A. M. 1647. A. C. 2347; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii. 20. TO THE END OF CH. ix. but that under the gospel it was enjoined by a very competent authority, to some particular Christians at least, for some determinate time. But then they contend, that, during these several periods, there could be no moral obligation in the injunction, but that, (setting aside the divine authority,)1 neither if they did eat, were they the worse, neither if they did not eat, were they the better.' For, if there was any moral turpitude in the act of eating blood, or things commixed with blood, how comes it to pass, say they, that, though God prohibited his own people the Jews, yet he suffered other nations to eat any thing that died of itself, and consequently had the blood settled in it? If3 meat commendeth us to God, the same Providence, which took care to restrain the Jews1 (for is he the God of the Jews only, is he not also of the Gentiles ?) from what was detestable to him, as well as abhorrent to human nature, would have laid the same inhibition upon all mankind; at least he would not have enjoined his own people to give to a proselyte of the gate, or to sell to an alien, or heathen, such meat as would necessarily ensnare them in sin.

The place, where the question arose, was Antioch, where (as Josephus tells us) there was a famous Jewish university, full of proselytes of the gate, as they were called, and who, in all probability, were converted by the men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who were among those that were dispersed at the first persecution,' which immediately ensued the martyrdom of Stephen.

The persons who moved this question, were some of the sect of the Pharisees, converted to Christianity, but still so prejudiced in favour of their old religion, or at least of the divine rite of circumcision, that they thought there was no coming to Christ without entering in at that | gate.

The law, therefore, which enjoined Noah and his children to abstain from blood, must necessarily have been a law peculiar to that time only. "Cain, in the first age of the world, had slain Abel, while there were but few persons in it: God had now destroyed all mankind except eight persons; and, to prevent the fate of Abel from befalling any of them, he forbids murder under a capital punishment; and to this purpose, forbids the use of blood, as a proper guard upon human life in the infancy of the world. Under the Mosaic covenant he renews this law, indeed, but then he establishes it upon another foundation, and makes blood therefore prohibited, because he had appointed it to be offered upon the altar, and to make an atonement for men's souls; for it is the blood,' saith he,' that maketh an atonement for the soul;' and what was reserved for religious purposes, was not at that time convenient to be ate. But now that these purposes are answered, and these sacrifices are at an end, the reason of our abstinence has ceased, and consequently our abstinence itself is no longer a duty.

Blood, we allow, had still something more sacred in it; it was a type of the sacrifice of Christ, who was to be offered upon the altar of his cross; but that oblation being now made, the reason of its appropriation, and being withheld from common use, is now no more. And though the council at Jerusalem made a decree, even subsequent to the sacrifice of Christ, that the brethren, who were of the Gentiles, should abstain from things strangled, and from blood; yet before we can determine any thing from this injunction, the occasion, place, time, and other circumstances of it, must be carefully looked into.

The occasion of the decree was this-while Paul and Barnabas were preaching the gospel at Antioch, certain persons, converted from Judaism, came down from Jerusalem, and very probably pretending a commission from the apostles, declared it their opinion, that whoever embraced the Christian religion, was obliged, at the same time, to be circumcised, and observe the whole law.

The persons to whom the question related, were prosélytes of the gate, that is, Gentiles by birth, but who had renounced the heathen religion, as to all idolatry, and were thereupon permitted to live in Palestine, or wherever the Jews inhabited; and had several privileges allowed them, upon condition that they would observe the laws of society, and conform to certain injunctions, that Moses had prescribed them.

The time when this question arose, was not long after the conversion of Cornelius; so that this body of proselytes was, very probably, the first large number of Gentiles that were received into the Christian church, and this the first time that the question was agitated,-whether the proselytes of the gate, who, as the zealots pretended, could not so much as live among the Jews, without circumcision, could be allowed to be a part of the Christian church without it?

