nors, when he speaks of their crucifying the Lord of glory. This, therefore, decifively points out the true interpretation of John xiv. 30; xii. 31; and xvi. 11. See dagxwv, Matt. xx. 25; Luke xii. 58; Acts vii. 27; xvi. 19; ufed of civil governors.

John xvi. 8 to 11. "When the comforter or "monitor is come, he will convince the world of fin, "of righteousness, and of judgment, because the

prince of this world is judged." That is, of their fin in not believing in me; fee Acts ii. 37, 41: of my own righteoufnefs and veracity, when I faid that I came from the Father; John v. 43; vi. 57: and fhould go the Father; John vii. 33: and of God's equitable judgment, in punishing and depriving of their power the princes or ruling magiftrates, who fo unjustly feized, arraigned, condemned, and crucified

me.

Comp. John xii. 31, 32; xiv. 30; xv. 23, 24; Luke x. 18, 19; 1 Cor. ii. 6 to 8.

2 Cor. iv. 4. "Our gospel is hid among those "unbelievers, whofe minds the God of this world "hath blinded, so that the luftre of the glorious

gofpel of Chrift does not enlighten them.". God of this world here fignifies any worldly object to which perfons are fo devoted as to prevent them from cherishing a due regard to the gospel. Comp. Matt. vi. 24; 1 John ii. 15, 16; v. 5, 19.

Rev. ix. 11. "And they had a king over them, "the angel of the bottomlefs pit, whofe name in the "Hebrew is Abaddon, but in the Greek he has the "name Apollyon." This king, and angel of the

bottomlefs pit, is, by Sir Ifaac Newton, (on Revel. p. 304,) Mede, and Bishop Newton, (on Prophecy, vol. iii. p. 107,) and Archbishop Newcome, (on Rev. ix. 11,) understood to fignify, Mahomet, and the Caliphs bis fucceffors.

1 Sam. xxviii. 12 to 20. Here the appearance of Samuel after his death to Saul was probably a divine miracle. It could not be the Devil who caused this appearance, or who himself appeared, even fuppofing him to be a real being: for Samuel came upon this occafion, not as a tempter to vice and impiety, but as a very severe reprover of difobedience to God. This does not correfpond with the character of the Devil, or of any of his affociates. See Clarke's Serm. on 1 Sam. xv. 23, near the end: alfo Inquiry into the meaning of the word Angel, ch. iii. fec. ii. Part II.

1 Sam. xvi. 14, 15. "The spirit of the Lord de"parted from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord "troubled him:" xviii. 10; xix. 9. This evil fpirit

was from God, not from the Devil.

It was melan

choly, which David dispelled by playing upon the harp to him; fee ver. 16, 23.

SECTION VIII.

Conclusions from all the preceding Sections.

FROM the preceding enumeration of texts in the 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Sections, and inquiry into their true meaning, it appears, that neither in the paffages in which the words Satan or Devil occur, nor in those in which he is supposed to be defcribed or alluded to, is there any proof of his real existence. Nor does the notion of his true perfonality accord with the fair and proper meaning of any of the texts which we have produced. We have before shewn, how inconfiftent this idea is with the general fpirit of the Old and New Teftament, and with many plain affertions in them, as well as with natural religion. We have noticed, alfo, how contradictory the common fentiments that are entertained of the Devil or Satan are to each other. All these confiderations together neceffarily oblige us to have recourfe to that explanation of the words which is actually given in feveral places of fcripture.

Now it deferves particular notice, that this very fenfe, namely adversary, is allowed to be the true one both of σαζανας and διαβολος in feveral paffages, even by those who think other texts imply his being a real perfon. But this fignification of adversary does alfo appear, from minute examination, to accord

with all the texts, both in the Old and New Teftament, in which the terms Satan and the Devil occur; and it avoids thofe contradictions and abfurdities that are implied in the common ideas of the meaning of these words.

The fenfe of adversary coincides, alfo, with our best natural fentiments of the perfections of the Most High; with every expreffion in the Old and New Teftament, concerning his nature, attributes, and government of the univerfe; and with the whole fpirit of the Patriarchal, Mofaic, and Chriftian religion. It agrees with the dictates of reafon and revelation, that vice originates from a perfon's own evil defires; that the powers of all claffes of beings are limited; that thofe of an angelic rank do not interfere with the affairs of this world, without a fpecial commiffion from God; and thus coincides with the exprefs affertions of fcripture, that miracles are decifive proofs of the immediate agency of the Most High. It banishes many groundless, unneceffary, and ufelefs terrors relative to an imaginary invifible being, who is fuppofed to be perpetually with us and about us, to injure both body and mind, to disturb our happiness in this world, and to be the cruel and unrelenting tormentor of the wicked in the next. It cherishes a liberal and ingenuous motive to obedience to the fole Governor and Parent of the universe, without a fear that his benevolent purposes towards us will be fruftrated by any powerful evil creature, of an order fuperior to man.

Finally, it obviates an unfounded objection to revelation, that the kind Father of all fhould commit fuch extenfive knowledge, power, and fkill, to a being who has no inclination to employ them for any other purpose, than the wideft poffible diffufion of vice and mifery, both in this life and in that' which is to come.

SECTION IX.

Objections stated, and answered.

1. WHY did Jefus and his Apoftles use the terms Satan, and the Devil, in the manner in

which they did, and fo frequently, if there were no fuch perfon?

In order to give a proper reply to this question, it will be neceffary to trace this language as nearly as we can to its origin.

The most early inquirers into nature and its Author, when they examined the real state of the world, being unable to account for the prevalence of moral and natural evil, upon the idea that a good Being was the fole creator and ruler of it, fuppofed that there was an evil principle who was the author of all the evil. Dr. Sykes, in the fecond part of his Inquiry, fays, "it is certain that the Chaldeans en"tertained the notion of a good and evil being very