FOOTNOTES:

First. In the Everlasting Covenant, provision was made for Covenanting under the Patriarchal and Levitical dispensations.

The acknowledgments and conduct of believers in those times illustrate this. These showed an acquaintance with the subject peculiarly striking. Where the engagements into which Noah and his family were brought are spoken of, no hint is dropped that the nature or design of the duty was new to them. The terms in which the covenant of God was made known to him, would appear to have been quite familiar to him; and the alacrity with which he engaged in performing the rite of sacrifice, would seem to indicate that neither he nor his family were strangers to that, as an accompaniment of Covenanting. The manner in which certain distinguished individuals, who lived anterior to the Mosaic economy, employed and desired the oath, showed that the information concerning it, which must have been communicated by Noah and his family, had been, by some at least, carefully preserved. Not merely Abraham, who may have received special information from above concerning the exercise, but some of his contemporaries in the region of Canaan would appear to have known well the character and tendency of covenant obligation. At the death of Joseph, his brethren manifested a complete acquaintance with the subject; nor were their descendants, two hundred years after, when emerging from bondage, unwilling to acknowledge the debt of duty which, by the oath of their fathers, was imposed upon them. At the solemnities of Sinai, Israel would appear to have recognised the obligation of vowing and swearing to God, as well as that of any otherrequirement of his law. It does not appear that any one of the Hebrews of those ages ever thought of calling in question the duty of attending to, and acquiescing in, every declaration made to them through an appointed channel from heaven. That they were a rebellious people is beyond a doubt; but that fact is not inconsistent with the conclusion that, in consequence of the force of habit or example, they might give a verbal acquiescence to requirements, the importance and necessity of obeying which they might not feel. As others are, they were assailed from without and within with temptations to fail in their duty; and before those they fell. Most of them were under unbelief, and they would not obey; but when addressed by Moses, or any other servant of the Lord, while a wonder or miracle was wrought and duty was enjoined, testifying to the duty of giving obedience when God commands, however soon they might forget, they said, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient."[408]There is only one principle on which this intimate acquaintance with the claims of the service can be accounted for. The obligation of the duty must have been taught to man from the beginning. That is implied in the law which was written on his heart in innocence. The duty incumbent on him as a sinner must have been revealed to him immediately after the fall. There is no reason to suppose that, seeing that sacrifice and covenanting for a vast length of time, were observed together, they were not coeval. But however that may be, equally with the one, the other, in the first ages, was known; and to one fact both are to be traced. The duties co-ordinate in their bearings—the one pointing to the great propitiation, the other rocognising the claims of the Author of that salvation which the "One Sacrifice" was to secure, bothhave their origin in that one glorious Covenant, by which the method in which it should be bestowed was arranged.

Provision was made through promises. Some of these were that the duty would be engaged in;[409]others of them, that the keeping of engagements made would be followed with good;[410]others, that all the blessings of the covenant would be bestowed.[411]The passages belonging to each of these classes are numerous. Containing a proposal of conditions on God's part, they lead directly to the duty. What is wanting, is the acceptance of them on the part of man. So often as they are read or meditated on, or pressed on sinners in the preaching of the gospel, the sinner is invited to take hold in God's covenant. The invitations addressed through them are made by the Redeemer as the Prophet of his Church, and as the Lord of all. They exhibit the will of the Father, that his people should acknowledge him as the God of grace. They testify to the love of the Spirit, whose work it is to lead to accept of them. They unfold the purposes which were of old. They are the echo of the promises of the Everlasting Covenant, made to the great Mediator between God and man.

