. This is, in other prophetic words, " the
mercy," which God raised up Christ, as an horn
of salvation in the house of his servant David,
" to perform to the fathers (Abraham, &c.) in
remembrance of His holy covenant," Luke i.
72, 73 (Troir\iav be Xa\ou/ue»' ev toIs reXeivis.
VOL. 111. I
130 A Dissertation on
and who were the first Christian Synedrion, or
great council ; consisting of the apostles and
elders, in contradistinction to the brethren'
(who were all full of the Holy Ghost, and
probably prophets and teacher^, such as Judas
and Silas, Acts xv. S2); and who are men-
tioned as thus contradistinguished from the
brethren, and as met together to consult and
debate of an affair of great importance to the
church,^ Acts xv. 6. 23. And I apprehend,
that the reason why the apostle says, " and to
the spirits of just men made perfect," is because
in the paradisaical state the bodies of just men
will not be perfected ; they not being to receive
their celestial, glorious, spiritual, and incorrupti-
ble bodies, till the end of the paradisaical (and
which I think is but an animal) state; when
they are to enter on that which is most properly
their celestial and spiritual state, and shall be
translated to the third heavens.
Finally ; you are not come to Moses (who,
though ''the faithful servant of the Lord," yet
offended at Massah and Meribah) *' the media-
tor of the old covenant," Gal. iii. 19, 20, who.
' The Cambr. Ms. is ovtcs TrXripeis Tn'evfxaTos aylov. That
shews they were of the CXX, and therefore called urbpes
rjyavfjievoi, ver. '29. Such prophets and teachers are men-
tioned, Acts xiii. 1.
'^ See Episcop. Ilor. Hebraic.
Heb. xii. 22—25. 131
after lie had been up in the mount with God,
came down again, and sprinkled the blood of
the beasts which he had slain, on the people,
Exod. xxiv. 2, 3. 12, to the purification of their
flesh, ver. 5 — 9, but to *' Jesus, the Righteous,
the Son of God, the Mediator of the new (and
better) covenant; by whose blood ye are
sprinkled from an evil conscience," Hebr. x. 22 ;
a blood, " that speaketh better things than (even
that of) righteous Abel" (the first sacrifice to
malice and envy), which cried for vengeance.
Gen. iv. 10, while Jesus prayed for forgiveness
for his murderers, when His was spilling upon
the cross, Luke xxiii. 34, and who is since risen,
and ever liveth to make intercession for His
people, and to dispense the blessings of pardon
and peace to them. Now that we shall come
to the Mediator of the new covenant, in the
paradisaical state of the 1000 years' reign, is
plain ; since it is the illustrious and happy state
of the Mediator's kingdom, Dan. ii. 44, 45.
vii. 13, 14. And Jesus promises to him that
overcometh, that '* He will grant to him to sit
down on His throne, as He overcame, and sat
down on His Father's throne," Rev. iii. 21.
And this promise must relate to the paradisaical
state. For in the truly celestial state, at the
consummation of all things, Christ is to "give
up all power to God, even the Father, that so
He may be all in all," ] Cor. xv. 28.
132 A Dissertation on
I flatter myself, from what has been said
imder several of the particulars of the text,
which have been here explained, that the
reader is by this time almost ready to concur in
opinion with me, that the state described by
them, is neither the present state of the gospel,
which obtained when this epistle was written,
nor yet that in which it will be wound up at the
consummation of all things ; but a paradisaical
state (at the restitution of all things to their
origfinal state ** in the new heavens and the new
earth),'' which will take place between the two
other. However, to convince him more fully
of this point, without giving him the trouble to
look back to what has been said under each
of those particulars, it may not be improper
to gather those broken considerations together,
and to lay them before him in one short view.
'' Mount Sion, the city of the living God,
the heavenly Jerusalem, the innumerable com-
pany of angels, the general assembly and church
of the first-born," which are the five first parti-
culars (either considered in their expression, or
in their opposition to the things that occurred
at giving the law), cannot signify the present
state, or the truly celestial state : nor, if they
signify the present state, could the Hebrew
Christians have been said, in any tolerable sense,
to be come to the two last of them.
**The spirits of just men made perfect, Jesus
Heb. xii. 22—25. 133
the Mediator of the new covenant, and the
blood of sprinkling," which are the seventh,
eighth and ninth particulars, do not agree to the
truly celestial state. But all these, namely, the
five or three first, and the three last, as well as
the sixth (which indeed may belong to all),
agree well with the paradisaical state, and
therefore must all be supposed to belong to it.
III. Every one that reads the text, that I
have been explaining, will presently observe,
that the order, in which things are represented^
ver. 22 — 25, seems to be strangely disturbed
and perplexed. It has been hitherto thought so
little to be accounted for, that I do not re-
member any critic or commentator who has so
much as attempted it. That excellent Scripture-
critic, Dr. Clarke, to support the sense he has
given to the text, has quite broken the order of
it ;' which shews he wanted a true key to it.
But a general observation that I have made, and
■ See Dr. Clarke's Sermon on this text, vol. iv. The
order, in which the Doctor discourses of these particulars is,
I. Mount Sion and the city of the living God, the heavenly
Jerusalem, as a royal city. II. The rest of the particulars,
of which he discourses, as the constituent members of that
city: 1. God the Judge of all. 2. The Mediator of the
new covenant : and then gives a reason why the Spirit is not
mentioned ; which, if it had been a good reason, might shew,
that the Mediator would not have been mentioned neither*
134 A Dissertation on
the explication I have given of each of these
verses, will easily let us into the reason of the
order which the Apostle observes here; and
will at the same time help to convince every one,
that duly considers it, that what I have given
as the interpretation of the verses, cannot be
very remote from the sense of the author of
them. The observation I refer to is this : that
the description the Apostle makes of this para-
disaical state, is by way of opposition to the
most majestic circumstances that attended the
giving of the law. From thence it is, that the
particulars, by which he describes **the heavenly
inheritance" (which, he says, the Hebrew
Christians were come to), are ranged in the
order they are ; precisely answering to the or-
der in which the most remarkable particulars
occurred at the giving of the law. This will
For there will be no more occasion for the Mediator in
heaven than for th^ Paraclete. 3. The innumerable com-
pany of angels. 4. The spirits of just men made perfect,
namely, in heaven, where yet no unembodied spirits ever
were, or shall be, 5. The general assembly and church of
the lirst-born, which are written in heaven. Whereas the
order of the text is nine, or, if you will, six particulars : and
of those the Doctor's first under his second general head is
the Apostle's fourth ; the Doctor's second is the Apos^tle's
ninth ; the Doctor's third is the Apostle's second ; the
Doctor's fourth is the Apostle's seventh; and the Doctor's
last is the Apostle's fifth.
Heb. xii. 22—25.
135
appear by setting those down as they occurred
in order of time and place, in that history, on
one side ; and the particulars, as they occur in
this text, on the othei' : only taking the liberty
to reduce the nine particulars, mentioned by the
Apostle, to six, for the greater perspicuity.
Things in the order of Time
and Place in which they
occnr at the Giving of the
Law, Exod. xix — xxv.
1. Mount Sinai in the
wilderness; one of the worst
spots of this earth in its
state under the curse; far
behind any city, particularly
the earthly or uncontinuing
city of the earthly Canaan
(out of which yet the Chris-
tian Hebrews are exhorted
to go, Heb. xii. 13, 14), as
much as that excelled the
cities of any dead heroes, or
mortal kings.
2. Twenty thousand an-
gels, at the giving of the law,
forming the thick darkness,
the fire, the tempest, the
earthquake, the thunder, the
lightning, the sound of a
trumpet, and the chariots of
God, Psal. Ixviii. 17, 18.
Things in the order of Place
in which they occur in the
Text; namely, Heb. xii.
22 25^
1. ** Mount Sion in the
city of the living God," the
heavenly or abiding Jeru-
salem (to come, Heb. xii.
14), to be fixed in Canaan,
become an heavenly coun-
try ; far excelling the earth-
ly Jerusalem in the earthly
Canaan, and even the first
paradise itself; that being a
garden without a city.
2. '' Myriads (or an
innumerable company) of
angels :" being, as Daniel
reckons them at this very
time (in his style, the time
when the *^ fourth beast
shall be given to the burning
flame," and an " everlasting
dominion shall be given to
one like the Son of man,
and to the saints," chap. vii.
13, 14. 27), *' a thousand
thousand, and ten thousand
times ten thousand," ver.
10.
136
A Dissertation on
3. The whole congrega-
tion of Israel assembled at
the foot of Mount Sinai
(Exod. xix. 17. Deut. ix.
10), whose names were all
written afterwards in the
land of Canaan ; in order
to their receiving an inhe-
ritance by lot, as though
they had been all first-born,
Josh. XV — XX.
4. God's Angel, or Re-
presentative, descending on
Mount Sinai, as Governor
of the Israelites, in order to
give the law, Psal. Ixviii.
17, 18, compared with
Eph. iv. 9, and in some
cases judging (and punish-
ing) them immediately. See
Numb. XV. 37, 38. xvi. 31
—50.
5. Moses, Aaron, Na-
dab, and Abihu, and seventy
of the elders of the children
of Israel, going up into
some part of the mount,
seeing the Lord God of
Israel (the Shecinah of the
Old Testament); and eat-
ing and drinking in His pre-
sence (the first Synedrion or
great council of the Israel-
ites), while the people were
kept at a distance, Exod.
xxiv. 1, 2. 9, 10, II.'
3. '* The general assem-
bly of the first-born (heirs
of God) whose names are
written in heaven."
4. God, the Governor
of all men, " both Jews
and Gentiles," judging the
saints, and dwelling with
them in paradise, becoming
*' their God (or King),
and they becoming His peo-
ple," Rev. XX. 41. xxi. 3 ;
and, at the end of a thou-
sand years, judging the
wicked. Rev. xx. 11 — 15.
5. " The spirits of just
men made perfect," by the
greatest communication with
God ; namely, by the illu-
mination of the Spirit (the
true Shecinah of the New
Testament) ; particularly
the CXX : consisting of
the '* apostles and elders"
(who had the greatest por-
tion of the choicest gifts of
the Spirit), composing the
first Synedrion, or great
council of Christians (dis-
* TheOth, 10th and 1 1th verses should follow the 1st and 2d, and
so make the 3d, 4th and 5th : and then that which now stands
the 3d verse should be the 6th ; the 4th should be ihe 7th; the
6th should be the 8th ; the 6th the 9th ; the 7th should be the
10th; the 8th the 11th; and that which is now the 12th should
follow; and so on, as they now stand, to the end of the chapter.
That there is such a transposition, and that this is the way to set
Heh, xii. 22—25
la?
6. <* Moses, the faithful
servant of the Lord" (yet
offending at Massah and
Meribah), the mediator of
the old covenant, Gal. iii.
19,20, sprinkling the blood
of the beasts that he had
slain on the people, Exod.
xxiv. 5 — 9, to the purifica-
tion of the flesh, Heb. ix.
13.
tinct from the brethren),
met together to consult.
Acts XV. 6. 23, though the
brethren are present at the
debate, and afterwards join
in the resolution that was
taken, ver. 12. 22, 23.
6. " Jesus, the Right-
eous, the Son of God, the
Mediator of the new (and
better) covenant,'^ by whose
blood (spilt by the imitators
of Cain, 1 John iii. 10—13)
" we are sprinkled from an
evil conscience," Heb. x,
22, "and whose blood speaks
better things than (even)
that of (righteous) Abel,"
that fell a sacrifice to Cain,
the first child of the devil,
1 John iii. 10 — 13.
IV. The exhortation couched in all this long-
connexion, and in these passages thus explained,
both as to their meaning and their order, is this :
Live by faith ! the faith that I have described,
and of which I have given you such illustrious
examples, chap. xi. and xii. ; and then you will
nqt, by preferring your ease and security to
your heavenly inheritance, lose it, through a
like contempt of it as Esau formerly shewed of
his heavenly inheritance, and of that birthright
which was the pledge of it. But, on the other
hand, being so much more fully informed of the
it right, will evidently appear to any one that reads tliat chap-
ter; and may farther appear by the order in which these par-
ticulars are ranged in this text.
138 A Dissertatmi on Heb. xii. 22 — 25.
particulars of your heavenly inheritance, and so
much better assured of possessing it, than any
of your ancestors ever were ; particularly on
seeing that the grandeur and glory of that state,
in which you are to have your inheritance, will
so greatly exceed the most majestic circum-
stances that appeared at the giving of the law;
and without any of that terror which mads the
most majestic circumstance at the giving the
law ; I say, on all this fuller information and
assurance of these several particulars of your
inheritance, you will undoubtedly endure the
contradiction of sinners, in some measure, as
Jesus, the Director and Rewarder of your
Christian course, did (who had the joy, that
was to be His recompense, immediately set be-
fore Him, as you have in some sort yours) ; and
will at least most assuredly hold out full as well
as those heroes of your nation did, who bore
great trials, in hope of this inheritance ; though
they only saw it indistinctly, and afar off: es-
pecially, since God has not yet called you " to
resist unto blood," as He has Jesus, and many
of that cloud of witnesses which encompasses
vou.
LETTERS
BETWEEN
LORD BARRINGTON AND DR. LARDNER,
ON SEVEUAL OF
THE SUBJECTS OF THE PRECEDING ESSAYS.
LETTERS, &c.
Lord Barrington to Dr. Lardner.
Becket House, Dec, 18M, 1727.
SECTION I. — Lord Barrington compliments Dr.
Lardner on his candour and penetration.
Rev. Sir, — ^I am very much obliged to you
for the objections you have proposed against the
Essay on the Dispensations of God to Mankind;
having been hitherto very much in the way of
thinking that runs through that Essay : not only
as to the method in which the author appre-
hends revelation in general should be consi-
dered, but in the main as to what he savs about
the several dispensations of God to mankind.
As I have wanted an objector, therefore, to
shew me where I was in the wrong, or to con-
firm me if I was in the right, by seeing that his
objections would not hold ; so I cannot wish
142 Oti the opinions of the Patriarchs and
for a better than yourself. Your great abilities
instead of suffering you ever to mistake the
question, enable you to discern every weak part
that is brought to support it. Your modesty
makes you propose the strongest objections
rather '' in the method of inquiry than of argu-
ment." Your candour and equity leads you to
profess a great value for the treatise, which is
to be the subject of your criticism ; and your
undeserved esteem for me will have it '- that it
is from me you are to expect a satisfactory
answer." The sentiments you entertain of the
book and of me, together with your known
talents and dispositions, insure me all the in-
struction that can possibly arise from a corre-
spondent on the weighty subject that is before
us.
SECTION II. — On the opinions entertained hy the
patriarchs and prophets respecting a future state.
You allow with the author " that God had
all along a view to the great design of the
Gospel dispensation, and that the spiritual and
heavenly blessings, to be bestowed through
Christ Jesus, were intended and included in the
curse pronounced on the serpent, the blessing
oi Shemy the " promise made to Abraham, and the
kingdom of David." — But you think the author
goes too far, when he imagines, ''that any
Prophets respectmg a future state. 143
of these persons were led to the thought of any
spiritual or heavenly blessings ;" though you
also own, that as low down as the later pro-
phets, and after them, it is likely good men had
such thoughts and expectations.
I have been for about five or six months past
in part of your opinion : for I have thought
the author went too far in supposing, that either
God gave intimations, or that good men were
led to the thought of heavenly blessings, be-
fore the revelation of Jesus Christ. But I still
think, there were plain intimations of spiritual
blessings and of a future life.
That I may open myself fully to you, I own
I have been for these five or six months past of
opinion, that from the fall to the time of Christ
there was no revelation of the heavenly happiness
after life ; that is to say, of the being translated to
the third heaven, where God is represented as
on a throne, where Christ is, and where the
blessed angels are ; or of a resurrection in a
spiritual, immortal, powerful, glorious, celestial,
body. But yet 1 think God gave plain intima-
tions to the patriarchs before Abraham, and an
express revelation to him, of a resurrection to
a future immortality. But I now witlial sup-
pose, that all that the patriaixhs before Abra-
ham expected, was a resurrection to some such
state as the garden of Eden: and that God
expressly revealed to Abraham, that he and his
144 Mystical senses ofScri'pture condemned.
seed, that is, such as should imitate him in his
faith and obedience, should be raised up to enjoy
Canaan for an everlasting possession,
SECTION III. — Lord Barrington advocates the me-
thod of the Caraites, and condemns mystical senses of
Scripture,
I own that as far as the author has given a
larger sense of any text either in the Old or
New Testament, than the words in the con-
nexion they stand do express, in support of
any thing he has said, he fails in proof. I am
against all mystical senses of Scripture. I am
a Caraite for the letter of Scripture, and that
alone : understood, however, not barely in the
grammatical, but in the critical sense of the
place. When we leave the letter of Scripture,
as I have now explained it, for any other mean-
ing, I am sensible we launch into a boundless,
unfathomable ocean, without any compass or
rudder to steer by.
I take it for granted, however, when I say
this, that you will not expect such letter of
Scripture, as one ought, in case the part of
Scripture I am considering was a system of
doctrine : but such letter of Scripture as may
be expected from a short history, written by a
Hebrew leader for the instruction of the people
he led, and with the main facts of which they
were well acquainted by tradition before. I
On the expressioiZy " Son of God ^ 145
must desire you would take the trouble to cast
your eyes on Essay, p. 368 — 371, where my
sense of this matter is expressed fully. I promise
myself, that you will not think this hint unbe-
coming of a C^r^iYe writing to a Caraite, Such
I take you to be. If 1 did not, I should hope
for little from this correspondence.
If therefore the letter of Scripture, as thus
explained, fails our author, every thing foils him.
But I cannot entirely say the same, if there
are not facts to support his sense of the letter
of the Xext, Yet I acknowledge that, on ttie
one hand, it will be a great prejudice against his
scheme, if there are no such facts; as, on the
other hand, that it will be a very great confir-
mation of his scheme, if there are. The proba-
bility therefore of his scheme will rise the higher,
or sink the lower, in proportion to the passages,
vrhere an expectation of future happiness is ex-
pressed either more clearly or more obscurely; or
to there being no such passages to be produced.
SECTION IV. — On the sense in which the expressions
'* Son of God " and ** likeness of God " are to be tinder-'
stood.
Adam undoubtedly knew, that God had
formed him, though it was but out of the dust
of the earth. This we may be assured, since
Moses could not know it as a historian, but only
yOL. III. K
146 On the expression, '^ Son of God"
by tradition from him : and it is plain that
Moses writes the history of Genesis in the cha-
racter of a historian, and not in the character
of a prophet, or of one that received his ma-
terials by revelation from God ; as if St, Paul
received his gospel from Christ ; or as St, John
received his revelations from Christ, the Angel,
or the Spirit ; when he was ordered to write the
things which he had seen, and the things that are,
as well as those, that should be hereafter. Rev. i. 1.
X. 19. Adam could not but know, that God had
given him dominion; since God expressly and
immediately blessed him with it. Gen. i. 28. If
He had a glory for a garment of dignity, and as
a badge of His dominion. He could not but see
that He had it : and that He had it, I think will
appear highly probable, from this consideration,
that we find it to be the garment of all the sons
of God, either by creation, adoption, or gene-
ration : and that it is a garment suitable to so
high and near a relation to the God and Father
of glory, who is Light, and dwells in it, I must
also beg you will turn your eye to Essay,
section iii. page S98, and to the texts quoted, pp.
402 — 405. I must likewise desire you to add to
those texts Phil. xi. 7, 8, vihexe form of God,
is opposed to the form of a servant, or a slave;
i. e. of one that is not entitled to an inheritance.
I apprehend St. Paul expresses this notion Rom,
viii. 3, by Christ's being in the likeness of
as applied to Adam before the fall. 147
SINFUL FLESH : OF else I do not well see what
that expression means. Besides, Adam found
that God was so gracious, as to put him in pos-
session of the blissful garden of Eden, and to shew
him the tree of life there, as that which would
make him immortal ; though, in his constitution
and frame, he was only taken out of the dust, and
consequently made a mortal, corruptible man;
or, as St. Paul expresses it, a living soul, by the
breath of life, that God had breathed into his
nostrils. By all this Adafn must know from the
nature of things, that God was his Father : having
been, as we see, produced by God, so as to have
no other father ; having been made in His image
and likeness, and that both in his moral per-
fections, and also in such of his natural perfec-
tions as may be considered as Adam's inheri-
tance as a Son of God. And that this is the
meaning of the expressions in Genesis, of his
being made in the likeness of God, in His own image,
does not only appear from the expressions
themselves, and the explication that is given of
them, Gen. i. 26. 28; but from the use that is
made of likeness and image in the farther sequel
of the history ; for Moses acquaints us that
Adam begat Seth in his own likeness, after
HIS image, Gen. v. 3. Can it be supposed, that an
accurate writer, as Moses is, when he had said,
that God created man in His own likeness, after
His image, Gen. i. 26, 27, and here says, that
148 On the sense in which Adam is said
Adam begat Seth in his own likeness, after
HIS image, did not set this expression in oppo-
sition to the other ? Nothing less appears from
the words being so exactly repeated. He must
therefore design to acquaint us, that Adam,
having lost the image and likeness of God,
could not for that reason beget Seth after that
image and likeness, or an heir of dominion, of
glory, as a badge of it, the possession of a bliss-
ful garden, and of the tree of life ; but in his
own likeness after his image ; a miserable, mortal
man like himself; an heir of his toil, care,
sorrow, and death. That Moses \YOw\d give us
to understand this by these expressions, appears
to me still the more likely, considering how it is
introduced. He gives us an account, chap, iv.,
of Abel's being murdered by Cain, and of Cain's
descendants; and then adds, v. 25, that Adam
knew Eve his wife again, and that she bore him a
son, and called his name Seth ; for God, said she,
hath appointed me another seed instead of (right-
eous) Abel, whom Cain slew. He then gives us
an account of Adam's descendants by Seth,
chap, v., from whom the children o^ Israel came ;
and says, This is the book of the generation of
Adam, (For C^rm was not reckoned as his seed,
but Abel, and Seth, whom God gave him, as a
seed instead of Abel ; as Shem was afterwards
Noah's : and it was said to Abraham, In Isaac
shall thy seed be coiled,) In the day that God crea-
to have been formed ** in the likeness of God,'' \ 49
ted man, in the likeness of God made He him,
niale and female created He them, and blessed theniy
and called their name Adam, in the day when they
were created. Thus it should be stopped. The
stopping in our version has somewhat disturbed
the sense. And Adam lived an hundred and
thirty years, and begat a son (viz. Seth) in his
OWN LIKENESS, AFTER HIS OWN IMAGE, and
called his name Seth, If one only considers
what Moses had said, Gen. i. 26, 27, can one
think that by this expression here he only means,
that Adam " had begot a man in miniature ;" espe-
cially when one considers all this repetition,
and that in a concise and accurate historian ?
Or rather, can this serve for any thing less, than
to let the children of Israel know (for whose use
he writ this history), lest they should have for-
got what he had said, chap. i. 26, 27, that
though they came from Seth, who was the son
that God gave Adam instead of righteous Abel,
and not from wicked Cain ; yet they were not
to have too high a notion of their ancestor;
for that Seth was but a mortal and miserable
man like themselves, begot by Adamin his own
likeness, after his own image, since the fall ;
and not in the likeness of God, and after His
image, as Adam was created ; and as he would
have begot Seth, as well as his other children,
if he had preserved his innocence? And to this
sense of Adam's begetting a son after his own
150 On the sense in which Adam is said
image, St, Paul plainly alludes, when he speaks
of Christ as the second Adam, 1 Cor. xv. 45, and
says, V. 44, That as tve have borne the image of
the EARTHY Adam (viz. in a mortal body); so
we shall bear the image of the heavenly.
And Rom. viii. 29. So that St. Paul must have
understood this phraseology of Moses in the
sense I have here given of it. And from this
use of likeness and image in GenesiSy it is, that,
in my opinion, image of God signifies almost
every where in the New Testament " the repre-
sentation of God's dominion;" as 1 Cor. xi. 6.
2 Cor. iv. 4. Coloss. i. 15. See also Ecclesias-
ticus xvii. 1. 10.
Thus Adam's sonship is strictly founded in
the nature of things. And Luke iii. ult. is
brought but as a short and additional proof of
that which flows from the circumstances of
Adam's creation ; and by which therefore St.
Luke's expression is to be explained. I agree
with you that St. Luke's expression immediately
shews, "That whilst others, mentioned* in
Christ's genealogy, had a parent, Adam came
immediately out of the hand of God." But
there must be more implied ; for if every thing
that came immediately out of the hand of God
was a son of God, not only the inanimate and
brute part of the creation must have the honour
of that relation ; but even the wicked angels, and
Adam, immediately after his fall. The ex-
to have been formed *' in the likeness of God,'' 151
pression therefore must imply, that Adam, who
was immediately produced by God, did also
resemble God in his moral excellencies, and in
some of His high natural perfections, and in the
glory and bliss that results from them ; or, in
other words, that he had an inheritance from
Him, becoming a son of God. And from hence
it is, that a son of God in Scripture ever after-
wards implies a resemblance of God in His
moral image, and in dominion, and (unless it be
in the case of princes, which indeed stops there)
in the farther inheritance also of glory, bliss, and
immortality. Thus, you see, I found my notion
oi Adam's filial relation to God, in the nature of
things, in the expressions in Genesis, and in the
constant use of the expression son of God in
Scripture, as well as in the text quoted from
the third chapter of St, Luke's gospel in parti-
cular. And though this long train of reasoning
may look here like a far-fetched thing ; yet it
only looks so, from our having now lost the
language that prevailed then, and was then well
understood: — I mean our not understanding
what is meant by the terms God, i??iage, and
likeness of God ; from which all this train of
reasoning flows : and flows, as reasoning ought
to do, when it is to be drawn from a concise
and accurate history ; especially when it records
what God has said, who must ever be supposed
to speak with point and emphasis : — and in that
152 On Adam's sonship,
method of reasoning I may venture to assert,
to one so knowing in the Bible as yourself,
that, on a careful examination, it will be found,
I have the New Testament writers for my ex-
ample, when they make quotations from the
Old: though they have been treated for this,
by such as look but superficially into the Bible,
as only allegorical and cabal istical reasoners ;
that is, as not reasoning at ail. Indeed all
writers argue thus from a bottoming notion, as
Mr. Locke calls it, when they argue either from
history, law, or any other art or science. What
arguments, for example, will not the best lawyer
draw from the crown of the realm's being an im-
poial crown, or from the law's being every Eng-
lishman's inheritance ?
As from what I have said, I flatter myself,
you will allows that Adam could not but know
he was a son of God before the fall ; so I cannot
but think you will agree with me, that he could
not but know, that by his sin and disobedience,
he had lost that relation. He finds himself
stript of the garment of a son of God, is naked,
is afraid of God, runs away to hide himself,
receives a curse from Him, (which must include
the total removing of the blessing, and more,) is
at last clothed with the skins of beasts, instead
of the glory he had had for a garment of dignity
and dominion, is driven out of Paradise, and
sees the way to re-enter it effectually barred
On * * the seed of the woman,'' 1 53
airainst him. Here could be little room left for
thinking himself a 50/2 of God, ''The prolonga-
tion of the threatening" was but a reprieve: it
was no pardon ; nor could not reinstate him in
his former privileges. The prolongation of his
life in sorrow, toil, care, and in the expectation
of death, is his sentence, and pronounced on
him as such (though indeed a milder one than
he might have expected) ; but sure his hopes
could not arise from his sentence.
SECTION y, — On the hopes entertained by Adam
from the promise respecting ** the seed of the woman"
Yet I do not doubt but that Adam had
hopes that God had restored him to His favour.
Wisdom X. 12; and that though he was to
die, yet he should be recovered from death, by
the sentence that God had first pronounced on
the serpent; viz. that one or more of his de-
scendants should break the head of that very
serpent, that had through his subtlety brought
death upon them. For it is said, the seed of the
woman shall break thy head, Genesis iii. 15.
Adam must now know, that it was not a literal
serpent that had deceived his wife and him.
He would have other notions of God, than to
think He would erect a tribunal against a beast.
He would by the sentence know that he was a
seraph, if he did not know it before : and, by
J 54 The hopes entertained by Adam from the
this time, that he was a fallen seraph, or Satan ;
Job i. 7. ii. 1. Zach. iii. 1 ; or the devil, Wisdom
ii. 2. 4 ; or the destroyer, as he is called. Exodus
xii. 23. Psalm Ixxviii. 49. Numbers xvi. 41. 48,
compared with Wisdom xviii. 22, with 1 Cor.
X. 10, and with Rev. ix. 11. What could he
then understand by breaking his head, but
destroying his stratagem ? or rather that which
his stratagem brought about? That was death.
And what could destroy the product of that
stratagem, but a recovery from death? And he
could not but be confirmed in his hopes of that
recovery, by every favourable circumstance,
either in the process, or in the sentence, against
the three offenders ; or in what followed after,
in providing garments for two of them.
It would be natural for Adam, when he hoped
for a recovery from death to immortality again,
by the mercy and favour of his heavenly Father
(at first by creation, and now by adoption), to
expect, that though the way to the garden of
Eden was barred against them in this life, that
way would be opened to it, when he should
recover from death. This was most likely to be
his thought, upon his supposing that God de-
signed to recover him from death, unless he had
had a more particular and distinct revelation ;
and that was the hope that it was most natural
for him to propagate to his posterity ; if they
would become like to God, in truth and purity,
promise respecting *' the seed of the woinaii.'' 155
justice and mercy ; and not imitate the serpent,
who was the father of malice and lies.
Nor could Adctm fail of being confirmed in these
hopes, and of confirming his posterity in them,
by seeing the exemplary punishment inflicted on
Cairi, in a farther curse upon him, and the
ground that he should till ; which he would
naturally consider as part of the lot and portion
of being one of the seed (i. e. one of the imi-
tators) of the serpent, as Cain was ; and with
whom they were to be at enmity. He would
therefore, upon the whole, conclude that they
were not the sons of God, but the children of
God's great enemy, and that therefore a recovery
from death to Eden would never be extended to
them.
And what tut this hope could make the
children of Seth, in the second generation, begin
to call themselves by the name of the Lord, as their
Father, in opposition to the wicked family of
Cain, that was cursed? and about the sixth
generation, to go (as it should seem) by no other
style, than that of the so?2s of God; in contra-
distinction to the sons of Cain ; who, despising
and rejecting the inheritance of the sons of God,
were out of His adoption, and so thereby t/te
sons of men, Genesis vi, 2.
156 On the t?^a?islatio?i of Enoch,
SECTION VI. — On the inferences made hy good men
from the translation of Enoch,
Forgive me, if I cannot agree with you, that
no certain or general conclusion could be made
from Enoch's translation in behalf of good men.
But I will trouble you the less on this head ;
because I cannot express my sense of it better
than it is, Essay, section xii. page 455. And
thither therefore I will take the liberty to refer
you. I will only add, that I am confirmed in the
opinion, that good men drew consequences in
their own favour from that case, by finding them
express their expectations after death, by saying
that God would receive them : the word used
Genesis v. 24, and Enoch was not : for God took
(received) him. And of Elijah, (2 Kings ii.
9, 10,) Psalms xlix. 15. Ixxiii. 24, where the
same Hebrew word is used. And to this pur-
pose, says the author of Ecclesiasticus, xliv. 16,
that Enoch pleased the Lord, and was translated^
being an example of repentance to all gene-
rations. But I think he could not have men-
tioned him as an example of repentance, if good
men could not have deduced their future reward
from his translation. I suppose they would
imagine he was carried to Eden.
The Arabic version renders Heb. xi. 5,
"translated into Paradise;" and The Zohar
says, that, *' by this translation, God assured all
On the sacrifice of Noah, 157
the faithful of the resurrection and eternal life."
And it is very remarkable that God took Enoch,
the seventh from Adam, when he was but 365
years old, which was not half the life of Lamech,
the shortest liver of all the antediluvian patri-
archs that left this world after Adam, on whom
the sentence of death had immediately passed,
and had all the rest of the ten patriarchs, except
Noah (that is to say, seven of them, witnesses
of his translation). His translation therefore
seems by these circumstances, as well as other
considerations, to have been designed by God,
as a fact of which all were to take the greatest
notice, and from which it was designed they
should form the most hopeful inferences. There
seems also to have been a tradition among the
Jews, that Enoch prophesied of the last judg-
ment, Jude 14: if he did, he prophesied of the
resurrection, by a necessary implication, and of
a future state of rewards and punishments.
SECTION VII. — On the hopes conceived bi/ Noah from
God^s acceptance of his sacrifice, and on the sense in
which the word " God" is to be understood in the book
of Genesis,
I do not doubt but Noah would conceive
greater hopes of adoption than he had be-
fore, from God^s smelling a savour of rest in his
sacrifice^ and for his sake promising, not only
158 *' Gody'' signifies a fatherly Governor.
that He would not drown the earth again, nor
curse the ground any more, or any longer ; but
blessing him and his sons, and bidding them be
fruitful, and multiply, and have dominion, I think
he would, with the traditional hopes he already
had from Adam, take this salvation from the
deluge, this partial removing of the curse, and
this restoration of part of the original blessing, as
an earnest of the removal of the whole of the
curse, and the restoring the whole of the original
blessing ; though he would no doubt think it
must be after death, to which he saw all men
subject.
This hope Noah expresses in blessing God as
the God of Shem. To prove that God ever
signifies a father, or a fatherly governor, where it
occurs in Genesis, or till Exodus iii. 7, 1 must refer
you to Essay, p. 393. 454. 499. 502. After Exod.
iii. God often signifies king, or a kingly governor
(and in the Old Testament, a king or kingly
governor over the Israelitish nation), as well
as father, or fatherly governor: and which of
the two it then signifies can only be learnt by
the context. The text you quote, Psalm cxlvii.
12 — 14, refers to God as a king ; and therefore
is well explained by protection and other bless-
ings and felicity of his people. And father^
when predicated of the Supreme Being in Scrip-
ture, includes in its notion the giver of an in-
heritance, to which his son had no right, but by
On our Lord's argument with the Sadducees, 1 59
his gift. Adams inheritance as a son of God
by creation had been dominion, enjoyed in a
body covered with a glory, in a blissful garden,
and with the means of immortahty; and such
would he teach his posterity, that it was likely
therefore for them to receive from God as their
father by adoption. And that would therefore
at least enter into their notion of God, unless
there had been something added to limit and
restrain it.
