1. This covenant, called “the old covenant,” was never intended to be of itself the absolute rule and law of life and salvation unto the church, but was made with a particular design, and with respect unto particular ends. This the apostle proves undeniably in this epistle, especially in the chapter foregoing, and those two that fol- low. Hence it follows that it could abrogate or disannul nothing which God at any time before had given as a general rule unto the church, For that which is particular cannot abrogate any thing that was general, and before it; as that which is general doth abrogate all antecedent particulars, as the new covenant doth ab- rogate the old. And this we must consider in both the instances belonging hereunto. For,—
(1.) God had before given the covenant of works, or perfect obe- dience, unto all mankind, in the law of creation. But this covenant at Sinai did not abrogate or disannul that covenant, nor any way fulfil it. And the reason is, because it was never intended to come in the place or room thereof, as a covenant, containing an entire rule of all the faith and obedience of the whole church. God did not intend in it to abrogate the covenant of works, and to substitute this _ in the place thereof; yea, in sundry things it re-enforced, established, and confirmed that covenant. For,—
[1.] It revived, declared, and expressed all the commands of that covenant in the decalogue; for that is nothing but a divine summary of the law written in the heart of man at his creation. And herein the dreadful manner of its delivery or promulgation, with its writing in tables of stone, is also to be considered; for in them the nature of that first covenant, with its inexorableness as unto perfect obedience, was represented. And because none could answer its demands, or comply with it therein, it was called “the ministration of death,” causing fear and bondage, 2 Cor. iii. 7.
[2.] It revived the sanction of the first covenant, in the curse or sentence of death which it denounced against all transgres-
«e
78 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [cHAP. VIL.”
sors. Death was the penalty of the transgression of the first covenant: “Tn the day that thou eatest, thou shalt die the death.” And this sentence was revived and represented anew in the curse wherewith this covenant was ratified, “Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them,” Deut. xxvii. 26; Gal. ii. 10. For the design of God in it was to bind a sense of that curse on the consciences of men, until He came by whom it was taken away, as the apostle declares, Gal. ii. 19.
[3.] It revived the promise of that covenant,—that of eternal life wpon perfect obedience. So the apostle tells us that Moses thus de- scribeth the righteousness of the law, “That the man which doeth those things shall live by them,” Rom. x. 5; as he doth, Lev. xviii. 5.
Now this is no other but the covenant of works revived. Nor had this covenant of Sinai any promise of eternal life annexed unto it, as such, but only the promise imseparable from the covenant of works which it revived, saying, “ Do this, and live.
Hence it is, that when our apostle disputeth against justification by the law, or by the works of the law, he doth not intend the works peculiar unto the covenant of Sinai, such as were the rites and ceremonies of the worship then instituted; but he intends also the works of the first covenant, which alone had the promise of life an- nexed unto them.
And hence it follows also, that it was not a new covenant of works established in the place of the old, for the absolute rule of faith and obedience unto the whole church; for then would it have abrogated and taken away that covenant, and all the force of it, which it did not.
(2.) The other instance is in the promise. This also went before it; neither was it abrogated or disannulled by the introduction of this covenant. This promise was given unto our first parents immediately after the entrance of sin, and was established as containing the only way and means of the salvation of sinners. Now, this promise could not be abrogated by the introduction of this covenant, and a new way of justification and salvation be thereby established. For the promise being given out in general for the whole church, as con- taining the way appointed by God for righteousness, life, and sal- vation, it could not be disannulled or changed, without a change and alteration in the counsels of Him “with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” Much less could this be effected by a particular covenant, such as that was, when it was given as a gene- ral and eternal rule.
2. But whereas there was an especial promise given unto Abra- ham, in the faith whereof he became “the father of the faithful,” he being their progenitor, it should seem that this covenant did wholly disannul or supersede that promise, and take off the church
VER. 6.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 79
of his posterity from building on that foundation, and so fix them wholly on this new covenant now made with them, So saith Moses, “The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, who are all of us here alive this day,” Deut. v. 3. God made not this covenant on mount Sinai with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but with the people then present, and their posterity, as he declares, Deut. xxix, 14,15. This, therefore, should seem to take them off wholly from that promise made to Abraham, and so to disannul it. But that this it did not, nor could do, the apostle strictly proves, Gal. iti. 17-22; yea, it did divers ways establish that promise, both as’ first given and as afterwards confirmed with the oath of God unto Abra- ham, two ways especially :—