that cloud of witnesses quoted in our entry on this subject, I might add a great many more. Nay it is remarkable that some who have explained the two covenants of the two dispensations, have taught at another time that the Sinai-covenant was indeed a covenant of works t. This seems also to be the judgment of the Westminster Divines. They bring all their proofs of a covenant of works either from the garden or the mount, from Eden or from Sinai. But if that covenant was not given at Sinai, one class of these proofs must go for nothing, being quite foreign to the purpose for which they are adduced. In our Larger Cat. Quest. 93. having defined the moral law as a covenant of works, they expressly assert, Quest. 98. that this moral law was delivered by the voice of God upon mount Sinai, and written by him on two tables of stone. Whence I think we may infer that according to them, the Sinai law was a covenant of works. The argument is shortly thus. The moral law is the covenant of works. But that law was delivered on mount Sinai. Therefore the covenant of works was delivered there. True it is, these same Divines teach in our Confession of Faith, Chap. 19. Sect. 2. That the law was delivered on mount Sinai as a perfect rule of righteousness. But these are no how contrary. The same law might be delivered both as a rule, and as a covenant. A covenant it surely was to all such as were Abraham's carnal descendants only, and being so it was also a rule to them; forasmuch as its federal form includes its authority as a rule: a rule only, and not a covenant, it was to Abraham's spiritual offspring. And thus the law, like the pillar of cloud, Exod. xiv. 20. had a dark side and a lucid. To sinners, it was as blackness, darkness, tempest, and the shadow of death. To saints, it was a Ames. Medulla, Cap. 39. fig. 4. Maccov. Loc. Com. Cap. 58. p. 500. Edward's Hist. of Redemp. p. 67, 68. Watt's Berry-Street Serm. 13th. † See Doddridge Fam. Expos, off Rom. viii. 3, note . chap. x. 5. note c. light to guide their feet into the way of duty and of peace. The second Proposition was to shew, that The covenant of works was delivered at Sinai, not in opposition, but in subserviency, to that of grace. And this will appear from the following considerations, all drawn from the preceding chapter. 1st. The covenant of works was now a broken covenant, it could not give life. And, being unfit for that purpose, God only wise could not give it for that end. All the institutions of his appointment have an aptitude to reach their end. But the covenant of works being now weak as to all the purposes of life, Rom. viii. 3. it would have been incongruous to the divine wisdom to repeat it of new for these purposes. How unbecoming all his attributes to rear up a second covenant of works upon the ruins of the first! When he gave it at first it was able to make man happy, but now it was no more so. It could bring such to heaven as gave it perfect obedience, but against such as failed in the least article, it denounced everlasting vengeance. And all having come egregiously short of that perfection, it could not be given to the Israelites as a covenant of life. So far from that, it was the ministration of death. To man in innocence it was a good covenant, his abilities being proportioned to its highest demands: but so it was not now. Though good in itself, it was not good for him. It could not give him what he wanted, he not being able to fulfil its terms. Therefore we may be certain that it was not set up as a covenant co-or dinate with that of grace, but subordinate to it. Not as opening up a way of life different from it, but as shutting up to that new and living way exclusive of every other, Gal. iii. 23. The Israelites were no more bound to seek righteousness and life by it, than the young man was, by our Saviour's saying to him, Matt. xix. 17, 18. If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. The latter was a repetition of the former *. • Boston on the Marow, p. 57. 2dly. That the covenant of works repeated at Sinai was in subserviency to the covenant of grace, appears from this last having been confirmed long before the Sinai transaction. Now if the covenant of grace was in being before the Sinai dispensation of that of works, surely this latter could not be set up as opposing or nullifying the former. The covenant of works being broken, and thereby the way to heaven blocked up as with mountains of brass, that of grace was revealed, throwing wide the gates of life to all who would enter in. Now, if after this, the covenant of works should be repeated, as in opposition to that of grace, what strange, uncomely, and contradictory work would it be? The covenant of grace revealed to remove the misery,brought in by the breach of the covenant of works, and this latter again revived as a sister-covenant to the disparagement of grace. A procedure this, unworthy of him, all whose