/ ,\\1L vlll 
 
 ilS 
 
 0= VMK 
 

 
 CASE OF SAUL,
 
 
 THE 
 
 CASE OF SAUL, 
 
 SHEWING THAT HIS DISORDER WAS A REAL 
 
 SPIRITUAL POSSESSION, 
 
 And proving (by the learned researches and labours of a strenuous 
 promoter even of the contrary doctrine) that actual 
 
 POSSESSIONS OF SPIRITS 
 
 Were generally acknowledged by the ancient writers among the 
 Heathens as well as among the Jews and Christians. 
 
 First Prmted"in the Year 1777> as an Appendix to a Tract 
 on the Law of Nature and Principles of Action in Man. 
 
 To which is added, 
 
 A SHORT TRACT, 
 
 WHEREIN THE 
 
 INFLUENCE OF DEMONS 
 
 ARE FURTHER ILLUSTRATED BY 
 
 REMARKS ON 1 TIMOTHY iv. 13. 
 
 By GRANVILLE SHARP. 
 
 Printed by W. CALVERT, Great Shire-lane, Temple-bar ; 
 VOR VERNOR AND HOOD, POULTRY j F. AND C. RIVINGTON, 
 
 ST. PAUL'S CHURCH-YARD; j. WHITE, FLEET-STREET; 
 
 J. UATCUARD, PICCADILLY ; W. DWYER, HOLBORS J 
 A^D L, PEXNINGTON, AT DURHAM. 
 
 1807.
 
 Stack 
 Annex
 
 PREFACE 
 
 
 
 TO THE READER. 
 
 
 
 THE following Tract, on the Case o 
 and on the reality of Demoniacal Posses- 
 sions^ as manifested in many other well- 
 authenticated instances, was first printed 
 [all bat the conclusion and two appen- 
 dages) in the year 1777 : for it was in- 
 tended as an Appendix, or sequel, to a 
 Tract published by the same Author in 
 the preceding year, intitled " The Law 
 ** of Nature and Principles of Action in, 
 " Man;" for as Human Actions are too 
 frequently prompted by the inspiration 
 of Demons^ this particular branch of " the 
 P Principles of Action in Man" must, of 
 
 course
 
 11 
 
 course, require our most careful attention 
 and consideration. 
 
 The Publication^ however, of this Ap- 
 pendix was deferred, at that time, because 
 the Author was informed that a very 
 learned work on the same subject was 
 then in the press, and very nearly finished, 
 by the Rev. Dr. Worthington^ to whom the 
 Author immediately sent a Copy of this 
 Tract as far as it was then printed ; and 
 lie retained only a very few other copies 
 of it for some particular friends, and in- 
 trusted the remainder of the impression 
 to the care of the Printer ; who, having 
 been liberally paid for -his labour and 
 paper, was the more particularly bound 
 to secure it for the Author's use, until he 
 should find a more favourable opportunity 
 of publishing it. But unfortunately the cir- 
 cumstances of the Printer happened to be 
 very different from what the Author sup- 
 posed; and he died a few years afterwards, 
 
 insolvent
 
 
 
 111 
 
 insolvent, and all that he possessed was dis- 
 posed of to pay his debts, without the 
 knowledge of the Author, until it was toa 
 late to recover any part of the impression* 
 The importance, however, of the subject 
 has induced the Author to reprint the 
 work ; for though he has neglected it for 
 so many years, yet he is thoroughly con- 
 vinced that the Topic is even still more 
 important in the present awful crisis than 
 it was before ; because all the scriptural 
 Signs of the Times demonstrate, that the 
 pouring of the 7th and last Phial of God's 
 Wrath upon the Air (alluding to the bind- 
 ing of Satan, " the Prince of the power of 
 " the Air?* and his spiritual Agents) must 
 be very nearly at hand ; whereby the ma- 
 licious rage of these spiritual Enemies will 
 undoubtedly be excited to the utmost exer- 
 tion of diabolical mischief (in Suicides, 
 Duels, Murders, &c. &c. besides the horri- 
 ble National Wars and Public Slaughter* 
 in all parts of the world !) during the short 
 
 remaining
 
 V ' 
 
 remaining time that they will be permit*' 
 ted to assail all unguarded persons, who 
 neglect the only true means of resisting 
 them, viz. urgent and sincere prayer to 
 our Heavenly Father, in the name of our 
 only " one Mediator" for the protection and 
 guidance of his Holy Spirit ! 
 
 Some farther warnings on this point 
 have lately been printed, by the same au- 
 thor, in a very short Tract on the tufa last 
 petitions of the Lord's Prayer, shewing that 
 our Lord has really commanded us ta 
 pray for deliverance from " the evil Being J* 
 by which the Chief or Prince of our most 
 dangerous spiritual enemies seems to hav< 
 been evidently intended. 

 
 THE 
 CASE 
 
 OF 
 
 SAUL, &c. 
 
 4< But the Spirit of the Lord departed 
 " from $ ft ul, and an Evil- Spirit from 
 " the Lord troubled him" 1 Sam. 
 xvi. 1,3. 
 
 THE literal Meaning of this Text 
 beinu; rejected by the Author of 
 a late " Essay on I lie Demoniacs of the 
 " ' A'cie? Testament" \\e must have re- 
 course to a comparative view of the 
 context (\vhieh he seems to have neg- 
 lected) in order to ascertain the real 
 state of Saul's disorder. And we shall 
 thereby be enabled to form a clearer 
 judgment concerning the doctrine of 
 A Possess-
 
 2 
 
 Possessions and Spiritual Influence, 
 which is so far from heincr foreign to 
 
 o o 
 
 the subject of the preceding tract, viz. 
 
 THE LAW OF NATURE and PRINCIPLES 
 
 " OF ACTION IN MAN," that without a 
 competent knowledge of it the com- 
 pound Nature of Man cannot he suffici- 
 ently understood, nor the principles of 
 Human Dictions properly investigated. 
 
 The Opinions and Suppositions of the 
 learned gentleman, whose labours have 
 obliged me to examine the Case of Saul, 
 are interwoven with much intricate 
 sophistry, and are dispersed through 
 ^veral other tracts besides that on 
 Demoniacs, containing in all, more than 
 1,100 pages, so that I should too much 
 exceed the proposed limits of my pre- 
 sent undertaking were I to attempt a 
 regular examination of them : but, 
 luckily for me, he has reduced my 
 labour by referring the decision to a 
 single Example ; " for if you can prove 
 
 the
 
 . 
 
 3 
 
 the REALITY OF POSSESSION IN ONE 
 
 INSTANCE//WM I fie Language of Scrip- 
 lure," (says. he, see note in p. 131) 
 you may prove it in ALL." And if 
 sucli proof should really be produced, 
 it will effectually confute the presump- 
 tive assertion of the same Author, 
 which follows in the *ery next sen- 
 tence " And if (says he) you can 
 " account for the scripture language 
 " concerning POSESSIONS in ANY ?>i- 
 ' stance, without allowing their reality, 
 " you may account for them in EVERY 
 " instance" This latter assertion there- 
 fore must fall of course, if the former 
 he proved, because they are manifest 
 contradictions, which cannot exist to- 
 gether. 
 
 Now the Example already mentioned 
 in the preceding Tract on the Lais of 
 Nature, 8cc. (see note in p. 190) con- 
 cerning the " Evil-Spirit from the 
 " Lord " which " troubled " Saul, is the 
 
 ONE
 
 4 
 
 ONE INSTANCE which I have chosen as 
 
 a proof of " THE REALITY OF POSSES- 
 
 " SIGN;" for this Example is of 
 more consequence in the present dis- 
 pute, perhaps, than any other ; because 
 the Author of " the Essay on the De- 
 " moniacs" has explained away the 
 literal sense <# the sacred Text where 
 this fact is related, in order to secure 
 from objection a contrary assertion 
 of his own concerning the evidence of 
 the OLD TESTAMENT on THE DOCTRINE 
 OF POSSESSIONS. " With regard to the 
 " Prop he is of THE OLD TESTAMENT, 
 " (says he) they stand clear from all 
 fl suspicion of countenancing the Doc- 
 " trine of REAL POSSESSIONS. It is not 
 " pretended that they ever expressly 
 " taught it. In all their writings, no 
 " traces of it are to be found, no men- 
 " lion (says he) of a SINGLE IN- 
 " STANCE of reputed possession, NOR 
 "ANY ALLUSION TO IT. For with re- 
 " gard to SAUL" (continues he) " of 
 
 " whom
 
 " whom we read, that AN EVIL-SPIRIT 
 
 " FROM THE LORD TROUBLED HIM, it 
 
 " is sufficient to observe, that the word 
 " SPIRIT is often applied to THE TEMPER 
 " AND AFFECTIONS of the human mind$ 
 " and that the Jews were wont to call 
 " all kinds of melancholy an Evil-Spirit. 
 " Saul's disorder, therefore (says he) 
 " was a deep melancholy" (p. 173 1 , 
 174.) By which he must mean a mere 
 natural disorder, or " a deep Mclan- 
 " choly " void of any supernatural or 
 spiritual influence, though he does not 
 expressly say so ; for otherwise the as- 
 sertion would not answer the purpose of 
 his argument in that place : but a view 
 of the context will demonstrate that 
 Saul was really disordered, by an Evil- 
 Spirit. The History of that Monarch, 
 indeed, affords incontestable proofs of 
 Supernatural Spiritual Influence (both 
 Good, and Evil) on the human mind ; 
 so that Saul was really a very remark- 
 able example of that compound nature 
 
 of
 
 of Man,, which I have endeavoured to 
 explain in the preceding tract, as 
 necessary to be known and understood, 
 that we may be enabled to give a 
 proper account of the Principles of 
 Diction in J\Ian. 
 
 After Saul was anointed he was fore- 
 warned by Samuel, that the Spirit of 
 the Lord would come upon him 
 " Thou shalt come to the Hill of Cod" 
 (said the Prophet) " where (is) the 
 " Garrison of the Philistines : and it 
 " shall come to pass when thou art come 
 " hither to the City, that ihou shalt meet 
 " a company of Prophets coming down 
 " from the High place, with a psaltery* 
 " and a tabret, and a pipe, and a harp 
 " before them ; and they shall pro- 
 " phesy. And THE SPIRIT OF THE 
 " LORD will come upon thee, and thou 
 " shall prophesy with them, and SHALT 
 
 ." BE TURNED INTO ANOTHER MAN !" 
 
 1. Sam. x. 5, 6. 
 
 Such
 
 Such is the glorious effect of God's 
 Spiritual Influence on the mind <&Man I 
 It is nothing less than an actual parti- 
 cipation of the Divine Nature, whereby 
 all involuntary delects of the Natural 
 Man are so amply supplied for every 
 great and good undertaking, that the 
 disposition and " Principles of Action " 
 as well as the abilities of the favoured 
 Mortal become totally different from 
 what they were before, as Samuel liter- 
 ally declared to Saul, " and titou s]ialt be 
 
 " 'JTRNED INTO ANOTHER MAN." This 
 
 should teach us that the Natural Dis- 
 position of the Human Soul is but of 
 little consequence in forming the J\'lan, 
 provided he is but endued with a sin- 
 cere desire to maintain and renew the 
 Divine Influence. Saul had the PRO- 
 MISE of that glorious change of dis- 
 position, from a single Prophet, and 
 indeed as a singular favour bestowed 
 upon the people in his person, to fit him 
 ibr die public service ; but, in these lat- 
 ter
 
 8 
 
 ter times, all Men have the PROMISE of 
 the same inestimable spiritual influence, 
 A PROMISE handed down to us by much 
 greater authority than that of Samuel ! 
 
 *J 
 
 Let us therefore take warning by Saul's 
 example, that we do not forfeit the free 
 heavenly gilt, as he did, and thereby 
 unhappily render ourselves subject (like 
 him) to a spiritual influence of a very 
 different nature, though, in his case, it 
 was still called a " Spirit from the 
 " Lord." To be " turned into another 
 "' Mart' the wrong way, (that is, from 
 good to evil,) how deplorable a state ! 
 And yet even the most amiable natural 
 dispositions are liable to it, if they neg- 
 lect that necessary vigilance and resist- 
 ance to evil, which our situation in this 
 life requires ! The promise by Samuel 
 was punctually fulfilled ; for the Text 
 afterwards informs us " that when he 
 " (Saul) had turned his back to go from 
 " Samuel, GOD GAVE .. HIM ANOTHER 
 4t HEART" (a strong expression for the 
 
 total
 
 9 
 
 total change in Saul's " PRINCIPLES o 
 " ACTION ") : " and all those signs came 
 *' to pass that day. And when they" 
 (that is, Saul and his father's servant) 
 " came thither to the hill, behold, a com- 
 " pany of Prophets met him ; and THE 
 " SPIRIT OF GOD came upon him, and 
 
 " HE PROPHESIED AMONG THEM/' &C. 
 
 (L Sam. x. 9, 10.) This must ne- 
 cessarily he understood as an actual 
 temporary impulse of the Holt/ Spirit 
 upon the mind of Saul ; anil not a 
 mere change of disposition, which will 
 more plainly appear by the sequel of 
 the history. It will also appear that 
 the Divine Impulse \vas not constantly 
 upon him, hut only on particular occa- 
 sions ; and that even the Evil Spirit 
 also (which afterwards troubled him) 
 did not possess him without intermis- 
 sion, hut left him intervals of rest : so 
 that Saul's natural understanding \va> 
 by no means deprived af its due power 
 of choke or -Free- Will, for otherwi^ 
 
 K hi*.
 
 10 
 
 his disobedience would not have been 
 sinful. 
 
 The first coming of the Spirit of God 
 upon Saul was manifested by the Spirit 
 of Prophecy, as 1 have already shewn. 
 The second instance of an immediate 
 impulse of God's Spirit upon him was 
 when the Liberty of his Country was 
 in the most imminent danger, Nahash 
 the tyrannical Monarch of the Ammo- 
 nites would grant no peace to the op- 
 pressed nation of Israel, but on terms 
 that were disgraceful to human nature. 
 Their reasonable Tender of SERVICE 
 on limited conditions by a Royal Char- 
 ter, (viz. " Make a Covenant icith us" 
 (said they) " and we will SERVE 
 " thee" ) was disdainfully rejected !- 
 Nothing but absolute submission could 
 satisfy the Tyrant ; and this must needs 
 be aggravated by the most cruel badge 
 of slavery that perhaps had ever been 
 devised ! " On this (condition) said the 
 
 haughty
 
 11 
 
 " haughty Monarch will I make (a. 
 " covenant) wil/i you, that I may thrust 
 " out all i/our right Eyes, and lay it 
 44 (for) a reproach upon ail Israel:" (1 
 Sam. xi. 1, 2.) An Idea so inimical to 
 Human Nature, could not enter the 
 heart of Man but by the suggestion or 
 inspiration of the grand spiritual Enemy 
 of Mankind : and it is very remarkable 
 that the Tyrant himself was marked not 
 only in his disposition but even by his 
 vert/ name, (for IS abash tTG literally 
 signifies, a Serpent) was marked, I say* 
 as an Enemy to Mankind, and thereby 
 was a true representative on earth of 
 that diabolical Serpent whom he wor- 
 shipped, and by whom his councils 
 were apparently directed. But Na- 
 tional Oppression cannot escape the 
 just indignation and vengeance of the 
 Almighty, who will not endure a mani- 
 fest breach of the eternal Laws of Na- 
 tural-Right, and brotherly Love among 
 men, without rendering a severe tempo- 
 ral
 
 12 
 
 jral retaliation upon the offending 
 tion, many striking Examples of which 
 are collected in rny tract on the Law of 
 Retribution. The immediate conse- 
 quences therefore, of such monstrous 
 
 * 
 national oppression were, that " THE 
 
 " SPIRIT OF THE LORD CAME UPON 
 " SAUL ishen lie heard Ihose Tidings" 
 (viz. the arbitrary demands of King 
 NAIIASH) " and his Anger was kindled 
 " greatly" The inspired SAUL collect- 
 ed the Hosts of Israel ; and the imme- 
 diate interposition of Jehovah Tsabaolh 
 (" THE LORD OF HOSTS ") was manifest- 
 ed by a total defeat of the Tyrant and 
 his Army. 
 
 By this extraordinary event, Saul 
 was established in his kingdom. But 
 us the Divine Inspiration did not 
 restrain the natural free-Jfill and 
 Choice of the Monarch, he reigned no 
 more than two Years before he resisted 
 the Divine Influence of God's Spirit, 
 
 and
 
 13 
 
 and yielded himself a Slave to false 
 worldly policy in the administration of 
 his government ; tor he presump- 
 tuously usurped the office of the Priest 
 and Prophet, in direct opposition to the 
 I^aws of God merely to serve a poli- 
 tical purpose, as if an imaginary ne- 
 cessity of Slate was sufficient to justify 
 the breach of a positive Law I Yet Saul, 
 like other temporal Monarchs, pleaded 
 Ike political necessity in answer to the 
 Prophet's charge " If hat hast Ihoit 
 done?"" Because" (said Saul) " / 
 " saw that the people were scattered 
 " from me, and that thon earnest not 
 " within the dai/s appointed, and that 
 " the Pint is lines gathered themselves 
 " together at Michmash ;. therefore 
 " said /, the Philistine's mil come 
 " dawn now upon me to (itlgal, and I 
 " have not made supplication unto the 
 " Lord: I FORCED MYSELF TIIKRE- 
 
 " FORE" (that is, on account of the 
 
 V 
 
 Apolitical Necessity hefore described) 
 
 " and
 
 14 
 
 * and offered a burnt Offering." Suc4i 
 was his oft once ; mid such his excuse, 
 which latter was indeed more* plausible 
 than any thing that caa be justly al- 
 ledg'ed in favour of the political ar- 
 rangements of some modern Govern- 
 ments; arid yet THE REAL EFFECT of 
 the Monarch's Policy was diametrically 
 opposite to the END PROPOSED, as it 
 generally happens when men presume 
 to dispense witli the the eternal Laws 
 of God,, howsoever pressing- the sup- 
 posed Necessity! " Thou hast done 
 "foolishly" (said Samuel to Saul) 
 " Tltoit hast not kept the commandments 
 " of the Lord thy God which he com- 
 " manded thee: for now would the 
 ** Ijord have established thy Kingdom 
 " upon Israel for erer," (that is, if he 
 had endured the temptation of those 
 precarious times, and trusted in God to 
 the last moment of POLITICAL NECESSI- 
 TY, submitting with due resignation 
 
 * * o 
 
 to such misfortunes as could not l>e 
 
 ^avoided
 
 15 
 
 Avoided -without injustice or Gomnpteon 
 of the National Laws) *' But now '* 
 (said the Prophet) " tky Kingdom shall 
 *' not continue : " (the very evil, of all 
 others the most dreaded by the anx- 
 ious Monarch, and which he hoped to 
 avoid by meanly yielding to THE SIT- 
 POSUD NECESSITY") " The Lord" (con- 
 tinues the Prophet) " hath sought him 
 *' a man after his own Iieart, and the 
 <l Lord hat k comma tided him (to he) 
 " Captain over his jteople, because 
 " thou hast not kept (that) which the 
 *' Lord commanded thee" (1 Sam. 
 xiii. 114.) A more remarkable Ex- 
 ample of the bad policy and extreme 
 danger of dispensing with the Laves 
 of God for purposes of State cannot 
 easily be found! 
 
 Nevertheless, even after this, the 
 mercy and forbearance of GOD to Saul 
 Mas manifested in many remarkable 
 instances; and the anointing of the
 
 16 
 
 was probably postponed 
 that the reigning Monarch might be 
 favoured with time and opportunity 
 to retrieve by obedience, what he had 
 lost by tallowing the dictates of hi* 
 own re/// and pleasure in direct opposi- 
 tion to God's Laws; for in so doing 
 he was guilty of the most notorious 
 and manifest resistance to the eternal 
 Spirit of God with which he had been 
 so wonderfully endowed ! 
 
 But the very next act of Providence 
 in his favour was abused by the rash- 
 ness of the Monarch in refusing to ask 
 advice of GOD, even alter he had sum- 
 moned the High Priest for that pur- 
 pose. " Withdraw thine Jiand" saiti 
 Saul to the Priest; for he would not 
 wait for the divine answer already de- 
 manded, but hastily followed the dic- 
 tates of his own 'Kill, and thereby sul- 
 lied the glory of that most wonderful 
 victory, which the Spirit of Cod had 
 
 V * fc/ 
 
 wrought
 
 17 
 
 wrought by the hand of his Princely 
 Son, the truly noble and generous 
 Jonathan: and though Jonathan him- 
 self as well as his victory, might be truly 
 esteemed, according to the proper in- 
 terpretation of his name, " the Gift of 
 " Jehovah, 1 '* (A Gift, indeed of in- 
 expressible value, not only to a Father, 
 but to a whole nation, if we consider Ms 
 virtuous and rare character; a Man 1 
 whose love of Justice and Equity could 
 not be biassed by the most pressing ne- 
 cessities of Self-preservation and private' 
 Interest! See p. 100 to 10:2 in the pre- 
 ceecling Tract) yet the Life of this ex- 
 
 * The author has since discovered, by grammatical 
 rules drawn from plain examples of the Hebrew Scrip- 
 tures, that this name "tPt^ (which seems to be an 
 abbreviation of "^^ JTirp) must be differently interpreted. 
 The nominative noun precedes a verb in A'c/, which, 
 therefore, must be rendered in the present tense, Je/io- 
 r,//< grict/t, and not Dominus dcdit, in the perfect tene, 
 fis rendered by the learned" Dr. L.yttleton and others. 
 Nevertheless, in cither way, it is still sufficiently implied in 
 the meaning of the name, that the worthy person who was 
 ished by it was considered as the Gift of Jcho.uh. 
 
 B cellent
 
 18 
 
 cellent Man, this Gift of Jehovah, was 
 forfeited, on the very day of his glori- 
 ous triumph, by a rash oath or curse of 
 his unthankful Father. " Cursed be THE 
 " MAN" (said Saul) " that eateth any 
 " food until evening," &c. and after- 
 wards, when Jonathan was proved by 
 Lot to be " THE MAN " " God do so, 
 " and more also " (said Saul) "for thou 
 " shall surely die Jonathan ! "but " the 
 t( people rescued Jonathan that he died 
 no t (i Sam.xiv. 1 45.) Never- 
 theless he was afterwards cut off from 
 the kingdom by an untimely death, 
 (nay, Saul's own hand had previously 
 aimed at his LIFE with a Javelin, because 
 he was too honourable to accept even of 
 Royalty on illegal and unjust terms) 
 but the loss was to the Royal House and 
 the Public, to whom he had been given 
 
 bv God. and not to Jonathan himself: 
 
 >/ 
 
 for his just spirit was formed and pre- 
 pared for a better world, where " the 
 " Righteous shall shine forth as the 
 
 " Swt,
 
 19 
 
 ~$ttn, in the Kingdom of their Father!" 
 (Matt. xiii. 43.) This unhappy tem- 
 poral fate of Jonathan, however, did 
 not take place, it seems, 'till several 
 years afterwards at the close of Saul's 
 reign; for God's mercy to Saul was 
 yet prolonged from time to time, and 
 he gave him victory over all the neigh- 
 houring tyrannical nations, which had 
 oppressed and plundered Israel: so 
 that Saul had ample opportunity to re- 
 trieve hv obedience to God's Will, what 
 j 
 
 he had forfeited by preferring and ex- 
 ecuting, contrary to Lam and Reason, 
 the hasty determinations of his ow/t 
 Will? and his fate was by no means 
 absolutely determined, until he had 
 proved himself totally unworthy of fur- 
 ther confidence, by failing in such a 
 trial of his obedience as left no room 
 for the least hope of his amendment ! 
 
 The Almighty had determined to 
 pour out his final vengeance upon an 
 
 abom-
 
 20 
 
 abominable Nation of unrepenting Sin- 
 -ners, the Amalekites; and Saul, (as the 
 last trial also of his obedience) was en- 
 trusted with the execution of it; and 
 was accordingly instructed by the Pro- 
 j)het Samuel concerning the Will of 
 God, in such clear and express terms, 
 -that a failure in duty could not possibly 
 liappen through misunderstanding, but 
 must afford an unquestionable proof to 
 all the Nation, that the Monarch ob- 
 stinately preferred his own worldly re- 
 finements in politicks to the declared 
 Will of God! " The Lord sent me" 
 (said Samuel) " to anoint thee to be 
 " King over his people, over Israel : 
 " now, therefore, HEARKEN THOU UNTO 
 
 " THE VOICE OF THE WORDS OF THE 
 
 " LORD. Thus sailh the Lord of Hosts, 
 " I remember (that) which Amalek did 
 " to Israel, how he laid wait for him in 
 " the way when he came up from Egypt " 
 (this should w r arn all nations that God 
 REMEMBERS all national Acts of trea- 
 chery
 
 21 
 
 cheryand unjust violence, and will cer- 
 tainly render a severe recompence, in 
 his own time, though perhaps many 
 ages afterwards, as in this case). '* Now 
 " go" (said Samuel) " and smile Ama- 
 " lek, and utterly destroy all that they 
 " have, and spare (hem not ; but slay 
 " both man and woman, infant and suck- 
 " ling, ox and sheep, camel and ass" 
 (1 Sam. xv. 1 3.) The nature of such 
 a Commission of Vengeance as this from 
 the Creator, the Almighty Lord and 
 Owner of all, is further explained in 
 my Tract on " The Just Limitation of 
 " Slavery," p. 1014 
 
 Saul's victory over the Amalekites 
 was, of course, complete, agreeable to 
 the divine commission with which he 
 was entrusted ; hut the unthankful Mo- 
 narch, as usual, resisted the Holy Spirit 
 of God, by once more yielding to his 
 own vain political principles, in direct 
 opposition to the letter and meaning of 
 
 his
 
 22 
 
 his instructions ! For " he took Ac AG 
 " the King of the tdmalekites ALIVE/' 
 " and though he " utterly destroyed all 
 " the people (that is, of the Amalekites) 
 " with the edge of the sword" yet he 
 " and the People (of Israel) spared Ag- 
 " ag" (the tyrant of Amalek, con- 
 trar}< to God's decreed Justice *) "and 
 " the best of the sheep -, and of (he oxen, 
 " and of the fallings, and the lambs, and 
 " all that was good, and WOULD NOT 
 " utterly destroy them : but every thing 
 tf that was vile and refuse, (hat they de- 
 
 * God's Justice against the Tyrant was postponed, in- 
 deed, for a short space, by the disobedience of Saul, but 
 this was only to render it a more tremendous and re- 
 markable example of the Divine f'cngeance against Royal 
 Tyrants and other wicked promoters of unjust Wars and 
 bloodshed ! Because, when A gag comforted himself with 
 hopes of having escaped the just Vengeance, and was 
 therefore the less prepared for what followed, (for he 
 came to Samuel delicately, (or rather pleasantly}, say- 
 ing, " surely the bitterness of death is past"} he heard 
 the awful sentence of God's unerring retribution pronoun- 
 red against him. " As thy Sword hath made Women 
 " childless, so shall thy Mother be childless among Wo- 
 " men." (1 Sam. xv. 33.) 
 
 *' stroyed
 
 23 
 
 " strayed utterly " Whereby it is ma- 
 nifest that Saul and his Council of War 
 preferred their own weak notions of 
 worldly oeconomy to the declared 
 " Judgment of the GOD OF ISRAEL." 
 But a dreadful Sentence was the reward 
 of his disobedience " Because thou 
 " hast rejected the word ofl/ie Lord, he 
 " hath also rejected thee from (being) 
 fl King:' (1 Sam. xv. 23.) And again 
 " The Lord hath rent the Kingdom 
 
 O 
 
 " from thee THIS DAY " (so that the fate 
 of SAUL'S House was not absolutely de- 
 termined it seems [though threatened 
 long before] until he had proved him- 
 self incorrigible " THIS DAY " by neg- 
 lecting so extraordinary an opportunity 
 of executing the Will of God upon Sin- 
 ners) " and hath given it " (continued 
 the Prophet) " to a neighbour of thine 
 " (that is) better than thou!" (v. 28.) 
 And after Samuel had anointed David 
 to be King in the room of the rejected 
 Monarch, we read expressly that " THE 
 
 " SPIRIT
 
 24 
 
 ** SPIRIT OF THE LORD came upon Da- 
 '** vid* from that day forward, :c. but 
 " THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD departed 
 " from Smil, and an EVIL-SPIRIT FROM 
 " GOD troubled him." (1 Sam. xvi. 13, 
 14.) Now if the coming of the Holy 
 Spirit upon David was a real, super- 
 natural inspiration ; and also if the De- 
 parture of the Lord's Spirit from Saul 
 was a real departure of the Heavenly 
 Orace or Divine Inspiration (neither of 
 
 * That David was really inspired by the Holy Spirit 
 appears by the reasons he assigned to Saul in order to 
 prove the certainty of his success against the Philistine. 
 viz. that be slew both a Lion and a Bear, and that the Phi- 
 listine should be as one of them. -" The Lord that deli- 
 " vered me" (said he) " out of the paw of the Lion, and 
 "" out (>f the paw of the Bear, will deliver me out of' the 
 " hand of this Philistine:" and as the event perfectly 
 -corresponded with his prediction, it was manifest that all 
 these Actions were supernatural! (J Sam. xvii. 36", 37-) 
 
 The wonderful effect of David's music upon Saul may 
 -also be well imputed to the sa-me -supernatural cause; 
 especially as it was apparently the means used by Pro- 
 vidence to introduce the young anointed King to the Court 
 of Israel, as well as to the notice and ebteem of the 
 people. 
 
 which
 
 which can reasonably be denied) there 
 can be no doubt but the " EVIL-SPIRIT 
 '*' from the Lord" (mentioned even in 
 the same sentence) which troubled Saul 
 on the Departure of the former, was also 
 a real inspiration, though of a very dif- 
 ferent nature ! It would destroy the 
 use of language to construe, in a literal 
 sense, what, is there said of the Holy 
 Spirit, and yet to esteem the mention 
 that is made (even in the very same 
 sentences of THE EviL-SpiRiT, as a 
 mere customary mode of expressing a 
 deep melancholy, or other natural disor- 
 der of the mind I 
 
 The expression therefore of the text, 
 i hat " THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD de- 
 " parted from Saul, AND AX KviL-Spi- 
 " HIT from the Lord troubled * him " 
 
 clearly 
 
 Tin- word " troubled" docs not sufficiently express 
 die horrible terror, with which Saul was certainly agita- 
 ted by t'tc Eiil-Spirit, according to the Hebrew term 
 in the test, (1 Sam. xvi. 1-t.) ; for wher- 
 I> ever
 
 20 
 
 clearly implies (if we regard the true 
 literal meaning) not only that the Evil- 
 Spirit came by the permission of GOD 
 (as it -was " an Evil-Spirit FROM THE 
 " LORD") but also that the said Evil- 
 Spirit was really " THE AGENT" which 
 "troubled" (or rather terrified) Saul! 
 This alone would be sufficient to con- 
 fute the Author of " the Essay on (fa 
 " Demoniacs/' as it must clearly de- 
 monstrate that SAUL was actually POS- 
 SESSED BY AN EVIL-SPIRIT : but tllCEC 
 is still another circumstance (which 
 he has likewise overlooked) that ren- 
 ders the nature of SAUL'S disorder 
 indisputable, The actual Influence of 
 the Evil-Spirit was manifested by a Spi- 
 rit of Divination or Prophecy, as in the 
 Case of the poor soothsaying Ctrl at 
 Philippi * (mentioned in Acts xvi. 16 
 
 18.) 
 
 ever this verb occurs it signifies to tcrrifv, or ag/fafe -ai/ft 
 filremefcar, Tevrere, cxagitare, excrcere inulo vcl ip.o 
 tu, obstupefaccre, &c. 
 