Through types. Covenanting itself is not a type or shadow, but a substantial reality. With many other things, however, which in some aspects of their character were types of good things to come, under other of their features it may be associated in presenting an emblem of what is spiritual. Thus, every institution of Divine grace may be understood as testifying to the excellence and necessity of every other, and to the reality of the exercises of the heart which ought to accompany their outward observance. Many things connected with the former dispensations, accordingly,vouch for the high origin, and nature, and claims of Covenanting. We contemplate them doing so, not as types of good things which had no existence when they occurred, but as emblems of good connected with vowing and swearing to God, which was common to every era of the history of the Church. By these, not less explicitly than by the voice of speech, instruction is addressed; and not less than the most explicit tender of good or obligation are their dictates to be received. Enoch, who clave to God; Noah and Abraham, each a covenant head; Aaron and Phinehas, each the representative of a Covenanted priesthood; and David, the federal head of a royal posterity; as individuals, were emblems of many devoted personally and socially by Covenant to the Lord. The Israelites, servants of God: the first-born among these, dedicated to the Lord: the Goel, or, Kinsman-redeemer, under a descending obligation to interpose in behalf of a relative: the voluntary bondservant, who, from love to his master and family, explicitly engaged himself to his service through life: sojourning strangers, not Canaanites, allowed and encouraged by the Israelites to wait on all the ordinances of religion: the Hebrew kings of David's family vested with rule according to a perpetual covenant: the Nazarites, peculiarly set apart to the service of God: the Aaronic priesthood, under the bond of an enduring covenant: and the Nethinims, a people employed about the sanctuary, descendants of the Gibeonites, who, though like Jacob they did not do well in the choice of means to obtain the blessing, were taken into covenant with God:—these were classes of persons who symbolized many explicitly engaged by covenant to the service of the Lord. The cities of refuge[412]—Kedesh,a holy place: Hebron,society, friendship, the end of a covenant: Shechem,a part orportion, as the lot of a covenant inheritance: Bezer,cut off and broken, as the sinner is from all vain confidences: Golan,exile, as separation from every visitation of vengeance: and Ramoth,eminences, orhigh places, as the stronghold provided in the covenant to prisoners of hope; true to their designations, as emblems point out the facts of a covenant made on behalf of many, who by sin are exposed to ruin. Canaan, a land of inheritance promised in covenant: Jerusalem,the vision of peace, and city of God: the tabernacle, the temple, and Mount Zion,—places where manifestations were made of the presence of God in covenant:—all denoted scenes, where his people, in every age, in giving themselves to the Lord, cleave unto him. The Ark prepared by Noah was entered by him and his house, betokening the accession of men, in all ages, to the covenant of God by faith in the Redeemer. The Ark of the Covenant, containing the book of the law: the table of shew-bread, representing the means of exhibiting Christ, the bread of life: the altar of incense, from which arose offerings, as of the praises and supplications of God's people, perfumed with the sweet incense of Christ's intercession: the golden candlestick, shedding forth light, as of the influences of God's Spirit: the laver, for washing, representing the means of purification from all defilement: the altar of burnt-offering, from which arose the flame of sacrifice, that betokened the offering of Him who made his soul a propitiation for sin; were sacred utensils, all of which referred to the ratification of God's covenant, and the dispensation of its blessings to those who are enabled to lay hold upon it. The Sabbath, returning every seventh day: the periodic feast of unleavened bread for seven days, following upon the Passover: the Sabbatic year, completing an interval reckoned by seven: the year of jubilee, occurring always after seven timesseven years were completed; were all seasons that pointed out times of waiting upon the ordinances of that Covenant which was ratified by the oath—represented by the number of perfection that should be waited on in ages most remote. Typical purifications; the ordeal for freeing from the imputation of murder, conducted by slaying the heifer, and washing the hands over it, while there was made a protestation of innocence, that embodied an oath:[413]the means of removing ceremonial defilement of various kinds: and the bitter water which, according to the innocence or guilt of the party to whom it was administered, acted innocuously, so as to denote the effects of a lawful oath, or as the oath which, by being sworn falsely, is converted into a curse; were all of the nature of an appeal to God. Oblations in general; the sin and trespass offerings, which were never merely voluntary: the burnt-offering: the peace-offerings, that were wont to be presented when vows were paid: in particular, the offering of salt, the symbol at once of communion and friendship, of durability and incorruption, and of sincerity of mind, and which was commanded to be presented with every offering—the emblem of an enduring covenant:[414]the pascal lamb, which represented Christ slain, the blood of which was sprinkled, as his blood was, for defence from wrath, and the flesh of which was eaten, so as to afford a vigour symbolizing that of those who, having eaten of his flesh, like the hosts of Israel from Egypt, go forth from bondage to liberty and peace; the Covenant sacrifice of Abraham, consisting of the red heifer, whose ashes were for purification; the she-goat of three years, for a sin-offering; the ram for a burnt-offering; the turtle-dove and the young pigeon, for a purification sacrifice and for a sin-offering, intimating that not merely did he, asa covenant-head, represent the rich who should present of their flocks and herds to the Lord, but of the poor, who of their poverty should present offerings absolutely less valuable, but not the less acceptable;—these offerings pointed out that the Covenant of God should be laid hold upon when the shadows which preceded the glorious reality of the "One Sacrifice" that had been foreordained would have come to an end, and there should succeed sacrifices spiritual in their stead, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. And circumcision, prefiguring Christ given for a covenant of the people, who, in the nature of man shedding his blood, should ratify God's covenant; and marking the people of God, sealing to them the Covenant of Grace, and pointing out their newness of life, regeneration, and deliverance from the vileness of sin, testified to the claims of obedience to the mandate of God in Covenant, which none could, but at the greatest peril, disregard. These types and others all pointed to the Redeemer. To the work which he had, from the days of eternity, Covenanted to perform, they gave prospective testimony. But of the effects of his mighty working upon the hearts of men, in leading them to keep his Covenant, they were not the less appointed symbols, nor were they less designed to teach that, but for the arrangements of that Covenant which had been made with him, there had not been made such manifestations of the power of his grace.

Through miracles. These were wrought in order to declare how near the chosen of God, as a people, were brought unto him, and how great was the covenant provision that had been made for them. The flame of fire which appeared on many solemn occasions, held a signal place among these. The "flaming sword," or the flame that dries up, or that which burns, displayed between the cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden; the flame offire in which the Angel of the Lord appeared unto Moses out of the midst of a bush, when He made himself known to him as the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; the flame of fire which appeared on the top of Mount Sinai when the Lord made a covenant with Israel; the pillar of fire by night, which accompanied Israel during their journeyings in the wilderness; the fire which was wont to descend and consume, in token of the acceptance of them, the sacrifices laid on God's altar—all testified to the gracious nearness of God to his covenant people. The cherubim, emblems of the ministry of reconciliation, first displayed immediately after the sin of man, represented afterwards in the act of looking upon the ark of the covenant in the tabernacle and temple, presented in vision before Ezekiel about to be sent to the rebellious house of Israel, and which, though denominated seraphim, were in like manner seen by Isaiah, when about to go forth to proclaim messages to the same people; through many ages pointed out that the servants of God in his house, by his appointment were set apart to unfold the truths of his Covenant. The dividing of the waters of the Red Sea, and the passage of Israel through the midst of it; and the presence of the cloud, in which, as well as in the sea, they were baptised;[415]and the cutting off of the waters, and the passing over of Jordan on dry ground, after the feet of the priests that bare the ark rested in its stream—manifested the almighty power of Him who had Covenanted to bring his people to a land of inheritance. The provision of bread from heaven, and water from the rock in the wilderness, showed in part how great were the resources of Him who had promised to his people, but not in vain. And the miracles wrought by the Redeemer in our world, from the over-ruling of external nature, to thefeeding of the hungry with food, the healing of diseases, the casting out of devils, the raising of the dead, and his own resurrection, taught that He had come to manifest his power, to give that eternal life that was promised in the Everlasting Covenant to all who were ordained to it. The subject of the import of the miracles that were wrought by Him and by the Holy Spirit, is exhaustless. Yet all of them are to be viewed as having been performed in order to the accomplishment of the Covenant's design.

