LEVIT. XXVII. 28, 29.

NO DEVOTED THING, THAT A MAN SHALL DEVOTE UNTO THE LORD OF ALL THAT HE HATH, BOTH OF MAN AND BEAST, AND OF THE FIELD OF HIS POSSESSION, SHALL BE SOLD OR REDEEMED: EVERY DEVOTED THING IS MOST HOLY UNTO THE LORD.

NONE DEVOTED, WHICH SHALL BE DEVOTED OF MEN, SHALL BE REDEEMED; BUT SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH.

The Objector refers to this passage, in order to infer from it, that "the Levitical law approved or countenanced "human sacrifices 8." He says, "authors are divided” upon it: and he presently lets us know what side he takes, too hastily listening to any slander raised against Scripture. A noble writer indeed says, that "something of this nature might possibly be deduced even from holy "Writh" he perhaps may be one of this gentleman's authors. But the learned Selden has so fully and so ac-. curately discussed the question, determining it in the negative, that there is no room left for further dispute about it among men of true learning. The 28th verse of this chapter in Leviticus speaks of things or persons devoted to sacred uses, by that sort of vow which was called cherem, a consecration under pain of a curse. Things or persons so devoted or consecrated were for ever to be set apart to sacred uses, and could never be redeemed or desecrated. The 29th verse is to be understood of persons devoted by the cherem also, but devoted to perdition, (in like manner as the city Jericho was devoted k,) in a hostile

· 8 · Christianity as Old, &c. p. 94.

h Characteristics, vol. iii. p. 124.

i Selden. de Jur. Nat. et Gent. lib. iv. cap. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. His conclusion, after such particular examination, is in these words: "Manifestum est ex Ebræorum interpretatione qualicunque dictæ legis sacræ, nullum omnino "homicidium ultroneum, seu extra pœnæ, seu quasi rationem, permissum ea "fuisse." Cap. x. p. 550.

* Josh. vi. 17. “And the city shall be accursed," (devoted, cherem,)

even it, and all that are therein, to the Lord." Compare Numb. xxi. 2, 3. Judg. xxi. 5. 1 Sam. xiv. 24.

or vindictive way, and not in the way of sacrifice. Persons so devoted were to be utterly destroyed. This is the true and the full meaning of that whole passage in Leviticus 1.

But our Objector has somewhat to plead for another construction. He is pleased to interpret the words, Is MOST HOLY UNTO THE LORD, in verse 28, by the words of verse 29, SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. "What "is meant," he says, "by being MOST HOLY UNTO THE "LORD is explained in the next verse," and then he recites the 29th. But we may observe that THE FIELD OF HIS POSSESSION was one of the things mentioned in verse 28, as being devoted, and thereby rendered "most "holy unto the Lord." But if by the field's being most holy, nothing more is meant than its being irrevocably and irredeemably consecrated to God, "as a field devoted, "the possession whereof should be the priests m;" then certainly the men mentioned in the same verse with the field may be understood to be most holy, as consecrated irrevocably to sacred uses or services. Thus the Levites were consecrated, who were to serve the priests for ever; and thus the child Samuel was consecrated to God by his mother, and thereupon delivered up to old Eli, who received him for the Lord": and thus also the Nethinims, who were given by David to serve the Levites, as the Levites were to serve the priests.

But the Objector says further, that "whatever was the "Lord's, as the firstborn of man and beast, was to be "slain, if God did not order its redemptionP." And for proof thereof, he refers us to some texts 9 noted in the margin. But if he means redemption with money, he forgets that all the firstborn, before God took in the Levites

1 See Sir John Marsham, sect. ix. p. 169. ed. Lips. In the next page he has these words. "Cædes itaque humana nullo Ebræorum jure permissa est, "extra pœnæ legitimæ, justique belli rationem."

m Levit. xxvii. 21.

• Ezra viii. 20.

n 1 Sam. ii. 25, 26, 27, 28.

P Christianity as Old, &c. p. 95.

a Exod. xxx. 12, 13. xxxiv. 19, 20.

