able to these men, who first taught these tenets; will it, I say, hence follow, that what a well-warranted history relates as having been fact near 3000 years before, was mere fiction and fable, because it does not accord with what was taught in these so much later times?

If the natural tenderness and regret of human nature against all appearance of barbarity were made use of to shew, how great a consternation it must have been to the first men, at a time when the creatures were not their food; and it could not but

The writers who would argue that sacrifices of the living creatures had commenced from human institution, would have it, that the eating flesh was before the flood; that the command to Noah, was to regulate, not to give the first liberty to eat flesh: see Philemon to Hydaspes, p. 55, letter v. But what a mere pretence, without shadow of foundation, this is, let any one con sider, who will examine what Lamech said at the birth of Noah, Gen. v. 29. If they had eaten flesh as freely before the flood, as after Noah had obtained a grant of it, what comfort did they want, or could expect, con

be more natural for them to say thing living,

vitaque magis quam morte juvatis,

OVID.

When to see it living must have been more agreeable, as well as more useful," than to put it to death; what less than a command from God, whenever they committed a sin, that the sin might not remain, and lie at their door,' could have induced them to bring an innocent, and to them innocuous animal, to offer its blood upon account of their own transgression? Time and custom

cerning their work and toil of their hands, because of the ground which the Lord had cursed?

The heathen poets conceived that some creatures might be sacrificed upon account of their destroying the fruits of the earth, of the vines or trees, or otherwise having been prejudicial to men: see Ovid, Fastor. lib. 1. Metamorph. lib. 15. But nothing of this sort can be imagined to have been Abel's reason for offering of the firstlings of his flock.

iSee Gen. iv. 7.

may reconcile us to almost any thing; but it is difficult to avoid the reflection, that when mankind came first to this service, it would truly rend their hearts, to see as it were death, unto which they knew themselves must one day come; to have displayed before their eyes its pangs and agonies inflicted by themselves on a creature which had no demerit; merely because they had themselves committed some offence against their God:-such a service must cause them both to think upon the victim and upon themselves. As to the suffering animal ; how could they avoid asking, what has this sheep done?

Quid meruistis oves, placidum pecus

OVID.

Upon themselves they must look with confusion of face, that what flesh and blood would naturally shrink back at, was without mercy to be performed, mercly upon account of their misdoings. One would think, that whilst their minds were

tender, (and they ought carefully to have kept them so,) nothing could have been enjoined, which could have been a more affecting rebuke of sin, to raise in them hearty desires, if possible, to sin no more, rather than to come often to repeat a service, in its nature so disagreeable; and to perform deliberately the rites of it. One would think, that not only Cain, but all mankind, would have been glad to have avoided it; if the offering of the fruits of the ground might have been accepted in its stead.

In fact, it appears that sacrifices had been offered thousands of years before any thing which can be cited concerning them from heathen writers was written. And, in truth, nothing can be cited from thence to shew us the reason of them, or their origin. Sacrifices of the living creatures, as in the case of Abel, were made ages before mankind had any thought of eating flesh; and, consequently, none of the weak reasons into which our ingenious writer supposes mankind might fall, to induce them to offer to

the gods in their injudicious way of thinking, part of what they experienced to be sustenance to themselves, could have any place in their mind at all. From what is argued in the New Testament, the first sacrifices in the world came of faith, and were made in obedience to some divine command. It may be apprehended that they were an institution so dehortatory against sin, that even upon this account they would appear a command worthy of God, to creatures who needed to be strongly warned against it. Besides, they bear such a reference to what was afterwards in reality to take away sin, and they might so instructively prepare the world to receive the revelation concerning it, when it should be more fully published, and to lead men to it; that what is said for supposing it a human institution, is frivolous and without foundation. Therefore I may, I think, without further controversy, refer the reader to the reason which I have given of this institution; viz. that God having determined what should in the fulness of time