In the 33d verfe of the fame chapter, the angel fays, I went out to withstand thee, which in the ori-ginal is, to be a fatan (17) or adverfary to thee. The word is alfo very frequently applied to men. Let not David go down with us to battle, (faid the princes of the Philistines) left in the battle he be a fatan, or adversary to us, i Sam. xxix. 4What have I to do with you, ye fons of Zeruiah, that ye Should this day bes a fatan, or adversary to me? 2 Sam. xix. 22. The Lord my God hath given me rest on every fide, fo that there is neither adversary (10) nor evil occurrent, 1 Kings v. 4. See also Kings xi. 14, 23, 25. Pfal. xxxviii. 20. Pf. lxxi. 13. Pf. cix. 4, 20, 29. In the New Teftament Chrift fays to Peter, Matt. xvi. 23. Get thee behind me, fatan, "You act rather as an enemy, than as a "friend, in diffuading me from submitting to fuf

66

ferings and death." St. Paul, in 2 Cor. xii. 7. fays, Left I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of fatan to buffet me. In the original it is not ἄγγελος τε σαλαν, “ the angel of Satan," but äɣyehos çarãv, an angel fatan, or adverfary. The best commentators fuppofe, that the bodily affliction, or thorn in the flesh, here referred to, was fome paralytic symptom, called elfewhere the infirmity of the flesh, Gal. iv. 13. In confirmation of this opinion it may be obferved,

the

and his angels, is it not very that the New Teftament in language, should always fpeak eafed perfons under confideroffeffed by a demon, or demons, by the devil, or devils? a word, allow, that is never there apil fpirits in the plural number, ts ufe may be in the fingular. inafmuch as Chrift is here re

aliva, ufed here in the original, is h both the New Teftament writers and

yficians defcribe the palfy. This difco have been occafioned by the splenions affecting the nervous fyftem; pofely defigned by God, not merely to O great elation in the apoftle, but, by m the gracefulness and energy of his render the divine power more confpifuccefs of his miniftry. It is imSt. Paul fhould refer this disorder to fpeaks of it as proceeding from God, he fame) his angel acting a part adveroftle; to whom this difpenfation of ence was exceedingly humiliating and ever wifely defigned by God.

cannot be supposed to speak of a different order of beings from what they did. Şatan therefore must be equivalent to demon, in the fenfe in which demon was used by them, which will be explained hereafter. And fhould it then appear, that by demons and their prince they understood human fpirits, it will from hence follow, that Chrift cannot be speaking of fpirits of a celestial origin.

Differt. on Mir. p. 388.

SECT.

SE C T. II.

By demons, whenever the in reference to poffeffions, eiScriptures, or other ancient Fe are to understand, not fallen the Pagan deities, fuch of them

been men.

ve elsewhere examined the

ning of demons, when applied Ets of popular worship in the orld; and fhewn from the mony of Pagans and Jews; hors of the Septuagint verfion 1 Teftament, and from the the New, that we are hereby nd fuch human fpirits as fueified. We are now to inther the word be not used in nfe by all the ancients, when upon the subject of Pos

fpirits to the rank of gods and demons; and that they judged them capable of entering the bodies of mankind, and of producing phrenfy and distraction, which, as will be shewn below, was regarded as the most usual effect of demoniacal poffeffion. Prophefying amongst the Heathens was attended with rage and madnefs. Almost all their oracles belonged to that species of divination which was by fury, fuch as was imputed to the power and prefence of their gods. And that these gods were deified men, appears from the oracles of Jupiter, the chief of all the prophetic divinities; of Apollo,

* Not only the Pythia at Delphi, but the Sibyls alfo fwelled with rage, and were befide themfelves. See Virgil. Æn. vi. 77. Quid vero habet auctoritatis furor ifte quem divinum vocatis, ut, quæ fapiens non videat, ea videat infanus ; & is, qui humanos fenfus amiferit, divinos affecutus fit ? Cicer. de Divinat. lib. ii. cap. 54

who,