:

and unbiaffed reader, appear fomewhat difficult to be accounted for, that of those Jews only he has attri→ buted their principle and conduct to the Devil; whereas, of all others, who were equally corrupt and unbelieving, he did not even once tell any of them they were his children, in the common acceptation of those words, efpecially when they gave him as great occafion for expreffing himself in as pointed a manner. To inftance only those Pharifees who wickedly and foolishly faid he caft out devils, i. e. demons, by Belzebub the Prince of Devils, i. e. demons.

As it is manifeft our Saviour has perfonified the wicked Jews who killed the prophets, as the cause of producing children like themselves, i. e. the Jews he spake to, who, it is certain, had not the leaft influence in effecting it; why should it be judged incredible that he should speak after a like manner in his ufing the words Satan, &c. The Apostle, in the 6th chapter to the Romans, has perfonified fin, as having been their lord and mafter, whom, before their converfion, they served, in fulfilling the defires of the flesh and of the mind. But every intelligent perfon, without the least objection, or difficulty, admits he is not to be underftood in a literal fenfe, but only as an expreffive figure, in which, in ftrong language, he describes their former wicked principles and conduct, as he doth in the 1ft chapter.

SECT.

I have, in the foregoing pages, confidered all the pafJages in the Evangelifts, in which the wicked one, &c. is faid to tempt men to fin; I will now attend to thofe in the Acts of the Apostles, and the other parts of the New Testament, of a fimilar kind.

A

ND the firft that is related in the Acts, is chap. v. 3, 4, 9, concerning Ananias, to him Peter faid, Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghoft, to keep back part of the price of the land?-After telling him, in the next verse, it was in his own power or choice to fell the land or not; and after he had fold it, to keep the price of it, or put it into the joint stock, he charged him with conceiving what he had done, faying, Why haft thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou haft not lied unto men, (in faying it was the whole given into the fund when it was but a part of it) but unto God. It may be faid that Peter's words, v. 3, carry in them an affirmation that Ananias's heart was filled by Satan, as the moving or exciting cause of his committing that fin. Alfo that the Apostle really knew there was such a being, and that he temps men to fin. To which I reply, that the Apostle could not know either, from the Old Teftament; and it is certain there is not any account in the Evangelifts, that Jefus made any discovery of either to the Apoftle, or other of them. And it is indifputably true, that he could not know either, by the light of his natural reafon; besides, his attributing the fin to Satan, in the fenfe commonly understood, is not confiftent

F 2

fiftent with what he faid to Ananias and his wife. To the former, Why haft thou conceived this thing in thine heart; thou haft not lied unto men, but unto God.-To the latter, How is it that we have agreed together to tempt the spirit of the Lord? In which he plainly attributes the primarymoving caufe to arife in their own breasts, and in contriving how they might put it in practice.

Peter's words therefore may be thought to create fome difficulty in determining whether he imputes Ananias's heart, being filled by Satan, or that the first rise of it was in himself, in conceiving the thing for, if Peter believed it was primarily owing to the former, it could not be to the latter but only in a fecondary fense; and had the Apoftle known this to be the true ftate of the cafe, onewould naturally conclude he would in one or both the latter addreffes to him, have in that manner represented it but, it is certain, from his own words, he hath not. From the whole relation of this fingular tranfaction, it appears to me, that the primary excitement in the heart of Ananias, to contrive and put in execution what is related of him, arofe from his own coveteous mind, which fuggested to him the thought of keeping back part of the price of the land, under the deluding hope, that could he fucceed in concealing the tranfaction from the Apostle and others, he might receive from the joint stock a greater income than he had any right to; and alfo keep part of it for his own ufe; as may appear probable from chap. ii. 44, 45. iv. 32, 34, 35. and vi. 1, 2, 3. But their deceitful and criminal conduct was not only detected, but alfo punifhed of God, in a very signal and exemplary manner, as a folemn and affecting warning to other difeiples, to avoid the like deceit ful and wicked conduct.

That,

1

That, by the word Satan, Peter did not intend a fallen angel, is to me undeniable from what I have obferved of the entire filence in the Old Teftament, of fuch a being, or his tempting men to fin, by his infufing evil thoughts into the mind; and that so far as we know, Jefus did not inform his Apostles of it. It follows therefore, that Ananias could not understand or believe that by the word Satan Peter intended fuch a being. Neither could Peter, fo far as we know, have any real evidence on which to believe his heart was filled by him as the exciting cause of his doing what he did; or Ananias have any inward perception or confciousness of it. And, it hath been obferved, that Peter imputes Ananias's fin to his conceiving the thing in his heart, and that he and his wife had agreed together in that act.

When, in 2 Cor. xi. 14. the Apostle faith, Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light, I think he cannot well be understood to mean into one like an holy angel, it having no connection or coincidence with v. 13, 15. and therefore most probably he means an apoftle of light, i. e. himfelf. See Gal. iv. 14. But then this transformation must be in a vifible character, as a teacher of his tenets, or doctrines, or an invisible transformation. If we fuppofe the former to be his meaning it will be attended with very great, if not with infuperable dif ficulties, to account for; there not being the least hint, much less an inftance of it related in the New Testament. If we fuppofe the Apoftle means the latter, it will, I prefume, be attended with equal difficulties. For, it is natural to afk, how, or by what means could his minifters come at the knowledge of this, or receive their doctrine, or any explicit direction or authority, as from him, or act as his minifters.

In

In the first Epistle chapter iv. 6. the fame original word is tranflated I have-in a figure transferred to myself, and Apollos-or rather to himfelf only; that is, I have contradiftinguished, or contrafted myself and Apollos with the falfe apostles, for your fakes,, that as we always have acted as the ftewards or fervants of Chrift only, and not made the leaft claim of headship over you, as though you were our difciples. (See chap. i.

12-15.) ye might learn, by our example, not to think of men, i. e. the falfe apoftles, your leaders, above that which is written, and therefore not be puffed up for one against another. In this contraft of himself with the falfe apoftles, he is not to be understood to admit their having the least claim to be the apoftles of Chrift any more than Satan, whom, he says, is transformed into an angel of light, i. e. an apostle of Chrift.

To the foregoing confiderations I may add, that when the Apostles in his 1 Epiftle i. ii. contrafts the tenets or doctrines of the falfe apoftles with the revelations of the fpirit of God made to him, or the wisdom of God in the gofpel, which he had taught the Corinthians; he calls their wifdom the wifdom of the wife, the wifdom of men, and the wifdom and fpirit of men, and the wisdom and fpirit of the world, or of the Princes of this world; but he hath not given the leaft hint that it was the wisdom or doctrine of Satan, which had he belived, it is natural to conclude he would have mentioned it, as a very strong argument why they ought to renounce it, and the false apostles as his minifters; but of these things he is entirely filent.

I will hazard a conjecture, and fuch I offer it, on v. 14, which, if admitted feems to obviate the difficulties above-mentioned, which is this, that one of the falfe apoftles, on fome account, perhaps as a Jew,