This notion of God was farther explained and
confirmed to Abraham (Shem's descendant) in
God's saying to him that, i?i blessing, He would
bless him (see Essay, p. 502 — 512); that in him
all the families of the earth should be blessed ; that
He would be his ej^ceeding great reward. Genesis
XV. I ; that He counted his faith for righteousness
(see Essay, p. 454— 502) ; and lastly, in styling
Himself his God, Genesis xvii. 7, 8 (see Essay,
p. 393 — -454) ; and giving him Canaan for an
everlasting possession : which to a mortal man,
that knew he must die, w^ithout any possession
in it, Genesis xv. 15, must be by a resurrec-
tion.
SECTION Vlll. — The precise bearing of the argument
between our Lord and the Sadducees stated,
I do not take Christ's arguments against the
Sadducees to turn either upon the expression, 1
160 On the condition of the soul in a separate state.
AM THE God of Abraham ; or upon God's being
CALLED the God of Abraham ; since the three
Evangelists use both these expressions, and like-
wise a third, in relating this argument. It
cannot therefore depend on any of them. Mat-
thew says, "Eycii £][xi b Oslg ; Mark says, ^Eyd^ 6
Seos\ and Luke, cog T^eysi Kvpiav rov Gsov *Afipad[JL,
The force of the argument therefore must lie in
the word God; signifying father or giver of an
inheritance in immortality by a resurrection : as
it must signify, since He is said to be the God
oi Abraham after he was dead, who received no
possession of an inheritance from God whilst he
lived. I think the force of the argument is
rightly explained. Essay, p. 483 — 505 ; and if it
be, it fully proves that our Saviour used the
word God in the sense I have explained it. And
it is as plain the Jewish nation understood God
as the Giver of an inheritance, or the Sadducees
would never have been silenced by this argu-
ment. What, I suppose, led them to deny the
resurrection, was, that they saw God had given
the children of Israel an inheritance in Canaan
in this life. But still this, I suppose, would not
have led them to deny the doctrine of the resur-
rection without their immoral lives, their opposi-
tion to the Pharisees, as a sect they extremely
envied, (and as is natural in such cases) to every
thins that was theirs : their oral law, their
cabal istical interpretations, and their supers ti-
The soul unconscious in a separate state, 161
tious observances ; and even so far as to run
quite into the contrary extreme. But all this to-
gether, indeed, led them to overlook the ever-
lasting POSSESSION OF Canaan promised to
Abraham, though it was impossible for him, who
had died without it, ever to receive it, but by a
resurrection ; and therefore, when our Saviour
did but point this out to them, they were entirely
silenced.
I think the author of the Essay has shewn,
that the question between our Saviour and the
Sadducees was about the resurrection, or revi-
viscence of a man, and not about the separate
existence of the soul, vol. ii. 503 — 6.
SECTION IX. — That the consciousness of the soul
depends on its union with the body.
But really, Sir, I am surprised that we talk of
the separate existence of souls, as we do. That
souls exist after the corruption and dissolution
of the grosser parts of our bodies, is certain ;
for they are in the hand of God, and reserved
in Hades: or, as it is expressed. Job xxxiv. 14,
they are gathered or return unto God: (viz.
the spirit or breath of a man). But to say,
that they are conscious of misery or happiness,
is not only without good ground froui reason or
Scripture, but in consequence destroys revela-
tion.
VOL. III. L
162 The soul unconscious when
We find ourselves a compound being of organ-
ized matter, and of something that thinks, and
animates, and acts this organized matter. We
find, when the organized matter is indisposed,
that we do not think ; as in deep sleeps, in faint-
ings, in lethargies, and apoplectic fits ; and that
when we recover, we think again. Is it not rea-
sonable to conclude, then, that, when the body is
wholly and irrecoverably indisposed by death,
the mind does not think? and that if ever it
is to think again, it must think as it did here ;
that is, when it shall be reunited to its own
body, and not in a separate state ?
And Moses informs us, that manivas created in
this manner. For he acquaints us, that God
formed man (or man's body) out of the dust of
the ground y Gen. ii. 7 ; and so in the sentence,
God says, that he should eat his bread in the
sweat of his brow, till he returned to the ground,
out of which he was taken ; for that he was dust, and
to dust he should return. Gen. iii. 19. All that
distinguished him from the ground, besides the
different modifications of his body, was thebreath
of life, that God breathed into his nostrils. And
so man became a living soul. The body was first :
and a breath breathed into that body, to animate
it afterwards. It was no separate pre-existent
soul, and is not like to be in a state of separate
action after the body goes to the dust; but, as
it was designed at first to animate that body,
separated from the body. 1 63
is most like to be totally inactive, till it ani-
mates its own body again. I should think the
doctrine of a pre-existent, and of a separate
state of souls (I mean of a separate state of
rewards and punishments) to be much more
consistent than the doctrine of a coeval forma-
tion of body and soul, and a separate state of
souls. If I therefore was for a separate state of
rewards and punishments, I should be for the
pre-existence of souls.
SECTION X. — The opinion that the soul is conscious
in a separate state is inconsistent with the notion of a
long life, or death.
Thus far I have examiaed the notion of a
separate state of reward sand punishments, with
our own experience, and with Moses' history of
the creation of man. Let us, if you please,
examine it a little by the notion of long life, or
death. The fir&t is ever represented in Scripture
as a blessing. But how that will be consistent
with the notion of a separate state, I do not see.
I can less see how it will consist with the Scrip-
ture notion of death. How will that, which was
the first threatening, stand on the supposition of
this separate state ? Can it on this supposition be
a threatening? or, when executed, a punish-
ment? What is death ? Nothing but the soul's
being separated from the body, to act in a sepa-
164 The soul u7iconscious when
rate state ? Where is the sting of death, then ?
What is it — only the few hours' or moments'
pangs of death ? Sometimes, when men die, they
are not felt, and men literally fall asleep. Where
is the punishment then in that case? Or suppose
it costs us pangs to ^ei rid of this prison, and to
escape, and be for ever free, are we not put in
a better condition by death ? and is it not worth
the struggle to be eternally loosed from this
confinement? Unless therefore we add eternal
death, from our systems, to God's threatening, I
cannot see that death could be any threatening
at all. But if dying be ceasing for ever to be
conscious and to enjoy ; then indeed the threat-
ening is tremendous. So aS'^. Paul understands
it : for he says, as by man came death , so by man
came the resurrection from the dead. And as in
Adam all died, so in Christ shall all be made alive.
And therefore all would have lain under the
power of death, according to his assertion, had
it not been for Christ.
SECTION XI. — The reasoning in the foregoing section
confirmed by considerations drawn from the translation
of Enoch and Elijah, and the restoration to life of the
widow's son, Lazarus, S^x.
Farther, what is translation, if the soul acts in
a separate state ? Could it be any privilege to
Etioch or Elijah to carry a body out of this
separated from the body. 165
world, if the soul can act without it? But if the
man that dies must not only taste death, but
see corruption (which is always represented as
somewhat different from death, the grave, and
Hades), under which the man does not act, and
must lie under the power of it a ^reat while,
then indeed it is evident, that translation must
be a great privilege ; since, without losing con-
sciousness and enjoyment for a moment, Enoch
and Elijah were immediately translated from
living and enjoying in this world, to live and
enjoy in a better.
Upon the supposition of a separate happy
state of souls, how hard, Sir, will be the case of
those that were raised from the dead so as to die
again ? as the son of the woman of Sarepta, and
of the Shunamite ; the dead man that revived
at touching the bones of the dead prophet ; the
widow oi Nain's son (whom Christ raised, out
of the greatest compassion); Lazarus, Christ's
friend ; the saints that rose and went into the
holy city after Christ's resurrection; and Dorcas:
for it was then no less than being fetched from
a happy state of reward, to such a wretched
state as this must be, in comparison of it. And
to be raised so greatly to their disadvantage,
and (as in several of these cases) out of the
greatest compassion, good-will, and the ten-
derest friendship, is altogether incredible. It is
much we hear nothing of the expostulations
166 The soul unconscious when
and complaints of the raised ; nor any account
from them of what passed in the separate state.
Can we suppose our Saviour, at least, to gratify
the affection of a widow for her son, so much at
his expense ? But it does not want your sagacity,
to see how this difficulty ceases, if, as in my
way of thinking, they were all raised from
sleep : for they then had so much more con-
sciousness and enjoyment added to their exist-
ence, as they had days and years in this life
again. And every one must see, in that case,
that it was a privilege to the parties themselves,
as well as to their relations and friends.
SECTION XII. — The consciousness of the separate
state inconsistent with the idea of a future judgment,
and with the idea of '* sleep" under which that state is
represented in the New Testament.
Besides, we are to be tried at the last judg-
ment. I see no previous particular judgment
in Scripture. That seems to have been contrived
to eke out the doctrine of a separate state of
rewards and punishments. And are we then,
Sir, to be tried for any thing, but what we have
done in the flesh ? One would not only wish,
but hope, from Scripture, that our trial would not
outlast this life. But are we to be tried for every
thing that was done in the flesh, for the short
term of about fourscore years, and to liave no
separated from the body, 167
trial at all of all that passes in the separate
state for so many hundred ages? And yet it is
sufficiently evident from Scripture, that the
separate state can be no state of trial neither.
But inconsistencies crowd in too thick upon me
here, to allow me to trouble you farther on this
head.
Nor is this notion of a separate state barely
inconsistent with the Scripture notion of long
life (translation, the resurrection of some to this
life again), and with the general notion of the
judgment, as considered separately in Scrip-
ture ; but also with these, when they are con-
sidered together, and joined also with the
resurrection : for the representation of the Did
and New Testament is, that a man (the com-
pound being) is born, lives, dies (or sleeps), and
rises (or awakes) : some first, whilst the rest of
the dead do not live ; and those others afterwards ;
and are sentenced to eternal life, or to the
second death. It is unnecessary to quote texts
to such a master of the Bible as you are.
Besides, how comes death to be called sleep, if
the soul wakes? or we to be described in a
state of forgetfulness and inaction ? whereas, if
the soul is conscious in a separate state, it can
never forget : and the only agent in man never
ceases to act, imagine, and devise for one single
moment.
163 The soul unconscious when
SECTION XIII The preceding argument confiimed
by several passages in St, Paul's Epistles, and in the
Revelation,
If, from comparing the doctrine of a separate
state of rewards with the representation of
things both in the Old and New Testament, we
compare it with some particular texts in the
New, we shall find St. Paul arguing, 1 Cor. xv.
18, that if there is no resurrection, then they
that are fallen asleep (even) in (or for) Christ
are perished. Though it is not to be supposed,
that those Corinthians, who doubted of a resur-
rection, doubted also of a future state. He also
speaks, v, 19, of the disbelief of a resurrection,
as having hope in Christ only in this life. The
Spirit pronounces the dead in the Lo7^d blessed;
because they rest from their labours, Rev.
xiv. 13. Would this part of their blessedness
have been mentioned, if they were immediately
to have had their reward ? And so also the only
reason Paul gives the Thessalonians why they
should not mourn for their friends, that were
fallen asleep in Christ, as the heathen did, who
had no hope, is, that God would bring their dead
friends again with Him, 1 Thess. iv. 13 — 18.
Yet the heathens talked of a separate state.
But this was so airy a notion, in St. Paul's
opinion, that he speaks of those who had it as
being without any hope at all. And xvithout
separated from the body, 169
Iwpe, is with him one of the characters of the
heathen state, as much as being without God in
the world, Eph. ii. 12. Indeed St. Paul would
be thought a miserable comforter now-a-days.
We can go land's length beyond him, and give
mourners the strongest consolation, by telling
them; '' That the souls of believers at death do
immediately pass into glory ;" that we should
not be so selfish therefore as to wish them here
again for our sakes ; since we must " be so cruel
to them, if we do, as to wish them back again
from Christ and out of Paradise. Whereas we
ought, like true friends, to be thoroughly joyful;
since our loss is their gain," and they, by leaving
us, become immediately happy.
If that was the case of the thief on the cross,
as well as of our blessed Saviour Himself; and
if perhaps St. Paul knew it to be his case too;
What then ? I should only still consider these
as excepted cases, like Enoch's (perhaps Moses')
and Elijah's under the Old Testament; and
from which no consequence to this purpose can
be drawn.
But if that were the general case, and the
martyrs and confessors are to have the blessed-
ness of the first resurrection, and are to live on
earth (as by the xxth of the Revelations one
would think they are), shall I not quite tire you
with questions on this head, if I ask, what that
blessedness can consist in, but the taking their
1 70 The soul unconscious when
souls from the third heaven, where they see the
glory of God, and are with Christ and the
blessed angels; to be reunited to their body,
and dwell here with men again ? This sure they
would scarce think a blessedness.
SECTION XIV. — The consciousness of the separate
state inconsistent with the scriptural description of the
happiness of the reunion of the soul and body, with the
account of the second death, and with the duties of
Christianity.
But why do I ask this question about the first
resurrection, which some suppose will be the
blessedness, comparatively, but of a few ? For if
we suppose a separate state, what will the doc-
trine of the general resurrection of the just, which
was all the hope of good men under the Old
Testament, and more clearly of good men under
the New, the great discovery of Christ to the
Gentiles, come to, but a doctrine useless in
itself,' and destructive of all the rest of revela-
tion ? For if we can be conscious and happy
without our own bodies, what use can a body
be of to us when we revive? It can add nothing
to a spirit capable of acting without it. Nay,
what is more, it must certainly be a clog to it ;
let it be as refined, as active, as powerful, as
glorious, and as heavenly, as it may. To be
pure spirit would be the greatest perfection, if it
separated fi^om the body, 171
could be attained. But perhaps that is the sole
prerogative of God Himself. I take this to
contain the force of the strongest objection that
the heathen philosophers ever made against
^Christianity ; namely, that what it proposed as
the hope of Christians, was their dread ; and a
punishment instead of their reward ; for that
when once they got rid of the clog of their
bodies, they never desired to be imprisoned in
them again. I do not see how it is possible to
answer it, on the supposition of a separate state
of reward .
But the notion of a separate happy state of
souls strikes at revealed religion yet deeper. It
does not only confound the doctrine of the
resurrection, but leaves little room for anv reve-
lation : that is to say, for any farther discovery
from God, than what we can attain by the help
of our reason. That discovers to us our duty,
and a future state of rewards and punishments.
But indeed it could not certainly tell lis what
that future state should be. On the other hand,
the future state was left in great uncertainty and
under great difficulties, whilst it was only sup-
posed to be enjoyed by unembodied ghosts and
shades. This might do well in poetical fictions
and romances; but was too airy to have satisfied
a thorough philosopher. Besides, we could not
be certain how long the future state would last ;
or that it would not be a state of trial. Nor
172 The soul unconscious when
could we see, how we should have bodies again
prepared for us, if we could have seen that they
were necessary to our future happiness. But if
a separate state be so improbable, and that it is
most probable that we can only act as com-'
pound beings, how seasonably does the doc-
trine of a resurrection come to our aid ? since,
as we cannot enjoy without a body, we, by the
revelation of this doctrine, know, that we shall
have a body again ; and that, instead of this vile,
weak, animal, earthy, mortal body, after the
first Adam (who was an earthy man, and but an
earthy lord), we shall have a spiritual, glorious,
active, powerful, immortal body, like to the
glorious body of the second Adam, a quickening
spirit, and a heavenly Lord : that we shall not
be subject to a state of farther trial ; that the
second death shall have no power over us; and
that we shall ever be with the Lord, and see
Him as He is. This is the doctrine of the
resurrection of the just, that is contained in the
New Testament. Our immortality, as described
there, rests on the incorruptibility of our raised
bodies. The immortality of the soul is a no-
tion not to be met with in Scripture ; and this
gives our future reward all the clearness, cer-
tainty, and value, we could wish ; and therefore
is that, which is highly worthy of God to reveal
to us ; and is therefore also that, which, it is
reasonable to think, He would reveal.
separated from the body, 173
Allow me to trouble you with one observation
more, before I conclude this head of argument.
The first death, according to Scripture, is a
man's going to the grave, and to Hades, and
seeing corruption, till the body comes out of
the grave, and the soul from Hades, and is re-
united to an immortal body ; at which time the
dead man enters into the possession of eternal
life. The second death, according to Scripture,
is the casting the dead, that are raised to con-
demnation, into the lake which burneth with fire
and brimstone, Rev. xxi. 8 (and where the
devil shall be tormented day and night for ever and
every ch. xx. 10). This account of the second
death is in some measure analogous to the
Scripture account of the first death. The first
being a falling into a natural sleep, in order to
revive again ; whilst the second is a violent
death, an everlasting destruction, from which
there is no recovery. But does the account of
the second death look at all like a description
of a separate state of punishment? And yet I
believe you will readily agree with me, that it
is not at all likely there should be any separate
state of reward, if there be no separate state of
punishment.
If the notion of immediate happiness after
death in a separate state comports ill with seve-
ral of the other doctrines of Scripture, I will beg
you once more to consider, whether it will com-
1 74 The sold unconscious in a separate state.
port better with some of the duties of it. Perhaps
it may be said, that we shall be kept from doing
direct violence to ourselves, from the fear of
losing the rewards both of the separate and of
the raised state. But will not this notion in-
sensibly tempt us to be less careful of preserving
life; and less patient under the pains and inquie-
tudes of it? lam sure I have seen unhappy
effects this way of some good men's persuasion
of their immediate happiness after death. Impa-
tience for death is a vice in a good man ; though
it may be considered as the excrescence of a vir-
tue. But if patience of life could be supposed to
be consistent with the notion of immediate happi-
ness after death, I should yet think it is hardly
consistent with the composure in dying, which
seems to me to be most proper and becoming
for those that are just falling asleep. The hope
of immediate happiness will beget rapture. But
rapture and composure cannot well consist to-
gether.
I think I may now venture to say, that the
notion I have been contending for, viz. that as
we act now, as compound beings, so it is the
law of the great Author of our beings, that
whenever, and as long as we act, we should
act as compound beings, is all along supposed
in revelation. Without this supposition, we
shall neither see clearly the end of a revelation
from God, nor of the revelation in particular,
Abraham hoped to possess Canaan for ever, 175
which He has given. Believers' not having this
in their eye has brought in more confusion into
divinity, than any thing else that perplexes that
sublime part of knowledge. And, by the way,
he that reads the Essay, &c. must suppose the
author to have had this thought ever present to
his mind, or I think he will not thoroughly
understand him.
SECTION XV. — Abraham expected to be raised to an
everlasting possession of the land of Canaan.
But to return to Abraham (after this long
though necessary digression) ; I do not suppose
that by God's blessing him, becoming his exceeding
great reward, reckoning his faith for righteousness y
or being his God, he understood, that after
death he should rise in a body of glory, and of
the great activity and power that the New Tes-
tament ascribes to the raised body, and in which
we are to enjoy heaven. No; here I think the
author mistaken. Any body may see he treads
tenderly in this place, like one that did not feel
his ground firm under him. Though I suppose
he saw no better ground to stand on, no more
than others who went before him. But I take
it for granted, that, with the traditional hopes
Abraham had from Adam, he now also ex-
pected to be raised up to have tlie land of
176 Abraham hoped to possess Canaan for ever,
Canaan for an everlasting possession, from the
farther revelations God saw fit to give him.
It is most likely, that the place of Eden, in
so long a tract of time, and by the alterations
the flood had made, was unknown and lost.
Besides, if it had been known, it was but a gar-
den ; incapable of holding a family like Abra-
hanis, that was to become a great nation. Gen.
xii. 2, like in number to the sand of the sea, or
the stars of heaven. It was therefore fit to point
out to him a country, that should be given to
him, and his seed, at their resurrection, for
an everlasting possession. What land should that
be, but the land God had directed him to, and
had now shewn him ? Gen, xii. 1 ; a land, even
as the GARDEN of the Lord, Gen, xiii. 10 ; a land,
which God is afterwards said, to have espied for
his children, the delight of all lands ; a land
flowing with milk and honey.
Now this land, God says, He gives to Abraham
for AN EVERLASTING POSSESSION, xvii. 8 (He
had before promised it to him and his seed for
ever, chap. xiii. 15), which I apprehend, was
no more than giving him and his seed an inhe-
ritance in Canaan in fee simple, as our lawyers
would now express it. But it was but an in-
heritance in fee simple in reversion, and a rever-
sion in fee simple in an inheritance in Abraham;
though Abraham himself was never to be in pos-
session of it. Abraham understands it so, chap.
Meaning of the covenant with Abraham. 177
XV. 2 ; for he says, What wilt thou give me, seeing
I go childless, and the steward of my house (who
must in all propriety be my heir, as a son of my
house, or born in my house, if I have no child)
is this Eliezer of Damascus ? so Abram also fully
explains it, v. 3 ; and in that sense the word of
the Lord, that came to him, makes a reply, v.'4,
saying, This (Eliezer) shall not be thine heir, but
he that shall come out of thy own bowels ; and
then tells him, that his seed, viz. by that one,
that was to come out of his own bowels, should
be in number as the stars: v. 5, after telling
him, that he shall have numerous descendants,
God adds, V. 7, I have brought thee out of Ur
of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it:
i. e. to have thyself an inheritance in reversion
in it, and for thy seed to inherit it from or
through thee. Abram then asks, v. 8, whereby he
should know that he should inherit it? in which
the word inherit has still the same sense, viz.
of a reversionary inheritance : as also farther
appears by God's answ^er ; which in sum is
this: "That by that time the iniquity of the
Amorites should be full, which would not be till
the fourth generation, his seed should come into
Canaan again, and have the land from the river
of Egypt unto Euphrates : that, in the mean
time, he should go to his fathers in peace,
and be buried in a good old age (all which
demonstratively shews, that his inheritance was
VOL. III. M
1 78 Abraham was promised, and expected,
to be no more than a right of inheritance in re-
version), and that his seed should be strangers
in a land that was not theirs, be slaves, and be
slaves groaning under hard oppression ; but that
God would punish that nation at length, and
that his seed should go out of that land with
great substance." In that same day (in the even-
ing) God makes a covenant with (or promise to)
Abraham, saying, unto thy seed have I given this
land: which He then describes very particularly
by two great boundaries, and by the several
nations that then inhabited it. And this very
covenant or promise, Nehemiah long afterwards
observes, that God had performed, because he was
righteous, Nehem. ix. 8 : that Nehemiah refers
to this covenant appears by his naming six of
the nations that are mentioned here; and
under which, those, that he does not mention,
are comprehended. And this I find is generally
the description of the land when the first pro-
mise is referred to. See Exod. iii. 8. 17. xiii. 5.
23. xxxii. 2. xxxiv. 11. Josh. ix. 1. xxiv. 11.
But after all this, when Abraham was ninety-
nine years old, just before he was ordered to
circumcise himself, and the males of his house,
and just before he obeyed that order, God
APPEARED to him. Gen. xvii. 1 : whereas in the
15th chapter, where God had given him and his
seed but a reversionary inheritance in Canaan
after 470 years, it was only the word of the
an everlasting possession in Canaan. 179
Lord that came to him (by some voice, or in
a dream, or vision). At this time God tells him,
that He appears to him, to make a covenant
with him, v. 2, or an everlasting covenant, as it
is called, v. 7. The introduction is very solemn
and majestic: I am the Almighty God, v. 1.
The condition of the covenant is, walk before me,
and be thou perfect (or upright). ** Walk as in my
sight, as Adam did, till sin made him fly from
me, and endeavour to hide himself; and as
Enoch did afterwards, whom I received; and
Noah after that, whom I saved." This con-
dition at least implies the most sincere and
exemplary piety. And when the promise
comes to be fully explained and particularized,
it is ; And I will give unto thee and to thy seed
after thee the land of thy pilgrimage, all the land
o/" Canaan for an everlasting possession.
God had made several promises, that is, absolute
promises, to Abraham before ; at least without
any condition expressed : one of which is called
a covenant, Gen. xv. 18 ; as a promise sometimes
is in other texts of Scripture. But here the
condition was fully expressed, and the promise
was made, to speak as the terms of our law, on
a consideration ; which is always thought to
give strength to any claim that may afterwards
be made in virtue of the promise. The promise
is, to give unto him, and to his seed after him, all
the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.
180 Each successive promise to Abraham
This must be something different from all that
God had promised Abraham before. God can
never be supposed to appear to Abram ; make
this solemn preface to what He is going to say ;
tell him, that He is come to make an everlasting
covenant with him; which is in general to be a
God unto him, and to his seed after him (which
He had never promised him before) ; insist on
a condition ; at last enjoin him a painful rite as
the sign and seal of this covenant ; and all this
at last in reality end in nothing but what He had
promised in the former chapters.
SECTION XVL — Each successive promise to Abraham
added something in substance and clearness to the
preceding,
I hope to make it evident that there is no
bare repetition in any one of God's revelations
to Abraham (in the xiith, xiiith, xvth, or xviith
chapters of Genesis), of any thing that God had
said in a former. The revelations in these
chapters ever contain something new, and
something more than had been plainly revealed
before. God's revelations to Abram are, as all
his others, like the shining light, that groweth
more and more unto the perfect day. Why
should not we then suppose that to be the case
in this appearance in the xviith chapter ? espe-
cially when it is considered in all its circum-
added something to the preceding . 181
stances? Indeed we cannot suppose it to be
otherwise, if, besides what I have just now men-
tioned, we consider the words of this promise,
and compare them with all the other words
mentioned Gen. xii. 7. xiii. 15. 17, and xv. 7.
16. 18: for possession is a very different thing
from an inheritance in fee simple in reversion ;
which was all (as I flatter myself you will
agree with me) that God had particularly and
plainly promised before. And an everlasting
possession is very different from an inheritance to
him and his seed for ever : since a man may have
an inheritance in him, to himself, and his seed
for ever; and yet he himself never have any,
much less an everlasting possession in it. And
this is plainly pointed out here by God's
promising Abram this everlasting possession in
the land, that was theland of his pilgrimage ;
or the land, wherein he was a stranger. And
so the author of the epistle to the Hebrews
understands it, Heb. xi. 8, by telling us, that he
sojourned in a land that he should afterwards
RECEIVE FOR AN INHERITANCE ; which WOrd
inheritance stands there for an inheritance in
possession. Besides, that this was a different
promise from any promise that God had made
him before, appears, not only from its being a
conditional one to Abram, but to all his seed;
which the other was not. This also shews, that
THE SEED, to whom this promise is made,
ISi The meaning of the covenant
means a different thing, from the seed men-
tioned when He promises the inheritance of
Canaan to his seed, or to him, or to both, /or ever
(Gen. xii. 7. xiii. 15. 17. xv. 7. 16. 18); and
therefore must mean his spiritual or faithful
seed, or his imitators, who are called seed, or
children in Scripture, as well as descendants ;
and particularly Gen. iii. 15. iv. 2 : and that
this promise was made to his imitators, appears
from hence : that the promise, being on the
condition of walking before God, and being per-
fect^ could not ensure to such of his descendants
as did not perform that condition.
SECTION — XVII. In what sense God promises Abra-
ham '* to multiply him exceedingly J^
This is farther evident by God's promising
him, that He would multiply him exceedingly, v. 2 ;
which God explains to be so exceeding, that
whereas He had before told him He would make
him become a great nation (ch. xii. 2); now he
tells him He will make him a father of a mul-
titude OF nations; which in the natural way
Abram was not, at the writing this history, nor
since, as far as we know, as I shall have another
occasion to observe to you presently : the mean-
ing therefore is, that he, like a father, shall trans-
mit the everlasting possession of Canaan to a
multitude of nations ; or to all the families or na-
tions of the earth who should imitate him in faith
with Abraham in Genesis xvii. 183
and obedience. Or, if you please, that a multitude
of nations should receive the everlasting posses-
sion of Canaan through him (as their father ; or) as
his children, if they imitated him in walking
before God and being upright ; but not have the
honour to receive it immediately from God, as he
had received it. So also St, Paul interprets it,
when he says, that God, foreseeing that He would
justify the Gentiles, through faith, preached the
gospel before unto Abraham, saying. In thee shall
all the nations of the earth be blessed, Gal. iii. 8.
God adds, that therefore his name should not
be called Abram, but Abraham : and says farther,
V. 6, and I will make thee ea^ceeding fruitful ;
and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall
come out of thee. The sense of which is, ^' not
that I would not have you think, that by this
new and everlasting covenant, with you as the
pattern, and with all that imitate your piety
(and who are your seed in the best sense), I
mean to cancel the promise I have already
made to you about your natural descendants :
no ; I will add even to that promise ; instead
of cancelling or diminishing it. For whereas I
have only hitherto promised you to make of
you a great nation ; now I promise you to make
NATIONS OF YOU (which was accomplished in
the Ishmaelites, Edomites and Israelites descend-
ing from him), and that kings shall come out
of you." This I think is the sense of v. 6. But
184 The meaning of the covenant
as he adds, v. 7, 8, " My main intention now
is to establish a covenant, or make it firm with
thee, and to that spiritual or faithful seed of
thine which I began to speak of, v. 2. 4, 5 ; on
the condition I have just now mentioned.
"And my covenant in general is, that I will
BE A God (or father or giver of an inheritance
that may be worthy of that relation) to thee and
to thy seed after thee» And hereby thou mayest
further understand what I meant, when I first
appeared to thee, and said. Gen. xii. 3, that in
thee all the families of the earth should be blessed:
for now thou seest, that in the covenant I make
with thee, the promised blessing is to be derived
from thee, by those that shall imitate thy piety,
in all generations, v. 7. But that I may be yet
more particular, and that thou mayest fully un-
derstand what that blessing was, ch. xii. 3, and
the full import of the promise which I have
now made thee, of being a God to thee and to thy
(spiritual or faithful) seed after thee, 1 will give
unto thee, and to thy spiritual or faithful seed
after thee, the land of thy pilgrimage, or wherein
thou art at present a stranger, without any pos-
session ; even all this land for an everlasting
POSSESSION. And thus will I be their God
as well as yours." Natural fathers cannot secure
a son more than a right in reversion ; sons being
mortal, and liable to death before their fathers :
but it would be altogether unbecoming the
with Abraham in Genesis xvii. 185
bounty and munificence of our heavenly Father,
even when He becomes such by adoption only,
not to secure every adopted son of His an ever-
lasting possession. So the author of the epistle
to i\\e Hebrews ?iVe pro-
mise, he is mentioned by Mary, and not Abra-
ham or Isaac,) and that of His kingdom there
should be no end, v. 32, 33. Here was a revela-
tion of Jesus' universal and everlasting kingdom :
and Alary in her hymn naturally connects with
this everlasting kingdom the helping His servant
Isi^ael (in his low and distressed estate), in
remembraiice of his mercy, (taken from Psalm
xcvi. 3, which is a prophecy of the universal
kingdom of Christ,) as He spake to our fathers,
to Abraham and his seed for ever: namely, Gen.
xvii. 7, 8, when God promised the everlasting
possession of Ca?iaan to Abraham and his seed
for ever. Mary therefore^ with great propriety
and beauty, connects the everlasting possession
with the everlasting kingdom, the one being to
be enjoyed under the other.
3. Zacharias refers to this everlasting posses-
202 Further proofs that Abraham
sion yet more expressly in his hymn ; when he
blesses the Lord as the God of (or giver of an
everlasting possession to) Israel: who hath visited,
and redeemed His people, (by Jesus, as He did
formerly by Moses,) and hath raised up an horn
of salvation (i, e. in prophetic language a king of
salvation) in the house of His servajit David, as
He spake by the mouth of His holy jjrophets, ever
since the world began ; that we should be saved
from our enemies, and the hands of all that hate us
(Gen. xxii. 17, and hereby), to shew mercy to
OUR FATHERS. (** Promised," as Mr. Jos. Mede
observes, is the insertion of our translators.)
And to remember his holy covenant, viz. in Gen.
xvii. (and which He confirmed by) the oath
that He sware to our father Abraham, the father
of all the faithful, Gen. xxii. ; that He would grant
unto us (viz. His faithful seed, &c.) ; and even of
those Gentiles, who sit in darkness, and in the
shadow of death, as well as to us (Jezvs), whose
feet are to be guided into the way of peace, v. 79.
So that, on the whole, Zacharias praises God in
this hymn for visiting his people by a King, raised
up according to the everlasting covenant with
David, in order to perform the promise of the
everlasting covenant with Abraham,
hoped to possess Canaan for ever. 203
SECTION XXIII.— r//e hymns of Mary and Zacha-
riaSy though they seem to refer only to the everlasting
possession of Canaan, have couched under their obvious
meaning an allusion to the heavenly inheritance.
This I hope may serve to account entirely
for the main thoughts, as well as the expressions
of these hymns ; and may shew, that Mary and
Zacharias had not their minds running on a
temporal kingdom to be then set up, as the
author of the grounds insinuates, but on the ever-
lasting possessio7i of Canaan, under a king that
was to reign over all nations, as well as the
Jews, in righteousness (through the remission of
sins), as well as in peace, according to the most
sublime discoveries made to the patriarchs and
prophets. And though we are not to expect in
these hymns any clear expression of the dis-
tinct discoveries made by Christ ; yet the Holy
Ghost, who filled Mary and Zacharias when
they uttered them, has couched them so, as that
the heavenly inheritance may be taken in, since
the everlasting possession of Canaan is to issue
in it. Thus these rapturous hymns take in the
great end that Jesus came into the world for ;
and was therefore the most fit to be the chief
matter of them. And thus our Saviour under-
stood the covenant made with Abraham in the
xviith of Genesis in His argument with the Saddu-
cees ; for though He builds it on Gvd^s caiiinQ-
204 Further proofs that Abraham
himself, in Moses history, the God of Abra-
ham, &c. ; yet he plainly refers to Gen. xvii. 7, 8;
that being the only place where God hath
covenanted to be the God of Abraham and
HIS SEED : which God there explains by adding,
that He will give Canaayi to him and his seed
FOR AN everlasting POSSESSION. And with-
out a reference to Gen. xvii. 8, our Saviour's
argument would have concluded only in favour
of the resurrection of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob ; but not for a resurrection of the just.
