mation. These things I have observed, because, as we shall see, the apostle, in the progress of his discourse, doth not confine himself unto this notion of a testament, but treats of it principally as it had the nature of a covenant. And we may here observe,

Obs. I. It is a great and gracious condescension in the Holy Spirit to give encouragement and confirmation unto our faith, by a representation of the truth and reality of spiritual things, in those which are temporal, and agreeing with them in their general nature, whereby they are presented unto the common understandings of men.-This way of proceeding the apostle calls a speaking, κara avowπоv, Gal. iii. 15, 'after the manner of men.' Of the same kind were all the parables used by our Saviour; for it is all one whether these representations be taken from things real, or from those which, according unto the same rule of reason and right, are framed on purpose for that end.

Obs. II. There is an irrevocable grant of the whole inheritance of grace and glory, made unto the elect in the new covenant. Without this, it could not in any sense have the nature of a testament, nor that name given unto it. For a testament is such a free grant, and nothing else. And our best plea for them, for an interest in them, for a participation of them before God, is from the free grant and donation of them, in the testament of Jesus Christ.

Obs. III. As the grant of these things is free and absolute, so the enjoyment of them is secured from all interveniences, by the death of

the testator.

VER. 18-22. Όθεν ουδ' ἡ πρωτη χωρις αίματος εγκεκαινισται Λαληθείσης γαρ πασης εντολής κατα νόμον ὑπο Μωύσεως παντι τῳ λαῳ, λαξων το αἷμα των μοσχων και τράγων μετα ύδατος και ερίου κοκκινου και ύσσωπου, αυτό τε το βιβλιον και παντα τον λαον ερράντισε. Λεγων Τουτο το αίμα της διαθήκης, ής ενετείλατο προς μας ὁ Θεός. Και την σκηνην δε και παντα τα σκευη της λειτουρ γιας τῳ αίματι ὁμοιως ερῥαντισε. Και σχεδον εν αἱματι παντα καθαρίζεται κατα τον νόμον, και χωρις αἱματεκχυσίας ου γίνεται άφεσις.

6

'00, unde, hence,' therefore.' Syr. No, propter hoc, quia, propter, for this cause,'' and hence it is.' Arab. EyKEkαIVIOтal. Syr. EN, was confirmed,' dedicatum fuit, 'was dedicated,' consecrated, separated unto sacred use.

6

Λαληθείσης γαρ πασης εντολής κατα νομον. Syr. When the whole command was enjoined.' Vul. Lat. Lecto omni mandato legis: The command of the law being read;' taking evroλn and vouos for the same. Arias, Exposito secundum legem. Most, Cum recitasset, having repeated,' recited, namely, out of the book.

MOOXWV Kαι TOаywv. The Syriac reads only snby, of a heifer;' as the Arabic omits roaywv also, of goats,' it may be in compliance with the story in Moses, without cause, as we shall see. Exidov is Σχεδον omitted in the Syriac.

VER. 18-22.-Whereupon neither the first (testament) was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover, he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry; and almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

What we have before observed is fully confirmed in this discourse; namely, that the apostle intended not to argue absolutely and precisely from the name and nature of a testament, properly so called, and the use of it among men. For he makes use of these things no further, but as unto what such a testament hath in common with a solemn covenant; which is, that they are both confirmed and ratified by death. Wherefore it was necessary that the new testament, as it was a testament, should be confirmed by death; and as it had the nature of a covenant, it was to be so by such a death, as was accompanied by bloodshedding. The former was proved before from the general nature and notion of a testament; the latter is here proved at large from the way and manner, whereby the first covenant was confirmed or dedicated.

But the apostle in this discourse doth not intend merely to prove that the first covenant was dedicated with blood, which might have been dispatched in a very few words. He declares moreover, in general, what was the use of blood in sacrifices on all occasions under the law; whereby he demonstrates the use and efficacy of the blood of Christ, as unto all the ends of the new covenant. And the ends of the use of blood under the old testament he declares to have been two; namely, purification and pardon, both which are comprised in that one of the expiation of sin. And these things are all of them applied unto the blood and sacrifice of Christ, in the following verses.

In the exposition of this context we must do three things. 1. Consider the difficulties that are in it. 2. Declare the scope, design, and force of the argument contained in it. 3. Explain the particular passages of the whole.

