eat together; and, by eating together, (which was a fœderal rite and a fymbol of friendship,) did enter into a covenant of friendship with one another. But of all this the text fays nothing: for it only speaks of the Ifraelites as joining themselves to Baal-Peor, by joining with his worshippers in two acts of that idolatrous worship which they payed to him; by joining them in the one, as much as by joining them in the other; that is, by eating of the facrifices which were offered to this idol, and by bowing down to him; and that without explaining the nature of either of thefe acts or rites of worship, or giving any hint that they were symbols of friendship or fœderal rites. In a word, all that this text fays, is, that the Ifraelites joined themselves to BaalPeor by joining in the acts of his worthip, but fays nothing of their doing this by any fymbol of friendship, or fœderal rite. This text, therefore, proves nothing for the Author's purpose.

The third text quoted by the Author, is, Exod. xxxiv. 15. where the Israelites are forbid to make any covenant with the inhabitants of the land of Canaan, for the following reason, viz. Left thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they (the Ifraelites) go a whoring after their gods, and do facrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his facrifice.-Here

the

the Author fays, that the meaning of these laft words, and thou eat of his facrifice, is, and thou engage in covenant and friendship with their gods and from this he would infer, that the eating of a facrifice with the god to whom it was offered, was a fymbol of friendship with him, and a foederal rite by which the owner of the facrifice did engage in covenant with him. But this is pure imagination, for the text fays nothing about it, nor supplies any hint from which it can be inferred. The eating of any facrifice that was offered to an idol, was, as is well known, an act of idolatry, or idolatrous worship, and as fuch only is it mentioned in the text, and not as a fymbol of friendship with the idol, or a fœderal rite.

The text mentioned next by the Author, is, Pfal. cvi. 28. They joined themselves alfo to Baal-Peor, and ate the facrifices of the dead. Here the Author is at it again with his favourite comment. They ate the facrifices of the dead, that is, fays he, they entered into a ftate of friendship with gods that were no more than dead men; from which he would have his readers to infer, that eating the facrifices of thofe gods, or dead men, was the fame thing as engaging in friendship or entering into covenant with them; confequently, a fymbol of friendship, and a foederal rite. But of all this the text fays nothing, which only speaks of the Ifraelites

as

as joining themselves to Baal-Peor by joining with the Moabites in his worship, and not by partaking of a fymbol of friendship, or the performance of a fœderal rite; and mentions their eating the facrifices of the dead, as an act of idolatrous worship only, without taking any notice of its having a fymbolical meaning and ufe, as an emblem of friendship, or a foederal rite.

The last thing which our Author mentions as a proof of his point, is, the covenant which, he ingenuoufly fuppofes, was made between God and the Ifraelites by their eating together of the pafchal lamb.

" As

"there was no altar, fays he, the blood "was to be ftruck upon the lintel, and the "two fide-pofts of the door, which served "instead of an altar. And then the Lord

engaged, on his part, that he would not "fuffer the deftroyer to come into any of "their houses. The children of Ifrael were "to eat the flesh of the lamb with one <another. The blood, upon this occafion, "was given to God's fhare; and then im

mediately the people were under his pro"tection." ANSW. It is no where faid, or hinted, that God and the Ifraelites entered into a covenant by the pafchal-facrifice, or that he and they did eat together of this facrifice, or engaged in covenant by eating of it together, or that the blood was given as God's fhare. All thefe are new ways of Speaking

and

fpeaking and thinking, of which the fcrip ture knows nothing. It is moft certain, that, at the inftitution of the paffover, no covenant was entered into by ftipulation and reftipulation, or by the mutual agreement and confent of two parties. All was of God's appointment and ordering whatever was done by the Ifraelites, was done in obedience to his authority and exprefs command; for their confent was not given or required previously to the injunction of it. As to the blood which was ftruck upon the lintel and the two fide-pofts of their doors; this, instead of being given to God as his fhare, which he was to eat, was only difpofed of in that manner, that it might be to the Ifraelites, for a token. upon the houses where they were; a token to them not of a covenant, or of God's entering into a covenant with them, but of divine protection from deftruction; a token to them, that God would pass over them, and the plague should not be upon them to deftroy them, when he fmote the land of Egypt, Exod. xii. 13. Withal, this whole tranfaction was intended to be a memorial, not of any covenant-engagement, but of a great and miraculous deliverance. When, therefore, the whole affair is duly confidered, it doth not appear to have any one circumftance in it, that is favourable to our Author's opinion about the fymbolical na

ture

ture and defign of facrifices, as being fym bols of friendship and fœderal rites.

The Author proceeds thus, " Hence it "is, that one may eafily explain what St. "Paul fays, I Cor. x. 21. Ye cannot drink of the cup of the Lord, and of the cup of "devils: Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's "table, and of the table of Devils. He "had been urging the Corinthians to flee "from idolatry, and was fhewing them "that, if they did eat of the facrifices "offered unto idols, they, by that act, pro"feffed themselves to be in a state of friend

ship with them. The Jews, by eating "the facrifices offered to God, partook of "the altar or table of God, and by that "were deemed to be in a state of friendship "with him. The Gentiles, by eating the things offered to their gods, were, for "the fame reason, in a state of friendship " with them. Now it is impoffible, as "the Apostle argues, to be in covenant "or friendship with two fuch contrary "mafters; and confequently, the Corin"thians ought not, could not, partake of "the table of the Lord, and of the table "of devils, or dæmons "."

ANSW. Whatever way be taken to explain this paffage of St. Paul, I can fee no reafon or neceffity for affuming the Author's

b Page 63, 64.

notion