 * Whether riie Prophesying Spirit in both cases was a 
 
 rcdl
 
 27 
 
 T8.) for when " the Evil-Spirit/hww God 
 
 " came 
 
 real spirit of PYTHON, or DIVINATION; or whether 
 only an imaginary spirit of APOLLO, or of " A DEAD 
 " MAN," according to the groundless notions suggested 
 rn " the Essay on the Demoniacs," let the Author of the 
 latter doctrine himself determine in what manner he 
 pleases : but let all persons who profess a sincere regard. 
 for scriptural evidence take notice, that if it is our duty 
 to believe tlie plain facts related in the Sacred Text, we 
 must necessarily admit that the manner in which botli 
 Stnil and the (lirl were atfecled was supernatural and spi- 
 ritual, and such as could have no connection whatever 
 with natural dfrtempers. 
 
 In the account of the Philippian Clirl, the text makes 
 no mention of ,-lpollo, nor that 'i'/f was with the Spirit of 
 " this Dead Man tliat the Damsel 'atPhilipfri zcas thought 
 " to be inspired," according to the bold assertions of the. 
 Author of the Essay, p. o(), 57. The Damsel is indeed 
 said to have been " possessed voith a Spirit vf Divination," 
 or of" Python:" and if APOLLO was surnamed Pythius 
 (nuOicr), or sometimes Python (TIi/6wj/), it \vas by no 
 means as his proper name, but (most probably) only from 
 the Spirit of Divination (or IluOwv from Ti\Kvop,ou to 
 ask or enquire) which, was supposed to t^rce answers to 
 those who consulted or FUT QUESTIONS TO HIS OKA- 
 ri.F.s ; so that the Dam.frl at'Philippl, or the Spirit with 
 which she was possessed, -had as good a title to that name 
 aydpollo ; for if all the circumstances of her case, that 
 are expressly mentioned, be duly considered, it will 
 appear that her disorder was really a supernatural spiri- 
 tual possession, or inHntus ! She " brought her Blasters 
 " much gain by soothsaying" (jUVTfc ( Uii/ii) j. e'. " by 
 
 " pro-
 
 28 
 
 41 came * upon Saul" " he PROPHESir> 
 " in the midst of the house;" (1 Sam. 
 xviii. 10.) which unquestionahly de- 
 notes an actual spiritual influence upon 
 Saul ; for it would be absurd to attri- 
 bute such supernatural spiritual symp- 
 toms to a natural disorder ? But as the 
 
 " prophesying or divining* which expression explains and 
 confirms the true meaning of the Spirit of PYTHON. It 
 is plain therefore that she was consulted, and did answer 
 AS AN ORACLE, and thereby " brought her Masters much. 
 " gain :" which gain ceased with her oracular powers im- 
 mediately on the ejection of the Spirit by Paul. These 
 circumstances., when considered together, are neither 
 .ptoras of a natural distemper, nor indications of fraud 
 or imposture, as if her pretension to Oracular Powers was 
 without foundation ! Besides, the Apostle made a clear 
 personal distinction between the Spirit, and the Damsel ^ 
 for he said " TO THE SPIRIT " (not to the Damsel) " I 
 " command TH EJE in the name of Jesus Christ td come out 
 " O/'HER," &c. 
 
 * The Etil-Spirit from God came upon Saul, &c. The 
 Hebrew Word n^XI"! here rendered CAME, is the 
 very same verb by which the Agency, or falling of THE 
 HOLY SPIRIT upon Men is usually expressed; so that 
 the manner cf Inspiration, ov spiritual communication with 
 the Human Soul, is apparently the same in both cases, 
 though the effects are as opposite as the nature of the 
 Spirits. 
 
 Inspi-
 
 Inspiration was that of an Evil-Spirit, 
 the effects of it were suitable to the na- 
 ture of the invisible Agent : for the Evii- 
 Spirit (taking advantage of the base po~ 
 litical principles of the worldly Monarch,, 
 and of his earnest desire to reign at all 
 events) inspired him with a thirst alter 
 innocent blood, which he manifested by 
 repeated attempts against the lile of 
 David, hoping by that wicked policy to 1 
 retain his kingdom ! 
 
 In these attempts however he was al- 
 ways providentially restrained ; "for 
 " Saul sought him every day, but God' 
 " delivered him not into his /taud." (L 
 Sam. xxiii. 14.) 
 
 At one time in particular David was 
 saved by an irresistible impulse of God's 
 Holy-Spirit upon Saul, even at a time 
 when that Monarch was apparently 
 under the influence of the Evil-Spirit) 
 if we may judge by the bloody purpose 
 
 which
 
 30 
 
 which lie then pursued of murdering-. 
 David, (for the Devil, tiie prompter of 
 all mischief, " was a Murderer from the^ 
 " beginning,) (John viii. 44.) but the 
 superior influence of God's Holy-Spirit,- 
 frustrated the united purposes of tho 
 Monarch's Will and of the inciting- 
 Demon, by compelling the profane 
 Mortal to join the Company of God'* 
 Prophets, headed by their leader Samu- 
 el ; and to prophesy in their presence, 
 as his wretched time-serving Messen- 
 gers (whom fie had previously sent on 
 the same nnlaisfitl errand) had done 
 before him ; * which proves, that even 
 
 pro- 
 
 * " And Saul sent messengers' to take David: fiivj 
 "when they siuv the Company of Prophets prophesying, 
 
 ** and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spi- 
 " rit ^f God was upon the"messengers of Saul, and tliey 
 " also propJictied. A'hd when it \s as told Saul, he Sex:& 
 " other niL'Sbcngcrs, and they nropliesied likcnvise. And 
 " Saul sent messengers again a third time, and they pro- 
 " phesied also. Then went he- also to Ranvih, and came 
 " to a great well that is in Sechu : and lie asked and 
 " said, where arc Samuel and David '<" (for he seems to 
 have had bad intentions against both) '' and one said. Be- 
 
 " hold,
 
 profane and wicked persons may occa- 
 sionally be controlled and influenced 
 by the Holy-Spirit. 
 
 At another time Saul's design -was 
 frustrated by a sudden invasion of the 
 -Philistines, when he had even " com- 
 *' passed David and his Men round 
 " about to lake them." ,(1 Sam. xxiii. 
 
 *25 28.) 
 
 At some other times Saul's wicked 
 .purposes were overcame by the convic- 
 tion of his own conscience, (or the 
 Hereditary Knowledge of Good and 
 Evil) which, on a fair remonstrance of 
 the injured party, compelled, him. to ac~ 
 
 ' hold, tlicy foe at Xaioth in iRamah. 'And he went 
 " thither to" Naioth ui llainah : am) T1U1 SIMIUT OF 
 
 " GOD WAS UPON HTM AI.^O. uiul ij<^ \\ciit on and pro- 
 " phcsied until he came to Naioth in Human. And he 
 
 * stripped off his Chvthes also, and [.rophcbu-d before 
 
 " Samuel in like manner, aivl lay down naked all that day 
 lU and all that night. ^Vhere^brc they say is Saul also 
 "** sainong tjic.Propiicts." (1 Sam, xix. 20 24.) 
 
 knowledge
 
 32 
 
 knowledge his Guilt, and desist for a 
 lime from bis bloody designs. Two re- 
 markable instances of sucb a Triumph 
 of Reason or Conscience in Saul, are ex- 
 .pressly recorded in the sacred Text. 
 
 Wheia David had spared his persecu- 
 tor in the Cave at EngedL, and privately 
 =cut off the skirt oi his robe as a certain 
 signal of his having been absolutely in 
 liis power, he appealed to the Monarch's 
 REASON or natural Krwucledge of GOOB 
 .and EVIL in a pathetic Remonstrance ; 
 and REASON became predominant even 
 in him that was subject to the influence 
 of an Evil-Spirit ! Saul felt the bitter 
 remorse or' a wouuded conscience, and 
 yielded to conviction : " Is this thy voice, 
 " my son David?" said he, and " lifted 
 * f up his voice, and uept. And he said 
 -*' to David, Thou.art wore righteous than 
 " I: for lltoit hast rewarded me GOOD, 
 "*' whereas I have rewarded thec EVIL. 
 i<f And thoti hast sfwwed this day how 
 
 ( that
 
 03 
 
 i \ 
 
 " that thou hast dealt well with me : for- 
 " -asmuch as when the Lord had deliver- 
 " ed me into thine hand, thou killcdst me 
 " not. For if a Man find his Enemy, 
 " will he let him go well away f Where- 
 " fore the Lord reward thee for thai 
 " thou hast done unto me this day." 
 Mark how the previous exercise of REA- 
 SON compelled the Monarch to bless 
 the Man whose life he had so eagerly 
 sought after hut just hefore. Nay, Saul 
 yielded even in the very point whigh 
 liad originally iired his resentment, 
 (viz. the anxious jealousy for his royal 
 dignity), which shews that hy a due 
 exercise of REASON the most violent j?o6-- 
 sions may be subdued, and the influence 
 even of evil Spirits (which always 
 take advantage of the passions) 
 may be effectually resisted; for Saul 
 having now permitted REASON to exert 
 itself as a principle of action, was ready 
 to allow, that even the Crown and Regal 
 Dignity, which of all other things hr
 
 34 
 
 had most at heart, was really due to 
 David. " And now," (said he) " be- 
 " hold I know well that thou shall surely 
 " be King" (probably this was the sub- 
 ject of Saul's unwilling prophecy before 
 Samuel and the prophets at JVa/o//z.wheii 
 " he stript off his Clothes" [perhaps as 
 a sign against himselfj] lading aside 
 his robes of distinction) " and that the 
 " Kingdom of Israel" (said Saul to 
 David) " shall be established in thine 
 " hand. Swear now therefore unto me 
 " by the Lord, that thou will not cut off 
 " my seed after me, and that thou wilt 
 " not destroy my name out of my Fa- 
 " thers House. And David sware 
 " unto Saul. And Saul went home ; 
 " but David and his Men gat thebn vp 
 " unto the hold." (See the whole 
 xxivth Chapter of 1 Sam.) 
 
 Another remarkable triumph of REA- 
 SON or CONSCIENCE, as a principle of 
 action in Saul, is related in the xxvith 
 Chapter. David
 
 - David look the spear, and the cruse of 
 water from Saul's bolster after he had 
 prevented Abishai from killing him, 
 when Saul and all his host were asleep 
 " because a deep sleep from the Lord 
 " was fallen upon them." And after- 
 wards when David had thereupon re- 
 monstrated a second time to Saul con- 
 cerning the unreasonableness of his per- 
 secution, and had awakened his CON- 
 SCIENCE by the justice of his appeal, the 
 Monarch once more submitted to REA- 
 SON and CONSCIENCE, saying, " I have 
 "sinned: return, my Son David : for I 
 " will no more do thee harm, because my 
 " Soul was precious in thine eyes this day : 
 
 " BEHOLD I HAVE PLAYED THE FOOL, 
 " AND HAVE ERRED EXCEEDINGLY." 
 
 A more humiliating acknowledge- 
 ment of repentance than this could not 
 luive been made in any case ! and it is 
 the more extraordinary, when we con- 
 sider that it proceeded from a poor 
 
 wretched
 
 36 
 
 wretched "Mortal forsaken by God's Spi- 
 rit, and absolutely subjected to Diaboli- 
 cal influence ! so that Saul's natural 
 REASON or CONSCIENCE, must in this 
 particular case be esteemed the sole 
 * principle of Action ; ' which now once 
 more compelled him to BLESS his hated 
 Rival ! ** BLESSED be thou my Son 
 **' David" (said Saul) " THOU SHALT 
 
 " BOTH DO GREAT (things), AND ALSO 
 " SHALT STILL PREVAIL. So David 
 
 " went on his way, and Saul returned to 
 " his place." 
 
 T 
 
 Thus the History of Saul affords some 
 ery remarkable examples of the com- 
 pound Nature of Man, and of the vari- 
 ous discording principles of action, as 
 well natural, as supernatural and spiri- 
 tual, wherewith Men are occasionally 
 influenced. 
 
 When all these circumstances of 
 Saul's case are duly considered, it must 
 
 necessarily
 
 necessarily be allowed that the Evil" 
 Spirit from the Lord which troubled 
 8aul, was (not a mere name for a natu- 
 ral disorder, or a mode of expressing 
 the distemper of a deep melancholy? 
 but) an actual distinct Being ; and con- 
 sequently that Saul was really POSSESSED 
 by an Evil-Spirit. And as the Nature 
 of THE DEMONS mentioned in the New 
 Testament is explained under the de- 
 nomination of Evil-Spirit $ and Unclean- 
 Spirits (these being mentioned, in a 
 variety of Instances, as Synonymous 
 Terms with Demons) it will necessarily 
 follow that Saul was an actual Demo- 
 niac, notwithstanding the contrary asser- 
 tions of the learned Writer on the De- 
 moniacs of the New Testament ; and 
 therefore I may 'now saiely avail my- 
 self even of his own authority on my 
 side of the question ; for as this very 
 instance of Saul's disorder (which he 
 has particularly mentioned as a case of 
 mere melancholy) proves, on a fair ex- 
 amination
 
 38 
 
 animation of the context, and " the 
 " language of Scripture," to be an un- 
 questionable instance of a real POS- 
 SESSION, we may fairly conclude, by the 
 authority of one of his own maxims, that 
 alt lite instances of POSSESSION, mention- 
 ed in the New Testament, were also 
 cases of real POSSESSION ; "for if" 
 (says he) " you can prove the REALITY 
 " of POSSESSION in ONE INSTANCE/TO;;* 
 " the Language of Scripture, you may 
 " prove it in all" (Essay on the De- 
 moniacs, &c. p. 131, note.) 
 
 Another extraordinary Instance in 
 the Old Testament of the Agency of a 
 wicked Spirit in tempting or persuading 
 Men, by the express PERMISSION OF 
 GOD, is related in the First Book of 
 Kings xxii. 20 23. And THE LORD 
 " said, Who shall PERSUADE (or de- 
 " ceive) Ahab, that he may go up and 
 " fall at Ramoth Giiead ? &c. And 
 " there came forth A SPIRIT, and stood; 
 
 before
 
 30 
 
 c * before the Lord, and said, I mil per- 
 (e suade him. And the Lord said 
 *' Wherewith ? And he said I mil go 
 " forth, and I will be A LYING-SPIRIT 
 " in the mouth of all his Prophets. 
 " And he said, Thou shall persuade 
 " (him) and prevail also : GO FORTH, 
 " and DO so." (Here is the express 
 PERMISSION of the Almighty; and the 
 AGENCY of the Lying-Spirit is as clearly 
 declared in the preceding Sentence.) 
 " A'oro therefore, behold " (said the 
 Prophet of GOD to Ahab) " THE LORD 
 
 " HATH PUT A LYING-SPIRIT in the 
 <l mouth of all these thy prophets, and 
 " THE LORD hath spoken evil concern- 
 " ing thee" Thus it is manifest that 
 THE LORD, by the true Prophet, de- 
 nounced Evil against the wicked King, 
 whilst the Lying-Spirit, (which acted 
 by GOD'S PERMISSION,) promised favour 
 and prosperity, in order to deceive the 
 abandoned Monarch, who, like other 
 unbelievers, was always more ready to 
 
 believe
 
 40 -;; 
 
 believe a Lye, than the Truth. These 
 are incontestible proofs from the Old 
 Testament of a doctrine, which is still 
 more clearly taught in the New, that 
 Human Nature, by THE PERMISSION OF 
 GOD, is certainly liable to the attacks 
 and baneful influence or inspiration of 
 Spiritual Enemies (as the Devil entered 
 Judas) if we neglect that necessary re- 
 sistance to EVIL both in thoughts and 
 actions, which Christ and his Apos- 
 tles have so earnestly recommended 
 throughout the New Testament. 
 
 Now, though the reality of POSS FU- 
 SIONS is (I trust) fully demonstrated, yet 
 it may be necessary, perhaps, to vindi- 
 cate some particular passages of scrip- 
 ture, which this Author has violently 
 pressed into his service, as evidences of 
 a contrary doctrine. He itlls us in 
 page 229 that " When St. Paul says, 
 
 " WE KNOW THAT AN IDOL IS 
 
 " NOTHING ; (he expression" (says he) 
 
 " implies,
 
 14 
 
 w implies, that the NULLITY of the Hea* 
 " then Gods or DEMONS was a principle 
 *' admitted by himself, as well as enter- 
 " tained by those Christians whom he 
 " was now addressing," c. But the 
 Sophistry by which the Author of the 
 Essay endeavours to support that impli- 
 cation is scarcely worth our notice, now 
 that a fact so contrary to his Doctrine 
 concerning " THE ABSOLUTE NULLITY 
 " OF DEMONS"* is already clearly prov- 
 ed; yet in vindication of the text it is 
 necessary to remark, that notwithstand- 
 ing all these hold and confident asser- 
 tions of our modern Critic concerning 
 the opinion of the Apostle Paul, yet the 
 Apostle himself has not said a single 
 word about " the Nultity of Demons!" 
 His Expression (which has been wrested 
 to that purpose) declare indeed, that 
 " an Idol is nothing ," but the Sen- 
 tence contains not the least implication 
 
 * See Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Testament, 
 p. 187, 201,240; and 37 8. 
 
 F that
 
 42 
 
 that a Demon is Nothing? And even if 
 we could conceive that the Apostle un- 
 derstood the word Demon to signify a 
 Human Ghost (according to the doc- 
 trine of our Critir) * yet surely he 
 couid not mean that such an actual 
 Being as the immortal Soul of Man is a 
 NULLITY ! 
 
 v 
 
 Again; this Gentleman paraphrases 
 a -passage in the 1st Epistle to the 
 Corinthians x. 19. as follows : " Ear- 
 " nestly as I am dissuading you against 
 " joining with the Heathens in the 
 " Sacrifices or Festivals of their 
 
 * " It occurs there" (says he, speaking of the word 
 Demon in the New Testament) " above Jifty times in re- 
 '" fcrencc to possessions ; and ice have shewn above' (says 
 he) " that -when used in this connection, "whether by the 
 " Sacred Writers or others, it constantly denotes a HUMAN 
 " GHOST," p. 208. " For DEMONS'' (says he) " DE- 
 
 " NOTED THE GHOSTS OF WICKED MEN, of SHC/l 
 
 " especially as suffered a violent death" &c. p. 215, 210. 
 " Nor are Angels concerned" (says he) " in the present 
 '* question; or AX y SPIRITS, except those which once 
 
 ** dwelt IN fLESH AND T.^OOD, SiC. p. 151. 
 
 " DEMONS, 
 
 '
 
 43 
 
 " DEMONS, far be it from me to suggest, 
 " that these DEMONS have any degree 
 " of power, or that what is offered to 
 " them suffers any real pollution" 
 
 (Essay, p. 235). 
 
 By the same notable method of para- 
 phrasing, such a Master of sophistry as 
 this learned Gentlemen might charge 
 the Scriptures with whatever doctrines 
 he pleases, whether true or false ! for 
 when we look hack to the Apostle's real 
 Hoards, we cannot iind that Demons are 
 cither mentioned, or even implied, or to 
 be understood. " What say I then ?" 
 (said the Apostle) " that the IDOL is 
 *' any thing, or that which is offered in 
 " sacrifice io IDOLS is any thing." (1 
 Cor. x. 19.) Here the Apostle plainly 
 speaks of the Idols, and not of the De- 
 ma > which they represented; bid in 
 the very next Sentence in which De- 
 mons are. really mentioned, he is so fir 
 from esteeming them as Nullities, ami 
 
 the
 
 44 
 
 the tendency of his Argument neces- 
 sarily requires us to understand that 
 they are actual Beings superior to the 
 Idols, which represented them.* In 
 short, the Sense of the Apostle appears 
 manifestly to he as follows that though 
 THE IDOLS themselves (as in the passage 
 before cited) are nothing in the World, 
 yet the sacrifices offered to them are, 
 in effect, offered to DEMONS, and not to 
 the mere IDOLS, which indeed are but 
 
 * Inslat cnim ut supponens, quanquam IDOI.U'.VI 
 " Niiii-L EST, tanien D.T1MONIUM KSSE ALIQUID, 
 
 " ESSE MAJUS QUID QUAM 1DOJ.UM, ET POSSE ID, 
 
 " QUOD IDOLUM NON POTF.ST, nempc pollucre cibuin. 
 M Alias vero, si censcivt, IDOLUM ac D.T.MOXIUM es^c 
 <c idem, ccrte concesso IDOLUM niltil essc, conccdcret, 
 " ct D^MONIUM ni/iil essc, sicque niliil hac ratiocinatiuiic 
 14 promoi'cret.Videtur autem Apostolivs istud 
 " ^ji) non tantum habere ex Kthnicorum 
 41 exquc rei veritate, sed et ex locis Deut. (S: Psal. citatis 
 " supra." (\\7.. Deut. xxxii. 17- l^ai. cvi, :;7.) " Ja- 
 i! cobus paiiter, c. 2. 19- Aal*on SU.PPOXIT E&SE 
 
 U KES VIVAS, AC COGNITIONE,- IMO vrtl UNIUS- 
 " QUE DEI COGNITION" E AC TIMORE PRXDITAS. 
 " NON AUTEM CSSC 1DOLA ; NAM IIXC COON1TIOXE 
 
 " CAKE NT." See Gussetius's Hebrew Lexicon, upon 
 tin: word TV? P.Tmon. p. I j^p. 
 
 dead 
 
 *
 
 45 
 
 dead and senseless nullities ; and there- 
 fore the Cup and the Table of DEMONS, 
 (not of Idols) are contrasted with the- 
 Cup and the Table of the LORD by the 
 same Apostle (1 Cor. x. 21.). 
 
 But notwithstanding the erroneous' 
 doctrine of this Author about " the 
 " Nullity of Demons" he roundly as- 
 serts" that the Spirits which we retkottg/it 
 '* to possess men were human Spirits," 
 (note in p. 335) though he has not the 
 least authority in scripture to justify 
 his assertion, lie attempts indeed 
 to prove from the Septuagint transla- 
 tion that " Demons are called Dead 
 " Men" but let the Reader judge with 
 " what little foundation !" ' it may be 
 ' observed ' (says he in a note, p. 225) 
 ' with respect to Ps. cvi. 37.' " ALL 
 
 " THE GODS OF THE HEATHEN ARE 
 
 " DEMONS," ' that what are here, by 
 4 the Septuagint, called DEMONS, are 
 ' called DEAD MEN,' v. 28. ('
 
 46 
 
 * $v?tzc; vzxpov} :c.' that is, " they 
 " eat. the sacrifices of the Dead" 
 
 But this affords no proof that DEMONS 
 are called DEAD MEN. The Sacrifices 
 there mentioned are not spoken of as 
 sacrifices, made to the Dead, but rather 
 for the Dead: as SVCIZQ I'&ipcov pro- 
 perly -signifies Sacrifices of (he Dead,, 
 as well as the Syriac Translation of that 
 passage, jJS^^ot J-AJL^I viz. Sacrifice? 
 OF the Dead, that is, Sacrifices made hi 
 behalf of the Dead, which is a practice 
 among several Heathen Nations even 
 to this day : and as the Spirit of Anti- 
 christ has so notoriously introduced the 
 most capital HEATHEN Customs into the 
 Church .of ROME,* we cannot be at a 
 
 loss 
 
 * The late ingenious Dr. Parsons in his ** Remains f 
 " Japhet,"p. '200, 201 citjcs from the Editor of Colonel 
 Grant's treatise, in the " Journal t ganger," scvcraite- 
 tnarkablu testiinonics of this. ' The Jesuit*, GUUKBER 
 
 * and DESIDERI, and also FATHER HORACE DE. LA 
 ' PON A, a Capuchin, hare obser-ed a great conformity 
 ' between the ROMAS Religion and that of TIBET," 
 Aic. /' FATHER
 
 47 
 
 loss about the true meaning of the HEA- 
 THEN " Sacrifices of the Dead;' if we 
 
 com- 
 
 " FATHER GREBILLON observes also, with astonish- 
 4t went, that THE LAMAS HAVE THE USE OF HOLT 
 
 "" WATERPRAYERS FOR THE DEAD, &C. MAKE 
 
 " PROCESSIONS; HONOUR THE UELICKS OF THEIR 
 " SAINTS, or rather their IDOLS ; they have MONASTE- 
 
 " RIES, AND CONVENTS OF YOUNG WOMEN, &C. 
 
 " they mortify their Bodies, particularly with the DISCI- 
 *' PLINE, or WHIPS," &c. " FATHER GRUEBKR '' 
 (says he) " has seen all this:" " and HORACE DELA 
 *' PON A, for his part, says, that the Religion of TIBET 
 " is like an image of that of ROME. They make alms, 
 " prayers, and SACRIFICES FOR THE DEAD; they 
 " have CONVENTS, wherein they make VOKS of Chastity 
 " and Poverty," Sue. The DISCIPLINE or FLAGEL- 
 LATION practised in the Church of florae, was a very- 
 ancient Kite of Heathenism, nf which the JKSI/IT PEUE 
 JLAFITAU has produced a great variety of Examples in 
 his " Mawrs <les Salvages Ameriquwns comparees am 
 " Ma:urs des premiers Temp*." Tome I. w. 273 313, 
 &c. 
 
 Poor innocent Girls nd Boys wcrt flogged in th 
 most cruel manner till their flesh was torn off their backs : 
 " les jeunetfilles etoient DECHIREES A COUPS DE 
 " VERGES, de la maniere les je tines gens I'ctoient a 
 " SPARTE decant I'Autel de la DIANE OKTHIE," 
 &c. " On/?agelloitccsjcv?ics gensavec TANT DE CRIT- 
 *' AUTE, qite le Sang ruisseloit de touted les parties de. 
 " Icur corps : On nc les ?>icnageoit en aucune maniere," 
 &c. " Lorsqu'ih etoient dans i/n etat si pitoyable, au'oA 
 *' uefrappoit plus quc SUR DES MEMBRES DECHIRES,
 
 48 
 
 compare them with the Romish Masses 
 and Propitiations made FOR THE DEAD in 
 all Popish Countries ! so that this Text 
 affords no proof at all that Demons are 
 called Dead Men. He nevertheless 
 asserts, that St. Paul " and the other 
 " Apostles, by DEMONS meaned the 
 
 " GHOSTS OF DEAD MEN ; and THEY 11S6 
 
 " the word" (says he) " as the An- 
 " dents did, sometimes in a good, at 
 " other times in a bad sense" (p. 219). 
 But the very learned Mr. Mede (from 
 v horn this Author seems to have too 
 hastily borrowed this notion about the 
 Ghosts of Dead Men) does not mention 
 any such supposition as the Scripture 
 sense of the word, but only as the 
 
 " rtquon fijoutoit VI.AYE sun PL A YE, il scleroit entre 
 41 eit.i' un coinhat d' emulation a qui soujfriroit daiantage 
 " et tcmoigneroit mieicx sa Constance," &c. A Practice so 
 total!)- contrary to human Nature, and yet so universally 
 submitted to by the Heather. Nations, cannot possibly be 
 accounted for on any other principle than the iuspira- 
 Il>jn of SATAN, the Grand Enewi/ of Mankind ! 
 
 Doc-
 
 49 
 
 Doctrine of the Gentiles.* And with 
 respect to the good or bad sense of the 
 word, the same learned Writer declares, 
 that " the word JztttOMW is in the 
 
 *' Scripture NEVER TAKEN IN THE BET- 
 " TER or INDIFFERENT SENSE, howsoever 
 
 " prophane Authors do so use it, but 
 
 " ALWAYS in an EVIL SENSE, for THE 
 
 " DEVIL or an EVIL SPIRIT. Now the 
 
 " Signification of words in Scripture is 
 
 " to be esteemed and taken 1 ' (says he) 
 
 " only according to the Scripture's use t 
 
 " though other writers use them other- 
 
 " mse," (p. 782). 
 
 And in the next paragraph he warns 
 us of a distinction very necessary to be 
 made, concerning the use of the word 
 in Scripture, viz. " That be- 
 
 * " I come HQ-K" (says he) " vnto another part of this 
 " Doctrine" (meaning the DOCTRIN E o r THE C.KN- 
 TILES im ntioned in the preceding Sentence) " which 
 '* concerned the original O/"DKMONS, -tchwn you shall jii.d 
 
 " to be THE HK1F1KD SOVLS OF MEtf AFTEtt 
 
 " HEATH." J. Mide, Book III. c. 4. j.. 17 n. 
 
 o " cause
 
 50 
 
 " cause those which the Gentiles took for 
 " DEMONS, and for DEIFIED SOULS OF 
 " THEIR WORTHIES, uere indeed no other 
 " than EVIL SPIRITS, counterfeiting the 
 " Souls of Men deceased, and marking 
 " themselves under the names of such 
 " supposed DAEMONS, under that colour lo 
 " seduce Mankind; therefore the Scrip- 
 " ture useth the name DAEMONS for that 
 " Iheywere indeed, and not for what they 
 " seemed to be," &c. (p. 782). 
 
