Page images
PDF
EPUB

A. M. 128. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 201. A. C. 3210. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25.

out the use of tents, or movable houses, to be carried about to places of fresh pasturage; and Jubal, who was the first inventor of all musical instruments, and himself a great master and performer. By the latter he had Tubal-Cain, the first who discovered the art of forging and polishing metals, and thereupon devised the making all sorts of armour, both defensive and offensive; and whose sister Naamah (a name denoting fair and beautiful,) is supposed to have first found out the art of spinning and weaving.

God vouchsafed a frequent manifestations of his glorious | improvements in the management of cattle, and found presence; and though by the divine decree no person was permitted to hurt him, yet, being conscious of his own guilt, he was fearful of every thing he saw or heard: till having wandered about a long while in many different countries, he settled at length with his wife and family in the land of Nod; where, in some tract of time, and after his descendants were sufficiently multiplied, he built a city, that they might live together, and be united, the better to defend themselves against incursions, and to secure their unjust possessions; and this place he called after the name of his son Enoch, which, in the Hebrew tongue, signifies a dedication.

This Enoch begat Jarad; Jarad begat Mehujael; Mehujael begat Methusael; and Methusael begat Lamech, who was the first introducer of polygamy. For he married two wives, Adah and Zillah, by the former of which he had two children; Jabal, who made great

a Both Lightfoot, Heidegger, and Le Clerc, seem to be of opinion, that what we render the presence of the Lord,' was the proper name of that particular place where Adam, after his expulsion from paradise, dwelt; and accordingly we find that part of the country which lies contiguous to the supposed situation of paradise, called by Strabo (b. 16. prosopora.) However this be, it is agreed by all interpreters, that there was a divine glory,' called by the Jews SCHECHINAH, which appeared from the beginning, (as we said before, page 15, in the notes) and from

which Cain being now banished, never enjoyed the sight of it again. If, after this, Cain turned a downright idolater, (as many think,) it is very probable that he introduced the worship of the sun (which was the most ancient idolatry) as the best resemblance he could find of the glory of the Lord which was wont to appear in a flaming light.-Patrick's Commentary.

b The words of Josephus are these. "So far was Cain from mending his life after his afflictions, that he rather grew worse and worse, abandoning himself to his lusts, and all manner of outrage, without any regard to common justice. He enriched himself by rapine and violence, and made choice of the most profligate of monsters for his companions, instructing them in the very mystery of their own profession. He corrupted the simplicity and plain dealing of former times, with a novel invention of weights and measures, and exchanged the innocency of that primitive generosity and candour for the new tricks of policy and craft. He was the first who invaded the common rights of mankind by bounds and enclosures, and the first who built a city, fortified, and peopled it.”—Antiq. b. 1. c. 3.; and Le Clerc's Commentary.

e Le Clerc, supposing that the increase of females at the beginning of the world was much greater than that of males, is of opinion that there might possibly want a man to espouse one of the women which Lamech married; nor can he think that Moses intended to blame him for what was the constant practice of some of the most eminent of the postdiluvian patriarchs. Bishop Patrick likewise makes this apology for him. "His earnest desire of seeing that blessed seed," says he, "which was promised to Eve, might perhaps induce him to take more wives than one, hoping, that by multiplying his posterity, some or other of them might prove so happy as to produce that seed. And this he might possibly persuade himself to be more likely, because the right which was in Cain, the first-born, he might now conclude, was revived in himself; and that the curse laid upon Cain was by this time expired, and his posterity restored to the right of fulfilling the promise." Both Selden and Grotius plead for the lawfulness of polygamy before the Levitical dispensation; but the learned Heidegger (who has a whole dissertation upon the subject) has sufficiently answered them, and proved at large, that this custom of multiplying wives is contrary both to the law of God and the law of nature.--History of the Patriarchs, Essay 7th.

d The words in the text are,-He was the father of such as dwell in tents;' for the Hebrews call him the father of any thing who was the first inventor of it, or a most excellent master of that art: and from the affinity of their names, as well as the similitude of their inventions, learned men have supposed, that

4

This is the register of Cain's posterity for seven generations and Moses, perhaps, might the rather enumerate them, to show who were the real authors and inventors of certain arts and handicrafts, which the Egyptians too vainly assumed to themselves: but then he barely enumerates them, without ever remarking how long any of them lived, (a practice contrary to what he observes in the genealogy of the Sethites,) as if he esteemed them a generation so reprobate as not to deserve a place in the book of the living.