in their stead, were the Lord's: and yet none of these (excepting 273, the supernumerary firstborn above the number of the Levites ) were either redeemed or slain. The Levites came in their places, and so the Levites were now the Lord's, and yet were neither to be redeemed nor slain, but to serve the tabernacle and the priests $. In that sense they were the Lord's, and holy unto the Lordt, as irrevocably and unredeemably consecrated to God's service. It is true, that captives taken in war, if before devoted, were to be slain: and of such may the 29th verse be understood. But verse 28. speaks of a man's devoting out of "all that he hath," out of what is his own property, as for instance, his own slaves bought with his own money: those so devoted were not to be sacrificed, or otherwise slain, but to serve to sacred uses. That was the full end and aim of their being so solemnly and so irreversibly devoted to the Lord. And let it here be noted that God, speaking to Aaron in capacity of high priest, and assigning the priest's portion, says, EVERY THING DEVOTED IN ISRAEL (every cherem, every thing consecrated under a Curse) SHALL BE THINE"; which answers to the words in Levit. xxvii. 28. EVERY THING DEVOTED IS MOST HOLY UNTO THE LORD. Yet both are to be understood but of one kind of cherem, of things consecrated for ever to sacred uses, not of things destined to destruction: for how could that be given for the use of the priests which was immediately to be destroyed? I may add, that when the animals allowed for sacrifice are numbered up in Leviticusx, we find mention made of bullocks, sheep, goats, turtle-doves, young pigeons: but not a word of sacrificing men: so little ground or colour is there for this injurious charge upon the word of God.

To conclude this head, it is observable, that almost all the

Those Levites who are said, Numb. viii. 19. to be given to the priests, are in verse 16. said to be given unto God, which amounts to the same: God says,

66

"They are wholly given unto me:" and, "I have taken them uuto me.”

Pagan countries have offered human sacrifices; the Phonicians, and Canaanites, Egyptians, Arabians, Athenians, Lacedæmonians, Romans, Carthaginians, Scythians, Gauls, and Britains. The Jews in a manner were the only nation that never admitted the practice, because they had been taught better by God himself: and it has been owing chiefly, not to infidels, but to Christianity and Christian priests, that that diabolical custom began to be laid aside, (about the time when oracles also ceased,) and that we are not sacrificing our sons and daughters unto devils at this day. All this is fact; and yet this unrighteous man, instead of commending revelation, as he ought to do, for these inestimable benefits which we enjoy by it, is pleased to charge it as faulty in that very article where it deserves his highest praises. Can there be any reason, any sincerity, any benevolence to mankind, shown in thus abusing the readers?

NUMB. XIV. 30-34.

DOUBTLESS YE SHALL NOT COME INTO THE LAND, CONCERNING WHICH I SWARE TO MAKE YOU DWELL THEREIN, SAVE CALEB, &c.-AND YE SHALL KNOW

MY BREACH OF PROMISE.

The Objector remarks, that "there are texts, which, if "taken literally, represent God not only falsifying his "word, but his oaths." Then he cites the two texts above specified. Now as to verse 30. no one but an half-witted reader can be at a loss to understand it, and literally too. YE, that is, ye Israelites considered as particular men, SHALL NOT COME INTO THE LAND CONCERNING WHICH I SWARE TO MAKE You (you considered as a people) DWELL THEREIN. God's promises were made to the seed of Abraham, to the children of Israel, to the Hebrews, as an abiding people which was to subsist for many

y Vid. Euseb. Præp. Evang. lib. v. cap. 16. p. 155, &c.

z Vid. Euseb. Præp. Evang. lib. v. cap. 17. p. 208. et lib. iv. cap. 17. p. 163, &c. Jenkins, vol. i. p. 360.

ages, though particular men were going off daily, as in all fleeting successive bodies. To that people, I say, the promises were literally made, and to the same people they were as literally fulfilled. The promise was not tied to certain persons, but to a certain people, and therefore might. be performed at any time (if not otherwise limited) while that people subsisted.

It is a very usual and a very intelligible way of speaking, common in all languages, to speak of nations in their national capacity, and to say we, or you, not meaning it of the individuals now living, but of their ancestors, or posterity: and I am persuaded there is scarce a plain countryman but who would readily understand such expressions at first hearing; so little ground is there for cavil upon this first article.

As to what is said in verse 34. YE SHALL KNOW MY BREACH OF PROMISE, it is a harsh translation, and merely conjectural, not warranted by the Hebrew original. Some of our older English translations had a more inoffensive and a juster rendering, than our last version here happens to have. Coverdale's Bible of 1535 renders; YE MAY KNOW WHAT IT IS, WHEN I WITHDRAWE MY HAND. Matthewes's of 1537 has, YE SHALL FELE MY VENGEAUNCE. The Great Bible of 1539, YE SHALL KNOWE MY DISPLEASURE. The Geneva translators of 1560 first ventured to say, YE SHALL FELE MY BREACH OF PROMISE: but then they added a marginal note to soften it : viz. "whether my promise be true, or no." Bp. Parker's Bible of 1568 altered it into, YE SHALL KNOWE MY BREACHE OF PROMISE, leaving no note at all in the margin: and the last translation following Parker's, reads the text as before, only throwing in another softer version into the margin, viz. "altering of my purpose."

The truth is, promise was inserted by the translators only to fill up the sense, as they supposed: there is nothing in the Hebrew to answer it. The most that can be made of the Hebrew, in that way of construction, is no more than this, (as Bishop Patrick has observed,) YE