 But though the word DEMON is al- 
 ways taken in an evil sense (as Mr. 
 Mede very justly remarks, and never in 
 the better or indifferent sense), yet the 
 same learned Writer in the next para- 
 graph hut one, endeavours to shew that 
 it is not always used in the worst sense. 
 The Distinction however between these 
 comparative terms evil sense, and worst 
 sense, is much too nice and refined for 
 the subject in question ; insomuch that 
 Ihe learned Author has not only been 
 
 misunder-
 
 51 
 
 misunderstood by many of his Readers, 
 but seems to have laid a foundation for 
 such opinions as he himself would have 
 been very averse to, and such as cannot 
 by any means be fairly drawn from any 
 of the Texts which he examined on that 
 occasion. The first Text that he men- 
 tions (viz. Acts xvii. 18. " This Fellow 
 " see me I h to be a setler-forth of strange 
 DEMONS)" affords no proof whatever of 
 the Scripture sense of the word DEMON. 
 The Sentence is not given as the words 
 of Revelation or Instruction, but only as 
 an opinion ftf some heathen Philosophers, 
 who expressed themselves according to 
 their own false ideas of DEMONS ; and 
 therefore it cannot afford any proof of 
 the real scripture sense of the word 
 DEMON : neither can any good or in- 
 different meaning of that word be witli 
 certainty implied in the Apostle's 
 answer. Because it does not appear 
 that he hud the least intention to explain 
 the real and piojrer qualities of DEMONS, 
 
 for
 
 52 
 
 for he only retorts upon the Athenians 
 their own charge about Demons that he 
 perceived them (GJC *ftWt-$mW<rt?v(;) 
 too Superstitious, or too full of Demons 
 already (as Mr. Mede translates it) with- 
 out the least intimation whether the 
 word was to be understood in a good or 
 bad sense ; though indeed, as the pur- 
 pose of his oration was to draw them 
 FROM Demon Worship, the latter is 
 rather to be presumed. The next pas- 
 sage of Scripture cited by Mr. Mede on 
 this occasion is from the Revelations, c. 
 ix. ver. 13. viz. " That they should not 
 " worship Azw.wiz and Idols of Gold" 
 Sec. He shews that this Prophecy relates 
 to the latter times, and is applicable only 
 to those backsliding Christians who 
 worship Demon Gods; whereby he means 
 the Souls of Dead Men : lor he adds 
 " Here therefore" (says he) " Aznwi'iw 
 " (Demon) is again taken in the common 
 " and philosophical sense, or at least, 
 " which is all one, for EVIL SPIRITS, 
 
 " vcr-
 
 *' worshipped under the names of 
 " DAEMONS and DECEASED SOULS," (p. 
 784). So that this Text by no means 
 proves either that Demons are really 
 Human Souls, or that they are not to be 
 understood in an evil sense; but only 
 that they are really evil Spirits, wor- 
 shipped under the names of Demons and 
 deceased Souls, according to the corrup- 
 ted notions of the Gentiles. 
 
 The third Text, which he cites, af- 
 fords as little authority, as the two for- 
 mer, to support his notion that the word 
 Demon is not to be understood in the 
 worst sense; because we have nothing 
 to do with the Gentile Opinion of its 
 meaning, when the same is not express- 
 ly declared in the Text of which no- 
 thing appears. " Ye cannot drink the 
 " Cup of THE LORD and the dtp of 
 " DEMONS, ye cannot be parlakers of 
 " THE LORD'S Table, and of the Table 
 " of Demons." (i Cor. x. 21.) Neither 
 
 indeed
 
 54 
 
 indeed in the former Verse 
 " Things which (he Gentiles sacrifice 
 *' they sacrifice to DEMONS, and not to 
 " GOD." DEMONS are manifestly men- 
 tioned in both these verses as the oppo- 
 site extreme to INFINITE GOODNESS : 
 from whence arises the force of the 
 Apostle's argument concerning the ab- 
 solute impossibility of partaking of God's 
 benefits, if we hold any degree of fel- 
 lowship whatsoever with Beings that are 
 totally opposite in their Nature. " Ye 
 " CANNOT drink the Cup of THE LORD, 
 " and the Cup of DEMONS," &c. It is 
 therefore manifest that Demons, in this 
 place also, must be understood in the 
 worst Sense, as being the very opposite 
 Extreme to God, and to Goodness. 
 " .Wot that the WOODEN IDOL " (as Mr. 
 Mede himself remarks) " was ought of 
 *' itself, bat that the Gentiles supposed 
 " there dwelt some DEMON therein, who 
 " received their sacrifices, and lo whom 
 " they intended their services." And 
 
 Yet
 
 55 
 
 yet the Gentiles' opinion of the matter 
 (as I before remarked) is not of suffici- 
 ent authority to instruct us in the Scrip- 
 ture sense of the word. 
 
 The only remaining passage of Scrip- 
 ture wherein Mr. Mede supposes there 
 is an allusion to the Gentiles' conceit of 
 Demons, is the Text which he has pre- 
 fixed to the beginning of his Tract on 
 " The Apostasy of the latter Times" 
 viz. ( 1 Tim. c. iv. ver. 1,2, &c.) " How- 
 " beit the Spirit speaketh expressly, that 
 " in the latter times some should revolt 
 " from the Faith, attending to ERRO- 
 " NEOUS " (as he translates the word 
 ~\ZVOIQ, whicii is more properly render- 
 ed SEDUCING) " Spirits and Doctrines 
 " of Demons," &c. . 
 
 This Opinion depends upon his inter- 
 pretation of the words JtSvLffxaLw JM- 
 lioncov Doctrine of Demons. " A'b/ " 
 (^ays he) " which DEMONS or DEVILS are 
 
 " Authors
 
 56 
 
 " Authors of (though that be true) as 
 " if the Genitive Case were Active ; but 
 
 " DOCTRINES CONCERNING DEMONS; 
 
 " the Genitive Case Jziaowof being 
 " here " (says he) " to be taken pas- 
 " steely for the object of these Doctrines; 
 " as in Hebr. vi. 2. we have ot$z%zi 
 " GfUtltetuav doctrines of Baptisms, and 
 " doctrines of laying on of hands, of the 
 " resurrection of the Dead, and of eter- 
 " nal judgment, that is " (says he) 
 44 Doctrines about and concerning all 
 " these" &c. And therefore he con- 
 cluded that the 4i$Z5m).izi SsqtoW&V 
 " are Doctrines of Damons, or Doctri- 
 " nte Deastrorum ; that is," (says he) 
 " The Gentiles' 1 idolatrous Theology of 
 " Daemons should be revived among 
 " Christians," &c. 2d Vol. p. 771. 
 
 But in order to introduce this conr 
 struction, Mr. Mede is obliged to leave 
 the literal interpretation of the preced- 
 ing verse, which ought never to be clone 
 
 with-
 
 without a necessity ; and there is, cer- 
 tainty, no necessity in the present 
 case. 
 
 The Words 
 X\QLV$tQ (which are literally rendered 
 " attending to SEDUCING Spirits ") he is 
 obliged to construe -" attending to 
 " ERRONEOUS Doctrines " but the 
 word ERRONEOUS by no means ex- 
 presses the full meaning of the word 
 x\WQ$ t which, either as an adjective 
 or substantive, signifies rather one who, 
 in an ACTIVE SENSE, is a Seducer, 
 or Deceiver, than one who, PASSIVELY, 
 is seduced, and is erroneous, or in error. 
 The word is. no where used in the New 
 Testament, I believe, in this latter 
 sense, though it is several times used 
 in the former ACTIVE SENSE : as for 
 instance, in 2d John, ver. 7. o7i xok\oi 
 
 Gy)J$QV tlQ TOV K05{JLO}', &C. " For 
 
 many Deceivers are gone out into the 
 World" &c. and the active sense of 
 
 H > the
 
 58 
 
 the word is still more strongly pointed 
 out by the application of it in the end 
 of the same verse to the first Mover of 
 Deceit, the Spirit of Antichrist, by whom 
 the visible Deceivers before mentioned 
 were most certainly actuated : " QUTQQ 
 " 0rw o #>./'& mi'6 df>riXpt&T<&>," that 
 is, not merely a Deceiver and an 
 Antichrist, as rendered in the common 
 English Translation ; for the Article o 
 before each substantive marks the Em- 
 phasis " This is THE Deceiver and 
 ." THE Antichrist" &c. denoting that 
 the many Deceivers (xokXoi ~\QLVOI) are 
 actuated by the Angels or power of one 
 principal Deceiver, who is called d 
 3\W&* THE Deceiver, and AvTVflp&zG* 
 THE Antichrist, by way of eminence, as 
 being the Father and Director of all 
 other Deceivers, because " he that 
 " committeth Sin is of the Devil ; for 
 " the Devil sinneth from the 'Jjegin- 
 <l ning" (1 John iii. 8.) and is the 
 Father of Lies, or, as the Apostle ex- 
 pressly
 
 59 
 
 pressly describes him* " he is a 
 ** and the Father of it" (John, 
 44. } He is therefore emphatically: THE 
 Deceiver and THE Antichrist by way of 
 Eminence, as the First Mover and in- 
 stigator (either by himself' or his Angels}' 
 of all other Deceivers r and therefore 
 as the word x\a>y~ in this Text cannot; 
 be understood otherwise than as a 
 Deceiver or Seducer* it is. clear that 
 xvsvuxoi rX^rs/c rnust signify Seducing 
 er Deceiving- Spirit^ and not Erroneous 
 &actrines> as Mr. Mede, to favour a 
 particular opinion, has construed it. . 
 
 And with respect to his Supposition 
 that the Substantive XVSWLOLGI Spirits,. 
 which is joined with the last- mentioned 
 Adjective^ must signify Doctrines * in 
 this place, and not Spirits, it is evident 
 that the Text, which he has cited as an 
 
 * " But I Had rattier* (sap Mr. Mede) " takj 
 " SPIRITS in t/tk plate for DOCTRINES tfovseht*? 
 *c.(p,770>, 
 
 txam-
 
 60 
 
 example, does not necessarily demand 
 such a construction, but, on the con- 
 trary, requires rather a literal render- 
 ing viz, (1 John iv. 1. ^ xoufli 
 xvsmaJi xiffTsvsls, " Believe not every 
 " Spirit" i. e. (says Mr. Mede) " every 
 " Doctrine :" but if the reason why this 
 adviqe is given (" Believe not every 
 '* Spirit") be duly considered, we shall 
 see no room for such an interpreta- 
 tion : happily the remaining part of 
 the same verse contains this reason 
 " Because many false Prophets are 
 " gone put into the florid." Now all 
 Prophets are supposed to be actuated by 
 the inspiration of some Spirit, either 
 good or bad, and not by mere human 
 sasracity. A remarkable instance of a 
 
 / 
 
 Lying-Spirit sent expressly to deceive 
 Ahab " in the mouth of all his Pro- 
 phets," has already been quoted ; and 
 the Spirit is always said to speak, 
 though the Prophet himself is the pnly 
 visible organ of communication. And 
 
 therefore
 
 61 
 
 therefore " as many false Prophets'* 
 were " gone out into the world," as well 
 in the time of Ahab, as in the time of 
 the Apostle who gave this advice, it is 
 manifest, that the latter intended there- 
 by to warn true Believers that they 
 should prove the Inspiration or the 
 Nature of the Spirits which actuated 
 the Prophets in the primitive Church, 
 and that they might carefully distin- 
 guish whether these Prophets spoke by 
 the Spirit of God, or the Spirit of Anti- 
 christ ; and in such a case it would be 
 absurd to mention the mere effect (the 
 Doctrine or Prophecy) instead of the 
 cause, or First Movers of the Prophets, 
 the Spirits themselves ! " Try the 
 " Spirits whether they be of God, be- 
 ff cause many FALSE PROPHETS ARE 
 if gone out into the world" We can- 
 not discern nor judge, indeed, con- 
 cerning the nature of invisible Spirits 
 but by the DOCTRINES of the Prophets ; 
 yet, even so, the Spirits themselves are 
 
 sufficiently
 
 62 
 
 sufficiently known, and are as readi!j 
 distinguished as a Tree by its fruits. 
 " Hereby Know we (he SPIRIT OF TRUTH 
 " and the SPIRIT OF ERROR" (ver. 6.) 
 which, in the proving of Prophets* 
 must refer us, back to the First Cause 
 or Spirit, by which each Prophet is in- 
 spired; especially as the Apostle in. the 
 13th Verse of the same Chapter adds 
 as folio ws,-r-" Hereby know ice that we 
 " d^ell m him> and HE IN us, because 
 " he hath given us OF HIS SPIRIT." We 
 are not by this to understand only that 
 God " hath given us of his" DOCTRINE 
 (though that is certainly true likewise) 
 but that he hath given ws AN ACTUAL 
 
 INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT,, to 
 
 which all sincere believers have an un- 
 questionable claim, the Bodies of true 
 Christians being the Temples of the 
 Holy Ghost, which I have fully demon- 
 strated, I trust, in the preceding Tract. 
 So that; " the Spirit of Truth" which 
 the Apostle, in the above-cited chapter 
 
 instructs
 
 63 
 
 instructs us to know, or distinguish from 
 ** the Spirit of Error" cannot signify 
 merely " the Doctrine of Truth" but Is 
 undoubtedly the Paraclete or Comfor- 
 ter ; that real divine Spirit which Christ 
 promised to send to his Church ** from 
 " the Father" (John xv. 26.) distin- 
 guishing his personality by this very ap- 
 pellation TO XVDIUK TT &.1$toff$ " the 
 " Spirit of Truth" (said he) " which 
 " proceedeth from the Father, he shnU 
 " testify of me" The same " Spirit of 
 " Truth " which "will guide " (us) " info 
 " all truth : for he shall not SPEAK of 
 " himself" (said our Lord) " but 
 " whatsoever HE SHALL HEAR, that 
 * SHALL HE SPEAK : and he will shew 
 " you things to come" (John xvi. 13.) 
 Surely these expressions necessarily 
 imply a personality : for though a Doc- 
 trine may, in one sense, be said to speak 
 to us, or instruct us, yet it cannot with 
 any possible propriety be said to Hear, 
 and, much less, to speak what it hears; 
 
 neither
 
 04 
 
 neither can it shew us things to come ! 
 And again, though a Doctrine may be 
 represented in an allegorical Figure, 
 yet no Doctrine whatever can assume 
 the visible figure or appearance of Fire, 
 or of fiery Tongues ; nor can a Doctrine^ 
 of itself manifest a reality of Being by 
 sensible effects on the Organs of Hear- 
 ing by an outward audible " SOUND 
 " like as of a mighty rushing Wind" 
 nor demonstrate the least degree of 
 personal existence by imparting the su- 
 pernatural Gifts of Prophecy, of un- 
 known tongues, of healing, and work- 
 ing miracles, Sec. And therefore " the 
 " Spirit of Truth' 1 cannot possibly sig- 
 nify the mere " doctrine of truth," as 
 I before remarked, but a real Spirit, 
 and consequently " the Spirit of error," 
 to which it is opposed in the same 
 sentence, (1 John iv. 6.) is undoubtedly 
 a real Spirit also ; the same that I 
 have already proved to be 6 X\OLV@* 
 d wrt%ptffT<&* THE Deceiver, and THE 
 
 ^Antichrist*
 
 05 
 
 Antichrist, that inspires and actuates 
 all other Deceivers, " that Old Serpent 
 " called the DEVIL and SATAN which 
 if DECEIVETH the whole world," (Rev. 
 xii. 9.) " the Prince of the power of the 
 " Air, THE SPIRIT that NOW \VORKETH 
 
 " IX THE CHILDREN OF DISOBEDIENCE." 
 
 (Eph. ii. 2.) 
 
 These several Texts, therefore, clear- 
 ly point out to us the true meaning of 
 the Apostle's advice " Beloved, believe 
 " not every SPIRIT, but try the SPIRITS 
 " whether they are of God." (1 John 
 iv. 1.) The " many False Prophets" 
 that were then (and are now) " gone 
 " out into the World," are undoubtedly 
 " Children of disobedience" in whom 
 " workcth" THE SPIRIT, " which de- 
 (t ceivclh the whole world" The Fa- 
 ther of Lies even THE DEVIL or his 
 dngels ; because " he that committelh 
 " sin is of THE DEVIL." (1 John iii. 8.) 
 The' known Influence of this danger- 
 I ous
 
 66 
 
 ous Spiritual Enemy on the Minds of 
 Men, rendered the Apostle's advice 
 necessary ! " Try the Spirits whether 
 " they are of God!" That is, whether 
 the Spirits of the Prophets were obe- 
 dient to " the Spirit of God," which 
 is expressly mentioned in the very next 
 verse as THE SPIRIT to be distinguished, 
 or known, on the one hand (viz. 
 " Hereby know ye THE SPIRIT OF 
 " GOD," &c.) or whether, on the other 
 hand, they were deceived and influenced, 
 by the contrary SPIRIT, mentioned in 
 the 3d verse, viz. " that of Antichrist" 
 (TO TV oufl*%jptOTv) which was permitted 
 to come INTO THE WORLD, " and even 
 " now already" (said the Apostle) " is 
 " IT IN THE WORLD." But notwith- 
 standing the extraordinary power which 
 (apparently for the probation and trial 
 of Mankind) is allowed to our spiritual 
 Enemy IN THIS WORLD, yet his power 
 can have no effect on those Men that 
 are truly Christians, and partake of the 
 
 Spirit
 
 07 
 
 Spirit of God, or as the Apostle ex- 
 presses himself in the very next verse 
 (4th) " are of God" because (says 
 he) " Greater is he that is IN YOU, 
 " than he (hat is in the world :" * which 
 is manifestly a Comparison (not of the 
 mere Doctrines of Men, but) still of the 
 influencing Spirits, which are also fur- 
 ther distinguished in the 6th verse by 
 the Test of obedience to the Gospel. 
 " We ARE OF GOD" (says the Apostle). 
 " He that knoweth God, heareth us" 
 (viz. the Apostles, and first promulga- 
 tors of the Gospel) : " he that is not of 
 " God heareth not us : hereby know we 
 
 " THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH and THE SPIRIT 
 
 " OF ERROR." And in the 12th, 13th, 
 15th, and 16th verses of the same chap- 
 
 * " He that is in THE WORLD" is elsewhere called 
 " the Spirit of TK WORLD," (1 Cor. ii. 1 2. wherein he 
 is expressly mentioned as the opposite Spirit to " ihs 
 " Spirit which is of God "). He is also intituled " the 
 " Prince of Tins WORLD,'' (John xii. 31, xiv. 30. xvi. 
 16.) whereby is plainly declared his power IN Tin* 
 
 \yORLD. 
 
 ter,
 
 68 
 
 ter, we are expressly assured that 
 " God dwelleth in us," if we entertain 
 that brotherly LOVE, which the Gospel 
 requires. This cannot mean the mere 
 Doctrine of Cod that " dwelleth in us" 
 but " the Spirit of God" " the Spirit 
 '** of Truth" which, throughout the 
 whole context, is so clearly contrasted 
 with " the Spirit of Antichrist ," " he 
 " that is in the world" " the Spirit of 
 " Error : " so that it would he absurd 
 to suppose that the words XMuyalt and 
 yw&jft&J$ Spirit and Spirits, mentioned 
 in the first verse of this chapter, signify 
 mere Doctrines, when the first Causes 
 or promoters of the Doctrines, the real 
 spiritual Agents themselves, are so dis- 
 tinctly mentioned and contrasted to- 
 gether in the context throughout the 
 whole Chapter ! And yet my learned 
 Friend the late Rev. Dr. Gregory 
 Sharp * was unwarily led away by the 
 
 * See his " Review of tlie Controversy about the 
 44 meaning of Demoniacks in t/ic New Testament " 
 (printed in 1739) pages 2p and 33. 
 
 Authority
 
 69 
 
 Authority of Mr. Mede to adopt the 
 same unwarrantable interpretation ! 
 
 This Text, therefore, from the First 
 Epistle of John (Chap. iv. ver. 1.) by 
 no means proves what Mr. Mede pro- 
 |>osed by citing it ; so that in construing 
 the other Text from 1 Tim. iv. ver. 1, 
 2, &c. we have no just authority to set 
 aside the literal meanin of the Words 
 
 " atlend- 
 
 " ing to seducing Spirits ; " which con- 
 sideration enables me to retort Mr. 
 Mede's conclusion on the opposite side 
 of the question, " So if this Sense" 
 (says he) " be admitted, we are some- 
 " thing less IN SUSPENSE than we were/' 
 Sec. (p. 170, 171.) 
 
 He means A SUSPENSE concerning 
 the true construction of the words which 
 immediately follow, viz. Ai&y.GWiki(tt 
 
 dzii'.oriC'H 1 Doctrines of Demons, which 
 he i* pleased to render " Doctrines 
 
 " con-
 
 70 
 
 " concerning Demons" (p. 771.) a 
 sense which cannot be admitted, when 
 the preceding Words MEVIUZM X\XVOIG 
 to Seducing Spirits are rendered accord- 
 ing to their literal and proper meaning ; 
 for these iix the sense of the following 
 words *' Doctrines of Demons," and 
 shew that the Apostle spoke of seducing 
 Spirits and Demons, as the promoters 
 of those wicked Doctrines which he 
 expressly foretold in the following Con- 
 text, viz. " Forbidding to marry, (and 
 tf commanding) to abstain from meats" 
 &c. Doctrines which unquestionably 
 mark and distinguish the Papal as well 
 as the Heathen dnlwhrist, though the 
 learned Mede has unaccountably over- 
 looked them : for He says " but sup- 
 " pose it to be so " (i. e. that the words 
 which literally signify seducing Spirits 
 may be construed " Erroneous Doc- 
 t( trines") " yet slill" (says he) " we 
 " are in suspense what these ERRONE- 
 " ous and IDOLATROUS DOCTRINES 
 
 " might
 
 71 
 
 * might be" But so learned and saga- 
 cious a Critic could not have been in 
 the least suspense about finding out the 
 erroneous Doctrines, had he not previ- 
 ously misled himself by setting aside 
 the plain literal construction of the pre- 
 ceding words seducing Spirits ; for 
 the Apostle has left no room for " *iw- 
 " pense" about the Doctrines, but has 
 expressly declared what they are, viz. 
 " the forbidding to marry, and com- 
 " man-ding to abstain from meats" both 
 of which 1 have elsewhere shewn to 
 have been heathen doctrines; so that 
 the revival of them in the backsliding 
 Christian Church is truly dcmontSal or 
 diabolical, and cannot be accounted fop 
 (as both the doctrines are totally con- 
 trary to the natural desires of Man* 
 
 V 
 
 kind) upon any other principles than 
 the interposition of seducing Spirits and 
 Demons, whom the Apostle has as clear- 
 ly declared to be the Authors of them ! 
 For the grammatical Construction of 
 
 the
 
 72 
 
 the Text in the original Greek unques- 
 tionably points out the Demons to be 
 the Authors of the Corrupt Doctrines 
 therein mentioned. The several par- 
 ticiples in the genitive plural, viz. 
 $&$tikbfap { , xxavrr,ot!ZZiJ.zvGi', and 
 xahuovror, have no other substantive 
 of that case to answer them, or to agree 
 with them, than Ay.iu.wicw which 
 immediately precedes them. This is not 
 at all obvious in the English version. 
 
 The word DEMONS cannot, therefore, 
 in this Text " be taken IN THE BETTER 
 
 " OR. MORE INDIFFERENT SENSE, as it 
 " was supposed and taken among the 
 " Theolcgists and Philosophers of the 
 " Gentiles," &c. according to Mr. 
 Mede's Assertion in p. 771, but only in 
 " an evil sense for DEVILS or EVIL 
 " SPIRITS," as it must always be under- 
 stood in Scripture agreeable to Mr. 
 Mede's own doctrine before quoted from 
 another part ef his Book. 
 
 The
 
 73 
 
 The learned Author of the Essay on 
 the Demoniacs should, as a Clergyman, 
 have endeavoured to correct, (and not 
 to build upon) the Jew errors that have 
 happened to escape the critical sagacity 
 of that excellent and worthy man Mr. 
 Mede (who was one of the most learn- 
 ed men of his time) ; but, on the con- 
 trary, this modern Divine is so prone 
 to catch at novelty, that he has even 
 wrested opinions from Mr. Mede, which 
 that truly worthy and learned Writer 
 never so much as conceived, though 
 the modern Critic has boldly cited his 
 Authority ! In the Introduction to his 
 Essay on the Demoniacs, page 2, he 
 tells us " it is necessary to shew, that 
 " the DISORDERS imputed to SUPERNA- 
 " TTRAL POSSESSIONS, proceed FROM 
 
 " NATURAL CAUSES, NOT FROM the 
 
 " Agency of any evil Spirits. This, in- 
 " deed, hath been already ATTEMPTED 
 " by several very eminent writers ; and, 
 " to my apprehension " (says he) " not 
 K " vith-
 
 74 
 
 " without considerable success" But, 
 unluckily for him, the very first Writer 
 whom he expressly cites in a Note as 
 one of these ATTEMPTERS (saying in a 
 Note particularly Mr. Joseph Mede t 
 Disc. VI. p. 28) ; unluckily I say for 
 the Author of the Essay, that very Mr. 
 Joseph Mede was an Advocate on the 
 other side of the question, and never 
 ATTEMPTED to propagate any such doc- 
 trine ; but on the contrary, " PARTI- 
 " CULARLY" asserts and maintains the 
 reality of Spiritual Possession in those 
 that were called Demoniacs; and this 
 he does in the very discourse to which 
 the Author of the late Essay on the De- 
 moniacs, &c. refers us for a contrary 
 
 attempt! * 
 
 The 
 
 * Other learned Men however, besides the Author of 
 the Essay on Demoniacs, have made (probably by too 
 hasty a perusal) the same mistake concerning the Opinion 
 of Mr. Mede on this Subject. A very learned and re- 
 ipectable friend of mine having accidentally mentioned to 
 me, some years ago, this novel doctrine of attiibuiing to 
 natural causes the Disorders of the Scripture Demoniacs,
 
 75 
 
 The Author of the Essay on Demo- 
 niacs is pleased not only to assert " the 
 
 " abso- 
 
 I expressed my surpri/e that he should have adopted it, 
 as well as my general disapprobation of the doctrine, in 
 the best terms I could ; in answer to which he referred 
 nie to the Works of this Mr. Joseph Mede ; and, as my 
 reply on the perusal of Mr. Medc's opinion will sufficient- 
 ly vindicate that excellent Writer from the supposed at- 
 tempt which the Author of the Essay on the Demoniacs, 
 &c. has too hastily attributed ,to him, I have here sub- 
 joined an Extract of the Letter which I wrote to my friend 
 on that occasion in the Year 1765, it being equally ap- 
 plicable to the present occasion, because my answer was 
 drawn, from that very discourse of Mr. Mede A and pro- 
 bably from the very page which the Author of the Essay 
 on the Demoniacs, &c. intended to refer to in page 2, for 
 a contrary Doctrine saying " Particularly Mr. Joseph 
 " Mede, Disc. VI. p. 28," but meaning p. 38, because 
 p. 28 belongs to another -discourse on a very different 
 Subject ! 
 
 Extract of a Letter from the Author to the Rev. 
 Dr. dated Aug. 9, 1765. 
 
 ' 1 bought Joseph Mede's Works on your recommen- 
 ' dation, and have read his discourse concerning Demo- 
 ' n iocs ;' wherein, though he does indeed say, that they 
 ' were ' " no other than such as we coll Madmen and 
 " Lunatics," ' yet near the bottom of the same page 
 (Disc. VI. p. 38) he adds' " Suck as these, I say, 
 ." the Jews bciie-icd (AMD so MAT WE) to be troubled 
 
 " and
 
 ** absolute Nullity of Demons " (p. 187, 
 234, 240, and 378) " that there were 
 " no such Beings as DEMONS in the 
 " World, or that they were as void of 
 " power as if they did not exist" (p. 
 344, 345) but also that our Saviour 
 and the Evangelists " never assert the 
 " reality of DEMONIACAL POSSESSIONS, 
 " or represent it as a part of THAT DOC- 
 " TRINE which they were immediately 
 
 " and actuated with EVIL SPIRITS, as it is said of Saul's 
 " Melanchotyy that AN EVIL SPIRIT from the Lord 
 " troubled him," &c. 
 
