60 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. VIII.
And in the following verses there are two covenants, a first and a latter, an old and a new, compared together. We must therefore consider what was that other covenant, than which this is said to be better ; for upon the determination thereof depends the right under- standing of the whole ensuing discourse of the apostle. And be-
cause this is a subject wrapped up in much obscurity, and attended:
with many difficulties, it will be necessary that we use the best of our diligence, both in the investigation of the truth and in the declaration of it, so as that it may be distinctly apprehended. And I shall first explain the text, and then speak to the difficulties which arise from it:—
[1.] There was an original covenant made with Adam, and all
mankind in him. The rule of obedience and reward that was be- tween God and him was not expressly called a covenant, but it contained the express nature of a covenant; for it was the agree- ment of God and man concerning obedience and disobedience, re- wards and punishments. Where there is a law concerning these things, and an agreement upon it by all parties concerned, there is a formal covenant. Wherefore it may be considered two ways:—
Ist, As it was a law only; so it proceeded from, and was a con- sequent of the nature of God and man, with their mutual relation unto one another. God being considered as the creator, governor, and benefactor of man; and man as an intellectual creature, capable of moral obedience; this law was necessary, and is eternally indis- pensable.
2dly. As it was a covenant; and this depended on the will and pleasure of God. I will not dispute whether God might have given a law unto men that should have had nothing in it of a covenant, properly so called; as is the law of creation unto all other crea- tures, which hath no rewards nor punishments annexed unto it. Yet this God calls a covenant also, inasmuch as it is an effect of his purpose, his unalterable will and pleasure, Jer. xxiii. 20,21. But that this law of our obedience should be a formal, complete covenant, there were moreover some things required on the part of God, and some also on the part of man. Two things were required on the part of God to complete this covenant, or he did so complete it by two things :—
(ist.) By annexing unto it promises and threatenings of re- ward and punishment; the first of grace, the other of justice. (2dly.) The expression of these promises and threatenings in ex- ternal signs; the first in the tree of life, the latter in that of the knowledge of good and evil. By these did God establish the origi- nal law of creation as a covenant, gave it the nature of a covenant. On the part of man, it was required that he accept of this law as the rule of the covenant which God made with him. And this he did two ways:—
VER. 6.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 61
[1st.] By the innate principles of light and obedience concreated with his nature. By these he absolutely and universally assented unto the law, as proposed with promises and threatenings, as holy, just, good,— what was meet for God to require, what was equal and good unto himself.
[2dly.] By his acceptance of the commands concerning the tree of life, and that of the knowledge of good and evil, as the signs and pledges of this covenant. So was it established as a covenant between God and man, without the interposition of any mediator.
This is the covenant of works, absolutely the old, or first covenant that God made with men. But this is not the covenant here intended; for,—
1st. The covenant called afterwards “the first,” was d:0djxn, a “testament.” So it is here called. It was such a covenant as was a testament also. Now there can be no testament, but there must be death for the confirmation of it, Heb. ix. 16. But in the making of the covenant with Adam, there was not the death of any thing, whence it might be called a testament. But there was the death of beasts in sacrifice in the confirmation of the covenant at Sinai, as we shall see afterwards. And it must be observed, that although I use the name of a “covenant,” as we have rendered the werd d:aé4xn, because the true signification of that word will more properly occur unto us in another place, yet I do not under- stand thereby a covenant properly and strictly so called, but such a one as hath the nature of a testament also, wherein the good things of him that makes it are bequeathed unto them for whom they are designed. Neither the word used constantly by the apostle in this . argument, nor the design of his discourse, will admit of any other covenant to be understood in this place. Whereas, therefore, the first covenant made with Adam was in no sense a testament also, it cannot be here intended.
2dly. That first covenant made with Adam, had, as unto any benefit to be expected from it, with respect unto acceptation with God, life, and salvation, ceased long before, even at the entrance of sin. It was not abolished or abrogated by any act of God, as a law, but only was made weak and insufficient unto its first » end, as a covenant. God had provided a way for the salvation of sinners, declared in the first promise. When this is actually embraced, that first covenant ceaseth towards them, as unto its curse, in all its concerns as a covenant, and obligation unto sinless obedience as the condition of life; because both of them are an- swered by the mediator of the new covenant. But as unto all those who receive not the grace tendered in the promise, it doth remain in full force and efficacy, not as a covenant, but as a law; and that because neither the obedience it requires nor the curse