present, I shall only take notice of one or two to this purpose. So, when it is said by St. Peter, 1 Ep. ii. 24, that He (Christ) himself bore our sins in his own body on the tree; plainly in contradistinction to the priests under the law, who did not themselves, in their own bodies, bear the sins of the people, but only made atonement for them, by offering, as it were, the bodies of others; is it not obviously implied, that those animals, when so offered, did bear the sins of those for whom they were offered? So also, when it is said, Heb. ix. 28, that Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many if we consider the context, and observe, that it is there suggested,that our Saviour was a sin-offering; which may be gathered from the words immediately following; unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin; i. e. sin-offering (see Chapm. Euseb. vol. ii. 321, &c.) unto salvation—that as such he bore the sins of many- -And that

he was offered only once to bear them; whereas the levitical sacrifices were offered, not once only, but often, ver. 25, 26. I say, if we consider these words in their entire connexion; will they not lead us to

consider the piacular sacrifices of the old dispensation, as offered to bear the sins of the Israelites? But in a note (page 33,) you are pleased to observe, (referring to this last passage) that to put away sin,

and to bear the sins of many, signify the same thing, Heb. ix. 26. 28.' As to which, I would beg leave to observe, that the words in the original seem to me not so favourable to your purpose, as from the English only, one would perhaps be ready to imagine. For as to the 26th ver. you are sensible, that what is in our translation, he hath appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, may be more literally rendered, he hath appeared (as abεlyon apaglias) for the abolition (or, in order to effect the abolition) of sin, by the sacrifice of himself; (see Mark vii. 9. Gal. ii. 21. 1 Cor. i. 19. and Heb. vii. 18, in the Greek) which abolition of sin might be effected, either by his bearing it away, or by his bearing it upon him: for the original word does not confine us to either of those senses. And as to the 28th verse, it will be sufficient to observe, for the sake of the English reader, that the word which is there rendered to bear, is the same with what is

used in the text just mentioned, 1 Pet. ii. 24, He himself bare our sins in his own body on the tree.*

However, after all; should we allow (which yet we need not) that we have neither any instance, in the law of Moses, of a sin-offering's being said to bear sin, nor any argument, derived from that law, to justify the sentiment of transferring sin; I cannot see, for my own part, that this would in the end be of any service to your cause since it is certain that our Saviour, who was made sin for us, is expressly said to have born our sins; to have had our iniquities laid upon him, &c. Isa. liii. 6, 11, 12. 1 Pet. ii. 24. and Heb. ix. 28.† As

* See Whitby again on the last mentioned text; and the verb ava@agw in Scapula's Lexicon.

† However, I am not insensible, that though the sense of the word bad (used Isa. liii. 11,) be to bear, not in the sense of carrying away, but of taking and bearing upon one, you are yet pleased to suggest, No. 47, that it will there ' admit the sense of carrying off, or away.' But surely no one, who considers the context (where so much is said, of the Messiah's being made an offering for sin; the chastisement of our peace being upon him; the Lord's laying, or causing to meet on him the iniquity of us all, &c. which last words, rendered either way, evidently suggest the same idea) will think, that it ought to be taken there in that sense, rather than the common one. And as to Isa. xlvi. 4, which you quote to shew, that it may be taken in

on the other hand, supposing you, sir, should allow, that we have not only argu

the sense of carrying off: I must own, that it does not yet appear to me upon an attentive consideration of the place, that the sense, in which you understand the word as even there used, is a more natural one, or, indeed, so natural a one as that, in which it is (at least) usually taken : accordingly, the Seventy have rendered it in the latter part of the verse by avaλy↓oμaι; which, if I mistake not, conveys an idea to the mind more favourable to the common than to your sense of the word ab. And as to Isa. liii. 4, He hath carried our sorrows; where, as you observe, the same word is used: though St. Matthew (chap. viii. 17,) has applied those words to our Lord's taking (away) the infirmities, and bearing the sicknesses of the persons he healed; yet no one, I should think, who considers what is said in that and the following verses of Isaiah, concerning the personal sufferings of the Messiah, can imagine, that the prophet intended, by His carrying our sorrows, His taking away, by His miraculous power, the infirmities and sicknesses of the Jews, rather than His undergoing in His own person sorrows or sufferings on our account; I say, no one can well imagine this, who considers the general strain of the context, and at the same time remembers,that we are under no necessity from what St. Matthew has said, of understanding the prophet's words in such a sense : because whatever might have been originally intended by them, they might, notwithstanding, have been very well applied by the evangelist as they are; being really applicable to Christ in the one sense, as well as the other. (See Dr. Doddridge's note on the place, Fam. Expos. v. i. p. 213.) Not to observe, that when one reads the original words in St. Matthew (Αυτος τας ασθενειας ημων ελαβε, και τας νύσες εβαςασεν) one plainly sees, if I mistake not, notwithstanding the purpose to which he haṣ

ments from that law, to justify that sentiment, but instances in it, of sacrifices being said to bear sin; I cannot see, that this

applied them, that he still had the sentiment in his mind, of our Lord's bearing upon him, as well as of his taking away, the burden of our diseases, &c. And indeed, if I may be allowed to observe it here, the notion of our Lord's bearing or taking away our sorrows and iniquities by his sufferings, is by no means inconsistent with that of his bearing or taking them upon him in suffering: on the contrary, his bearing or taking them upon him seems to have been, in order to his bearing or taking them away; the death of Christ as a sacrifice for sin, in whatever light we consider it, being one way, which the divine wisdom appointed for the taking away the sins of the world. And this, perhaps, may be one reason, why our Lord's bearing our sins is sometimes expressed by such Greek verbs as generally signify (though not always) to take away, as well as by such as most properly signify to bear or take upon one. However after all, should we allow (which yet, I suppose, few will be willing to do ; vid. Pool, Synops. in Isa. liii. 4,) that b2b may possibly, in some place or other, admit the sense of carrying off, or away; it must be allowed, at the same time, on the other hand, that N (though its common and current sense may perhaps be, to take, or carry away, No. 46,) is yet not seldom used in the sense of bearing upon one; as appears, not only from Num. xiv. already mentioned (and other places, No. 41, and Pool, Synops. ibid.) but also from Ezek. iv. 4, 5, 6, which I therefore take notice of here, because, however uncertain it may be, how the 'prophet Ezekiel bore the iniquities of the children of

Israel; No. 51. this is plain, that by his bearing their iniquities, the same thing is meant, as by his having their iniquities laid upon him.