Through the teaching of the prophets. That was addressed in the name of the Lord as God in Covenant: to Israel as a covenant people, it was extended: and it embodied only the revelations of the Covenant. It included sketches of the history of the Covenant alone; under imagery, the most varied and expressive, as well as by direct explicit statements, it unfolded the relations subsisting between God and his privileged people; and, in like manner, presented the future history of the Church, incorporated by solemn confederation.

Through the whole of the Old Testament Scriptures. The scope of these in general, and of many representations of them in particular, illustrates the bearing of every fact in the history of the Church upon the Covenant. As illustrations, some designations both of Christ and his people, may be adverted to.Heis introduced as aHusband,[416]and, consequently, as the Head of his people, engaged to him by vow.[417]He is exhibited as theCaptainof the Lord's host, and as aLeaderandCommanderto the people.[418]That he might be presented as at once of the lineage of David according to the flesh, as the author of everlasting righteousness, as allied in the capacity of the First-born among many brethren to the Church redeemed by his blood, and as the Builder and theHead thereof, and Head over all things to it, he is denominated theBranch.[419]As the Covenant of the people he is revealed, to denote that he is the Mediator of the Covenant, and that in that capacity he received the gift of the people of the Covenant, fulfilled its conditions by obeying the law and presenting himself as a covenant sacrifice, appeared as a sign of the Covenant, and was to carry into final effect the whole scheme of it. As theDays-Man,[420]he is made known, to intimate that, by Him alone, and only in a covenant relation, men chargeable with sin can hold communion with God. As theLadder,[421]he is spoken of, to point him out as, in the natures of God and man, the only means of communication between earth and heaven. As aWitness[422]to the people, he is described to be given by the Father, and consequently according to his own voluntary engagement. And asShiloh, he was promised, and his people thus received him as their Peace—provided in the Covenant.[423]And his Church is denominated hisportion, andthe lot of his inheritance. In various passages she is described aspeaceableorperfect, and is thus presented as in Covenant.[424]And asIsrael, thelovedof the Lord, she appears under his promised protection. And, to give and conclude with one illustration more belonging to this place, reference may be made to two terms. First,atonement(כפר—χαταλλαγη.) "The idea that seems to be expressed by this word, is that of averting some dreaded consequence by means of a substitutionary interposition. It thus fitly denotes the doctrine of salvation from sin and wrath, by a ransom of infinite worth." Secondly,reconciliation. "This term occurs in both the Old and New Testaments several times. But it is generally, if not always, used as a translation of the original words above explained. Indeed, as has already been remarked, it is quite synonymous with the term atonement, involving the same ideas and serving the same purposes. It supposes bringing into a state of good agreement parties who have had cause to be at variance, as is the case with God and his sinful creature man."[425]The two terms, therefore, manifestly stand connected with the representations given of a covenant state. The Hebrew term of which each of them is a translation, accordingly means both the ground of covenant privilege, and also that privilege enjoyed by men. The term cannot be interpreted independently of a reference to the Covenant of God. But for that Covenant, there had been no atonement. With the forgiveness of sin, atonement is indissolubly connected. The latter is never presented in Scripture without reference to the former. It was not alone the slaying and offering of sacrifice, but also the sprinkling of blood that made atonement. Where the blood was not sprinkled, sin was not put away, and no atonement was made. Where the blood was sprinkled, and accordingly sin was representatively put away, atonement was always effected. Only the following passage will be referred to here in corroboration of this. "If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to show unto man his uprightness; then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit; I have found a ransom (an atonement)."[426]The reason for giving deliverance therefore was, that an atonement was found. Had the atonement been found for two, accordingly two would have been delivered. Had it been foundfor all, all would in like manner have been delivered. But all will not be delivered. An atonement, therefore, was not made for all. Indeed, the atonement was devised and effected in order to the deliverance of the elect alone. Had it not been for them, there would have been no atonement. But for them, there had been no Everlasting Covenant. And only for the ratification of that Covenant, the atonement was designed. The atonement cannot exceed the comprehension of the covenant for the ratification of which it was effected. As no soul will be saved that was not given to Christ in covenant, so no soul that was not thus given to him has an interest in the great atonement. "The Scriptures represent the divine persons as entering into a federal agreement for the salvation of men. In this covenant of peace, the Father is the representative of the Godhead, and the Son representative of those who are to be redeemed. He is, on this account, called the Mediator and the Surety of the covenant. Whatever he did as Mediator or Surety, must, therefore, have been done in connection with the covenant. His death was the condition of the covenant. It was stipulated, as the condition of his having a seed to serve him, that he should make his soul an offering for sin; that he should bear their iniquities; that he should pour out his soul unto death. In reference to this, the blood of the ancient sacrifices was calledthe blood of the covenant, while of his own, the Saviour testifies, this cup is the new testament in my blood. The blood of Christ was not shed by accident, it was not poured out at random or on a venture. No: he laid down his life by covenant. The terms of the covenant must, therefore, define the designed extent of the objects of his death. If all mankind are included in the covenant,—if the Surety of the covenant represented, in this eternal transaction, the whole human race, then the atonement ofChrist must have been indefinite. But if the children of the covenant, as is admitted, are only a given specified number of the human family, then must the atonement of the Mediator be restricted tothem. There seems no evading this inference. To give the designed objects of the Saviour's atonement a greater extension than the covenant of grace, is to nullify its character as the stipulated condition of the covenant, and to render nugatory and unavailing the consolatory address by which the heart of many an awakened sinner has been soothed. 'Behold the blood of the covenant.'"[427]

Secondly, and lastly. In the Everlasting Covenant, provision was made for Covenanting under the last or present dispensation.

