seem to be two distinct covenants. 1. The parties are distinct. In the one, the Father and the Son are the parties covenanting: in the covenant of grace, God and man. In the mediatory covenant there were two persons equal; in the covenant of grace, there is a superior, God; and an inferior, man.....The revelation of the covenant of redemption was in time, but the stipulation was from eternity; the Father and the Son being actually in Being, and so stipulators.....It was made when some were given to Christ; and therefore must be as ancient as election, which was before the foundation of the world.'...... 4. Christ is the mediator of the covenant of grace (i.e. the new testament), but not the mediator of the covenant of redemption, but a party, Heb. xii. 24. He was the surety of the covenant of grace, Heb. vii. 22. The covenant of redemption had no surety; the Father and the Son trusted one another upon the agreement. The covenant of grace is confirmed by the blood of Christ; but we cannot say that the covenant of redemption was confirmed properly by his blood, any more than as the shedding of his blood was a necessary article in that covenant.-5. Christ performed his part in the covenant of redemption; and, by virtue of this mediatory covenant, performed the covenant of works; but he confirmed, not performed, the covenant of grace.-6. By the covenant of redemption, Christ could challenge his reward upon his own account; but by the covenant of grace, believers have a right to the reward only upon the account of Christ."Charnock, vol. v. part iv. Parson's Edit. 1815.

Now, though covenant of redemption be a better term than covenant of grace, yet it will not quite answer. For the new covenant is also a covenant of redemption of the body of those who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, as well as of the whole irresponsible creation. Rom. viii. 20-23; " For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope; because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." Besides, when a new interpretation is given, perhaps, on the whole, new terms are best. Therefore, I will call the one, the covenant of imputation*; and the new covenant, the covenant of inherency, or peace. Under the present dispensation, the state of the believer is militant; "the flesh," yet unredeemed, "warring against

* I use the term imputation, not because it is unexceptionable; but I do not think the common acceptation of the term will convey an erroneous impression.

66

the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh :" Gal. v. 17, " fleshly lusts, which war against the soul:" Satan being the god of the age, and the enmity existing between the seed of the serpent and the Seed of the woman. Under the future covenant, the body will be redeemed; a perfect holiness will be fulfilled in the believer. Now are we perfecting holiness in the fear of God," 2 Cor. vii. 1: then shall we be perfect in holiness. The age to come will be in subjection to Christ; and the devil will be chained. As angry passions will cease, so also will their effects: "The sword will be turned into ploughshares," &c. Isa. ii. 4. I would ask, how can the present covenant be called the covenant of peace, in contradistinction to the other different dispensations of the Abrahamic covenant? for all looked to peace with God by the blood of the cross. Nor can it be in opposition to the state of Adam before the fall, for that only existed when he was at peace with God. I therefore conclude we are now under the old covenant, or covenant of imputation, in its testamentary form *.

I would now glance at the difference between a covenant, and a bequest or testament. The argument in Heb. ix. 16, 17, rests upon the nature of the testament (of which the Apostle is speaking), being similar to that of common testaments respecting civil matters amongst men. It appears a just inference, that the term covenant be likewise intended by the Lord to convey the idea of a compact, similar to the agreement so called in the common transactions of life. This the Apostle also appears to imply, Gal. iii. 15: "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men : if it be but a man's covenant, no`man disannulleth or addeth thereto."

Now, a covenant is an agreement on certain terms. There are several civil compacts mentioned in Scripture, answerable to this definition: between Abraham and Abimelech, Gen. xxi. 27; Jacob and Laban, xxxi. 44, 52; Jonathan and David, 1 Sam. xx. 8, 15; Ahab and Benhadad, 1 Kings xx. 34. And I question whether it does not always imply a mutual and voluntary obligation. The example given in Johnson's Dictionary, to illustrate the verb " to covenant," which is thus defined, "to agree with another on certain terms," is Matt. xxvi. 15, " And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver." The mutual obligation may not be expressed in all places; as between Isaac and Abimelech ; but I incline to believe it necessarily implied, from the nature of a covenant +.

Then it may be asked, how does this hold respecting the cove

I say simply testamentary, and not new-testament, form; because the previous dispensations were only testamentary in a typical, and not in a real sense. + As even there we find "they sware one to another," Gen. xxvi. 31.

nants to which the Almighty binds himself; such as Gen. ix. 11, and Jer. xxxiii. 20, the two instances advanced by Dr. Owen ? It is declared to be because of the burnt-offering: "And the Lord smelled a savour of rest," Gen. viii. 20, 22 (marg.) Therefore he had respect to the covenant with the Son; for he is the only offering of a sweet savour, Eph. v. 2. "He bears up the pillars of" the earth, that it be not dissolved, Ps. lxxv. 3: and thus is he "the Saviour, or preserver, of all men," 1 Tim. iv. 10. Adon, the base, by whom (d' avrov) all things subsist, and in whom (ɛv avτw) all things consist, Col. i. 17.

A covenant implies that the parties lay themselves under voluntary obligations: thereby intimating previous independence. Therefore, he who enters into covenant with God must be God co-equal: therefore, "against the Man, Jehovah's fellow," the sword is called to smite, Zech. xiii. 7. If the condition be the laying down his life, he must be self-existent, Acts iii. 15: if to be made under the Law, it must be the "heifer without yoke," Num. xix. 2, the unaccountable Deity: if to be made sin, he must "know no sin ;" he must be Kedoosh, the Holy One.