12

Under these circumstances the council at Jerusalem convened, and accordingly made their decree, that the proselytes of the gate (for it is persons of this denomination only which their decree concerns)' should" abstain from the meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication;' the very things which, according to the law of Moses, they engaged themselves to abstain from, when they were first admitted to the privilege of sojourning among the Jews. So that, in effect, the decree did no more than declare the opinion of those who made it, to those to whom it was sent, namely, that Christianity did not alter the condition of the proselytes in respect of their civil obligations, but that, as they were bound by these laws of Moses before their conversion, so were they still; and, consequently, that the sense of St Paul is the same with the sense of the council at that time; 13 let every one abide in the calling,' that is, in the civil state and condition wherein he is called. But, supposing the decree to extend farther than the proselytes of Antioch, yet there was another reason why the council at Jerusalem should determine in this manner, and that was, the strong aversion which they knew the Jewish converts would have conceived against the Gentiles, had they been indulged the liberty of eating blood; and, therefore, to compromise the matter, they laid on them this prudent restraint, from the same principle that we find St Paul declaring himself in this manner :14 Though I am free from all men, yet have I made myself a servant unto all, that I might gain the more. Unto the Jew, I became as

A. M. 1657. A. C. 2347; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii, 20. TO THE END OF CH. ix.

a Jew, that I might gain the Jew; to the weak, became subjects, say they, they usually reserve some royalties I as weak, that I might gain the weak. I am made all (such as the mines, or minerals) to themselves, as memothings to all men, that I might, by all means, save some.' rials of their own sovereignty, and the other's depenNay, admitting the decree was not made with this view, dance. If the grant, indeed, be given without any reserve, yet, being founded on laws which concerned the Jewish the mines and minerals may be supposed to be included polity only, it could certainly last no longer than the in it; but when it is thus expressly limited, 'You shall government lasted; and, consequently, ever since the have such and such lordships and manors, but you shall temple worship has expired, and the Jews have ceased not have the mines and minerals with the lands, for seveto be a political body, it must have been repealed; and ral good reasons specified in the patent,' it must needs accordingly, if we look into the gospel, say they, we be an odd turn of thought to imagine that the grantee may there find a repeal of it in full form. For therein has any title to them; and yet this is a parallel case: we are told,' that the kingdom of God is not meat and for, when God has thus declared his will to the children drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy of men, You shall have the flesh of every creature for Ghost; that meat commendeth us not unto God;" that food, but you shall not eat the blood with it,' it is every 'what goeth into the mouth, defileth not the man;'* that whit as strange an inference, to deduce from hence a 'to the pure, all things are pure; and that there is general right to eat blood. nothing unclean of itself, but only to him, that esteemeth The commandment given to Adam, is,12 Of every tree it to be unclean, it is unclean; for every creature of God in the garden thou shalt freely eat; but of the tree of is good, and nothing is to be refused, if it be received knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat.' This is with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified with the word of the first law; and the second is like unto it," Every God and prayer;'6 and therefore we are ordered,' that moving thing, that moveth, shall be meat for you; even 'whatever is sold in the shambles, even though it be a as the green herb, have I given you all things; but flesh, thing offered to idols, that to eat, asking no questions for with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall you conscience sake;' and are told, that whoever command-not eat.' This, upon his donation both to Adam and eth us to abstain from meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving of them that believe, and know the truth,' ought to be ranked in the number of seducers.

6

Noah, God manifestly reserves to himself, as an acknowledgment of his right to be duly paid; and when it was relaxed or repealed, say they, we cannot tell.

Nay, so far from being repealed, that it is not only in his words to Noah that God has declared this inhibition, but in the law, delivered by his servant Moses, he has explained his mind more fully concerning it. Whatsoever man there is, of the house of Israel, or of the strangers, that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people.' This is a severe commination, say they; and therefore observe, how oft, in another place, he reiterates the injunction, as it were with one breath. 15 Only be sure that thou eat not the blood, for the blood is the life, and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh. Thou shalt not eat it; thou shalt pour it upon the earth, as water; thou shalt not eat it, that it may go well with thee and thy children after thee.'