This was practically acknowledged by believers in the apostolic age. The common fund that was raised from the contributions of the Church assembled and addressed by Peter on the day of Pentecost, was devoted by solemn vows. From what was said by that Apostle to Ananias and Sapphira his wife, this appears. "Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." "How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?"[428]If a promise or vow to God to give up their substance had not been made, the language of reproof addressed to them would have been inapplicable. It is true, that when one lies to men, he disobeys God. But the language, "thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God," must intimate that the possession of the two individualshad been, either publicly before their brethren, or secretly, or in both ways, vowed to God. The conclusion is corroborated by the obvious consideration, that the practice of acting in this manner, although not to such an extent, was quite in accordance with that of vowing things to God under the dispensation that had then been brought to a close; and especially by the very language of Peter, "Whilst it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?" precisely agreeing with the words of the Old Testament record, "But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee." Again, the practices of makingconfession, and ofprofessing, which we have found to be in reality the making of Covenant engagements, would appear from the references made to them by the inspired writers, to have been ordinary occurrences of their times. And, lastly, the conduct of the Macedonian Churches, in giving themselves to the Lord, to which we have had occasion to refer, is worthy of being remembered as an authenticated source of Covenanting in those times, that had been performed by many, in one of the spheres where the truth had most manifestly taken effect.

The practice was provided for through the direct injunctions of the last inspired writers. These, dissuading from idolatry,[429]taught the necessity of the practice, the reverse of that, of recognising God and acknowledging him by vowing and swearing to him as a covenant God. Teaching the necessity of faith and other graces, they showed that it is dutiful to engage in that and those other exercises in which these are requisite. They explicitly enjoin the exercise of Covenanting.[430]Inculcating the holding fast of the Christianprofession,[431]an apostle teaches that such a profession shouldnot merely be adhered to, but also made. And delivering the express words of the Redeemer, the last of the apostles, teaching the duty of entering into covenant engagements, and keeping them till Christ should come, tendered the command, "But that which ye have already, hold fast till I come."[432]

The practice was provided for through the whole of the New Testament writings.

The New Testament contains the same kinds of expression in reference to the Covenant of God as the Old, and employs them for the same purpose as that for which those statements of that Testament are used. It makes use of figurative and other language of the same origin as that of the Old Testament, for the purpose of inculcating nothing else than the keeping of the Covenant.

By an apostle, there is strikingly brought into view the truth taught in the prophets,—that the Lord created, or formed, or fore-ordained, a people, to enter into Covenant with him, and by obedience also, otherwise to keep it.[433]

The imagery of thefoundation[434]employed in prophecy to point out Christ, and the sureness and continuance of the Covenant, is also used by two apostles for the same purpose. Their references to it illustrate the doctrine, that, in the New Testament, types, though realized in Christ, and also partly illustrated in the blessings at any time bestowed by Him, are not to be disregarded but studied, that the good things prefigured by them, but as yet unattained, may be enjoyed.

The designation of the Holy Spirit, as the "Spiritof promise,"[435]teaches that He was given in consequence of the arrangements of the Covenant of God; and consequently, that all the benefits bestowed on believers, not merely in Oldbut also in New Testament times, were to come to them in connection with the acceptance of the gift of the Spirit, as included in the promise of the Covenant.

The idea ofreconciliation, dwelt on by the apostles, necessarily implies the notion of a covenant agreement, as being not merely made but maintained, between God and men—once exposed to his curse, but afterwards put in possession of an interest in the atonement of Christ.

References made by the apostles topurificationcannot be explained independently of the principle of, a covenant ratified by the blood of Christ being the channel of the communication of faith and the other graces, and of sanctification—that results from the implantation, support, and direction of these by the Holy Ghost.

Thesprinkling, whether of blood or of water, referring to the operation of the Spirit, is introduced by an apostle as enjoyed by those who take hold on God's covenant.[436]

Even as circumcision was,baptismis, a sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace.[437]

In theLord's Supper, the bread is a symbol of the body of Christ—broken in the sufferings endured by him on behalf of his people; and the wine is a symbol of his blood—shed for the remission of their sins. Commemorating the Redeemer's dying love, and receiving a seal of all the benefits of his death, by partaking of these elements according to his command, they signify the actings of their faith on him in an act of Covenanting.[438]

Preaching peace, Christ, and after him his apostles and other servants in the ministry of the gospel,[439]proclaimed the Covenant of Peace, and urged the duty of acceding to it; and speakingpeace to his disciples,[440]He declared it to be his prerogative to bestow on all his people the blessings of that Covenant.

The Redeemer, foretelling his address to be delivered at the day of judgment to his enemies of all ages of the world,—"I never knew you: depart from me," intimated that he would not recognise them as covenant children; and declaring of his people,—"I am the good Shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine," he taught that they know him, as they alone do who take hold on God's covenant.[441]

Allusions to the seal imply the doctrine of Covenanting. The declaration,—"He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true,"[442]refers to a solemn covenant attestation to the truth.