We know that "where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of the testator:" but it would be equally blasphemous towards the Divine conduct, as absurd with respect to human affairs, to say that this is a necessary condition in a covenant. It appears, from the general opinion of divines, as well as the Scripture declaration, that Christ cannot, properly speaking, be Mediator of the covenant, but as in its testamentary form. I before quoted Charnock, as saying that the covenanter could not also be the mediator. Dr. Owen says: "Every covenant between God and man must be founded on and resolved into promises hence, essentially, a promise and a covenant are all one; and God calls an absolute promise, founded on an absolute decree, his covenant; Gen. ix. 11. See also Jer. xxxiii. 20. The being and essence of a Divine covenant, lies in the promise. Hence are they called the covenants of promise,' Eph. ii. 12. The nature of God requires that it should be so. In promises be reveals himself as the Eternal Spring of goodness and power: for the matter of all promises is somewhat that is good, and the communication of it depends on sovereign power.'

Then he says, on Gal. iii. 20, " In an absolute promise, or sovereign precept, there would be no need of, and no place for, a mediator.'

Bishop Hopkins, in his Introduction to the subject of the Covenants, speaks nearly to the same effect,-to wit: "The creature's consent and agreement is not necessary to the covenant which God makes with it....This voluntary obligation, which God is pleased to lay upon himself, is so vastly transcendant and disproportionate to all our performances, that it cannot be

....

our due, upon a strict and proper covenant.. But rather a free beneficence upon an arbitrary promise."

Hence, according to the opinion of Owen and Hopkins, a covenant has no mediator. But that a testament has a mediator, is declared in Heb. ix. 15, "He is the Mediator of the New Testament." The following verse shews that the rendering must here be testament: v. 16, "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator:" and it goes on to shew that the Mosaic testament was dedicated with blood and so we see in Gal. iii. 19, that it had a mediator also; "It was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator." In this I am supported by the double authority of Whitby as quoted by D'Oyly and Mant in loco, as follows: "And it was ordained,' or delivered, not, as the promise immediately by God himself to Abraham, but by angels;' it being the word spoken by angels,' Heb. ii. 2. Not, as the promise, without a mediator betwixt God giving, and Abraham receiving; but in the hand of a mediator,' even Moses; who stood between them and the Lord at that time, to shew them the word of the Lord, Deut. x. 5, and to ratify the covenant on the people's part." Christ was surety or sponsor for the fulfilment of the conditions of the covenant, and mediator by having fulfilled them: 1 Tim. ii. 5, 6, "There is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all." In that he died, he became qualified to mediate; in that he liveth, he has the power to intercede: Heb. vii. 25, "Seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." In that he died, it became his testament; in that he liveth he is also the mediator. And this appears the invariable order; his advocacy resting on his atonement: 1 John ii. 1, 2, "If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins." So also in Rom. viii. 34, intercession is made the climax.- "An all-sufficiency in his death (who shall condemn? it is Christ that died'); a rather in his resurrection (yea, rather is risen again'); a MUCH RATHER that he lives, and is at God's right hand.' Rom. v. 10. The Apostle rises yet higher, to a saving to the uttermost,' put upon his intercession. Heb. vii. 25."-Goodwin, Christ the Mediator.

One more example will suffice: "The blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, shall purge your conscience from dead works, to serve the living God. And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament," Heb. ix. 14, 15. The precious promises are comprised in the Lord Jesus, in whom they are all yea and amen; made to us in him before he died; made most sure to us by him when he died. All the promises, thus confirmed by the last

will and testament of Christ, are legacies given by one who now doth and ever shall live to be his own executor. Rev. i. 18. All other legacies are the gifts of the dead, but the believer's legacies are the gifts of Him who " was dead," but is "alive" and "liveth for evermore."

With these premises, I trust we shall be enabled to fix with some certainty, the rendering of Diatheké throughout the New Testament. But as in every instance the rendering will be the same as that of the Authorized Version, I will, for greater convenience, consider, first, each place where it is rendered covenant; then, each place where it is rendered testament; and lastly, those few places which our translators have made optional, by putting one rendering in the text and the other in the margin.

xii. 24.

xiii. 20.

Luke i. 72: "To perform the mercy (promised) to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant." This is clearly "covenant,' the covenant between the Father and the Son; for he came to "perform the mercy," which implies a previous compact, and that as far back as the commencement of the world. Ver. 70 marks what was before said-viz. from the fall of Adam to the finished work of Christ, all who were saved were so under the same covenant; by "the Horn of Salvation,' spoken of by all the holy prophets since the world began."—"There were Christian people in the world, before ever there was a Jewish nation." (Ambrose, in Hopkins.)-What was before said of the nature of God's covenants given to men, is also confirmed. "To perform," implies conditions to be fulfilled on Christ's part: with him it was a covenant of works. There further appears a distinction between Christ's active and passive obedience: "That we should be saved from our enemies," by his passive obedience. Ver. 71, "To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant." Performance implies active, obedience: "To do the will of him that sent him, and to finish his work," John iv. 34. Which is the same strain as that which Christ assumes in John xvii. "I have finished the work thou gavest me to do."-" It must be the active, and not the passive, righteous

* In Heb. viii. 7, 13, and ix. 1, there is no word in the original, as is shewn by the word covenant being printed in Italics in our version.