In a word, the very genius of the Christian religion, say they, is a charter of liberty, and a full exemption from the law of Moses. It debars us from nothing but what has a moral turpitude in it, or at least, what is too base and abject for a man, that has the revelation of a glorious and immortal life in the world to come: and, as there is no tendency of this kind in the eating of blood, they therefore conclude that this decree of the apostles, either concerned the Jewish proselytes only, who, in virtue of the obedience they owed to the civil laws of Palestine, were to abstain from blood; or obliged none but the Gentiles of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, to whom it was directed; was calculated for a certain season only, either to prevent giving offence to the Jews, who were then captious, or to reconcile Gentile and Jewish con- Now there are several reasons, continue they, why God verts, who were then at some variance; but was to last should be so importunate in this prohibition: for, having no longer than till the Jews and Gentiles were formed appointed the blood of his creatures to be offered for the into one communion. So that now the prohibition given sins of men, he therefore requires, that it should be reliby God to Noah, the laws given by Moses to the Israel-giously set apart for that purpose; and, having prohibited ites, and the decree sent by the apostles to the Christians at Antioch, are all repealed and gone, and a full license given to us to eat blood with the same indifference as any other food; if so be we thereby give no offence to our weaker brethren, for whom Christ died.' Those who maintain the contrary opinion, namely, that the eating of blood, in any guise whatever, is wicked and unlawful, found the chief of their arguments upon the limitation of the grant given to Noah, the reasons that are commonly devised for the prohibition, and the literal sense of the apostolic decree.

"When princes give grants of lands to any of their

the sin of murder under a severe penalty, he therefore guards against it, by previously forbidding the eating of blood, lest that should be an inlet to savageness and cruelty.

The Scythians (as 16 Herodotus assures us) from drinking the blood of their cattle, proceeded to drink the blood of their enemies; and were remarkable for nothing

so much as their horrid and brutal actions. The animals

that feed on blood are perceived to be much more furious
than others that do not; and thereupon they observe that
blood is a very hot, inflaming food, that such foods create
choler, and that choler easily kindleth into cruelty.
Nay, they observe farther, that eating of blood gave
occasion to one kind of early idolatry among the Zabii
12 Gen. ii. 16, 17. 13 Gen. ix. 3, 4. 14 Lev. xvii. 10.
15 Deut. xii. 23, &c.
16 Book 4.

A. M. 1657. A. C. 2347; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii. 20, TO THE END OF CH. ix.

every Sabbath-day.'

in the east, namely, the worship of demons, whose food, | city them that preach him, being read in the synagogue as they imagined, was blood; and therefore they who adored them, had communion with them by eating the same food. Good reason, therefore, say they, had God in the gospel, as well as the law, to prevent a practice, which he could not but foresee would be attended with such pernicious effects.

For the apostolic decree, as they argue farther, did not relate to one sect of people only, the proselytes of the gate, who were lately converted to Christianity; nor was it directed to some particular places only, and with a design to answer some particular ends, the prevention of offence, or the reconciliation of contending parties; to subsist for a determinate time, and then to lose all its obligation: but it concerned all Christians, in all nations, and in all future ages of the church, was enacted for a general use and intent, and has never since been repealed. And to support these assertions, they proceed in this method :—

6

26

My sentence (says the apostle) is, that ye write unto the Gentile converts upon these points; For Moses has those of old in every city that preach him,' that is, there is no necessity of writing to any Jewish convert, or any proselyte convert to Christianity, to abstain from these things, because all that are admitted into synagogues (as the proselytes were) know all these things sufficiently already. And accordingly, upon this sentence of St James, the decree was founded and directed (according to the nature of the thing) to those whom it was fitting and necessary to inform in these points, that is, to those who were unacquainted with the writings of Moses.

The letter, indeed, which contained the decree, was directed to the brethren at Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia; but it would be shocking and unchristian to think, that the precepts of an apostolic epistle were obligatory to those only to whom the epistle was directed. The purport of it concerned all. It was to apprise the heathen converts to Christianity, that they were exempted from the observance of the law of Moses, except in four instances laid down in that canon; and as it was of general concern for all converts to know, the apostles, we may presume, left copies of it in all the churches: for so we are told expressly of St Paul and his companions, that, as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees to keep, which were ordained of the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem; and so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.'