This everlasting possession is also what St, Paul
refers to, Rom. iv. 13, when he speaks of a
promise God made to Abraham, that he should
be the heir of the world: by which word I
take Canaan to be understood ; x6(rii.og may as
well signify Canaan as olxovixivr). As to the word
itself, olxovixivT] could not signify Canaan, but
by a figure, that carries in it a very high compli-
ment to that land. When Canaan shall be in the
paradisaical state, how much better may it de-
serve to be called xoa-fAog, than olxovixivri, in the
time of our Saviour and His apostles ; when the
nations of them that are saved s'-liII walk in the
light of its metropolis, and the kings of the earth
shall bring their glory and honour, and the glory
and honour of the nations, into it? Rev. xxi.
24. 27. Further, 7co(T[jLog often signifies in the
New Testament the Jewish state. The Jewish
state could scarce be thought to take place till
hoped to possess Canaan for ever, 205
the Israelites came to a settlement in Canaan,
They were but a camp before. Koa-fjLos then
may by an easy figure signify the land where
the Jewish kingdom and constitution took place,
as in other texts of the New Testament it signi-
fies the constitution that took place in that
country. I think St, Paul also refers to this
covenant, when he says further, that the promise
is sure to all the seed, not 07ily to that (seed) which
is of the laxvy but to that (seed) lohich is (imitators)
of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us
all (Jews, or Gentiles, that believe) ; and through
whose title, as the original heir, or grantee, we
are all to have any right to a share in that ever-
lasting possession. That St, Paul here refers to
the covenant in Gen. xvii. no body can doubt
that compares both places. The Talmud has
this question, Where has the resurrection of
the dead any foundation in the law ? The answer
is, E.vodus vi. 4, where it is said, I established my
covenant with them {Abi^aham, Isaac and Jacob) ;
for it is said with them, not with you : this it
seems was the tradition of Rabbi Simai. — When
R, Gamaliel, Paul's master, was asked by the
Sadducees, whence he could prove the resurrec-
tion of the dead, he could not silence them till
he produced Deut. xi. 21, where it is said,
which land the Lord sware unto your fathers
TO GIVE THEM.
After all I have said, I must, however, still
206 Conclusion of the first Letter,
agree with you, that '* notwithstanding faith is
the substance of things hoped for, and the
evidence of things not seen ; yet faith, in this
notion of it, does not necessarily include any
thing beyond this world ; and that, as you
justly observe, many of the instances in the xith
of the Hebrews do not go beyond it. And I
own too, that a belief of God's protection and
blessing of the patriarchs, and their posterity in
this world, might possibly have been a principle
of obedience in some cases (though I think not
in all); and that obedience, even from this
principle, might have been acceptable to God,
and might have engaged Him to bestow upon
them a happiness of a higher nature than they
expected, or He had expressly promised."
SECTION X^X.IN ,— Conclusion. The promises in
GenesiSj and the comment on them in Heb. xi. can
only be reconciled by making the former refer to the
everlasting possession of Canaan,
But though I own all this true in the nature
of the thing, and therefore that it might in some
measure have been the case ; yet from what I
have said, you will easily see, that I apprehend
this in fact was not the case : either as it is
represented in Crenesis, or in the comment that
is made upon it in the xith of the Hebrews
Temporal protection and felicity indeed are
Conclusion of the first Letter, 207
mentioned but as lesser matters, and in order to
the greater. But all is wound up in the ever-
lasting covenant of an everlasting possession
in Canaan: otherwise, as I have observed,
IshmaeVs temporal felicity is little, if at all, less
than Isaac's. And yet the everlasting covenant
M^as with Isaac, and in him was Abrahams seed
called, and in Jacob, and his seed afterwards:
and in his {Jacob's) seed I will endeavour to
trace this everlasting covenant, through Moses
and the Judges ; through the law ; the ever-
lasting covenant with David; the prophecies of
the prophets ; and several particular passages
up and down in the Old Testament. In the
mean time all I shall add is, that the author of
the epistle to the Hebreios says expressly, that
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob themselves expected
a better inheritance in a better country, and a
city, whose maker and builder is God ; and
which they have not yet enjoyed : and that all
the heroes of the Old Testament, and of the
apocryphal times, though they, through faith have
obtained a good report, yet have not received the
promise that was the object of their faith ; a
lower faith indeed than ours ; God having pro-
vided some better thing for us, which is the
object of our faith, that they zvithout us should
not be made 'perfect.
After a letter of so unusual a length, I am
208 Conelusion of the, first Letter,
sure I need not make much excuse for breaking
off before I have performed the promise I just
now made you. I shall trouble you soon with
the rest.
I am, Reverend Sir,
your most faithful, humble servant,
Barrington.
Lord Barrington to Dr. Lardner.
Becket House y January 3d, 1728.
SECTION 1. — Summary of the reasoning in the pre-
ceding Letter f with observations respecting Moses, the
Israelites, and David, in which the argument is pursued.
Rev. Sir, — Hitherto I have endeavoured to
shew the faith and expectations of the antedilu-
man and postdiluvian patriarchs concerning a
future life by a resurrection, and on what they
might found them : I hope I have shewn this
from passages in their own history : though 1
have endeavoured to corroborate my expHcation
of those passages by subsequent authorities, in
the Old and New Testament. And I hope I
have shewn in particular, that the faith of
Abrahanis exceeding great reward was founded
in the original promise of Canaan to him, and to
him and to his imitators after him, for an ever-
lasting possession, in all their generations : a
promise that was afterwards renewed to Isaac
and Jacob respectively in their own persons.
The promise to Abraham being the great original
promise, has called for all my diligence to
VOL. III. O
210 Moses e^vpected an evef^lasthtg possession.
explain, support, and vindicate it. But I shall
not need to give you the like trouble about
other facts and passages that follow.
I need not say any thing in particular here of
Joseph's commandment about his bones, having
had occasion to take notice of it before. The
next person of distinction in the Israelitish
story after him is Moses, and he seems to have
had tiiis everlasting possession of Canami in his
eye, when he refused to be called the son of
Pharaoh's daughter; leaving the Egyptian court,
to visit his brethren : though he could not have
any thing else at that time in view, that could
stand in competition with all the glory of that
kingdom (save the afflictions the children of
Israel underwent there), besides the recompense
of reward (i. e. Abraham's reward, Gen. xv. 1,
viz. the everlasting possession of Canaan), So
the author of the epistle to the Hebrews i\x^\\\
infers from this fact, chap. ii. 24. And what other
recompense of reward can we trace in the
sacred history, that he could have had in view,
previous to this fact ? After this, the facts that
shew this expectation, are the valour and reso-
lution in getting and keeping the possession of
Canaan, the pledge of the possession of that better
country, which they had in their eye. This at
least seems to have been the thought of the
author of the epistle to the Hebrews, in this
chapter, v. 32 — 35: for it was through faith
The nature of the covenant of "■ life'' at Sinai. 211
of a promise, which Gideon, Barak, Sampson,
Jepthah, David, &c. have not received (v. 39),
that he says, that they subdued kingdoms, wrought
righteousness (even rewarded with life), out of
weakness were made strong, waxed valiant injight,
turned to flight the armies of the aliens.
Between Moses' leading the children of Israel
out of Egypt and their taking possession of
Canaan, under Joshua and the Judges, God
erected the children of Israel into a kingdom at
Sinai ; condescending Himself to be their tem-
poral or earthly King. The promised reward
to their obedience was to be life. Not long life
barely, as is promised in some places; but life :
that is, life without death; that the term life
imports : and I think the author of the Essay
has fully proved that no less can be meant by
it, vol. ii. 410. Life therefore, as promised by
the law, was living on, without dying. But this
life was to be but terrestrial animal life ; which
indeed was a suitable promise for an heavenly
King, condescending to be an earthly prince, to
make to the perfect obedience, that any of his
civil subjects should pay to a perfect civil law,
the full meaning of which I take to be the same
as if God had said to them : " I have promised
all Abraham's spiritual seed an everlasting pos-
session in the paradisaical Canaan after death.
Gen. xvii. But if you, whom I now take to
be my people, and am carrying to give you the
212 The nature of the covenant of " life " at Sinai.
possession of Canaan in its present state, ac-
cording to my promise to yonv fathers, Gen. xv.
and other like places ; if you, I say, become
perfectly obedient to the laws I now give you,
you shall live on to possess and enjoy Canaan
in its present state, till you come to the ever-
lasting possession of it in its paradisaical state;
which you will be entitled to only as the spiritual
seed of Abraham'' But though this sort of life
was a reward fit for God, as their King, to annex
to the perfect obedience that should be paid to
His perfect law by His civil subjects ; yet the Is-
raelites soon found that they could not yield a
perfect obedience to this law. They were animal
men, fraught with appetites and passions which
led them to transgress it ; and the law forgave
no transgression. From hence this law, that
should have given life, brought death on the
Israelites in particular, by virtue of its sanction
(as the original threatening had brought it on
all), and always brought an immature death
upon them ; that is to say, it brought death on
the Israelites sooner, than it would have come
on them, as men, barely by the original threaten-
ing. This was the great flaw in this constitution ;
or, in other words, in the law, as given to such
subjects. Such an imperfect constitution shew-
ed that it was not designed to be perpetual,
and would naturally lead the Israelites to hope,
that a good Being designed some time or other,
" The sure mercies of Davids 213
to erect another kingdom over them, which
should be so constituted (or in other words),
have such a law, and such motives as to secure
life to them, as the reward of obedience ; and
that the kingdom God then erected was but
introductory to that future one. This they might
in some sort spell out from that very state of
things. See the Essay, vol. ii. 451.
But this view was opened more fully after-
wards ; for in the time of David, and after, we
see this hope of a resurrection break out in the
faith that good men had in the everlasting
covenant God made with David (called the sure
mercies of David, Isaiah Iv. 3. Acts xiii. 34).
That his line and family should not fail till it
ended in a son of his, the true David, that should
reign, by virtue of a new and better covenant,
over all Israel and the Gentiles, whose kingdom
should bring in righteousness and peace, and of
which there should be no end. See the Essay ^
vol. ii. 452. A thought that was carefully kept
alive by the latter prophets, in order to support
the hopes of good men under the threatening
state of the Jewish kingdom, under their captivity,
and under the low state of things on their
return from it. And eternal hfe has always an
inseparable connexion in Scripture with right-
eousness, as 1 have already observed to you.
Give me leave to observe to you, how the
covenant with David secures and confirms the
214 The covenants with Abraham
covenant with Abraham; and what an analogy
there is between them : God promises Abraham,
that his natural descendants should possess Ca-
naan in the state it then was : God promises
David and his natural descendants, that the
possession of Canaan in the state it then was
should be secured to Abraham's seed by David's
and his seed's possessing a throne over them :
God promises to Abraham, and to all that
should walk before Him, and be 'perfect, an ever-
lasting possession of Canaan: God promises
David and his righteous Branch, that He would
cause to bud from him a perpetual reign over the
faithful seed of Abraham in Canaan ; or, which
comes to the same thing, God promises the
faithful seed of Abraham a son of David io reign
over them for ever in righteousness and peace.
Both these are every where implied in the
promise of perpetuating the kingdom in David's
family; and in terms, Jer. xxxiii. 25, 26. Ezek.
xxxvi. 28. As the first covenant with ^^rfl^^w
was a pledge of the performance of the last, so
was also the first promise to David of his and
his seed's reigning over Israel, a pledge of
a future David (viz. his son's) reigning for
ever over Israel, 2 Sam. vii. 5 — 10. 12 — 17.
1 Chron. xvii. 4 — 9. xv. 9, 10. As the ever-
lasting possession of Canaan in its paradisaical
state by the faithful seed had for its pledge the
possession of Canaan by his natural descend-
and David compared. 215
ants; and that first in proMse^ and then in
fact, in the fourth generation : so also the ever-
lasting reign of David's Son in Canaan, in its
paradisaical state, had for its pledge David
and his natural descendants sitting on his
throne, and that first in promise, and then in
fact, for about 470 years, to the burning of
the temple. — As God calls this last covenant
with Abraham an everlasting covenant; so He
does this with David, 1 Sam. vii. 6. xxiii. 15.
1 Chron. xvii. 12. 14. Ezek. vii. 26. As
God's temporal and everlasting covenant with
Abraham was to descend to his seed through
Isaac; so God's temporal and everlasting co-
venant with David was to descend to his seed
through Solomon. As God confirms the cove-
nant to Abraham by circumcision; so God
confirms the covenant with David by the temple
built for an house for Him, as a mark of his
settled continuance and perpetual rest in the
land of Canaan, 2 Sam. vii. 11 — 17. 1 Chron.
xvii. 10 — ^15. God confirms both His cove-
nants to Abraham by swearing by his life;
and so likewise He ratifies both covenants
to David by swearing by His holiness, Psalm
Ixxxix. 35. cxxxii. 11, 12. But there is this
difference between them ; that as God's first
covenant with Abraham was absolute, promising
Canaan to Abraham's seed in the fourth genera-
tion, for Abraham's past pietv ; but his second
216 The covenants with Abraham
covenant, promising* the everlasting possession
of Canaan to him and his seed, was conditional :
so, on the contrary, God's first covenant with
David was conditional, viz. that if his seed
should ohserve His laws, one of them should
never fail to sit on his throne ; and the second
covenant was absolute ; viz. that one of his line
should at last arise, who should reign over all
the house of Israel (or all true Israelites) for
ever.
This everlasting covenant with Abraham,
promising him the everlasting possession of
Canaan^ gives Abraham occasion to worship the
Lord, as the everlasting God, Gen. xxi. 23.
And this everlasting possession promised to
Abraham and his seed, and secured by the
everlasting covenant with David, of a perpetual
kingdom over the land of Canaan, under one of
his line, gives occasion to several expressions
of the Old Testament of the like kind ; as, the
way EVERLASTING, Psalm cxxxix. 24 ; that is,
the way that will lead to Canaan, as an ever-
lasting possession, in opposition to any wicked
way, which might be in him, David, and which
shall perish, Psalm i. 6, everlasting right-
eousness, Psalm cxix. 22. 24 (or a righteous-
ness by which one may live everlastingly, viz.
in Canaan, as an everlasting possession), God's
everlasting mercy, Psalm c. 5; God's ever-
J.ASTING kindness, Isaidh liv. 8; or His ever-
and David compared, 217
LASTING LOVE, Jer. xxxi. 3 ; His everlasting
covenant, Jer. xxxiii. 37,41. Ezek. xxxvi. 36;
EVERLASTING JOY, Isaiah XXX. 10. Ixi. 7 ;
EVERLASTING SALVATION, Isaiah xlv. 17. li. 6.
8; and everlasting light, Isaiah Ix. 19, 20.
All these places point this way ; but the last
more especially : when (as the prophet says) the
people, viz. of Israel, being all righteous, and
so inheriting the land forever; the sun
shall no more be thy light by day, neither for
brightness shall the moon give thee light : But tiie
Lord shall he unto thee an everlasting light, and
thy God thy glory. Compare Rev. xxi. 23. 26.
This is the state of things that shall take place,
when God, who for the sins of his people Israel,
and their kings, hath given their kingdom to
the heathen, under the four beasts or four great
successive monarchies (except seventy weeks,
cut out of that long line of time, in order to the
birth, life, sacrifice and covenant oi the Messiah)
shall, when these times of the Gentiles shall be
fulfilled, consume the fourth and last beast,
giving his body to the burning flame: and the
Son of man shall have 2i dominion given Him by the
Ancient of days ; xvhich is an everlasting, as
well as universal, dominion ; under whom the
saints shall possess it, Dan. vii.
218 Meaning of the word ''blessedness'' in Scripture,
SECTION II. — On the occasion and meaning of
Psalm xxxii. &c.
The author of the Essay took David as an
instance of one whom God justified under the
law, to eternal life, on his being an imitator
of Abraham: he quotes Psalm xxxii. 1, 2, for
it. You except to this proof, and your excep-
tion deserves my attention : you think that
Psalm was penned on the occasion of Nathan's
message. That however seems to me at least
doubtful and uncertain. But if it was, should
one imagine that the blessedness David
there speaks of, related only to a reprieve from
death ? Blessedness in Scripture language, I think,
must signify the removing of the original curse,
and restoring the original blessing, in part or in
whole, and it must signify the restoring it in
whole, when a blessedness is mentioned ; that is
the effect of righteousness, or of not imputing
iniquity y or the reward of sincerity, or the reward
(in his language) of a mind zv it h out guile ; for that
blessedness must be life, the inseparable reward
of righteousness ; and not barely a short re-
prieve from death. And since all die, this
blessedness must include a resurrection to life ;
and so in effect *S'/. Paul interprets it, Rom. iv.
6'. 10. 13.
But though I differ from you about this xxxiid
PsabUy yet I must agree with you about Job
Occasion and meaning of Psalm xlix. 219
and the 16th Psahn : for I own my poor eyes
cannot discover any resurrection in the former,
with all the help Bishop Sherlock has afforded
us : nor can I see a general resurrection in the
latter ; for the reasons you give, however,
I think it is very fully expressed in other
Psalms as well as in Psalm xxxii. : particularly
in very clear terms in Psalms xlix, 14, 15,
Ixxiiid, and the xviith, 14, 15. But I choose to
consider the two last towards the close of my
letter : and the Ixxiiid in particular, because you
seem to me to consider that Psalm as an ob-
jection to my hypothesis. And it is but iit
that I should endeavour to answer that objec-
tion before 1 pretend to serve myself of it as
an argument.
The xlixth Psalm is composed to comfort a
good man against the fear of death, v. 5. To
do it, the Psalmist in the first place says, that
death is unavoidable : that the greatest riches
will not purchase redemption from the grave,
V. 6. 10 : that wisdom will not do it : for that
wise men die as well as the simple and the
wicked, v. 10 : but that there is still a wide dif-
ference between them ; for whilst the last think
of no other immortality than what houses they
build, or their dwelling places and lands, called
after their own names, will give them, and in
which their posterity follow their examples,
notwithstanding its manifest folly ; since it is
220 071 the hope of Solomon , Prov. iii. 18.
plain that they are laid in their grave, like
sheep (the weakest of all cattle), and that death
shall feed on them, and utterly consume them
from those dwellings, in which their pride lies ;
so, on the other hand, the upright, whom they
despised, shall have dominion (the word used
Gen. i. 26. 28, of Adam, a son of God) over
them, when they wake from death in the morn-
ing ; when God, as will be the good man's
case, will deliver his soul from the power of
hades, and afterwards receive him to Himself
as He did Enoch, Gen. v. 24, and Elijah,
2 Kings ii. 9, 10. 12 ; and to this purpose the
Chaldee paraphrase interprets this place. The
moral of the poem concludes it, v. 16 — 20,
which is, that no man should envy another
barely for his riches and prosperity ; for that it
is but shortlived; since death puts an end to it,
notwithstanding the applause the rich and the
great may meet with here ; and that a man
in honour, without true wisdom, will perish like
a beast, and never see light.
SECTION III. — Observation on the hope of Solomon,
Prov. iii. 18.
Proverbs iii. 18, Solomon says of Wisdom,
that she is a tree of life ; i. e. everlasting life to
them that lay hold on her ; alluding to the tree
of life in Eden, This I think must be the
The latter 'pro'phets allude to a resurrection. 221
meaning of Solomon here ; since he had before
just said of Wisdom^ v. 16, 17, That length of
DAYS ARE IN HER RIGHT HAND, and hi her left
riches and honour ; and that all her ways are plea-
santness, and all her paths aix peace. So, Prov.
xi. 30, where he says yet more expressly, that
the fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and he
that winneth souls is wise, (Comp. Dan. xii. 3;
and see the version of the LXX.) This seems to
be a most manifest allusion to the tree of life in
Eden ; and so Josephus brings in the mother of
the seven sons quoting this text. And though
the resurrection is not so clearly expressed,
Eccles. xii. 13, 14, as in the place I have just
now quoted ; yet it is plainly hinted there, as
the conclusion of all the reasonings of Solomon,
in that book, about every thing in human
life : which is this ; that to fear God and keep
His commandments was the whole duty of man,
*' For a judgment shall pass at last on every
work, even the most secret, whether it be good
or evil." The doctrine of the judgment must
suppose a resurrection from death, in order to
that judgment.
SECTION IV. — The notions of the later prophets con-
cerning a future life,
I think the later prophets speak of a resur-
rection to a future life, agreeably to what I ob-
222 Notion of the later prophets
served in relation to the antediluvian ^x\^ post-
diluvian patriarchs, in my former letter; and
agreeably to what I have observed in this con-
cerning Moses, the judges, the law, the everlasting
covenant with David, and several incidental
cvpressions up and down the Old Testament
(being expressions that are consequential from
these two everlasting covenants), as also in seve-
ral places of the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes :
but if we just dip into the prophetic books, w^e
shall find them speak of the resurrection more
fully and expressly than any of the former.
I will only take liberty just to refer you to
Isaiah xxv. 7, 8, and xxvi. 13, 14. 24, 25, as
w^ell known places to this purpose : one of them
being quoted by St. Paul in that view, 1 Cor.
XV. 54. But chap. li. 6. 8, the prophet speaks
of a salvation, that shall be for ever, even after the
heaven shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth
shall wax old as a garment, and they that dwell there-
in shall die in like manner : and speaks of this
salvation of some in opposition to others, whom
the moth and the worm shall consume, v. 8. I
think this text the more to the purpose, because
St, Peter seems to have borrowed his expression
from hence, when he describes the destruction
of this world by fire, in order to the new
heaven and earth's taking place, wherein dwells
righteousness, 2 Peter iii. 12, 13. Isaiah also
speaks to the then children of Israel, saying.
concernmg a future life. 223
Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and
the glory of the lord is risen upon thee.
The 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, 11th, 19th, and 22d
verses of this chapter of Isaiah should be com-
pared with Revelation xxi. 22. 27. For as
St. Peter borrows his expressions about the new
heaven and the new earth from the former
place of Isaiah ; so St, John takes his expres-
sions, Rev. xxi. from this last, the better to
describe the glory of the new Jerusalem. Eze-
kiel says still more particularly, that after he
had seen the vision of the dry bones being
covered with sinews, flesh and skin, and being
breathed upon, so as to live again, and stand
upon their feet, and be an exceeding great
army, God said to him. These bo?ies aix (or
represent) the ivhole house of Israel. And bids
him prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord God,
Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and
cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring
you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that
I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves,
O my people, and brought you up out of your
graves, And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall
live, and I shall place you in your own land : then
shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken^ and
performed it, saith the Lord, Ezek. xxxvii. 1 — 15,
16 — 28. I own all this seems to me to be a
literal description of the first resurrection to the
everlasting possession of Canaan. 1st, Because
224 Hosea alludes to a resurrection.
the expressions, v. 24. 28, seem to be those which
are used by St. John concerning the first resur-
rection, Rev. XX. 4, the state of which is de-
scribed ch. xxi. 3. 2d, Because, as the follow-
ing chapters of Ezekiel are a prophecy about
Gog and Magogs so we find a like prophecy
about them at the end of the thousand years,
after the first resurrection, Rev. xx. 8. 11. If
this be a literal description of the first resurrec-
tion, no text of the Old Testament can be more
full to my purpose. But if it be figurative, and
only signify the return of the Jews from their
captivity, considered as their graves ; yet I
think it will prove that the doctrine of the resur-
rection was a received doctrine at that time ;
or else a metaphor would never have been taken
from it to describe the return of the Jews out
of their captivity. Hosea xiii. 14, introduces
God saying, I will ransom them from the poxver of
the grave : I will redeem them from death : O death,
I will be thy plagues ; O grave^ (or hades) I will
be thy destruction ; repentance shall be hid from
mine eyes. This text. Sir, you know, St. Paul
seems to allude to, after giving us the most par-
ticular account of the resurrection of the just
that we have in all the New Testament, 1 Cor.
XV. bb : nor could he have made a more per-
tinent or elegant allusion. For nothing can
ransom from death, or redeem from the grave,
but a resurrection : and there can be no plague
Inferences from the Book of Daiiiel. 225
for death, nor destruction for hades, but immor-
tality ; and therefore St. John, after the resurrec-
tion, sees death and hades cast into the burning
lake, Rev. xx. 14. Daniel, however, speaks in
some particulars still more clearly of this matter,
Dan. xii. 2, 3, even if thexxxviith of Ezekielis to
be taken literally. But I shall do no more than
quote this text in Daniel, as I have done little
more about that in Hosea, because you acknow-
ledge the doctrine of the resurrection was suf-
ficiently understood in Daniel's time, and after.
I should think even from his mentioning it, that
it was a doctrine known before, at least such
are his discoveries as to most other points con-
tained in his books ; viz. not so much an en-
tirely new discovery of what was altogether
unknown, as a more particular and clear reve-
lation of what had not been so distinctly dis-
covered before. I should from hence therefore
conclude, that though Daniel spoke of the
resurrection more clearly than the former pro-
phets; yet that, however, it had been the known
doctrine before. Indeed it had been so all
along; having been first (to recapitulate what I
have said) only couched in these terms, God
(i. e. Father), sons or children of God, likeness and
image of God,^ in opposition to the sons of men
* These terms came to be used, and to the purpose I
have mentioned, from the circumstances of the first man,
VOL. HI. P
226/4 Resurrection inferred from the promises
born after their likeness, and in their image, heirs
of toil and death ; and to the seed of the serpent,
heirs of his curse : exemplified in some sort
in the translation of Enoch; shadowed forth in
the salvation of Noah, and the covenant with
hhn. It was also couched in God's being ex-
pressly called the God (or Father) of them. But
.more especially in God's blessing Abram and all
the families of the earth in him, in becoming
Abram' s cvceeding great reward, in counting his
faith for righteousness ; and especially in be-
coming Abram s God (and Father) by covenant,
was to give him and them Canaan for an ever-
lasting possession, and was signed and sealed by
circumcision : a covenant which was renewed
afterwards with Isaac and Jacob respectively.
From the time of Moses' being sent to Pharaoh,
this doctrine was couched in the term people of
God (in opposition to the wicked, or the idola-
trous heathen, who worshipped Satan, reserved
who was created by God, in His likeness, after His image, and
was vested with dominion ; and though he was created naked,
and continued so till the woman was created. Gen. ii., yet
soon after had a garment ; which when he was deprived of,
on eating of the forbidden tree, he became afraid (ex-
pressing thereby liis guilt and the loss of his dominion), who
was placed in the blissful garden of Eden, in the midst of
which was the tree of life, which he rejected, and also the
tree of death, of which he ate, through the seduction
of the serpent.
to Abraham and David. 227
in darkness to the judgment of the great day,
instead of God), and pointed out by the imper-
fection and antitype of the Mosaic constitution.
It is couched in several parts of the Psalms,
Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, in the terms, judg-
ment, God's receiving any to Himself ^ (as He did
Enoch and Elijah^ glory, blessedness, not imputing
iniquity. This doctrine was at length couched
in the everlasting covenant with David : and as,
from the everlasting covenant with Abraham, it
was couched in the term everlasting God, Gen.
xxi. 33 ; so, from the everlasting covenant with
Abraham, and the everlasting covenant with
David, as confirming the everlasting covenant
with Abraham, it is couched in the terms, ever-
lasting mercy, kindness, love, covenant, joy, salvation,
light, life, portion, inheritance (the last in oppo-
sition to the portion of the wicked), and in the
kingdom of the true David, which was to bring in
righteousness, and consequently life. It is also
expressed figuratively by awakening in the morn-
ing after the sleep of death ; and at last, clearly
and literally, in several passages of Isaiah,
Ezekiel, Daniel and Hosea.
228 A Resurrection inferred from the Apocrypha
SECTION W — The doctrine of a resurrection under-
stood by the apocryphal writers, and hy the Jews who
were contemporaries of our Lord and His apostles.
And we must not wonder, that by the later
and clearer discoveries of a resurrection in the
prophets, and which reflected great light on the
more obscure discoveries that had been made
of it before; we must not wonder, I say, that
the apocryphal writers came to speak of it more
frequently, and more clearly than the more
ancient Jewish writers had done ; particularly
the author of Wisdom, chap. ii. 16. 24. chap,
iii. 1. 4. 7, 8. chap. v. 1. 4, 5. 15, and the
seventh son in the Maccabees : thus I should
choose to account for the difference between
the ancient and later Jewish writers before our
Saviour concerning the resurrection, and the
state that follows it. From these later writers
it became the doctrine that was generally re-
ceived by the Jewish nation in our Saviours time,
and before, and was very well understood ; as
appears by the Pharisees' approbation of our
Saviour's argument for the resurrection, Mark
xii. 28, and by the young man's question to
our Saviour, Luke x. 25, and by Martha's
conversation with him upon it, John xi. 24. 28.
and from sayings of our Lord's contemporaries, 229
SECTION VI. — The argument for the resurrection
further confirmed from Acts iii. 21, and particularly
from 2d Veter iii. 13, and Rev. xx. 21, xxii. 1. 6.
I might make several quotations from the
New Testament, besides those I have made up
and down in this letter, in order to prove that
the doctrine of the resurrection was understood
in the time of our Saviour and His Apostles, to
be the doctrine of the Old Testament, had I not
anticipated myself in my former letter, when I
endeavoured to trace the everlasting possession
of Canaan in the New Testament writers. I
must beg you therefore to cast your eye back to
them ; for every text in the New Testament that
speaks oi Abraham and all his seed's possessing
Canaan, or refers to it, will serve my present
purpose as well as it did the purpose for which
I then brought them, since dead men cannot have
an everlasting possession in Canaan by any
other way than a resurrection. I will only add
one text to those I quoted there, viz. Acts iii.
21, where St. Peter, speaking of our Saviour,
says, whom the heavens must receive until the time
of the ^^^TiTHTio^ of all things, which God has
spoken of by the mouth of his holy prophets, ever
SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN. This agrees well
with the notions which I have supposed in my
former letter to have been entertained by Adajn
and his immediate descendants, as well as by
230 Remarks on the order of the visions of St . John,
Abraham, Isaac, 2ind Jacob afterwards, of living
again in a paradisaical state. Where else the
ti77ies of the restitution of all things, spoken of by
the prophets from the beginning of the world, will
be found, I own I do not know.
But though I have endeavoured to shew
that a future state by a resurrection has been
spoken of, in some measure, by all holy men,
and prophets, from the beginning of the world,
and most clearly by Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
and Daniel, chap. vii. ; yet I must take the liberty
to add, that it is described still with much
greater certainty, clearness, and particularity,
by St. John, 2 Ep. iii. 13 ; and above all, by
St. John, Rev. xx. 21. xxii. i. 6, where the
state of the first resurrection, and the thousand
years' reign of and with Christ in a paradisaical
state of the earth (the centre and metropolis of
which is to be the heavenly Jerusaleni) is described
in a more lively manner, chap. xxii. 15, and as
a state previous to the general resurrection and
judgment. I apprehend this portion (viz. ch. xxii.
15) should be read after chap. xxi. and chap,
xxii. 1 — 6, if we would enter into the precise
order of St, Johns visions, notwithstanding it
precedes them. The like method must be used
to settle the order of his visions in other parts of
his book ; as has been observed by those who
have been the best acquainted with it.
Inferences from the punishments of the wicked. 231
SECTION VI[. — The necessity of a resurrection of the
spiritual seed of Abraham inferred f'om the dreadful
punishments of the wicked.
Thus I have taken the liberty to point out to
you, in what places of the Old Testament, I
apprehend, the inheritance of a son of God to
be implied or expressed, from the creation of
man down to Christ, who has set the adoption
of Jews and Gentiles in the clearest light. But
it may serve to illustrate this point the bet-
ter, if we take into consideration the remarkable
judgments of God on His enemies. It seems
to have been a Jewish tradition that the devil
and his angels, the first of all beings that revol-
ted from the allegiance to their Maker, having
been cast down from their bright and glorious
mansionsy are reserved in chains under darkness
unto the judgment of the great day. Terrible
destruction has ever since overtaken those who
have been his imitators, whether they were of
the family or kingdom of the devil or the no-
toriously disobedient in the family or kingdom
of God. Thus Cain and his descendants had a
particular curse as the seed of the serpent. And
the blessed descendants oiSeth having at length
despised the inheritance of the sons of God, and
mingled themselves with the accursed descen-
dants of Cain., were overwhelmed with a com-
mon destruction, for their common impiety and
232 A Resurrection inferred from the
unbelief, God saving only Noah and his family
alive, whom alone He had found righteous in
that generation. The inhabitants of Sodom and
Gomorrah, part of the accursed family of Canaan,
are set forth for an example, suffering the ven-
geance of eternal fire; vi^hile just Lot was de-
livered, though his wife, who had escaped the
fire, was yet afterwards made a perpetual mo-
nument of unbelief. The rest of the accursed
race of Canaan (being at the first ten nations,
and at last as it should seem reduced to seven)
are devoted by God to an utter destruction ;
and some of Shem's posterity are brought to
inherit the land in their stead. Korah, Dathan
and Abiram are swallowed up alive for their
notorious rebellion, most presumptuously and
contumaciously persisted in against the express
order of the Lord by the hand of Moses. And
not to mention any other particular desolations
brought upon the Jewish nation in their several
judgments and captivities, or on those hea-
then nations that God made the rod of His
anger, or the staff in His hand of His indigna-
tion against them, of which the prophets and
historians of those times are full ; or the re-
markable vengeance that is yet to overtake the
fourth beast (in St, John's style the beast and the
false prophet, ^nd in St. PauVs, the man of sin and
perdition), we art assured in general, that whilst
the righteous Lord loveth righteousness, and xvith
punishments of the wicked. 233
favour iipholdeth the upright; snares, Jire, brim-
stone, and an horrible tempest shall be the portion of
the wicked.
What upon all these instances of God's just
vengeance would men conclude about God,
from the natural notions they had of Him, and
from the observations that arose to them, either
from history, or their own experience, or from
God's immediate discoveries ? would they think
that He was a being that delighted in judg-
ment, and was estranged from mercy ? or the
contrary ? If the latter, as they certainly must,
would they imagine that God would avenge
Himself thus terribly of the wicked» by hurling
them into amazing and irrecoverable destruc-
tion, as they saw in several instances was their
lot, and that He did not intend such an inherit-
ance or reward for His faithful children and
subjects, as should bear a proportion to all this
eternal perdition of ungodly men? And since
they saw no such proportionable reward and
inheritance alloj:ted to good men in this life,
would they not be led, even by these amazing
desolations of the wicked, to expect an ever-
lasting inheritance and reward in another for
the righteous ?
234 Inferences from the chronological order
SECTION Vlll. — The foregoing opinion cotifirmed
from the chronological order in which the discoveries oj
the future inheritance stand.