The people of God designating the Redeemer, as the "High Priest of our profession,"[443]recognise him as bestowing grace upon them, to take hold on God's covenant, and to continue to cleave to it.

In the Epistles, there is distinctly brought into view aninheritancewhich is not else than the blessings provided in God's covenant, and appropriated in adhering to it.[444]

The designations,—"Children of the kingdom,"[445]"Followers of God as dear children,"[446]"Friends (of Christ),"[447]"Heirs of God,"[448]"God's heritage,"[449]"the bride, the Lamb's wife,"[450]"Perfect,"[451]or possessed of integrity, healthful, safe, willing, complete, "sanctified," are all calculated to point out the covenant relation and privileges, and duties, of the people of God; and, accordingly, to show that by special explicitengagements they should devote themselves to him; and the representation of the Church as the "Pillar and ground (stay) of the truth,"[452]teaches that her duty is to make an unequivocal and steadfast public profession of Divine truth.

The Covenant of God, from the last dispensation being introduced as the "New Covenant," and as one of the covenants of promise,[453]is represented by the last inspired writers as extended, both in regard to its blessings and its duties, to the latest times.[454]

And, by some of the evangelists and apostles, the Covenant of God is exhibited as a testament. By them the dispensations of Divine mercy to men, are represented as being each both a covenant and a testament. By them are applied such representations to each of the dispensations—both to the former dispensations, and to the last of them. The conclusion, therefore, to which we are brought by them is, that each, as a testament, is essentially an exhibition of a corresponding covenant, or a given dispensation of one covenant. The truth is, that the Covenant of God, under each dispensation, includes in it a testament, or that every dispensation of grace, whether in former times, or in the last times, viewed as a testament, is a covenant. Every testament is a covenant, and each of those dispensations is at once a testament and the Covenant of God. Take first the present dispensation. A testament, like every covenant, has a stipulation, or promise and demand; in both, good is offered, and duty required. In this dispensation, the blessings of God's favour are offered, and obedience to the law of Christ is required; it has, therefore,onecharacter, both of a covenant and of a testament. A testament, like every covenant, when acceded to, has a re-stipulation, or engagement corresponding to the stipulation. In the present dispensation, when the overtures of Divine grace are acceded to, there is tendered an acceptance of Christ and all his benefits, and the promise of obedience in dependence on his strength. It has, therefore,anothermark common to both a testament and a covenant. A testament and a covenant have alike a seal or ratification. The seal of the testament is not valid till the death of the testator; the overtures of Divine mercy were ratified or sealed by the death of Christ. The present dispensation has, therefore, thethirdand last mark both of a testament and of a covenant. It has, consequently, all the characteristics of a testament, and of a dispensation of the Covenant of Grace. It must, therefore, now appear how the idea of the present dispensation being a covenant is contemplated in the New Testament, even while it is described as a testament. The coincidence between a covenant, and a testament as a particular case of it, explains how the Greek term διχθηχη capable of being rendered sometimes by the wordtestament, and, at others, by the wordcovenant; and shews the error of the insinuation, so derogatory of the inspiration of the Scriptures, that the Apostle Paul, finding that this Greek term, which is used forcovenant, meant, in some connections, atestament, therefore proceeded to unfold the covenant of God as a testament. The reason why the apostle, guided by inspiration, exhibited the Covenant of God as a testament, was, that it is in reality a testament. Yea, the fact that that covenant is a testament, must have been the reason why, even before the days of the apostle, even that Greek word had, from direct or indirect communication between the Greeks and the Israelites, acquired the twofold import. Hence, besides, it is doing no service to the interpretation of the Scriptures, to attempt to shew that in the passageof the Epistle to the Hebrews,[455]where the covenant is represented as a testament, either that the term διαθηχη there, must have only the meaningtestament, or that it must be renderedcovenantexclusively throughout. In some parts of the passage it means the one, in others the other, in others both. It means both in the original of the passage, "And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." It means a testament in that of the following, "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth." In the original of the words, "Whereupon neither the first (testamentunderstood) was dedicated without blood," it means properly a covenant ratified by the blood of sacrifice, and, consequently, a testament. And it means both in the original of the words that follow, "This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you." The parallelism between the death of the testator and the shedding of the blood of the covenant, is beautiful, and it cannot be destroyed. In the case of the death of Christ, it becomes an identity. The death of the testator is there the shedding of the blood of the covenant!

We have seen that the last dispensation is both a covenant and a testament; but so was the former. The blood of sacrifice was typical at once of the blood of the Mediator, and of his death as the great Testator. The blessings of his purchase in the first ages were, even as in the last, testamentary. They were not reversionary, but no less by bequest and no less sure than they hadbeen had he, whose death by sacrifice was continually pointed out antecedently, really died.

In conclusion, from the whole,

It is manifest, that to represent Covenanting as a mere Jewish thing, is an error. It was engaged in before the father of the Hebrew race was called. It was practised when the Levitical economy was on the verge of dissolution, and attended to in the apostolic age by churches that were not subjected to its peculiar institutes. It was provided for the Church, whether existing in Old or New Testament times. It was independent of the peculiarities of the former dispensations, though it attracted to itself the performance of their characteristic observances. It was by Covenanting that the Church was incorporated; by it the Church has been hitherto kept distinct from the world; and by it, throughout all time, she will prove herself to be the heir of the Covenant promise of God, made from eternity, and to be bestowed in time and eternity to come.