6

e

5

The murder of Abel had, for a long time, occasioned a great animosity between the family of Seth and the descendants of Cain, who, though at some distance, lived in perpetual apprehensions that the other family might come upon them unawares, and revenge Abel's untunely death: but Lamech, when he came to be head of a people, endeavoured to reason them out of this fear. For calling his family together, he argued with them to Le Clerc's Commentary. Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs. Le Clerc's Commentary. Shuckford's Connection, vol. I. Jabal was the Pales; and Jubal the Apollo; Tubal-Cain (which in the Arabic tongue, still signifies a plate of iron' or 'brass') the Vulcan, and his sister Naamah the Venus, or (as some will have it) the Minerva of the Gentiles.-Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs; and Stillingfleet's Origins, b. 3. c. 5.

2

Howell's History of the Bible.
Patrick's Commentary.

6

e This speech of Lamech, as it stands unconnected with any thing before it, is supposed by many to be a fragment of some old record which Moses was willing to preserve; and, because it seems to fall into a kind of metre, some have thought it a short sketch of Lamech's poetry, which he was desirous to add to his son's invention of music, and other arts. Many suppose, that Lamech, being plagued with the daily contentions of his two wives, here blusters and boasts of what he had done and what he would do, if they gave him any farther molestation. Others imagine, that as the use of weapons was found out by one of his sons, and now become common, his wives were fearful, lest somebody or other might make use of them to slay him; but that, in this regard, he desires them to be easy, because, as he was not guilty of slaying any body himself, there was no reason to fear any body would hurt him. The Targum of Onkelos, which reads the words interrogatively, favours this interpretation much? Have I slain a man to my wounding or a young man to my hurt?' that is, I have done no violence or offence to any one, either great or small, and have therefore no cause to be apprehensive of any to myself. But the Rabbins tell us a traditional story, which, if true, would explain the passage at once. The tradition is,-That Lamech, when he was blind, took his son Tubal-Cain to hunt with him in the woods, where they happened on Cain, who being afraid of the society and converse of men, was wont to lie lurking up and down in the woods; that the lad mistook him for some beast stirring in the bushes, and directed his father, how, with a dart, or an arrow, he might kill him; and this (they say) was the man whom he killed by his wounding him; and that afterwards, when he came to perceive what he had done, he beat Tubal-Cain to death for misinforming him: and this was the young man whom he killed by hurting or beating him.' But besides the incongruity of a blind man's

A. M. 123. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 201. A. C. 5210. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25.

this purpose. "Why should we make our lives uneasy with these groundless suspicions? What have we done, that we should be afraid? We have not killed any man, nor offered any violence to our brethren of the other family; and surely reason must teach them, that they can have no right to hurt or invade us. Cain indeed, our ancestor, killed Abel; but God was pleased so far to forgive his sin, as to threaten to take the severest vengrance on any one that should kill him; and if so, surely they must expect a much greater punishment, who shall presume to kill any of us. For if Cain shall be avenged seven-fold, surely Lamech,' or any of his innocent family, 'seventy-seven-fold."" And it is not improbable, that by frequent discourses of this kind, as well as by his own example, he overcame the fears and shyness of the people, and (as we shall find hereafter) encouraged them to commence an acquaintance with their brethren, the children of Seth. This is the sum of what the Scripture teaches us of the deeds of Cain, and his wicked offspring, who were all swept away in the general deluge.

CHAP. II.-Difficulties obviated, and Objections

answered.