 ' Thus it is plain that Mr. Mede did not believe the 
 ' Demoniacs to be mere M admen > according to our 
 
 * modern ideas of madness ; and his discourse plainly 
 
 * tends to a very different purpose, viz. to shew, that some 
 
 * Madmen cien at this day are really DEMONIACS, 
 ' troubled and actuated BY KVIL SPIRITS as much as 
 ' those mentioned in Scripture ! How far this opinion 
 ' may be true, with respect to some modern Madmen, J 
 ' am not able to determine ; but that the Dcnoniacs 
 
 * mentioned in Scripture were REALLY POSSESSED BY 
 
 * EVIL SPIRITS, appears to be so plain a truth not only 
 
 * by Mr. Mede's arguments, but by a multitude of pas- 
 ' SJa^e* in Scripture, that I cannot possibly doubt of it, 
 
 * notwithstanding that the Gentile opinion of Demons may 
 
 Utn lery dffirentt 
 
 " instructed
 
 77 
 
 " instructed and commissioned by Hea* 
 " ven to publish and confirm" And he 
 is pleased to add, that This is a fact 
 which cannot be denied, &c. (p. 182) not- 
 withstanding that the Cases of the De- 
 moniacs are related by the Evangelists 
 in the plainest literal terms (and that re- 
 peatedly) that could possibly be found 
 to express the REALITY OF FACTS ! And 
 with respect to his assertion about THE 
 DOCTRINE, we are as clearly taught by 
 the Evangelists that Demons were Evil- 
 Spirits, and Unclean-Spirits (for they 
 are repeatedly so denominated in the 
 sacred Text). We surely have ample 
 warning of our being liable to the in- 
 cursion of Evil-Spirits, for it is a fact 
 which cannot " be denied," that RESIS- 
 TANCE to SPIRITUAL ADVERSARIES 
 [" the Devil and his dngels" Your 
 " Adversary the Devil," &c. " walk- 
 " eth about " " whom RESIST." 1 Pet. 
 v. 8, 9. " RESIST the Devil and he will 
 " flee from you" James iv. 7. " We 
 
 " wrestle
 
 " wrestle not against FLESH and BLOOD, 
 " but against principalities, against 
 " powers" &c. Eph. vi. 12.] is a very 
 material, if not a principal " part OF 
 " THAT DOCTRINE which the Apostles 
 " were instructed and commissioned by 
 tf Heaven to publish and confirm ;" so 
 that the Hypothesis of the above-cited 
 Writer is entirely opposite and contra- 
 dictory to the evidence of Scripture, 
 
 though he so confidently affects to build 
 
 * f 
 
 on that foundation \ 
 
 His Suppositions, for they are merely 
 such, about Demons, are principally 
 built on other suppositions of imaginary 
 " inconveniencies attending the belief 
 " of our being in the power of any 
 " SUPERIOR malevolent Spirits : " 
 " this belief" (says he) " hath a di- 
 " rect tendency to subvert the founda- 
 " tion of natural piety, and to beget 
 " Idolatry and Superstition" (p. 168). 
 And so indeed it would, if it 
 
 were
 
 79 
 
 were true that these malevolent Spi- 
 rits were really SUPERIOR. But the 
 fallacy of this Gentleman's argument 
 consists in the insertion of that single 
 adjective SUPERIOR, of which he likewise 
 avails himself in a similar argument 
 at page 234, viz. " that Our Religion 
 " supposes and asserts the sole Do-mi- 
 " nion of Jehovah and his Messiah over 
 " the human Race, and in so doing, 
 " utterly subverts the claims of all other 
 " SUPERIOR Beings to interpose in hu- 
 " man Affairs :" and in the next sen- 
 tence he denies that Demons have any 
 power over Mankind, whether it be 
 original or subordinate. But surely we 
 may believe in the existence and 
 activity of malevolent Spirits or Demons, 
 without supposing them SUPERIOR ! 
 The Scriptures sufficiently instruct us, 
 that they can have no superiority over 
 us, whilst we are vigilant and careful to 
 resist them, and every suggestion of 
 Evil ; but if at any time we neglect that 
 
 material
 
 80 
 
 material duty (which is certainly re- 
 quired of us till the last moment of our 
 Lives) they will inevitably obtain the 
 Superiority, and lead us to destruction ! 
 - This is unquestionably a " part of 
 " that Doctrine which they " (the Apos- 
 tles) " were immediately instructed and 
 tf commissioned by Heaven to publish 
 " and confirm" which, I hope, is 
 already demonstrated in the foregoing 
 pages, thou'gh this learned Critic is 
 pleased to assert the contrary ! 
 
 He refers us in page 168, from the 
 passage already recited, to a similar 
 strain of reasoning in page 100, of his 
 Dissertation on Miracles. " If the 
 " course of Nature be not under the Sole 
 ' direction of God" (says he) " what 
 " foundation can there be for our ivor- 
 " ship of God alone, and for the con- 
 " tinual exercises of gratitude and sub- 
 " mission to htm in every condition?" 
 (which is certainly true ; but then he is 
 
 pleased
 
 81 
 
 pleased to tack to it a groundless sup- 
 position of his own, which is by no 
 means chargeable to the nature of our 
 belief concerning " MALEVOLENT SPI- 
 " HITS)." " If we believe " (says he) 
 " that other invisible Beings can INTER- 
 " POSE in our affairs AT THEIR OWN 
 " PLEASURE, and either inflict punish- 
 " ments or bestow blessings upon u$ 
 " such as are quite out of the ordinary 
 " course of Nature, and contrary to it ; 
 " could we consider ourselves as under 
 " the protection and government of 
 " God?" Thus he combats an ob- 
 stacle merely of his own raising ! 
 The Art of Sophistry consists, first, in 
 blending Falsehood with Truth, and 
 then in drawing plausible conclusions 
 from the unnatural combination ! This 
 Key, carefully used, will unlock the 
 most intricate sophistical argument 
 against Truth. May we not reasonably 
 believe that invisible Spiritual Beings 
 -have power to interpose in our affairs, 
 
 L without
 
 without supposing, (what this Gentle- 
 man erroneously sets forth as a neces- 
 sary consequence,) that they interpose, 
 
 &C. " AT THEIR OWN PLEASURE !'* 
 
 By incontestable authority of Scripture 
 we believe that such Beings act by 
 God's PERMISSION, and that such PER- 
 MISSION is by no means inconsistent 
 with the necessary Doctrine thai " the 
 " course of nature is under the sole di- 
 *' reel ion of God;" though this Critic 
 is pleased to assert in the preceding Sen- 
 tence concerning the said permission, 
 that " this alone would be destructive 
 " to all true piety" (p. 100) which is a 
 Doctrine not only totally void of foun- 
 dation, but even contrary to the evir 
 dence of many notorious facts very 
 clearly related in the Scriptures ! 
 
 A Belief in the agency and activity of 
 " the Devil and his Angels ' (as clearly 
 inculcated in the Scriptures) is by no 
 means derogatory to the necessary and 
 
 comfort-
 
 83 
 
 comfortable " belief, that the World is 
 " under (he Government of God alone " 
 though this Critic (in the preface to 
 his Dissertation on Miracles, p. vi.) in- 
 sinuates the contrary. The Scriptures 
 sufficiently inform us that there is no 
 power without the permission of the 
 ALMIGHTY, who proves mankind .by 
 their resistance to the malicious insin- 
 nuations of Spiritual Adversaries ; and 
 though the Malicious Dispositions tff 
 the latter are totally inimical to the 
 purposes and designs of INFINITE BE- 
 NEVOLENCE, yet even this natural pro- 
 pensity in them to evil is turned TO THE 
 GLORY OF GOD, and they themselves 
 are thereby rendered mere instruments 
 (as it were) in the hand of Providence 
 to carry on that great System of Trial 
 and Probation, which the Almighty has 
 been pleased to adopt in his Govern- 
 ment of the florid! This Doctrine may 
 be illustrated by a great Variety of Ex- 
 amples and Proofs from the Holy Scrip- 
 tures ;
 
 84 
 
 tures ; and therefore as we are favour- 
 ed with such ample warning concern- 
 ing the true nature of our spiritual war- 
 fare, the fault is our own, if we are 
 deceived and overcome by the Ene- 
 my ! 
 
 ' 
 
 It must (therefore) appear that this 
 Author does not state his objections 
 fairly, when he speaks (as above) of 
 " inconveniences attending our belief in 
 " the power of any SUPERIOR Malevo- 
 " lent Spirits," for our BELIEF in their 
 POWER is not of such a nature as to be 
 liable to his objections. Though we 
 believe that " Malevolent Spirits " have 
 POWER, yet we know, by Scripture au- 
 thority, that their POWER is not absolute, 
 but only conditional, viz. in case we be- 
 come negligent in that spiritual warfare 
 to which God has appointed us in this 
 World : for to what purpose does the 
 Apostle Peter warn us to " be vigilant" 
 but because he assures us that our 
 
 " Adver-
 
 85 
 
 " .Adversary the Devil, as a roaring 
 " lion, walketh about seeking whom he 
 44 may devour?" (1 Pet v. 8). Whereas 
 if our Adversary had no such power of 
 AGENCY against us, the warning of the 
 Apostle would be vain and nugatory, 
 which is not to be conceived, especially 
 as our Lord himself has also given sufti* 
 cient intimations of it, and even of his 
 attempts upon that very Apostle, whose 
 warning I have quoted above. 
 
 Another Apostle also assures us that, 
 if we RESIST our Adversary as we 
 ought, he will flee from us,* and 
 consequently it may fairly be implied 
 from thence, that if we neglect the said 
 necessary advice, he mil really accom- 
 pany us ! But in this he would seem to 
 have a great deal too much work upon 
 his hands, if the Assertion of this 
 Author in page 207 were really true, 
 that " the Scripture speaks of no more 
 
 * " Resist THE DEVIL, and he willjlcc from you* 
 James iv. 7. 
 
 " than
 
 86 
 
 " than ONE DEVIL, and never confounds 
 " him with Demons" To attend innu- 
 merable Multitudes of unguarded Indi- 
 viduals separately and personally (for 
 innumerable Multitudes of Individuals 
 undoubtedly there are, which neglect 
 the Apostle's Warningof reslstan ce) 
 would surely be too much employment, 
 for ONE DEVIL, \vithout further spiritual 
 assistance, for we have no authority in 
 Scripture to favour an opinion of his 
 Omnipresence, that being indeed a 
 Divine Attribute ! We are happily re- 
 lieved, however, by Scripture from any 
 such difficulty ; for there we not only 
 read of fallen Angels (viz. Angels 
 which kept not their first Estate, Jude 
 6. also t( the Angels that sinned" 2 Pet. 
 ii. 4.) in the plural number, (which, 
 undoubtedly are all Devils according 
 to the common acceptation of that 
 word) but we read expressly of " the 
 " Devil and his Angels " (Matt. xxv. 
 41.) " the Dragon and his dngels" 
 
 (Rev,
 
 87 
 
 (Rev. xii. 7.) who are all involved in 
 the same condemnation to " everlast- 
 " ing Fire," into which they are not yet 
 cast [for they must first be judged even 
 BY MEy ; " know ye not that we shall 
 JVDGE ANGELS?" (1 Cor. vi. 3.) Such 
 is the dignity of human Nature!] and 
 consequently we may presume, that the 
 Devil's Angels are of the same nature 
 and employment as the Devil himself 
 for " the Dragon fought and his 
 Angels" (Rev. xii. 7.) especially as the 
 Apostle, who warns us against " the 
 wiles of the Devil,' 1 does not suppose 
 him alone and unassisted in his malici- 
 ous Agency, but assures us at the same 
 time, that " we wrestle not with flesh 
 " and blood" (that is, not with flesh 
 and blood ONLY) " but against Princi- 
 " palities, against Powers" &c. in the 
 plural number, apparently meaning 
 spiritual or supernatural Powers, &c. as 
 they are so clearly distinguished from 
 " Flesh and Blood:" and even our 
 
 Author
 
 88 
 
 Author himself allows, that ' the very 
 ' words of our Saviour,' " HOW CAN 
 " SATAN cast out SATAN," ' if taken in 
 * their strictest sense, imply that there 
 ' were SEVERAL SATAXS.' Essay, p. 16. 
 
 And though the Word pttf, SATAN, 
 properly signifies an Enemy, or one that 
 acts in opposition, or as an Enemy, and 
 is frequently used both as a verb and 
 as a participle merely in that sense, 
 without any reference to Evil-Spirits, 
 yet this affords no just argument against 
 the peculiar appropriation of the word, 
 when used as an appellative in many 
 passages of Scripture, which, by their 
 context respectively, do confine us to 
 the common acceptation of the term 
 SATAN, viz. that it denotes a particular 
 Spirit * or order of Spirits, as in the 
 
 Text 
 
 * The same observation holds good also with respect 
 to the Greek word Aiao>.oj or DEVIL, and therefore 
 the propriety of the common rendering is not influenced 
 
 Of
 
 89 
 
 Text last quoted, viz. " If SATAN cast 
 " out SATAN," &c. and therefore the 
 
 sensible 
 
 or varied by the Critic's remark in page 13, " that even 
 *' according to the translation now in use, -when the same 
 " Greek Word occurs in the plural Number, it is never 
 " applied to any Evil-Spirits*" But the reason of this is 
 manifest ; the Word is not then used as an appellative, 
 but only as a plural adjective, the governing substantives of 
 which are expressly mentioned in the context of all the 
 examples he has cited of it " It occurs " (says he) 
 u only in the following passages: Their WIVES must be 
 " not SLANDERERS, (pv, <^aoAsf, not Devils) 1 
 " Tim. iii. 11. In the last times MEN will be (AaoAo, 
 " Devils) FALSE ACCUSERS, 2 Tim. iii. 3. In like 
 " manner, in Tit. ii. 3. aged WOMEN are forbidden to be 
 " (AiaSoAa?, Devils) FALSE ACCUSERS," page 13, 
 Note. In all these texts, cited by the Author of thf. 
 Essay, the words ^laSoAoi and At<*oAtf? are merely ad* 
 jcctivcSj governed by substantive* expressed in each sen- 
 tence respectively ; but, when AaoAc?> or Devil, is 
 mentioned as an appellative, the sense of the context 
 generally demonstrates that the word can be applicable 
 tb none but the Evil-Spirit, the ancient Enemy of Man- 
 kind ; or at least has some reference to his influence, or 
 inimical nature, as when Judas Iscariot is called A 
 DEVIL: " Have not I chosen you twelve" (said our 
 Lord) " and one of you is A DEVIL?'' t u|tx,j> sf 
 AtiaSXoy fj-iy. Now the peculiar guilt of Judas was not 
 as n Wanderer ot False Accuser, according to the literal 
 meaning of the epithet which, eur Lord bwtowed upoa 
 M him,
 
 sensible objection * arising from the 
 said Text, to which, as he allows, 
 
 Dr. 
 
 him, but as an avaricious betrayer, or Traitor ; who, for 
 the sake of a little paltry pecuniary emolument (like our 
 modern Time-servei s) betrayed Ms Lord and Master !, 
 So that AaoAo? cannot be applied to him, to express 
 ihat particular offence but manifestly to mark his affinity 
 in abandoned reprobacy to that dark Spirit, which after- 
 wards really entered into him ! See John xiii. 27. and 
 Luke xxii. 3. 
 
 * Viz. " Satan and Beelzebub are names for the same 
 " person : for when Christ was reproached with casting 
 V out Demons, he replied, How can Satan cast out 
 ' Satan ? Now, if Satan, who is considered as the same 
 '' person with the Devil, (Rev. xii. 9- xx. 2. Compare 
 *,' Matt. iv. 1. 10. with Mark i. 12, 13.) was the Princ* 
 ** of those Demons who were cast out by Christ; 
 " then Demons are the sam Spirits as the Devil's An* 
 *' gcls.-f And on this supposition, there can be no other 
 " difference between Demons and the Devil, than that 
 " which subsists between a Prince and his Subjects, wh 
 ' 'both partake of one common nature, though the Prince, 
 
 as presiding over the rest, hath a peculiar name J of 
 
 " his 
 
 f- ' " into everlasting Fire prepared FOR THI DEVIL AND 
 " HIS ANCELSJ" Matt. xxv. 41. " And the great Dragon was cast 
 " out, that oid Serpent called THE DEVIL and SATAN, which dcceivctk. 
 " the u,hoie vitjrld ; he was cast out into the earth, and HIS ANCIL* 
 
 " WERE CAST OUT WITH HIM." Rev. xii. 9. 
 
 % I have already remarked that the word Stan (]1Q]!/ (sijnifjine 
 
 tt
 
 81 
 
 Dr. Sykes " never replied" and the 
 " Force'' of which, he says, " Dr. 
 " Lardner seems to admit" (see Essay 
 pages 15, 16) must also be admitted, 
 even by himself, if he is equally candid 
 with the other two ; because he himself 
 has remarked in pages 19 and 20, that 
 " inasmuch as Christ is here replying 
 " to I he Pharisees, and reasoning with 
 " them on their own principles, he can- 
 " not be supposed to speak of a different 
 " order of beings from what they did. 
 " SATAN, therefore," (says he) " must 
 " be equivalent to DEMONS, in the sense 
 " in which DEMONS was used by them" 
 &c. So that as there is no authority 
 
 " his own." The Author of the Essay cites this in 
 page 14, from Mr. Pegge's Answer to Dr. Sykes, &c. 
 
 to act as an Enemy, is frequently used both as a verb and as a partici- 
 ple in that sense, xit/toHt any reference to Evil-Spirits; but the construe* 
 lion of the context always sufficiently proves when it is used as an Ap~ 
 feflative peculiar to the Grand Enemy of Mankind, which is on ao 
 eount of his implacable malignity ! in like manner the opposite Nature 
 cf GOD is called LOVE, from the glorious attribute of universal bent- 
 valence: " GOD is LOVE," (John iv. 8. 16.) See more concerning 
 the Love of GOD, and the Return of Love which is due to hirn from 
 Mankind, in page 12, &c. of my Tract on the Lax of Liberty. 
 
 whatever
 
 92 
 
 whatever in the Holy Scriptures to prove 
 that the Pharisees, or the Jews in gene- 
 ral, ever conceived that Satan was a 
 Human Ghost ; and as, on the contra- 
 ry, there is ample Evidence in the 
 Scriptures to prove, that Satan is men- 
 tioned by the Sacred Writers as a Spi- 
 rit of a very different order and origin 
 from Human Spirits, we may be assur- 
 ed that the word DEMON does not, in 
 Scripture, signify " the Ghost of a Dead 
 " Man," because it must be esteemed 
 " equivalent to the word SATAN 
 (" SATAN" being declared " equivalent 
 " to DEMON " by the very Rule which 
 this Gentleman himself has laid down) 
 and therefore as SATAN was never un^ 
 derstood by the Sacred Writers to be a 
 Human Ghost, neither can the word 
 DEMON (which is equivalent, or parallel 
 to it) be understood in that sense ! 
 
 And upon the very same Principles, 
 likewise, it may be demonstrated that 
 
 the
 
 03 
 
 the word DEVIL is also equivalent to 
 DEMON, (though the Author of the 
 Essay confidently asserts in p. 219, that 
 the latter " never means the DEVIL 
 *' and his Angels " in the New Testa- 
 ment,) for if" SATAN is equivalent to DE- 
 ft MON," so also must DEVIL ; because 
 the Appellatives SATAN and the DEVIL are 
 jointly mentioned in Scripture as deno- 
 ting the selfsame malicious Spirit, " the 
 " Great Dragon, that Old Serpent, which 
 " Is the DEVIL and SATAN." Rev. xx. 2. 
 The same application of these Titles the 
 DEVIL and SATAN, are made also in the 
 12th Chapter of the same Book ver. 9, 
 so that there can he no mistake or error 
 in the Text. " And the great Dragon 
 4t was cast out, that Old Serpent called 
 -" THE DEVIL and SATAN'* (&dX<gw&. 
 CALLED the Devil and Satan; so that 
 this is an incontestable evidence of the 
 common and proper application of these 
 respective Terms by which the Old Ser- 
 pent was CALLED) " which deceivcth 
 
 " the
 
 " 
 
 94 
 
 the whole world: he was cast out into 
 the earth, and his Angels" (by which 
 the plurality of SATANS or DEVILS is also 
 confirmed, though the Author of the 
 Essay, in p. 385, asserts, " that there is 
 " only OWE Devil") " WERE CAST OUT 
 " WITH HIM." 
 
 How absurd therefore is the insinua- 
 tion in page 20 of the Essay " that 
 " by Demons and their Prince, they " 
 (meaning Christ and the Pharisees with 
 whom he " reasoned" as the Author 
 of the Essay remarks, " on their own 
 " Principles") understood HUMAN SPI- 
 RITS ! 
 
 . That " by Demons and their Prince 
 tf they understood" real SPIRITS, is, in- 
 deed, very certain ; for when the Scribes 
 said of Jesus " He hath BEELZEBOUL, 
 " and by the Prince of DEMONS casteth 
 " out DEMONS," &c. (Mark iii. 22.) our 
 Lord (after he had " reasoned with 
 
 " them
 
 '* them on their oven Principles?' viz. 
 " How can SATAN cast out SATAN," &c.) 
 plainly charged them with blasphemy 
 against THE HOLY GHOST ; * the reason 
 of which the Evangelist further ex- 
 plains by adding " Because" (says 
 he) " they said, He hath an unclean 
 " Spirit:" which -plainly proves, that 
 they supposed Christ to he assisted by 
 a real SPIRIT, when they said " He hath 
 
 " BEELZEBOUL." 
 
 But how doth it appear that by Beel- 
 zeboul and the other Demons, (which 
 they supposed to be cast out by Beelze- 
 
 loul,) " THEY UNDERSTOOD HUMAN 
 
 SPIRITS ?" There is not the least sha- 
 dow of evidence in the Scriptures to 
 justify such a notion ! On the contra- 
 ry we find that the Idea of Casting out 
 Demons by Beehcboul the Prince of De- 
 mons, was considered by our Lord him- 
 
 * Mark iii. 28, 2 
 
 self
 
 QQ 
 
 self as exactly parallel to the casting out 
 of Satan by Satan : " if SATAN cast 
 " out SATAN " (said our Lord) " he is 
 t( divided against himself; how shall 
 " then his Kingdom stand? dnd if I 
 
 " % BEELZEBOUL Cast out DEMONS," 
 
 &c. (Matt. xii. 26, 27.) Christ mani- 
 festly considered these Terms Satan, 
 Beeheboul, and Demons as synony- 
 mous ; for " as he is here replying to 
 " the Pharisees, and reasoning with 
 " them on their own principles, he 
 " cannot be supposed" (for I must 
 again repeat this just observation of the 
 Author of the Essay) " he cannot be 
 '* supposed " (I say) " to speak of a dif- 
 " ferent order of Beings from what 
 " they did." And as " Satan, therefore, 
 " must be equivalent to DEMON, in the 
 '* sense in which DEMON was used by 
 " them," &c. it is sufficiently clear that 
 DEMON does not signify a Human Spi- 
 rit; because SATAN is no where in 
 Scripture represented as a Human Spi- 
 rit,
 
 97 
 
 rit, but on the contrary as the implaca* 
 ble Enemy of Human Nature in gene- 
 ral! 
 
 Not less absurd and void of founda- 
 tion than this about " Human Spirits" 
 is the bold assertion in page 189 of the 
 Essay that " All the Prophets of God, 
 " in every age, when professedly deliver - 
 " ing their divine messages to mankind, 
 " have with one voice proclaimed the 
 
 " UTTER IMPOTENCE OF DEMONS : and 
 
 " hereby entirely subverted the Doctrine 
 " of Demoniacal Possessions!" And 
 again, in page 371 that " the Pro- 
 " phets of God under the New Testa- 
 " ment, as well as those under the Old, 
 " openly taught, what their miracles 
 " intimated, the utter inability of these 
 tf spirits to do any good or evil to Man- 
 " kind." Also in page 374, he asserts 
 that " it is nevertheless an undoubted 
 14 fact, that God's inspired messengers 
 " do constantly represent all DEMONS 
 N " with-
 
 08 
 
 " without distinction as mere fictions of 
 " the human imagination, and clearly 
 " demonstrate their inability to produce 
 " any effect" But all these bold asser- 
 tions are so totally opposite to the real 
 evidence of Scripture on these points, 
 that one would think it impossible that 
 a sensible and learned Man (as the Au- 
 thor of the Essay is reputed to be) 
 should be guilty of such gross misrepre- 
 sentations 1 
 
 God 's inspired Messengers are so far 
 from " representing all Demons with- 
 " out distinction as mere fictions of the 
 " human imagination," that they have 
 left us on record the strongest historical 
 Testimonies of their real existence, as 
 well as of their ability to do harm, that 
 words can possibly express ! And all 
 this not only under the name of De- 
 
 / 
 
 mons, but have also declared their real 
 nature in terms less equivocal by occa- 
 sionally calling them " Evil-Spirits" 
 
 and
 
 . ^i 99 
 
 and " Unclean-Spirits" * which surely 
 are not to be esteemed " mere fictions 
 
 " of 
 
 > A~ 
 
 * The Gadarene DEMONIAC is called by the Evan- 
 gelist Mark (chap, v. ver. 2.) " a Han with AN UN- 
 *' CLEAN SPIRIT." And our Lord himself " said unto 
 " him" (ver. 8.) " come out of the Man (thou) UN- 
 " CLEAN SPIRIT" (t%\ To^Tnttvpa. TO axaS-a^ot/.) 
 which proves that to have an unclean, or evil Spirit, 
 does not signify mearly the having a disease, as the Au- 
 thor of the Essay would insinuate, (though sometimes 
 persons " oppressed by mi Evil-Spirit," were affected only 
 by a bodily disease ; which was the case of Job, when Sa- 
 tan had obtained permission to touch " his Bones and his 
 " Flesh,") but that it signifies more particularly the hav- 
 ing a Demon : for the Unclean-S/Yif or rather Spirits 
 that possessed the Gadarene Demoniac, are expressly 
 called DEMONS by the same Evangelist in the 12th 
 verse, and he again calls them Unclean-Spirits in the fol- 
 lowing verse ; which proves that these terms, Demons, 
 and Unclean-Spirits are synonymous terras. " And all 
 41 the DEMONS besought him, saying, Send its into the 
 ' Swine, &c. and forthwith JESUS gave them leave. And 
 " the UNCLEAN-SPIRITS went out and entered into the 
 41 Swine" &c. Mark v. 12, 13. The Evangelist Luk 
 (chap. iv. ver. 33.) also informs us of " a Man which 
 " had a SPIRIT OF AN UNCLEAN DEMON," which in 
 the 35th verse he again expressly calls TO Aaijuoi/iop 
 THE DEMON ; and the People on seeing the miraculous 
 cure of the Man from whom our Lord commanded this 
 DEMON to " come out," considered it as an instance of 
 
 Jesus'*
 
 100 
 
 " the imagination" unless we mean 
 to handle Scripture as this Author has 
 done, and to assert the direct contrary 
 to what it reveals ! 
 
 If " all the Prophets in every Age, 
 " when professedly delivering their di- 
 " vine Messages to Mankind," had 
 " with one voice proclaimed THE UTTER 
 
 " IMPOTENCE OF DEMONS," IS it COn- 
 
 ceivable that our Lord himself, when 
 
 Jrsus's Power over UNCLEAN-SPIRITS. " What a 
 " -word (is) this ;" (said they, referring to Christ's com- 
 mand, the effects which they had just then seen) " for 
 *' with authority and pu-er he commandeth THE-UN- 
 " CLEAN SPIRITS, and they come out" Luke iv. 33 36, 
 The Author of the Essay indeed allows, that " all the 
 " diseased uere spoken of by the " Jesus as oppressed by 
 (t an EVIL-SPIRIT, but not" (says he) " as possessed 
 ** BY DEMONS of whom there is here" (referring to the 
 Texts mentioned in the same Paragraph, Acts x. 38. and 
 Matt, iv. 23.) " no mention." See note in p. 74 and 75 
 of the Essay. Thus he founds his Hypothesis on an ima- 
 gimtfy distinct /onbeivfcen EVIL-SPIRITS and DEMONS; 
 but as these different Terms are manifestly applied to ths 
 same spiritual Brings, the whole sophistical Fabrick must 
 fall to the ground. 
 
 he
 
 101 
 
 he was accused by the Pharisees of cast- 
 ing out Demons by Beelzeboul the 
 Prince of Demons, should apply to that 
 Spiritual Prince, as well as to his Sub- 
 jects, a Term by which the ACTIVE and 
 powerful Spiritual Enemy of Mankind 
 is clearly revealed to us both in the Old 
 and New Testament ? viz. SATAN, the 
 Enemy, " If SATAN cast out SATAN," 
 &c. 
 
 ' For ly our Saviour's argumentation, 
 ' when he was accused of casting out 
 ' Demons by BEELZEBUB' (or Beelzeboul, 
 as he is called in the New Testament) 
 ' the Prince or chief of the DEMONS, 
 (Matt. xii. 2232. Mark iii. 2230. 
 ' Luke xi. 14 26.) it is plain to De- 
 ' monstralion,' (says a very learned and 
 much respected Prelate,* whose Disr 
 sertation on tbis Subject was unknown 
 to me 'till I had thus far proceeded in 
 my Tract, or I might have saved much 
 
 * Bp. Newton. 
 
 trouble)
 
 102 
 
 trouble) ' that casting out DEMONS is 
 
 * casting out SATAN, that casting out DE- 
 ' MONS by BEELZEBUB is opposed to cast- 
 
 * ing out Demons by THE SPIRIT OF GOD, 
 ' that casting out Demons by BEELZEBUR 
 ' is the same as casting out Demons by 
 ' SATAN, that Satan'3 casting out DE- 
 ' MONS is casting out HIMSELF, that SA- 
 ' TAN and Beelzebub are the same, that 
 ' the DEMONS and SATAN, and Beelze- 
 
 * bub the Prince or Chief of the De- 
 ' mons are Beings of the same Nature, 
 ' and differ only in order and degree. 
 ' When the Seventy returned to our 
 
 * Saviour,' (Luke x. 17, 18.) " SAYING, 
 LORD, EVEN THE DEMONS ARE 
 
 " SUBJECT UNTO US THROUGH THY 
 " NAME ;" ' he considered the fall of 
 ' DEMONS as thefali'qfSATlfa, as another 
 < fall of dngels,' " I BEHELD SATAN 
 
 " AS LIGHTNING FALL FROM HEAVEN.'* 
 
 * St. Peter speaketh of the Demoniacs 
 ' under the name and notion of' " OP- 
 " PRESSED WITH THE .PEVIL," VXO re
 
 103 
 
 when he told Cornelius the 
 ' Centurion,' (Acts x. 38.) " HOW GOD 
 
 " ANOINTED JESUS OF NAZARETH WITH 
 " THE HOLY GHOST AND WITH POWER, 
 " WHO WENT ABOUT DOING GOOD, AND 
 " HEALING ALL THAT WERE OP- 
 
 " PRESSED OF THE DEVIL, FOR 
 
 " GOD WAS WITH HIM." ' He mentions 
 * this as one of the greatest exertions of 
 ' divine goodness and power. It is evi- 
 4 dent then, that these WICKED AND UN- 
 
 ' CLEAN-SPIRITS, these DEMONS AND THE 
 ' PRINCE or CHIEF OF THE DEMONS are 
 
 ' not the Souls of Men or Women de- 
 ' ceased, but are really and truly THE 
 ' DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS; and come- 
 f quently that the word DEMONS is justly 
 ' and properly translated DEVILS, espe" 
 ' dally throughout the Gospels J* 
 
 The 
 
 * " A Dissertation on the Demoniacs in the Gos- 
 ' pels," (Printed for Mess. Rivington, London, 1775.) 
 pages 10 12. See also pages 43 46 of this excellent 
 jittle Tract, for a full answer to the groundless assertions 
 before quoted from the Author of the Essay, viz, " That 
 
 " God's
 
 104 
 
 The Text, last mentioned, which the 
 Right Reverend and learned Author of 
 
 the 
 
 * God's inspired Messengers do constantly represent all 
 " DEMONS without distinction as mere fictions of the 
 " Human imagination, and dearly demonstrate their in- 
 " ability to produce any single effect" p. 374, &c. for the 
 learned Prelate, speaking of the power commonly ascribed 
 to Devils and Unclean Spirits, remarks, that ' our Saviour 
 
 * was so far from reproving or correcting this Notion, 
 ' that he hath confirmed and established it beyond all 
 ' reasonable contradiction. He was so far from giving 
 ' other instructions to his disciples, that he hath said and 
 
 * done more than enough to convince them of the reality 
 ' of these possessions. When he had called his twelve 
 
 * disciples,' (Matt. x. 1.) " he gave them power against 
 " Unclean-Spirits to cast them out," ' and he gave it be- 
 
 * sides in commission t them, (ver. 8.) " to cast out 
 " devils :" ' and would he have given such a power and 
 ' such a commission, if there had been no devils to cast 
 
 * out, and the whole had been a vain imagination ? 
 1 When he had sent forth the seventy disciples, and they* 
 (Luke x. I/O " returned again with joy, saying, Lord, 
 '* even the devils are subject unto us through thy name," 
 
 * he was so far from repressing their joy, that he rather 
 
 * encouraged it, and fixed it upon its proper foundation,' 
 (ver. 18, 19, 20.) " I beheld Satan as lightning fall 
 "*' from heaven. Behold, I give unto you power to tread 
 " on serpents 'and scorpions, and over all the power of 
 " the enemy ; and nothing shall by any means hurt you. 
 " Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are 
 " subject unto you ; but rather rejoice, because your 
 
 name?
 
