The Pulpit Commentary — Deuteronomy — Section 444

exemplifications in the Scotch covenants, and in the "Solemn Leagne and Covenant" of 1643-14. Irrespective, however, of the particular stipulations of these covcnant.s, tho propriety of ench engngernente must be pronounced doubtful. The case of Israel c~n ecarcoly bo pleaded as a precedent. Certainly, were God to reveal himself to any nation now as he did to thnt chosen race, grant it a revival of religion, give it laws nnd judgmonts, and summon it by positive command to an engagement of the kind, it would, ns of old, be its duty to obey. Even then: 1. The covenant would involvo a remodelling or the constitution of the State. It would be mcanin';less save on a theocratic basis, Church and State merging in one body, and breaches of covenant obligation being regarded and punished as crimes. 2. The arrangement would requin for its successful working conditions of strictest isolation-such conditions as God in his wisdom devised for Israel. The difficulties in the way of such a covenant amount now practically to impossibility. In ancient times, the units of society were families, tribes, nations, the sense of individuality being comparatively weak; now the sense of individuality is strong, and every arrangement must take large account of the indi vidnal conscience. In Israel, again, Church and State were one, but they are so no longer, Christ's kingdom refusing to identify itself with any earthly polity. The modem state, based on popular representation, and declining to take cogniz,rnce of differences of creed, is least of all favourable to the coalescence of civil with spiritual functions. Oaths are to be deprecated in any case, save where absolutely called for. They ensnare consciences, and lead to profanation by the disregard of them by the irreligious. Large sections of the community must always be left outside of such covenants, and in so solemn a transaction, the right of the majority to bind the minority, and still more to bind posterity, must be questioned. 'l'he covenants, in Scotland especially, were the sonrce of great religious inspirations, but the good was not unmixed with evil. On the other hand, the fact of such obligations being freely undertaken by a nation must be admitted to involve it in grave responsibility, and greatly aggravates the guilt of subsequent apostacy. II. INCLUDED ALL CLASSES, AND HAD RESPECT TO POSTERITY. 1. It inclnded children (ver. 11). Whatever may be said of national covenants, it is undoubted that, in the spiritual sphere, parents and children stand in very close relation. The act of a parent, himself in covenant with God, in dedicating his child to God-probably naming the Name of God upon it in baptism-entails on that little one the weightiest responsibilities. It is a child of the covenant, stands within its bonds, and is pled~ed to love, serve, and worship the God of its fathers. 2. It bound posterity. Covenanting apart, the people that is faithful to God and zealous for his glory, abounding in fruits of righteousness, may expect his blessing to distant generations; whereas the nation that forgets him, and abounds in impiety, infidelity, and wickedness, with equal certainty provokes his indignation, brings down his scourge, and bequeaths to posterity the inheritance of a curse.-J. 0. Vera. 16-21.-The lying hope. We have here- I. INEXCUSABLE UNBELIEF. (Vers. 16-18.) The man who, turning from Jehovah, went after the gods by the nations, was doubly inexcusable. 1. The true God had been revealed to him. 2. The worthlessness of heathen idols had been demonstrated. He had the light, and could compare it with the darkness of the nations around. If not himself a witness of God's mighty works in Egypt and in the desert, he had heard of them from his forefathers, or could read of them in his Scriptures (ver. 20). The existence of the nation was a proof that such things had been done. Unbelief is not less inexcusable in us: 1. With the Bible in our hands. 2. With so large a body of evidences of Divine truth. 3. With centuries of experience of the regenerativo influence of Christianity. 4. With a wide knowledge of heathen nations, discovering; to us by contrast our own advantages. Unbelief may be: 1. Speculative. 2. Practical. It is enough that our practice be shaped on the hypothesis of the untruth of God's Word, to constitute us unbelievers (1 Tim. v. 8). II. GRoss BELF-DEOEIT. (Ver. 19.) The act of this wicked mnn is very remarkable. He blesses himself in his henrt, and says, " I will have peace," at the very time that God's curses are being read out to him. Yet his case is not a solitary one. He does no more than men do every day in the teeth of the threatenings of tha Bible,  'l'HE noott OF DEU1'EnONOMY. tCU, J"'illt, 1-2{1, Satnn whispers," Ye slrnll not surely die" (Gen. iii. 4); "De it far from thee: this shall not be unto thee" (Matt. xvi. 22); and Satan, not God, is believed. We may explain this self-<leceit: 1. From want of consideration (cf. Isa. i. 3), The wicked man d0es not really trouble himself about the curses. 1'hey are mere words to him. The mind makes no application, scarcely even asks the meaning, of what it hears. The oracle with which the wicked man consults is in his own heart (Ps. xxxvi. 1-6), and the" oracles of God" get no attention. 2. From want of faith. God's Word, even if attended to, could not compel belief in a heart alre."ldy possessed by an opposite set '1f beliefs, and determined not to part with them. 3. From self-will. Will entors into the question of our beliefs; so long as it can twist-evidence, resist unwelcome conclusions, find ernsi0ns and pretexts, it will not accept what is contrary to its ordinary bent. "'bile, if the worst comes to the worst, it can cut the knot by a simple "I won't," and obst.inat.ely refuse to believe aught but what it likes. 1'he account of tho sinner's unbelief and self-deceit is therefore this: 1. He has not liked to retain God in his knon-le~ge_. 2. O:nwelcome subjects have been banished from his mind. 3. Through unfa1111hanty to his thoughts, the supcrsensual world has become less and less a reality to him. 4. He acquires the power of ignoring it, and ends by disbelief in it. III. UNUTTERABLE FOLLY. (Vcrs. 20, 21.) Unbelief, unhappily for the sinner, cannot alter the actual state of the case. God's anger smokes against him, and will certainly destroy him. His sin, agreeable as it may appear at present, will yield at last gall and wormll'ood. Contending with the .Almighty, he rushes on his ruin. Tho curses written in the Book will not fail to overtake him. It is easy for sinners to "laucrh now" (Luke vi. 25), but there awaits them a terrible undeceiving-a day when th~y shall "mourn and weep."---J. 0.