36

4

St Paul, while he was at Athens, endeavoured to convince the people of the vanity of that idolatry into which he perceived them fallen, by this argument, among others, that God had made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth.' Some Greek copies read it i§ vós, ́of one man,' leaving out paros, wherein they are followed by the vulgar Latin : but allowing the common reading to be just, yet still the word aux, or blood, must be taken in the a sense wherein it occurs in the best Greek authors, namely, for the stock or root out of which mankind came; and so the apostle's reasoning will be-"That however men are now dispersed in their habitations, and differ much in language and customs from each other, yet they all were originally the same stock, and derived their succession from the first man that God created." Neither can it be conceived, on what account Adam is called in Scripture the first man,' and that he was made a living soul of the earth, earthly,' unless it were to denote, that he was absolutely the first of his kind, and so was to be the standard and measure of all that followed.

[ocr errors]

5

The design of Moses is not to give us a particular account of the whole race of mankind descended from Adam, but only of those persons who were most remarkable, and whose story was necessary to be known, for the understanding of the succession down to his time. Besides those that are particularly mentioned in ScripTHOUGH it cannot be denied but that Moses might ture, we are told in general, that Adam 'begat sons principally design to give us a history of the Jewish and daughters; and if we will give credit to an ancient nation; yet, in the beginning of his account, and till eastern tradition, he had in all thirty-three sons, and they came to be distinguished from other nations in the twenty-seven daughters, which, considering the primipatriarch Abraham, he could not have that under his tive fecundity, would in a short time be sufficient to peculiar consideration. He acquaints us, we find, with stock that part of the world at least where Adam dwelt, the origination of the first of other animals, whence they and produce a race of mechanics able enough to supply arose, and in what manner they were perfected; and others with such instruments of husbandry as might then when he came to treat of the formation of human crea- be requisite for the cultivation of the ground. For in tures, it is but reasonable to imagine, that he intended the infancy of the world, the art of tillage was not come likewise to be understood of the first of their kind. to such a perfection but that Cain might make use of Now, that Adam and Eve were the first of their kind, wooden ploughs and spades, and instead of knives and the words of our Saviour, from the beginning of the hatchets, form his tools with sharp flints or shells, which creation God made them male and female,' are a full were certainly the first instruments of cutting. And confirmation; because he produces the very same pre- though in those early days there was no great danger of cept that was applied to Adam and Eve at their crea- Abel's losing his cattle by theft; yet, to provide them tion, therefore shall a man leave his father and his with cool shades in hot climates, to remove them from mother, and cleave to his wife:' and that there could be place to place as their pasture decayed, to take care of Lone before them, the reason why Adam called his their young, and guard them from the incursions of wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all liv-beasts of prey, (with many more incidental offices,) was ing,' i. e. the person who was to be the root and source of all mankind that were to be upon earth, is a plain demonstration: for if she was the mother of all living, there certainly was no race of men or women before her.

[blocks in formation]

Fing a hunting, this story is directly contrary to the promise of God, which assured Cain, that no person should kill him, and seems indeed to be devised for no other purpose, but merely to solve the difficulty of the passage. Among the many interpretations which have been made of it, that which I have offered seems to be the most natural and easy, and is not a little countenanced by the authority of Josephus. "As for Lamech," says he, "who saw as far as any man into the course and methods of divine justice, he could not but find himself concerned in the prospect of that dreadful judgment which threatened his whole family, for the murder of Abel, and, under this apprehension, he breaks the matter to his two wives."—Antiquities, b. 1. c. 3.

then the shepherd's province, as well as now.

According to the computation of most chronologers, it was in the hundred and twenty-ninth year of Adam's age, that Abel was slain; for the Scripture says expressly, that Seth, (who was given in the lieu of Abel) was born in the hundred and thirtieth year, (very likely the after the murder was committed,) to be a comyear

3 Acts xvii. 26.

9

7

Stillingflect's Sacred Origins, b. 3. c. 4. 1 Cor. xv. 45. 6 Patrick's Commentary. Gen. v. 4. Nicholls's Conference, vol. 1. 9 Gen. v. 3.

a Homer employs it in this acceptation:

Since mine thou art indeed, and of my blood.' Thence those that are near relations are called by Sophocles, 'of the same blood,' and accordingly Virgil uses sanguis, or blood, in the same sense; sprung from Trojan blood.'-Stillingfleet's Sacred Origins, b. 3. c. 4.

