If you acknowledge their claims,

uft deny his; if you theirs f."

give up

admit his, you

apostle urges feveral other confions to diffuade them from eating fcuoufly, and without fcruple, things to falfe gods; but as they are y drawn from the ill effects their ole might have upon others, who be tempted to imitate it, though lly perfuaded of the lawfulness of it, they need not be explained in lace. It is very obfervable, that, fly as the apoftle treats this subject, ver once makes any mention of the never intimates that he, or any mifus fpirits, perfonated the heathen fupported their worship, and were e apostle, in like manner, taxes the Colofhap. ii. 19.) with not holding the head, beey worshipped angels. For though they might hrift to be the chief mediator, yet they utterly ed his proper claim to be the fole mediator ■ God and man.

them

to be the cafe, it would have been much to his purpose to have clearly and fully stated it, in order to give proper force to his argument against celebrating festivals in their honour. The whole reafoning of St. Paul concerns the idols and demons of the Gentiles, thofe fpirits whom they regarded as gods and lords; and whoever they were, the apostle hath not urged one argument against eating things facrificed to them, that fuppofes or implies their having any degree of power; but urges quite different confidérations, drawn from the circumftances under which fome Christians partook of thofe facrifices, which might make it an act of religious honour and worship, or might prove a ftumbling-block to their weak brethren.

He grants, that things offered in facrifice to the heathen demons underwent no change, and that no man was either bet

ter

worfe for partaking or not partaking m. He alfo admits, that the demons Telves were mere nothing; and wing that fome Chriftians at that were disposed to ascribe a real power fe demons, and probably foreseeing me difpofition in others, in after shews that the nullity of demons juft and neceffary inference from Fundamental article of Chriftianity, being but one God and one Lord nankind. The reader cannot fail

ing, that St. Paul is here profeffeding the doctrines of the Gofpel, and ea which he himself had of them. 1, he elfewhere reprefents it as the defign of his commiffion, to destroy ctrine of demons, or, to use his own , to turn men from thefe vanities unto ing God1.

m the whole of what occurs in this , may we not infer, that there is

cs xiv. 15. Compare 1 Theff. i. 9.

much

demoniacal poffeffions? Did the facred writers first introduce this doctrine ?. It

is not even pretended that they did. Did they ever affert it as a part of that revelation which they were divinely commiffioned to publish to the world? They could not thus affert it; for it overturns. the main doctrine and evidences of the Jewish and Chriftian revelations. On the contrary, they have done every thing they could fitly do, to banish it out of the world, by carefully inftructing Christians in the abfolute nullity of demons, by continually inculcating this principle upon them, with a zeal equal to its great importance, and by establishing it upon the clearest evidence. If you regulate your judgment concerning demons by that of the writers either of the Old or New Teftament, you must allow, that there never was, nor can be, a real demoniac.

CHAP.

CHA P. . II.

ceed to folve the feveral objections, nich have been urged against the ing explication of the Gospel de

CS.

t the perfons spoken of in the New ment as demoniacs, were really many have attempted to prove, ift. what was faid and done by the decs themselves. 2dly, From the deon of the herd of fwine, which the s are faid to have entered, and stied to an inftantaneous madness. dly, From the expreffions used by viour in performing, and his difcirecording, the cure of demoniacs. these three heads may be comprizthe objections, drawn from the Teftament, against the doctrine adin the preceding chapter.