without father, without mother, without defcent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life; all which, when underftood literally, are tokens of greatness indeed.. But then, if the forementioned account is to be understood in a proper and literal fense, it must, of neceffity, infinitely exceed the bounds of truth. To have been through all duration past, without having been defcended from any, and to be through all duration to come, may not, perhaps, with propriety and certainty, be attributed to any other being, to any other agent, or perfon, but the one fupreme Deity; and therefore, not to the man Melchizedec. The extraordinary and extravagant account this author has given of Melchizedec, does obviously tend to perplex, if not to mislead the reader, and renders whatever else he has faid, in his epiftle, less proper to be relied upon. Melchizedec, according to the account given of him in the hiftory, from which alone we can receive any information concerning him, was no more, nor no other, than one of the Kings of Canaan; for as to his being a priest, that was common to all other Kings and heads of families in thofe times; and therefore, for this author to venture to af firm of him as above, must needs have been a bold attempt, and fhews he was capable of pushing at any thing; and it also fhews, that whatever the cafe may be with other authors, and other epiftles, yet this author, in this his epiftle to the Hebrews, ought not blindly to be fubmitted to in any thing, but ought rather to be carefully examined in every thing he has put upon us. But farther, I understand, it has been urged against me, that there are feveral inftances, or relations, in facred history, where there is moft certainly a change of perfons, without any notice given by the hiftorian of such change. Upon which, I obferve, that if there is certainly a change of perfons in the inftances referred to, then this appears from the accounts or relations themfelves in thofe inftances, or it does not. If fuch change of perfons appears, and is made evident from the relations themselves, then it is plain that thofe inftances are not parallel to the inftance or cafe under confideration; because no fuch change of perfons appears from that relation, but rather the contrary; and confequently, thofe inftances prove nothing against me. If no fuch change of perfons appears, in those inftances, from the relations themfelves, I felves, then the question is, how do my opponents know certainly that there is a change of perfons in thofe inftances? I fay, how can my opponents know this, except they deal in divinations? Befides, if a change of perfons is to be admitted where the relation does not require it, nor point it out, but rather the contrary, which is the present cafe; then confusion and uncertainty in hiftory muft needs follow upon it. The text faith, and he gave him tithes of all. Now the question is, who is this [he] that gave tithes as aforefaid? And in order to give a proper answer to this queftion, recourse, surely, must be had to the context, like as in other cafes of like kind, thereby to dif cover who the term [he] is relative to; which context plainly fhews it to be HE, who bleffed Abraham, and faid, blessed be Abraham of the most high God, who hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand: it was he who bleffed God, and faid, blessed be the most high God, poffeffor of heaven and earth; it was he who was a priest of the moft high God; it was he, viz. Melchi zedec, who brought forth bread and wine to entertain Abraham and his company with; this was [he] who gave tithes of all; the Dd 3 con context knows no other. I fay, it is moft obvious, from the context, that it was Melchizedec who gave tithes of all; and had I courage and refolution enough, I think, I might venture to challenge any of my opponents, even our DEPTFORD * BULLY to fhew the contrary, which as yet they have not done; nor, furely, can they do it, notwithstanding all their boastings. And as the feveral fentences which compose the branch of history referred to, are fo far independent of each other, as to be capable of being tranfpofed, without being injured thereby; so I beg leave to place them in the following order, with the addition of a Supplement to render the reading more eafy and intelligible. And the King of Sodom went out to meet him (after his return from the flaughter of Chedorlaomer and the Kings that were with him) at the valley of Shavah, which is the King's dale. And Melchizedec King of Salem, he also went out to meet Abraham, at his return from the flaughter. of the Kings; and he was a priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, blessed *James Bate, M. A. rector and lecturer of St, Paul's, Deptford, &c. &c. a fcourger of infidelity. bleffed be Abraham of the most high God, poffeffor of heaven and earth; and blessed be the moft high God, who hath delivered thinë enemies into thine hand. And he brought forth bread and wine; and he gave him tithes of all. Whether the copies of the Hebrew pentateuch do any way encourage or difcourage the above tranfpofition I cannot say, because I am altogether ignorant of that language; but this I fay, that this reading is the most easy and natural; and therefore, if it be not fairly barred by the reading in the Hebrew copies, it has a right to be admitted, and that will help to put an end to the difpute. I LIKEWISE understand a late writer oppofes me with an authority brought from the Polyglot-Bible, which feems to have a terrible afpect, as it is attacking me with a five-edged weapon; not but poffibly every one of it's edges may not point against me. Tho', by the way, it looks as if my opponent thought his cause to be in fome distress by his calling in the Polyglot-Bible to it's help; like as men, when in danger of drowning, lay hold of every twig to fave themselves. There are, I apprehend, contained in the Polyglot-Bible, five pentateuchs in five dif Dd 4 ferent |