4 6

Before the passing of this decree, say they, St Paul preached Christianity to the whole body of the Gentiles at Antioch. For he had not long preached in the synagogues, before the Gentiles1 besought him, that he would preach to them the same words, that is, the doctrine of Jesus Christ, on the next Sabbath-day; and accordingly we are told, that, on the Sabbath-day, came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God;' which certainly implies a concourse of people, more than the proselytes of the gate, nay more than the whole body of the Jews, who were but a handful in comparison of the rest of the inhabitants of that great city; and that this large company was chiefly made up of Gentiles, the sequel of the history informs us. For when the Jews saw The apostles, say they, out of Christian prudence, the multitude they were filled with envy, and spake might do many things to prevent offences, and to accomagainst those things which were spoken by Paul, contra-modate matters to the people's good liking: but certainly dicting and blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas it looks below the dignity of a synod to meet, and waxed bold, and said, it was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you, but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldst be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed; and the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.'

Now this transaction at Antioch, say they, happened seven years before the decree against blood and things strangled was passed at Jerusalem; and therefore as the Gentiles, not in Antioch only, but in all the region round about, were no strangers to the doctrine of Jesus Christ, there is reason to suppose that this decree, when passed, was not confined to one particular set of men, but directed to all Gentile converts at large. For hear what the president of the council says upon this occasion; 'Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, who from among the Gentiles are turned to God; but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood: for Moses of old time hath in every

3

'Acts xiii. 42, &c. 2 Acts xiii. 45, &c. Acts xv. 19-22.

debate, and determine a question with the greatest solemnity, merely to serve a present exigence; to leave upon record a decree which they knew would be but of temporary obligation; and yet could not but foresee would occasion endless scruples and disputes in all future ages of the church. If it was to be of so short a continuance, why was not the repeal notified, and why were not so many poor ignorant people saved, as died martyrs in the attestation of it? But, above all, how can we suppose it consistent with the honour and justice of the apostles, to impose things as necessary, which were but of transient and momentary duration?

Observe the words of the decree, cry they, 'It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things, namely, that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.' If these abstinences were only intended to be enjoined for a season, could they properly be enjoined under the denomination of necessary things? Is that the appellation for duties of a transient and temporary observation? Did neither the apostles nor the Holy Ghost know the distinction between necessary and expedient? Or, suppose it not convenient to make the distinction at that time, how come things of a temporary, and those of an

Acts xvi. 4, 5.

A. M. 1657. A. C. 2347, OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2257. A. C. 3154. GEN. CH. viii. 20. TO THE END OF CH. ix. eternal obligation, to be placed upon the same foot of | abstain from certain meats, as an infringement upon our necessity in the same decree? Or, were fornication and idol-pollutions to be abstained from only for a season, in compliment to the infirmity of the Jews; or in order to make up a breach between some newly initiated converts? These are absurdities, say they, which cannot be avoided, when men will assert the temporary obligation of this decree.

SECT. II.

CHAP. I. Of the Confusion of Languages.

THE HISTORY.

A. M. 1757. A. C. 2247; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 2857. A. C. 2554. GEN. CH. xi. TO VER. 10, Christ: and, therefore, unless we are minded to impair the authority, and sap the foundation of revealed religion, we must allow the decree to be still in force; and the command, which prohibits the eating of blood, still chargeable upon every man's conscience. A command given by God himself to Noah, repeated to Moses, and ratified by the apostles of Jesus Christ; given immediately after the flood, when the world, as it were, began anew, and the only one given on that occasion; repeated with awful solemnity to the people whom God had separated from the rest of the world to be his own; repeated with dreadful denunciations of Divine vengeance upon those who should dare to transgress it; and ratified by the most solemn and sacred council that was ever assembled upon earth, acting under the immediate influence of the Spirit of God; transmitted from that sacred assembly to the several churches of the neighbouring nations by the hands of no meaner messengers than two bishops and two apostles; asserted by the best writers and most philosophic spirits of their age, the Christian apologists, and sealed with the blood of the best men, the Christian martyrs; confirmed by the unanimous consent of the fathers, and reverenced by the practice of the whole Christian church for above 300 years, and of the eastern church even to this very day.

These are some of the chief arguments on both sides of the question: and, to form a judgment hereupon, we may observe-That, though this prohibition of eating blood can hardly be deemed a commandment of moral obligation, yet is it a positive precept which cannot but be thought of more weight and importance, for being so oft, and so solemnly enjoined; that though the reasons alleged for its injunction are not always so convincing, yet the prevention of cruelty and murder, which is immediately mentioned after it, will, in all ages, be ever esteemed a good one; and though the liberty granted in the gospel seems to be great, yet it can hardly be understood without some restriction.