If you would not think me too rabbinical^
I would endeavour to confirm this sketch of
some of the dispensations of God to mankind,
which may be considered as so many different
great discoveries and confirmations of our inhe-
ritance as sons of God, from one observation
more, taken from the chronological order in
which these discoveries stand. From Adam,
the created son of God (and on whom, upon
his forfeiture of that relation, the threatening of
death passed into a sentence), unto Enoch, who
was translated, are seven generations. From
Enoch unto Abraham, the grantee of the ever-
lasting possession of Canaan, are fourteen gene-
rations : from Abraham to David, the grantee of
the everlasting kingdom, are fourteen genera-
tions : from David to Jeconiah, the last possessor
of that temporal grant, as th^ pledge of the
spiritual and everlasting grant (and to which
time Solomons temple stood), are fourteen gene-
rations; and from Jeconiah, when D^w/e/ and the
mi?ior prophets began their clearer predictions of
the everlasting kingdom, to Christ, the ever-
lasting and perpetual King of it, are fourteen
generations. It is not fit to be too bold with
numbers here, where we see but in part, and but
of the discoveries of a future inheritance. 235
through a glass darkly ; yet it is certain that all
God's works are done in number, weight, and
measure; and I do not doubt, but when we
come to have the whole scene of God's dis-
pensations opened to us, we shall see beautiful
proportions in the chronological order of things,
as well as in all other orders of them. But
notwithstanding the caution one ought to have
in these matters, I have ventured the rather to
submit this thought to you (which I was afraid
at first might be singular), because I find, since
I have in three of them St. Matthew's authority,
in some sort, to support me, ch. i. 17, the
periods which I have mentioned seem to be the
great epochs in the sacred chronology of the
Old Testament, perhaps to point out to us the
periods in which our inheritance in a future life
have been opened and confirmed. And the
measure of the chronology is not years, but
generations, or the life of man. I should think,
that if the sacred chronology of the Old Testa-
ment were considered in that manner and
method, some observations of consequence might
from thence offer themselves to us, both in re-
lation to the views we may take of the times
past or to come : for I cannot but observe that
with the last fourteen generations, save one, the
times of the Gentiles (heathen) began, which is
the beginning of Daniel's great calendar of time.
And the last fourteen generations end where
236 Recapitulation of the preceding argument.
the stone is cut out of the mountain^ and which is
at last to become a great mountain, and Jill the
whole earth.
I have owned to you, in my former letter,
that I did not consider the resurrection in the
Old Testament as a resurrection to a paradi-
saical Eden or Canaan, till lately, but as a
resurrection to the heavenly state. What misled
me was, that I saw a resurrection in the most
ancient books of the Old Testament, but I did
not think of a resurrection to Eden or Canaan;
but only of a resurrection to such an heavenly
life as the New Testament describes, with
which my idea of a resurrection was, I own,
immediately connected, though unhappily; and
in which I even now apprehend the resurrec-
tion to Canaan is at last to end, as the com-
pletion of all God's dispensations to mankind.
SECTION l^.~—Summari/ of the foregoing argument.
That I may give you the less trouble in
favouring me with your opinion upon the whole
of what I have troubled you with about the
future inheritance of the sons of God, I would
put it all together in this manner. I apprehend
that from the fall to Abraham, good men were
not without expectations of being received by
God, and translated to Eden, when they should
be raised from the dead, in such sort of bodies
Recapitulation of the preceding argument. 237
as Adam had there. From Abraham to Christ,
good men had a more certain hope of a resurrec-
tion to Canaan ; (and from David's time, under
a son of his, who should reign in righteousness
and peace, and extend his rule to the Gentiles ;)
and therefore, it is most likely, thought they
should enjoy it in a more than a paradisaical
state (especially from the description of some of
the prophets), and in such a body as Adam had
had in Eden. But it is from Christ and His
apostles alone that we learn, that after a pre-
paration by this paradisaical state (the centre
and metropolis of which will be the New Jeru-
salem, in the land of Canaan) all which He,
that sits on the throne says, shall be inherited
by him that overcometh {ttolvtol raura, as the best
copies have it), and I will be his God, a7td he shall
be my son, Rev. xxi. 7 ; after a preparation by
this paradisaical state, I say, we shall at last be
changed; and in spiritual, powerful, glorious,
celestial, incorruptible bodies, like to the angels
derived from Christ, and fashioned after His,
mount the air, be wafted up to the third hea-
vens (that is the heaven that is above the airy,
and the starry heaven, where God is repre-
sented as sitting on a throne, where Christ is
seated at His right hand, and surrounded with
an innumerable host of glorious angels), from
whence the Word came, and whither, since He
became incarnate, He is gone before {to His
23a Recapitulation of the preceding argument.
Father, and our Father, to His God, and our
God), to prepare a place for ns, in a house where
there are sufficient mansions for all the children
of God, and whence He vvill come, to take us
to Himself, that we may be with Him, to be-
hold his glory. Thus He is the first that has
told us, and if it were not so. He would not
have told us. Thus, on the whole, we see, that
the patriarchs as well as the good men among the
Jewish people, all died in faith of a future pro-
mise, which they had not received; [viz. the ever-
lasting possession of a paradisaical Canaan f\
God having provided some better thing for us
[Christians'] (viz. heaven, to be enjoyed in an
heavenly body, far better than a paradisaical
Canaan, to be enjoyed in an earthly body), that
they without us might not be made perfect, Heb.
xi. 39, 40.
This recapitulation may serve to show that
beautiful gradation, which has been observed
by God, in opening to us the nature of the
inheritance of the sons of God, and reserves
a just distinction to that clearer and fuller
discovery of it, which one should expect to be
made by the only-begotten Son of God Him-
self, the image of the invisible Father, the Heir of
every creature; and which is but like the gra-
dual discovery of other points in Scripture, that
have been observed by the curious.
Observations on the Ixxiiid Psalm. 239
SECTION X. — Observations on Dr. Lardner's opinion
respecting the denunciations in the Psalms.
But I own I do not remember that the re-
surrection of the wicked is ever revealed by any
of the sacred writers before Daniel : and there-
fore I think your accounting for the hearty
curses in the Psalms, from the respective authors
not knowing a future state, very just, as well
as extremely ingenious, if it be but restrained
to the future state of the wicked. But Chiist
and His apostles have set this matter in a much
fuller light than Da?uel did, and have greatly
enhanced the value of the inheritance of the
sons of God, by letting us see tliat it is at the
same time a salvation from that dreadful wi^ath
which is the portion of the wicked.
SECTION XI. — Dr. Lardners opinion, that there is
evidence in the [Ixxiiid] Psalm of Asaph against a
future state, considered.
But I see, Sir, you have not only thought
that there is no proof of a future state from
the ancient books of the Old Testament, but
that there is proof in them (at least conse-
quential proof) against it. Your consequence
is drawn from the disturbance that the promis-
cuous dealings of Providence in this life gave
240 The condition of the Israelites
good men about David's time. Asaph, indeed,
I find, was once extremely disturbed at this
appearance, if the Ixxiiid Psalm be of his com-
posing. Nay, he puts the difficulty stronger,
and supposes the wicked to be the prosperous
men, and the righteous the afflicted. And you
argue that this phenomenon would not have
perplexed them so much if they had expected
a future state. Whether this was a problem that
puzzled all other good men of those times as
much as it did Asaph, I cannot say. But if it
was a common difficulty then, yet it will not fol-
low, that a resurrection to the everlasting posses-
sion of Canaan had never been revealed to Abra-
ham. That was an expectation that after it had
been oiice raised by revelation, would not fail of
being kept alive among the /)<2/mrc/?«9 sojourning
in Canaan as a strano;e land, and that never
thought of any better habitation in it than a
tent, but yet might be very much weakened in
the 'plenty of Goshen ; and after that more in the
brickkilns oi Egypt, where the children o/' /^r^e/
learnt idolatry and hard labour at the same time.
It might be further sunk after the possession of
Canaan came to Abraham's seed ; and more
especially in the midst of the high prosperity
that country enjoyed in David's reign. A future
state of rewards and punishments might have
been spelt out by the Israelites, without resur-
rection, from the appearance of things, as you
led them to expect a resurrection. 241
yourself think it was by the heathen philoso-
phers. Whatever then hindered men from spell-
ing that out, by the help of their reason from
the appearance of things, might have made
them love the doctrine of the resurrection ;
though it had been revealed to their ancestor,
and fully believed by them. But though this
was a difficulty with Asaph, yet he got rid of it
by the belief of a resurrection and a future
judgment. I think there is something in this
Psalm of Asaph that must lead one to think
so. If that shall appear, I shall not barely
answer the objection from the problem in this
Psalm, but make it a strong argument on my
side. He says, v. 15, " that if he should say,
that religion was unprofitable and vain, he should
offend against the generatmi of God's children,''
who are ever considered in Scripture, not only
as like God, but entitled to an inheritance from
Him. And when he rejected this thought, to
which the success of the wicked tempted him,
where, and how did he get the solution of this
difficulty? By musing in the field, or in his
closet, and making deep reflections on the
course of Providence in this life, which he had
before observed, and from whence his difficulty
arose ? No ; but by going to the sanctuary, where
the five books of Moses were read and explained,
and where he conversed with wise men that
understood them. There it was that he learnt
VOL.111. Q
/
242 Exposition of the words of
the end of the wicked. What end ? " That they
were often health]/ and prosperous, without any
mia^ture of those troubles and diseases, which were
often in a manner the whole lot of the children of
God? A?2d that at last they had no bands in their
death I " This end of the wicked was his diffi-
culty, and therefore could not be the solution
of it. Nor, above all, was it a solution that he
was likely to meet with in the sanctuary. But
the END of the wicked, that he learnt in the
sanctuary, and that set him right, was (as we
may learn from his Psalm), *'that they were in
their prosperity only set in a slippery place,
from whence they would soon slide to irrecover-
able destruction : that if they had not the bodily
pangs of death, that good men often had, yet
they were seized with the terrors, that men must
be utterly consumed with, who knew that death
would make a final end of them. And that when
God, who now appeared as one asleep, by
letting things go on in this seemingly prepos-
terous manner, should awake to judgment, (so
the Chaldee paraphrase interprets it,) He should
in wrath despise their image or their shadow:
whereas that a good man, or one that was a
true Israelite, (of a clean heart, or one of the
children of God,) though afflicted, was held up
by the right hand under his afflictions, and
directed by God's counsel to grow wise and
better by his afflictions; till God should re-
Asaph in the Ixxiiid Psalm. 243
CEiVE hiai, as He did Enoch and Elijah [to or
with'] glory: namely, the glory which is the
garment of God's children, and the badge of
their dominion. And therefore when a true
Israelite's flesh, and even his heart came to fail
him, God would be the strength of his heart,
and HIS PORTION [or inheritance] for ever."
From hence it is, that he begins his Psalm
as he does, Truly God is good to Israel, [namely]
to such [of them] as are of a clean heart! This is
to be considered as the conclusion that he had
come to, from all his reasoning, that he had had
before, and then gives us an account of in the
Psalm, and into which he abruptly breaks out
in the beginning. Now why may he be sup-
posed to have chosen here the word Israel,
rather than the many words that might have
filled that place, but that every Israelite was a
son of God, as he had a title to an inheritance
in Canaan, Exodus iv. 22 ; and that every
Israelite, that was of a clean heart, was in a
better sense a son of God, and was entitled to
a better portion^ even in paradisaical Canaan, as
an everlasting possession ? It is remarkable that
Asaph is at last astonished at his own folly,
inattention and stupidity, which had been the
great source of his difficulty, v. 22.
David seems to express the same thoughts in
his prayer. Psalm xvii. 14, 15, that Asaph does,
Psalm xxiii. 23, 24. 26. The learned Ainsworth's
244 E.vplanation ofPs'dlm xxxvii. 10, 11.
version differs little from ours ; and that is the
thought, if our version, or his, be just. He says,
/ shall behold thy face (God's) in righteous-
ness (with which life is ever connected) when
I awake, I shall be satis/ied with thy likeness
(the likeness of God, in which Adajn was created,
and which may be considered as his inheritance
in the filial relation he stood to God), and this
he opposes to the men of this world, who have their
PORTION IN THIS LIFE. The Hebrew doctors
interpret this likeness or image, by the shechinah
OY glory. See Rabbi Menachem on Lev. x.
The like difficulty with this (in the Ixxiiid
Psalm) seems to be considered in the xxxviith
Psalm, and it has much the same solution there :
particularly v. 10, 11; For, says the Psalmist,
yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be:
yea, thou shall diligently consider his place, and it
shall not be. But the meek shall inherit the earth ;
and shall delight themselves in abundance of peace.
This sure can never be the state in this scene
of things. It can be only when, as he says,
V. 18, of the upright, that their inheritance
shall be for ever; viz. in Canaan, given to'
Abraham and his spiritual seed (all the upright
ov perfect) for an everlasting possession : or, as
the Psalmist says, v. 20, when the wicked (that
is, all the wicked) shall perish, and (all) the ene-
mies of the Lord consume ; as the fat of lambs into
smoke ; or when the time comes, that it shall be
A unity of flan in all the Dispensations, 245
said, Psalai Ixviii., \,%Let God arise Jet {ia\\) His
enemies be scattered: let {d\\) them also that hate
Him flee before Him I As smoke is driven azvay, so
drive them away : as wa.v melteth before the fir e^ so
let (all) the wicked perish at the presence of God,
SECTION Xll,-— All the dispensations of God have,
throughout, a unity of plan.
I should have the greatest reason to ask your
pardon for a letter of this length, were it not on
a subject of so great importance as all the dis-
pensations of God to mankind. You see I have
ventured to correct the Essay, that bears that
title, in the dispensation of Abraham, and a
little in the dispensation of Moses, and have
endeavoured then to support it the best I can,
and to answer the objections with which you
have attacked it so vigorously. If you think on
the whole that this scheme of God's dispensations
is the true one, I shall then begin to think one
may rest satisfied with it. If you do not, let me
beg you to make a sketch of them for me. I
think, if they are of God, a thread must run
through them. You allow ** that God had all
along a view to the great design of the gospel
dispensation; and that the spiritual and hea-
venly blessings to be bestowed by Christ Jesus
were intended, and included in them." If I
246 Co?iclusion of the second Letter.
have not got the due, then be so good as to
help me to it. It is not in the power of any man
to oblige another more, than hereby you will
me, who am, with truth and esteem,
Reverend Sir,
your very faithful,
humble servant,
Barrington.
Dr. Lardner to Lord Barrington.
August 20th, 1728.
My Lord, — I am very much indebted to your
Lordship for the honour of your very kind
letter, and have great reason to set a very high
value on your opinion of my performance. But
surely your Lordship has read me not only with
candour, which you shew upon all occasions,
but with favour; your Lordship's just zeal for
the cause which I have proposed to serve
has not only approved the design, but likewise
favoured the execution. I am, however, ex-
tremely happy that my endeavours have not
been unacceptable to a person of your Lordship's
merit and distinction, who so well understands
the true nature of Christianity, and the best
manner of defending it.
I return your Lordship my most humble
thanks for those remarks you have bestow^ed
upon the ' Credibility.' I am very desirous to
concur entirely with your Lordship's sentiments,
and have therefore deferred, longer than I ought
248 Josephus silent co7icerning the Innocents.
to have done, my acknowledgments of your
favour: and your Lordship will perceive I
have taken those matters into fresh consi-
deration.
SECTION I. — The silence of Josephus respecting the
slaughter of the innocents not to be regarded,
I was so intent upon the authors near the rise
of Christianity, that I had like not to have put
down Macro bins' passage at all, because it is
so late. I the les^ regarded it, because the
objection relating to the slaughter of the infants,
taken from the silence of Josephus, appeared to
me of no moment. When we have but one his-
tory of the affairs of a country, and that history
a brief one, the omission of some particular
event is no difficulty ; and all that the author of
the scheme has said to make it one, in my
opinion, deserves nothing but contempt. Be-
sides, as Josephus was a firm Jew, there was a
particular reason for his passing over this event,
because he could not mention it without giving
the Christian cause a very great advantage. To
write that Herod, at the latter end of his reign,
had put to death all the infants at Bethlehem
under two years of age, on occasion of a report
spread, that the King of the Jews had been
lately born there, would have greatly gratified
the Christians, whom Josephus hated, since it
Character of Macrobius. 249
was well known, when he wrote, that about
thirty years after the slaughter, and the latter
end of Herod's reign, Jesus (who was said to
be born at Bethlehem), being then about thirty
years of age, styled Himself the King of the
Jews, and did many things, to say no more in
proof of it. I have hinted this, and thought I
should have been understood from what I said
of Josephus, Credib. vol. 2. p. 80. 86, and 196;
but did not care to speak more expressly, till I
shew that the testimony concerning our Saviour,
found in Josephus' works, is not genuine, which
I hope to do hereafter.
SECTION U.— Character of Macrobius and Aulus
Gellius.
Macrobius appears to me a blind and bigotted
heathen. I did not know that any one supposed
him a Christian. Nor did the author of the
scheme think he was ; and his putting in such a
hint was unjust and unfair. Your Lordship has,
en passant, called Macrobius an historian ; but
I believe your Lordship does not intend the
strictest sense of the word. I have upon this
occasion looked into the index of Vossius'
book, * De Historicis Latinis,' and I do not find
there the name of Macrobius, nor of Aulus
Gellius, whose Fur and Simia the witty Tana-
quil Faber says Macrobius was. Aulus Gelhus,
250 Remarks concerning Macrobius.
I think, was a Latin grammarian, who lived at
Athens. And Vossius' not inserting an ac-
count of either of those authors in that treatise,
is an argument he thought the nature of their
works did not entitle them to the character of
historians. Nor does Macrobius seem to be
well acquainted with history : witness his blun-
der about the Plinys, lib. xi. c. 12 ; a thing that
lay in his own way as a Roman critic, in which
study he seems to have employed his leisure
hours, when at liberty from his family concerns
and public employments, though it may be
esteemed some apology for him, that St. Jerome
and some other authors have also confounded
the two Plinys : vide Scaliger, Animadv. Euseb.
I think it is not a natural interpretation of
Macrobius' words that Augustus having heard,
that about the time that Herod commanded the
children to be put to death, his own son was
killed, &c. And who would put a forced con-
struction upon a passage writ four hundred years
after an event? Besides, I do not think that
Antipater's death happened about that time.
It seems to me very probable, that the infants
were slaughtered some considerable time before
Antipater's death, and that he was then in high
favour with Herod, and had a hand in that
slaughter, and increased the cruelty of it.
Of Augustus' jest upon Herod, 251
SECTION III.— Remarks upon Augustus' jest upon
Herod, aud the occasion of it.
I make no doubt but Macrobius has given us
exactly the words and terms of Augustus' jest.
The question is, what was the occasion of the
jest?
I will put down the several events which
might give occasion to that jest upon Herod.
1. The death of Alexander and Aristobulus. If
Herod had then put to death but one son, and
that upon just cause, I should not reckon this a
very likely occasion of the jest, it being the first
instance of Herod's executing a child of his.
But since he then put to death two sons, it is one
very likely ground of the jest, especially con-
sidering their enemies were not so great as some
are. 2. When Herod first wrote to Augustus
for leave to put Antipater to death, and there
were not the strongest proofs of his crime. This
is another very likely occasion, since Herod had
before executed two sons. 3. Antipater's death,
provided Augustus heard of it before Herod
was dead. For if Herod was dead when Au-
gustus heard of Antipater's death, he could not
have said in the present tense, '' It is better to
be Herod's hog than his son ;" but must have
spoke in the time past. Now, though it is pos-
sible that Augustus might hear of xintipater's
being executed before he heard of Herod's
252 Of Augustus jest upon Herod,
death, and thereforeit is possible he might pass
that jest upon occasion of the execution of
Antipater; yet it is highly improbable ; first,
because it is most likely the news of Herod's
death would be brought him as soon as that of
Antipater; Herod's death being the more im-
portant event, and having happened five days
after Antipater's. Secondly, because Antipater
was the worst of men, and Augustus knew it.
He had put to death at Rome a Jewish woman
for being an accomplice with him; so great
and notorious was Antipater's crime. These
reasons render it somewhat improbable that
Augustus should thus joke upon Herod on oc-
casion of Antipater's death. 4. If there had
been any young child, or even grandchild of
Herod, under two years of age, put to death
among the children at Bethlehem, this might
have been another occasion. But such a sup-
position would be little better than a fiction,
since there is nothing plainly said of it in anti-
quity.
Baronius did (A. 1. p. 50) from this passage
of Macrobius infer that a young child of Herod
was slain with the infants.' But there is no
other ground for this supposition, except that
* But I do not know that any one else has thought that
Macrobius' passage, writ at the end of the fourteenth
century, could justify such a supposition, when none of the
Christian writers have said any thing of it.
Of Augustus jest upon Herod. 253
passage of Josephus I have alleged, v. 2.
p. 71, 72, where the words which I have trans-
lated, every one of his own family, might possibly
be understood of relations, because oIxsTo* is
sometimes so used. And as Antipater seems then
to have been in high favour, and was making
his efforts for the succession, it might be con-
jectured, that if there was then any young child
and descendant of Herod, he might get it
despatched with the rest. But it would still be
a groundless conjecture.'
It is unlikely that a child of Herod's de-
scendants should be born at Bethlehem; but
very improbable that any child of his own
should be born any where but in his own palace.
Besides, Josephus speaks of none killed but
those who stood with the Pharisees, which
cannot be said of a young child, but only of
grown people. Moreover, if any young child
of Herod himself had been slain, Josephus,
notwithstanding his great reservedness about
that execution, could not have omitted it. And
if any young child of Herod's relations had
been killed, one would think it should have
been a child of Pheroas. And if it had, Jose-
phus could not have omitted it, having said so
* It would have been a most daring attempt in Antipater,
since Herod himself did not venture to put to death any of
his sons without leave first obtained from Augustus.
254 The occasion of Augustus' jest.
much of him ; nor would he, as may be con-
cluded from the part Joseph us takes in that
narration. There is therefore no sufficient
ground for that supposition. I do not mention,
as an occasion, Antipater's death heard after,
or together with, the news of Herod's death ;
because I have shewn that these words could
not be spoken by Augustus at that time.
There were therefore two very likely occasions
of this jest; namely, the death of Aristobulus
and Alexander, and Herod's letter for leave to
put Antipater to death, when his crimes were
not fully proved ; and one more occasion pos-
sible, the death of Antipater, if known by
Augustus before he heard of Herod's death.
Jt seems to me therefore highly probable, that
Macrobius was mistaken about the occasion of
the jest; and that the jest has no relation to
the infants. He met with the jest, and invented
the occasion. It is easy to suppose Macrobius
knew nothing of Herod's history from ancient
writers. It is even likely from this passage, he
had never heard of the executions of Aristobulus
and Alexander, or of Antipater. The jest then
he had from some author, the occasion he
collected from the common report at that time
among the Christians, who often spoke of
Herod's murder of the infants in Judea.
Or, if Macrobius had this whole passage (the
jest and the occasion of it) from some author,
Inferences Jrom the allusion of Macrobius. 255
the same ignorance must be imputed to his
author in common with himself.
SECTION n.—TJie allusion of Macrohius shews that
the slaughter of the infants was well known in his
time.
Upon the whole, then, all the use that can be
made of this passage is, that the slaughter of
the infants in Judea by Herod was a thing
well known in Macrobius' time, and not con-
tested by heathens. And this use I shall be
willing to make of it hereafter if I have oppor-
tunity ; as also any farther use of it, if I should
be convinced there is reason, as I am very
willing to be. And indeed if there were ground
to suppose the whole passage (and not only the
jest) was taken from some ancienter author, it
would be a proof that the slaughter was known
in that author's time also. But who this author
was, or when he lived, is altogether uncertain.
This, however, is most likely ; he w^as not a Chris-
tian, because Macrobius probably did not much
use such authors. Another thing concerning
him is also pretty evident, namely, he did not
know Herod's history.
256 St, Peters Epistles intended for the Gentiles.
SECTION v.— Dr. Lardjier's opinion that St. Peter's
Epistles were inscribed to the Jews, but intended for the
Gentiles also.
What led me to think Peter's Epistles were
writ to Jews is that part of the title or inscription
of the first epistle, scattered, compared with the
inscription of James, "The twelve tribes which
are scattered abroad,'' which must, I suppose, be
understood of Jews, and because Josephus uses
this phrase, Contr. Ap. 1. 1. and 7. Hudson xa*
stTTOv T7]g ciKk'ifig olxovixevrjs tou yeuovg ruiV Upscov sicn
rivsg ^iscnrapixivoi. I own that this was the chief
reason I had. But then if the Siao-^ropa, John
vii. 35, be understood of the Gentiles, as many
think it must, this will very much weaken my ar-
gument. Though I think even then hiaa-Topa tCov
'EXKrivaov may mean the Jews : and the sense of
that place will be this : will he go to the Jews
scattered among the Gentiles, and, being got
among them, teach the Gentiles? If this be the
true sense of that place, then all the instances
we have of the use of haa-TopoL will be under-
stood of Jews. There is, however, another par-
ticular in the inscription of St. Peter's first
epistle, which favours my reason, namely, stran-
gers. Can the Gentiles that are at home be
called strangers ? If we interpret the word in a
religious sense, as good men are strangers in
" More sure word of prophecy .'^ 257
this world, it seems low and whimsical. If it be
really so, I am sure it is unworthy of the apos-
tles, and unsuitable to the rest of their style.
There is also this to be said for my opinion,
that it seems not agreeable to Peter's character
to send an epistle to Gentiles (if there were
any Jews Christians in those parts) without
particularly mentioning the Jews. His epistle
therefore might be inscribed to the Jews, but
intended also for the Gentiles : and this way
will pretty well account for those expressions in
his epistles that seem to relate peculiarly to
Gentiles. Though the letter was inscribed to
Jews, the believing Gentiles would yet be very
willing to pay a due respect to it. But if it had
been directed to Gentiles, the Jews might have
disregarded it. Moreover, as I understand that
text a more sure word of prophecy y of Old Testa-
ment prophecies, and not of the prophecies, or
any particular prophecy of the New Testament,
that part of the epistle seems more especially
addressed to the Jews. Only, by the way, I
should translate those words, a *cery sure xvord ;
not more sure ; much after the same manner
that Mr. Rowe has done. I have represented
my reasons for supposing St. Peter's epistles
addressed to the Jews ; but I am far from being
positive of the goodness of them, and they are
humbly submitted to your Lordship's better
VOL. III. R
258 Conclusion of Dr. Lardners Letter,
judgment, as is also what I have here oflfered
concerning Macrobius' testimony.
I am, my Lord,
your Lordship's most humble,
most obedient servant,
N. L.
Au^st 20fA, 1728.
Lord Barrington to Dr. Lardner.
Becket House, June 23d, 1729.
Rev. Sir, — ^Nothing could be more accep-
table to me, than the frankness with which you
urge further difficulties against my opinion, in
yours of the 6tli March.' Without frankness in
objecting, and candour in weighing what is ob-
jected, no correspondence on any subject can be
agreeable or useful, what other talents or good
qualities soever may be employed in it. These
indeed are a great felicity to those who possess
them, and raise our admiration and esteem
wherever we meet with them ; but the others are
what we indispensably owe to such as we
choose to converse with : and being in our
own power, can never be wanting without
exposing us to censure. I therefore promise
you, as I ought, that you shall meet with these
in every page : and I promise this the rather,
since I am in hopes that candour and frankness
on my part, like charity, to which they belong,
will cover a multitude of faults.
* Tbc letter here referred to caunot be found.
260 The sound interpretation of the New
SECTION I. — Necessity and advantage of studying the
Old Testament critically.
I agree in general with what you say about
curiosity. But, in pursuance of the freedom I
have just now promised you, I must add, that
I do not see how what you say against curiosity
is more applicable to critical inquiries into the
meaning of the Old Testament, than it would be
to inquiries into the critical meaning of any
other ancient book ; which yet I think has
never been censured as needless curiosity ;
since we can never understand the precise and
full meaning of any author, without under-
standing him critically, (i. e. without under-
standing him according to the rules of language
and context,) much less discern the beauties and
elegancies of his performance. And shall not
the Old Testament have the preference of all
other ancient books ? Its matter is of infinitely
greater weight ; its authority is more undoubted ;
the information it gives us can be had no other
way ; the references to it in the New Testament
are very numerous (all of them, except in the
gospel of St, Luke, and the Acts, having been
written by Jews, and many of them addressed to
people of that nation). The whole design of all
God's providences with the children of men,
from the creation, centres in the dispensation of
God to mankind in Christ Jesus : and without
Testament depends upon a knowledge of the Old, 261
a regard to those several dispensations, the
scheme of the Christian religion can never be
fully understood, or fully proved and vindicated
against all its adversaries. These are all of them
so many considerations, which give the prefe-
rence to the critical study of the Old Testament
infinitely before any other book of antiquity ;
and does not only free us from the charge of
curiosity, when we study it, but renders men of
learning and leisure exposed to a charge of a
contrary nature if they neglect it. Men can
never have a just value for a book, how inva-
luable soever in itself, which they do not under-
stand. It is well, in case they happen to under-
stand it, if they do not fall into a contempt of
it : and if men once come to have a contempt
for the Old Testament they will not easily be
brought to have a just respect for the New;
especially when they consider the regard which
the Author of our religion always paid to 3Ioses
and the prophets whenever they came in His
way. And I cannot but think it is the want
of understanding the Old Testament critically
which makes so many skeptics about revelation
as we daily meet with. The New Testament
has had great pains bestowed on it, and a great
deal of new light cast on several parts of it ; but
the Old Testament has not been cultivated with
proportionable care : yet the Deists will be apt
to say to us, ''What signifies removing the diffi-
262 Importance of the Book of Genesis.
culties, that are objected to the New Testa-
ment, if you cannot remove those which occur
in the books which are previous to the New
Testament, and which are so often quoted and
referred to, as Scripture, in them ?" I am heartily
sorry more pains has not been bestowed on the
Old Testament, because I am of opinion that a
fruitful harvest of useful knowledge offers itself
there to every friend of revelation who will be
but at the pains to reap it. In this I had the
honour of my Lord Chancellor King's concur-
ring with me, in a conversation I had the happi-
ness to have with him on this subject, a little
before the Essay on God's Dispetisation to Man-
kind was published.
SECTION 11. — Great hnportance of the Book of
Genesis,
Whilst I am on this head, I must also take
the liberty to say that I think the book of
Genesis preferable to all the other books of the
Old Testament, as it gives us the fullest proof,
from the clearest and earliest tradition, that the
world is not eternal ; that it was created by
God about six thousand years ago; that our first
parents were created at the same time ; that
they were designed for immortality ; that death
entered by sin; that the first man who was
remarkable for walking with God (after Adam
Importance of the Book of Genesis, 263
had first run away from Him) was visibly re-
possessed of immortality by translation ; that
men presently conceived hopes of this immortal
inheritance, calling themselves '' sons of God ;"
th^t Abraham y (in all likelihood the only one of
his age free from idolatry,) a descendant of the
seed which God gave Eve instead of righteous
Abel, viz. Seth, by righteous Noah and blessed
Sheniy &c. was promised an everlasting posses-
sion of Canaan, and, by the strongest and most
obvious implication, was promised it through a
resurrection from the dead ; if, instead of apos-
tatizing to idolatry and vice, he would continue
to walk before God and be perfect ; and was
further promised, that this grant should endure
to all persons of every family, even of the most
accursed, that should imitate his pious example.
If inquiries into the critical meaning of the
Old Testament be the thing you intend, when
you say, that you are discouraged in the pur-
suit of speculations in religious matters, on
observing that our Saviour and His Apostles do
not enter into many particulars of the '' future
life," allow me to express some surprise at it,
when you know, Sir, that our Saviour bids the
Jews search the Scriptures, (viz. of the Old Tes-
tament,) as that wherein they thought (and to be
sure justly, or else He could not have enjoined
that search) they had eternal life; — when the
only argument He uses to prove a future life or a
264 Critical study of the Bible recommended,
resurrrection (which in Scripture differs but as
the door and the house) is fetched from a pas-
sage in Moses' history, and which, without a
critical understanding of the Old Testament,
will never appear to us to be an argument that
is conclusive against the persons whom it was
brought to convince, or at least to silence;
and, to add no more, when our Saviour, His
historia72s; and apostles, abound every where with
references to it, and citations and proofs from it,
I must likewise take liberty to say, that I
cannot but be the more surprised at your saying
this, if I take your meaning in it aright; when
the great objection made against Christianity in
our days, by every artful adversary of it, is,
** that the quotations made from the Old Testa-
ment, by the writers of the New, are not to be
met with in the Old Testament, or are not perti-
nent to the purpose for which they are brought."
The only answer, sure, to this objection, is only
to be fetched from a critical study of the books
of the Old Testament as well as of the Next\
It is very true, '* all critical inquiries are sub-
ject to some uncertainty :" they can otherwise
never rise higher than probabilities. But we
must make the best of them we can. Notwith-
standing they are but probable, there is great
use to be made of them ; and we are answerable
for it, if we do not act up to the degree of pro-
bability we can arrive at by our critical inquiries
State of Adam before the Fall. 265
about them. Whatever objection therefore you
can urge from this topic against the critical study
of the Old Testament, will hold in a propor-
tionable degree against the study of the New;
where nothing, now at least, is to be done
(as you let me see you are well aware) without
more or less critical skill : I say this, notwith-
standing that I apprehend with you, that the
Gospels and the Acts were plain books when they
were writ : but so, as I apprehend, was Genesis
also. What is necessary for salvation is still
plain. Let that satisfy the busy and active part
of mankind. The scheme of God's dispensations
is difficult. Here is employment for those of
greater leisure and contemplation.
After saying thus much in general, I will
make my observations on the several particulars
of your letter, in the order in which they lie
in it.
SECTION III.— 0;^ Adam's nakedness before the fall
I agree with you that Adam was created
naked, and that he was naked after his fall.
But we must suppose he had a garment or
covering between these two periods; or else,
why was it said, that, after he had eaten of the
forbidden fruit, his and his wife's eyes were
opened, and they saw that they were iiaked ; that
is, destitute of the garment that had covered
266 Aclain invested with a garment
them, which, as I apprehend, was the badge of
all their dignity and felicity ? God had she\vn
thera the tree of knowledge of good and evil,
and told them that in the day they eat of it they
should surely die. The serpent had told them,
that if they would but eat of it, their eyes would
be opened, and they should be as God, knoxving good
and evil; i. e. knowing good and evil, so as to
be indefeasibly possessed of the one, and in-
violably secured against the other ; particularly
against death, which had been threatened, an
evil that must for ever deprive them of all good.
