Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

being far from the most tempting entertainment. This having been, in all likelihood, the reason of their being at first forbidden by the great legiflator to the profelytes of the gate, St. James is the lefs careful in his fpeech to obferve the order in which they had been forbidden in Leviticus". And perhaps he was the lefs curious to observe that order, because there was no question in this affembly, whether the profelytes of the gate were bound by thefe laws of Mofes after their converfion to chriftianity or no.

The queftion only was, whether they were not bound to more. But, when they fend their decree to the profelytes of the gate converted to christianity, they put them in the very order in which Mofes had promulgated these laws; to fhew them that, notwithstanding their converfion to christianity, they must not pretend to a freedom from these laws of Mofes; but muft acknowledge themselves ftill bound by them, as much as they were before; though by thefe four only. How they came to be fo, we fhall fee afterwards,

I am apt to think, no hypothefis but that which I have here advanced will anfwer these queries: they quite puzzled all the learning and acutenefs of Dr. Spencer; and, I believe, must puzzle every one without the help of

w Ley. xvii. 18.

this folution. He feemed to feel his own weakness here, when he fays, " varias itaque "tam fingularis interdicti caufas affignabo, ut "earum faltem nonnullæ fcopum attingere cenfeantur *."

3. It feemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay no greater burthen than these "neceflary things;" that is, things which thefe Gentile chriftians were neceffarily to obferve by virtue of fome precept or obligation; which circumcifion was not. Why neceffary to Gentile chriftians; who are the perfons fuppofed to be concerned in this decree, by all that have written upon it?" Neceffary to all Gentile chriftians in their "own nature," fay fome: blood being unwholesome, and making men fierce; which yet the physicians and the fupreme powers of countries have not found out: the one not advising against it, nor the other forbidding the ufe of it.

-66

Neceffary to all Gentile chriftians," by virtue of the precepts to Noah, fay others. But it is not likely, that there were ever such precepts given to Noah; fince Mofes fays nothing of them. Nor are things offered to idols, fornication, things ftrangled, or blood, any of the feven precepts, as they are enumerated by the Rabbins. All that has any fort of affinity to this matter in the precepts of > C. iii. § 4: See Selden, de Jur. Nat. Noah

Noah is the feventh; which is, not to tear off a limb from a live animal; by which, great cruelty to the animals was thought by the Jews to be forbidden; and which undoubtedly was the cafe. Nor is it likely, that Noah and his children thought they were reftrained from things offered to idols, if they thought they were forbidden all fpccies of fornication; which Grotius and Selden think they were not. But, after all, are we fure that more is meant by this prohibition, than that they should not eat the flesh of an animal that had life remaining in it, and the blood yet warm and flowing in the part they had torn from it to devour, as birds and beafts of prey do?

66

66

Neceffary to all chriftian Gentiles, by christian prudence, from the then state of things," fay others: in which class Spencer has excelled. But where is any thing faid to be neceffary in fcripture, on this confideration? This confideration may make things faid to be expedient in fcripture, but never fimply neceffary. And where is this notion hinted? From what is it collected by Spencer? From a vast farrago of Pagan and Jewish learning; but without a fingle notice from

z Selden, ibid.

a See my Differt. on Gen. ix. 1-8.

Grot. in Acts xv. 20. Selden, de Jur. Nat, lib. vii. c. 5.

the

the debate, or the letter, or the decree itself, to fupport it. All the reasonings to fupport it can only be drawn by a man of equal learning with Spencer (from other fountains than this text or any other in the Bible); and are not to be understood without a great compass of thought, or to be retained without a very happy memory. Do any of the apostles write thus to chriftians in any parallel cafe? We have fomething fimilar to that which Spencer fuppofes this to be, in the cafe of eating in the idols temple. Does St. Paul determine the thing abfolutely, going upon a concatenation of deep reafoning, built on the knowledge of a great deal of divine and human learning? Or does he not fupport his opinion by arguments, and answers to objections, and then appeal to the judgement of his reader? Let any one perufe the eighth and tenth chapters of the first epiftle to the Corinthians, and fee if I have not reprefented the cafe fairly. Can any one then fuppofe, that the apostles, elders, and brethren, would treat the Gentile brethren of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, in this manner? I think no man can suppose it, that either confiders the character of the apoftles, or the vast tendernefs and refpect with which they appear to treat the Gentile brethren on this occafion. If the meaning of the apostles had been this, namely, "In answer to your defire to know

66 our

66

66

.66

66

66

"our fenfe, whether all Gentile chriftians "are obliged to fubmit to all Mofes's law; "we tell you, that you must abstain from things offered to idols, &c. only whilst the ❝ converfion of heathens is a new thing; left they should be drawn, or draw others, to idolatry; or left they should be thought to "be idolaters ftill;" as Spencer would have it. Would they not first have faid, No, you are not obliged by Mofes's law?" Not only good fenfe requires it (for without this, the fuppofed enthymem is a meer riddle); but especially their tenderness for the Gentile chriftians: left the zealots fhould have occafion, from their filence, to have urged the conformity of all chriftians to the law. Was there no danger of giving too much countenance to this notion, when the falfe brethren were urging the vigour of the law fo ftrenuously, and spying into the full liberty of the idolatrous Gentiles converted to chriftianity, which Paul kept from them, and revealed only to the three chief apostles; for fear of the ill effects of a furious oppofition from them, if they had known it? Sure it had been neceffary first to have secured this point, and then, if needs muft, to have added, " but, "left ill confequences fhould enfue from too great an use of your liberty, abstain from

66

Gal. ii. 2.

thefe

« AnteriorContinuar »