Ir is reasonable to believe, that, for some years after the flood, Noah and his family lived in the neighbourhood of the mountains of Armenia, where the ark rested; thence removed into the countries of Syria; then crossing the Tigris into Mesopotamia, and so shaping their course eastward, came at length to the pleasant plain of Babylon, on the banks of the river Euphrates. The fertility of the soil, the delightfulness of the place, and the commodiousness of its situation, made them resolve to settle there; and to build a city which should be the metropolis of the whole earth, and in it a vast high tower, which should be the wonder of the world; for the present use, a kind of pharos, or landmark, and, to future ages, a monument of their great tower and might. a

By this project they promised themselves mighty matters; but that which chiefly ran in their heads, was their keeping together in one body, that, by their united strength and counsels, as the world increased, they might bring others under their subjection, and make themselves universal lords: but one great discouragement to this, their project, was-That in the place, which they had chosen for the scene of all their greatness, there was no stone to build with. Perceiving, however, that there was clay enough in the country whereof to make bricks, and plenty of a pitchy substance called bitumen,

b

a It is the opinion of many eminent critics, that the whole of Noah's descendants were not engaged in the rebellious project of building the tower of Babel-but only the descendants of Ham, or a portion of them; and this they ground chiefly on the opinion, that it is not likely the whole family of Noah would leave the fertile regions of Armenia, but that portions of them It seemed once good to the Holy Ghost, among other would emigrate as their number increased. During the life of necessary things, to prescribe an abstinence from blood; that patriarch, and the lives of his sons, Dr Hales is of opinion and when it seemed otherwise to him, we are nowhere, themselves gradually into the adjacent fertile and pleasant that the whole of his descendants occupied Armenia, extending that I know of, instructed. Could it be made appear, regions of Assyria, Mesopotamia, and Media. The same indeed, that this prescription was temporary and occa- learned chronologer is likewise of opinion that the regions sional, designed to bind one set of men only, or calcu- destined for the respective possessions of the families of Shem, lated for the infant-state of the church, the question before his death, in that famous prophecy relative to the curse upon Ham, and Japheth, were pointed out by Noah himself a little would be then at an end: but since there are no proper Canaan, that he should be a servant to Shem (spoken by Noah marks in the apostles' decree to show the temporary on awakening from his disgraceful sleep) which has been already duration of it; and the notion of proselytes of the gate, considered; and he supports this opinion by apostolical authority. to whom alone it is said to be directed, (how commodi-division of the earth among the sons of Noah was not made at "We learn," says he, "from St Paul, (Acts xvii. 26,) that the ous soever it may be to solve all difficulties,) upon random," but that God made of one blood all nations of men, examination is found to be groundless or uncertain, the to dwell upon the whole face of the earth, having ordained the obligation, I fear, lies upon every good Christian still. predetermined seasons, and the boundaries of their respective But as this is not every one's sentiment;' settlements." This important event took place, according to believeth that he may eat all things, and another thinketh Noah, and about 29 years after the death of Shem, when Japheth the same author, B. C. 2614, about 191 years after the death of it the safe side of his duty to abstain; so let not him that and Ham were probably dead likewise.-ED. eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth; but judge this rather, plain did very much abound with it, which was of two kinds, that no man put a stumbling-block, or an occasion to liquid and solid; that liquid bitumen here swam upon the fall, in his brother's way. Let us therefore follow after waters; that there was a cave and fountain which was continuthe things which make for peace, and things wherewithally casting it out; and that this famous tower, at this time, and one may edify another.'

' Rom. xiv. 2, 3, 13, 19.

as one

b The word which our translators make slime, is in Hebrew hhemar, in Greek ärpaλros, in Latin bitumen; and that this

the no less famous walls of Babylon were afterwards built with this kind of cement, is confirmed by the testimony of several profane authors. For thus Strabo tells us, "In Babylonia much bitumen abounds; there are two kinds of it," says Eratosthenes,