So God knows good and evil ; but, says Moses,
'* when they had eaten the forbidden fruit, so far
was this vain, delusory, and presumptuous pro-
mise of the devil from being made good to them,
and so fully was God's threatening verified,
that their eyes were only opened (beyond what
they had been before) to see the evil and misery
they had brought upon themselves, stript of the
Godlike robe which covered them, which he
expresses by their seeiiJg themselves naked; a
nakedness that what they girt about their loins
could by no means hide. For to this purpose
it is, that when God asked Adam^ where he was?
he says in anssver, I hid Jiiysdf^ because I was
naked ; as naked, (in Moses' sense of nakedness,)
after they had made themselves aprons, as before,
V. 7. 10. He farther says, that he zvas afraid.
That it was a garment of dignity, (a badge of
of glory before the Fall, 267
his dominion, bliss and immortality,) seems also
to be plainly implied in this, that his fear pro-
ceeded from his nakedness; or, from finding
himself stript of this garment ; otherwise I can-
not conceive how his nakedness should make
him afraid. On the supposition that it was a
garment of dignity, (a badge of his filial relation
to God,) it is obvious how his being stript of it
made him afraid ; for he then must needs see
that God was not his Father, nor he His son ;
since he was stript of the badge of that relation.
Moreover, is not this implied in God's reply ?
which I apprehend amounts to this ; How earnest
thou to be 72aked ? Hast thou eaten of the forbidden
tree? Does not this imply, that God had told
him, when He gave him that prohibition, or
when He gave him that garment, that if he
broke through that prohibition, he should be
stript of that garment? Thus I consider this
matter, who have ever thought the third of
Genesis a history. And if a glory be, or is to
be, the garment of all God's sons, either by crea-
tion, adoption, or generation, as it certainly is, it
seems most probable that Adam's garment or
covering before the fall was also a glory, he
being then a son of God. Supposing ybrw^ of
God (Phil. ii. 6) to signify the glory which the
Word had before His incarnation, (a badge of
His high dignity and power, or of His future
heirship,) and/orw of a slave to signify flesh with-
268 Sense in which Adam is said
out a glory, (the badge of sonship or heirship,)
and all the text is easy : particularly the words
that follow : being made in the likeness of man
(as it should be rendered) : without it, all is
disturbed. This therefore is, in my opinion, a
good reason to go into this interpretation. Give
me at least your difiiculties against this supposi
tion ; or, if you please, an interpretation of that
text that may be as free from objection. If
sinful flesh (Rom, viii. 3) means nothing but
man, or flesh, the word sinful has no emphasis,
but is entirely superfluous and redundant.
Whereas, in my way of interpreting sinful, there
is a great force and beauty in that epithet's being
added io flesh. The sense of the place then will
be, *' There is no condemnation therefore [to the
second death] to those who walk not after the
flesh, but after the Spirit [the Author of eternal
life]; who by His [revelation] law has made
us free from the law [of Moses], which was a
law of sin and death." For when the law [of
Moses] could not give us life, by reason it was
too weak to subdue our sinful flesh, God sending
His own Son in the likeness of that sinful flesh,
i. e. of flesh which, through sin, was first de-
prived of its glory (the badge of immortality,
&c.), by making Him (in that mortal body which
He took) a sacrifice for sin, condemned sin in
the flesh.
I agree, that St. Luke's immediate meaning,
To have been made *' in the likeness of God.'' 269
when he says (chap. iii. v. ult.) that Adam was
the son of God, is, ** that whilst others had an
earthly parent, Adam was immediately created
by God :" so immediately at least, as to have
no other father but God. But the being created
immediately by God in the circumstances in
which Moses* history informed St, Luke that
Adam was created, implies that he was a son of
God in all that extended sense and meaning of
the word which I have given it.
You say, **that Moses speaks nothing of
God's creating Adam in his moral perfections."
But can any thing come out of the hand of God
but what is perfect, spotless, and innocent ? If
Adam had not been so, would it have been con-
sistent with wisdom and justice for God to have
given him dominion, to have placed him in Eden,
and to have shewn him the tree of life, in order
to preserve his earthly frame to immortality?
and as a badge of all this, to give him a glory
for a covering ? These high favours, in all cases,
ever suppose a resemblance of God in His
moral perfections, and must therefore suppose
it in Adam, Otherwise we take away all reason
of God's treating one being as a son, and
another as a servant or slave.
270 '* Adam begat Seth i7i his own likeness.'"
SECTION IV. — On the sense in which Adam is said to
have begotten Seth " in his own likeness,*^
If Moses meant no more by saying that
** Adam begat Seth in his own likeness'' besides
telling us, "that Adam begat a perfect man,
though a little one," why, I pray you, does not
he say the same thing on the birth of Cain, his
first-born (or even of righteous Abel) ? the only
proper place for such a thought as you suppose
Moses to express by these words. Do you
suppose, Sir, that by adding these words on the
occasion of Adam's begetting Seth, when he
omitted them in acquainting us that he begat
Cain [and Abel], Moses intended to tell us,
that Adam did not beget Cain [and Abel] a
perfect man, but mutilated in some parts of his
body ? That is what I should be led to think
Moses designed, by not adding these words,
when Caifi [and Abel] was born, since he adds
them when Seth was born, if I understand them
as you do ; or else I must think Moses a very
bad writer, who appears to me to be a very
accurate one. But what occasion was there for
Moses to add these words at all, if your sense is
their true meaning ? God had blessed our first
parents, and bid them be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth. Did Moses then only intend
to tell us that when Adam begat Seth, he begat
after his kind? Moses tells us that God gave
Accurate mode of reasoning among lawyers. 271
alike blessing to the fowls and the fish, the
beasts and the cattle. But yet he does not
think it worth his while to inform us that they
actually multiplied after their kind. He sup-
poses, after informing us that God blessed
[or promised to bless] them in this manner, that
his reader would take it for granted that they
were actually blessed accordingly : and why
would he not suppose his reader would take it
for granted in the case of Adam's begetting Seth,
as well as in the case of Adam's begetting Cain
[and Ahet] ; and in the case of the multiplica-
tion of animals after their several kinds ?
SECTION V. — The mode of reasoning employed hy
lawyers more suitable to theology than that of philo-
sophers or schoolmen.
God has ever treated with that part of man-
kind that He has been pleased to reveal His
will to, under the notion of a father, or of a
king, or of both. The relations between a
father and son and a king and his subjects are
law notions, and are best learned from the
lawyers. Philosophers, schoolmen, and others, do
not talk of these with the accuracy that lawyers
do. Lawyers being used to debate with one
another, and before dhXe judges, and about mat-
ters in life, makes them generally, in my opinion,
closer and clearer reasoners, than any other
272 Accurate mode of reasoning among lawyers,
body of men. They cannot so easily talk non-
sense or wander in matters of life, as on other
subjects. But if they do, they are presently
called back to their point ; which other plead-
ers, writers, or haranguers, are not. From
hence it is that there are fewer differences in
opinion among able men of that profession than
any other. What they call pleadings, are the
most exact draughts in the world; because their
whole strength and beauty lies, in not using one
word unnecessarily, or in using any that has
an indeterminate signification. Either of these
might be a flaw in the pleading, and vitiate the
plea. And as divines are but the interpreters of
the sacred code concerning notions (as applied
to God and man) that the lawyers but explain ;
and as the lawyers are the best body of rea-
soners among us (as they also were so among
the Romans), I think their way of reasoning is
more suited to a true divine, than the reasonings
oi philosophers or schoolmen, or systematical and
polemical theologiies.
SECTION VL— r^e interpretations of the Jewish law-
yers necessarily vicious.
But it is not a wonder, if the Jeioish laioyers
corrupted the Testament, since they did not
interpret it by itself; but by oral traditions :
and that their reasonings were not appeals to a
'* Sons of God,'' and " sons of men.'' 273
judge, about matters of life; but addresses to
the superstition of the people, about another
life ; entirely consisting in the recommendation
of things to the people, much more profitable to
themselves, and much less difficult to the
people, than the love of God and their neigh-
bour.
SECTION VII. — On the meaning of the expressions^
" sons of God/' and *' sons of men."
I cannot be of opinion, that when Moses
^* calls the children of Seth sons of God, he
only means worshippers of God." Language
will not admit it, that the sons of God should
only signify worshippers of God. The natural
idea that sons of God carries in it, is obedience
and submission to God, resignation to His will,
from a trust placed in Him ; and an expectation
of an inheritance from Him. Nor can I see by
what rule of language, " sons of man" can signify
" men of the w^orld," or ** men that pursue the
world." Sons of men signify men that are mere
sons of men, and have no other father : that is,
are not made the adopted sons of God. And
we may well suppose, that this was the original
signification of these terms in the fifth or sixth
generation from Adam: the original use of
words being always according to their natural
import ; though in a long tract of time, and by
VOL. III. S
274 The soul unconscious in a separate state,
accidents, we sometimes find the natural import
of words and expressions laid aside, and a cant
use of them taken up, understood only by small
communities and societies of men. Savouring
or relishing the things of God, and the " things
of men," are expressions that keep their native
signification, but will not help to show that sons
of God stand in Genesis for worshippers of
God : or that sons of men stand for those that
only mind worldly things, or the things that
are generally pursued by men.
SECTION VIIL — Probable reasons from observation
and Scripture that the soul is unconscious in a separate
state.
I am glad that *' what I have offered against
the separate state of rewards and punishments
appears so highly plausible to you ;" because I
think it tends to support and explain revelation
in a degree far beyond what we can imagine,
till we consider it very attentively. But you
have some difficulties remaining. You ask, "since
in my opinion souls subsist in hades, why they
may not have thought and perception?" My
answer. Sir, is, because I think it appears from
observation and Scripture, that God has designed
them to act in an united state, and not in a
separate state. If I am to speak my mind
freely, I think that, which was in our Saviour,
''This day shalt thou bt with me in Paradise.'' 275
what a soul is in us, was unconscious in its
separate state, as I apprehend our souls are : or
else, I think our Saviour could not be said to
have tasted of death, if death be to us a state of
unconsciousness.
SECTION IX. — On the sense of the words of our Lord
to the penitent thief
Our version renders our Saviour s saying to
the thief, thus : Verily verily I say unto thee, this
day shalt thou be with me in paradise. This is
the only text on which the opinion is built of
Christ's going to paradise during His separate
state. But St. Peter supposes His soul went to
hadesy and that it was brought from thence at
his resurrection (Acts ii. 31) ; and so you know
the apostles' creed runs [dead and buried] \_He
descended into hades] ; yet hades in Scripture
does not signify paradise. For every soul goes
to hades (Psalm Ixxxix. 48) ; but every soul does
not go to paradise, to be entertained as St. Paul
was, when he was wrapt up into it (2 Cor.
xii. 4). Why then may not this text be translated
thus? Verily verily I this day [or now] ^^j/
unto thee, thou shalt he xviih me in paradise : viz.
at the resurrection : as soon as thou beginnest
to be conscious again. And I say this to thee,
THIS DAY, notwithstanding it is the day of my
weakness, and the hour and power of darkness.
276 On the parable of Dives and Lazarus.
We see crjixspou used for noiv (Matt. xxi. 28.
Acts iv. 9). This was a sufficient answer to the
prayer of the thief: viz. Lord, remember me when
thou comest into thy kingdom ! Yes, says our Sa-
viour, I now assure thee, that when I come into
my kins^dom, viz. that high and exalted state
of it, which is alone called my kingdom by
Daniel (Dan. vii. 9 — 14), and is that state of
my kingdom, when the stone cut out of the moun-
tain shall Jill the whole earth, (which Mr. Joseph
Mede}\x^t\Y calls regnum montis,) then thou shalt
be with me in paradise ; or in the paradisaical
state of my kingdom upon earth.
SECTION X. — On the only inference that can he legi-
timately drawn from the parable of Dives and La-
zarus.
I think nothing is to be proved from parables,
but the moral of them : the rest is to be consi-
dered but as embellishment. All therefore that
I should apprehend from the parable of Dives
and Lazarus, is, that the cause why men do not
believe, is from wicked prejudice, and not from
want of evidence ; or that supposed greater evi-
dence would not have the force with wicked
men that we are apt to imagine it would. I
cannot think that body or matter, that is, some-
thing purely passive, can add any thing to a
soul that is purely an active and conscious
Canaan promised to Abraham, 211
principle, and supposed to be capable of thought
and enjoyment in a separate state. If it could,
I do not see how it could be the highest perfec-
tion to be pure spirit, as God undoubtedly is.
SECTION XI. — The promise ofeternaUife to Abraham
to be fulfilled in Canaan.
If it be true, that God promised Abraham an
everlasting possession of Canaan after death, I
dare say it has its good consequences ; because
no truth is without good consequences, whether
we see those good consequences or no. But I
flatter myself I now see several good conse-
quences flowing from that assertion. It makes
this revelation in itself the more probable, inas-
much as it is evidently suited to the state of
things at the time it was made. It supports
those assertions of the New Testament, that
eternal life was promised before the Jewish
state commenced ; or, which comes to the same
thing, that it was promised to Abraham : I will
not mention the places here ; give me leave to
refer you to the last paragraph of my letter for
them. But where are the fathers promised to
enjoy eternal life ? In heaven ? We have not a
word of going to heaven in all the Old Testa-
ment, much less in Genesis or E.vodus ; as we
must, if God promised eternal life in heaven
before the Jewish state. Is it not of consequence
278 The Shechinah jylaced at the entrance of Eden,
then to find everlasting life promised to Abraham
in an everlasting possession oi Canaan ? Another
good consequence of seeing that God promised
Abraham the everlasting possession of Canaan
is, that it shows the great beauty and proportion
of those discoveries of our future happiness
which God has made. When Adam had just
lost Eden, and was debarred from it, good men
had hope of being readmitted to it after death ;
as it is probable they thought Enoch was, when
God took him ; as I have offered something to
prove in my first letter. The glory called an
angel, with a flaming sword, which I apprehend
was the Shechinah (Gen. iii.), was placed at the
entrance of Eden immediately after the fall. That
seems to have been considered as the fall, and
presence of God (Gen. iv. 14. 16) ; and thither
it is probable the first men directed their wor-
ship, praying to be readmitted to that happy
mansion. And from thence probably came the
ancient worship of fire. When good men were
to multiply greatly, and from a family to be-
come, not only a nation, but a multitude of
nations, God promises that Ca^iaan, a whole
country, should be Eden ; and expressly gives it
to Abraham and his pious imitators for an ever-
lasting possession [after death].
No promise of heaven till after the Ascension, 279
SECTION XII. — The oijoy merit of heaven not ex-
pressly promised till after the ascension of our Lord.
But Christ is come from heaven, to show lis
the way thither, and to assure us, that at the
end of this long, this one thousand years' pos-
session of Canaan, we shall be carried to heaven ;
whence He came, and whither He is gone, to
prepat^e a place for us, that where He is there we
may be also. Our Saviour gives us distant hints
of this when He says. The meek shall inherit the
earth ; and when He says, That we shall sit down,
and eat and drink with Abraham, and Isaac, and
Jacob, in the kingdom of God ; and that they who
have lost possessions for Christ's sake, shall in
this time receive an hundredfold ; and in the time
to come, life everlasting. But the fuller opening
of these things was left, in great wisdom, as
many others were, to St. Paul, St. Peter, and
St. John, who might make these discoveries,
after the spiritual nature of our Saviour's king-
dom was fully understood, and established as a
principle among Christians, with less hazard
than our Saviour could have done in His own
time, when these discoveries might have been
abused, through the more carnal notions that
were so fixed in the minds of the apostles and
first disciples, concerning the immediate ap-
280 Possession of Canaan tak^n in a Chiliastic sense.
pearance of the temporal kingdom of our Lord,
in the then state of things in the world.
SECTION XIIL — The everlasting possession of Ca-
fiaan is to he understood of a residence therefor a thou-
sand years ; after which, Abraham and his spiritual
seed are to be advanced to the enjoyment of heaven.
I confess I thought I had fully proved in
mine of the 18th December, that God had pro-
mised Abraham an everlasting possession of Ca-
naan after death. I have nothing material to
add to it. But I will endeavour to answer your
objections, which I find keep you in some hesi-
tation about this matter ; though you do not
show me any flaw in my proof. You ask, *' why,
if God designed that Abraham should possess
this land in person afterwards, He did not say
expressly, You shall be also revived and raised
up hereafter, to live here yourself in person ?" If
God designed Abraham a future possession of
the land of Canaan, it must be in person ; for
possession is a personal thing ; and the posses-
sion of Abraham's seed could not possibly in
any sense be Abraham's possession. Abraham's
possession and inheritance, is the possession
and inheritance of his seed, because it endures
to them ; and his possession strengthens their
title : but their inheritance or possession cannot
" Everlasting " signifies a long duration, 281
in any sense possibly be his. For their inherit-
ance does not endure to him, nor their possession
strengthen his title or possession. Thus there-
fore it appears that God's promise to raise up
Abraham was sufficiently plain. And must not
Abraham, and we, understand what God says,
when He speaks plainly, only because He
might have spoken more plainly ; that is, be-
cause He might have expressed what is fully
implied ; and have said, You shall revive and be
raised up, in order to take this everlasting pos-
session ?
I make this difference between an inheritance
to Abraham and his seed for ever, and Abra-
ham's everlasting possession. The difference be-
tween these two does not lie in for ever and
everlasfmg, as I think you imagine it does.
And I agree with you that everlasting signifies
only a long duration, or the longest duration of
its kind ; but not a duration without end. The
instances you give of this sense of the word
everlasting are irrefragable, and therefore when
Abraham is promised an everlasting possession
of Canaan, I do not suppose that he is to live
there for ever. No, Sir, I suppose that, after the
resurrection, and a thousand years' enjoyment of
the heavenly Jerusalem in the land of Canaan,
he will be taken up to the third heavens,
where Christ is, and where the good aiigels and
all good men shall be also. I suppose therefore
282 Difference between " everlasting possession''
that Canaan is promised to Abraham, as an
everlasting possession ; because it will not only
be for so long a term as a thousand years, but
because it will be the last possession on this
earth.
SECTION XIV. —On the difference between ''an ever-
lasting possession^' and " an inheritance fo?' ever."
But the difference I have just now mentioned
lies, with me, between an inheritance for
EVER, and an everlasting possession. I
have an inheritance in this county to me
and my heirs for ever ; because it will go to my
heirs to the world's end, if something be not
done to alter it. But sure I have not an ever-
lasting possession, unless my personal con-
tinuance here was to be everlasting ; possession
being something personal. I may also have the
grant of an inheritance to me and my heirs /or
ever after another, of which I have no pos-
session, much less an everlasting possession.
This may serve to show the difference between
giving the land to Abraham and his seed for
ever, and giving him an everlasting possession
of it.
For this reason, whatever be meant by giving
the land for an everlasting possession to thee^
and thy seed after thee, Gen. xvii. 8, it cannot be
giving the everlasting possession of it to him in
and '* inheritance for ever'' 283
or by his seed : language will not bear this. For
possession is personal ; and the possession of
Abrahams seed cannot be called Abraham s pos-
session. Nor can their inheritance be called
his ; though his possession and his inheritance
may be called theirs. After, therefore, does not
refer to give ; as if the meaning was^ I will give
the everlasting possession of Canaan to thy seed,
after I have given the everlasting possession of
it to thee. That has not been the case ; for
Abraham has as yet had no possession of it ; but
after is to be referred to seed ; as much as to
say, I will give it not only to thee, but to thy
seed, which shall be after thee : parents, whe-
ther natural or spiritual, being before their natu-
ral or spiritual seed. And I apprehend Gen.
xlviii. 4 is the same covenant renewed with
Jacob that God first entered into with Abraham,
Gen. xvii. 8 ; for the everlasting possession of
Canaan is to be given to all true Israelites,
SECTION XV. — On the true nature of that covenant
of which circumcision was the seal.
" Circumcision was not given as a condition
of Abraham's and his spiritual seed's having the
everlasting possession of Canaan f' because it
was enjoined to all his seed in all their genera-
tions ; consequently to Ishmael and his seed,
as well as to Isaac and his seed; notwithstanding
284 Nature of the covenant of
that God told Abraham at that time, that He
would not establish his everlasting covenant
(or the covenant of the everlasting possession)
with Ishmael, but with Isaac, On the other
hand, every servant born in Abrahams house, and
bought with his money, was to be circumcised,
ver. 12, 13 ; but nobody else : no stranger; not
even an hired servant : so that whatever was
the full intent of circumcision, we see it was a
family badge, or a token in the flesh of every
male part of Abraham's family, and the suc-
ceeding families of his seed (especially whilst
God's family should be in a manner confined to
Abraham's) ; but not in the flesh of any one that
was a stranger to Abraham's family, or that was
but a fluctuating and unsettled part of it. Cir-
cumcision is to be considered as a sign and a
seal of God's performing that promise to Abra-
ham and all his spiritual seed, which Abrahams
righteousness in some sort called for, and en-
titled him to, and was the condition of, Rom.
iv. 11. The promise, however, would endure to
his spiritual seed, though they were uncircum-
cised, if they walked before God, and were
perfect, as he was (the sole condition of this
promise) ; the promise being made to Abraham in
uncircumcision, as St. Paul observes, Rom. iv.
10 — 13. And circumcision, though a badge or
token peculiar to Abraham's family only ; yet
it would serve as a sign and seal of the truth of
which circumcision was the seal. 285
God s promise to all Abraham's spiritual seed,
of whatever other family and nation they were,
to whom this rite of Abraham's family should
be know^n. And the one seed being now come,
which consists not only of the believers of
Abrahams family, but of the believers of every
other family and nation, without distinction of
Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female, now
that God's family is no longer confined to Abra-
ham's, we have all, by being baptized into Christ
Jesus, and having put Him on (as the new clothes
after baptism), Gal. iii. 27, 28 ; we have all, I
say, a sign and token, that, if we die unto
sin, and are raised unto newness of life, we
shall be raised again from the dead ; and after
possessing the paradisaical Canaan as Abraham's
seed, by virtue of the promise made to Abraham,
Gal. iii. 29, we shall, in bodies like to our
blessed Lord's, ascend to His Father, and our
Father, to His God, and our God, and be for ever
with the Lord.
'' The difference between what is promised to
Isaac and what is promised to Ishmael, does not
seem to lie in a greater degree of temporal fe-
licity promised to Isaac than to Ishmael;' but
singly in this : that the covenant or promise
made to Isaac, was an everlasting covenant or
promise ; (that is, the covenant or promise of an
everlasting possession of Canaan;) whereas the
promise to Ishmael was not the promise of an
^86 Gradual developement of revelation.
everlasting possession, though indeed of great
temporal felicity.
SECTION XV^l. — On the gradual developement of
revelation.
When I said that God's revelations are like a
'* shining light," &c. I only meant it of such reve-
lations as have a thread or connexion ; such as
these to Abraham appear to be. Take the asser-
tion, as relating to such as these, and I believe
it will hold. But I did not mean it of occa-
sional revelations : such as that to Paul, Acts
xxiii. 11 ; yet even that revelation was in some
sort progressive ; for whereas it is probable that
in former revelations Paul had been ordered to
go to Syria, Asia, Macedonia, Greece, and Illyri-
cum, he is now ordered to go as far as Rome,
the metropolis of the world, and the seat, not
only of empire and riches, but of the greatest
heroism, learning, and politeness, in the world.
SECTION XVII.— TAe hopes of the patriarchs of an
everlasting possession in Canaan inferred from their
choosing a burial place there.
If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob expected an
everlasting possession of Canaan after death, I
believe you will readily agree, that they could
never think of Canaan without having that
On Abraham's sojourinng in Cayman. 287
everlasting possession in their mind, particulary
when they ordered themselves to be buried there.
And I think this accounts best for all that great
particularity which Moses uses in relation to
the purchase of the burying place in Machpelah,
before Mamre, Gen. xxiii. 13 — 20.
I think the expectation that God would in the
fourth generation (or in about four hundred and
seventy years) give Abraham's descendants the
possession of Canaan, was a principle too feeble
to animate his heroic conduct in piety, and
what has never been seen in human nature.
You think it is what has been seen in all ages,
in the pains men take to raise their families.
But then it is their immediate descendants that
they take all that pains to raise. But I think
we do not see any man animated to a course of
the greatest self-denial, difficulty, and danger, in
the prospect of some descendants from him
enjoying it four hundred and seventy years after
him.
SECTION XVIIL— Ow Abraham's sojourning in
Canaan.
You think that all that can be gathered from
Abraham's staying in Cattaan, dwelling in tents,
and not building himself a city, was, '' that God
had said he was to live a stranger there, and to
die (I suppose you mean there) in a good old
288 Inferences from 2 Mac. viii. 36.
age.*' But I must beg you to refer me to the
texts that prove this : I do not remember them.
It seems to me that he sojourned there in tents,
and without building a city, to show, that he
expected his everlasting possession there, in a
city to be built in a country where it should be-
come an heavenly one, and whose Builder and
Founder was God : a city which He (God) had
prepared for him : and that it did not become a
man who expected an everlasting possession of
such a city, in such a country, to think of going
to any other country, or to possessions he had
elsewhere, or to live in such a city as he could
build there. This, the author of the efistle to the
Hebrews says, was the language of his sojourn-
ing where he had no possession (instead of
returning to those he had in TJr of the Chaldees),
and to his dwelling in tents there, Heb. xi.
9. 13. 17.
SECTION XIX.— Lor^ Barrington's defence of his
opinion respecting the son of the Maccahean woman,
and the words of Mart/ and Zacharias.
I did not make the quotation from 2 Mac.
viii. 36, as the only one to my purpose. There
are you know several others, v. 9. 11. 14. 23. 29.
But I pitched on that as the clearest ; and I do
not see that you attempt to show how the seven
sons died under a covenant of everlasting life.
The sons of Mary and Zachary, 289
In my way of referring it to the covenant or
promise given to Abraham and all his imitators,
Gen. xviii. 8, of an everlasting possession of
Canaan, it is very plain ; and that they expected
a resurrection to a life over vi^hich death should
not prevail again, is plain from the author of the
epistle to the Hebrews, ch. xi. 25, who says, that
though they were tortured, they would not accept
of deliverance, that they might obtain a better re-
surrection ; that is, a resurrection that was better
than the resurrection of the women's sons men-
tioned just before ; viz. the widow's ofZarepta,
and the Shunamite's ; because their resurrection
to life ended again at last in natural death.
I cannot understand Mary and Zachary of a
spiritual salvation. To me the expressions taken
in that sense are all forced and unnatural ; espe-
cially that of SHEWING MERCY TO OUR FATHERS,
AND REMEMBERING His holy covcnant, Luke
i. 72. I think in your way you must insert the
promised ; and so render to perform the meixy
PROMISED to our fathers^ as our translators do ;
though without the least foundation.
SECTION XX. — Our Lord's argument for the resur-
reciion in Luke xx. 37, 38, implies that the soulis
unconscious in a separate state.
Our Saviour s argument for the resurrection,
Luke XX. 37, 38, is an argument to prove that
VOL. III. T
290 Inferences from Luke xx. 37, 38.
good men will be raised. I think that is fully
made out in the Essay on the several Dispensa-
tions, &c. vol. ii. 503. The force of the argument
does not lie in God's being called the God of
Abraham, &c. ; because then Matthew and Mark
do not repeat it so as to make the argument
conclusive ; for they do not use that word when
they give us an account of this argument. Nor
can it lie in these words, God is the God of the
living, and not of the dead. What proof is it, Sir,
that Abrahayn shall be raised, that his soul now
acts and enjoys in a separate state? Instead of
a resurrection being a consequence from this, I
think it must be entirely overthrown by it ; be-
cause I see no use of Abraham's being raised, if
Abraham's soul can act and enjoy without his
being raised. Besides that, supposing the souls of
good men are conscious in a separate state, the
persons, whose souls they are, are not said to
be living, in the language of Scripture. The
style of Scripture is the reverse, and ever calls
persons dead till their souls at the resurrection
are reunited to their proper bodies. This is the
style of Scripture every where ; which always
speaks of the dead being raised, but never
speaks of the living being raised ; and when aS'^.
John had described the first resurrection. Rev.
XX. 4, he says expressly that the rest of the dead
lived not till the end of the thousand years, v. 5.
So that the force of our Saviour s argument for a
Inferences from Luke xx. 37, 38. 291
resurrection can by no means lie in God's being
the God of the living, as you would explain
that phrase.
I find I have not expressed myself so in
shewing where I think the force of this argu-
ment lies, as to make myself understood. I will
endeavour to express my meaning more clearly.
Moses' history informs us that when God ap-
peared at the bush, God called Himself, or said,
lam the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. What
reason had God for giving Himself that title?
The sole reason and foundation of that title is
God's promise to ^^7W/(2W2, Gen. xvii. 7, A?id I
will establish my covenant between me and thee, and
thy seed after thee, in (all) their generations ; to be a
God to thee, and to thy seed after thee. Then He
shews in what sense He will be their God, v. 8,
And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee,
the land of thy sojourning, all the land of Cayiaany
for an everlasting possession : and (thus) I will be
their God, Abraham is the first to whom God
ever promised to be a God, or a Father, or the
Giver of an inheritance ; and this is the first time
He ever promised that inheritance to Abraham;
I mean, so as to specify what it should be, He
renewed this covenant with Isaac and Jacob.
Why then, Sir, to be, or to be called the God of
Abraham, is to be, or to be called the adopting
Father of Abraham ; and, in particular, the Giver
of an everlasting possession of Canaan to Abra-
292 Inferences from Luke xx. 37, 38.
ham for an inheritance. Now since God was, or
was called, the God of Abraham^ &c. at the
bush, when Abraham, Isaac, &c. were all among
the dead, God must raise them up, or He can-
not be, or be called their God ; that is, their
Father by adoption, and, in particular, the Giver
of an everlasting possession in Canaan to them :
for, as it follows, God is not the God of (or the
giver of an everlasting possession to) the dead
(since they cannot receive it), but of {pv to) the
living, who alone can receive it. For all (good
men about whom the question was) live with
Him. So, Sir, you know it may be rendered as
well as TO Him by the rules of grammar: and
the sense requires that it should be so rendered.
And all live with Him, is the same as all shall
live with Him. As the sense of the dead are
raised, v. 37, is the same us that the dead shall
be raised . And the sense of Moses calleth God,
is the same as Moses did call God : but thus
far the argument only concludes in favour of the
resurrection oi Abraham, Isaac ^nd Jacob; which
it must be allowed was not the question ; but
the resurrection of all good men that are dead.
You are satisfied, I see, if our Saviour's argument
concludes strongly for the resurrection of Abra-
ham, Isaac and Jacob, though it concludes only
that God is able to raise others, and that there
is some probability that He will. This I own
does not satisfv me. I cannot but think our
Inferences from Luke xx. 37, 38. 293
Saviour's argument concluded strongly for a
resurrection of all good men, in so important a
point, against the greatest enemies of His doc-
trine, both from the regard we owe to His argu-
ment, and from -the great effect it produced on
the company ; procuring an utter silence from
the Sadducees, not only at that time, as you term
it, but for ever afterwards (as despairing to get
the better of Him in any other point), and a great
applause from the Pharisees. To show therefore
the conclusiveness of our Saviour s argument for
the resurrection of all good men ; it must be
remembered, that when in Genesis God had
promised to be the God o^ Abraham, and at the
same time, particularly, to give him Canaan for
an everlasting possession. He had likewise pro-
mised to be a God unto his seed in (all) their
generations, or unto all his spiritual seed in all
ages ; and to give them Canaan for an ever-
lasting possession also: so that our Saviour's
argument concludes equally for the resurrection
of all Abraham's spiritual seed, as it does for
the resurrection oi Abraham himself, though that
part is not expressed.
294 Proof of a resurrection from
SECTION XXI.— The fact of a resurrection inferred
from the Talmud^ and from certain passages in the
Pentateuch.
I think the argument that the Talmud draws
for a resurrection from Exod. vi. 8, and Deut.
xi. 9, has great force in it ; because God esta-
blished a covenant with Abraham to give him an
everlasting possession of Canaan (Gen. xviii. 8),
as well as U7ito his seed : and Abraham's posses-
sion can be only a possession in his own person,
as has been observed before. But I think the
argument cannot be as you put it ; for a cove-
nant between two parties cannot possibly re-
quire that the two parties should subsist to see
the performance of it. If I should covenant
with your son (if you had one) ray estate, at the
expiration of the term of seven years, does this
imply that you and I must live to see this cove-
nant performed ? The law will oblige my re-
presentatives to perform this covenant to your
son, though we should both die before the per-
formance.
Since Moses informs us (Gen. xv. 1), that
God told Abraham that He would be his e.vceeding
great reward, and that exceeding great reward
comes out afterwards to be the everlasting pos-
session of Canaan after death, ch. xvii. 7, 8, I
think it is more agreeable to the rules of inter-
pretation to suppose, that an author so well
the Pentateuch and the Talmud. 29e5
versed in Mosei writings as the author of the
epistle to the Hebrexvs appears to have been,
when he uses these words, the ixcompense of
REWARD, in relation to Moses, should be under-
stood to mean the everlasting possession of
Canaan, rather than the honour of leading the
children of Israel to the promised land : besides,
I reckon that the author of the epistle to the
Hebrews *' cannot mean his conducting the chil-
dren of Israel to the land of Canaan as the
recompense of reward ;" because he reckons
that to have been his affliction; the affliction
that he suffered with the people of God, and which
HE PREFERRED to all the trcasurcs of Egypt, and
to have borne the reproach of Christ (or of the
anointed people), which he preferred to the honour
of being called the son of Pharaoh's daughter ; and
that the recompense of reward, to which he had
his eye, was what made him choose to suffer
those afflictions with the people of God, and to
esteem that reproach of Christ, or of the anoin-
ted people; and therefore cannot be those
afflictions, or that reproach, but something very
different from them, and even some future thing,
to which he had his eye.
