wherein that similitude doth consist, and shew also wherein there is a dissimilitude whereunto his reasonings are not to be extended. For so it is in all comparisons; the comparatives are not alike in all things, especially where things spiritual and temporal are compared together. So was it also in all the types of old. Every person or every thing that was a type of Christ, was not so in all things, in all that they were. And therefore it requires both wisdom and diligence to distinguish in what they were so, and in what they were not, that no false inferences or conclusions be made from them. So is it in all comparisons; and therefore in the present instance, we must consider, wherein the things compared do agree, and wherein they differ.

1. They agree principally in the death of the testator. This alone among men makes a testament effectual and irrevocable. So is it in this new testament. It was confirmed and ratified by the death of the testator Jesus Christ, and otherwise could not have been of force. This is the fundamental agreement between them, which therefore alone the apostle expressly insisteth on, although there are other things which necessarily accompany it, as essential to every testament; as,

2. In every testament amongst men, there are goods disposed and bequeathed to heirs or legatees, which were the property of the testator. Where a man hath nothing to give or bequeath, he can make no testament. For that is nothing but his will concerning the disposal of his own goods after his decease. So is it in this new testament. All the goods of grace and glory, were the property, the inheritance of Christ, firmly instated in him alone. For he was appointed heir of all things.' But in his death, as a testator, he made a bequeathment of them all to the elect, appointing them to be heirs of God, co-heirs with himself. And this also is required to the nature and essence of a testament.

3. In a testament there is always an absolute grant made of the goods bequeathed, without condition or limitation. So is it here also; the goods and inheritance of the kingdom of heaven are bequeathed absolutely to all the elect, so as that no intervenience can defeat them of it. And what there is in the gospel, which is the instrument of this testament, that prescribes conditions to them, that exacts terms of obedience from them, it belongs to it, as it is a covenant, and not as a testament. Yet,

4. It is in the will and power of the testator, in and by his testament, to assign and determine both the time, season and way, whereby those to whom he hath bequeathed his goods, shall be admitted to the actual possession of them. So is it in this case also. The Lord Christ, the great testator, hath de termined the way whereby the elect shall come to be actually

possessed of their legacies, namely, by faith that is in him,' Acts xxvi. 18. So also he hath reserved the time and season of their conversion in this world, and entrance into future glory, in his own hand and power.

These things belong to the illustration of the comparison insisted on, although it be only one thing that the apostle argues from it, touching the necessity of the death of the testator. But notwithstanding these instances of agreement, between the new covenant and the testaments of men, whereby it appears to have in it in sundry respects the nature of a testament, yet in many things there is also a disagreement between them, evidencing that it is also a covenant, and abideth so, notwithstanding what it hath of the nature of a testament, from the death of the testator. As,

1. A testator amongst men ceaseth to have any right in, or use of the goods bequeathed by him, when once his testament is of force. And this is by reason of death, which destroys all title and use of them. But our testator divests himself neither of right nor possession, nor of the use of any of his goods. And this follows on a two-fold difference, the one in the per sons, the other in the goods or things bequeathed.

1st, In the persons. For a testator amongst men dieth absolutely; he liveth not again in this world, but lieth down and riseth not, till the heavens be no more. Hereon all right to, and all use of the goods of this life, ceaseth for ever. Our testator died actually and really to confirm his testament; but, 1. He died not in his whole person. 2. In that nature wherein he died, he lived again, and is alive for evermore. Hence all his goods are still in his own power.

2dly, In the things themselves. For the goods bequeathed in the testaments of men, are of that nature, that the propriety of them cannot be vested in many, so as that every one should have a right to and the enjoyment of all, but in one only. But the spiritual good things of the new testament are such, as that in all the riches and fulness of them, they may be in the pos session of the testator, and of those also to whom they are bequeathed. Christ parts with no grace from himself; he dimi nisheth not his own riches, nor exhausts any thing from his own fulness, by his communication of it to others. Hence also,

2. In the wills of men, if there be a bequeathment of goods made to many, no one can enjoy the whole inheritance, but every one is to have his own share and portion only. But in and by the new testament, every one is made heir to the whole inheritance. All have the same, and every one hath the whole. For God himself thence becomes their portion, who is all to all, and all to every one.

3. In human testaments, the goods bequeathed are such only as either descended to the testators from their progenitors, or VOL. VI.

were acquired during their lives by their own industry. By their death they obtained no new right or title unto any thing; only what they had before, is now disposed of according unto their wills. But our testator, according unto an antecedent contract between God the Father and him, purchased the whole inheritance by his own blood, obtaining for us eternal redemption.

4. They differ principally in this, that a testament amongst men, is no more but merely so; it is not moreover a solemn covenant that needs a confirmation suited thereunto. The bare signification of the will of the testator witnessed unto, is sufficient unto its constitution and confirmation. But in this mystery the testament is not merely so, but a covenant also. Hence it was not sufficient unto its force and establishment, that the testator should die only; but it was also required that he should offer himself in sacrifice by the shedding of his blood, unto its confirmation. 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 ob

serve,

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, xaτu ardewñor, 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 covevant. 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 εδ ̓ ἡ πρώτη χωρις αίματος εγκεκαινισται· Λαληθείσης γαρ πάσης εντολής κατα νομον ύπο Μωυσέως παντί τω λαω, λα των το αίμα των μοσχων και τράγων μετα ύδατος και ερικ κοκκινη και

ύσσωπε, αυτό τε το βιβλίον και παντα τον λαον εῤῥαντισε. Λέγων Τετο το αίμα της διαθήκης, ἧς ενετειλατο προς ὑμᾶς ὁ Θεός.

Και την

και πάντα τα σκεύη της λειτεργίας τω αίματι όμοιως ερμαν. τισε. Και σχεδόν εν αίματι παντα καθαρίζεται καλα τον νομον, και χωρις αἱματεκχυσίας & γίνεται αφεσις.

"Or, unde, hence,' therefore.' Syr. Nan hop, propter hoc, ́quia, propter, for this cause,'' and hence it is.' Arab. Efxixaviera. Syr. nnwx, was confirmed,' dedicatum fuit, was dedicated,' consecrated, separated unto sacred use.

,אשתררת

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

Morxay xxι Teαywy. The Syriac reads only anhay, of a heifer;" as the Arabic omits reay also, of goats,' it may be in compli ance with the story in Moses, without cause, as we shall see. Σχεδόν is 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 remis

sion.

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 blood-shedding. 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.

1. 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 authori ty 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