 105 
 
 the said Dissertation cited (as above) 
 from Acts x. 38. has not been overlooked 
 
 " names are written in heavan." ' But what is the sense 
 
 * or meaning of all this phraseology, if nothing more 
 was performed than some cures of epilepsy and mad- 
 ness ? How can the healing of the falling sickness b 
 
 * said to be the fall of Satan from his power and domi- 
 ' nion ? How can the curing of bodily diseases be said to 
 ' be the subjection of the Spirits, and a victory and 
 ' triumph overall the power of the enemy 1 ? Our Saviour 
 4 often commands the Unclean-Spirits to come out of a 
 '. man, " Hold thy peace," (Luke iv. 35.) " and coma 
 M out of him." * But where is the reason or propriety of 
 ' this command, if there were no spirits to come out, and 
 ' only some distemper to be cured ? When the Jews 
 ' charged our Saviour ' " with having a Devil," (John 
 Tiii. 4S.) * he denies the charge indeed, and disproves 
 ' it : but upon this supposition the shorter and better 
 ' answer would have been, that there was no such posscs- 
 
 * sion, there was no such thing as having a Devil. In 
 
 * like manner, when the Pharisees accused him (Matt, 
 ' xii. 2-i ) of " casting out Devils by th prince of th 
 11 Devils," ' the proper reply would have been to have 
 J denied the principle instead of refuting it, and directly 
 4 to have told the truth, if it had been the truth, that 
 
 * the Devil was notinthe least concerned one way or other : 
 1 but, he admits the truth of his casting out Devils, 
 ' and only exposes the unreasonableness and absurdity of 
 1 imputing it to the prince of the Devils. And would he 
 ' have employed so many arguments upon a subject that 
 : bad not the least foundation in truth or the nature of 
 
 4 things ?
 
 100 
 
 by the Author of the Essay, who is 
 therefore the more inexcusable, when 
 he asserts in page 13 as " an undoubt- 
 " edfacl, that there is not a single pas- 
 " sage in (he New Testament, in which 
 " the DEVIL or DEVILS are spoken of, 
 1 in reference to the present subject" 
 And in a note at the bottom oi the page 
 he adds " that Acts x. 38. is no ex- 
 " ception will be shewn below, Sect. 
 "V." 
 
 The Proposition prefixed to this 5th 
 Section, to which he refers us on this 
 occasion, is that " The particular dis- 
 
 1 thing? ? Would he have attempted to prove the truth 
 ' of his divine mission from a false chimaera, from a 
 ' thing that was not ? Would he have argued upon the 
 
 * reality of his casting out devils, if it had been only a 
 ' vulgar notion, an idle dream, a wild fancy, and no 
 ' reality in it; or have pretended,' that he " cast out 
 " Devils by the Spirit of God," ' and that therefore' 
 .*< the kingdom of God was come?" 'The devil that 
 ' was cast out might have reasoned in this manner ; but 
 
 * not He, who is emphatically stiled' (John xiv. C.) 
 '* the way, and the truth, and the life/' 
 
 " orders
 
 107 
 
 " orders which the Ancients, 
 " Heathens or Jews, ascribed to THE 
 ". POSSESSION of Demons, uere such only 
 " as disturbed the understanding.'' 
 Here the learned Author of the Essay 
 displays great skill in the art of sophis- 
 try ! The common received doctrine 
 which he opposes, (if I understand 
 rightly the tendency and consequences 
 of the controversy) is, that Evil-Spirits, 
 or Unclean-Spirits in general (it matters 
 not by what other names they are call- 
 ed) have now, or at least have formerly 
 had power occasionally to afflict and 
 oppress mankind by disordering the 
 Body, as well as by influencing and dis- 
 turbing their Minds. Yet the Author 
 of the Essay warily confines his 5th 
 Proposition to one single term, viz. to 
 .DEMONS ; though the Spiritual Enemies 
 _and disturbers of mankind are plainly 
 mentioned in Scripture under various 
 other denominations: and he confines 
 his proposition also to one single mode 
 
 of
 
 108 
 
 of spiritual influence, viz. to POSSESSION, 
 though the power of Evil-Spirits over 
 Mankind was manifested in various 
 ways, and by external as well as inter- 
 nal Effects : so that he is apparently 
 more intent and solicitous to fortify and 
 defend a weak Hypothesis by guarded 
 terms and positions, than to trace out the 
 true state of the questions whether or 
 not Evil-Spirits in general have now, or 
 formerly have had, power to afflict and 
 disturb mankind! 
 
 / 
 
 The general Hypothesis of this Au- 
 thor has but a very slender support from 
 the distinction, which (in the beginning 
 of this 5th Section) he so earnestly re- 
 commends to be observed " between 
 " diseases supernaturally INFLICTED, 
 " and POSSESSIONS" because it ap- 
 pears upon a fair examination of Scrip- 
 ture, that both these, viz. bdtdily- 
 
 DISEASES, as well POSSESSIONS, (or such 
 /* 
 
 dissorders " as disturbed the under- 
 
 " standing")
 
 109 
 
 " standing") are occasionally attribu- 
 ted in the New Testament to t/ie Agency 
 of Evil-Spirits; and therefore, if the 
 5th Proposition of this Author had 
 been stated agreeably to the necessary 
 decision of the general question con- 
 cerning the power of Evil-Spirits, it 
 would be so glaringly contradictory to 
 the evidence of Scripture, that the Au- 
 thor would not have dared to refer us 
 to this head in defence of his Assertion 
 that " there is NOT A SINGLE PASSAGE 
 *' in the New Testament in which Hie 
 " DEVIL or DEVILS are spoken of in re- 
 " ference to the present subject" (p. 
 13). Nor durst he immediately have 
 added " that Acts x. 38. is no excep- 
 " tion" &c. referring to this very Sec~ 
 tion : for the Apostle Peter in the said 
 text expressly mentions the Healing of 
 those that were oppressed or over- 
 powered BY THE DEVIL, VXO Tx OlX^O^ti ; 
 so that, as the general question before 
 -iis is whether Evil-Spirits (the chief of 
 
 whom
 
 110 
 
 whom the Devil or Satan is declared to 
 be) have, or ever had, any power to af~ 
 flic I and disturb Mankind, it cannot be 
 denied, that " (he DEVIL is here spoken 
 " of in reference to the present subject" 
 though the Author of the Essay so pe- 
 remptorily asserts the contrary. 
 
 He has also asserted in page 2, 
 " that the Disorders imputed to super* 
 " natural possessions, proceed from NA- 
 " TURAL CAUSES, not from the Agency 
 " of any EVIL-SPIRITS." We have no 
 reason to douht, indeed, that the gene* 
 rality of Disorders or Diseases among 
 Men are Natural ; but w r e have, never- 
 theless, ample and unquestionable Tes- 
 timony from Scripture, not only that 
 " the Disorders imputed to SUPERNA- 
 " TURAL POSSESSIONS" (or " such dis- 
 " orders as disturbed the Understand- 
 " ing") were frequently occasioned by 
 the Agency of EVIL-SPIRITS, but even, 
 sometimes, BODILY DISTEMPERS, wherein 
 
 the
 
 Ill 
 
 the mind was not at all affected ; so 
 that, which ever way the argument is 
 taken, the temporal Power of Evil-Spi- 
 rits is demonstrated, and of course the 
 general Hypothesis of the Author of 
 the Essay concerning " the absolute 
 " Nullity of DEMONS " (p. 187) " and 
 * f the utter inability of these Spirits to 
 " do any good or evil to Mankind" (p. 
 371) is confuted and disproved! 
 
 The extreme Corporal sufferings of 
 Job, after SATAN had obtained the Di- 
 vine permission to " touch his bones 
 "and his flesh" but not" his life" 
 (Job ii. 5 8.) afford an unquestionable 
 example of the power of that Evil-Spi- 
 rit, called SATAN, to affect (when the 
 {ill-Ilnliiip Providence of God permits) 
 even THE BODIES OF MEN; ( r)d that 
 "he has always power to influence THE 
 MINDS OF MEN, who do not duly resist 
 him, I hope is already (lemo'nstruted in 
 the preceding Tract tin the Law on Ma- 
 ture
 
 112 
 
 ture and Principles of Action in Man,) 
 so that the Case of Job confirms the lit" 
 eral sense of the Evangelist's expres- 
 sions concerning the " Woman vhich 
 " had a Spirit * f of Infirmity eighteen 
 " Years* and was bowed together" &c. 
 " whom " (our Lord himself express- 
 ly declared) *' SATAN hath bound, lo, 
 " these eighteen Years" Luke xiii, 
 1110. 
 
 Now if, with the Author of the Es- 
 say in page 76 and 77, we were to sup- 
 pose" this Woman's disorder to be 
 " the palsy, or a total relaxation of the 
 " nerves, and that it proceeded from 
 " NATURAL causes," that is, merely from 
 Natural Causes, is it conceivable that 
 Christ (who is Truth itself j " / am the 
 " may, THE TRUTH, and the Life," John 
 xiv. 6.) could expressly declare that 
 " SATAN bound her?" Or if" this 
 " Affliction befell her by the Providence 
 " of God," according to the sense 
 
 which
 
 113 
 
 which the Author must necessarily 
 mean when he so expresses himself in 
 p. 77, (that is he must mean that the 
 Affliction befell her " by the Provi- 
 " dence of God" WITHOUT any Agency 
 or interposition of SATAN, for otherwise 
 his argument would be vain) is it con- 
 ceivable that Christ should expressly at- 
 tribute to SATAN, the Prince of Demons 
 and Unclean-Spirits, what he knew to 
 be effected by the agency of God's Pro- 
 vidence? Would not this be blasphe- 
 my against the Holy Ghost? 
 
 G \J 
 
 1 have already caught the same Wri- 
 ter in a similar unlucky predicament 
 about the Agency of Satan ; and to pre- 
 vent repetition in producing my proofs 
 against him, I must beg leave to refer 
 my Readers to the Notes in pages 178 
 . 191 of the preceding Tract on the 
 " Law of Nature and Principles of Ac- 
 " lion in Man" where will also be found 
 some further remarks concerning the 
 
 Demoniacs of the New Testament. 
 
 p It
 
 114 
 
 It will be but common justice how- 
 ever, not only to the Author of the Es- 
 say, but also to the subject in question, 
 to remark before I conclude, that this 
 learned, though mistaken, Author has 
 produced ample evidence from classical 
 Authors and ancient Historians, that 
 the Greeks and other Heathen Nations 
 believed in Demoniacal Possessions, 
 notwithstanding that the said Evidence 
 operates against his own Hypothesis on 
 that head ; and he proves, with a great 
 deal of learning, that the Diseases usu- 
 ally ascribed to DEMONS were not pecu- 
 liar to the Gospel Age, as some persons 
 have erroneously conceived. 
 
 ' Many Ages before the birth of 
 6 Christ,' (says he) ' and in other Coun- 
 ' tries besides Judea, men ascribed their 
 f diseases in general to Spirits ' p. 
 134, for which he cites Celsus, lib. i, 
 prcefat.* and Homer s Odyss. v* 396. 
 
 * " Morbos turn ad iram Deorum immortalium rela- 
 " tgs esse, et ab iisdem opcqi posci solitara," 
 
 With
 
 * With respect to Demoniacs in particu- 
 ' lar, we meet with them as we have 
 ' seen'* (says he) * in Writers of 
 
 ' great 
 
 * He bore refers us to pages 23, 78, and 87 of his 
 Essay. In the first of these pages (i. c. 23) he says 
 ' The Terms employed by the Greeks to describe person* 
 
 ' INSPIRED, POSSESSED, AND DISORDERED IX 
 ' THEIR UNDERSTANDINGS, SCri'e to shcTf, that THE 
 
 ' SPIRITS by whom these persons were thought TO BE 
 
 ' ACTUATED, Were NOT FALI.EN ANGELS, but the. 
 
 *' Gofls the Heathens worshipped ; particularly such a.<t 
 ' trere of human origin, or mere fictions of the imagi- 
 
 I nation.' His quotations under this head prove, in- 
 deed, that the Greeks, &c. believed that men were fre- 
 quently possessed and actuated by Spirits; but by no. 
 means proves that the Spiritual Agents were not fallen 
 Angels, or that they were either of human origin or mere 
 fictions of the imagination, whatever might be the com- 
 mon opinion among the Gentiles ! for thouuli the vulgar 
 and less .considerate persons amons* the Gentiles might 
 Mipnose them to be the Ghosts or Spirits of dead men, yet 
 the most learned writers among them have mentioned these 
 inspiring Spirits expressly as DEMONS, and they earnestly 
 endeavoured to cast them out from tie un'iappy persons 
 infested by them ; which would have IK-I-II unreason* 
 able, if they had considered them either as the Spirits of 
 their gods, or of their aeijicd heroes; and this would have 
 been still more unreasonable, if (like this writer himself) 
 they had supposed them to be " merejictions oj the imu- 
 
 II filiation .'" Most of the testimonies he has cited in ' 
 
 the
 
 110 
 
 ' great antiquity, particularly in JEs- 
 ' chyius, Sophocles, Euripides, as well 
 ' as in later dramatic Poets ; nor are 
 ' they mentioned in a manner that 
 ' would lead us to suppose they were 
 ' not as common' (from p. 135) ' as mad- 
 ' men and epileptics are amongst us. 
 * These dramatic writers, it should be 
 ' remembered, give us the truest repre- 
 ' sentation of life and manners. Demo- 
 ' niacs occur also in their historians/ 
 
 the following note for the confirmation of his own no* 
 lions, demonstrate (very happily for the cause of truth) 
 that the ancient heathens believed in the actual existence 
 of Demons or Spirits, ami that they had power to inspire 
 (or possess) the bodies of men. In p. 78, note, he 
 says " As to the Lymphatic!, we read in Pljny" (Nat. 
 Hist. lib. viii, sect. 71.) *' Hi greges repente lymphati 
 " futura prcecinunt." (Pliny therefore, it is manifest, 
 did not consider this case either as the effect of a natural 
 distemper like the delirium of a fever, or as fl a mere. 
 " fiction of the imagination," but clearly as a snpcrna- 
 fural inspiration.) " The Lymphatici " (continues the 
 learned author of the Essay) *' are the wp.QoXvnrlot of the 
 11 Greeks, concerning whom Aristotle" (lib. 1. Ethicor. 
 Epidem..) -" says, T&S yD^^oA^wlyy t9THoiet&vi*ea> vflMM^H/' 
 &c. Much more evidence to this purpose is cited in his 
 notes in p. 80 and 81 of his ss.ay. 
 
 (for
 
 11:7 
 
 (tor which he cites Herodotus, and re- 
 fers to his own observations upon it in 
 p, 83) 
 
 * ' as well as where we might 
 
 most 
 
 *^'But the ancients' (says he, in p. 88) ' did not 
 ' consider any persons as possessed who were not dis- 
 ' ordered in their understandings; yet they did not con- 
 
 sider all who were disordered in their understand- 
 
 ings as possessed. (Thus he clearly allows that the 
 ancients were sufficiently aware of the due distinction 
 between natural and supernatural disorders of the mind) 
 ' The Greeks' (says he) * did not impute to Demons the 
 
 delirium of the fever, and phrenzy caused by drinking 
 : to excess. We read in Herodotus, (lib. vi. cap. 84-.) 
 ' that it was said of Cleomencs, that his insanity did 
 ' not proceed from any Demon, but from Jtarddrinicing. 
 ' Nevertheless, the turn of expression here used, serves 
 
 to shew, that for the most part, madness was ascribed 
 
 to possession. To this some have thought they impu- 
 ' ted every species of madness, for which they could not 
 
 account by the sole operation of natural causes. The 
 ' fact seems to be, that they imputed to possession, only 
 i those cases of madness in which the symptoms appear- 
 ' ed to them best to agree with the supposition of tlx 
 
 patient having his faculties corttrouled by evil Demons, 
 
 and with his speaking, and acting under their malig- 
 ' nan! influence.' A more reasonable distinction between 
 natujal and supernatural cases of mental disorders, 
 rould uol possibly have been made : so that the learned 
 Author of the Essay has really furnished us with ample 
 "stimouies against his own infidelity about the existence 
 
 of
 
 118 
 
 * most naturally expect them, in the 
 
 * writings of their Physicians.' 
 
 ' From Hypocrates' (for which he 
 cites his book, " cle Morho Sacro") ' it 
 
 * appears that it was a very common 
 ' thing among his cotemporaries, to as- 
 ' crihe the epilepsy and different species 
 
 * of madness to the possession of 
 
 * Demons arid Heroes.' 
 
 ' With respect to their Philosophers;* 
 
 * it is needless to appeal to the tesii- 
 
 * monies of particular persons ; for 
 
 * Demonoljh' composed a very eminent 
 ' part of the Pythagorean and Platonic 
 
 of Demons! ' Besides madness ' (says he in the same 
 page/, viz. 8.9) * the ancients ascribed the epilepsy to pos- 
 
 * .session ; esteeming this disorder sacred on account of 
 * the entrance of Demons into the bodies of those who- 
 4 suffered under it.' For this, he has cited Aretacus de 
 Causis Morbi Diuturn. lib. i. cap. -i. And Hippocrates 
 (f>. 103) de Morbo Sacro. 
 
 * ' Demoniacs' (says lie in a note) l arc mentioned 
 ' in. Aristotle,, in sucii a manner as to shew, that though, 
 
 * kc denied, others asserted their existence.' 
 
 * philoso-
 
 119 
 
 ' philosophy,* which prevailed greatly 
 
 * after as well as before the time of 
 ' Christ' (p. 136). ' Lucian wrote his 
 
 Philopseudes on purpose to expose the 
 ' folly of the learned physicians and the 
 ' most able philosophers, the heads of 
 ' their several sects, for their absurd at- 
 
 tachment to Demonism, possession?, 
 4 and magic. '-}- 
 
 * These articles, at that time, seern 
 ' to have composed the common creed 
 
 * of all men, except the followers of De- 
 ' mocritus,' (for which he again cites 
 
 * For which he refers to Plutarch, De Placit. PhiL 
 fib. v. cap. 1. Cicero, De Diviuat. lib. i. sect, j, 6, 82. 
 87. 
 
 t '. Tn the Philopseudes of Lucian,' (says the author 
 of the Essay in a note) ' Cleodomus the Peripatetic, 
 4 bmomachus the Stoic, and Ion the Platonist, do all 
 ' plead the cause of Demonism,' vol. ii. p. 330, &c. 
 ed. Var. A: ibtel. 1687- Towards the close of the dia- 
 logue, p. 3-1-6, a Pythagorean is introduced to give his 
 sanction to the same doctrine. So that possessions, 
 exorcisms, and magic, composed the creed of the phi- 
 losophers of different sects, as well a of the common. 
 people, in ?h*' time of Lucwo. 
 
 Lucian
 
 Lucian p. 349). ' The express mention 
 ' made of Demoniacs (under this very 
 'name) by Lucian,* by Plutarch, -f- 
 ' and by' (from p. 137) ' Appolloiiius,J 
 ' bears ample testimony to the common 
 ' persuasion concerning the existence 
 ' of such persons in their times. The 
 
 * established theology of the Heathen 
 
 * To this, the author of the Essay adds in a note 
 as follows. ' He' (Lucian) ' speaks of those icho dt~ 
 
 * iivered demoniacs from their terrors T,- 5<^o>av?a s - 
 
 * a7rXAaTKcri TUV ^uofoy Philopseud. p. S3?.' And he 
 also refers to p. 23 of liis own Essay on the Demoniacs 
 in the New Testament. 
 
 f Here again the author of the Essay adds in a note 
 as follows: * Plutarch says' (Sympos. 1, vii. c. 5.) 
 ' The magicians commanded the Demoniacs to read over 
 
 * and renounce the Ephcsian letters. He uses ' (says, 
 the author of the Essay) ' the very word Sai^n^ofjuvti;, 
 which is commonly used in the New Testament.' 
 
 J ' In Philostratus's Life of Apollonius/ (says the 
 author of the Essay in a note) ' mention is made of 
 *,a young man who had been a Demoniac two years, 
 ' Jai/xcvwy & $uo ET?J, lib. iii, cap. 38- p. 128, ed. Olear. 
 
 * Concerning another youth, it is said $a,ip.*v {Aau* <re, 
 1 And Apollonius undertook to cast out Demons,' lib. iv. 
 cap. 20, p. 157. 
 
 4 world.
 
 121 
 
 World, from its first rise to its final 
 overthrow, rested upon the basis of 
 Demon ism. Scarce was there a single 
 oracle delivered but by a person said 
 to be possessed. 
 
 ' With regard to the Jews, Josephus 
 tells us, that the method of exorcism 
 prescribed by Solomon prevailed or 
 succeeded greatly among them down 
 to his own time.* Indeed, the very 
 
 ' existence 
 
 * ' 
 
 yv;tj Antiq. lib. viii. cap. 2. sect. 5. In speaking ot 
 Saul, (Antiq. lib. vi. cap. 8. sect. 2.) he says, Demons 
 came upon him Tripiyo^-TO 7ra0>] Suva, xat fot.ifji.onx, 
 and that when the demons came upon him, and dis- 
 turbed him, (OTTO] ctvotvTu 7rpo<rtX$oi,TX Jaiiu,oi/ta xat 
 
 _ 1 * * 
 
 r<xf a-rioO David was his only physician against the 
 disturbance he suffered from them, and brought him to 
 his right mind again TT^O? TW O,TTO TWV eTaj^uovwv 
 i jU-ovo; iafleomti x*i TTOIUV faura y^vforOat 
 In cap. 11. sect. 2. he makes Jonathan 
 ' Miy to his father, that when an Evil-Spirit and Demons 
 seized him, David cast them ont (f^f^aAfi/.) In his 
 ' .Irwibh War, lib. vii. cap. 6. sect. 3. he says, the 
 ' plant baaras drives avay (f^eAuvt) Demons. 
 ,Q * Elsewhere
 
 * existence of Exorcists ; * both before 
 ' arid after the time of Christ,' (says he 
 in p. 138) ' and the general prevalence 
 ' of magic arts -f- amongst this people, as 
 ' well as amongst the Gentiles, are a 
 
 * full proof that a belief of frequent 
 
 * possessions was common to both. 
 
 * The same conclusion ' (says he in p. 
 139) ' may be drawn from the manner 
 
 * in which such of them as were stran- 
 
 * gers to the doctrines of Christianty, 
 
 ' Elsewhere (Ant. lib. viii. cap. 2. sect. 5.) he speaks 
 ' of a Demon's going out (oi>1) of the possessed 
 
 * person, and being adjured to return no more. This 
 ' phraseology is very conformable to that of the Gos- 
 ' pel.' 
 
 * For which, in a note, he cites ' Matt. xii. 27. 
 ' Acts xix. 13. Joseph. Antiq. lib. viii. cap. 2. sect. 5. 
 
 * Justin. Mart. Dial, cum Tryph. p. 31 1. Iren. lib. ii. cap.. 
 ' 6. sect. 2. Origen. cont. Gels. lib. 1. p. 17. lib. iv. p. 
 ' 183. 184.' 
 
 t ' See Lightfoot,' (says he, in a note) < vol. ii. p.. 
 ' 175. Beza, Wliitby, Grotius on Acts xix. 13. 19- 
 
 * and Biscoe's History of the Acts, p. 2.90.' 
 
 * addressed
 
 123 
 
 * addressed our Saviour : Have mercy 
 
 * on me, said the woman of Canaan, my 
 4 daughter is grievously vexed with a 
 ' Demon.* In. the same style, a Jew 
 f implores his compassion on behalf of 
 ' his Son :' " Look on my Son; he hath 
 " a Spirit, and is sore vexed. "-\- ' It 
 
 * was not those who received, but those 
 ' who rejected the doctrines of Christ, 
 ' that reproached him and his fbrerun- 
 ' ner with having a Demon. J So that 
 ' the Scripture itself furnishes abundant 
 4 evidence, that the doctrine of posses- 
 
 * sions was prior to the Christian sera. 
 
 * Hence it comes to pass, that posses- 
 ' sions are never mentioned in the Gos- 
 
 * pel history with any degree of sur- 
 ' prize, as a thing new or extraordinary, 
 
 * but altogether ' (p, 140) ' as a matter 
 
 * Matt. xv. 21, 22. Mark vii. 2-i. See also Acts 
 xvi. 16. 18. xix. 13. 
 
 f Matt. xvii. 15. Mark ix. 17. Luke ix. 3p. 
 J Matt, xi, 18. -John vii. 48. 52. 
 
 to
 
 124 
 
 ' to which they had been accustomed. 
 ' Nor did the enemies of Christ ever re- 
 ' proach him with introducing Demons 
 ' into Judea, merely for the sake of dis- 
 
 * playing his power over them ; nor on 
 ' this account accuse him of acting in 
 ' concert with them, which, neverthe- 
 
 * less, it would have been natural for 
 ' them to do, had possessions never been 
 ' heard of till the time of Christ, and 
 e then only in Judea. 
 
 ' That the same notions concerning 
 ' them, which prevailed in Judea, in 
 ' the age of the Gospel, were current 
 ' in the succeeding as well as in the 
 ' preceding ages, and in other coun- 
 
 * tries, is evident, not only from the 
 ' authorities already cited, but also from 
 ' the writings of the Christian Fathers, 
 ' (to say nothing of those of the latter 
 ' Platonists). It would be endless to 
 ' produce all the passages from the 
 ' Fathers in which possessions are either 
 
 * asserted
 
 125 
 
 e asserted or refered to.' And he adds 
 in p. 141 * There is no subject so fa- 
 ' iniliar to them as this ; there is nothing 
 
 o 
 
 ' they boast of so much as the power 
 ' of the meanest Christian to eject 
 ' Demons from the bodies of men.* 
 ' In the History of the Church, there 
 
 * is more frequent mention made of 
 
 * possessions, than in any other annals.^ 
 ' So little truth is there in the asser- 
 ' tion, that we never hear of them but 
 ' in the time of Christ. 
 
 ' Surely no men forget themselves 
 
 * For this, the author of the Essay, in a note, re- 
 fers us to ' Whitby's General Preface, p. 26 32, and 
 ' Stillingfleet's Orig. Sacr. p. 166; Ode de Angelis, p. 
 
 * 649 6 j6, andj. 867, 868.' 
 
 t Here the author of the Essay adds, in a note 
 
 ' Mede ' (says he) ' p. 30, observes, that the Energu- 
 
 * meni are often mentioned in the church liturgies, in 
 ' the ancient canons, and in other ecclesiastical writ- 
 ' ings, many ages after our Saviour's being on earth ; 
 ' and that not as any rare and unaccustomed thing, 
 
 * but as ordinary and usual. This is a fact' (says he) 
 ' so \\ell known, that none, I presume, will controvert 
 
 * it/ 
 
 ' more
 
 120 
 
 * more than those do, who sometime* 
 
 * would persuade us, that the Devil's 
 
 * tyranny expired (as well as revived) 
 
 * at the coming of Christ ; and at 
 
 * other times, maintain the credit of 
 
 * those writers, who, in every succeeding 
 
 * age, represent the devil as being every 
 
 * day dispossessed by Christians,' 
 
 This last sentence of the learned 
 Writer is not so strictly correct as the 
 preceding testimonies, here cited from 
 him, whereby he has clearly confuted 
 his own doctrines about the nullity of 
 Demons, the general object of his Es- 
 say. For with respect to " the Devil's 
 " tyranny," above mentioned, there is 
 no such contradiction, as he supposes, 
 between those who assert that it is 
 " expired," and those who are justly 
 aware that he is still allowed power to 
 possess mankind, and consequently may 
 *' be every day dispossessed by Chris- 
 " tians" 
 
 41 The
 
 127 
 
 " The Devil's tyranny " is certainly, 
 " expired" in one sense, that is with 
 respect to all faithful Christians who 
 are duly vigilant to resist him. 
 
 " TJie Devils tyranny" first began 
 to fall by our Lord's own glorious re- 
 sistance (even in his human nature) to 
 Satan's personal temptations. And his 
 tyranny was farther reduced when our 
 Lord granted extraordinary spiritual 
 powers to his dposl/es, and " to other 
 " seventy Disciples" in human nature, 
 to enable them to preach and promul- 
 gate the doctrines of his heavenly 
 Kingdom. And on their return from 
 that extraordinary mission they declar- 
 ed to him, " Lord, even the Demons 
 " are subject unto us through thy name t 
 To which our Lord replied " / be- 
 " held Satan" (says he) " as lightening 
 " FALL FROM HEAVEN. Behold I give 
 
 " unto you power to tread on Serpents 
 n and Scorpions, and over all the power 
 
 " of
 
 12$ 
 
 " of the enemy, and nothing shall by 
 ft any means hurt you. Notvithstand- 
 " ing in this " (said our Lord) " rejoice 
 " not, that the Spirits are subject to 
 " you ; but rather rejoice because your 
 " names are written in Heaven " (Luke 
 x. 1720). 
 