296 On Solomon's notion of
SECTION XXU,'--Meaning of the word ''blessing''
in the Old Testament,
" Blessing," in its original acceptation, signi-
fying all the blessedness of our first parents,
before any part of the curse took place that was
pronounced upon them, and the blessedness
that David speaks of in the xxxiid Psalm
being interpreted by St, Paul to stand for the
whole blessedness that our final justification
shall give us, Rom. iv. 2, 3. 9. 11 (as blessing
all it does, Gal. iii. 8, 9, compared with v. 14
and ver. 29), when (as St. John tells us, Rev.
xxii. 3) there shall he no more curse, and when
all the original blessing shall be restored, v. 14 ;
I think I am very well warranted from these
considerations to give blessedness in the xxxiid
Psalm that extended signification which you
complain of as not necessarily belonging to it.
SECTION XXIII.—O/j Solomon's notion of ever-
lasting ///e, Prov. iii. l6 — 19-
If Solomo7t means everlasting life, by the tree
of life, which he asserts Wisdom to be, Prov.
iii. 16 — 19, the passage rises very beautifully;
otherwise it is flat and inaccurate. Let us try
it both ways. *' In Wisdom's right hand are
length of days, or long life ; in her left hand
riches and honour. And as all her ways
everlast'mg life, Pro v. iii. 16 — 19. 297
entitle us to honour and the esteem of others,
so they likewise afford both peace and pleasure
to our own minds here, and such an everlasting
life hereafter, as the tree of life would have
afforded mankind, if they had not been debarred
from, it." Let us put it the other way. '*In
Wisdom's right hand is long life ; in her left
hand riches and the esteem of others ; all her
ways at the same time give both peace and
pleasure to our own minds ; and she gives long
life." You will agree, I dare say, that nothing
can be more against the rules of good writing
than the last paraphrase, or more agreeable to
them than the first.
If Solomon and the other sacred writers were
of opinion, that as all bodies went to the grave,
so all souls went to hades, the house of uncon-
sciousness and silence (Eccl. ix. 10. Psalm cv.
17. Isaiah xxxviii. 18, according to the version
of the LXX), and were of opinion, that as long
as the body lay in the grave, and the soul con-
tinued in hades, there was no thought or action ;
then I think judgment musty with them, pre-
suppose a resurrection. And that I take to
have been the case. It is men, and not the
souls of men, that are every where in Scripture
said to die, to rise, and to he judged.
298 *' The new heaven and the new earths
SECTION XXIV.— TAe new heaven and the new earth
probably figured the paradisaical state in the land of
Canaan.
I own there may be a new heaven and a new
earth, without a paradisaical state in Canaan ;
but, putting the passages of Scripture together,
which relate to that matter, from the xviith of
Genesis to the end of the book of Revelation,
I think it most probable, that the new heaven,
and new earth, means the paradisaical state in
Canaan. The natural and easy meaning of
restitution of all things is the restoring them to
their first state ; that is, to their paradisaical
state. But language will not allow us to make the
restitution of all things mean the accomplish-
ment of predictions. But if it would, I do not
apprehend it would alter the case much : for
I think the prophets foretell the restitution of
all things to the paradisaical state.
If the teaiporal salvation of some good men
be to the eternal perdition, that the ungodly
have suffered in several instances, as the flood,
&c. ; I confess tlien I should be of your opinion,
and think ** that these judgments, and the sal-
vation from them, weakened the expectation of
a future state ; especially considering some cir-
cumstances that you very justly fling into this
consideration ;" but I think the eternal perdition
of ungodly men can only be equalled by the
Exposition of Psalm xvii. 15. 299
eternal salvation of good men. And if that
way of thinking be just, I conclude men in the
early ages of the world would argue from such
judgments as eternally destroyed the wicked,
for an everlasting salvation of the righteous.
SECTION XXV.-.^ defence of Lord Barringtoti's
opinion concerning Asaph,
If Asaph at last attained to a belief of a future
recompense to good men, then there are indi-
cations of a future recompense before Daniel.
That is the main question between us. Whether
it is to be in a paradisaical state of Canaan, is
but incidentally flung in by me, in my two last
letters, in order to open my whole mind to
you, not indeed with the art of a disputant, who
says no more than is absolutely necessary to
support his point; but with the frankness of a
friend of truth, corresponding with you on a
subject to which I invited you.
I cannot but think the words, Psalm xvii. 15,
words that are plainly expressive of a resur-
rection. But you are stumbled when you
reflect how good men could be so disturbed at
the prosperity of the wicked, consistently with
that belief. I do not know that the texts that
express this disturbance are so frequent as you
seem to think them. As far as I know, they are
but few. And why must those few be supposed
300 Meaning of 1 Chron. xvi. 15. 17.
to be the real sentiments of the authors of those
compositions, where this objection occurs? What
is a more common way of writing, especially in
poetical performances, than to state an objec-
tion in the strongest manner, only to give the
better answer to it? And I think such answers
are given wherever this difficulty is put.
SECTION XXVI. — The everlastirig promise to Abra-
ham pointed at in 1 Chron. xvi. lo, and in Acts vii.
5, 6, 7.
I apprehend that the promise made to Aby^a-
ham of the everlasting possession of Canaan is
pointed out, 1 Chron. xvi. 15, in these words,
Be ye mindful always of His covenant. God
calls the promise of giving Abraham and his
seed Canaan for an everlasting possession, my
COVENANT, xuT e^ox^v, Gen. xvii. 7. 19. 21 ;
whereas the promise, Gen. xv., to give Canaan to
Abraham's seed, in the fourth generation, is only
called A covenant, v. 18. This His covenant
is also pointed out in the words that follow.
(1 Chron. xvi. 15), The word which He com-
manded to a thousand generations. That
is, I think, circumcision, which He commanded
in all their generations, Gen. xvii. 9 ; and circum-
cision was, inter alia, a sign and token that God
would perform His promise of giving Abraham
and his seed Canaan for an everlasting posses-
Promise to Abraham alluded to by St, Stephen, 301
sion. This His covenant is likewise pointed
out, 1 Chron. xvi. 17, in these words : an ever-
lasting covenant being so called. Gen. xvii. 8.
13, 14, as being a covenant of the everlasting
possession of Canaan, v. 8.
I likewise think the promise of Abraham's
posterity's inheriting Canaan^ in the fourth gene-
ration, is hinted by St, Stephen, Acts vii. 5, 6, 7,
referring to the history of that promise, as it is
recorded. Gen. xv. 18. And I think the pro-
mise to give Abraham the everlasting possession
of Canaan is hinted by Stephen under the notion
of the covenant of circumcision, v. 8, referring to
Gen. xvii. 8, 9. The covenant of circumcision
is the covenant that circumcision was a sign
and seal of, as I have just said.
SECTION XXYil,— Lord Barrington's theory con-
sistent with the words of Abraham, Gen. xviii. 23,
You think Abraham could not have any ex-
pectation of a future reward, even after he had
received all these promises ; because he ex-
presses himself on the occasion of a temporal
calamity to be brought on Sodom and Gomorrah,
as he does. Gen. xviii. 25. If he had expressed
himself so on occasion of a common calamity
that was to have been brought on these cities, in
the ordinary course of things, I think indeed it
would follow, that either Abraham had not anv
302 On the words of God to Abraham,
expectation of a future state of rewards for good
men ; or at least, that through inadvertency, and
his overconcern for Lot and his family, he had
not talked consistently with it. But that was
not the case. God is here represented as a
Judge, who had heard a great cry of the
wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah, and came
down to see how it was, and to judge accord-
ingly. He is represented as finding the fact to
be true, as sending two angels, extraordinary
messengers, to destroy it, and Himself as send-
ing down fire and brimstone from heaven upon
them. And surely in such a judicial process it
vras very fit for Abraham to say, notwithstanding
his belief in the resurrection of good men to a
future life, Will not the Judge of all the earth
do right, and not destroy the righteous with the
wicked? Abraham knew not only that God could
not, but that He had not done it in other like
judicial proceedings ; as in the case of the
flood. For though it repented the Lord that
He had made man, by reason of his wicked-
ness ; yet He saved Noah, whom He had alone
found righteous in that generation. Gen. vi. 7.
vii. 1.
Allusion to the possession of Canaan, Heb. xi. 303
SECTION XXyUL— The author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews plainly alludes (chap, xi.) to the everlasting
possession of Canaan, — A dejlnition of the word
" Gospel:'
I have the happiness to agree with you in the
view in which you see several branches of the
argument in the xith of the Hebrews, But I
have the misfortune to continue to differ from
you about Abraharriy Isaac and Jacob, and
about Moses, And I cannot imagine what you
will do with the 29th verse, where the author of
the epistle says, of all the worthies he had
mentioned in that chapter, that though they had
through faith obtained a good report, yet they had
not received the promise. That promise therefore
cannot be the temporal inheritance of Canaan ;
since all from Joshua had obtained it. And I
beg you will help me to any other promise that
could be referred to these, than that of the ever-
lasting possession of Canaan, '' The promise
that in thee {or in thy seed) all the families or
nations of the earth should be blessed,'" is not the
promise of sending Jesus Christ, but the promise
of giving Canaan to all Abraham's imitators in
more general words, which afterwards came to
be explained thus ; that in blessing Abraham
with the promise of the everlasting possession of
Canaan, He also promised to bless all the na-
tions or families of the earth, that should become
304 Meaning of the word *' Gospel.''
his spiritual seed, with the like everlasting pos-
session. For blessing, as has been observed
already, signifies everlasting life. So I said in
my former letter it appeared to me to lie in
Ge?jesisy for which I gave my reasons. And so
I add St, Paul thought it lay there ; for he calls
this the gospel, Gal. iii. 18 ; i. e. the good news
of everlasting life. So I take gospel to signify
here ; and so it also signifies, Heb. iv. 2 ;
standing there for the good news of an ever-
lasting rest, in the everlasting possession of
Canaan^ that David told the Israelites of his
time yet remained for them, if they would obey
God's voice. But I troubled you with so much
about this text in my former letter, that it would
be impertinent to trouble you with more upon it
here. Gospel has the same sense with a little
variation, Mark i. 1, The begin?ii?ig of the gospel
of Jesus Christ, the Son of God ; i. e. the begin-
ning of the good news of eternal life in heaven,
brought by Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who
hath brought (heavenly) life and immortality to
light to the Jews, and life and immortality in
general to the Gentiles. And the good news of
eternal life in heaven, brought by Jesus Christ, is
what is generally signified by the gospel. But I
see it will break in too long on the other parts
of my answer, if I pursue this argument here as
far as it deserves. I will therefore break it off,
and add the remainder in a postscript.
Obscure promises ofafuture life in the prophets. 305
SECTION XXIX. — Daniel gives a clearer revelation
of a fid me Ife than any of his predecessors or con-
temporaries.
It is certain that we find the revelation of a
future life clearer in Dufiiel than it was before.
All the revelations to the Jews about that time
grow clearer, as well as this about the resurrec-
tion. God had undoubtedly wise ends to serve
by it. A people in their distressed circum-
stances wanted support from the clearer views
of the glorious state of the kingdom of the
Messiah, which is to take place after the first
resurrection. From having clearer discoveries
from God, concerning the resurrection and
eternal life, they spoke more clearly of them
than those before had done. And when they
understood so fully, that many who were in the
dust of the earth were to arise, they saw this
doctrine expressed and implied in some parts
of the former revelation, where otherwise, after
so many ages, and the loss of other writings
and traditionary interpretations, it might have
escaped their notice. But as to " Isaiah, Jere-
miah and Ezekiel,'" I do not wonder they do
not " back their calls to repentance with pro-
mises of a future life ;" because I apprehend
they, as all the other Jewish prophets, were
sent to the nation, to call it to repentance, on
the promise and denunciation of national bless-
TOL. III. U
306 Obscurities in the Scriptures are
ings and cnrses ; but were not sent to call
individuals to repentance (to whom alone any
thing that is future can belong), as indeed John
the Baptist in some sense was, and especially as
the apostles afterwards were ; namely, to indivi-
duals, and to them only. Yet these prophets,
in other views, seem to me to speak of the
resurrection as I have expressed my sense to
you in my former letters.
SECTION XXX.^The argument from Psalm xlv.
defended^ and the necessity/ of the close study of revela-
tion strongly urged,
I begin to think my argument from Psalm
xlv. conclusive ; since you are pleased to ac-
quaint me, "that you have nothing to offer
against it, in which you can satisfy yourself."
I asfree with vou that we should be cautious in
all our inquiries ; especially in those which re-
late to the scheme of God's dispensations to
mankind ; they being of a very great compass,
and we having but short accounts of some of
them. I assure you I have not set myself to
make new discoveries. God is my witness I have
had no guide but my Bible, and I have only
followed where I thought that would lead me.
In going over I have started many of these
notions, whilst I have been pursuing other game,
and had not the least thought of meeting with
designed to quicken our diligence, 307
this quarry. I suppose the accounts we have
of the dispensations of God to mankind are
given to us, that we may search and pry into
them. If I can find out nothing, I am tho-
roughly contented to stay till the whole scene
shall be laid open to us in the future state.
Yet I apprehend we may be too easy and indo-
lent, as well as too curious and impatient. If
Sir Isaac Nexvton had been content to have
staid till he arrived at the regions of full light
before he had set himself to trace the works of
God in the natural world, we had lost his sur-
prising discoveries. If we can spell out any
thing in the moral scenes of things, let us thank-
fully receive it, and make the use, and enjoy
the pleasure, that results from it, whilst we
live in so deistical an age, and in a world of
disappointments, care, and sorrow. P^w/ indeed
flung away all his Jewish knowledge, as of no
avail to salvation. But "if he had quite flung
it away, as of no use at all," we had lost many
beautiful allusions, explications, and arguments
for the Christian religion, drawn from the Jewish
economy scattered up and down all his epistles,
and the argument that is so nobly managed
against apostatising to Judaism, from the begin-
ning to the end of the epistle to the Hebrews.
I think, with you, that a religion that is of the
highest value, must be a religion that contains
plain directions of duty, and plain promises of
308 The pf^omise of a future inheritance in Canaan
a reward, sufficient to encourage the bulk of
mankind to their duty in all circumstances, to
strengthen against temptations, to calm the
affections, and give comfort under afflictions ;
and that what must do this must be plain in
those articles, or it can be of no use to the
unlearned : — such is the Christian religion. But
then, as there are first principles in that religion
that are plain, and of the greatest use, and con-
sequently the most obvious to the bulk of man-
kind, so there are doctrines for those that are
advancing towards perfection. Such is this of
the scheme of God's dispensations to mankind,
and of a future reward of a paradisaical Canaan
previous to the more glorious reward of the
third heaven. If that be not so clear or certain,
I do not see how it can hurt the bulk of man-
kind. It is much at one to them where they
are to be happy after the resurrection, or in
what degree. They believe they shall be ex-
ceedingly happy : happy enough to reward
them infinitely abundantly above all their
self-denial and sufferings. But why may not
men of more leisure and extended thought see
what gradation God has observed in revealing
this happiness of the third heaven to us, or
when He revealed it ? And observe how well this
and all other of His revelations of future happi-
ness were suited to the condition of men and
things at the time they were made. I cannot
one of the obscure doctrines of the Bible. 309
but think these proportions in revelation the
greatest proof of the truth of it, and to afford an
entertainment to the mind, whicli makes the
histories of kingdoms and empires, and all the
boasted scenes of their various changes and
revolutions, not only dwindle, but appear as
nothing before us.
SECTION XXXl.^Rulefor sound Scripturalinter-
pretation,
I think we are to interpret passages in the
Old Testament as we do passages in other
books : viz. by the rules of grammar and
rhetoric, and by the context. Whatever these
rules determine to be the meaning of a passage,
we are to take to be the meaning of it. Whatever
we take by these rules to be the meaning of the
words, we are to suppose they to whom they
were spoken or written understood to be the
meaning of them, unless we see plain facts to
show they did not understand them so. But
if, on the other hand, we see facts that show
they understood those words according to the
common rules of speech, that is a farther proof
that they understood them in that sense. And
if we find subsequent writers, especially inspired,
understand them in the same sense, that is a
third argument that the persons, to whom they
were spoken, understood them as we now
310 The design of revelation
do. I have endeavoured to make this my
rule; and after having proved my opinion, the
best that I could, from words and facts in the
Old Testament, have endeavoured to corroborate
the sense I have given them by passages in the
New Testament. How well I have squared this,
and my former letters, by it, I must submit to
you. You at last, after all I have said in my
former letters, seem to think that God made
no express revelation of future recompenses
after this life till Christ came into the world.
Yet surely, my good friend, on a little recollec-
tion, you will allow that future recompenses
after this life were revealed by Daniel and the
minor prophets, I must still be of opinion they
were revealed from the beginning. What can be
the design of revelation ? To discover to us our
duty ? That is wTitten in our hearts. To dis-
cover our duty to us may be of great use indeed,
after the law in our hearts is greatly perverted
by corrupt traditions and usages ; and there-
fore our Saviour dwells much upon it, and with
the greatest propriety and advantage ; not only
natural, but revealed religion having been
grossly corrupted by the Scribes and Pharisees,
and by the idolatrous priests and theologers
under the authority of tradition and oracles,
both before and at His appearance. But this
does not seem to have been the case in the
earlier ages of the world. Nor does revelation
to supply motives to obedience, 311
from Adam to Moses turn upon it. On the
other hand, supposing men to know their duty,
, it gives them motives to perform it. These
motives must either be the promises and threat-
enings of this life, or of another. Now I think
the promises and threatenings of this life
too feeble to animate men to their duty at
all times and in all cases ; and therefore I
should from hence be apt to conclude that
it was the promises and threatenings of another
life. How feeble would the motive have
been to Adams repentance, who had been in
Eden, had seen himself a son of God there,
an heir of dominion, bliss, glory and immor-
tality, to have understood that, if he reined in
all his appetites and passions, and was obedient
and submissive to God's will in all things, he
should, in recompense, have a skin of a beast
to cover him from the noxious air, and fruit
enough from the sweat of his brow, to furnish
him with bread for his sustenance. If God
designed to recover Adam to his obedience, we
must suppose He would use more powerful mo-
tives than these : much more if He, in infinite
mercy, intended to preserve a generation among
his descendants, who, while the greater part
of mankind would worship and obey the devil,
should obey and imitate God, as the children of
His family, and preserve His faith and worship
alive in the world, and thereby make a people
312 Recapitulation of the evidence concerning
that should be prepared for the Lord when He
came; a people that should be ready to receive
Him, and His apostles, whom He sent to call
the Gentiles from idolatry and vice to the
worship of the one God, through one Mediator,
Jesus Christ, the Righteous, and to the practice
of all virtue.
SECTION XXXII. — Recapitulation of the evidence
produced from Scripture that the promise to Abraham
referred to the everlasting possession of Canaan,
And as it seems but reasonable on these
accounts to think that God would use other
motives with mankind for these purposes than
temporal rewards and punishments ; so I must
be of opinion He actually did propose others,
till you will be so good as to show me how,
among the many texts I have brought to sup-
port a contrary opinion, I am, without the help
of it, to account for those in particular which
follow ; as, what the everlasting possession of
Canaan is, that is promised to Abraham, as well as
to his seed in their generations, or in all
their generations (for none are excepted), when
neither Abraham nor any of his seed, till the
fourth generation, had any possession in Canaan,
besides a burying place which he purchased of
Ephron: how Abraham came to plant a ^^rortf,
and there to call on the name of the Lord, as the
the everlasting possession of Canaan. 313
EVERLASTING GoD, sooii after God had made a
covenant with him to give him the everlasting
possession of Canaan, Gen. xxi. 33, when He
had never done it before ; unless it was to praise
God as the giver of an everlasting possession to
him and his seed after him : how we can,
without this notion, understand what the sacred
writers meant by everlasting covenant^ everlasting
way, everlastifig mercy, everlasting kindness, ever-
lasting love^ everlasting joy, everlasting salvation,
everlasting light, everlasting portion, everlasting
inheritance: expressions that occur in several
parts of the Old Testament, and I think all of
them before Daniel? how our Saviours argu-
ment against the Sadducees can be made out
to be worthy of Him, without supposing that
the foundation of God's calling Himself at the
bush, the God of Abraham, &c. was God's
having promised to be Abraham's God, Gen.
xvii. 7, and to give him and his spiritual
seed Canaan for an everlasting possession,
v. 8? What is that heavenly country, and what
that city, that the author of the epistle to the
Hebrews tells us Abraham looked for, whose
Maker and Builder is God ? or what is that city
which God prepared for him, for which reason He
was not ashamed to be called his God ? And must
not that city be the heavenly Jerusalem men-
tioned in the following chapter, v. 22 ? which
St. John says, he saw coming down from heaven
314 Recapitulation of the evidence concerning
like a bride adorned for her husband. Rev. xxi. 1 .
What is the covenant of eternal life which the
seven sons in the Maccabees died under ? How
Zacharias could say that Christ came to shew
mercy to our fathers, viz. Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob, in remembrance of His holy covenant, &c.
but by coming in order to receive and give the
Spirit, which was to raise them up to the ever-
lasting possession of Canaan ? in what sense
Abraham is said by St. Paul, to be heir of the
world, through the righteousness of faith, Rom.
iv. 13, but as he was to be heir of the paradi-
saical Canaan : how God (^foreseeing that He
would justify the Gentiles to eternal life through
faith) preached the gospel, or that gospel (viz.
of justifying the Gentiles to eternal life) to
Abraham: unless it was by saying, that all
nations should be blessed in Him, i. e. in the
good news of the everlasting possession of
Canaan, belonging to all his imitators ? What is
that promise that none of the Old Testament, or
Apocryphal worthies have obtained, Heb. xi. 39,
if it be not paradisaical Canaan? and w^hat is
that better thing that God had provided for the
Christian Hebrews, that without them the Old
Testament and Apocryphal worthies might not be
made perfect, if it be not the third heaven? ver.
ult. What are the covenants preceding the
giving of the law and the service (Rom. ix. 2),
if not the two covenants to Abraham ? The one,
the everlasting possessmi of Canaan, 31 5
that his carnal seed in the fourth generation
should inherit Canaan, which is mentioned, Gen.
XV. ; and that other, that he and his spiritual
seed should have the everlasting possession
of Canaan, which is mentioned, Gen. xvii.
What is the inheritance that we believing Gen-
tiles have from God, through Abraham, who is
the father of us all, Rom. iv. lf>, (and which
must be supposed to be different from our in-
heritance from God through Christ, as our Elder
Brother,) if it be not the everlasting possession
of Canaan ? For the promise of Abraham's being
heir of the world does not only belong to Abra-
ham, but to his seed, v. 13. And that promise is
sure to all his seed, not only to that (faithful seed)
which were of the law (or the believing Jews),
hut to that which is only of the faith of Abraham
(i. e. the believing Gentiles), v. 16. For we are
but ONE SEED (Gal. iii. 16), being all one
(seed) by faith in Christ Jesus. And if we are all
one (seed) in Christ Jesus (as the Clermont copy
reads it), then are we Abraham's seed, and (Abra-
ham's) heirs according to the promise, viz. the
promise made to Abraham, Gen. xiii. 3, ex-
plained. Gen. xvii. 8, and confirmed, Gen. xxii.
18. For he was the original grantee of the
everlasting possession of Canaan; and we
come to be entitled to an everlasting posses-
sion in it through our adoption in him ; or, in
other words, as his seed, i. e. his imitators.
316 Recapitulation of the evidence.
When and how are the meek to inherit the earth,
as our Saviour tells us they yet shall (Matt.
V. 5), even so long after it had been said that
they should inherit it, Psalm xxxvii. 2 ? And
what is the hundred fold that they shall re-
ceive in this time with persecution, who
have lost houses and lands for Christ's sake,
as well as in the world to come life everlasting?
And when and where shall they have that
hundred fold (Mark x. 29, 30), unless it be in
Canaan, at the thousand years' reign ? What is
Solomons tree of life, that Wisdom is to those that
find her, over and above long life, riches, honour,
pleasantness and peace ? What is the restitu-
tion of all things, that God spake of by the
mouth of all His holy prophets since the world
began (Acts iii. 21), but the everlasting pos-
session of Paradise, hinted probably in the ser-
mons of the antediluvian prophets and preachers
of righteousness, and most expressly promised
to Abrahamy Isaac and Jacob ? How were the
Gentile Ephesians chosen (to eternal life) before
the foundation of the world (irpo xoLTOLJ^oXrig
xoa-ixov), or before the Jewish state (Eph. i. 4),
but in God's giving the everlasting possession of
Canaan to all Abraham's imitators ? or, to add
no more, where was eteiiial life promised by God
before the world began (or before the times of
ages or jubilees, Trpo ^povcov alcuviwu, i. e. before
the Jewish state commenced), and which was
Conclusion of the Letter. 317
afterwards manifested to the Gentiles through
PauVs preaching (Tit. i. 2, 3), but in the promise
of this everlasting possession of Canaan to Abra-
ham, and all his spiritual seed, of what nations
or family soever they should be ?
I 'return you my hearty thanks for all the
objections you have urged against my opinion,
as far as it has been expressed either in so much
of the Essay, &c. as I have espoused, or as far
as I have endeavoured to support it in my two
former letters. Your objections have put me
upon reconsidering the matter carefully, as
several of them required I should ; from the
most plausible manner in which you have urged
them, and from their being the best that I
believe can be urged. I flatter myself you will
acquit me from any breach of the promise I
made you in the beginning of my letter. I am
sure I have had no reserve. I wish my letter
as faultless in every other respect. If any thing
occurs to you, that you think may assist my
inquiries on this subject, be so kind as to impart
it to me. May the God of truth lead us into
it, and direct our inquiries for the promoting
it!
When I received your letter I was very ill.
My sickness continued for some time. Before I
was well recovered I took a journey into
Essex, at the time I had the pleasure to see
you in my way. There I found my hands
318 Passages from Job concerning a future life.
full ; and so they have been ever since ray
return, in order to get up the arrears of business
here that my journey had brought upon me.
I got the first hours of leisure last week ; and as
soon as I could get my letter transcribed, and
an opportunity of a private conveyance for a
long epistle, on a subject that will not pay the
postage, I have transmitted it to you, with the
best assurances, that I can give you at a dis-
tance, that
I am, Reverend Sir,
your very faithful,
humble servant,
Barrington.
SECTION 1. — Passages from Job, which shew that he
had an expectation of a future Ife.
P. S. Though I gave up the famous passage
in Job in mine of January 4th, as not relating to
the resurrection, yet I think there are passages
in that book that plainly shew that Job had an
expectation of a future life. Ch. xiii. 15, \Q, he
seems to me to say, '* that as the waters fail
from the sea at the tide of ebb, and return at
the tide of flood, and as a flood of rain is dried
up, but yet returns on the next great rains ;"
so man lieth down in the grave, and riseth not till
the heavens be no more ; nor will they till then
Remarks on Genesis xiii. 3. 319
azmke, and be raised out of their sleep. See also
V. 14, 15, and chap, xxvii. 8. He asks, fVhat is
the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained,
when God taketh away his soul? This is a ques-
tion that I think he could not possibly have
asked, unless he had supposed that a sincere
man had the best reason for hope when God
took him out of the world.
SECTION IL— The promise, Gen. xiii. 3, and xxii. 18,
does not refer to our Lord, hut to Abraham's spiritual
seed,
I will now endeavour to show that the
promise which God made to Abraham, Gen.
xiii. 3. xxii. 18, In thee or in thy seed I will
bless all the nations of the earth (as it is
quoted and argued by St, Paul, Gal. iii. 8),
does not mean, that in or by one of thy de-
scendants, namely, Jesus Christ, I will bless
all the nations of the earth; but that it means
that I will bless all that shall become thy spiri-
tual seed, or that shall imitate thee. In order
to it, you must give me leave to premise, 1st,
that in my way of understanding the 2d and
3d of the Galatians, with St. Paul, justification
(ch. ii. 16. iii. 18), or accounting for right-
eousness (v. 6), the spirit (v. 2. 5. 14), blessing,
or the blessing of Abraham (v. 8, 9 — 14), gospel,
(v. 8), life (v. 21), and inheritance (v. 18), are
320 The blessing of Abraham.
in effect the same thing, and are promiscuously
used by him in this chapter, as any one of these
terms will best suit the other expressions he
has occasion to use in the several parts of it. I
think the promiscuous use of these terms may
be very well accounted for thus : justification is
God's final acquittal of a man from a charge ;
which, if it had been true, must have ended in
death ; but which, being adjudged to be false,
brings on the sentence of eternal life : this
acquittal or justification is, in other words, being
accounted righteous : or having truth (i. e. sincere
obedience) accounted for righteoustiess. The Spirit
is to raise us up to eternal life, and was, in the
mean time, the earnest of that resurrection to
the Galatians: blessiijg signifies, the removal
of the curse, and the restoration of the original
blessing, namely, bliss and immortality. The
blessing of Abraham, is the blessing promised to
Abraham ; viz. that which was promised in
general terms to him, Gen. xiii. 3, In thee shall
all families (or nations) be blessed; but which
came to be more particularly explained, ch.
xvii. 7, 8, that God would bless Abraham and
all his seed (or his pious imitators) with the
everlasting possession of Canaan (called there-
fore an inheritance, Gal. iii. 18), and which God
afterwards confirms by an oath, that i7i his seed
all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Gen.
xxii. 18; so that St, Paul makes no difference
Meaning of " /iis seed,'' Gal. iii. 16. 321
between any of these three promises, the second
being but an explication of the first ; and the
third but a confirmation of the first and second
by the oath of God. Yet the first promise is
more generally referred to by St. Paul in this
chapter; particularly v. 17, as plainly appears
by the note of time that he adds ; for it is 430
years before the giving of the law that God
said to Abraham (Gen. xiii. 3), In thee shall all
nations he blessed. Life is eternal life ; inheri-
tance is that right we have to it ; and gospel is
the good news either of the title, or of the actual
inheritance of it.
2. I must premise that «S'^ Paul uses pro-
mise and covenant promiscuously ; both of them
signifying the promise or covenant that God
would give justification, righteousness, the Spirit,
blessing, or the blessiiig of Abraham, inheritance
or life, and glad tidings to Abraham and his seed.
3. Moreover, seed^ or one seed, in this chapter
signifies, Abraham's one believing seed of all
nations, particularly of Jews and Gentiles, now
made one by being baptized into Jesus Christ,
and putting on Christ, v. 27 (as Christians used
to do new clothes after baptism), whereby,
without any manner of distinction of Jew or
Gentile, bond or free, male or female, we all be-
come one seed ; whereas he, that was not of
Abraham's family, or that was an hired servant
in it, or a female, could not be circumcised.
VOL. in. X
322 Meaning of " his seed,'' Gal. iii. 16,
And as the apostle adds, if we he one seed in Christ
Jesus (as the Clermont copy reads it, and that
is to be sure the true reading), then are xve Abra-
ham's seed (or one seed), and heirs according to
the promise; that is to say, more generally, heirs
of the blessing of Abraham, that was promised.
Gen. xiii. 3; or, more particularly, heirs of the
everlasting possession of Canaan, promised
Gen. xvii. 7, 8, and confirmed by an oath to
his seed, or to those who should be his imitators,
Gen. xxii. 18. This seed, or one seed, stands
with St. Paul in opposition to seeds, or two
sorts of seed, viz. those that are of faith Ix
Trlcrrscog), V. 7, and those that are of the works of
the law (l^ipymv i^o[j.oo), V. 10. St, Paul speaks
of these two sorts of seeds, Rom. iv. 13 — ^18,
and ix. 6 — 9 ; only he varies the expression in
the last place, calling the two seeds, the seed of
(or according to) the flesh ; and the seed of (or
according to) the promise. St. Peter speaks in
the like strain. Acts iii. 25, 26: Ye are the
children of the covenant which God made with our
fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed
shall all the kindt^eds of the earth be blessed. And
therefore adds, U7ito you (as part of that seed)
first {God having raised up His Son Jesus) sent Him
to bless you, in turning every one of you from his
INIQUITIES. In consequencq of which they
would certainly become righteous, and of course
obtain justification to eternal life ; expressed by
'' And to thy seed, which is Christy 323
St. Peter, v. 19. 21, by their sins being blotted
out, when the times of refreshing should come from
the presence of the Lord (who will be revealed
against the wicked in flaming fire) ; and by the
restitution of all things, viz. to their paradisaical
state. By all this I think it appears, that the
blessing promised to Abraham, in these words.
In thee, or in thy seed, shall all the nations of the
earth be blessed (as the words stand in Genesis,
and according to the interpretation of all the
New Testament writers that quote them), sig-
nify the good news of everlasting life (or of the
Spirit, who is to raise us up to everlasting life),
and not Jesus Christ, notwithstanding that He
was of the seed oi Abraham according to the
flesh. But this will appear more fully by what
follows.
4. In the last place, St. Paul gives this one
seed a name in the singular number, viz. Chnst,
V. 16, 17; that is, the anointed (\\z. seed). This
one seed having received the promise of the
Spirit, or the spirit that had been promised,
(which is our unction, 2 Cor. i. 21, 22. I John
ii. 20. 27), V. 14. Christ has this signification,
Psalm cv. 15 (teach not mine anointed, Xpia-Toug,
according to the LXX), and Heb. xi. 26. That
the seed (or the one seed), v. 16, signifies all
those who are made one, by being anointed
with one Spirit, or by being baptized into one
Spirit, as the one Spirit of the one Lord (Media-
324 Scope of St. Paul's argument
tor), and of one God, even the Father, and
does not mean Jesus Christ, will appear more
plainly if we consider the thread of St, Paul's
argument in the Galatians. His argument is to
^ prove, that the Galatians as well as other Gen-
tiles, and even the Jews, were justified by faith,
and not by the works of the law, ch. ii. 16 ;
and the sum of his argument to support this
assertion is, that they received the Spirit (the
earnest of this resurrection, and by which they
should at last be raised from the dead), by
believing the word which they had heard from
Paul, and not by the works of the law, v. 2 ;
just as he (viz. Paul) that ministered the Spirit
to them, and wrought other great miracles
among them (the special miracles of an apostle),
did it by the faith of that word of the gospel,
which he had heard from Christ, and not by
the works of the law, v. 5; and just as Abraham
was justified by believing, v. 6. He therefore
adds that men only became the children (or
seed) of Abraham by believing God, as Abraham
did, or by imitating his faith, v. 7 ; and God,
foreseeing that He would (in His due time)
justify the heathen (or all nations) to eternal
life through faith, preached the good news
beforehand to Abraham, in the promise made
to him. Gen. xiii. 3, In thee shall all nations be
blessed, v. 8; so that it follows, that all they which
be of faith (or of the seed of faith, Ix Trla-Tews) are
in the iiid chapter of Galatians. 325
(now and were then) blessed (dlou^) with faithful
Abraham, v. 9 ; whereas, on the contrary, that
^Q^Aoi Abraham, who ares§ %py(oj/ vofxau, must be
under the curse of the law, instead of the bless-
ing (or justification to eternal life), according
to the doctrine of the Testament itself; Ha-
bakkuk, having asserted, that the just (or right-
eous) shall live (th3,t is, eternally) bi/ faith (i. e.
by faith or faithfulness alone) (whereas in truth
Christ has died to redeem us Jews from the
curse that we were under by the law, being
made a curse for us, and to impart the blessing
of Abraham to the Gentiles, through their faith
in the word, which they had heard from St. Paul,
V. 10 — 14). Now, adds St. Paul, a covenant
among men is a thing that cannot be uttered by
any but the parties themselves : it is unalterable
by any one else, v. 15 : but (the covenants or)
the promises that God made to Abraham, He
made to Abraham and to his seed, v. 16. So
they run, Gen. xiii. 3. xvii. 7, 8. xxii. 18. Then
it cannot be to seeds ; for seed is but one sort
of seed, and not two or more sorts of seeds.