FOOTNOTES:[365]Heb. xiii. 20.[366]Ps. xc. 2.[367]Prov. viii. 23.[368]Mic. v. 2.[369]Ps. lxxxix. 3, 28.[370]Is. liii. 10-12.[371]Is. xlii. 21.[372]Rom. v. 15-19. 1 Cor. xv. 47-49.[373]Is. lix. 21.[374]Gen. vi. 18; xvii. 7; Lev. xxvi. 9; Ezek. xvi. 62.[375]Deut. xxviii. 9; xxix. 13.[376]Is. xlix. 8.[377]Ps. lxxxix. 4.[378]Jer. xxx. 20-22.[379]Ezek. xxxiv. 24; xxxvii. 24, 25.[380]Ps. xxii. 28.[381]Heb. x. 19-23.[382]Compare Ps. ii. 8, and Deut. xxxii. 9.[383]Is. viii. 18, and Heb. ii. 13.[384]Jer. iii. 19.[385]Ps. xxii. 30.[386]Eph. i. 4.[387]Jer. xxxi. 3.[388]John xv. 5.[389]Heb. xiii. 15.[390]2 Thess. ii. 13.[391]Is. xxviii. 15-18, and 1 Pet. ii. 6-10.[392]Phil. ii. 11.[393]Col. ii. 6, 7.[394]Ps. viii. 2, and Matt. xxi. 16.[395]Ps. xcvi. 6.[396]Is. xlvi. 13.[397]Rom. iv. 9, 10, 11.[398]Gal. iii. 14, 15.[399]Gal. iii 17.[400]Compare Heb. xiii. 20, and Is. liii. 10-12.[401]See Is. xxi. 2; xxix. 11. In the latter of these passages it may mean both a revelation and a covenant.[402]Is. xxviii. 18.[403]Is. xxxiii. 17.[404]Ps. xxvii. 8.[405]Ps. xl. 7, 8.[406]Compare Ps. lxiii. 17, 18, with Eph. iv. 8.[407]Zech. ix. 11.[408]Exod. xxiv. 7.[409]Ezek. xvi. 60, 62.[410]Ps. xix. 11.[411]Gal. iii. 18.[412]Job xx. 7, 8.[413]Deut. xxi. 4-8.[414]2 Chron. xiii. 5.[415]1 Cor. x. 1, 2.[416]Is. liv. 5.[417]Jer. xxxi. 32.[418]Josh. v. 15; Is. lv. 4.[419]Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12, 13; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6.[420]Job ix. 33.[421]Gen. xxviii. 12.[422]Is. lv. 4.[423]Eph. ii. 14.[424]Is. xxxii. 18; Is. xlii. 19.[425]"The Atonement and Intercession of Jesus Christ." By the Rev. Dr. William Symington. 2d Ed., pp. 9, 10, 11.[426]Job xxxiii. 23, 24.[427]"Atonement and Intercession," pp. 257, 258.[428]Acts v. 3, 4, 9.[429]1 Cor. x. 14; 1 John v. 21.[430]Rom. xii. 1; Rom. vi. 13.[431]Heb. iv. 14; x. 23.[432]Rev. ii. 25.[433]Compare Eph. ii. 10, with Is. xliv. 2.[434]Eph. ii. 20, 21; 1 Pet. ii. 5-10.[435]Eph. i. 13.[436]Heb. x. 22.[437]Rom. iv. 11, and Col. ii. 11, 12.[438]1 Cor. xi. 24, 25.[439]Eph. ii. 17, and Rom. x. 15.[440]John xiv. 27.[441]Is. xix. 21.[442]John iii. 33.[443]Heb. iii. 1.[444]Col. iii. 24, and 1 Pet. i. 4, 5.[445]Mat. xiii. 38.[446]Eph. v. 1.[447]John xv. 14.[448]Rom. viii. 17.[449]1 Pet. v. 3.[450]Rev. xxi. 9.[451]Philip, iii. 15.[452]1 Tim. iii. 15.[453]Heb. viii. 13; Eph. ii. 12[454]Heb. ix. 15.[455]Heb. ix. 15-20.

[365]Heb. xiii. 20.

[366]Ps. xc. 2.

[367]Prov. viii. 23.

[368]Mic. v. 2.

[369]Ps. lxxxix. 3, 28.

[370]Is. liii. 10-12.

[371]Is. xlii. 21.

[372]Rom. v. 15-19. 1 Cor. xv. 47-49.

[373]Is. lix. 21.

[374]Gen. vi. 18; xvii. 7; Lev. xxvi. 9; Ezek. xvi. 62.

[375]Deut. xxviii. 9; xxix. 13.

[376]Is. xlix. 8.

[377]Ps. lxxxix. 4.

[378]Jer. xxx. 20-22.

[379]Ezek. xxxiv. 24; xxxvii. 24, 25.

[380]Ps. xxii. 28.

[381]Heb. x. 19-23.

[382]Compare Ps. ii. 8, and Deut. xxxii. 9.

[383]Is. viii. 18, and Heb. ii. 13.

[384]Jer. iii. 19.

[385]Ps. xxii. 30.

[386]Eph. i. 4.

[387]Jer. xxxi. 3.

[388]John xv. 5.

[389]Heb. xiii. 15.

[390]2 Thess. ii. 13.

[391]Is. xxviii. 15-18, and 1 Pet. ii. 6-10.

[392]Phil. ii. 11.

[393]Col. ii. 6, 7.

[394]Ps. viii. 2, and Matt. xxi. 16.

[395]Ps. xcvi. 6.

[396]Is. xlvi. 13.

[397]Rom. iv. 9, 10, 11.

[398]Gal. iii. 14, 15.

[399]Gal. iii 17.

