of justifying works only end with that of human life? If the former, let the period be pointed out, when the man has gone through such a course of obedience, as entitles him to justification. If such a period be, the consequence is, that all his good works posterior to it, are not in order to be justified, as he is in that state already. It also follows, that all good morals are not justifying, but only such as are previous to the supposed period. If the good works necessary to justification must run in a parallel with human life, the unavoidable consequence is, that the man's legal state is never changed while he is in this world; he is never justified till he die. This, however, besides all its other gloomy attendants, is obviously contrary to scripture: which uniformly teaches, that as soon as a sinner believes in Christ, he passes from a state of condemnation, into a state of justification, John iii. 18. v. 24. Rom. v. 1. Col. i. 13. 1 John iii. 14.

1

The precepts of the gospel is a phrase, which however common in the mouths of many, has need to be well explained, in order to prevent mistakes. As the word law sometimes refers to history, Gal. iv. 21, 22. so the word gospel, taken largely for all that is contained in the New Testament, comprehends both history and precepts, Mark i. 14, 15. In this view, the gospel includes the law, as the word law sometimes implies the gospel, Psal. xix. 7. Thus we read of subjection to the gospel, 2 Cor. ix. 13. and of not obeying the gospel, 2 Thess. i. 8. and of an angel having the everlasting gospel to

1

preach, saying, "Fear God, and give glory to him," Rev. xiv. 6. 7. Comprehensive precepts indeed. But if the word gospel be taken strictly, for glad tidings concerning a Saviour, with life and salvation in him to the chief of sinners, there are no precepts in it, faith and repentance not excepted; and so our venerable Author expressly teacheth chap. 17. sect. 9. Sure as man's present state is different from his primitive, the gospel is distinct from the law. As the law given him at first was not the gospel, neither is the gospel now sent him a new law. So far from it, the embracing of the one delivers him from the curse of the other. As the law is perfect, every precept is reducible to it. Our Lawgiver himself said, "On these two commandments (viz. to love God and our neighbour) hang all the law and the prophets," Mat. xxii. 40. Whatever therefore was enjoined in the law of Moses, or in the prophets, was comprehended under these. As pity to the poor, and love to our enemies, is included in the repentance in the other. The law being a transcript of God's holiness, it must necessarily follow, that as there is one God, and he unchangeable, so there can be but one law, and it unchangeable. Nor do the ceremonial and judicial precepts, given of old to the Israelites, militate against this doctrine; inasmuch as even by the moral law, they were bound to observe these. Turret. Institut. Loc. ii: Quest. 14. Sect. 1. For if it bind the rational creature to believe whatever God reveals, and to obey whatever he enjoins, then surely to give prompt obedience to every positive precept. If

one, so are faith and

this be denied, it inevitably follows, that man's eating the forbidden fruit was not a breach of the moral law. It is cheerfully granted that he was not bound to abstain from that fruit till the prohibition was made known, but the moment that it was, the law under which he previously was, obliged him to abstinence; and hence in eating, he broke the covenant of works. In like manner, though the law does not bind us to repent, till we have sinned; nor to believe in Christ, till he be revealed; yet soon as we have committed the one, or hear the joyful sound concerning the other, we are bound by the law to repent and believe; otherwise, impenitence and unbelief, would be no transgressions of the moral law, but only of that which is very improperly called the gospel law. Faith is commanded by the law, not taught. It is taught by the gospel, not commanded. Obligation is from the law, the revelation of the object from the gospel. [Maccovius.] If the gospel issue out commands, then it `must also condemn for disobedience to them; and thus we shall have gospel-threatenings, yea, as some speak, gospel-vengeance. It also merits our attention, that if the gospel be indeed a new law, then as Arminius taught, God is bound to give every man to whom the gospel cometh, power to believe. For if a law be given, which was in no sense obligatory on man previous to his fall, and which he had no power to obey, one would think, that in justice he should be endued with new powers for that purpose. That man would not believe in Christ, before he fell, was not owing to his want of ability, but to the want of revelation. On supposi

tion that he had not lost his primitive powers, he could and would have believed in Christ, soon as revealed unto him. Had not the eyes of his understanding been darkened, and his heart hardened by his fall, he would have seen the Redeemer's beauty, and received him with joy. The patrons of the new, the remedial law, tell us that it is milder far than that of works, being proportioned to man's abilities, and accordingly requiring not perfect, but only sincere obedience. But if it sink in its demands in proportion to his strength, it can require no obedience at all, no not so much as sincere. For he being without strength, dead in trespasses and sins, Rom. v. 6. Eph. ii. 1, 5. can yield no acceptable obedience, can do nothing but dead works, Heb. vi. 1. ix. 14. What though perfect and sincere obedience are things vastly different, yet they are equally impossible to the unregenerate; as a dead man can no more remove a mole-hill than a mountain. It may also be observed, that a law requiring only imperfect obedience, is an imperfect law. But that an all-perfect God should emit an imperfect law, not requiring us to love him with all the heart, is poor divinity. If perfection be not required, imperfection is no sin: and if so, what is the necessity of a satisfaction? See Answers of the Twelve Brethren to the Commission's Queries, Query 1. with the human authorities there quoted, and Dickinson's Familiar Letters, Let. 13.

No. 14.-Page 87.

The Sinai-transaction was of a mixed nature. There the covenant of grace was certainly renew

ed, as appears from Exod. xx. 2. where the Most High expressly says to Israel, "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Thus putting them in mind of the promise in the Abrahamic covenant, Gen. xv. 14. To the same purpose is the endearing appellation which he takes to himself at the bush, Exod. iii. 15.-18. Compare Deut. vii. 6.-11. xxix. 10.—13. To this we must also refer the offering of sacrifices, and the sprinkling part of their blood upon the people, accompanied with these ever-memorable words, "Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you." This was a covenant made by sacrifice, and therefore the covenant of grace, Psal. 1. 5. Heb. ix. 18.-20. No blackness, no darkness, nor tempest here: No sound of a trumpet, no terrible sight, or tremendous voice of words, Heb. xii. 18.-21. Nothing like the terrors of the fiery law. Every thing indicates mildness and mercy, the meek Moses saying, "Behold the blood of the covenant," Circumcision and the passover were the signs and seals of this covenant, Rom. iv. 11. 1 Cor. v. 7. And therefore it was the covenant of grace.

A national covenant was also established with Israel by the ministry of Moses. As a nation, kingdom or commonwealth, they were under a theocratical government, God giving them a body of laws by which they were to regulate their conduct: laws accompanied with promises and threatenings of a temporal nature. The promises and threatenings respecting them in their national capacity could not belong either to the covenant of

U