ways are marked with the highest wisdom and faithfulness. Brethren, says our apostle to the Galatians, who had so grossly perverted the use and intention of the Sinaitic covenant, I speak after the manner of men: though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. And then he applies this just and well known maxim to God's covenant, chap. iii. 17. And this I say, the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. The Abrahamic covenant was confirmed by sacrifice, Gen. xv. 8-21.; by circumcision, Rom. iv. 11.; by the birth of Isaac, the precious pledge of the promised seed, Gen. xxi. 1. S.; and last of all by God's own oath, Gen. xxii. 15—18. And being thus confirmed, surely the Sinaitic covenant could not in the least disannul it. That was as impossible as it is for the God of truth to set his scal to a lie, Heb. vi. 17, 18. He had sworn that in Abraham's seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed, therefore if blessedness could have been obtained by the Sinaitic covenant, that solemn oath had been rendered void. It must be owned that conditional promises, and threatenings, are sometimes express ed absolutely, as in the case of Hezekiah and Nineveh, but then an oath is never found added to these. Where Jehovah's oath is interposed, the thing is absolute: He may repent, as scripture speaks, of what he has said only, Jonah iii. 10. but never, never of what he has sworn, Psalm cx. 4. Heb. iii. 18. vi. 18. Now, the Abrahamic covenant being strictly absolute to all the seed, in asmuch as what is required of them in point of duty, is made the matter of the promises; and being also confirmed by the irreversible oath of God who cannot lie, the Sinaitic covenant could not be set up in opposition to it, as an equal, but in subordination as a hand-maid. Nay, it is worthy of our observation, that the covenant of grace was given at Sinai itself and before the covenant of works: intimating that the one was to serve the other in the church of God, as Hagar did Sara in Abraham's family. Grace is the preface to the law: and from the burning mount, as from the tribunal in Eden, Gen. iii. 15. the joyful tidings come. When the many thousands of Israel, stood at the nether part of the mount to hear what God the Lord would say, What were his first words? Why words of grace indeed, I am Jehovah, thy God, who have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, Exod. xx. 1. These words teach us, as our Shorter Catechism well observes, that God is the Lord, and our God, and Redeemer. God says to Moses, Exod. vi. 3. I appeared to Abraham, and to Isaac, and to Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them. This is not meant of the sound, but of the sense of that glorious and fearful name. It signifieth not only God's being in himself, but also his giving being, substance, and performance to his promises. To the three patriarchs, he had promised to bring their seed out of Egypt. This promise they did not see fulfilled, and in this respect did not know God by his name Jehovah. But it being now performed to their children, he addresses them in the new covenant style, so to speak, I am Jehovah, thy God, who have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. This is that covenant mentioned, Deut. xxix. 25. as made with the Israelites when they came out of Egypt: repeated to them on Sinai immediately before the covenant of works. And both in itself, and in God's intention, it was the principal part of the Sinai transaction, though the covenant of works was the most conspicuous *. Therefore unless we make one part of that transaction destructive of another, the covenant of works must have been subservient to that of grace. 3dly. This is further evident from the manner in which the law-covenant was given. It was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator, Gal. iii. 19. Moses was the mediator between God and the people at mount Sinai; and in, or by, his hand, the law was given, according to the phrase used upwards of twenty times in the Old Testament, Lev. x. 11. xxvi. 46. &c. Of this mediation Moses reminds them, Deut. v. 25. The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord talked out of the midst of the fire. I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to shew you the word of the Lord. He was a mediator chosen by God, Exod. xix. 3. and by the people themselves, chap. xx. 19. Speak thou with us, said they, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die. What a solemn day was that when they stood O before the Lord in Horeb! What an awful distance is represented as betwixt God and them! Angels for him: a mediator for them: but God and the people come not nigh each other. The law was received by the disposition, or through ranks of angels marshalled in solemn array, Acts vii. 53.: the word was spoken by them, Heb. ii. 2. They as ministers of the eternal Boston on the Marrow, p. 58. |