Now, says he, that one seed is Christ, or all the
people that are anointed with the Spirit; and
therefore the promises of blessing belong to you,
who are of the one seed of faith, and have by it
received the Spirit. And, as he adds, if any
should suggest to you, that the law has dis-
annulled the promise, that in thy seed shall all
326 Scope of St. Paul's argument
nations be blessed, which God had conjirmed (by
an oath, Gen. xxii. 18) to Christ slgXpia-rov, i. e.
to the anointed people) ; I answer, that it is im-
possible : because the first promise of that kind,
made Gen. xiii. 3 (explained and confirmed by
the promise. Gen. xvii. 7, 8, and xxii. 18), was
four hundred and thirty years before the law,
V. 17; whereas, on the contrary, if the inheritance
of blessing to Abraham had been given by the
law, it could not have been given by the pro-
raise, as it most certainly was ; as may be
plainly seen, Gen. xiii. 3. xvii. 7, 8. xxii. 18.
And if it should still be said, why then vras the
law added ? St. Paul answers, it was added to
show the Israelites the punishment due to every
transgression of the law of nature, by giving
them such a number of more precepts than
there were in the law of nature, and by making
death the penalty of the breach of a great many
of them ; that so the Jews, seeing themselves so
manifestly concluded under sin, both by frequent
breaches of the numerous laws they were
under, and by death, that often followed, might
be led by the law to the gospel, where they
would see that they might obtain righteousness
and life. But this law was only added till
that one seed should come, to whom ihepromise
of life and blessedness is made ; which one seed
is made up of a body of Jews and Gentiles, by
one faith in one God, through one Lord, and by
in the iiid chapter ofGalatians, 327
one Spirit. This law was ordained by angels
in the hand of a mediator, viz. Moses, v. 19.
But still, says he, this very thought suggests
another, that may farther serve to show that
the law could not vacate the promise made to
Abraham and his seed ; because Moses (as
Mr. Locke first showed us), who was the me-
diator at the giving of the law at Sinai, was
only a mediator of a covenant, where but
one of the parties concurred that concurred to
Abrahams covenant. For Abraham's covenant
was a covenant between God and Abraham,
and his one seed of faith. Now Moses was only
a mediator between God (one of the parties
indeed), but was not a mediator between God
and Abraham and the one seed of faith, the
other party to Abraham's covenant ; for Abraham,
and the Gentiles of all nations, who were part
of that one seed of faith, were not there:
whereas \( Moses had been a mediator of such a
covenant at Sinai as could have vacated the
covenant with Abraham and his seed, he
should have been a mediator of a covenant
between both those parties (viz. God, Abraham,
and his spiritual seed of all nations), and not of
a covenant between one of those parties only,
viz. God and quite another party (the carnal
seed of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob), which
\vasthe case at Sinai, v. 20. St. Paul then inter-
sperses some thoughts to show that the law,
328 Conclusion of the Postscript,
instead of being intended to be against the pro-
mises, which God made to Abraham, or to
vacate them, by giving righteousness and life
(which was alone to be had by faith in the pro-
mise), was only intended to bring us all to the
faith of Christ, by which alone the body of the
Gentiles come to be children of God, and with
the believing Jews, v. 25. He then brings his
last argument, to show that we become one
seed by faith in God (through the word of
God, preached by Christ and His apostles),
from the significant rite of initiation, by which
we are baptized into one body and one spirit;
and then concludes, v. ult., that if we are one
(seed) in (by faith in God through) Christ Jesus,
then are we Abraham's (one) seed (to whom the
promise was made. Gen. xiii. 3, as explained,
xvii. 7, 8, and confirmed, xxii. 18), and (conse-
quently) heirs according to the promise.
Lord Barrington to Dr. Lardner.
Becket House, December 30, 1729-
SECTION I. — Importance of frequently referring to
the Old Testament in expounding the Neiv.
Rev. Sir, — I cannot but own that I wish, with
you, ** that Christianity may be proved from the
New Testament alone, without being under a ne-
cessity of recurring to the Old Testament for
proofs. I am also of opinion, with those late de-
fenders of Christianity that think it may be so
proved ;" at least that it may be so proved to us
Gentiles. But then I also think, that it cannot
be so clearly understood, so fully proved, or so
well vindicated, even to us, if we do not recur
to the Old Testament, as if we do. And I at
the same time think that we must necessarily
recur to the Old Testament, in order to con-
vince a Jew that Jesus is the Messiah, promised,
and foretold to the Fathers, to justify several
of our Saviour's assertions concerning His own
character, and the prophecies to which He
330 Abraham probably chosen
refers ; and to remove those objections, where a
Jew will be apt to stick, notwithstanding all the
proof we can bring to convince him.
SECTION II. — It is probable that God chose Abraham
because he was singularly pious in the midst of an
idolatrous generation.
As God does every thing in the natural
world in number^ weight and measure, so He
undoubtedly does in the moral world too. I
can never suppose that God shows favour to
men blindly, or according to mere arbitrary
pleasure, since He never acts but according to
the counsel of His will. I cannot but think
Divine favours w^ere always proportioned to the
inward dispositions, or to the outward appear-
ances of virtue, in an age when nothing was
known of the rewards of Heaven, or that they
would be proportioned to men's sufferings in
this life, if they behaved themselves suitably
under them. When I see God, then, not barely
hold forth Abraham as His friend, but single him
out visibly and immediately to the men of his
own time, and to believers in all ages, for such
high favours, as making him remarkably great,
rich, and powerful, highly esteemed and ho-
noured ; victorious in battle ; receiving a rever-
sionary grant of the finest country in the world
in the fourth generation ; blessed with a beloved
in consequence of his singular piety. 33 1
son by his beloved Sa7'ah in his old age, and
endued with a new youthful vigour for the
great part of the remainder of his life ; having
the glory of God frequently appearing to him,
and conversing familiarly with him ; and at last
adopting him to the everlasting possession of
Canaan, by a resurrection from the dead, at the
restitution of all things ; when I see all this
confirmed to him by a covenant, and by the
oath of God ; and finally observe, not only
the singular honour of his being called the
friend of God, but the father of the faithful in
all ages (they being to derive their immediate
title to paradise as his children, who is himself
to be the heir of the new world); I say, when I
consider all this, I cannot but suppose that
Abraham was a singular instance of known and
distinguished piety in the age in which he lived.
And therefore I should from hence conclude,
that if men were at that time generally idolaters,
Abraham was not. Enoch was translated to
paradise because he was singularly pious, and
walked with God; di^ Adam had done in inno-
cence, till guilt made him run away from God,
and hide himself God saved Noah from the
flood, because He had seen him al.o^e right-
eous in that generation. God's providences
are similar in similar cases. It is likely there-
fore that Abraham, who was thus distinguished
in his age by the favour of God, as Enoch and
332 Melchisedek probably worshipped
Noah were in theirs, was likewise as singular
in his piety as his two most singularly pious
ancestors. We have reason to think, from se-
veral testimonies of Scripture, that the best men
in the world, Abraham's immediate ancestors, de-
scendants of the blessed Shem, were all infected
with idolatry. It is most natural then to think,
that, since Abraham was thus distinguished
by Providence, he was clear of it. Besides,
Joshua, who charges Ttrah and Nachor with
worshipping idols, does not charge Abraham with
it, though he mentions him, Josh. xxiv. 2.
That seems to me fairly to acquit him. I need
not tell one so perfectly acquainted with Jose-
phus as you are, that he goes farther, and
says, that Abraham argued against the idolatry
of his relations before he came out of Ur of the
Chaldees. I hope I do not misrepresent Josephus,
though I quote him memoriter. I think he
says this in hx^Jirst book of Antiquities.
SECTION l\L—On the character of Melchisedek.
I have been so little able to satisfy myself
about Melchisedek, that I confess any objection
fetched from that instance against the singula-
rity of Abraham's worshipping the only true God
without images, cannot have great weight with
me. I should think, if Melchisedek was a man,
and every way as free from idolatry and vice as
the true God by images. 333
Abraham^ there would be less beauty and wisdom
in Providence's making Abraham so much more
illustrious (at least in history) than Melchise-
dek. Perhaps Melchisedek, though no poly-
theist, since he was a priest of the Most High
God, yet might be an idolater. Abimelech is
said to be one that feared God, and yet most
likely was not freer from the worship of idols
than Terah, and Nachor, and all Nachor's de-
scendants. Balaam was a worshipper of the
true God, and a prophet, and yet was a sorcerer.
I do not know any harm that can come from
supposing Melchisedek to have worshipped the
true God by images (notwithstanding he was
thus distinguished by Providence), provided
his worship was less gross than others, and he
a man of remarkable piety. Why might he not
in that case, according to rules of the strictest
proportion, be honoured with the singular cha-
racter of king of righteousness, and priest of
the Most High God, and be an antitype of the
royal, eternal and unchangeable priesthood of
Christ? But \i Abraham was more distinguished
by the singular friendship of the supreme Being
than Melchisedek^ as he seems to have been,
methinks I would willingly have it appear, that
that singular friendship was founded on the
most singular piety and worth. However, I
must own there is a good deal of uncertainty
in what I have said about Melchisedek, .^ Perhaps
334 " / have gotten a man from the Lordy
Melchisedek may be thought, not only to be a
person of an higher dignity than Abraham, as to
be sure he was; but also to have been more
remarkably, visibly, and perhaps immediately
distinguished by Providence, in the instances
just now mentioned, than Abraham himself was,
by all that is recorded about him in Scripture.
If this should be so, why then he might not only
be equally pious with Abraham, but even in a
superior degree; and yet a just proportion have
been observed by Providence in the distribu-
tion of its rewards to these two. That is the
great point, as you will easily see, that I am so
desirous to secure : and in that, I dare say, I
shall have your concurrence.
SECTION IN.— Remarks on Gen. iv. I and 3.
If Eve's saying, I have gotten a man from the
Lord, Gen. iv. 1, be of the same import with
Moses' saying, that Adam begat a son in his own
likeness, after his image, Gen. v. 3, in the con-
nexion which these last words have with the
two verses that immediately precede ; I must
then think yours a good answer to my allega-
tion. Bear with me, however, whilst I own that
I cannot help being of a different opinion. What
you, with great sagacity, assign as the reason
of Moses' repeating words in the case of Seth,
which you suppose to be of equal force with
Promise to the penitent thief. 335
those which he had used before on the birth
of Cain, is extremely ingenious ; but yet would,
in my apprehension, have been much stronger
if all the antediluvians had been descended from
Seth, as it is generally thought the postdilu-
*oians are.
SECTION V. — Further observations on the word of our
Lord to the penitent thief. See Letter iii. Section ix.
I have the happiness to agree with you ; yet
there must be an emphasis laid on this day, in
what our Saviour says to the thief on the cross.
But I think the emphasis lies, not in the thief
being to be with Christ that day in paradise, but
in our Saviour's saying it to him, that day, or
at that hour; which was the hour of his weak-
ness, and the power of darkness. And I ap-
prehend that our Saviour takes notice of this
day, as the hour of His weakness, and the power
of darkness, on purpose that the thief might not
be discouraged by seeing Him in those circum-
stances : He therefore then assures him most
expressly, that notwithstanding those his own
circumstances of weakness, yet he should be
with Him in paradise ; viz. at the time when
that state of His kingdom should come, in
which He is to reward His servants, and con-
sequently when He could remember him to
purpose. I should also think that a man, who
336 Reply to objection from Psalm cv. 8, 9.
had been a thief, and was suffering for that
crime, may reasonably be supposed to have
had some doubt mixed with his hope, whether
Christ would remember him when He came into
His kino^dom, or no, and might be highly thankful
to have the most express assurance from Him
that He would ; though he did not understand
our Saviour as having any intention to have
him with Him in paradise that day.
SECTION VI. — An objection to the theory respecting
the paradisaical state, from Psahn cv. 8, 9, noticed
and answered.
You do me the honour to approve of what I
have said concerning the promise of an ever-
lasting possession of Canaan to Abraham and
his imitators after death, and to acquiesce in it.
Yet give me leave to state a difficulty to you,
which has occurred to me since my last, together
with the answer that satisfies me, and to ask
your opinion of it. I flatter myself you will
not think this to be unbecoming a free inquirer
after truth. Psalm cv. 8, 9, the Psalmist says,
as our copies and versions read it, He [God]
HATH REMEMBERED HiS COVENANT FOR EVER,
the word which He commanded to a thousand gene-
rations : the covenant which He made with Abra-
ham, saying, Unto thee will I give the land of
Canaan, the lot of your inheritance. And gave
Reply to objection from Psalm cv. 8, 9. 337
them the lands of the heathen, and they inheinted
the labour of the people, v. 44. God is here said
to have remembered His covenant for ever, [i. e. His
covenant to give the everlasting possession of
Canaan to Abraham and his seed,] called by-
God MY covena?it, Gen. xvii. 2. 4. 7, the word
which He commanded to a thousand generations ;
[i. e. the commandment of circumcision, which
was to be observed throughout all their ge-
nerations, and which was enjoined at the time
when He estabhshed His covenant with Abraham
to give him and his seed the everlasting posses-
sion oi Canaan, Gen. xvii. ;] and God is said in
this Psalm to have remembered it, by having
given them the lands of the heathen. If God
has already remembered His covenant, or, which
is the same thing, fulfilled it, particularly by
giving them the land of the heathen, it is not
still to be fulfilled : and particularly, it is not
yet to be fulfilled to Abraham and his faithful
seed by a resurrection at the restitution of all
things. I find, since this difficulty has occurred
to me, that it was observed by Archbishop
Usher.
The difficulty, I confess, seems unanswerable,
if the reading and version be true. But one
would think that it ran in the best copies of
the original in the imperative mood, or in the
subjunctive plural, and not in the third person
singular of the preterperfect of the indicative:
VOL. 111. Y
338 Reply to objection from Psalm cv. 8, 9.
since all the preceding verses are in the impera-
tive. V. 1 — 6, ** O give thanks, sing unto Him :
sing psalms unto Him. Glory ye in His holy
name. Seek the Lord and His strength ; seek
His face evermore. Remember His marvellous
works that He hath done." And then, as I think,
one should naturally suppose it to have been in
the best copies of the original, Remember His
€0vena7it for ever, v. 8 ; and not as we now read
it, He hath remembered, &c. Agreeably, here,
to the copies, read it in the subjunctive mood,
(and so the LXX have rendered it,) 1 Chron.
xvi. 15, Let us remember ; which comes to
the same thing as if it had been said. Remem-
ber. And the Psalm, as it lies there, goes on
in the imperative mood, in several of the verses
that follow the 15th verse, as well as in several
that precede it. Thus, " Sing unto the Lord all
the earth. Shew forth His salvation," v. 24.
'* Declare His glory among the heathen," v. 25.
" Give unto the Lord ye kindreds of the people ;
give unto the Lord glory and strength," v. 28.
" Give unto the Lord the glory due unto His
name : bring an offering, and come before Him :
worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness," v.
29. *' Fear before Him all the earth," v. 30. " O
give thanks unto the Lord," v. 34. ** And say ye,"
V. 35. These verses may be met with, Psalm
cv. 8, and not as our copies and bibles have it,
He hath remembered. And after all, I sup-
Infereyices from the Apocalypse. 339
pose the plural reading may be justly rendered.
He REMEMBERS His Covenant always ; and that
reading entirely removes the objection.
SECTION VII. — The theory respecting the paradisaic
cal state farther confirmed from several passages in the
Apocalypse of St. John, with some observations re-
specting that book.
After stating this fresh objection and answer,
give me leave to add a farther observation, that
has also occurred to me since my last, and
which I think is a very great confirmation of all
I have troubled you with about the paradisaical
state : I mean the state which is to take place
on the new earth at the restitution of all things;
which, as St. Peter says, God has foretold by
the mouth of all His holy prophets since the
world began : my observation arises from the
rewards, which the Spirit promises to the seven
churches of Asia. Those rewards, I dare say,
you will readily allow, must be either paradisai-
cal or celestial. I do not see how they can by
any rules of language be possibly thought to be
celestial rewards ; though I own they have
been quoted often by the greatest men to that
purpose. They must therefore be paradisaical ;
and such I think they will appear to be on
considering each of them. Thus, Rev. ii. 7,
To him that overcorneth will I give to eat of the
340 The rezvards ynentioned in the Apocalypse
tree of life, that grows in the midst of the paradise
of God, This tree of life is said to be in the
midst of the city, viz. of the new Jerusalem, Rev.
xxii. 2, which cometh dozvn from heaven on the
earth. Rev. xxi. 1, 2. This reward is too express
to my purpose to want any thing more to be
said upon it. Thus, Rev. ii. 11, he that o-ver-
cometh shall not be hurt of the second death. This
promise must take place before the end of
Christ's reign, and consequently in the paradi-
saical state : for at the end of the general judg-
ment, and before the celestial state begins,
death and hades are to be destroyed, by being
cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, Rev. xx.
14 ; and consequently after that cannot hurt
any one. So that to make this promise a pro-
mise of any consequence, it must be supposed
to refer to the paradisaical state, and not to the
celestial. Thns, Rev. ii. 26, To him that over-
Cometh will I give power over the nations, and he
shall rule them with a j^od of iron ; as the vessel of
a potter shall they be broken to pieces. This sure
must be in the paradisaical state, when there
will be nations that may be- broken. But not
in heaven, where all civil communities of men
will be dissolved, and nations shall be no more.
Thus, Rev. iii. 5, He that overcometh shall
walk, &c. And I will not blot out his name out of
the hook of life, but will confess his name before my
Father, and before His angels. This cannot relate
are not celeatialy but paradisaical, 34 1
to the heavenly state, since that succeeds the
judgment; and consequently must relate to the
paradisaical state that precedes the judgment,
and ends immediately after it. Thus, v. 12,
Him that overcometh luiil I make a pillar in the
temple of my God : and I will write upon him
the name of the ?iew Jerusalem, which cometh down
from heaven [viz. on the new earth]. Rev. xxi. 1,
2. Thus, V. 21, To him that overcometh xvill I give
to sit aoivn on my throne, &c. Christ will continue
to have a throne in the paradisaical state. It is
the glorious state of His kingdom, described
Dan. vii. But after that this glorious state of it
shall be at an end, and He is to deliver up the
kingdom to the Father, that God may he all in alL
I confess I do not well understand the reward
promised. Rev. ii. 17. But yet to eat of the
hidden manna looks more like the paradisaical
state than the celestial, where there is to be
no eating nor drinking, but we are to be like the
angels which are in heaven.
After saying this on the reward, that is pro-
mised to each of the seven churches in particu-
lar, I will trouble you with two general ol)ser-
vations on the book of Revelations, by which I
imagine you will be more strongly induced to
think that these rewards are paradisaical, and
not celestial : the first is this : the Apocalypse is
said to be the revelation which God gave unto
Jesus Christ, and which He signified by His
342 Paradisaical rewards in the Apocalypse,
angel to His servant John, The manner of this
revelation being made to Christ is represented
in the fifth chapter by the Lamb's taking the
seven sealed book out of the hand of Him that
sat upon the throne, and opening the seals
thereof. God had hitherto reserved the times
and seasons in His own hand: now He reveals
them to Jesus Christ; and, as one would natu-
rally suppose, in order to His administering that
kingdom the better that was put into His
hands. This is probably what St, Paul partly
designed by telling us, that all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge are hid in Christ, Coloss.
ii. 3; and that God anointed Christ with the oil
of gladness above His fellows, Heb. i. 9. This
revelation (called also treasures of wisdom, and
knowledge, and a superior unction by St. Paul)
— this revelation, I say, Christ sends, and signi-
fies by His angel to His servant John. One would
think, then, that all that is foretold in this book
should end with His kingdom, to the better
administering of which it seems to have been
given Him. And there in fact it seems to end.
For the last prophecy is of death and hades'
being cast into the lake of fire, Rev. xx. 14. All
that is said of the new heavens, and new earth,
and the new Jerusalem, is in time before it ; being
a description of the state of things in the Millen-
nium, before death and hadei being destroyed;
though, according to the usual method of this
Division of the Apocalypse. 343
book, what is said of the new heaven, &c. is in
place after it ; as I observed in a former letter.
I must yet add one observation more. The
Apocalypse is divided into iJie things which John
had seen, ivhich are, and which shall be hereafter.
Rev. i. 19. The things which John had seen,
are the vision of the first chapter; the things
which are, are the epistles to the seven churches,
contained in the 2d and 3d chapters : these
are manifestly within the times of Christ's king-
dom. The things that shall be, are those con-
tained in the rest of the book ; and I should
think they also should be within the times of
Christ's kingdom, as well as the two former,
which are evidently within that period. Besides,
several of these rewards agree with the state of
things that is more particularly described in the
xxth, xxist, and xxiid of the Revelation, which
undoubtedly contain a description of the para-
disaical state. They must needs then be para-
disaical rewards.
SECTION V III.— On the descent of Christ into hades,
*' If our blessed Saviour had been a man, as
we are, consisting of soul and body, as we are
supposed to do," I own with you, there could
not have been the least difficulty in supposing
His soul to have gone to hades at the time of His
death, and to have been in a state of uncon-
344 Observations on the humiliation
sciousness. But then, you know, there would
have been another insuperable diflSculty, viz.
that has been always urged against Nestorius ;
since, in that case, our blessed Saviour must have
been two Saviours, or two persons, and not
one ; consisting of one body and two principles
of intelligence and agency, (namely, the Logos
and the soul,) to act it ; or, at least, the Logos
could not be united to the body of Christ.
SECTION IX. — On the humiliation and exaltation of
Christ,
It must be owned that there is a difficulty,
at first sight, in supposing so high a Being as
the Logos to have humbled Himself in any one
of the instances which the Scripture gives us an
account of. It may seem amazing to us, that
the first, and only immediately derived Being,
by whom God made the worlds, and still
upholds them ; who is consequently the bright
effulgence of the Father's glory, and the express
character of His person ; and who was in the
form of God; should empty Himself of His
dignity and glory ; take a human body ; lie in
the Virgin's womb ; submit to all the laws of
infancy and childhood, without more percep-
tion than an animal ; afterwards grow in wis-
dpm and stature as a child ; not only feel the
and exaltation of Christ. 345
common infirmities of our nature, but be a man
of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; be spit
upon, buffeted, insulted, crucified, and buried ;
all this, I say, will seem astonishing at the first
view : but then let it be considered that all this
was in order to promote the glory of God and
the happiness of man, and in order to His own
highest exaltation and advancement ; He being
thereupon to receive a name above every name,
till there shall be no name but that of God, even
the Father only; that so God may be all in all.
And when Christ's humiliation is placed in this
light, what is there in all His exinanition, and
abasement, that should seem to clash with any
rule of wisdom, or proportion, that is in the
least unfit for the only underived Being to pro-
pose, or for the only immediately derived Being
to comply with, especially considering Him
capable of a reward ? what more proper than
this, to give the highest instance of humility to
all the subjects of God's vast and extended
empire, and thereby to preserve them from
pride, the snare and condemnation of the devil ?
Since they are hereby all taught in the highest
instance, and consequently in the most effectual
manner, th?.t the true way to honour and ad-
vancement, is to think no condescension too
mean by which glory can redound to God, or
happiness to others, or ourselves.
And if it was not the Logos that took a body,
346 On the humiliation of Christ,
and lay in the womb ; that was subject to the
laws of childhood and humanity; and that
underwent all those infirmities, reproaches, and
sufferings, which the Scriptures mention Christ
to have undergone, how was the Logos humbled
at all ? or in what did His humiliation consist?
All these instances in any other case could not
have been the humiliation of the Logos, The
soul that animated the body of Jesus might
indeed be made subject to all this low state, but
could not for that reason be said to be emptied
or humbled. Or if, fancying His soul to have
been pre-existent, (for that is sure a groundless
conceit,) we suppose it to have been emptied
and humbled, Jesus may be said to have been
emptied, or humbled, but not ihe Logos ; and
we shall fall into an heresy, like that of Cerin-
thus ; and hold, that Jesus was emptied and
hum.bled, but that the Logos, or Christ, was no
ways affected thereby.
Nor can I see, on the other hand, if the Logos
was in a state of unconsciousness for about
eight and thirty, or forty hours, at the time of
His death, that the Logos was in a lower state
of abasement, in that instance, than in many
others which have been mentioned. Sure it is
much less to be in a state without perception
and ideas, for eight and thirty, or forty hours,
than to have been in a state without ideas,
and of bare perception only, for a great many
Dr. Lardner's vindication of the miracles, 8^c, 347
months ; which must have been the case of the
Infant Word.
SECTION X. — Observations on Dr. Lardner's vindica-
tion of the truth of certain miracles against the objec-
tions of Woolston.
I read the vindication of the miracles, which
our blessed Saviour wrought on Jairus daugh-
ter, the widow of Nains son, and Lazarus, soon
after you had made me that kind present. I take
this opportunity to return you my best thanks
for it. In the preface you have managed an
argument for free writing, that seemed to be
quite exhausted, with a beautiful turn, that is
peculiar, and that cannot fail to strike your
reader. You have done justice to Christianity,
and honour to the dissenters, by the sentiments
you profess in that preface. You have shown
a very masterly knowledge of the gospels through-
out your whole performance. Allow me at the
same time to say, that you have omitted no cir-
cumstance that occurs in any of them to support
the three miracles you defend, or to answer
what Mr. Woolston has alleged to prove them
impostures, without straining any thing, either
to support the miracles, or to lay open the
injustice of Mr. Woolston's cavils. And every
one must allow that you have done this with
348 Inquii^y concerning the miraculous
the simplicity in which the histories of these
miracles themselves are writ, and in the spirit of
the author of them : I mean the greatest mo*
desty and temper imaginable. So that I do
not at all wonder to hear that Mr, Woolston
seems more touched himself, and more urged
by his friends with what you say against him,
than with any other of the many ingenious and
learned answers that have appeared.
SECTION XI. — On the raising of Jnirui>^ daughter ;
whether the miracle consisted in healing, or in restora-
tion to life ?
However, I will freely own to you, that I
apprehend the recovery of Jairus daughter to
have been a miracle of a great, instantaneous,
and perfect cure, rather than of a resurrection.
I will give you the reasons that induce me to
think so ; submitting them to you with the
deference that is due to one who has considered
these three miracles so carefully.
1. There is not that conclusive evidence,
from the circumstance of tlie case, that Jairus'
daughter was dead, as there is in the case of
the widow of Nains son, or of Lazarus. The
widoiv of Nains son was carrying to his grave :
Lazarus had been dead four days, and had
been, it may be, three of them in his tomb :
Jairus daughter might not have been thought
restoration of the daughter of Jairus, 349
dead many hours. Jairus probably was the
ruler of a synagogue at Caipernaum, Our Saviour
had crossed the sea of Tiberias, and had come
to the other side ; that is, the side opposite to
Gadara, and consequently near to Capernaum ;
but staid near the sea ; perhaps but a few fur-
longs from the city. There Jairus comes to
Him, and thence our Saviour accompanies him
to his house, though very leisurely. All this
might not take up above two or three hours'
time. And though it is very true, as you ob-
serve, that when persons are supposed to be
dead, that are not, it is generally in sudden
distempers, and not after a lingering one; yet
even such cases sometimes happen. And it is
not so sure that the case of Jairus' daughter
was a lingering case. It might not have lasted
many hours for what appears. She might seem
at the point of death to her father, from some
sudden and violent distemper.
2. The word that St. Luke reports our Sa-
viour to have used, when He tells Jairus in the
way to his house what He will do for his
daughter, is a word of healing. When one told
Jairus, Thy daughter is dead ; trouble not the
Master ; ouv Saviour says, Fear 7wt ; believe only,
and she shall be made whole, (T(D^r\(TiTai, Luke
viii. 49, 50. This word is used by Jairus when,
as another evangelist relates it, he came to Jesus,
to desire Him, that He would come and lay
350 Inquiry co7icerning the mii^aculous
hands on her, that she might be healed,
and live, oircog o-cofiSj xou ^r^a-sTai, Mark v. 23.
And this is the word that is often made use
of for Christ's and His apostles' healing the
sick. Now our Saviour's using- this word shows
plainly, that, when news was brought to the
ruler that she was dead, Christ did not think
her dead. If Christ, thinking her dead, had
resolved to restore her. He would have said ;
'* Fear not ; I will raise her ;" or, " She shall
rise again," [avao-TTjo-sra/,] as He says in the
case of Lazarus, John xi. 23. But sure He
would never have said, I will heal her, or make
her whole. The word a-ai^a-eron relates to heal-
ing a person that is sick, but can never be
properly used to signify the raising up one that
is dead. It would have been as improper for
our Saviour to have said, I will heal the dead,
or make the dead whole, as to have said, I will
unstop the eyes of the blind, or open the feet of
the lame.
3. The word that the three evangelists re-
port our Saviour to have used, in what He as-
serts about the state of Jairus daughter, when
He came into his house, is xa^suSs* ; which
always signifies to sleep in the nineteen other
places of the New Testament where it is used.
It never signifies to sleep the sleep of death
once; unless it should be thought to do so in
the three evangelists, which give us the account
restoration of the daughter of Jairus. 351
of Jairus' daughter. Wherea"^ the words that
are used about the widow of Nains son are,
Ts^vriKOig and vs>cpog : words subject to no ambi-
guity: and the word that our Saviour uses
about Lazarus is xsxolixrjrai. Koi[xaoiJLai is used
in eighteen places of the New Testament ; and
in fifteen of them it signifies death ; and in the
other three, indeed, natural sleep. From these
words having sometimes the latter sense, the
disciples misunderstood our Saviour when He
said AoL^apos xsxoliAriTai : thinking that He [Christ]
meant that Lazarus was in a natural sleep.
What induced them the rather to understand
TcsxoiixYjTai in this sense was, that they had only
then heard that he was sick, and had heard
our Saviour say, This sickness is not unto
DEATH, but for the glory of God. But then, to
remove all ambiguity, our Saviour explains Him-
self by a word that is of a determinate significa-
tion, and says, Ad^apog olttsSolus. The words
therefore that are used about the widow of
Nains son, and Lazarus, being words that
signify death, and the word that is used about
Jairus' daughter never signifying death, in any
other place of the New Testament, makes her
case quite different from the other two.
4. But there is yet a stronger reason to
induce us to think that Jairus daughter was
not dead. For our Saviour says, owx otTrsfiai/sv,
ctAXa xafleuSfi, she is not dead, but sleepeth. This
352 Inquiry concerning the miraculous
makes the assertion the most positive that can
be ; it being expressed negatively as well as
positively. And it is remarkable, that the word
[a^re^ai/s] that our Saviour uses in the negative
form of speech is tlie very same word that He
uses in the case of Lazarus, when He would let
His disciples know that Lazarus was dead, by
removing the ambiguity of the word [KSKoiiJ.y]TOLi]
that was not so liable to be understood of sleep,
as the word He uses oi Jairus* daughter, when
He says of her, xa^siiosu
You are very much in the right to insist on
what our Saviour said in the case of Lazarus,
when He was told that Lazarus was sick. It
is the strength of what can be said in reply to
this fourth reason against supposing Jairus"
dauo^hter to be dead. But I think when our
Saviour says, on the news of Lazarus' sickness,
that this sickness is not imto death, it is the
same thing as if He had said, it shall not
BE unto death ; meaning such a death as men
commonly undergo, from which there is no
recovery till the general resurrection. This
might have been the sense if nothing farther
had been added ; but words and circumstances
that follow in Lazarus' case force us into that
sense of them, as the only sense they will bear.
But there are no such words or circumstances
in the case of Jairus' daughter that should
make us depart from the literal and usual
restoration of the daughter of Jairus, 353
signification of so strong an expression, and
which is to be understood as it is expressed, in
the present tense, she is not dead, but sleepeth.
5. That which I think adds force to all
that has gone before is, that our Saviour says
these words as a reason why they should not
go on with the lamentations that they were
making, and which seem to have been but
such as were usual on the like occasion with
that which they supposed this to be. Our Sa-
viour does not seem to reprove these lamenta-
tions as wicked and immoral ; but as foolish,
and besides the purpose : For when He saw the
people, the multitude, and the minstrels [all] mak-
ing a noise, the tumult, and them that wept and
wailed greatly, He saith unto them (as soon as
He comes into the house), fVhy make ye this ado,
and weep ? Give place, for the maid is not dead,
BUT SLEEPETH. "Be gouc, for their is no
occasion for you. You mistake the case ; the
maid is not dead, as you suppose, but sleepeth;
that is, under the power of a violent disease,
from which I am going in an instant to restore
her." Our Saviour is so far from reproving the
grief, that was expressed in the two other cases,
that He bears a part in it.
6. There is a circumstance or two still be-
hind, that incline me to think that Jairus'
daughter was not dead ; and the last of them
as much as any of the rest. The first is, that
VOL. III. z
354 Inquiry concerning the miraculous
our Saviour takes her by the hand, before He says,
Maid, arise. To be sure there was the greatest
propriety in every action of our Saviour. Each
action was perfectly well suited to every cir-
cumstance of the case. Now it seems to me
that the taking her by the hand, is not an action
suited to raise one that was dead, absolutely,
and totally incapable to help herself (as you
must suppose her to have been before the
word Ai^ise was spoken by our Saviour), but to
assist one that had some life, and some sort
of strength left in her. We read indeed of
Peters taking a lame man by the hand, to raise
him up : but it was after he had bid him, Rise
up, and walk. Acts iii. 6, 7. By which words he
had restored him from his lameness, and given
him strength. We read also of Peter's giving
Dorcas his hand, to raise her up, Acts ix. 42 ;
but it was after he had bid her arise, and she
had opened her eyes, and had sat up. But we
do not read of any such action preceding the
command to arise, in the case of the other two
resurrection miracles.
