A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux

You proceed to the vindication of another passage in your Fiat, from the Animadversions upon it, with as little success as the former you have attempted. Fiat Lux says, God forbade foreign Images, such as Moloch, Dagon, and Astaroth, but he command his own (Sir, Moloch and Astaroth were not Images properly so called, whatever may be said of Dagon; the one was the Sun, the other the host of Heaven, or the Moon and Stars) but the Animadversions say that God forbade any likeness of himself to be made; they do so, and what say you to the contrary! why, You may know and consider, that the Statues and graven Images of the Heathen, towards whose land Israel then in the wilderness was journeying, were ever made by the Pagans to represent God and not any devils, although they were deluded in it. But 1. Your good friends will give you little thanks for this concession, whose strongest plea to vindicate themselves and you from Idolatry in your image worship is, that the Images of the Heathen were not made to represent God, but that an Idol was really and absolutely nothing. 2. God did not forbid the people in particular the making Images unto Moloch, Dagon or Astaroth, but prohibits the worshipping of the Idols themselves in any way; but he forbids the making of any Images and similitudes of himself in the first place, and of all other things to worship them. But what of all this? why then say you, there was good reason that the Hebrews who should be cautioned from such snares, should be forbidden to make to themselves any similitude or likeness of God. Well then they were so forbidden, this is that which the Animadversions affirmed before, and Fiat Lux denied, affirming that they were the ugly faces of Moloch that were forbidden▪ ⟨p. 518⟩Moses say you, p. 294. forbade profane and foreign images, but he commanded his own; but here you grant that God forbade the making of any similitude or likeness of himself; the reason of it we shall not much dispute, whilst the thing is confessed; though I must inform you, that himself insists upon another, and not that which you suggest, which you will find if you will but peruse the places I formerly directed you unto.

You proceed to the vindication of another passage in your Fiat, from the Animadversions upon it, with as little success as the former you have attempted. Fiat Lux sayes, God forbad forreign Images, such as Moloch, Dagon, and Astaroth, but he command his own (Sir, Moloch and Astaroth were not Images properly so called, whatever may be said of Dagon; the one was the Sun, the other the hoast of Heaven, or the Moon and Stars) but the Animadversions say that God forbad any likeness of himself to be made; they do so, and what say you to the contrary! why, You may know and consider, that the Statues and graven Images of the Heathen, towards whose land Israel then in the wilderness was journeying, were ever made by the Pagans to represent God and not any devils, although they were deluded in it. But 1. Your good friends will give you little thanks for this concession, whose strongest plea to vindicate themselves and you from Idolatry in your image worship is, that the Images of the Heathen were not made to represent God, but that an Idol was really and absolutely nothing. 2. God did not forbid the people in particular the making Images unto Molock, Dagon or Astaroth, but prohibits the worshipping of the Idols themselves in any way; but he forbids the making of any Images and similitudes of himself in the first place, and of all other things to worship them. But what of all this? why then say you, there was good reason that the Hebrews who should be cautioned from such snares, should be forbidden to make to themselves any similitude or likeness of God. Well then they were so forbidden, this is that which the Animadversions affirmed before, and Fiat Lux denyed, affirming that they were the ugly faces of Moloch that were forbidden