こ

themselves deifts, or who are thus ftiled by others, may err, both in judgment and practice; but then fuch error makes no alteration in deifm; the diftinction therefore, of ancient and modern deism, must needs be most idle and vain. Such, indeed, is the penetration of fome men, that they can discover connections and relations where there are none in nature; and fuch are their abilities, that they can conftitute or diffolve connections. and relations at pleasure, and that meerly to exhibit an ill-natured reflection, or for the fake of a gibe,

AND as it has been obferved, that Melcbizedec may have been the high or chief prieft; fo that may have been the ground of Abraham's giving tithes to him, tho' Abraham himself was a prieft. It has also been obferved, that it was the custom in thofe antient times for the victorious perfon to give the priest a tenth part of the Spoil he had taken in war. To which, furely, it may be fufficient to anfwer, that as thefe obfervations relate to ufages of most ancient times, which may well be fuppofed to be out of the reach of my enquiry; fo thereby perhaps I may be difqualified to return fuch proper anfwers to them, as, poffibly, thofe cafes may admit. How

ever, I farther observe, that tho', in these latter times, things are in fuch a state as to admit the distinctions of Chief King, or King over Kings, and of chief or arch Prieft, or Prieft over Priests; yet in the ancient times referred to the cafe was otherwife; for as then the Kingly and Prieftly offices both centered in one and the fame person, viz. in the head or principal of each family, tribe, or community; fo then there could be no place for the diftinctions of high or chief King and under or petty Kings, or high or chief Prieft and under or petty Priefts, because there was but one who exercifed both thefe offices in, and to each collective body or fociety; for tho' multiplicity admits of disparity, yet unity admits of none. deed, whilst things were in this ftate, if one King affumed a dominion over other Kings and their people, and those other Kings became Subject and tributary to him, then the fupreme may properly enough be faid to have been a chief or arch King, or a King over Kings, and a chief or arch Prieft, or Priest of Priests; and thofe fubordinate Princes may be ftiled petty Kings and petty Priefts: But then, thefe diftinctions do no fervice in the cafe before us, because it was not Mel

In

chizedec

chizedec, but Chedorlaomer, who had obtained fuch fovereignty, by wickedly affuming a dominion over other Kings and their people, as thereby to have raised himself to the dignity of being King of Kings, or chief King, and of being Prieft of or over Priefts, or Prieft of Priests. And admitting that in Abraham's time it was a custom for the victorious person to give the Priest a tenth part of the spoils he had taken in war, yet no point is gained by it in the present cafe; because it does not appear that any fuch spoils were relative to it, but only that goods which had been taken away by enemies were refcued out of their hands, and were returned to their proper owners.

AGAIN, complaint has been made that I have not paid the deference, by fubmitting to the authority of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, (whether he be St. Paul or otherwise) that I ought or should have done; and this probably is the principal grievance, or the ground of that displeasure, which has been taken up against me on account of my first differtation. And, to justify the aforefaid complaint, it has been urged, that it ought to be prefumed the author of the epiftle to the Hebrews was

well

well acquainted with the books or copies of the Old-Teftament, which were in being in his time; and that his epiftle was exactly agreeable in all things to thofe copies; and confequently, what that author has faid, touching Abraham's giving tithes to Melchizedec, ought to be admitted as fact: That the unbelieving Jews, very foon after the opening the Chriftian difpenfation, greatly corrupted the books of the Old-Teftament, to the great prejudice of Chriftianity; and that the difference which now appears betwixt the Old-Teftament and the New, such as the latter quoting from the former a prophecy that now does not appear to be contained in it, is wholly owing to fuch corruption. Upon which I obferve, that if my not fubmitting blindly to the authority of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews has given great offence, it may, perhaps, not have been without ground; because my opponents may, poffibly, reafon after this manner; if fuch blind fubmiffion be denied to that author, and to that epiftle, then it may be denied to others, and that this is an evil of fuch confequence as ought to be guarded against at all bazard; and therefore, every thing ought to be taken forgranted or prefumed, which is necef

fary

fary to answer that purpose. But then, it ought to be remembered, that whatever purpose may be ferved by admitting, without trial, and taking for granted, all that is laid down above; yet fuch prefuming must be greatly injurious to truth; and therefore the truth of all ought rather to be enquired into. And if the books of the Old-Teftament have been greatly corrupted, as is pretended, then they muft needs be a very unJafe guide to us; feeing we cannot distinguish and Separate the parts that are corrupted from those that are not ; and then the putting those corrupted books upon us as a facred record must be a moft grofs impofition. And if theOld-Teftament be greatly corrupted, as is fet forth above; yet,furely, fuch corruption cannot, with any colour of justice, be charged upon the unbelieving Jews. At, and fome time after, the opening the chriftian difpenfation, all its profeffors were Jews, or persons who had been converted from Judaism to Chrif tianity; and as thefe, in a little time, were increased to fome thousands, (Acts ii. 41.) who were zealous of the law, (Acts xxi. 20.) at which time the Jews were well acquainted with the books of theOld-Teftament, which had not been the cafe in former times,