The other circumstance is, that when she
arose, and walked, our Saviour ordered that
some meat should be set before her. This seems to
me to be done on purpose to show that she was
recovered to perfect health from sickness, and
not to life from death ; in order to point out to
them wherein the miracle that He had wrought
restoration of the daughter of Jairus. 355
consisted, and to prevent any mistake about it.
It seems to me to have been altogether unne-
cessary to have ordered meat to be set before
her, to show that she was alive. Life appeared
a thousand other ways : strength also appear-
ed in her walking. But perfect health could
appear no way so well, as if she fell to eating,
on meats being set before her : whereas the
other two cases, being a recovery from death,
no such order is given by our Saviour; it not
serving to the purpose of showing a person to
be brought to life that had been dead ; though
nothing could so well show a perfect, as well as
an instantaneous recovery from the force of a
violent distemper.
These are the reasons why I differ from you
in an opinion which has had all the critics and
commentators on its side, and which is yet bet-
ter supported by you than it has ever been by
any other writer. Be so good to me, if you
can, as to help me over difficulties which make
me singular in this point.
I am, Reverend Sir,
your most faithful,
humble servant,
Barrington.
TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE
Explained, Paraphrased, or otherwise illustrated.
Vol.
Page.
Gen. i. 26. 28. . . . iii.
146
iii. 15.
—
153
— 22.
ii.
409
V. 3. .
i«.
421
147
viii. 21, 22.
ii.
471
ix. .
—
477
xii. 1—8.
iii.
61
xiii. 14—19.
—
66
XV. .
69
xvi. 15, 16.
—
76
xvii. 1—21.
—
77
— 7,8.
— 159.182
xviii. 1, 2. 9, 10. 17, 18
. •
—
90
xxi.
—
92
xxii. 15—19.
—
94
xxxi. 54.
—
49
xxxv, 14.
»
ibid.
xlix. 30.
—
197
Exod. xxxii. 18.
—
31
Psal. xxxii.
—
218
xlix.
—
219
Ixxiii.
—
239
Ixxviii. 18.
i.
97
Prov. iii. 18.
iii.
220
Dan. xii.
—
221
Isai. xi. 4.
—
35
Iv. 3.
, —
213
Luke i. 54, 55.
—
201
iii. 10. . .
i.
159
xxiii. 43.
iii.
275
John iii. 5 — 7.
i.
160
vii. 35.
ii.
115
— 39.
i.
137
ix. 7.
, —
157
xvi. 8.
• —
251
Acts i. 2.
ii.
31
— 5.
i.
160
ii. 19—27.
ii.
193
15 39.
i.
238
iii. 21.
iii.
229
ix. 22.
ii.
334
xi. 20.
iii.
213
XV. 9.
• i.
112
358
Texts of Scripture, 8^c.
Acts XV. 10.
— 40.
xvi. 4.
— 4,5.
xviii. 24 — 27.
xxii. 14.
xxiii. 1.
Rom. viii. 23.
xii. 8.
XV. 16.
1 Cor. ii. 15.
xi. 3—17.
xii. 1.
xiv. 16.
— 26.
XV. 24—28.
2 Cor. ix. 2.
xii. 1.
Gal. ii. 2.
iii. 16.
vi. 1.
Ephes. i. 3.
iv. 8.
__ 12—17.
Col. iii. 16.
1 Thess. iv. 13— -18.
V. 12.
2 Thess. ii. 14.
1 Tim. iii. 2.
— 13.
iv. 14.
2 Tim. i. 6.
Titus iii. 5, 6.
Philemon 9.
Heb. i. 9.
xi. 8.
xii. 22—25.
xiii. 2—17.
James v. 14, 15.
1 Peter i. 12—20.
iii. 17—22.
iv. 10, 11.
2 Peter iii. 13.
Rev. xxi. 7.
— 8.
_ 22—27.
Vol.
Page.
ii.
178
301
.
177
__
300
60
__
189
82
i.
117
61
133
42
46
,^_
70
__
45
.
39
iii.
43
i.
80
ii.
202
311
iii.
99
i.
42
100
15
—
167
—
40
iii.
168
i. 62.
83.87
ii.
122
i.
52
___
61
ii.
87
i.
209
ii.
80
153
i.
113
iii. 181
. 206
111
i.
80
157
ii.
108
iii.
53
i.
241
iii.
230
—
126
173
—
233
INDEX.
Abel, remarks on his sacrifice, ii. 441. iii. 19. why ac-
cepted by God, ii. 442 — 447.
Abraham, remarks on his teaching and travels, i. 7. '' chil-
dren of Abraham/' extensive apphcatiou of the expression,
ii. 516. the calling and blessing of him, 483. 489. " God of
Abraham," meaning of the expression, 505. meaning of,
" I will be thy God," 497. 503. iii. 177. of the inheritance
promised to him, 508. sacrifices probably not off"ered by
him, 44. hoped to possess Canaan for ever, 175. 193. in
what sense God promised " to multiply him exceeding-
ly," 182. the promise of Canaan plainly implies his
resurrection, 185. the terms of the promise confine the
possession of Canaan to the spiritual seed only, 187.
enumeration of the covenants with him, 191. his conduct
in reference to the sacrifice of Isaac indicated his belief in
a resurrection, 198. the covenants with Abraham and
David compared, 215. 226.
Adam, the rules of conduct which he might have collected,
in a state of innocence, without the aid of revelation, ii.
387. in what sense he is said to have been " the son of
God," (Luke iii. 38.) ii. 394. supposed to have been clothed
with a glory before the fall, 399. iii. 265. v/hy the animals
were brought before him in pairs, 3.
Allegories and metaphors in Scripture need a key to open
the sense that is couched under them, ii. 377.
Altars, erected by the postdiluvian patriarchs were not used
for the purpose of sacrifice, iii. 49.
Ambassador, why St. Paul calls himself one, ii. 18, 19.
Amos, meaning of the passage cited from him by James in
the apostolical council, ii. 294.
360 INDEX.
Ananias, the reasons why St. Peter struck him and Sapphira
dead, ii. 66.
Ananias, Paul did not receive the Holy Ghost by the laying
on of his hands, ii. 189.
Angel of God's presence, who, i. 6. iii. 24.
Angels, the illumination of the Holy Ghost could not be
conveyed by any of them, i. 322.
Antediluvians, nature of the hope of immortality entertained
by them, ii. 451. particularly from the translation of
Enoch, 455. 500.
Antioch,the church of, in Syria, consisted chiefly of proselytes
of the gate, ii. 114. 280. sent its alms to Christian not to
Jewish elders, 142. why it sent for advice to Jerusalem,
174. its peculiar fitness to be the next church in impor-
tance to the church at Jerusalem, 287.
Antioch, in Pisidia, St. Paul first preaches to the idolatrous
Gentiles there, ii. 200.
Apocalypse, remarks on the order of the visions in that
book, iii. 230.
Apostle, definition of the term, ii. 15.
Apostles, always appeal to facts as the foundation of Chris-
tianity, i. 29. would not have proceeded to publish the
gospel without assistance from on high, 181 — 199. state
of the church in their time, ii. 2. their first commission
terminated after a short time, 8. their second commission,
10. began to execute their commission for life on the day
of Pentecost, 13. the most distinguishing part of their
character, what, 19. the terms of their last commission
general, why, 20. they alone testified the resurrection of
Christ, 27, 28. the apostles' company, what, 37. their
peculiar boldness, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, ii. 58.
power of punishing offenders with instant death peculiar
to them, 64. power of performing extraordinary cures 67.
and of conferring miraculous gifts, 68. their power of
** conferring the Holy Spirit" the peculiar gift of the apos-
INDEX. 361
ties as witnesses, 72. importance of their office, 9.5. ne-
cessary that they should have seen the Lord, 102. two
divisions of the apostleship, 105. the twelve, the apostles
of the Jews only, Paul and Barnabas, the apostles of the
Gentiles only, 106. on their temper and dispositions,
128. probable reasons why only twelve apostles were first
appointed, 129. on their condition and manner of life,
130. 132. why two learned men were afterwards chosen,
133.
Apostolical decree, observations on it, ii. 265. only related
to such as became converts from having been proselytes
of the gate, 267. 280. 293. and to them only while the
Jewish polity lasted, ibid, not intended for proselytes of
the gate, 272. reason of the order of the terms in the pro-
hibition, 305, 306. what the question was which caused
the decree, 313. the conversion of the idolatrous Gen-
tiles not known at Jerusalem at the time of the decree,
314. objections to the author's interpretation considered,
322.
Arabia, probable reason why St. Paul preached there imme-
diately after his coaversion, ii. 233.
Ark of Noah, that God vouchsafed a visible indication of His
residence in it during the flood, iii. 22.
Asaph, Psalm of, (Ixxiii.) considerations respecting it, iii.
239.
Ascension and Pentecost, causes of the interval between
them, i. 134.
Authors, what qualifications they should have, i. 65^ 66.
Babel, tower of, probable object of building it, ii. 479.
Baptism, nature of the rite appointed by our Lord before
His death, ii. 4. "baptism now saveth us," meaning of
these words, iii. 57.
Barnabas, chosen with Paul to testify the resurrection of
Christ, ii. 30. likely that he was one of the Seventy, 36.
362 INDEX.
import of the name, 37. 39, 40. probably the same as
Barsabas, ibid, always named before St. Paul by Luke,
till after St. Paul's second visit to Jerusalem, why, 247.
Barrington, Lord, in early life the friend of Mr. Locke, note,
i. 51.
Barsabas, probably the same as Barnabas, ii. 37.
*' Being put to death in the flesh,'* meaning of these words,
note, iii. 53.
Bible, great leisure, care, and ability necessary to arrive at
the true sense of it, ii. 370, 371. advantages of a critical
study of it, ibid.
*' Blood," meaning of the word in the apostolical decree, ii.
269.
" Brethren," a name of all disciples who were not apostles
or elders, ii. 168.
"But to seed, as of one, which is Christ," Gal. iii. 16.
meaning of these words, iii. 99 — 110.
Cain, enmity put between his family and the family of Seth,
437. observations on God's words to him, Gen. iv. " If
thou doest well," 444. why his offering was rejected, ibid,
and 447 — 449. brought his offering to the place of the
visible presence of Jehovah, iii. 19.
Calvin, defended Episcopacy, note, ii. 161.
Canaan, the promise of an everlasting possession of it im-
plied a future life, 508 — 516. an everlasting possession
of it expected by Abraham, iii. 177.
Caraites, their mode of interpretation commendedj 144.
Celsus, answer to one of his objections against Christianity,
ii. 99.
^apis, meaning of the word in the Scripture, i. 42. meaning
of the word in Col. iii. 16.
Circumcision, design of the rite, ii. 521 — 524. nature of the
covenant of it, iii. 86. 284.
City, the emblem of one often used in Scripture to denote a
future life, ii. 514.
INDEX. 363
Christ, observations on His divine nature, i. 11. and on His
effusion of the Holy Spirit, 13. on His teaching while on
earth, 19. probably born at the feast of tabernacles, 137.
promises the gift of the Holy Ghost at the feast of taber-
nacles, 158. Ihe Holy Ghost did not descend on Him at
His baptism, till after His coming out of the water, 166.
the Holy Spirit rested upon Him without measure, 228.
reason why He appealed to prophecy, 251. nature of the
baptism appointed by Him during His life, ii. 4. the rod
of His power, meaning of, 70. why He appeared to a few
only after His resurrection, 98. true force of His argu-^
ment against the Sadducees, 503 — 506. Christ is to be
understood by " the visible presence of God," in the Old
Testament, iii. 23. "preached to the spirits in prison,"
meaning of these words, note, 54.
Christianity, what, ii. 91. could not have been established
without miraculous assistance, i. 180. founded on facts,
249. order in which God ordained it to be preached, 232*
in the apostolic age did not alter the civil duties of those
who embraced it, 330, 331. a rational and consistent
view of it the best cure of deism, 376.
Christian, origin and meaning of the word, ii. 285, 286.
Church, state of it at the time of the apostles, ii. 2. denoted
by the word *' Christ," in Gal. iii. 16., 520, 521.
Church of England, the good effects of its conduct towards
the enemies of Christianity, i. 247.
Clarke, Dr., his definition of a miracle, i. 232. mistaken in
his explanation of a passage in the epistle to the Hebrews,
iii. 133.
Clemens Romanus, his testimony to the gifts of the Holy
Ghost in his time, i. 221.
Clergy, the state they were in at the time of the Reformation,
i. 192.
Cloud of glory, considerations on it, iii. 37.
Coats of skins, design of them, ii. 440.
364 INDEX.
Confusion of tongues, extent of it, ii. 480.
Conscience, the instrument by which God appeals to all men
since the fall, i. 3. remark on it by St. Paul, ibid.
Corinthian church, character of it, ii. 76. denoted in the
epistle to the Galatians by the term " Christ," 520.
Cornelius, on his being filled with the Holy Ghost, i. 116.
128. he and his family th& first fruits of the proselytes of
the gate, ii. 112.
Daniel, book of, inferences from it concerning the resurrec-
tion, iii. 225.
** David, the sure mercies of," meaning of the expression,
213. the covenants with David and Abraham compared,
214. 226.
" Deacons," in the Christian church, probably the same as
those who were called "helps," i. 54. nature of their
office, 55—57.
Deism, observations on its prevalence, ii. 361, 362. what
disposes men to it, 372. 374. a rational view of, 376.
Christianity the best cure of it, ibid.
Deluge, causes of it, ii. 462.
" Discerning of spirits," observations on the gift, i. 35.
Disciples, the one hundred and twenty, remarkable provi-
dence concerning them, ii. 55.
Eden, hopes of a restoration to it conceived by the ante-
diluvians from its preservation, ii. 440.
Elders, under the gospel dispensation, could not confer the
Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands, ii. 88. meaning of
the name, 140. held the next rank to the apostles, 143.
the first teachers next to the apostles selected from them,
to succeed in government of the churches, ii. 144. analogy
between them and the officers chosen by Moses, 145.
elders among Christians were the earliest converts, 146.
their privileges, 148 — 150. difference between the avronrai,
awap)(ai, and irpuiTH hiabo^^t 150, 151.
INDEX. 365
'EWrfves, Gentiles, the word most opposed to it in the Acts
of the Apostles is 'lovbdioi, 282. sometimes signifies
proselytes of the gate, 326.
'EW^vtarot, is opposed to 'E(3pa1oi, 282.
Enoch, hopes conceived by the antediluvians of a restoration
to paradise, from his translation, ii. 439. 455, 456. re-
mark on his translation, ibid, and 457 — 461. 500.
Episcopacy, the original church government, ii. 159.
Eusebius, his testimony concerning the cessation of the
miraculous gifts in his time, i. 222.
** Evangelists," their character, 57 — 61.
Eve, probable nature of the curse pronounced upon her,
ii. 486. iii. 11. why so named by Adam, 13.
Facts, arguments from of greater weight than from pro-
phecy, i. 252.
Faculties, natural, not the only inlet to the knowledge of
divine things, ii. 363.
Fall of Adam, consequences of it, 419. remedies of it, 434.
Fall of man, observations on Moses' account of it, iii. 1.
Father, when applied to God, in the Scriptures, import of
the term, ii. 393. 454. 499. 502.
" Filled with the Holy Ghost," meaning of these words,
i. 114. different from receiving the Holy Ghost, 164.
Foreknowledge of future events, a faculty imparted to the
prophets who held the next rank to the apostles, i. 32.
" Form of God," meaning of the expression, iii. 267.
Future state, the opinions of the patriarchs and prophets
concerning it, iii. 142.
Genesis, book of, importance of it, iii. 262.
Gentiles, the word 'E\X>/ms properly so translated, ii. 281.
opinion of the Jews with respect to them, i. 172. their
equality with the Jews demonstrated by the miraculous
gifts, 174.
Gifts, miraculous, the exercise of them subjected to the
366 INDEX.
heads of the Churches, i. 86. circumstances common to
all of them, 92. why called gifts, 97. 100. might be, and
frequently were abused, 98. conferred upon all believers
in the early churches, 163. their analogy with the ordi-
nary faculties of the mind, 175. on the duration of them,
221. in what their manifestation and influence consisted,
225. effects of them upon the minds of the receivers,
228, 229.
*' God's visible presence,'' observations on, iii. 19. 41 — 43.
meaning of the expression, 23. inferences from the cir-
cumstance, 43. meaning of the word '' God" in the Pen-
tateuch, 158.
" Governments," Kv^epvriaeiSy persons so called, nature of
their office, i. 61. real import of the term, what, 69. terms
supposed to be synonymous with it, 78.
** Heal the lepers,*' remark on these words, ii. 5.
Healing, power of, different from the gifts of the Spirit, i. 105.
Heaven, not distinctly promised till after the ascension of
our Lord, iii, 279.
Hebrews vi. 2. explanation of this passage, i. 140. explana-
tion ofxii., 22— 25., iii. 111.
*' Helps," probably the same as deacons, i. 54. nature of
their office, 57 — 61.
« Hellenist Jews," who, ii. 106. 284.
Holy Spirit, the, the last and greatest proof of the Christian
religion, i. 1. the New Testament cannot be clearly under-
stood without carefully considering it, 2. more extensive
and efficacious effusion of it after the Ascension, 13 — 16.
on the teaching and witness of it, 19. not given under the
law, how, 96. visible descent of it only permitted on rare
and important occasions, 117. remarks on its effusion on
" the hundred and twenty," 119 — 122. effusion of it on
Saul, and on the proselytes of the gate, ibid. 123. the
last visible descent of it was on the idolatrous Gentiles,
INDEX. 367
124. imparted to the Samaritans by the laying on of hands,
129 — 134. probable reason why it was not given imme-
diately after the Ascension, 134 — 140. observations on the
giving of it by the "laying on of hands," 140. 164. im-
parted at baptism, 144. promised by Christ on "the last
day of the feast" of tabernacles, 157. design and objects
of the witnessing of the Holy Spirit, 169. 178. the be-
stowing of these gifts much insisted on in Scripture, 170,
171. in what the manifestation and effects of its miracu-
lous influences consisted, 225. rested upon Christ without
measure, 228. sin against it, what, 245. on whom it was
poured out in the time of the apostles, ii. 151.
Jacob, probably did not offer sacrifices, iii. 44 — 48.
James, writes to the twelve tribes, ii. 106. president at Je-
rusalem after the dispersion, 128. the passage cited by
him from Amos explained, 294, 295. his argument in the
council at Jerusalem could only apply to the proselytes of
the gate, ii. 296, 297. his argument paraphrased, ibid.
" Idols, things offered to," what, ii. 269.
"Jehovah, the face of," observations on these words, 437.
the Angel Jehovah visible among men before the deluge,
438. probably resided at the entrance of Eden, ibid.
iii. 26. implies the second person in the Blessed Trinity,
24, 25.
Jerusalem, decision of the council of, ii. 176. remarks on the
decree, 177—180.
Ignatius, his testimony to the existence of the gifts of the
Holy Spirit in his time, i. 222.
"In his likeness, after his image,'' meaning of, ii. 421.
Inns, not common at the commencement of the Christian
era, i. 79.
Interpretation of any word in Scripture, conditions of a just
one, what, i. 69.
** Interpretation of tongues," nature of the gift, i. 48.
368 INDEX.
John the Baptist, the spirit of prophecy revives in him, i. 8.
his character, 9, 10.
John, St., his epistles to the seven churches in Asia, address-
ed to believing Jews, ii. 116. these epistles not to be
understood in a mystical sense, ibid,
Irenseus, his testimony to the existence of the miraculous
gifts in his time, i. 222.
Isaac, probably did not offer sacrifices, iii. 44. observations
on the promise to him, 89.
Israel, why called the first-born, ii. 5^6.
Israelites, revelations of God to them, i. 6. effect of their
knowledge and conduct on the Gentiles, 7. their opinions
with respect to the Gentiles, 172.
** It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us," meaning of
these words, ii. 303.
" It shall bruise thy head," meaning of this expression,
ii. 429.
Jews, revelation of God to them, i. 6. effect of their know-
ledge and conduct on the Gentiles, 7. state of religion
among them at the coming of Christ, 9. opinions enter-
tained by them with respect to the Gentiles, 172.
Jupiter, the fables concerning the visits to men by him and
other gods derived from the Scriptural accounts of God's
visible presence, iii. 51.
Justin Martyr, his testimony concerning miraculous gifts,
i. 222.
Jairus' daughter, inquiry concerning her miraculous restora-
tion, iii. 348.
" Kingdom of heaven," meaning of, ii. 3.
*' Knowledge, the word of," the gift of it constituted a pro-
phet of the highest rank, i. 31.
*' Knowing good and evil," meaning of this expression, ii.
400.
Language, probably revealed to our first parents, ii. 406.
INDEX. 369
" Laying on of hands," (Heb. vi. 2.) meaning of these words,
i. 140. 164. ii. 257. not a peculiar circumstance of ordi-
nation, 258.
Lawyers, mode of reasoning used by them the best for
theologians, iii. 271.
Lazarus, inferences from his restoration to life, iii. 165.
" Lest by any means he should run in vain," meaning of
these words, ii. 315.
Leviticus xvii. chapter, paraphrased^ ii. 345.
Life, a future one, often denoted in Scripture under the
emblem of a city, ii. 514.
Leprosy, the opinion of the Jews respecting this disease, ii. 5.
*' Likeness of God," meaning of this expression, iii. 145.
268.
Luke, St., on an expression of his concerning Paul and Bar-
nabas, i. 129.
Luther, defends episcopacy, note, ii. 161.
Lystra, St. Paul first preaches the gospel there to heathens
only, ii. 215.
Machpelah, the cave of, Abraham's purchase of it for a
burial place implied his expectation of an everlasting
possession of Canaan, iii. 197.
Maimonides, his paraphrase of a passage in Leviticus xvii.,
note, ii. 346. 355.
Mark, mutual attachment between him and St. Peter, ii. 141.
Mary, the blessed Virgin, observation on her hymn, iii. 203.
" Men uncircumcised," signifies proselytes of the gjate, ii.
290.
" Messenger of Satan," &c. remarks upon these words, ii.
207, 208.
Metaphors and allegories in Scripture, need a key to open
the sense that is couched under them, ii. 377.
Millennium, state of the promised under the patriarchal dis-
pensation, iii. 40.
VOL. III. 2 A
370 INDEX,
Minister, whence the term, ii. 16.
Miracle, definition of one by Dr. Clarke, i. 232. a true one
how distinguished from a false one, ii. 94.
" More sure word of prophecy," observations on these
words, iii. 257.
Moses, observations on his request that God would show
him His glory, iii. 31. expected an everlasting possession
of Canaan, 210.
Mystery, meaning of the term in the New Testament, ii. 45.
Nachash, the Tempter, why so called by Moses, ii. 428.
New Testament, the, cannot be understood without a critical
knowledge of the Old, iii. 260.
Nicholas, the deacon, probably the author of the sect of
Nicolaitans, i. 35.
Nicodemus, remarks on our Lord's discourse with him, 101.
Noah, probably the only antediluvian who had kept free
from the forbidden intermarriages which gave occasion to
the deluge, ii. 462. the blessing pronounced upon him,
463—475. 489.
Old Testament, the, a knowledge of it necessary to a sound
interpretation of the New Testament, iii. 260.
Origen, his testimony concerning the recent existence of
miraculous gifts, i. 222. best acquainted of any of the
fathers with Jewish learning, ii. 277.
Uapprjffia, import of this word in the New Testament, ii.
60.
Pastors and teachers, nature of their office, i. 50.
Paul, St., his description of conscience, i. 3. on the time
when he received the miraculous powers of the Spirit, 126.
appeals in his epistles to the possession by his converts of
the miraculous gifts, 210 — 221. Paul and Barnabas
chosen to testify the resurrection of Christ, ii. 30. they
alone were the apostles of the Gentiles, 106. on his
speaking by permission, 51. power of inflicting diseases
INDEX. 371
granted to him, 65. the time when he received the Holy
Ghost considered, 77. the Holy Ghost imparted to him
immediately, as on the other apostles, 84. a peculiar gift
possessed by him, 90. his preaching to the Gentiles called
his peculiar gospel, 120. his epistles written only to be-
lieving Gentiles, 122. the other apostles wrote only to the
Jews or proselytes, 123. remarks on the style of his
epistle to the Hebrews, ibid, reason of his personal de-
fects, 134. compared with the other apostles, 135. and
particularly with St. Peter, 136. none of the apostles at
Jerusalem at his second visit to that city, 141. received
his apostleship then, 194. Saul the aged, remarks on these
words, 153. of the time when he and Barnabas became
apostles, 181. on the light which appeared at his conver-
sion, 184. and on the voice which addressed him, 185.
whether he saw the Lord on the way to Damascus, 187.
not made an apostle by Ananias, 189. first preaches to the
idolatrous Gentiles at Antioch in Pisidia, ^00. did not
communicate his preaching to the Gentiles to the church
at large at Jerusalem till the fifth time of his visit there,
218. the probable reason why he was so solicitous about
the collection of alms for the church at Jerusalem, 220 —
223. observations on what he calls "his gospel," 225.
why he commenced preaching in Arabia, 233. meaning of
his words. Acts ix. 2., 234, 235. remarkable change in
his conduct after his second journey to Jerusalem, ii. 238.
— 240. works no extraordinary cures till after his second
visit to Jerusalem, 243. and then first changes his name
from Saul to Paul, ibid, first called an apostle (Acts
xiv. 14.) at Lystra, 245. Barnabas always named before
him by St. Luke till after his second visit to Jerusalem,
why, 247. why urged by James and the elders to take
upon him a vow, 332. his rebuke of St. Peter considered
and explained, 335, 336.
Pentecost and Ascension, causes of the interval between
them, i. 134. nature of the feast, 138.
372 INDEX.
*• People," \ads, in the New Testament denotes Jews only,
ii. 111.
2 Peter i. 19. meaning of this passage, i. 239 — 243.
Peter, remark on his striking Ananias and Sapphira dead,
ii. 66, preaches to Cornelius and the proselytes of the
gate, 108. his epistles to whom written, ibid, observation
on his reference to an epistle of St. Paul, 128. always
president at Jerusalem before the dispersion, ibid. Peter
and John in what sense called elders, 153. on his eating
with the Gentiles, 334.
Philip, could not confer the gift of the Holy Spirit, ii. 72.
" Praying with the Spirit," observations on it, i. 45.
Prophecy, spirit of, having ceased in Malachi revives in
Zacharias, Simeon, &c., i. 8. character of the intervening
period, ibid, brief view of the predictions concerning the
Baptist, our Lord, and the miraculous gifts, 200. the
spirit of prophecy, after the Ascension, compared with what
it was under the Jewish dispensation, 225. why appealed
to by our Lord, 251. argument from it of less weight than
from facts, 252.
** Prophesying," under the Christian dispensation, what,
i. 38.
Prophets under the Christian dispensation, character of
them, i. 52, ii. 53. their peculiar duty, what, 28.
Proselytes of the gate, their character, ii. 271. St. Peter
preaching to them, 108. in the opinion of the Jews at and
before our Saviour's time, not bound to keep the Sabbath,
277. reason of the prohibitions of Moses concerning them,
278, 279. those of Antioch in Syria first converted by
the men of Cyprus and Cyrene, 281. more numerous in
Syria and Cilicia than elsewhere, 299.
Psalms, observations on the denunciations contained in
them, iii. 239.
** Quickened by the Spirit," meaning of these words, iii. 54.
INDEX. 373
Ramsay, Chevalier, proves that the creation, fall, and resto-
ration of man, are to be clearly traced in the heathen
mythology, ii. 452.
Rational divines, errors committed by them, ii. 366.
" Restitution (or respiration) of all things," what, ii. 513.
Resurrection of our Lord, the first duty of the apostles was
to certify the truth of it, ii. 26.
Revelation, means of it before the fall, i. 1. after the fall, to
mankind in general, 3. and to particular individuals by
His Holy Spirit, 5. source of the difficulties which pre-
vent a right apprehension of it, ii. 365. use of its peculiar
doctrines, 367. leisure, care, and ability necessary to
arrive at the true sense of it, ii. 370. progressively im-
parted, 378. those divines who have considered it histori-
cally the best critics, 379. the SINGLE NOTION, which
runs through it, what, ibid, and 382. object of it, iii. 17.
** Receive ye the Holy Ghost," remarks on these words, i.
15, 16.
Receiving of strangers, an important duty in the early ages
of the Christian church, 81.
" Remember them which have the rule over you," Heb.
xiii. 7. meaning of these words, i. 88.
" Receiving the Holy Ghost," different from ** being full of
the Holy Ghost," i. 164.
Righteousness, meaning of, under the Mosaic dispensation,
ii. 494.
Sabbath, proselytes of the gate not bound to keep it, ac-
cording to the opinion of the Jews, at and before our
Saviour's time, ii. 277.
Sacrifices, divinely appointed, ii. 441. to be slain at the
door of the tabernacle, why, 272. hopes from their
institution of a restoration to paradise conceived by tfie
antediluvians, 440. intermitted from the time soon after
the flood until the time of Moses, iii. 44.
Sadducees, the true force of the argument employed against
.374 INDEX.
them by our Lord, ii. 503 — 506. iii. 159.
Samaritans, on the imparting of the Holy Ghost to them,
i. 129—134.
Sanchoniatho, seems to have written the history of the de-
scendants of Cain, ii. 465.
Saturn, remarks on the fables concerning him, iii. 51.
Sceptics and deists, difference between them, ii. 373, 374.
" Seed of the woman," observations on the expression, iii.
153.
Selden, on the proselytes of the gate, ii. 271.
" Sending forth," does not signify ordination, ii. 259.
" Separating," does not signify ordaining, ii. 256.
Septuagint, irapoiKOL used by them to denote the " proselytes
of the gate," ii. 108.
" Serpent, the," remarks on his nature, character, and
temptation, ii. 427 — 433. why so called by Moses, 429
— 432. iii. 9. the sentence on him, 434.
Seth, as well as Christ, meant by " the seed of the woman,"
ii. 450. 454. in what sense Adam is said to have begotten
him in ** his own likeness," iii. 270.
Seventy, the, appointed on the termination of the first apos-
tolic commission, ii. 6. the title not given in the New
Testament to any of the disciples, why, 39.
Shechinah, meaning and derivation of the word, iii. 38.
placed at the entrance of Eden, iii. 278.
" Shall not be forgiven in the world to come," meaning of
these words, i. 245.
Shem, the blessing pronounced on him, ii. 475.
Sherlock, Bishop, his reason why the name serpent was
given to the Tempter by Moses, ii. 430.
Shinar, causes of the dispersion there, ii. 477.
Silas, why called Sylvanus by St. Peter, ii. 114.
Siloam, observation on the custom of fetching water from it
at the feast of tabernacles, i. 157.
Sin against the Holy Ghost, what, i. 245.
Sinai, nature of the covenant of " life" there, iii. 211.
INDEX. 375
** Singing with the Spirit," what, i. 40.
Son, implies resemblance in Scripture, ii. 397.
" Sons of God," (Gen. iv.) signified good men, ii. 450.
454. iii. 145. 273. sometimes mentioned in Scripture,
in opposition to the children of men, 455.
Soul, its consciousness depends on its union with the body,
iii. 161—174. 274.
"Speaking by permission," meaning of the expression,
ii. 51.
Spencer, Dr., his learned dissertation on the apostolical de-
cree, ii. 267. character of his writings, 269.
Spirit of prophecy, as it existed under llie Jewish dispensa-
tion compared with it as it was after the Ascension, i.
225.
" Spiritual songs," what, i. 41.
"Spiritual gifts," (1 Cor. ii. 15.) what, 70—72. right classi-
fication of them in the primitive church, 74. 77.
" Strangers," import of the term in the New Testament,
ii. 111.
** Strangled things," meaning of the expression in the apos-
tolical decree, ii. 269, 270.
Sykes, Mr., his remarks on the meaning of the words
" kingdom of heaven," ii. 3.
Syriac version, the most accurate, ii. 115.
Teachers and pastors, in the primitive church, nature of their
office, i. 50.
Temptation of Adam and Eve, detail of it, iii. 4. statement
and refutation of the objections to the literal account of
it, 15.
Tempter of Adam ancT Eve, nature and character of him,
ii. 427. iii. 4, 5.
** The God of glory appeared to Abraham," meaning of these
words, iii. 28.
" Those that are lords over you," explained, i. 64.
376 INDEX.
Timothy, on his receiving the Holy Spirit by the hands of
St. Paul alone, ii. 86.
Titus, probably converted at Antioch, ii. 327. criticism of
Grotius and Mill concerning him, 328.
Tongues, gift of, remarks on, i. 102. common to all, 108.
Tongues, cloven, observations on, i. 109.
"Tree of knowledge," its nature and effects, ii. 413.
"Tree of life," what its virtue probably was, ii. 408.
Thief, the penitent, remarks on our Lord's promise to him,
iii. 275.
"Time of restitution (or respiration) of all things," what,
ii. 513.
Vow, a, the only voluntary part of the Jewish polity, ii. 332.
Wake, Archbishop, the accuracy of his opinion concerning
the epistle of Barnabas questioned, ii. 125.
Wicked, the, inferences respecting a resurrection drawn
from their punishment, iii. 231.
"Wise men," meaning of the appellation, ii. 44.
Witnessing of the Spirit, necessity of it, i. 168. 178. in what
it consists, 225. its superiority to all other testimonies in
favour of the truth of the Christian religion, 230.
Word, the Eternal, the means by which God conversed with
man before the fall, i. 2.
" Word of wisdoniy" nature of the gift, i. 23. peculiar to the
apostles, ii. 44. 48.
" Word of knowledge," nature of, i. 27. ii. 48.
Zacharias, observations on his hymn, iii. 203.
THE END.
PRINTED BY A. J. VALl'Y, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREEl, LONDON.
nnceton Theological Seminary-Speer Library
1 1012 01147 2877