[400]Compare Heb. xiii. 20, and Is. liii. 10-12.

[401]See Is. xxi. 2; xxix. 11. In the latter of these passages it may mean both a revelation and a covenant.

[402]Is. xxviii. 18.

[403]Is. xxxiii. 17.

[404]Ps. xxvii. 8.

[405]Ps. xl. 7, 8.

[406]Compare Ps. lxiii. 17, 18, with Eph. iv. 8.

[407]Zech. ix. 11.

[408]Exod. xxiv. 7.

[409]Ezek. xvi. 60, 62.

[410]Ps. xix. 11.

[411]Gal. iii. 18.

[412]Job xx. 7, 8.

[413]Deut. xxi. 4-8.

[414]2 Chron. xiii. 5.

[415]1 Cor. x. 1, 2.

[416]Is. liv. 5.

[417]Jer. xxxi. 32.

[418]Josh. v. 15; Is. lv. 4.

[419]Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12, 13; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6.

[420]Job ix. 33.

[421]Gen. xxviii. 12.

[422]Is. lv. 4.

[423]Eph. ii. 14.

[424]Is. xxxii. 18; Is. xlii. 19.

[425]"The Atonement and Intercession of Jesus Christ." By the Rev. Dr. William Symington. 2d Ed., pp. 9, 10, 11.

[426]Job xxxiii. 23, 24.

[427]"Atonement and Intercession," pp. 257, 258.

[428]Acts v. 3, 4, 9.

[429]1 Cor. x. 14; 1 John v. 21.

[430]Rom. xii. 1; Rom. vi. 13.

[431]Heb. iv. 14; x. 23.

[432]Rev. ii. 25.

[433]Compare Eph. ii. 10, with Is. xliv. 2.

[434]Eph. ii. 20, 21; 1 Pet. ii. 5-10.

[435]Eph. i. 13.

[436]Heb. x. 22.

[437]Rom. iv. 11, and Col. ii. 11, 12.

[438]1 Cor. xi. 24, 25.

[439]Eph. ii. 17, and Rom. x. 15.

[440]John xiv. 27.

[441]Is. xix. 21.

[442]John iii. 33.

[443]Heb. iii. 1.

[444]Col. iii. 24, and 1 Pet. i. 4, 5.

[445]Mat. xiii. 38.

[446]Eph. v. 1.

[447]John xv. 14.

[448]Rom. viii. 17.

[449]1 Pet. v. 3.

[450]Rev. xxi. 9.

[451]Philip, iii. 15.

[452]1 Tim. iii. 15.

[453]Heb. viii. 13; Eph. ii. 12

[454]Heb. ix. 15.

[455]Heb. ix. 15-20.

COVENANTING ADAPTED TO THE MORAL CONSTITUTION OF MAN.

The law of God originates in his nature, but the attributes of his creatures are due to his sovereignty. The former is, accordingly, to be viewed as necessarily obligatory on the moral subjects of his government, and the latter—which are all consistent with the holiness of the Divine nature, are to be considered as called into exercise according to his appointment. Hence, also, the law of God is independent of his creatures, though made known on their account; but the operation of their attributes behove to be regulated according to that law. The principles of eternal holiness, embodied in the law, necessarily existed because of the eternity and infinite glory of God; but would not have been made the basis of a law had creatures not been formed. The constitution of creatures who should be called to give obedience, was wholly due to the will of God, but in perfect harmony with the spirit of his commands. Moral creatures having been formed, the law of God speaks one language to all of them. They, possessed of different characteristic attributes, alike recognise its appeals. Angels have a constitution which distinguishes them from man, yet with him they apprehend the authority of the one moral law. Over a range, therefore, of infinite extent, the principles of eternal rectitude are maintained. Man, in innocence, recognised them. Man, redeemed, cleaves to them according to his attainments in grace. Angels, possessed of a nature different from that of man, acknowledge their obligation upon them. And God himself, distantfrom his highest moral offspring by a difference that is infinite, exhibits them as a manifestation of his holiness, and the principles according to which he acts towards his creatures. Much, therefore, in common belongs to the constitution of the moral natures of angels and men, and necessarily proceeds from and accords with the nature of God. His law, we have seen, inculcates the duty of Covenanting. From what has been said, we would, therefore, conclude that the constitution of man was fitted to that exercise. That it was so appears, moreover, from other considerations now to be adduced.

Covenanting was adapted to the moral constitution of man in innocence.