[ocr errors]

A. M. 123. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25.

fort to his disconsolate parents. So that Cain must haveing the mark which God, set upon Cain, to prevent his been an hundred and twenty-nine years old when he abdicated his own country; at which time there might be a sufficient quantity of mankind upon the face of the earth, to the number, it may be, of an hundred thousand souls. For if the children of Israel, from seventy persons, in the space of a hundred and ten years, became six hundred thousand fighting men, (though great numbers of them were dead during this increase,) we may very well suppose, that the children of Adam, whose lives were so very long, might amount at least to a hundred thousand in a hundred and thirty years, which are almost five generations.

1

Upon this supposition, it will be no hard matter to find Cain a wife in another country; though it is much more probable that he was married before his banishment, because we may well think that all the world would abhor the thoughts of marriage with such an impious vagabond and murderer. Upon this supposition we may likewise find him men enough to build and inhabit a city; especially considering that the word Hir, which we render city, may denote no more than a certain number of cottages, with some little hedge or ditch about them and this cluster of cottages (as was afterwards customary) he might call by his son's name rather than his own, which he was conscious was now become odious every where. Upon this supposition, lastly, we may account for Cain's fear, lest every one that lighted on him would kill him; for by this time mankind was greatly multiplied, and though no mention is made of Abel's marriage, (as, in so short a compendium, many things must necessarily be omitted,) yet he perhaps might have sons who were ready to pursue the fugitive, in order to revenge their father's death; or some of his own sisters, enraged against him for the loss of their brother, might possibly come upon him unawares, or when they found him asleep, and so dispatch him. Various are the conjectures of learned men concern

[blocks in formation]

a There is an original tradition, that Eve, at her two first births, brought twins, a son and a daughter; Cain, with his sister Azron, and Abel, with his sister Awin; that when they came to years of maturity, Adam proposed to Eve, that Cain should marry Abel's twin-sister, and Abel Cain's, because that was some small remove from the nearest degree of consanguinity, which even in those days, was not esteemed entirely lawful; that Cain refused to agree to this, insisting to have his own sister, who was the handsomer of the two; whereupon Adam ordered them both to make their offerings, before they took their wives, and so referred the dispute to the determination of God; that while they went up to the mountain for that purpose, the devil put it into Cain's head to murder his brother, for which wicked intent his sacrifice was not accepted: and that they were no sooner come down from the mountain, than he fell upon Abel, and killed him with a stone.-Patrick's Commentary; and Universal History, No. 2.

[ocr errors]

b Almost all the versions have committed a mistake in translating ver. 15, that God had put a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.' The original says no such thing, and the LXX have very well rendered it thus: God set a sign before Cain, to persuade him, that whoever should find him should not kill him.' This is almost the same with what is said in Ex. x. 1., that God did signs before the Egyptians;' and Isa. Ixvi. 19., that he would set a sign before the heathen;' where it is evident, that God did not mean any particular mark which should be set on their bodies, but only those signs and wonders which he wrought in Egypt, to oblige Pharaoh to let his people go; and the miraculous manner wherein he delivered them from

being killed. Some think that God stigmatized him on his forehead with a letter of his own name, or rather set such a brand upon him, as signified him to be accursed. Others fancy that God made him a peculiar garment, to distinguish him from the rest of mankind, who were clothed with skins. Some imagine, that his head continually shaked; others, that his face was blasted with lightning; others, that his body trembled all over and others again, that the ground shook under him, and made every one fly from him: whereas the plain sense of the words is nothing more, than that God gave Cain a sign, or wrought a miracle before his face, thereby to convince him, that though he was banished into a strange land, yet no one should be permitted to hurt him; and to find out the land into which he was banished, is not so hard a matter as some may imagine.