First. Sundry difficulties there are in this context which arise from hence, that the account which the apostle gives of the dedication of the first covenant and of the tabernacle, seems to differ in sundry things from that given by Moses, when all things were actually done by him, as it is recorded, Exod. xxiv. And they are these that follow.

1. That the blood which Moses took was the blood of calves and goats; whereas there is no mention of any goats, or of their blood, in the story of Moses.

2. That he took water, scarlet wool, and hyssop, to sprinkle it withal; whereas none of them are reported in that story.

3. That he sprinkled the book in particular, which Moses doth not affirm.

4. That he sprinkled all the people, that is, the people indefinitely, for all the individuals of them could not be sprinkled.

5. There are some differences in the words which Moses spake in the dedication of the covenant, as laid down ver. 20.

6. That he sprinkled the tabernacle with blood, and all the vessels of it; when at the time of the making and solemn confirmation of the covenant, the tabernacle was not erected, nor the vessels of its ministry yet made.

For the removal of these difficulties some things must be premised in general; and then they shall all of them be considered distinctly. I. This is taken as fixed, that the apostle wrote this epistle by divine inspiration. Having evidence hereof abundantly satisfactory, it is the vainest thing imaginable, and that which discovers a frame of mind disposed to cavil at things divine, if from the difficulties of any one passage we should reflect on the authority of the whole, as some have done on this occasion. But I shall say with some confidence, he never understood any one chapter of the epistle, nay, nor any one verse of it aright, who did or doth question its divine original. There is nothing human in it, that savours, I mean, of human infirmity, but the whole and every part of it is animated by the wisdom and authority of its author. And those who have pretended to be otherwise minded on such slight occasions as that before us, have but proclaimed their own want of experience in things divine. But,

2. There is nothing in all that is here affirmed by the apostle, which hath the least appearance of contradiction unto any thing that is recorded by Moses in the story of these things. Yea, as I shall show, without the consideration and addition of the things here mentioned by the apostle, we cannot aright apprehend nor understand the account that is given by Moses. This will be made evident in the consideration of the particulars, wherein the difference between them is supposed to consist.

3. The apostle doth not take his account of the things here put together by him from any one place in Moses, but gathers up what is declared in the law, in several places, unto various ends. For, as hath been declared, he doth not design only to prove the dedication of the covenant by blood, but to show also the whole use of blood under the law, as unto purification and remission of sin. And this he doth, to declare the virtue and efficacy of the blood of Christ under the new testament, whereunto he makes an application of all these things, in the verses ensuing. Wherefore he gathers into one head, sundry things wherein the sprinkling of blood was of use under the law, as they are occasionally expressed in sundry places. And this one observation removes all the difficulties of the context; which all arise from this one supposition, that the apostle gives here an account only of what was done at the dedication of the first covenant. So in particular, by the addition of those particles, kaι, de, ver. 21, which we well render 'moreover,' he plainly intimates, that what he affirms of the tabernacle and the vessels of its ministry, was that which was done afterwards, at another time, and not when the covenant was first confirmed.

On these grounds we shall see that the account given of these things

VOL. IV.

L

by the apostle, is a necessary exposition of the record made of them by Moses, and no more.

First. He affirms that Moses took the blood, μоoɣwy kaι трaywv, 'of calves and goats.' And there is a double difficulty herein; for, 1. The blood that Moses so used, was the blood of oxen, Exod. xxiv. 5, 6, which seems not to be well rendered by pooxwv, of calves.' But this hath no weight in it. For D, the word there used, signifies all cattle of the herd, great and small; every thing that is generis bovini: And there is no necessity from the words, that we should render there by oxen,' nor uooxwv here by 'calves;' we might have rendered both words by bullocks. But, 2. There is no mention at all of goats in the story of Moses; and, as we observed, it is here omitted by the Syriac translator, but without cause.