First. From the Scripture account of that constitution this appears. In this manner he is there represented—"God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him."[456]"God hath made man upright."[457]These declarations imply that man was created at least "in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness," and accordingly, in conformity with the will of God, as to his intellect, his affections, his conscience, and will. When brought into existence, his intellectual and moral powers were full grown, and his knowledge was suited to the state of a creature fitted to hold communion with God. His intellect was fitted completely to survey, according to its capacity, the whole scene of natural and moral existence presented before it, from the lowest stage of dependent being to what it was competent to him to know of God. His affections, in a flame alike pure and ardent, glowed at the prospect of moral excellence which appeared in the works of God, and above all, in Himself. His conscience, tender as the perfection of a delicate spiritual organisation worthy the creative energy of a Being of spotless infinite holiness, was in perfect sympathy with the awards of that perfection of judgment which, from eternity to eternity, is unchanged. And his will, the mighty gift, emblem of the volition of the Giver, approved what He decreed. With such capacities, accompanied with corresponding knowledge of the external world and the internal man, and with a perfect acquaintance with the nature and demands of God's law, the favoured creature man could not but acquiesce in it. To the claims of its glorious Author, put forth by it, he was led by the most sure, and yet most gentle and delightful constraints, to give his acquiescence. What it demanded as duty to God, and duty to man, as if bound, yet free, he joyously proffered and endeavoured to give. What it forbade, he, in the same spirit, desired not to attain to, but resolved to reject. That law required, in its first command, the avouchment of God as a God in Covenant; in its second, it demanded the same, in anticipation of whatever evil—such as the inroads of satan, might tempt to lead from him; in its third, it claimed the fulfilment of the duty of solemn appeal to theI Amby oath; in its ninth, it required the speaking of truth to man, and consequently, the public avouchment of God as a God in Covenant before others; and in entering into Covenant with him, the favoured creature man, to all these and the other statutes of that law, from his holy nature, gave his adherence. In his nature, as a living personification of finite excellence, designed to transact with God, and rendered fit to adhere to his engagements, and true to the constitutional character of his existence, in the presence of his glorious Lord he stood a being in Covenant with him. Had there even not been a representative phase of character provided for Adam, he had, therefore, necessarily, from his very constitution, been in Covenant with God. A law was made known to him by the great Creator and Ruler; a willingness to accept of it as a guide to duty, manifested by receiving it, was given to him. To the formation of a covenant, though any other condition that God should propose might be added, nothing more was necessary. The covenant due to this was embodied in that which, as we shall presently see was, at his creation, in sovereignty made with him.

Secondly. This appears from the fact, that the law of God to man in innocence, was given in a covenant form. From the very origin of his existence, Adam was placed under law to God, both as an individual, and as the representative head of the human family. Under both aspects of his condition he was, accordingly, amenable to that law; nay, more, to that law in a covenant form.

To him, as an individual, it was promulgated, not merely as a law but as a covenant. It could not have been proclaimed to him as the federal head of others, had it not conferred obligation upon him as a moral agent, responsible for his own actions. Now, the law that was given to him in his twofold character was, in reality, a condition of a covenant. Both the positive precept and the statutes of the decalogue unfolded what was designed as a covenant claim. The command to obey, implying the command to agree to obey, is an injunction to enter into covenant, and, therefore, itself the condition of a covenant, to be constituted in the acquiescence of the creature addressed. The giving of any command to man, therefore, in a state of innocence, was a recognition of him as a creature on his constitution designed, and, in the providence of God, to be called, to enter into covenant with him. But this conclusion is corroborated by the very matter of the moral law itself. We have seen that several of the precepts of that law require the observance of entering into covenant. These commands could not have been obeyed as the dictates of God's laws, had the duty of Covenanting not been performed. And that duty could nothave been performed otherwise than in the recognition of the commands of the law as the conditions of a Covenant. From other considerations this also appears. We are warranted to maintain that the covenant of God dispensed to men is in reality a covenant. But the positive precept forbidding man to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, is inculcated in the very same terms in which the Covenant of God is enjoined. Both are spoken of as commanded. "And theLordGod commanded (יצו) the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it."[458]"He hath commanded (צוה) his covenant for ever."[459]A law, when promulgated, cannot but be commanded. A covenant when revealed, as we here see, is commanded. We should, therefore, take an unwarrantably circumscribed view of the law given to man at first, were we to view it as given as a law, but not as a covenant. Even as the matter of the law revealed at Sinai was an exhibition of the provisions of the Covenant of Grace, so that of the law given to man in innocence was the condition of the Covenant of Works. It was not merely by the promise, but also by the gift of life, that the positive law was converted into the nature of a covenant. By that promise, indeed, the Covenant of Works was distinguished; that showed the unspeakably beneficent design of the great Creator, and formed the most powerful motive to obedience. But the making of that promise was not essential to the existence of a covenant between the parties. By the giving of that promise, God indeed became, by explicit intimation, engaged to man; but by giving to his creature capacities for enjoying good, and desiring it, he virtually engaged to give him what was to be beneficial for him, so long as Heshould choose. Adam was in the enjoyment of good when God revealed to him his law. God addressed him, not as one who might be doubtful whether or not he should receive good from his hand, but as one in possession of powers and capacities even then appropriating extensive benefits. His delighting himself in God—the highest good that he could enjoy, though no explicit promise of good had been made to him, would have been a token to him that he was in covenant. But the promise in which that good was implied rendered the anticipation of it definite, both as to time and duration.

Again, the law of God was given both as a law and as a covenant to Adam, as the representative of the human race. Though the giving of the positive precept put him into a covenant state as a federal head, and though by breaking it he fell, and in consequence of his sin they fell in him, yet it is unwarrantable to maintain that the duty of abstaining from the tree of life was the only condition of the covenant to be observed by him as the public covenant head of his descendants. What would have been his condition had he neglected any other duty incumbent on him? Would he not have been depraved as an individual personally guilty? and accordingly seeing that he that offends in one point is guilty of all, would he not have been unworthy of representing his posterity, or in consequence of his depravity would he not have resolved to eat of the tree of life, and thus have exposed himself to the stroke of Divine indignation, and have been cut off? As, had he existed alone, he would from the very constitution of his nature have been under covenant obligation to perform whatever duties his Creator might have made known to him, so in his public character, his obedience to the law of God on his own behalf and towards the fulfilment of the peculiar duties connected with his relation to his descendants, was due as required by covenant. As one with his posterity he was bound by requirements that would have brought them under obligation. Feeling himself commanded to obey on behalf of many of whom he himself was one, no less than as if he had acted in an individual capacity, did he or could he recognise his obligations to acquiesce in duty prescribed, nor less was he called and urged solemnly by covenant to engage to them.

Back to Index Next