bedience, but gave not power for it but in virtue of the covenant of grace, which alfo belonged to them.

LIV. What was it then? It was a national covenant between God and Ifrael, whereby Ifrael promifed to God a fincere obedience to all his precepts; especially to the ten words; God, on the other hand, promifed to Ifrael, that fuch an obfervance would be acceptable to him, nor want its reward, both in this life, and in that which is to come, both as to foul and body. This reciprocal promife fuppofed a covenant of grace. For, without the affiftance of the covenant of grace, man cannot fincerely promife that obfervance; and yet that an imperfect obfervance fhould be acceptable to God is wholly owing to the covenant of grace. It alfo fuppofed the doctrine of the covenant of works, the terror of which being increased by those tremendous figns that attended it, they ought to have been excited to embrace that covenant of God. This agreement therefore is a confequent both of the covenant of grace and of works; but was formally neither the one nor the other. A like agreement and renewal of the covenant between God and the pious is frequent; both national and individual. Of the former fee Jofh. xxiv. 22. 2 Chron. xv. 12. 2 Kings xxiii. 3. Neh. x. 29. Of the latter, Pfal. cxix. 106. It is certain, that in the paffages we have named, mention is made of some covenant between God and his people. If any fhould afk me, of what kind, whether of works or of grace? I fhall answer, it is formally neither: but a covenant of fincere piety, which fuppofes both.

LV. Hence the question, which is very much agitated at this day, may be decided: namely whether the ten words are nothing but the form of the covenant of grace? This, I apprehend, is by no means an accurate way of speaking. For, fince a covenant ftrictly fo called, confifts in a mutual agreement; what is properly the form of the covenant should contain the said mutual agreement. But the ten words contain only a prescription of duty fenced on the one hand by threatenings, taken from the covenant of works; on the other, by promifes, which belong to the covenant of grace. Hence the fcripture, when it speaks properly, fays that a covenant was made upon these ten words, or after the tenor of those words, Exod. xxxiv. 27. diftinguishing the covenant itself, which confifts in a mutual agreement from the ten words, which contain the conditions of it. The form of the covenant is exhibited by those words, which we have already quoted from Exod. xix. 5, 6, 8. I deny not, that the ten commandments are frequently in fcripture called the covenant of God. But at the fame time, no perfon can be ignorant, that

the

the term covenant, has various fignifications in the Hebrew, and often fignifies nothing but a precept, as Jer. xxxiv. 13, 14. Thus Mofes explains himself on this head, Deut. iv. 13. " And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments." They are therefore called a covenant by a Synecdoche, because they contain thofe precepts, which God, when he fet his covenant before them, required the Ifraelites to obferve, and to which the faid Ifraelites bound themfelves by covenant.

. LVI. The ten words, or commandments, therefore, are not the form of a covenant properly fo called, but the rule of duty: much lefs are they the form of the covenant of grace: because that Covenant, in its ftrict fignification, confifts of mere promises, and, as it relates to elect persons, has the nature of a testament, or laft will, rather than of a covenant strictly speaking, and depends on no condition; as we have at large explained and proved, Book III. chap. I. fect. 8. &c. And Jeremiah has fhewn us, that the form of the covenant of grace, confifts in abfolute promifes, chap. xxxi. 33. and xxxii. 38-40. In like manner Ifa. liv. 10.

look

LVII. Least of all can it be faid, that the ten words are nothing but the form of the covenant of grace, fince we may upon them as having a relation to any covenant whatever. They may be confidered in a twofold manner. 1ft, Precifely, as a law. 2dly, As an inftrument of the covenant. As a law, they are the rule of our nature and actions, which HE has prescribed, who has a right to command. This they were from the beginning, this they ftill are, and this they will continue to be, under whatever covenant, or in whatever ftate man fhall be. As an inftrument of the covenant they point out the way to eternal falvation; or contain the condition of enjoying that falvation: and that both under the covenant of grace and of works. But with this difference; that under the covenant of works, this condition is required to be performed by man himself; under the covenant of grace it is propofed, as already performed, or to be performed by a mediator. Things, which thofe very persons, with whom we are now difputing, will not venture to deny.

TH

CHA P. V.

Of the Doctrine of the Prophets.

HE plan we formerly laid down, fhould now require to speak a little of thofe things from Mofes himself and the fucceeding prophets, which they have published concerning the perfon, natures, ftates, offices, and bleffings of the Meffiah. And it would be easy to fhew, that nothing remarkable did befal our Jefus, nothing great was either faid or done by him, which the prophets did not foretel was to come to pass. The prophets, I fay, who " prophefied of the grace that should come unto us; fearching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Chrift which was in them did fignify, when it teftified beforehand the sufferings of Chrift, and the glory that should follow," Pet. i. 10, 11. and who all, with one confent," give witness to Jefus, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him fhall receive remiflion of fins," Acts x. 43. The apoftle Paul, who protefted," he had not fhunned to declare all the counsel of God," Acts xx. 27. at the fame time protests, " he lays none other things than those which the prophets and Mofes did fay fhould come, Acts xxvi. 22. And certainly, the body itfelf fhould exactly agree with the picture, that was long before presented to the view of the ancient church fince it became the wisdom and goodness of God, to give such an exact defcription of the Methah, with all his marks or characters, that he might be known by any thoughtful and attentive mind, and diftingufhed from all manner of impoftors, who fhould impioufly pretend to, or counterfeit his name. But this fubject has been, both formerly and lately, confidered by the learned, and treated with fuch accuracy, that I have nothing to add. If any would have a compendious view of these things, he may confult the preface to the New Teftament, drawn up, with great judginent, by our divines.