 Thus were the inimical Spirits ren- 
 dered subject to the Disciples of Christ' 
 so that the Kingdom of God came nigh 
 to them, as declared in the 9th and 
 1 1th verses of the same chapter ; but it 
 became much more nigh } and was more 
 perfectly secured to them, and to all 
 other true Disciples, after our Lord's 
 glorious triumph (in our own nature, as 
 " the Son of Man ") over Sin and Death, 
 by his own death and resurrection to 
 life, when he declared his supreme and 
 universal power, saying " all Power is 
 " given unto me in Heaven and in 
 " Earth:' (Matt, xxviii. 18.) It was then 
 that " the Devil's tyranny expired" 
 
 with
 
 129 
 
 with respect to all true and faithful 
 Disciples of Christ, whom he has secur 
 ed with inestimable privileges and fran* 
 diises from spiritual oppression and 
 slavery through the promised guidance 
 of the Holy-Spirit, if they duly ask and 
 pray for it in his name* But, on the 
 other hand, the Devil's tyranny is still 
 grievously oppressive, and most notori- 
 ously manifest over careless and un* 
 guarded mortals, who suffer themselves 
 to he puffed up with pride, and to he 
 contaminated with luxury, intemper- 
 ance, and unrestrained lust of any 
 kind, whereby the greater part by far 
 of all mankind are withdrawn from the 
 love of God and are involved in the 
 thraldom and slavery of the Devil. For 
 " wide //? the gate and broad is the way" 
 (as our Lord hath assured us) " thai 
 " leadeth to destruction, and many there 
 " be which go in thereat ! " and, on the 
 contrary, that there are but few that find 
 " the other narrow way that leadeth 
 " unto lifer (Matt. vii. 13, 14.) 
 
 R But
 
 But, even in this unhappy state of ex- 
 treme danger, the narrow and difficult 
 way is still open, during life, to all sin- 
 ners, who, by a timely repentance, will 
 endeavour to recover their forfeited 
 dignity and privileges. And thus " the 
 " Devil" may still " be every day dis- 
 " possessed by Christians " that is by 
 all who will sincerely endeavour to be 
 
 w 
 
 worthy of that title; because " the 
 " DeviFs tyranny" is so effectually 
 " expired," that he will certainly flee 
 from all who duly resist him, as St. 
 James, (in his Epistle c. iv. 7.) has as- 
 sured us, saying " resist the Devil, 
 " and he will flee from you" But, by 
 the same rule, in the converse state of 
 the case, we are equally assured that he 
 still exists in actual power and continu- 
 ed tyranny over all persons, who post- 
 pone their repentance, and willfully neg- 
 lect to resist him, and who, of course, must 
 be inthralled in the most deplorable of 
 all Slavery to the destruction both of 
 
 body
 
 131 
 
 body and soul ! For the " Devil," though 
 " cast out" " hath great wrath" (Rev. 
 xii. 9.-12.) and is still that most danger* 
 ous " Adversary" who is compared 
 to a " roaring Lion" that " walketh 
 " about" as watching our steps, and 
 " seeking whom he may devour," (1. 
 Pet. v. 8.) And therefore, " lest Satan 
 " should get an advantage of us" we 
 ought not to be " ignorant of his devi- 
 " ces." (2. Cor. ii. 11.) " Neither give 
 " place to the Devil" (Eph. iv. 27.) 
 
 These are ample proofs " that the 
 " Devil" maybe" every day dispossess- 
 " ed by Christians" consistently with the 
 doctrine that his " tyranny is expired" 
 (i. e. with respect to all persons who 
 rightly avail themselves of our Redeem- 
 er's promises) " as well as that it is 
 " revived, " viz. over all who neglect 
 the inestimable charter of privileges and 
 franchises which we have obtained and 
 hold in Christ. 
 
 Having
 
 132 
 
 Having thus solved a difficulty which 
 ^eerhed to have perplexed the learned 
 Author of the " Essay on the Demoni- 
 " acs of the New Testament," I may 
 now resume my proposed citation from 
 him of some farther evidence, against 
 himself, concerning the reality of De- 
 moniacal Possessions ; and I have there- 
 fore chosen his confutation of the erro- 
 neous notions suggested on this subject 
 by Dr. Sykes and Dr. Lardner, as the 
 concluding article of my little Tract. 
 
 .' A further argument in favour of real 
 
 * possessions' (says this learned, though 
 very inconsistent Writer in p. 280) ' is 
 ' taken from the destruction of the 
 ' herd of Swine, which the Demons 
 ' are said to have entered and stimula^ 
 ' ted to instantaneous madness.' (for 
 which he cites Matt. viii. 30. Mark v. 
 11. Luke viii. 32.) ' This case is consi- 
 * dered by some as a decisive proof of 
 ' the power of Demons, both over the 
 
 ' human.
 
 188 
 
 r human and ' (lie improperly adds) 
 
 ' brutal race,* and is thought even to 
 
 '*& < have 
 
 * The learned author certainly extended his argument 
 too far, when he included the " brutal race " as being 
 ^ in the power of Demons," because the miracle he 
 has cited is so far from being " a decisive proof of 
 " the power of DEMONS over the BRUTAL race," that 
 it is, on the contrary, a most " decisire proof " that the 
 Demons have no power at all over the " brutal race" 
 without an express permission (as in this instance, and 
 there is no other instance on record) by divine autho- 
 rity. In this mdnner the learned writer has very fre- 
 quently marred and confounded his own arguments by 
 unguarded additions, of which his present work, in par- 
 ticular, contains great abundance of examnles. Other 
 animals, as well as Man, are certainly liable to some 
 peculiar kinds of madness, arising from natural causes; 
 and even very timorous animals may lose their appre- 
 hension of bodily danger, when so enraged by cruel 
 usage as to be rendered furious for revenge ; or they 
 may be blinded by extreme terror so as to lose thoir 
 natural sense and means of avoiding danger, like a 
 frightened horse, or like little birds and other weak 
 and helpless animals, when fascinated by the eyes of 
 cats, serpents, or other beasts of prey, under which 
 fatal influence they will, advance towards their own 
 destruction j and female animals of very gentle nature, 
 will frequently lose all apprehension of danger to them- 
 *'lvcs, when prompted with a natural zeal in defence 
 <?f their young. -In any of these cases, other animals be- 
 sides
 
 1-34 
 
 have been purposely designed by 
 ' Providence, to convince us of this 
 ' principle, and to refute the op- 
 ' posite opinion. 
 
 'To 
 
 sitres Man, may evidently rash headlong to their own de- 
 struction ; but never with any such apparent design to 
 cause their own death, as could reasonably be imputed to 
 the incursion of Demons, or inimical Spirits, like that ti- 
 mifu rat propensity to self-murder, which is frequently and 
 notoriously prevalent in mankind / For there never was 
 ran instance (at least on record) either before or since this 
 &N0tMC*i possession of the Swine by "our Lord's express 
 permission, that any othrr animal, except Man alone, 
 should be so totally deprived of its natural principle of 
 y*Tf-f reservation or self-lore, as to manifest an earnest 
 -fpsire and premeditated design to destroy itself! And 
 Sterne, of all other animals, are the most remarkable not 
 rvly for scff lore, but also for their jealous apprehension 
 of bodily danger, and for clamorously expressing their 
 *zt rente fear of death whenever they are seized for the 
 -daughter. 
 
 There is one animal, indeed, the Scorpion, which seems 
 to afford an exception in this point to all other animals of 
 K less noxious nature. It is said, that if a Scorpion is sur- 
 nmnded by burning coals of fire, he will strike his own 
 fcack with the poisonous sting of his tail, and instantly die 
 of the wound. 1 do not pretend to assert the truth of 
 ihb circumstance ; but even if it were a known fact that 
 rhls noxious animal is so far like abandoned Men, as real- 
 ly to prefer and adopt self-murder as a relief from other 
 it will not otherwise uflcct the argument re- 
 specting
 
 1-35 
 
 * To enervate this argument,' (says 
 he), ' Dr. Sykes suggested ' (Inquiry,]). 
 
 52) 
 
 spccting all other less noxious animals, than as affording a 
 peculiar exception to their general case respecting the 
 power of Demons ; which indeed ought, here, to be parti- 
 cularly noticed, because Serpents and Scorpions are ex- 
 pressly included in " t/tc power of tin- enemy " by our 
 Lord himself, (Luke x. 19.) and also because the lir^l 
 Serpent was notoriously inspired by the spiritual Rncwy 
 as his instrument for the temptation of our first parents! 
 So that Serpents and Scorpions are really similar to soici- 
 ed Men in this point of diabolical influence, as being liable 
 to be rendered instruments for the purposes of the Dcrif, 
 and of course to be included in " the power of the 
 41 enemy" And the converse state of this case ought to I*.- 
 strongly urged to all unguarded and voluptuous sinners, 
 who do NOT " put on the u-Jtote armour of God," and of 
 course are not " able to mthttaxd the -wiles of the Devil," 
 (Kphes. vi. 11. for there is no middle way; as we must 
 either be the servants and sons of God, or the servants 
 and sons of the DeritJ so that by yeilding themselves in- 
 struments to Satan's delusions, they arc necessarily inchi 
 ded in the pouer of the Enemy, and of course are ranked 
 with Scorpions ami Pipers, as the haughty and jealous Pha- 
 risees and Saducees, in all their literary pride and seJl 
 sufficiency, were expressly intituled by John the Baptist, 
 " a generation of Vipers " (Matt. iii. 70 and also by oar 
 Lord himself, " Ye generation of Vipers, /io"v can you c.v 
 " cape the damnation of Hell" (Matt, \xiii. 33.) Su 
 are the horrible fruits of selfishness, pride, vice, and u \- 
 
 lighteousm-,-
 
 136 
 
 52) ' and Dr. Lardner ' (Case, p. 17, 
 101, and Remarks on Dr. Ward, p. 17) 
 
 ' strenuously 
 
 righteousness, that by yielding to temptation, men become 
 regenerated, as it were, by the I) nil himself, as his own 
 children and famili/, (instead of the promised regenera- 
 tion by the Holy-Spirit, to par fake of the dirine nature ; 
 because there is no middle way, as before remarked). 
 For " He that commit teth sin is of the Devil," (1 John 
 iii. 8. ; and this is farther explained by the Apostle in the 
 )th and 10th verses of the same chapter: " Whosoever 
 " is l/orn of God" (alluding to the same necessary doc- 
 trineof spiritual regeneration) " doth not commit sin ; for 
 " his seed rcmainelh in Jam: and he cannot sin, because 
 " he is born of Gad. In this the children of God are 
 " manifest, and the children of (he Devil : Whosoever doth 
 " NOT RIGHTEOUSNESS, NOT of GQ~D,ncithcrhethat 
 " lovcth not his brother." And (he same doctrine was 
 strongly asserted by our Lord himself, when he charged 
 the Jew* with their murderons intentions against his own 
 person, though they affected the dignity and purity of 
 Abraham's Seed." Whosoever comm'itleth sin" (said our 
 Lord) " are the servants" (or rather slaves) " of sin" ^.c. 
 " / know that, ye are Abrahams Seed ; but ye seek to 
 " kill me, because my word hath no place in you : I 
 " speak that which I have seen with MY FATHER : and ye 
 " do that which ye have seen with your father." (Here our 
 Lord states the true contrast between the sons of God 
 and the sons of the Devil.) " They answered and said 
 " vnto him, Abraham is our Father. Jesussaith unto them, 
 ' If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of 
 " Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me } a man that hath 
 
 " told
 
 137 
 
 ' strenuously contended, that the Swine 
 
 * were frighted by the two madmen, and 
 ' so driven down the precipice into the 
 
 * sea. On the other hand, the advo- 
 ' cates of the common hypothesis 
 ' insist upon it, [to my apprehension/ 
 (says he-in p. 281,) ' with great reason,] 
 ' that it was impossible for two men, 
 ' however fierce, to put so vast a herd 
 ' of swine as two thousand into motion 
 
 *' told you the truth vhich I have from God : this did not 
 " Abraham. Ye do the deeds of YOUR father" (mean- 
 ing the Devil). " Then said they to him, We be not bora 
 " of fornication ; we have one Father, (even) God. Jesut 
 11 said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would 
 " love me. Why do not ye understand my speech? (even) 
 " because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of YOUR 
 " FATHER THE Dciil, and the lusts of your father ye 
 " will do. He -was a murderer from the beginning, and 
 " abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in 
 " him. When he speaketh a lie, he spcaketh of his ovin : 
 " for he is a liar and the father of it," John viii. 34 
 4^. AH this should be awfully considered by those unhap- 
 py persons, who, for worldly interest, have ever ventured 
 to misrepresent and betray the truth, or in any other rc- 
 pect have yielded themselves as instruments or slates 
 in the service of Satan; for as such, they are certainly 
 debased to the detestable rank of Vipert. 
 
 s ' in
 
 138 
 
 ' in an instant, and to cause them all 
 1 to rush with violence down a precipice 
 ' into the sea ; Swine, contrary to the 
 ' nature of most other animals, running 
 ' different ways when they are driven. 
 ' But this part of the controversy might 
 ' well be spared ;' (says he) ' it not ap- 
 ' pear ing from history, that the men 
 ' ever fell upon the herd, or made any 
 ' attempt to drive them into the sea. 
 * Nay ' (says he) ' the history expressly 
 ' refers their destruction to a different 
 ' cause from the behaviour of the mad- 
 ' men.' After these unexceptionable 
 arguments against the false notions of 
 Dr. Sykes and Dr. Lardner, the Author 
 himself, most unaccountably, reverts to 
 his own absurd hypothesis of attributing 
 Demoniacal possession to mere madness, 
 and, in p. 282, he is careful to remind us 
 of it. ' We must recollect' (says he) 
 * that those persons, who were anciently 
 ' thought to be possessed, were disor- 
 ' dercd in (heir understandings.' On 
 
 which
 
 139 
 
 which I shall only remark, that " we 
 " must recollect" also at the same 
 time, that HE HIMSELF has produced 
 many unquestionable proofs (several of 
 which I have already cited from him, 
 and which without his learned labours 
 I should never have known), that from 
 the most ancient times, according to 
 the testimony, not only of the best his- 
 torians, but also of physicians, philoso- 
 phers, and the most eminent classical 
 writers, a due distinction between De- 
 moniacal Possession and Madness from 
 natural causes was always duly observ- 
 ed and known ; and therefore, how far 
 the mention of his own notions, under a 
 reference to the case in question, may 
 tend to render his own notions about 
 mere madness in the-case more consis- 
 tent and reasonable, on the supposition 
 that the Swine were not really possessed, 
 but were only " disordered in their im- 
 " derstandiugs" (an obvious conclusion 
 to be drawn from the said reference,
 
 140 
 
 though not literally so expressed) does 
 not require much consideration. I shall 
 therefore omit what he has further ad- 
 vanced about his own opinion (which is 
 amply confuted in the preceding re- 
 marks on " the Case of Saul") and 
 iv ill resume my quotation from him, as 
 far as it relates to his learned confuta- 
 tion of Dr. Sykes and Dr. Lardner, 
 which is continued in p. 283 as follows : 
 ( It appears likewise from history, that 
 ' at the time the Demoniacs were cured, 
 ' they were present with Christ ; and 
 ' the herd of Swine at some distance 
 'from them. Nevertheless' (says he 
 in p. 284), ' no sooner was leave asked 
 ' for the Demons to enter the herd, 
 ' than it was granted : Forthwith, or 
 ' immediately Jesus gave them leave, 
 ' and said unto them, Go. Then went 
 * the Demons out of the Men, and en- 
 ' tered into the Swine,' (for which he 
 cites Mark v. 13. Matt. viii. 32. and 
 Luke viii. 33.) *' The Demoniacs, 
 
 ' therefore,
 
 141 
 
 therefore, were cured upon the spot, 
 while the Swine continued feeding 
 quietly by themselves; and conse- 
 quently they had no opportunity of 
 falling upon them and forcing them 
 down a precipice into the sea. Far- 
 ther, the Men, at this time, could 
 have no disposition to make any such 
 attempt upon the herd ; for we have 
 seen, that before the latter grew mad, 
 or appeared ' (says he in p. 287) 'un- 
 der any disorder, the former were re- 
 stored to their right mind ; or, in other 
 words, the Demons had left the Men 
 before they took possession of the 
 Swine. The men, therefore, if the 
 words of the evangelists are to be our 
 guide, neither drove, nor attempted 
 to drive, the herd into the sea. Had 
 the spectators seen them engaged in 
 such a mad and mischievous attempt, 
 
 they would not have thought the De- 
 
 j 
 
 inons had left them, but considered 
 them still as possessed madmen. The 
 
 ' history, 
 
 4
 
 142 
 
 * history, it is certain, doth expressly 
 e ascribe the destruction of the Swine, 
 ' not to their being driven by the De- 
 f moniacs, but to the entrance of De- 
 
 * mons into them, or to their being 
 ' seize, 1 with the same disorder from 
 f which th* 3 men were relieved, and 
 ' which was tuought to be caused by 
 
 * Demons. The Evangelists, even sup- 
 
 * posi;i^ them to have adopted the 
 ' common hypothesis, would not have 
 ' said, thai the Demons had entered 
 ' the Swine, if the latter had only been 
 c pursued by the Demoniacs. Nor 
 ' can I see ' (says the Author of the 
 Essay in p. 288) ' any room to dispute 
 ' the testimony of the Evangelists in 
 
 * this matter.' 
 
 END OF THE CASE OF SAUL, &C.
 
 THE 
 
 INFLUENCE OF DEMONS 
 
 FURTHER ILLUSTRATED, 
 IK 
 
 REMARKS ON 1 TIM. iv. 15.
 
 OK 
 
 1 TIMOTHY iv. 13. 
 
 SHEWING, THAT THI 
 
 PROHIBITION OF MARRIAGE TO PRIESTS, 
 
 ADOPTED BY THE 
 
 f)urrf) of ftomc, 
 
 DOCTRINE OF DKJIOA'S," 
 
 AKD HAD BEKN PREVIOUSLY INCULCATED BY THEM AMO.NG 
 
 THE ANCIENT PAGANS, 
 
 AS WELL AS AMONG 
 
 THE MANICHEES AMD OTHER HERETICAL CHRISTIANS. 
 
 BY GRANVILLE SHARP. 
 
 Uonfcon : 
 
 I'rinted by W. CALVERT, Great Sliirc-lanc, Temple-bat; 
 
 For 
 VERKOR AND HOOD, POULTRY ; f. AND C. RIVIKGTON', ST. 
 
 PAUL'S CHURCH-YARD; j. WHITE, FLEET-STREET ; 
 j. IIATCHARD, PICCADILLY; w. DWYER, UOLBORN j 
 
 AND L. KJEKNINGTON, AT DVKUAM, 
 
 1807.
 

 
 HEMARKS 
 
 1 TIMOTHY iv. 13, 
 
 THE Rev. Mr. * * *, in his 
 " General and connected P*iew of 
 14 Prophecies" Sec. p. 229 to 239* 
 speaking of St Paul's prophecy, in the 
 first Epistle to Timothy c. iv. that ' in the 
 1 latter times some should depart from 
 ' the faith, giving heed to seducing Spi- 
 ' rils and Doctrines of Devils,* &c. re- 
 marks, that ' this most accurate pro- 
 ' phecy of the introduction of Celibacy, 
 ' among the Clergy, and the injunc- 
 ' tion of it as a duty by the Monks, 
 ' appears to me ' (says he) c to have 
 
 ' been
 
 147 
 
 * been considerably obscured by the 
 ' manner in winch our translators have 
 ' rendered part of the passage that 
 ' contains it. As the Text now stands ' 
 (continues lie) ' the words in the close 
 
 * of the first, and the beginning of the 
 ' second verse of the fourth chapter, run 
 * thus ' " giving heed to seducing Spi- 
 " rits and DOCTRINES OF DEVILS; 
 " speaking lies in hypocrisy." ' Now 
 (says Mr. ***,) * if the w r ord, here tran- 
 ' slated Devils, be, in the original, real- 
 ' ly a Substantive, in natural construe- 
 ' tion, 'that translated speaking lies 
 
 * should agree with it ; and consequent- 
 ' ly those Teachers who should prohi- 
 ' bit Marriage a'e denominated Devils ; 
 
 * but, at present, it seems far from 
 4 clear whether these Devils are spoken 
 ' of as the subject, r the teachers of 
 ' the Doctrines.' To which I must re- 
 ply, that the word, translated Devils, 
 is really a Substantive, dx/fioi'tar, the 
 Genitive plural from the Substantive by 
 
 which
 
 148 
 
 which the Demons are most commonly 
 mentioned in the New Testament, viz. 
 TO Jziuoi'iei'-u, in the Neuter Gender. 
 There is also another Substantive, by 
 which Demons are sometimes mention- 
 ed, viz. a Substantive in the Masculine 
 Gender, 6 JMUCJI'-WOZ, which occurs 
 only five times in the N. Test, bnt the 
 other at least sixty times, so that there 
 is no want of examples to prove that 
 the word is really a Substantive ; and, 
 consequently, Demons, or Devils, arc 
 here spoken of (not as the Subject, but) 
 as the Teachers of the Doctrines w 
 xztoci^ zrozr^cr'zt rtvss 
 
 TTV 
 
 x.G)\')c,i\c-}i' yzuzir, zz 
 , Sec. In some Greek copies of 
 this text a period lias been erroneously in- 
 serted alter the word jtpwi&l', which is 
 contrary to the proper grammatical con- 
 
 struction
 
 149 
 
 struction of the whole context ;* for not 
 only the Participle ifwfaldfyfyv (speak* 
 
 * Some late editions of the Latin Vulgate seem to 
 have been formed from a Greek copy with this false point- 
 kig, or interpolated period, \\hich does not appear m the 
 ancient editions of the Vulgate. (See the Appendix.) But 
 the peculiar stile of the Latin Vulgate itself, in this 
 Text, proves the absurdity of inserting a period at the 
 cod of the first verse ; because the attempt to give a lite- 
 ral rendering of the Greek, so pointed, into Latin, has 
 occasioned, in the 2d and 3d verses, an uncouth sen- 
 fence, which is as notoriously ungrammatical and imper- 
 fect in the Latin, as it is in the Greet, when that period 
 is inserted. 
 
 For if the 1st verse had been a perfect sentence, in 
 the original Greek, so as to require a period at the end 
 of it, (for that is the true meaning of the word period), 
 the persons therein mentioned (very properly in the no- 
 minative case) as the predicted agents, (viz. " discedent 
 u QUIDAM ajide, ATTENDENTES spiritibus erroris, ct. 
 11 doctrine :DJEMONiORUM,")would also in the following 
 sentence, where the same subject is continued, be men- 
 tioned, in like manner, as the agents, without any 
 change of the nominative case, as " LOQUENTES 
 " mendaciiim, ct cautcriatam HABENTES suam con- 
 " scicntiam ; PROHIBENTES nubcre" &c. But, on 
 the contrary, we find, that all the leading participles 
 in the following sentence are in the genitive case plural 
 (forming a very imperfect and ungrammatical sentence, 
 if the period bt admitted} which cannot otherwise be ac- 
 
 couuted
 
 f 
 
 ing lies) must necessarily agree with the 
 Substantive AuuLWtav* (there being no 
 
 other 
 
 counted for, unless they are allowed to refer back to th 
 substantive in the genitive case plural D^MONIOHUM, 
 in the preceding sentence ; which destroys the probabili- 
 ty of any period having been originally placed after that 
 word in the original Greek. And therefore though the 
 Bishops of Rjnie have really been Prohibitory of Marriage 
 " (Prohibentes Nubcre}" we must acquit them, at least, 
 of being the Jirst Authors of that unnatural doctrine; 
 and we must also allow that they were not really the De- 
 luders, predicted in the Text, but only the Deluded, the 
 ft Qiiidam" of whom it was foretold that they would 
 1* depart from the faith " the " attendee tcs Spiritibuser- 
 11 roris et doctrinis D&moniorum." So that the unnatural 
 doctrine must necessarily be attributed, in the first place, 
 'to the DEMONS, (as it is truly a " doctrine oj Demons)" 
 and to " seducing SPIRITS," as the original authors of 
 it ; and indeed, it must also be allowed, in strict and 
 impartial justice to the Supreme Pontiffs, that they were 
 not even the first persons deluded into this " DOCTRiyg 
 " op DEMONS;" for the GNOSTICS and MANICHEES* 
 were really before them in it, as well as in many ether 
 
 * " Alter* lege de caclibatu divulgata horribiles in plerisqxre Euro- 
 " pas proyincjis tujnultus cicbant Sacerdofos *ive legilima uronLus 
 " si\e Concuhinis, juncti : quorum quidem rnulti, preerlin> in Italics 
 ' Provincia MHi'j'tnsi Sactrdotia dirnittere nutlabantquam conjuges. 
 " abEccle?i Romano secedebant et infatni Paterinorufn, id est Mani- 
 '* chvor im, vocabtilo Pontifrrm fjut<)ite asieclas notabant <\\\\ Con- 
 *' ju<>taSacerdotum'(!umnabant," tic. Mothcinii Hist. Eccles. Sasr. 
 xi. pan 2. c. 2. p. 3i5. 
 
 leading
 
 151 
 
 other Genitive plural, than the Substan- 
 tive JatftwiG)!', that can possihly be 
 constructed with it) but also the two 
 next Participles in the Genitive plural 
 which follow, viz.lftx&vfyizaust'ai' and 
 r fici\') 01*0)1'. For all these three partici- 
 ples, in strict grammatical construction, 
 refer to the substantive in the Genitive 
 case plural, Jzwoi't&v, as being the de- 
 scription and work of Demons, the delu- 
 ders ; But the *' giving heed to seduc- 
 *' ing Spirits," mentioned in the first 
 part of the sentence, relates to different 
 Beings, or persons ; for the participle 
 tfriftM a nominative plural, which 
 
 leading doctrines of the Church of Rome, wherein the Pa- 
 fists have unhappily departed from the practice of the 
 primitive Church of Christ, and " from thcfaithoncc dc- 
 " lircrcd to the Saints." But the true read ing of the Greek 
 Text is sufficiently proved by the necessary grammatical 
 construction, which is confirmed by the most approved 
 Greek copies, viz. Kobt. Stephen ss elegant Paris editions of 
 1550 and 156.Q. The copies also from which the English 
 versions were, taken ; and that from which the old Spanish 
 version of 15<)6 was translated, as also all the best and 
 most correct modern editions of the Greek Text. 
 
 refers
 
 152 
 
 refers to the nominative Pronoun Ttrsc, 
 the " some persons" whose apostacy 
 in the latter times is predicted : and 
 the very manner and means of their 
 apostatizing is also predicted, viz. the 
 " giving heed to seducing Spirits" 
 x%OG%oi'7t(; xvvty.OL'ji xkawoiQ : and what 
 kind of seducing Spirits these were is 
 explained in the next portion of the 
 sentence, annexed by a conjunction KM 
 ^ilnTfizkiziz A2iu.oviG)V, and to the 
 " doctrines of Demons." So that the 
 " seducing Spirits " to whom these 
 Apostates (as predicted) would attend 
 were undoubtedly Demons, as it is ex- 
 pressly added, that they would attend 
 " ALSO to the doctrines of DEMONS. 
 
 r. * * * seems to apprehend, that 
 the word Demons signifies rather " de- 
 " parted Spirits" than Devils. But 
 the Scripture use or application of the 
 word Demon is regularly to denote an 
 
 Unclean-Spirit, or Devil, and there is , 
 
 u not
 
 153 
 
 not the least authority throughout the 
 whole Scriptures (notwithstanding all 
 the Sophistry of Mr. Farmer in his 
 Tract on Demoniacs) for applying that 
 wore! to signify a human departed Spi- 
 rit. Nevertheless, Mr. * * * remarks, 
 ' Nor will tlxe change of the term into 
 ' that of Demons, *as according with 
 ' the worship and the belief in the 
 ' interposition of departed Spirits, en- 
 
 * tertained by the Papists, remove the 
 ' difficulty, since it cannot alter the 
 
 * construction of the passage ; for how 
 ' many lies soever departed Spirits may 
 
 * have had told of them, we are not 
 
 * warranted to say they have told any 
 ' themselves/ And he has remarked 
 in a Note that J\fr. Mede ' does not 
 
 * seem sufficiently to have attended to 
 ' the want of the Article before vxo- 
 
 * xoi'jti,' &c. I perfectly agree with 
 him, that Mr. Mede (though a very 
 learned and most excellent commentator 
 in general) has not sufficiently attended 
 
 to
 
 154 
 
 to the necessary grammatical construc- 
 tion of this particular text. But with 
 respect to the belief of the Papists ' in 
 ' the interposition of DEPARTED SPIRITS,' 
 mentioned by Mr. * * *, I must re- 
 mark, on the Hypocrisy of Demons (if 
 we may judge by what is revealed in 
 the Holy Scriptures of the Hypocrisy of 
 ' the Prince of Demons,' viz. that " Sa- 
 " tan himself is transformed into an 
 " Angel of light" 2 Cor. xi. 14, 15.) 
 that it is very natural to suppose, that 
 other Demons as well as their Prince, 
 may also be " transformed as Ministers 
 " of righteousness,' and may endea- 
 vour to appear as " Angels of light" 
 or to personate * Departed Saints,' the 
 Virgin Mart/, Si. James, and other 
 holy persons from whom the Roman 
 Catholics profess to have received Re- 
 relalions concerning the efficacy of 
 Holy water, and other enchantments, as 
 well as many other heretical practices 
 and doctrines of the Papacy, which are 
 
 contrary
 
 155 
 
 contrary to the Faith and Practice of the 
 primitive Church. Besides it is neces- 
 sary to be observed, that Men, while in 
 the flesh, are never, in Holy Scripture, 
 called Spirits, though they are frequent- 
 ly called Wuy^ix.1, Souls ; and therefore, 
 according to the general meaning of 
 words used in Holy Scripture, the " se- 
 " ducing Spirits" to whom the pre- 
 dicted Apostates gave heed, must have 
 been really Spirits, or Demons, and not 
 either Men, or the departed Spirits 
 " of Men." For it is not at all probable 
 that " departed Spirits of Men " ever 
 appeared to delude mankind wth lies. 
 We have one remarkable instance, in- 
 deed, of %, phantom or appearance in the 
 form of Samuel the Prophet, which fore- 
 told the approaching destruction oi Saul 
 and his sons, and the defeat of Israel ; 
 but, though this Spirit appeared in con- 
 sequence of the incantations of ^Witch^ 
 yet he spake the Truth ; and the manner 
 of his appearance was so different from 
 
 what
 
 156 
 
 what the Witch herself expected, that 
 she was terrified, and " cried with aloud 
 " voice," and exclaimed to Saul, " Why 
 " hast thou deceived me, for thou art 
 " Saul." And when he encouraged her 
 to lay aside her fear, saying *' Be not 
 " afraid, for what sawest thou " She 
 answered, " / saw gods ascending out 
 " of the earth" So that the appearances 
 were unquestionably very different to 
 what she had expected, and by the na- 
 ture of the advice given to Saul, at 
 that time, and the- truth of the prophe- 
 tical part of it, we may be assured that 
 it was not communicated by a " sedu- 
 " cingi Spirit " or Demon, but by some 
 more respectable Agent of the Divine 
 Will, whose unexpected appearance oc- 
 casioned the extreme terror of the 
 woman ; and it is not at all improbable 
 that the Agent was the departed Spirit 
 of Samuel himself, appearing (not by 
 i\\? incantation of the Witch, but) by the
 
 157 
 
 mil of God, to denounce his awful veil- 
 .geance against Saul ! 
 