Answ. 1. There was two sorts of offerings that were made on this occasion; 1. Burnt-offerings; 2. Peace-offerings, Exod. xxiv. 5. "They offered burnt-offerings and sacrificed peace-offerings.' The distinct expression of them, proves the offerings to have been distinct;

wow by, they offered burnt-offerings, and they sacrificed, or slew peace-offerings; and as for the peace-offerings, it is said that they were of bullocks or oxen; but it is not said of what sort the burnt-offerings were. Yea, and it may be, that although bullocks only are mentioned, yet that goats also were sacrificed in this peace-offering. For it is so far from being true, what Ribera observes on the place, that a goat was never offered for a peace-offering, that the contrary unto it, is directly expressed in the institution of the peace-offering, Lev. iii. 12. Wherefore, the blood of goats might be used in the peace-offering, though it be not mentioned by Moses. But,

2. The apostle observes, that one end of the sacrifice at the dedication of the first covenant was purging and making atonement, ver. 22, 23. For in all solemn sacrifices blood was sprinkled on the holy things, to purify them, and make atonement for them, Lev. xvi. 14, 19, 20. Now this was not to be done, but by the blood of an expiatory sacrifice, it was not to be done by the blood of peace-offerings. Wherefore the burnt-offerings mentioned by Moses were expiatory sacrifices, to purge and make atonement. And this sacrifice was principally of goats, Lev. xvi. 7. Wherefore the text of Moses cannot be well understood without this exposition of the apostle. And we may add hereunto also, that although the blood of the peace-offering was sprinkled on the altar, Lev. iii. 13, yet was it not sprinkled on the people, as this blood was; wherefore there was the use of the blood of goats also as a sin-offering in this great sacrifice.

3. In the dedication of the priests, these two sorts of offerings were conjoined; namely, peace-offerings and sin-offerings, or burnt-offerings for sin, as here they were. And therein expressly the blood of goats was used, namely, in the sin-offerings, as the blood of bullocks was in the peace-offering, Lev. ix. 3, 4. Neither is there mention any where of burnt-offerings or sin-offerings and peace offerings to be offered together, but that one of them was of goats; and therefore was so infallibly at this time, as the apostle declares.

Secondly. It is affirmed in the text, that he took the blood with water,

scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled it; but there is mention of none of these things in the story of Moses, but only that he sprinkled the blood. But the answer hereunto is plain and easy. Blood under the law was sprinkled either in less or greater quantities. Hereon there were two ways of sprinkling; the one was with the finger; when a small quantity of blood, it may be some few drops of it, were to be sprinkled, it was done with the finger, Lev. viii. 15, xvi. 14. The quantity being small, though the blood were immixed, and almost congealed, it might be so sprinkled. But there was a sprinkling whereunto a greater proportion of blood was required; as namely, when a house was to be sprinkled and thereby purified; this was done by mixing running water with the blood, and then sprinkling it with scarlet-wool, and hyssop, Lev. xiv. 50-52. For these things were needful thereThe water prevented the blood from being so congealed, as that it could not be sprinkled in any quantity. The scarlet wool took up a quantity of it, out of the vessel wherein it was; and the bunch of hyssop was the sprinkler. Whereupon when Moses sprinkled the altar, book, and people, he did it by one of these two ways; for other there was none. The first way he could not do it, namely, with his finger, because it was to be done in a great quantity. For Moses took that half of it that was to be sprinkled on the people and put it into basons, Exod. xxiv. 6-8. It was therefore infallibly done this latter way, according as our apostle declares.

Thirdly. It is added by the apostle, that he sprinkled the book, which is not expressed in the story. But the design of the apostle is to express at large the whole solemnity of the confirmation of the first covenant, especially, not to omit any thing that blood was applied unto; because in the application he refers the purification and dedication of all things belonging unto the new covenant, unto the blood of Christ. And this was the order of the things which concerned the book. Moses coming down from the mount, told the people by word of mouth, all things which God had spoken unto him, or the sum and substance of the covenant, which he would make with them, Exod. xxiv. 3. And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord; that is, the words spoken on Mount Sinai, the ten commandments, and all the judgments of the Lord, that is, all the laws contained in ch. xxi-xxiii. with this title, DE ON, These are the judgments,' ch. xxi. 1. Upon the oral rehearsal of these words and judgments, the people gave their consent unto the terms of the covenant. The people answered with one voice, All the words which the Lord hath said we will do,' Exod. xxiv. 3. Hereon Moses made a record, or wrote all the words of the Lord in a book, ver. 4. This being done, the altar and pillars were prepared, ver. 4. And it is evident that the book which he had written, was laid on the altar, though it be not expressed. When this was done, he sprinkled the blood on the altar, ver. 6. After which, when the book had been sprinkled with blood as it lay on the altar, it is said, he took the book, that is, off from the altar, and read in the audience of the people, ver. 7. The book being now sprinkled with blood, as the instrument and record of the covenant between God and the people, the very same words which were before spoken unto the people are