I.

S

CHAP. VI.

Of the Types.

UCH is the inexhauftible copioufnefs of the Holy Scriptures, that not only the words are fignificative of things, but even the things, which are firft fignified by the words, do like

wife represent other things, which they were appointed to prefigure long before they happened. Chrift principally, and Paul have informed us of this, when they apply moft of the things which happened under the old difpenfation to the Meffiah, and to the œconomy of a better teftament. And indeed, if the old inftitutions of the deity had not their mystical fignifications, they might defervedly be accounted childish, ludicrous, and unworthy of God. These are things, which not only Christians require to be granted to them, but also were acknowledged by the ancient Jews, who befides a literal, or plain meaning, fought alfo a myftical fenfe in fcripture. And it was a conftant and received opinion among them, that all things were mystical in the law of Mofes, and therefore may be myftically explained.

II. Their myftical fignification points to Chrift, in his perfon, States, offices, and works, and in his fpiritual body, the church: for Chrift is the end of the law, Rom. x. 4. the body, or fubítance of the ceremonial fhadows, Col. ii. 17. and the centre of the prophecies, Acts x. 43. The doctrine of Chrift is the key of knowledge, Luke xi. 42. without which nothing can be savingly understood in Mofes and the prophets. As is apparent in the Pharifees of old, and the Socinians in our day; who being tainted with falfe notions concerning the Meffiah, pollute for the most part, all the teftimonies concerning the common falvation by their impure interpretations. It was very well faid by the ingenious Bifterfield, that "the Lord Jefus Chrift was the fpirit and foul of the whole, both of the Old and New Teftament," de Scripturæ eminentia, §. 40.

III. It is an unquestionable truth, that the Old Testament believers, especially those who were favoured with a fuller meafure of the Spirit, applied themselves with peculiar diligence, to find out the mystical meaning of the TYPES: in which study they were very much affifted by the prophets and divinely infpired priests. Thus David declared, that he had feen God in the fanctuary," Pfal. Ixiii. 2. that is, that he had, by the figures of the Levitical fervice, fearched by holy meditation, into the very truth of the things. This made believers fo chearful in the acts of external worship; not that they were very much taken with thofe minute corporal performances, but that "they beheld in them the beauty of Jehovah, and enquired in his temple," Pfal. xxvii. 4. They were not put off with mere fhadows, but were "fatisfied with the goodness of God's house, even of his holy temple;" and though it was but darkly, yet they heard hin "speaking terrible things in righteoufnefs," Pfal. Ixv. 4, 5. IV. Though Chrift and the Apostles, in order to illustrate and prove the truth of the gofpel, argued from the types by divine

divine inspiration, and the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit: yet they did not lay the stress of thofe arguments on their own bare authority, because they were inspired, (for that authority was at times called in question, and upon fuppofing it, all reafoning would almost seem fuperfluous), but on the evident de ́monstration of the truth to the conscience, which plainly discovered to an attentive perfon, that it was worthy of God to reprefent fuch a truth by fuch types.

V. The strength of those arguments refts on this fuppofition, that God was pleafed to give the church at that time, in the memorable perfons of the Old Teftament, to whom fome remarkable things happened in an extraordinary way, and in the whole of his inftituted worship, a beautiful picture, and becoming the accuracy of fo great an artist, in which Chrift with his myftical body might be delineated. The apoftle, when he argued with the Jews in his epiftles to the Galatians and Hebrews, lays this down as a fundamental truth; and having laid that foundation, directly proceeds, with a kind of divine skill, to the application of the types. For, when there is any thing in the antitype resembling the type, it is justly affirmed, that God, who knows all things from the beginning, ordered the type in fuch a manner, that it might fignify beforehand that truth; which was in the antitype. Unlefs we would rather maintain, that the likeness of an ingenious picture to the original, was rather the effect of chance, than of the intention of the artift; which is contrary to all reafon.

VI. It is not only lawful but the incumbent duty of teachers, even though not inspired, to tread in this very path, and to explain, in the fame method, the types of the Old Teftament. For, we must not think, either that an infallible authority is neceffary to explain the types, or that all the types of the Old Testament are explained in the New. Not the former; for, why should an infallible authority be required in interpreting the types, rather than in interpreting the prophecies and other dark expreffions in fcripture? Since it is manifeft, that it was the will of God to inftruct the church by types; and the explication of the types is now oftentimes far more easy, on account of the diftinct knowledge of the antitype, than of many prophecies, which it is far more difficult to determine to what they refer. Not the latter for why fhould we believe, that all the types of Chrift were explained rather than all the prophecies concerning him? Efpecially, as the apoftle affirms, that he has not spoken particularly of them all, Heb. ix. 5. We are therefore to maintain, that the inspired teachers have pointed out to us the way and method, in which we ought to proceed in explaining the

types,