 We have another remarkable in- 
 stance, in Scripture, of the appearance 
 of departed Spirits of Men, BEFORE our 
 Lords resurrection. [For it is necessary 
 to speak of them distinctly from those 
 Saints who " appeared unto many" in 
 Jerusalem, AFTER the resurrection; 
 because the latter were not merely Spi- 
 rits, but the " Bodies of Saints f their 
 Spirits being really re-united to their 
 Bodies, or else we should not have been 
 informed of the opening of the graves : 
 and of their coming " out of the grave sf 
 because the opening of the graves would 
 not have been necessary for the appear- 
 ance merely of their Spirits, without 
 their BODIES : whereas the appearance 
 of the departed Spirits of Men, BEFORE 
 the resurrection was not attended with 
 any such circumstances, which their 
 case (the nature of the Spiritual exis- 
 tence)
 
 tence) did not require.] 1 speak of the 
 Spirits of Moses and Blias, who not 
 only appeared, but were heard to dis- 
 course with Christ in the Mount, though 
 they were merely departed Spirits, 
 without their bodies; because Christ 
 had not then suffered death, and he 
 was to be " the first fruits from the 
 " Dead."* But when //<?,$ are told by 
 Spirits, we may he sure that such " se- 
 " during Spirits" are not the departed 
 Spirits of Men, but the Spirits only of 
 Demons, though they may affect to per- 
 sonate Angels, or even departed Spirits 
 of Saints, in order to delude, as we are 
 warned, tbat " the coming of the Matt 
 " of Sm " (or Papacy) f " shall be 
 
 " after 
 
 * The first Man that should rise with an incorruptible 
 and immortal Body. 
 
 f The deplorable state of the Papal Religionis strong- 
 ly represented by tlie late Edward Gibbon, Esq. in his 
 Miscellaneous Works, vol.ii.p. 437. notwithstanding that 
 
 D 
 
 be himself h*d been, for a time, an unwary convert to ii. 
 
 His
 
 159 
 
 " after the working of Satan with all 
 " power, and signs, and It/ing wonders." 
 (2 Thess. 2. 9.) 
 
 The 
 
 His just censure is cited in " a collection of political 
 " Papers," No. vi. p. $6. Such extreme depravity, as 
 he has described, of persons -professing to be Christians, 
 cannot surely be more reasonably accounted for than 
 by attributing their perversion to " the working of Satan" 
 p.s the Holy Scriptures have expressly warned us. And 
 of this re or king of Satan, even Mr. Gibbon himself (not- 
 withstanding his defective faith in general, concerning 
 spiritual matters repealed in the Holy Scriptures) has 
 citerl ample testimonies of the actual communication of 
 Demons, or Evil-Spirits, to delude mankind, in that part 
 of his Roman History relating to the Emperor Julian, 
 shewing that these " seducing- Spirits" so artfully per- 
 sonated the false pagan deities Apollo, Mercury, &c. that 
 he Apostate Emperor, the Infallible Pont if ex Maximus 
 himself,* was completely deluded by them, and confirm- 
 ed in his rejection of the Christian Faith, so as seriously 
 to embrace the dark errors of Paganism. Mr. Gibborf 
 nevertheless has, at the same time, most indiscriminately 
 dignified the imperial Apostate with the title of " Pious 
 " Prince!" The shameful adoption of the Pagan Celibacy 
 by the Church of Rome, in direct opposition to the prac- 
 tice of the primitii'eChurch of Christ, cannot be accounted 
 
 * Julian was at that time (like all the other Roman Emperor; 
 of the western branch who formed the 6th crowned head of the 
 beast, during their lives) the only Roman Pontifcx Maximiis then 
 existing : and he acted in the genuine spirit of that function in 
 promoting Idolatry and the worship of Demons. 
 
 for
 
 The new version, however, of this 
 Text, proposed by Mr. * * *, would 
 not be at all consistent with the original 
 Text ; * but the Spirit speakethexpress- 
 ' ly that in the latter times some shall 
 
 * depart from the Faith,, giving heed to 
 
 * seducing Spirits and doctrines of 
 ' WRETCHED Men' (says Mr. * * *, 
 instead of Devils or Demons) ' speaking 
 ' lies in hypocrisy, seared in their con^ 
 ' sciences, forbidding to marry j &G. 
 But if such liberty in translating (the 
 substituting one word for another) be 
 admitted, the Holy Scripture may be so 
 perverted as to countenance any kind 
 of doctrine, that whimsical writers may 
 wish to impose on us ! 
 
 According to this new version, the 
 " seducing Spirits," mentioned in the 
 
 ed for on any other principle, than that of the actual com- 
 municution of " seducing Spirits;" so that it may justly 
 be deemed a " doctrine of Demons." See a note in the 
 Tract on Congregational Courts, p. 77 and 78, 2d Note. 
 
 x same
 
 161 
 
 same sentence, must also be understood 
 to mean ' seducing Men,' and not * sc- 
 ' during Spirits,' as they are expressly 
 called, so that the sense, in that case, 
 must be entirely inconsistent with the 
 real words of the original, xi'FMaffi and 
 
 O k 
 
 dxtu.oi'i&i''. Had the inspired writer 
 intended to express the sense above pro- 
 posed, he certainly would not have used 
 the word zi's'juaei, because living Men 
 are never called Spirits in Holy Scrip- 
 ture ; and had he intended to express 
 the case of Men infected, or inspired, 
 by Demons (which case I suppose Mr. 
 
 * * * means by his expression 
 " wretched Men" ) he would, probably, 
 have used a proper Participle (and not* 
 the Substantive Aouu.oviai'} as r&i' Azi- 
 tJLwiou.Ei'G)V, or JzitJioi'ted'cw, &c. which, 
 even then, would barely justify 
 his version of " wretched Men," though 
 Demoniacs are surely wretched enough ! 
 
 * But whatever the more learned rea- 
 ' der' (says Mr. * * *) < may think of 
 
 * this
 
 162 
 
 * this proposed alteration, the inspection 
 ' of the original will convince him, 
 
 * that the persons termed Devils are 
 ' those who it is said sltall prohibit 
 ( Marriage, Sec. In which he is certain- 
 ly right : for the Demons did always 
 prohibit Marriage to their Priests and 
 Votaries in the ancient state of Pagan- 
 ism ; and the Pagan Priests in Thibet, 
 Boutan, Ava, Pegou, and China, are not 
 permitted to marry, even to this day ; 
 so that the Prohibition to marry may 
 .well be called, a " doctrine of Demons." 
 But the Apostate Church did not prohi- 
 bit Marriage until " the latter times" 
 w vjSMic; XZI^IQ, (as predicted by St. 
 Paul,) when those persons arose who 
 are described as " giving heed" ZMffsy 
 d'hc;, " to seducing SPIRITS" and to the 
 " Doctrines of Demons" The Spirits 
 and the Demons, therefore, were the 
 leaders in the Prohibition of Marriage, 
 
 k/ ty ' 
 
 and the various stories related in the 
 ** Golden Legend," and in the " Gestes 
 
 of
 
 " ofSainls,"*&c. about the appearances 
 \- of Saints and Angels, " commanding " 
 the several establishments, or orders, of 
 Celibacy (howsoever incredible in other 
 matters, yet in this of " Forbidding to 
 " marry," and " commanding to abstain 
 "from meats" when compared with 
 this prediction of St. Paul,) afford ample 
 reason to suppose, that many of the ap- 
 pearances were really Demoniacal De- 
 lusions " Demons speaking lies in Hy- 
 " pocrisy ;' which they certainly did, 
 if they personated the blessed Virgin, 
 or any of the Apostles or Saints ; for 
 we are sure that the departed Spirits of 
 Saints could not teach any such doc- 
 
 * " Gcstes of Saints." To the title of this collection 
 of ridiculous popish miracles, we are indebted for the 
 ironical derivations of our English words, jest, and 
 jests. 
 
 f Apparitionum, visionum, somniorum, et illusion- 
 um Diaboll, ad confirmandas supi rstitiones, extra ver- 
 hum Dei, approbatores praecones et dictaton-s agebant. 
 Hist. Ecclesiast. Hottingcri, c. viii, p. 4?8. 
 
 trines.
 
 164 
 
 trines, as the Pro/lib it ion of Marriage, 
 the Adoration of Images, the " Vain re- 
 " petitions" of prayers, numbered or 
 counted by the rosary or string of beads, 
 &c. &c. exactly as practised by the Pa- 
 gans of Thibet, Bontan, &c. And there- 
 fore the appearances on which the Ro- 
 manists have founded and asserted these 
 unnatural and idolatrous practices may 
 very fairly be deemed " strong delu- 
 " s?'o?is," by which the Apostate Church 
 has been induced to " believe a Lie!"* 
 And the very manner of this unhappy 
 Apostttiizfag seems to have been in 
 exact conformity (" EXPRESSLY," or 
 Grj&o} with St. Paul's prediction in the 
 Text before us,f " Aoa> the Spirit 
 " speaketh EXPRESSLY " tyrac) " that 
 " in the latter times some shall depart" 
 (or literally, " shall Apostatize," (azo- 
 
 * 2, Thess. ii. II. 
 t Sec 1 Tim. i\'. i.
 
 165 
 
 ) "from the faith ;" (and, then, 
 for the very manner of their Apostatiz- 
 ing lie adds XQQ3%pvk) " giving heed 
 " to seducing Spirits and to doctrines 
 " of Demons " (for whatsoever outward 
 appearances the Demons may have as- 
 sumed, in order the more effectually to 
 seduce them, yet the Doctrines them- 
 selves, which the Church of Rome has 
 adopted confessedly on account of su- 
 pernatural appearances and spiritual 
 relations, are so notoriously contrary to 
 
 / - 
 
 the Holy Scriptures, and to " the Faith 
 " once delivered to the Saints" that 
 4'here can be no reason to doubt of their 
 being really what the Apostle has ex- 
 pressly called them, viz. Doctrines of 
 Demons,) *' speaking Lies in hypo- 
 " crisy, having their conscience scared" 
 (or cauterized) " Forbidding to Marry" : 
 (and commanding) " to abstain from " 
 meals, &c. This fatal Apostatizing, "from 
 " the faith" (by " some persons" TWSC) 
 botli as to the manner of it, and the prin- 
 cipal
 
 166 
 
 cipal doctrinal marks of it, could not 
 have been more expressly declared than 
 the}* are in this Text ; insomuch, that the 
 TU'Z> or " some persons apostatizing" 
 need no farther description to make 
 them known than these very circum- 
 stances as declared in the Text, where- 
 by the Church of Rome hath been most 
 notoriously convicted and exposed for 
 many centuries \ 
 
 DEO SOLI GLORIA.
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTE, 
 
 OR 
 
 APPENDIX, 
 
 TO THE 
 
 REMARKS ON 1 TIM. iv. 13, 
 
 SUSPECTING 
 
 THE PERIOD, OR POI.VT, 
 
 INSERTED AFTEU THE WOUD 
 
 IN SOME 
 
 GREEK AND LATIN COPIES 
 
 OF THAT 
 
 EPISTLE.
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTE, 
 
 Oil 
 
 APPENDIX, 
 
 TO 
 
 THE REMARKS ON 1 TIM.iv. I S. 
 
 RESPECTING 
 
 THE PERIOD, OR POINT, 
 
 ERRONEOUSLY INSERTED AFTER THE WORD 
 
 IN SOIrfE 
 
 GREEK AND LATIN COPIES 
 
 OF 
 
 THAT EPISTLE. 
 
 'T'lIE insertion of a Period after S(Xi(JL- 
 *- wiov t at the end of the first verse, is 
 inconsistent with the necessary gram- 
 matical construction of the context; 
 because the three following Participles, 
 K$nzvrriQi&3{t.WG}v, and 
 ', are all expressed, likewise, 
 in the Genitive case plural, so as mani- 
 festly to be governed by the preceding 
 
 Sub-
 
 171 
 
 Substantive in the Genitive case plurel r 
 
 There are no other Agents mention- 
 ed in the context, except those that are 
 included in the preceding description 
 of r/i'cC r/jc WG?C, the " some persons 
 " of the Faith," whose future dposf&cy 
 from it was foreseen, and the manner 
 of it, that it would he occasioned by 
 their " giving heed" (zpozr^orfzc) " to 
 " seducing Spirits, and to doctrines OF 
 " DEMONS," (Jaittoi'/cw, in the Genitive 
 case plural) ; so that the grammatical 
 form of the words which immediately 
 follow (viz. w vr.M'jiczi W&OG^oycn',} 
 would be absurd if a farther des- 
 cription of the delusive agency of De- 
 mons, and of their hardened and repro- 
 bate state of mind, (HRimrr\pi&G\wccw r\v 
 mzv ovvziftfiw) and of their peculiar 
 unnatural Doctrines (XCO\'JO) ; TCO ?Z{/MP, 
 &c.) "forbidding to Marry" &c., had not 
 been intended to be expressed by the 
 three following Participles in the Genitive 
 
 case
 
 172 
 
 case plural, but only the Agency and 
 dark mental state of the first-mentioned 
 TWSS TKC, XIQZCO^, whose aposlacy from 
 the faith was predicted, and the man- 
 ner of it, " giving heed to seducing Spi- 
 " rits, &c. viz. JWaW^OVfciiJ the nomina- 
 tive case plural; whereby the other three 
 Participles, now in the Genitive case 
 plural, must, otherwise, have been ne- 
 cessarily expressed also in the Nomina- 
 tive case, so as to agree with TIVSQ, the 
 preceding pronoun ; and not (as at pre- 
 sent) in the genitive plural ; which can- 
 not refer to any other Agents mention- 
 ed in the context except to the De- 
 mons, i. e. to the Substantive plural 
 AMiJLOi't&P, the only preceding word of 
 that sentence in the Genitive jzase 
 plural, 
 
 This will be more clearly illustrated 
 .ty reviewing the commentary of the 
 learned Jesuit, Cornelius a Lapide, 
 upon this Text. He wished, indeed, to 
 
 inculcate
 
 173 
 
 inculcate the opposite doctrine, that 
 these plural Genitives had best be 
 referred, not to the Demons, but to the 
 word " quidam" (in Greek rti'Zt;,) 
 though he is obliged to apologize for 
 such a palpable error in grammatical 
 construction by supposing a Hebraism 
 in the Apostle's mode of expression, as 
 not agreeing with the propriety of 
 either the Latin or Greek Syntax* 
 
 For even he himself allows that it 
 might,' more commodiously' (i.e. for the 
 Popish Faith) and clearly, have been 
 expressed in the Nominative case, 
 " QUIDAM LOQTJENTES mendacium, et 
 " cauleriatam HABENTES conscicntiam" 
 rather than * Quidam LOQUENTIUM men- 
 ' dacium, et cauteriatam HABENTIUM 
 * conscientiam ; ' " sed PER HEBRAIS- 
 " ML'M" (says he) " maluit dicere in 
 " GENITIVO, quia precessit GENITIVUS, 
 " D^MONIORUIM, etiamsi ad eum 
 " propriinonpertineat: sic em'mUEBRMi 
 
 " con-
 
 174 
 
 * concordant nomen vel verbum subtndc 
 " cum propinquiore nomine, non autem 
 " cum eo quod proprw respicit, el cum 
 " quo hi LATIN A et GR^ECA SYNTAX! 
 *' CONCORDARE DEBET." 
 
 But the examples of Hebraisms, 
 which he has cited to justify this per- 
 version of the Text, are not at all suit- 
 able, or similar, to the construction of 
 this particular Text ; so that the suppo- 
 sition of a Hebraism is a mere excuse 
 without any foundation at all, and even 
 in direct opposition to the necessary 
 construction of the Greek Text, as well 
 as of the Latin Vulgate. 
 
 The learned Jesuit, nevertheless, has 
 produced ample evidence that the doc- 
 trines of " forbidding- to Marry" and 
 " commanding to abstain from meats" 
 Sec. were really Doctrines of the 
 *' Simon-tans" (from Simon Magos, who 
 communicated with Devils), " Gnos- 
 
 " tics.
 
 175 
 
 " tic$,Manicheans"* and other ancient 
 Heretics ; so that the adoption of the 
 
 same 
 
 * " Sic MANicn^Ei ft Encratitce, quos proprie hie 
 11 taxat ApostoluSy" (and surely he also equally taxes 
 the Papisfs, who likewise " forbid to iixirry," &c.) " ut 
 " mox dicam,cum -doMjiet secrctoviverent tarpissime ct 
 " Jibidinosissime, foris tamen et exterins simulabant so 
 '* caste et sancte -viverc, adeoque darnnabant nvptias 
 44 ctiam legitimas, tit c/ocr^Epiphan: et August, "p. 787. 
 And again this learned Jesuit (in his comment on the 
 
 VOrds " PKOHIBENTIUM NUBERE, ABSTINEUE A 
 
 4 * CIBIS/' in p. 7 88) supposes that the Apostle is here 
 speaking against thf.se Heretics, though the censure, 
 most certainly., is equally applicable to all other Sects 
 that are stained with the same marks of 4pustacy ; so 
 that the Church &f Rome, which still retains them, can- 
 not be withdrawn from this most humiliating conviction 
 of the predicted APOSTACY ! " Loquitur" (says th 
 Jesuit, speaking of this awful prediction) " contra 
 " SIMON JANOS, Safunirnvm, (qui tc mpore Apostolorum 
 " visit') Ebiosfffl } TiiA'Sicu&.o$ t M8rchionitas > Encrati- 
 *' tas, qui dicebant KUFTIAS V viaum, cornet, Sj-c.non 
 " fS9 a Deo bono, scd mala, pitta Diabolo, creuta, Sfc" 
 and a little lower he adds, u De MANICHJEIS te&tis est 
 " Epip/ianirjs, kcrresi 66 ee.y de abstinentia ab anhnatis 
 i{ cadem doccrearm Mctrcione, Edcj,tem (inquit) carries 
 ' MANICH^EUS an imam edcre dicit, $c. Et si quis 
 " (inquit MANICH^US^ Uxorcm ditxerit y ctiam ipse 
 " post discfssnm ex liac rifa in aliud corpus transit, ct 
 * 4 Jit mutter, qnb ettam ip*c nvbat :" &c. And he cites 
 
 also
 
 & 
 
 ;me doctrines, also, by the' Church of 
 Home, is surely an indelible stain of 
 Heresy, which cannot be covered or 
 palliated by any of the sophistical disj- 
 unctions of imperceptible difference 
 v, hieh he has attempted to draw be- 
 tween these same doctrines as held by 
 "he .M(t)i tehees, and as adopted from 
 Tin-in (or from the original spiritual: 
 ?>romott.Ts of Celibacy) by the Papists I 
 With respect, however, to the pointing- 
 :f the Text, a Man so learned as Corr 
 iciius a Lttpide could not be guilty of 
 such an error as the placing a period 
 in the iirst verse, either after fatVLOVitoP 
 in the Greek Text, or after Dfemontorum 
 
 also the testimony of St. Ananstine, lib. tk litres, il in . 
 Jlurcsi Manichtrurum : '' und c x u r T i A s sine ditLita- 
 " tionc COXDKMXAXT it quantum in ipsis est PRO- 
 " IllBfcN i',". iNsc. and surely the Jesuit- must have been 
 sfran<Ti-ly Minded by papistical prejudices not to perceive 
 t!i;it tlic&unc soiitenci' is equally applicable to himself &nd 
 nthcT advocates tor the Papacy, bccatsc, " nitjtiias sine- 
 " ditbittttionv conduiuiant, et quantum in ipsis cst> 
 ** pro'tibcnt." 
 
 z in
 
 177 
 
 in the Latin copies ; and therefore we 
 find his own copy of the Vulgate, on 
 which he commented, properly point- 
 ed, with only a comma, after Dccmoni- 
 orum, though an attempt had been 
 made, long before, to pervert the Text., 
 Most of the Greek editions which have 
 the interlineary Latin version of Ben. 
 Arias Mcnlanus, (except the London 
 PoJyglotte) have the period (most er- 
 roneously and ungrammatically) after 
 &<XtUOVt&t>. His first edition of 1571, 
 indeed, I have not seen, but only pre- 
 sume that it was most likely to have 
 
 * 
 
 been similar, in this point, to the gene- 
 rality of the copies taken from it. It was 
 inserted also in a Creek edition of the 
 preceding year, 1570, printed at Basil, 
 with the Latin version of Erasmus, 
 corrected bv Matthew Flacciits Illnric- 
 
 / -/ 
 
 ns ; but the Latin version is not altered, 
 having only a comma, after Dccmoni- 
 oritm ; so that Erasmus is not at all 
 answerable for the error in the Greek 
 
 copy*
 
 178 
 
 copy, especially as all his own editions, 
 both Greek and Latin, are free from 
 it. 
 
 Three years afterwards the period 
 was inserted, after Sztuot'tc-n', in u small 
 8vo. edition of the Greek Testament 
 printed with a very samll Type, at Ge- 
 neva, in 157:3, and also in another edi- 
 tion of the Greek Testament at Genera, 
 in 4to., dated 1620 : so that many of 
 the Protestants about these times had 
 carelessly and indiscriminately adopted 
 the error. And we find even an English 
 version, in Hmo., printed at London, by 
 Christopher Barker, Queen Elizabeth's 
 printer, in 1595, has the period after 
 the word " Devils" Also the Greek 
 edition printed at Geneva in 1610, and 
 another Greek edition, in 12mo., printed 
 at London in 1653. Likewise a para- 
 phrastical GreekvcrsionbySecapheim, a 
 Monk oi'Mlylene, printed at London in 
 1703, and even the elegant Glasgow 
 
 rditirn
 
 179 
 
 edition of the Greek Testament, in 
 12mo.,by ,K. Urie, in 17,30. But the. 
 Greek editions, in general, are withoiit. 
 this error. I have examined, on this 
 occasion, no less than 32 different edi- 
 tions in my own collection, including 
 many of the most approved editions, 
 which have no period after. Jziv.ci'icjp 
 in this text* 
 
 With 
 
 * Editions of (Itc Greek Test (tmcvi in nni calh ction, 
 1'Juch have no Period after the nord Az.ip.wiw, in 
 1 Tinotln/ iv. I . 
 
 Krasmns's fir.7f edition, in folio, printed at Basil, 
 1 ">!(>, by John Fro ben, dedicated- to Pope Lro tlie 
 10th. 'Also liis 3d edition, in folio, A. D. 1.522' 
 \vhcTfin I'opc Leo's npprobjition to his first edition 
 inserted, dated 1518. 
 
 3. The Batil edition of 1531, in ICmo., by John Bcbcl- 
 
 lius. 
 
 4. The Paris ditto of 1554-, in ditto, l/y Simon Coloneti? 
 
 5. Tlie Basil ditto of l.)38, in ditto, by Thwn 
 
 v\i;h a Preface, by John O(X:ol?imj)jidius. 
 
 5. The Basil ditto of 1542, in ditto, " Grrrci <?t f.n 
 juxta Wterum cftm Grsecorum, tuin 
 'einemhrtissiraa excraplari.i, accuratissirna cura et 
 diligentia, D. Erasmi, Iloter. jara -Hcr.uo ct 
 t postrema matiu castigatum."
 
 -ISO 
 
 'With 'respect to the 'Latin versions 
 < of- this text, it seems strange that the 
 
 period 
 
 . 7. The Basil edition, of "both Testaments in Greek, by 
 
 Joan/ IJervoguis,'154-. f >, folio. 
 
 8. The beautiful Paris edition of the "New 'Testament, 
 in 12ino., by Robert Stephens, 154fi. 
 
 '(). Tiie elegant' Paris edition ditto, in folio, by ditto, in 
 
 1550. 
 10. The London edition of Eraslnus's Greek and'Latin 
 
 Testament, in 155.9, with th'e same Jrtle as the 
 
 Basil edition of 1512. 
 
 vM. -The Luipsig edition of 156-i, in I2aio., by Voegrl. 
 ;l:2. Bcza's edition of 156'5, in 8vo., having his o\vn 
 
 Latin Version collated \ritli the- Greek, printed by 
 
 Henry Stephens. 
 
 13. The elegant Paris edition, by Robert "Stephens, in 
 
 3*21110., printed in 136.9. 
 
 ' 34-. The Frankfort etiition of 1597, in folk). 
 15. The Cambridge ditto of 1632, ^n 8vo., by Thomas 
 
 Buck. 
 
 .10. The London Plyglotte of 1657, by Bishop '-Walton. 
 17- Tli', 1 r;in;l>ridi:c edition of the N. T.'l6d5, in l^tno., 
 by John Field. 
 
 -18. The London edition of 'l67t, in 12mo,, by 'John 
 
 Redinayne. 
 .J^. The Oxford cdkion of 16^5, in Svo., with Bishop 
 
 Fell's note.s 
 
 90. Tiic
 
 181 
 
 period shouldjappear after DMtnoniorum, 
 
 in an edition of Beza's Latin version, in 
 12mo., printed at Amsterdam by Corne- 
 lius Breugal, ' sumptibus Henrici Lau- 
 4 renlii; 1-633, which in the title page 
 is declared to be taken from the last 
 
 20. The Utrecht edition of l6Y5, in 12mo., by the 
 
 learned John Leusdcn. 
 
 21. The London edition of lG<)2, in 32mo. 
 
 22. The Cambridge edition of 176*0, in 12mo. 
 
 23 Dr. Milk's very valuable edition of 1707, in folio, 
 with various readings, printed at Oxford. 
 
 2-i. The Amsterdam edition of 171 1, in small Svo.., with 
 various readings and rules of criticism, by Gerand 
 Van Mastricht, printed by Westcin. 
 
 25. The 'London edition, by Bowyer, 1715. 
 
 6". The London edition of 1730,in 12mo., byMattaire. 
 
 27. The Edinburgh edition of 1 7 40, in 12mo., by the 
 
 lUuldimans, 
 
 28. John Jacob Wetsten's folio edition, in 1751, with 
 
 various readings. 
 
 29. The London edition, by Bowyer, 2 vols. Svo. 1763. 
 
 30. The Polish edition of 176*5, printed at Uratislaw, by 
 
 Christian Schoettgen. 
 
 31. The Tubingen edition of 1776, by the learned Jo. 
 
 Alb. Bengelius, in Svo. 
 
 32. The Vienna edition of 1786*, from the ancient Vien- 
 
 na, MS. in Svo. 2 vols., with various readings. 
 
 version
 
 version of Beza " ex pastrenia 7>. 
 "" Bezte interpretations ; y though all 
 the editions of Bezas version that I 
 had ever yet seen are free from that 
 error ; and those also which were col- 
 lated with the Greek : and I have a 
 copy of it printed a-t Amsterdam in that 
 very yeaiv 1633> (" apudr Guile!. Janso* 
 " nium B.laevaso" ) which is without that 
 interpolation, I had proceeded thus 
 far in my remarks, w he nailer a farther 
 research in my collection of Bibles, 
 I found a folio edition of the Greek 
 Testament, dedicated to Queen Eliza- 
 beth, in 1598, by Beza, wherein the 
 old Lit^in version and Beza's version 
 are collated with the Greek, and 
 though both thte farmer version and 
 the Greek text of this passage are 
 properly pointed, yet Beza has unfortu- 
 nately added the period to his own vcr- 
 sfon after D&moniorum : so that the 
 Roman Catholics rrin,y have a very 
 eminent Protestant testimony on this 
 
 their 

 
 188 
 
 their favourite point, if. they chuse to 
 claim it: but \\vhuman authority con 
 avail against the plain grammatical 
 construction of the text, as preserved in. 
 all tiie best and most approved copies. 
 
 The first attempt to alter the pointing,^ / 
 that I have b < :i able to trace, appears- 
 in a small duodecimo copy of the JLatiii\ 
 Vulgate, printed at Easily, by John 
 Froben, in 1495,- though not by the. 
 addition of a period alter Dtemtmiornm, 
 but by the insertion of a colon after the 
 following substantive " //MIYPOCIUSI :"" 
 viz. " atfendcntes spirilibus erroris ct 
 " doclt\'nis D.iiMONionuM in hyj.-crisir: 
 " LOQUENTU.'M mendifcit/tn el ctiutcria- 
 " lam HABENTIUM sifam conscleH4iai 
 tf PROIIISKXTIUM nufjere : alslinere <** 
 " cibis" &c. Another old edition of. 
 the Vulgate (in 4to., printed by John 
 Pivard, in 1500) has likewise a colon- in,-- 
 serted after " in Hypocrisi : " (which is 
 totally inconsistent wiih the necessary 
 
 con-
 
 184 
 
 construction of the Greek original,- 
 
 as well as of the Latin version), and has 
 
 also a still different pointing in the next, 
 
 verses equally inconsistent with the 
 
 original ; though hoth of them seem 
 
 to have been intended to prevent the 
 
 idea of representing Demons as the 
 
 teachers of Ccelibacy, and the actual 
 
 prohibitors of marriage. But, in gene- 
 
 ral, the copies of the Latin Vulgate had 
 
 no such erroneous pointing in this text. 
 