The description which Moses gives us of it is this:36 And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east side of Eden; and there he built a city, and called the name of it after the name of his son Enoch.' Hereupon the learned Huetius observes, that Ptolemy, in his description of Susiana, places there a city called Anuchtha; and that the syllable tha, which ends the word, is, in the Chaldee language, a termination pretty common to nouns feminine, and consequently no part of the name itself: from whence he infers, that this Anuchtha, mentioned by Ptolemy, is the same with the city Enoch mentioned by Moses; especially since Ptolemy places it on the east side of Eden, which agrees very well with what Moses says of the land of Nod. But though it be allowed, that Anuchtha and Enoch be the same name, yet it will not therefore follow, that there was no other city so called but that which was built by Cain. It is certain, that there was another Enoch, the son of Jared, and father of Methuselah, a person of remarkable piety, in the antediluvian age; and why might not the city, mentioned by Ptolemy, be called after him, in respect to his illustrious character, and miraculous exemption from death? or rather, why might it not take its name from some other Enoch, different from both the former, and living some generations after the flood? For it is scarce imaginable, how the city of Enoch, built before the flood, should either stand or retain its ancient name, after so violent a concussion, and total alteration of the face of nature.

Nor should it be forgot, that the province of Susiana, where Huetius places the land of Nod, is one of the most fruitful and pleasant countries in the world; whereas, considering that Cain's banishment was intended by God to be part of his punishment, it seems more reasonable to think, that he should, upon this account, be sent into some barren and desolate country, remote from the place of his nativity, and separated by mountains, and other

[blocks in formation]

CHAP. III.—Of the Institution of Sacrifices.

THE first plain account that we meet with of sacrifices, is here in the examples of Cain and Abel. Mention is made indeed of the skins of some beasts, wherewith God directed our first parents to be clothed; but expos

might not denote some other sort of covering, or shelter from the weather; or, if they were the real skins of beasts, whether these beasts were offered unto God in sacrifice or no; whereas, in the Scripture before us, we have oblations of both kinds, bloody and unbloody sac

of the field, offered by Cain, and the firstlings of the flock, by Abel. So that from hence we may very properly take an occasion, to inquire a little into the orig

A. M. 128. A. C. 3876, OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25. natural obstructions, from the commerce of his relations. For which reason the learned Grotius is clearly of opinion, that the country into which Cain was sentenced to withdraw, was Arabia Deserta: to the barrenness of which, the curse that God pronounces against him, seems not improperly to belong. And now thou art cursed from the earth, and when thou tillest the ground, it shall not, henceforth, yield unto thee her strength.' But after all, their opinion is not to be found fault with, who sup-itors are not agreed, whether what we render skins pose, that the word Nod, which signifies an exile, or fugitive, is not a proper, but only an appellative name; and that therefore, wherever the country was where Cain took up his abode, that, in after ages, was called the land of Nod, or the land of the banished man. Thas the account, which Moses gives us of the mur-rifices, (as they are commonly distinguished;) the fruits der of Abel, stands clear of the imputation of all absurdity or contradiction, wherewith the lovers of infidelity would gladly charge it. The time when his brother murdered him, was in the 129th year of the world's cre-inal of sacrifices; for what ends and purposes they were ation, when, " according to a moderate computation, their and their parent's descendants could not but be very numerous. The manner in which he murdered him might not be with a sword or spear (which perhaps then were not in use,) since a club, or stone, or any rural instrument, in the hand of rage and revenge, was suffi-inally from a dictate of nature, or a grateful inclination cient to do the work. The place where he murdered him, is said to be in the field, not in contradistinction to any large and populous city then in being, but rather to the tents, or cottages, where their parents and offspring might then live. The cause of his murdering him, was a spirit of emulation, which, not duly managed, and made a spur to virtue, took an unhappy turn, and degenerated into malice: and the true reason of all (as the apostle has stated it) was, that Cain was of that wicked one, and slew his brother, because his own works were wicked, and his brother's righteous.'

'Gen. iv. 11.

Le Clerc's Commentary. Shuckford's Connection. 1 John iii. 12.

a Though we should suppose that Adam and Eve had no other cldren than Cain and Abel in the year of the world 128, which (as the best chronologers agree) was the time of Abel's murder; yet, as it must be allowed, that they had daughters married with these two sons, we require no more, than the descendants of these two children, to make a considerable number of men upon the earth in the said year 128. For, supposing them to have been arried in the 19th year of the world, they might easily have had each of them eight children, some males, some females, in the 25th year. In the 50th year there might proceed from them, in a direct line, 64 persons; in the 74th year, there would be 572; in the 95th, 4096; and in the 122d year, they would amount to 32,768. If to these we add the other children, descended from Cain and Abel, their children, and the children of their children, we shall have in the aforesaid 122d year, 421,164 men, capable of generation, without ever reckoning the women, both old and young, or such children as are under the age of 17 years,-See Chronological and Geographical Dissertation on the Bible History, in the Journal of Paris, January, 1712, vol.

li. p. 6.

