ical declarations of these effects;. I must beg leave to say, that the effects themselves seem to me to have been owing to those expiatory sacrifices, which had been offered before, and by which atonement for

* When particular sins were committed, or uncleannesses contracted; if discovered, particular sacrifices were appointed to be offered in order to atone for them; and such sacrifices had their effect but because such sins or uncleannesses might be committed or contracted, as might not be discovered, and therefore not particularly atoned for; it pleased God, as it would seem, to appoint, on a certain day every year, a general atonement to be made; the virtue of which should extend to all such sins and uncleannesses, undiscovered as well as discovered, as the law had appointed atonement to be made for that ye may be made clean, says the text, from all your sins before the Lord. (See Lev. xvi. 29, 30, and Chapm. Euseb. v. 2, p. 482.) Which I therefore mention, because it will, perhaps, sufficiently account for what is intimated, v. 21, 22, that the scape-goat bore upon him, into a land not inhabited, all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins. But you are pleased to intimate, No. 32, that the putting the iniquities of the people upon the scape-goat, and his carVrying them away into a desert, &c. signified that God 'had cast all their sins, repented of, behind his back, put 'them out of his sight, and would never lay them to their 'charge." As to which, I would beg leave to observe, that if the expiatory sacrifices offered at this' time, did really make atonement for all the sins of the Israelites without exception; then, without doubt, what was done to, and with, the scape-goat, did signify, that all their sins, repented of, were forgiven: but if those sacrifices did not make atonement for all their sins without excep

their sins had been most properly made. And in this light, if I mistake not, this whole transaction will appear to every one, that attentively considers that chapter, and particularly, the order in which the several things there mentioned are directed to be done. So that the high-priest's laying his hands on the scape-goat, sending him into the wilderness, &c. do not seem to have been designed to have any effect with God (No. 32.) but only to declare to the Israelites, by expressive actions, that their sins: and iniquities were forgiven, at least, so far

tion, but only such as the law appointed atonement to be made for; then the transaction of the scape-goat could not signify the forgiveness of all their sins whatsoever, repented of, but only of such as the law had appointed atonement to be made for for the affair of the scapegoat seems to have had a reference only to those sins which had been expiated just before. If it should seem an objection to this, that the scape-goat was to carry away into the wilderness all the iniquities of the children of Israel, &c. v. 21, it should be remembered on the other hand, that the priest was to make atonement for them (no doubt by the sin-offerings) to cleanse them, that they might be clean from all their sins before the Lord, v. 30. So that the significancy of the affair of the scape-goat extended no further than the atoning virtue of the sin offerings. However I do not deny, but that God forgave all their sins truly repented of: but then, his doing so seems to have been grounded, not upon the sacrifices of this day, but upon one of a more extensive virtue and efficacy as you yourself seem to intimate, No. 134.

as that they might approach his tabernacle with impunity. And whereas it is expressly said, that Aaron-shall confess over the live goat, all the iniquities of the children of Israel, &c. putting them upon the head of the goat; and that the goat, being sent away, shall bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited: no one, I presume, will say, that in this case, their sins were laid upon the live goat, in order to be expiated in such a manner, as they were by the expiatory sacrifices; nor that the goat carried them away into the wilderness, in the same sense, in which those sacrifices took them away, or made atonement for them; but only so far as to signify that their sins and uncleannesses were now pardoned and removed, as certainly and effectually, as if they had been actually brought together, laid on the 'head of the scape-goat, and so sent away ' into the wilderness.'

However, though I allow, that Aaron's putting the sins of the Israelites upon the head of the scape-goat, &c. (as being, in this case, only emblematical) does not directly prove, that their sins were laid upon the sin-offerings; yet I would beg leave

to observe one thing from it, which is this, that if the sins of the Israelites might be. said to be laid upon the live goat, and to be carried by him into the wilderness, so far as to signify to them God's forgiveness of them; it seems to me hard to shew, why they might not be said to be so far laid upon the sin-offerings, as that these should be the grounds of their being forgiven; so far as their virtue and efficacy extended in neither case could sin be strictly and properly said to be laid on the animal, but only in regard to the effect or consequence which followed; in the former case, as the sending the goat into the wilderness signified the forgiveness of it; in the latter, as the death of the sacrifice was the ground, upon which it pleased God to forgive it.

But, it seems, if the high priest's putting the iniquities of the children of Israel upon the scape-goat, will not justify the sentiment of transferring sin; 'we have then• neither instance nor argument left to justify it, in any sense: for no where is any ⚫ sacrifice (levitical, I suppose) said to have sin put upon it, or to bear sin.' No. 31. That we have any instance to this purpose;

R

I mean, that a levitical sacrifice is any where said to bear sin, is what I will not take upon me positively to say; though, if I mistake not, the learned Dr. Benson (as well as Dr. Whitby; see his note on 1 Pet. ii. 25,) seems to think we have; for in his note upon 1 Pet. ii. 24, Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree; he tells us, that 'the allusion, in this text, seems to have been (not to the scape-goat's bearing away the sins of the Israelites into the wilderness, but) rather 'to the sin-offering, which was given to the 'high priest, to bear the iniquity of the 'congregation of Israel, and make an atonement for them before the Lord, Lev. x. 17. However, I shall not insist upon this; being sensible, as you suggest, No. 38, that . is there rendered by the Sev- *. enty, wa apελle, that ye may bear the iniquity of the congregation, &c. supposing, I presume, that the sin-offering had been given to the sons of Aaron, for them to bear the iniquity of the congregation. But whatever may be the case as to this, when that we have no argument left

you say,

6

6

to justify, in any sense, the sentiment of

transferring sin;' you seem to me, as I