that the author of the letters himself would ad

mit of it. However, by expreffing himself so incautioufly on this head, he has given occasion to those who may be disposed to improve it, for putting the most perverse and corrupt glosses upon the several passages in the New Testament, where a diftinction is made betwixt flesh and spirit.

I know not the least shadow of reason Palæmon could have for expressing himself in this manner, if it is not, that the inspired penman of the epistle to the Hebrews, calls the rules and ceremonies belonging to the law of Mofes, carnal ordinances, and the fanctuary, in which the most solemn acts of worship were performed under the law, a worldly fanctuary*: and indeed, confidered in themselves, they were such; as they had no intrinsic excellency, nor were useful, any further then they served to typify and prefigure spiritual or heavenly things: for they were only shadows of good things to come, and not the very images of the things themselves; or, as the apostle, elsewhere, in the same epistle, emphatically designs them, PATTERNS of things in the heavenst. But, in respect of their spiritual and mystical fignification, they were divine ordinances, in which Christ, his righteousness, offices, grace, and salvation, were exhibited to the faith of believers under the Old Testament dispensation; and in the due observation of which God was pleased to admit his people to gracious communion and fellowship with himself: and it is plain, that in so far as they belonged to the old covenant, they were intended to typify and represent good things to come--

*Heb. ix. 10.-1.

+ ὑποδείγματα τῶν ἐν τοῖς ὀυρανοῖς; exhibiting not a perfect image, but only some faint resemblance of those things they were intended to represent or typify. Heb. ix. 23.

which are more clearly revealed and exhibited to the view of the church, now under the Chriftian dispensation. Thus though confidered abstractly, or without any regard to their mystical fignification, they might be termed carnal, or fleshly ordinances; yet, in so far as Christ, and the bleffings of the covenant of grace, were shadowed forth and prefigured by them, doubtless they belonged to the adminiftration of the covenant of grace, and, in this respect, cannot be called flesh. And it is obfervable, that, though they are sometimes designed carnal ordinances in the New Testament, we do not find that they are any where called flesh in the abstract; much less is the old covenant itself fo called.

As the author of the letters will not allow, that the old covenant made with Ifrael, either contained a repetition of the law, or covenant of works made with Adam in the state of innocency, or any way belonged to the administration of the covenant of grace; we are at a loss to know what it was, or in what light it is to be viewed according to his scheme. Perhaps, with Socinians and some Anabaptists, he thinks it no way respected eternal life and falvation, nor contained any promises of fpiritual bleffings; but that God therein promised only temporal bleffings, or the good things of a present life, to the obedient. But, if we may believe the Scriptures, this opinion cannot be admitted: for the Lord promised to Ifrael, that if they would obey his voice, and and keep his commandments, they should be a peculiar treasure unto him above all people; and that they should be unto him a kingdom of priests, an holy nation *. Further, upon their obedience, he promised, that he would dwell

* Exod. xix. 5, 6.

among them, and be THEIR GOD*. Yea, life is expressly promised in the old covenant; fuch a life as includes everlasting happiness, if we may credit our Lord and his apostles; who, when speaking of the life promised in the old covenant to the obedient, fufficiently intimate, that they underftood by it not only temporal bleffings, or a happy life in the poffeffion of the earthly Canaan, but also, yea chiefly, eternal life in heaven t.

And here it may be observed, that the life that was promised in the law, only upon the condition of perfect obedience, was given, or offered abfolutely, without any condition, to finners under that dispensation, in the promise first made to Abraham, including his feed, and afterwards to the rest of the patriarchs. Which promife was from time to time renewed, amplified, and more clearly unfolded to the whole nation of Ifrael by the miniftry of the prophets. This promise, with the types, facrifices and ceremonies belonging to the Mofaic economy, whereby Christ and spiritual blessings were then exhibited to the faith of the church, was the gospel that was preached to finners under that dispensation; wherein the gift of righteousness and falvation through the promised Messiah, was as really brought near to all within the pale of the visible church during the Patriarchal and Mofaic, as they are to us now under the Christian economy. Though still it must be acknowledged, that this latter dispensation of grace is far more clear, glorious and extensive, than the former.

+

* Exod. xxix. 45. Levit. xxvi. 3-11, 12. † Levit. xviii. 5. compared with Matt. xix. 17. 23. Rom. x. 5. Gal. iii. 12.

In

In short, if a special relation to God, and interest in him, with all the blessings and privileges included in, or which neceffarily flow from the fame, as also everlasting life and happiness, were promised in the old covenant; it may fafely be affirmed, that the very fame bleffings for substance, that are freely bequeathed in the new, were promised in the old covenant; conditionally in the law, and abfolutely, or gratuitously, in that typical covenant that was made with Abraham, and frequently renewed and confirmed to his feed. And therefore the Socinian notion above-mentioned, namely, that the first covenant contained only a promife of the land of Canaan, and other temporal blessings, must be acknowledged to be a very wild and extravagant supposition; a fuppofition entirely repugnant to the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament.

That there were promises of temporal bleffings in the old covenant peculiarly suited to that state of minority, and confequently servile state, which the church was then in; yea further, that those were chiefty, and the promises of spiritual bleffings and salvation more sparingly insisted on under the legal dispensation, is readily granted; but that temporal blessings only were promised in the firft covenant; promised only or chiefly for themselves, and not rather as types and shadows of good things to come; of spiritual bleffings and eternal falvation, which were thereby exhibited and represented, though darkly, to the faith of believers under that difpenfation; is an imagination that has not the leaft foundation to support it, in the sacred writings, but is directly contrary thereto.

To admit this supposition, argue from it, and recommend a fcheme of Chriftianity formed upon

the

1

the fame, would indeed be in a remarkable manner to take away the key of knowledge, and mis-lead many in the understanding of the Scriptures; as Palæmon, with as little reason as modesty, affirms * those have done who maintain, that the old and new covenants are not to be accounted two covenants for life and salvation differing in substance from each other, but only two dispensations of one and the fame covenant of grace. If we may believe him, all who teach, that believers under the Old Testament were not saved by one covenant of grace, and believers under the New by another; or that the former were not under a covenant of works, by fulfilling the condition of which they were to feek righteousness, life, and everlasting happiness, but under a dispensation of the covenant of grace, as well as the latter; and that the old and new covenant are not two covenants for life and salvation specifically, or substantially different from each other, but two different administrations of one and the fame covenant of grace; do contradict the apostle. Paul, who expressly calls them two covenants, and in many respects opposes the one to the other.

But this Gentleman might know, that those whose sentiments on this head he thinks fit to impugn, never fcruple to call the old and new covenant TWO COVENANTS, in the same sense, or oppofe them to each other in the same manner the apostle does; though they never could find any reason to think that the apostle, by distinguishing and oppofing them to each other, intended to shew, that the faints before the coming of Christ were under a covenant of works, so that they could not receive any spiritual blessings, or obtain everlasting