There is an oriental tradition, that when Cain was confirmed in the design of destroying his brother, and knew not how to go about it, the devil appeared to him in the shape of a man, holding a bird in his hand; and that, placing the bird upon a rock, he took up a stone, and with it squeezed its head in pieces. Cain, instructed by this example, resolved to serve his brother in Li same way; and therefore, waiting till Abel was asleep, he Lifted up a large stone, and let it fall, with all its weight, upon his head, and so killed him; whereupon God caused him to hear voice from heaven, to this purpose, 'The rest of thy days shalt

at first appointed; and by what means they became an acceptable service unto God.

The Scriptures indeed make no mention of the first institution of sacrifices; and from their silence, in this respect, some have imagined that they proceeded orig

to return unto God some of his own blessings. But in so short an account of so large a compass of time, (as we have said before,) it may well be expected, that several things should be omitted. To this purpose, therefore, others have observed, that Moses says nothing of Enoch's prophecy; nothing of Noah's preaching; nothing of the peopling of the world; though these be referred to in other parts of Scripture: nor does he here introduce the sacrifices of Cain and Abel, with an intent to inform us of the origin of that rite, but merely to let us know what was the unhappy occasion of the first murder that ever was committed in the world.

7

The Jews indeed, to whom he primarily wrote, knew very well, that their own sacrifices were of divine institution, and that God had manifested his acceptance of them, at the very first solemn oblation after that institution, by a miraculous fire from the divine presence; nor had they any reason to doubt, but that they were so instituted, and so accepted from the beginning: and therefore there was less reason for Moses to expatiate upon a matter, which had doubtless descended to them in a clear and uninterrupted tradition.

A grateful sense of God's blessings will, at any time, engage us to offer him the calves of our lips, (as the Scripture terms them,) or the warmest expressions of our praise and thanksgiving; but what dictate of nature, or deduction of reason, could ever have taught us, that, to destroy the best of our fruits, or the best of our cattle, would have been a service acceptable to God? Goodness, and mercy, and lenity, and compassion, are the ideas we have of that infinite being; and who would then have thought, that putting an innocent and inoffen. sive creature to torture, spilling its blood upon the earth, and burning its flesh upon an altar, would have

[blocks in formation]

A. M. 128. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 23.

[ocr errors]

been either a grateful sight, or an offering of a sweet ficing among them is thought to be too late, why may smelling savour' to the Most High?

No 1being, we know, can have a right to the lives of other creatures, but their Creator only, and those on whom he shall think proper to confer it: but it is evident, that God, at this time, had not given man a right to the creatures, even for necessary food, much less for unnecessary cruelty; and therefore to have taken away their lives, without God's positive injunction, would have been an abominable act, and enough to desecrate all their oblations. When therefore we read, that his acceptance of sacrifices of old was usually testified by way of inflammation, or setting them on fire, by a ray of light which issued from his glorious presence, we must allow, that this was a proof of his previous institution of them; otherwise we cannot possibly think, why he should so far concern himself about them, as even to be at the expense of a miracle, to denote his approbation of them. 2 Who hath known the mind of the Lord,' is the Apostle's way of arguing, or who hath been his counsellor?' And, in like manner, without a divine revelation, it would have been the height of vanity and presumption, to have pretended to determine the way of reconciliation with him, and (without his order and appointment) to have entered upon a form of worship, entirely new and strange, by killing of beasts, and burning their fat. 3'No man,' says another Apostle, 'taketh this honour to himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron;' nor can any one lay hold on the promise of forgiveness of sins (which is the great design of all sacrificing) any other way than by symbols of God's own institution.