 See a much older copy of the Latin 
 
 f'*itlgale(\\\$m either of the two last-meiir 
 
 tioned) printed at Venice, in 1480, by 
 
 Francis Hailbrun, in 4to. wherein the 
 
 pointing is perfectly agreeable to the 
 
 best copies of the Greek original, so 
 
 that* the Demons are clearly represented 
 
 by it as the Prohibilors of Marriage, 
 
 See also an edition of the Latin Vul- 
 
 gate in small 8vo.. printed at Leyden, 
 
 (" Lugduni") by Jacob Sacon, in 1522, 
 
 A a and
 
 185 
 
 and the edition in 12mo. printed iy 
 John Tib aid, atdntieerpr in 1526, "juxtts 
 " veteran et consueiam edftionem," &c^ 
 and likewise the copy of the Vulgate 
 collated with the English version of the 
 New Testament, by " Johan. Holly- 
 " bushe," (i. e. Dr. Coverdale, after- 
 wards Bishop of Exeter) " in 1538," a 
 small 4to. and Sebastian Minister's 
 Latin edition (small 4to.) in 1539; and 
 also a Latin edition,, in 12m, printed by 
 Robert Stephens, the King's printer afe 
 Paris, in 1541, which he professes to 
 have collated with the most ancient 
 MS. copies. 
 
 : 
 
 See also a Latin Testament printed 
 at Par is in 1543, by Simon Co linens, and 
 Galeatus a Prato, intitled, " JVbu. Tcs- 
 " tamenlum hand poenitendis sacrorum 
 " doctormn scoliis, JOANNIS BENEDICT! 
 -" Theologi paresiensis cur a concinnatis, 
 ," non inutiliter illustratum." 
 
 And
 
 186 
 
 And also the Latin l^ulgate^ collated 
 with the Italian version of the N. Test, 
 printed ait Lyons in 1558, (12ino.) in 
 which, as well as in all the above -men- 
 tioned Latin editions, the pointing of 
 diis text is consistent with the hest 
 Greek copies. 
 
 And lastly, I refer to a copy of the 
 Latin Vvlgate, the authority of which, I 
 trust, will iK>t he questioned by any 
 Roman Catholic, because it is intitled 
 : " P*ersio Lalina Vulgata, snmmormu 
 " Ponlfjicum Sixti V. et Clementis VI II . 
 " autoritate edita et recognita." This 
 Latin version is joined, or collated with 
 *the Greek text in the fine folio edition 
 <of the Old and New Testaments, print- 
 ed at Paris, by Sebastian Chappelet, in 
 1658 : In this noble edition the pointing 
 of the particular text in question is per- 
 fectly grammatical, both in the Greek 
 
 and
 
 187 
 
 and Latin, and agrees with all the most 
 ancient as well as the best and most ap- 
 proved editions of the Greek text. So that 
 there is ample authority, even from the 
 Church of Rome against herself, for re- 
 establishing the ancient scriptural doc- 
 trine that "forbidding to marry" (and 
 commanding) " to abstain from meals" 
 &c. are really " Doctrines of Demons" 
 
 INDEX-
 
 INDEX. 
 
 cited, p. lift. 
 
 Agag spared by Saul, contrary to an express command 
 of God, p. 22. The just vengeance against that 
 Tyrant denounced and executed by Samuel, p. 22, n. 
 
 Ahab deluded by a Lying Spirit, p. 38 40. 
 
 Atnalvkitts, God's vengeance against them as a nation of 
 unrepenting sinners, p. 20, 21. 
 
 Ammonites, their abominable tyranny under their wicked 
 Monarch Nahash, p. 10. God's vengeance against 
 them, p. 1 1. 
 
 Apollonius cited, p. 120. 
 
 Apostate Church, see Papacy, p. 162. 
 
 Aretxus cited, p. 118, n. 
 
 Aristotle cited, p. 118, n. 
 
 Ava, see Pagan Priests, p. 16*2. 
 
 Augustine, lib. de Ilctres. cited in p. 170*. 
 
 Author of the Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Test. 
 cited for the most part throughout the work, but 
 more particularly at p. 1, 3, 4, 5, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 
 45, 48, 75, 76, 78 to 84, pi, 94, P5 to P8, 100, 
 106 to 113, 114 to 127, 132 to 138,140 to 142,
 
 11 'INDXX. 
 
 his confutation of Dr. Sykes and Dr. Lardner, 
 
 p. 132 to 138, 140 to 142. * 
 
 his own Doctrine about 1hc Power of Demoas 
 
 over the brutal race, confuted, p. 133, n,; Serpents 
 and Scorpions excepted, p. 134, n. 135, ix. 
 
 his own error in attribtiting Demoniacal Pos- 
 session to mere madness, answered, p. 138 and 139- 
 
 B. 
 
 -Beelzebub, and Beelzeboul, p. 101, 103. 
 eza cited, p. 122. n. 
 
 Fnscoes History of the Acts, -cited, p. 122, n. 
 Boutan, see Pagan Priests, p. l62. 
 Unites, Dc?no.s have no powers to affect them, p, 
 n. except Serpents and Scorpions, 135, n. 
 
 c. 
 
 Capuchin, the evidence of one against the Church ef 
 
 Rome cited, p. 46. n. 
 Celsus cited, p. '114. 
 -China, see Pagan Priests, p, !&?.. 
 Choice, see Free Will. 
 Cicero de Divinat. cited, p. lip. n. 
 Cleodomus cited, p. 1 ip. n. 
 Conscience, see Knowledge of Good and Ei-il. 
 Cornelius a Lapide, a Jesuit. His attempt to pervert th 
 
 Text, i Tim. iv. 13. p. 172 to 17$.
 
 m 
 
 D. 
 
 David. Samurl informed Saul that the Lord had sought 
 a man after God 's heart to be Captain oier his people , 
 p. 15. But the anointing of the new King is postpon- 
 ed for a farther trial of Sanl r p. 16.. 
 
 anointed King of Israel on the final rejection 
 
 of SauJ, p. 23. 
 
 spares Saul at Engedi^p. 32 to 34. 
 
 prevents Abishfd from killing Saul, p. 35. 
 
 , Mr. Mcde's explanation efitp. 49, 49. n. 5<k 
 The Reality of Possession, if proved in one 
 instance from the Language of Scripture, may be prov- 
 ed in all, p. S. 
 
 The Case of Saul cited as that instance, p. 3.. 
 
 The perversion* of that instance by the Author of the 
 Essay on the Demoniacs, p. 4. and 5. The Card arene. 
 Demoniac, p. .99. n. The case of Job, p. 99, n.. 
 
 Demons, the Argument for their nullity answered, p. +0 
 to 45 ; and also the supposition of their Jm potency, p. 
 97, 100; not mere fictions, p. .98. 
 
 not the Ghosts of Dead Men^p. 45 to 50, 92, 
 
 96. 
 
 Mr. Mtde's opinions concerning them,, p. 48 to 
 
 6l.- his Interpretation of i Tim. iv. 1 2.. erroneous,, 
 p. 55 to 61, 6972. 
 Doctrines- of, distinguish the Papal as well as. 
 
 Pagan Antichrist, p. 70_ 
 
 Bp. Newton's opinion of them, p. 101 10(5. 
 
 Demons* Their supposed impotence and inability, p.
 
 IV INDEX. 
 
 answered p. 98, 99, 100. Have no power o\erBruff3, 
 p. 133. n. except over Senpents and Scorpions, 135 ; 
 did always prohibit marriage to their Pagan Priests, 
 p. 162, and also to the Priests of the Church of Rome^ 
 p. l6'2, 163. 
 Demons, were subjected to Christ's Disciples, p. 102. 
 
 not mere fictions, p. 98. Have had power to 
 
 aficct the body as well as the mind of Man. p. 107, 
 110, 111, 112. Y\ill have no more power after the 
 7th Phial, the pouring of which is very near at hand. 
 Preface. 
 
 vexed the Daughter of the Canaanitish Wo- 
 man, p.. 123; other Instance, p. 123. 
 Dinomachus cited,, p. Vl-9- " The same notions con- 
 cerning them both before and after the age of (he Gos- 
 pel, p. 1-24. and 123. 
 
 " Doctrines of Demons." The scripture sense of this ex- 
 pression, p. 69 to 74, Mfr to 155, 1^0 to 166, 170 
 to 187. 
 
 De la Po, a Capuchin HTs Evidence against the 
 . Church of Rome, cited, p. 46. n. 
 Desideri a Jesuit, His Evidence against the Church of 
 
 Home ciled, p.. 46. n. 
 
 j&evil, Erroneous Opinion that there is but one Devil 
 confuted; p. 85 9. Equivalent to Demons, p. 93, 
 U)3. His Tyranny expired in what sense, p. 120 -to 
 126. And in what sense still oppressive, p. 159'to 
 132. The time of his being bound draws very near. 
 Preface See Salan. 
 
 E. 
 
 j the apperance of his Spirit* p. 158.
 
 IVBE.T. 9 
 
 Endor, see Wtch, p. 155, 156. 
 
 Enemies, spiritual, have permission of God to enter and 
 
 possess all human Beings who neglect to resist evil both' 
 
 in thought and deed, p. 40, 81 86. 
 Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Test, cited, p. 1, 3, 
 
 4, 5, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 75, 76, 78 to 
 
 84, 91, 94, 95 to 98, 100, 106 to 113, U4 to 
 
 127, 132 to 138, 140, to 142. 
 Euripides cited, p. 116. 
 
 F. 
 
 Flagellation, practised in the Church of Rome, an ancient 
 rite of Heathenism^ p. 47, n. 
 
 Tret-Will, or natural Choice of Man, not restrained bjn 
 the Diiine Inspiration, as in the case of Saul, who 
 pleaded a political necessity for his resistance to the' 
 Dhine Influence, p. 12, 13. Such resistance [always 
 produces a contrary effect to the political end propoed, 
 p. 14, 15. 
 
 G. 
 
 Gardarene Demoniac, p. 99, n. 137 
 
 Ghost, see Human Soul, p. 42. 
 
 Ghosts of Dead Men. Mr. Mede's opinion of them ex- 
 plained, p. 48,49. 
 
 The Gentile's opinion of them, 50 
 
 to 55. 
 
 See also Spirits of Men departed, 
 
 155 to 158. 
 Gibbon, Eduard, Esq. his account of the deplorable 
 
 State of the Pupal Religion, p. 158, n. 159. " 
 his account of the Communication 
 
 of Demons \\ith the Emperor Julian, p. 159, n. 
 
 Bb
 
 Gilgal',p. 13. 
 
 Grant y Colonel, cited, p. *6, n. 
 Grotius on Acts xix. cited, p. 122, n. 
 Cruder ; a Jesuit, .'his Evidence against tne C/turcJi. of-' 
 Home, cited, p. 46, n. 
 
 Ileb. Lex. cited, p. 4,4, ru 
 
 H. 
 
 Heathens, the Ancient, 
 
 p. 114 to 121. 
 
 Hebrew Syntax, Rule for the Present Tense, p. U*,..n. 
 Herodotus cited, p. 117- 
 Homer's Odyssey cited, p. 114. 
 Human Soul, not a Nullity, p. 42. 
 Spirits, not Demons,?. 42 to 46, 92,94, 95, 6, 
 
 155 to 15S. 
 Hypocrates cited, p. 11 !k 
 
 I, 
 
 " Idol, is nothing" p. 40. 
 
 Jesuits, the Evidence of some of them against the Church.- 
 cfliome cited, p. 46, n. and 47, n. See also Rome, 
 
 Papacy. 
 
 . 
 Jevs, Exorcists prevailed among them, p. 121, 122. 
 
 Ion. cited, p.. 119, n. 
 
 Job, in his Case the Evil Spirit Lad permission to affect 
 only his Body, p. 99, n. 111. 
 
 Jonathan (Son of Saul) his excellent Disposition and 
 Character suitable to his name, p. 17. The People 
 rescue him from Saul's rash Vow, p. U>.-~-Saul aims to,
 
 IJTDllt. Vli 
 
 Jkill him, ib. Tic is cut off by an untimely death, ib.-r- 
 His just Spirit formed for a better world, p. 18, 19- 
 His speech to his Father, cited by Josephus, p. 121-,n. 
 
 Josephus cited, p. 121, 12?, 
 
 Ireneus cited, p. 122. n. 
 
 Julian, die Roman Emperor, and Pontifcx Maxrmus, 
 deluded by Demons or Seducing Spirits, p. 159, n. 
 
 Justin Martyr cited, p. 122. 
 
 Jc/*, in what sense called a Deri/, p. 89, n. 90, n. 
 
 f . 
 
 K, 
 
 Knowledge of Good and Evil in Man (i.-c. Reason or 
 Conscience} in the Case of Saul, wa3 several times 
 triumphant over the Evil Spirit, by which he was ..pos- 
 sessed, p. 31 37. 
 
 L. 
 
 iidfitau, Pcre, Jesuit, his Testimony of an ancient Rite 
 of Paganism, adopted by the Church of Rome, p. 47, 
 
 'Latin Vulgate, Editions of it cited, 183 to 186. 
 
 Lardncr, Rev. Dr., p. 91, 132, confuted by the Asthor 
 of the Essay on Demoniacs, p, 132 to 138, 140 t 
 U2. 
 
 Lightfoot, Dr. cited, p. J22. n. 
 
 Liiciun cited, 119, 120. 
 
 Lymphatki, p. 11 6. n. 
 
 M. 
 
 .Va/j. " The Law of Nature and Principal of 
 in Man" cited, p> 0, 3, 111 to 113.
 
 vm INDEX. 
 
 3Ian All men have a promise of a Divine Spiritualln* 
 fluencc, p. 8. The effect of this glorious Divine In- 
 fluence in Saul's case, is described as being " turned 
 " into another man" and that " God gave Mm another 
 " heart" signifying a total change in his " principles of 
 " Action," p. 6 8 ; but without depriving his natural 
 understanding of its due power of Choice, or Free-Will, 
 p. p. 12. Human Reason, Conscience, or the Natural 
 Knowledge of Good and Evil in Man, prevalent in vari 
 ous instances over Demoniacal Possession, p. 31 37- 
 
 Jtlan of Sin, p. 158. See Papacy. 
 
 Marriage, The Prohibition of it a Doctrine of Demons, 
 p. 146*, &c. See Papacy. 
 
 Mede, Rev. Jos. p. 48, 49, 49, n. 50, to 6 1, 69 to 72. 
 73 to 76,125, n. 
 
 Melancholy, a supernatural instance of it to be distin- 
 guished from cases occasioned by mere natural dis-^ 
 order, 36 38. 
 
 Michmash, p. 13. 
 
 Moses, the appearance of his Spirit, p. 138. 
 
 N, 
 
 Nahastf required absolute submission of the Israelites to 
 a most cruel badge of Slavery, p. 10. The meaning 
 of his name, a Serpent, shewing him to be a represen- 
 tative on earth of the Diabolical Serpent, p. Jl. His 
 total Defeat, p. 12. 
 
 Nations, Ancient Heathen, believed in ' Demoniacal 
 Possessions, p. 114 to 121. . 
 
 National Oppression cannot escape the Divine Venge- 
 ance, p. 1 1. See Ammonites Instance of Vengeance 
 against a Nation of unrepenting Sinners. Sec Aniak- 
 
 ' kites, p. 20, 21. 
 
 Newton, Bp. his Dissertation on the Demoniacs cited, p, 
 101106.
 
 JMDEX. IX 
 
 O, 
 
 , National, cannot ejscape Divine Vengeance, 
 p. 10, 11, 12. 
 .Qrigen cited, p. 122. n. 
 
 P. 
 
 Pagan Pricsfs, in Thibet, Boutan, Ava, Pegou and 
 C/tina, forbid to marry, p. 1 62. Use vain repetition* 
 in praying, and count their prayers by the rosary or 
 strings of beads, p. l64. 
 
 Papacy, or Man of Sin, p. 158, did notprohibit Marriage 
 until the latter times, p. 162 ; it was prohibited in the 
 Golden Legend, Gestesof Saints, and by Apparitions,?. 
 l63. Departed Saints could not preach such Doc- 
 trines as prohibition of Marriage, Adoration of Images, 
 ram Repetitions of Prayers, counted by Beads, p. 163. 
 1^4. 165, and l66. See also Flagellation, Jesuits, 
 Pagan Priests, Pontifet Maximvs, Rome. 
 
 Parsons, Dr., his Remains of Japhet cited, p. 46, n. 
 
 Pegge, Mr., his answer to Dr. Sykes, p. 90, n. 91, n. 
 
 Pegou, see Pagan Priests, p. 1()2. 
 ' Pliny's Nat. Hist. p. Il6, n. 
 
 Plutarch. 119, n. 120. 
 
 Political Necessity affords no excuse for perverting the 
 Laws of God, or natural Justice, p. 13 to 15. 
 
 Pontifcx Maximus. The Roman Emperor Julian, when 
 Pvntifex Maximus, deluded by Demons, p. 159, n. 
 
 R. 
 
 Jiamoth Gilead, p. 38. 
 
 Reason, see Knowledge of Good and Evil in Man. 
 
 .. By a due exercise of it, the most violent passions 
 
 may be subdued, and even the influence of Eiil-Spirit? 
 
 f ffectually resisted, p. 32 to 37-
 
 Retribution, Law of, p. 12. 
 
 Rome, Church of- The most capital HtatkenCustoms have 
 been introckioed into it, p. 46 to 48. Great Conform- 
 ity between the Roman Religion and. that of Thibet, p. 
 46, n. The Lamas have the use of Holy Water, p. 47. 
 Prayers for the Dead, rtj. Processions, ib. Honour 
 the Relics of .their Saints, ib. Prohibit Marriage, and 
 
 haw Monasteries and Convents, mortify their Bodies 
 
 ~T 
 with Whips, ib. These " Doctrines of Demons." mark 
 
 -C -J-7. ' * . It 
 
 \hcPapal as welt as Heathen Antichrist, p, 70 to 72, 
 .162 to 166. See also Jesuits, Papacy, Pugan Priests, 
 
 flagellation. 
 
 
 c 
 
 Sainuel warned Sa;/J that the Spirit of tJte Lord should 
 come upon him, and that he should be turned into 
 another Man, p. 6. Declares Saul's rejection, p. 1 15. 
 His appearance to the \Vitch of Endor, p. 155, 156. 
 
 Satan ,, meaning of the word,', p. 8, 89, ^0, n. 
 
 ' equivalent to Demons, p. pi, 96. 
 
 ' '' the same Being ab Beelzeboul, p. 96. 
 
 The time of his being bound is very near at hand, 
 preface. 
 
 Saul's Disorder Spiritual, p. I. Proofs of supernatu- 
 ral 'Spiritual Influence in Saul's case both good and 
 bad, p. 5. 1st Instance of good Influence by the 
 lit of God upon Saul, p. 6, 8, 9- Saul had a pro- 
 
 
 
 'mist of 'this, ib. p. 7, 10. His natural understanding 
 \vas not deprived of it's due power of choice, his Free 
 /FJfl, p. 9, 12. 2d Instance of Divine Influence upon 
 him when (h Liberty of his Country uas in danger, 
 > . 10, 1 1, 12. He yields' himself a Slate to worldly 
 iV/Vy, p. 13, which generally produces the contrary 
 fjcct from what was pr^v>sel by it. p. 14, -35. Ilk
 
 INDEX. 
 
 jashncss in refusing to ask advice of God, p. lt>.~ His 
 rashness in his wicked vow, p. 18. Aims to kill his 
 Son with a Javelin, p. 18. God's inercy to him pro- 
 longed from time to time until he -proved himself un- 
 worthy by preferring his own will, contrary to Law and 
 Reason, p. 19. The last Trial of his Qbedioqce in the 
 War appointed by God against the Amalf kites, p. 20. 
 His resistance to God's command, p. 21. Spaces 
 Agag, p. 22.~^-The dreadful Sentence of rejection from 
 the Throne for his disobedience, p. 23. The Spirit of 
 *he Lord departed from him, p. 24 ; and he ishonhly 
 terrified by an Evil Spirit, (2528,) by which he is 
 prompted to thirst after in/iocffit blued, but is providea- 
 tially restrained, p. 29. lie was at one lime prevent- 
 ed by an impulse of the Holy Spirit, even at a time 
 that he was under the influence of the Evii-Spirit, p. 
 $9; when all his bleody minded Messengers, as well 
 as himself, were compelled to prophc&y, p. 30, SI. 
 His bloody design at one time frustrated by an inva- 
 sion of the Philistines, p. 31 ; at other ti.nys by his own 
 conscience, p. 3 1 to 30. All these circumstances prove 
 that the Evil-Spirit was not a natural disorder, or faep 
 Melancholy, but a real possession of an Evil-Spirit, 
 p. 37- 
 
 Sharp, Rev. Dr. Gregory, his review of the 
 about Demoniacs, p. 6$. 
 
 "Law of Nature, &c. in 
 Man, p. 2, .3, ,U1, 
 
 Warp, Gran-cMe, his Tract ll3 * 
 
 on th-e 
 
 1 Retribution, p. J2. 
 
 Limitaiion of Slavery, p. 21. 
 Letter, on Mr. Mede's Opi- 
 nionof Dem&oi*c,p. 74,. 
 V n. 75, n.
 
 xii 
 
 Slaves to the Devil, p. 135, n. 137, n. 
 
 Slavery, Limitation of it in the Laws of God, p. 21. 
 
 Sophocles cited, p. 1 \6. 
 
 Salomon, accord ing to Josephtis, prescribed a method of 
 Exorcism, p. T21. 
 
 Spirit of the Lord. The Influence of it promised to 
 Saul by Samuel, and that he should " be turned iiito 
 ** another Man," p. 6. This glorious change (a par- 
 ticipation of the Dirine Nature ) was promised to Saul 
 by a single Prophet (Samuel}, but under the Christian 
 Dispensation all men have the promise of the samt 
 inestimable Spiritual Influence, p. 7 and 8. 
 
 .. ' " came upon Darid, and departed 
 
 from Saul ; a real supernatural inspiration to the one, 
 and a real departure of it from the other, p. 2-i. 
 
 Spirits of Men departed, never appeared to delude, p. 
 155. The Appearance of Samuel, p. 155, 156'. Of 
 Moses and Elias, p. 157, 158. When&es are told by 
 Spirits, they are not the Spirits of Men, but of De- 
 mons, p. 158. 
 
 Spirit, Evil, trouUcd Saul on the departure of the Lord's 
 Spirit, p. 24, 25, 2(5. TheHebrew word here rendered 
 troubled, signifies rather that he was horribly ttrrrfifj, 
 or agitated tcith extreme fear, p. 25, 26, n. 
 
 was really the Agent which terrified Saul,- 
 
 p. 26. AnactualpossmJow, and not a natural disor- 
 der ! p. 27 28. which prompted him, to thirst after hv- 
 nocent blood, p. 29, 30. 
 
 An actual influence of it manifested in the 
 
 soothsaying Girl at Philippi, p. 26. 
 
 and Unclean-Spirit synonymous terms with. 
 
 Dtjnons, p. 37, 38. 
 The Agency of one of them (a Lying Spi-
 
 TNDEX, Xiil 
 
 rlt) in persuading Ahab by God's permission, p. 38 
 41. 
 
 - . " A Belief in their Agency affords no argu- 
 
 ment against the Governing of God, p. 81 84. Must 
 be resisted, p. 85. That which affected Job had no 
 power over his Mind, but only his Flesh and Bones, 99, 
 n. The imaginary distinction between them and 
 Demons, answered, p. 100, n. 
 
 Spirits, to be " trycd, whether they be of God" 60 71. 
 
 Stittingflcet, Bp. cited, p. 125, n. 
 
 Swine, see Gardarene Demoniacs, p. 99, n. 137. 
 
 Sykes, Rev. Dr. cited, p. 91. confuted by the Author of 
 Essay on Demoniacs, p. 132 to 138, and 140 to 142. 
 
 T. 
 
 Testament, Greek, Editions of it cited in this Work, p". 177 
 
 to 183. 
 Thibet, see Pagan Priests, p. l52. 
 
 w. 
 
 Whitly, Dr. cited, p. 122, n. 125, n. 
 Witch ofEndor, p. 155 to 157- 
 
 C c
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 Peut. xxxii. 17. p. 44, n. 
 
 i Samuel x. 5, 6. p. 6 and 
 7. x. 9. 10. p. 9. xi. 1, 
 2. xiii. 1. 14. 
 
 xiv, 1 45. p. 18. 
 
 xv. 13. p. 21. 
 
 23. p. 23. 
 
 28. p. 23. 
 
 33. p. 22, n. 
 
 xvi. 13, 14. p. 24. xvi. 14. 
 p. 25, n. 
 
 15. p. 1. 
 
 xvii. 36,37- p- 24, n. 
 *viii. 10. p. 28. 
 xix. 20 24. p. 31, n. 
 xxiii. 14. p. 29. 
 
 25 28. p. 31. 
 
 xxiv. p. 32 to 34. 
 xx vi. p. 34 to 36. 
 
 i Kings, xxii. 2023. p. 
 38, 39. 
 
 Job. ii. 58. p. 99, n. 
 
 111. 
 
 Psalm cvi. 37- p. 44, n. 
 T p. 45. 
 
 Matth. iii. 7- p. 135, n. 
 iv. 1. 10. p. 90, n. 
 
 Matth. iv. 23. p. 100, n, 
 
 -. vii. 13, 14, p. 129. 
 
 viii. 30. p. 132. 
 
 32. p. 140. 
 
 x. 1. p. 104, n. 
 
 xi. 18. p. 123. n. 
 
 xii.22 32. p. 101. 
 
 24. p. 105, n. 
 
 26. 27. p. 12.2, 
 
 n. 
 
 xiii. 43. p. 19- 
 
 . xv. Ki, 22, p. 1^3, 
 
 n. 
 
 xvii. 15, p. 123, n. 
 
 xxiii. 33. p. 135, n. 
 
 xxv. 41. p. 86, 90,11. 
 
 xxyiii. 18. p. 128. 
 
 Mark i. 12, 13. p. 90, n. 
 
 iii. 22. p. 94, 101. 
 
 iii. 28, 29- p- 95. 
 
 v. 2. p. 99, n. 
 
 11. p. 132. 
 
 12, 13. p. 99, n. 
 
 13. p . 140. 
 
 vii. 29. p. 123, n. 
 
 - ix. 17- p- 123, n, 
 
 Luke iv. 33. p. 99, n. 
 
 iv. 33 36. p. 100,n. 
 
 35, p. 105,n.
 
 INDEX OT TEXTI. 
 
 Luke viii. 32. p. 132. 
 33. p. 140. 
 
 ix. 39, p. 123,n, 
 
 x. 9 11. p. 128. 
 
 17, 18. p. 102, 
 
 104, n. 
 
 18,20. p, 104, n. 
 
 t rv nr\ t f\* 
 
 1720; p. 127 
 and 128. 
 
 19. p. 135, n. 
 
 xi. 14 26. p. 101, 
 
 xiii. 11 16 % . p. 112. 
 
 John iii. 8, 9, 10, p. 136, 
 n. 
 
 iv.8, 16. p. 91, cl. 
 
 ' vii. 48, 52. p. 123 n. 
 
 viii. 14. p. 30. 
 
 34 4i.p.l37,n. 
 
 44. p. 30, S<). 
 
 48. p. 105, n. 
 
 xii. 31. p. 67. 
 
 xiii. 27. p. 90. n. 
 
 xiv. 6. p. 106", 112. 
 
 30. p. 6'7. 
 
 xvi. 16'. p. 67. 
 
 Acts x. 38. p. 100, n. 
 103, 105.105,n. p. 106. 
 109. 
 
 xvi. 16 18. p. 26, 
 
 123, n. 
 
 T xvii. 18. p. 51, 123, 
 
 n. 
 
 xix, 13. p. 122, n. 
 
 J Cor. ii. 12. p. 67, n. 
 vi. 3. p. 87. 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 4. p. 40. 
 
 x. 19- p- 4-2, 43, 44. 
 n. 
 
 x. 21. p. 45.53. 
 
 2 Cor.ii. 11. p. 131. 
 
 xi, 14, 15, p. 154. 
 
 Ephcs. ii. 2, p. 65. 
 
 iv. 27- p. 131. 
 
 vi. 11, p. 135, n. 
 
 vi. 12. p. 78. 
 
 2 Thess. ii.9.p. 159. 
 
 ii. 11. p. 164. 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 11. p. 89, n. 
 iv i. o. & c , p, 
 
 55,69, 146 to 154. 160, 
 166, 170187. 
 
 2 Tim. iii. 3, p. 89, n. 
 lleb, vi. 2. p. 56. 
 James iv. 7. p. 77, 85, n. 
 
 130. 
 
 1 Pet. v. 8, 9, p. 77, 85, 
 131. 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 4. p. $6. 
 
 1 John iii. 8. p. 58, 65, 
 136. 
 
 iv. 1. p. 60, 65. 
 
 66, 67, 69. 
 
 iv. 6. p. 64. 
 
 iv. 12, 13, 15, 16, 
 
 p. 67 and 68. 
 
 2 John v, 7. p. 57. 
 Rev. ix. 13. p. 52. 
 
 - xii. 7. p. 87. 
 
 9. p. 65, 90, n, 
 
 and 2dn. 131. 
 
 - 9 12. p. 131. 
 
 J-XINTED JY W. CALVERT, SHIRK LANK,
 
 UNIVEW 
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which it was borrowed. 
 
 IDNY-SOV 
 
 BRARY 
 
 APR 191981 
 
 tfff 
 
 invj-jo 
 
 NV-S01^ 
 HVERS/4 
 
 IV-SOF^ 

 
 c