In most nations indeed, the custom of sacrificing did prevail: but that it did not arise from any principle of nature or reason, is manifest from hence that the gravest and wisest of the heathen philosophers always a condemned bloody sacrifices as impious, and unacceptable to their gods; but this they would not have done, had they looked upon them as any branch of natural religion, which none were more warm in extolling than they. It is no improbable conjecture, therefore, that other nations might take the rite of sacrificing from the Jews, to which the devil, in heathen countries, might instigate his votaries, purely to ape God, and imitate his ordinances: or if this commencement of sacri

Revelation Examined.

Rom. xi. 34. 3 Heb. v. 4.
Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs, Essay 1.
5 Edward's Survey of Religion, vol. 1.

6 Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs, Essay 8.
a It is the opinion of Tertullian, Apol. c. 46. that none of
the ancient philosophers ever compelled the people to sacrifice
living creatures. Theophrastus is quoted by Porphyry in Euse-
bius' Evangelical Preparation, b. 1. c. 9. as asserting that the
first men offered handfuls of grass; that, in time, they come to
sacrifice the fruits of the trees; and, in after ages, to kill and of-
fer cattle upon altars. Many other authors are cited for this
opinion. Pausanias on Phrygian Crops, seems to intimate, that
the ancient sacrifice was only fruits of trees (of the vine espe-
cially,) and of honeycombs and wool. Empedocles on the
most Ancient Times, affirms, that the first altars were not stained
with the blood of creatures; and Plat) on Laws, b. 6. was of
opinion, that living creatures were not anciently offered in sac-
rifice, but cakes of bread, and fruits, and honey, poured upon
them; for "The heavenly deities delight not in the sacrifice of
an ox," was an old position of more writers than Ovid.-See
Shuckford's Connection, vol. 1. b. 2

76

not we suppose, that they received it by tradition from their forefathers, who had it originally from Adam, as he had it from God by a particular revelation? Now that there was some warrant and precept of God for it, seems to be intimated by the author to the Hebrews, when he tells us, that by faith Abel offered unto God a more acceptable sacrifice, than Cain:' for if faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God,' faith is founded on some word, and relieth on divine command or promise; and therefore, when Abel offered the best of his flock in sacrifice, he did what was enjoined him by God, and his practice was founded upon a divine command, which was given to Adam, and his sons, though Moses, in his short account of things, makes no mention of it.

In fine, if it appears from history, that sacrifices have been used all over the world, have spread as far, as universally among men, as the very notions of a Deity; if we find them almost as early in the world as mankind upon the earth, and, at the same time, cannot perceive that mankind ever could, by the light of reason, invent such notions of a Deity, as might induce them to think, that this way of worship would be an acceptable service to him; if mankind indeed could have no right to the lives of the brute creation, without the concession of God; and yet it is evident, that they exercised such right, and God approved of their proceeding, by visible indications of his accepting the sacrifices; then must we necessarily suppose, that sacrifices were of his own institution at first; and that they were instituted for purposes well becoming his infinite wisdom and goodness.

For we must remember, that Adam and Eve were, at this time, become sinners, and though received into mercy, in constant danger of relapsing; that, by their transgression, they had forfeited their lives, but as yet could have no adequate sense, either of the nature of the punishment, or the heinousness of the sin which procured it; and that now they were to beget children, who were sure to inherit their parents' corruption and infirmity. Since man, therefore, had forfeited his life by his transgressions, and God, notwithstanding, decreed to receive him into mercy, nothing certainly could better become the divine wisdom and goodness, than the establishment of some institution, which might at once be a monition both of the mercy of God, and the punishment due to sin. And because God foresaw that man would often sin, and should often receive mercy, it was necessary, that the institution should be such as might frequently be repeated; and in such repetition, frequently remind man of his own endless demerit, and of God's infinite goodness to him; to which purpose the institution of sacrifices for sin was of excellent use and service.

Both from the commandment which at first was given to Adam, and the sentence which was afterwards denounced against him, we learn, that death was the penalty of his disobedience; and since it was so, certainly it was highly proper, that he should know what he was to suffer; and consequently that he should see death in all its horror and deformity, in order to judge rightly of the evil of disobedience. And what could exhibit this evil

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »