« PreviousContinue »
they heard; because it was only, partly a promise, partly an accusation of fin and guilt, with which man is born, but was not then abolished and blotted out ; nor what they poreled; because they were to leave them, or because the wicked enjoyed them as well as they in fine, because they were no real blessings, capable
. to satisfy the foul.” Who may not gather from this, that, in the Pralms of David, the present blessings of saving grace were neither foretold, commended or celebrated, and therefore the Israelites did not possess them, though not only the hopes of these blessings, but also the actual poffeffion of them, have been in all ages, the subject and cause of unspeakable joy. For, if David, in his psalms, can celebrate even such spiritual blessings, which are connected with eternal salvation as himself and other believers enjoyed even at that time : with what design can it be said, that their only solace and comfort consisted in meditating on the joy of the time to come, and that they possessed blessings, which were neither real, nor sufficient to satisfy the soul? Who, on reading these things could imagine he was perusing the writings of a reformed doctor?
VII. But I would not have you to believe, that this very learned author, though he writes in this style, is gone over to the Socinians, whom, in almost all his writings, he has ftrenuously opposed, and happily confuted. He repeats it a thou. fand times over, and makes it appear, by cogent arguments against those most pestilent heretics, that the promise of the spiritual and heavenly inheritance was made to the fathers of the Old Testament, and the possession of it granted to them in consequence of the testament of grace. And in the very place we first quoted, $. 885. he writes: that “ Jehovah was the father of that people; for he purchased and made them, and beftowed all good things upon them, which is to be understood not only in a figurative sense, or with respect to any external favour ;
but with respect to the benefit of redemption, the new creation, and the donation of all things necessary for life and godlinefs, by which he is in truth manifested to be the father of that people, with respect to his elect children, who were at all times contained in that people, as in a seminary, but less frequently in the great multitude of the Ifraelites of that age.” So far well : I could wish, he had stopped here.
VIII. But these two affertions are so different, that they seem to be even contradictory. For, as the blessing of redemption, the new creation, and the donation of all things necefsary for life and godliness; and in fine, to have God not in figure, but in truth, for their father, are indisputably true and permanent blessings, and are even salvation itself. Whoever afserts, that these things were bestowed on, and discovered to the Ifraelites, and yet denies, that true and permanent bleffings had been conferred upon, and discovered to them, seems to involve himself in a manifest contradiction. - IX. What then? Did memory, did judgment, did soundnefs of mind fail this very learned author, when he advanced things so contradictory? But his acknowledged learning forbids us to suspect any such thing. Let us then declare the matter as it is. By true and permanent benefits, which, he says, were not bestowed on the fathers of the Old Testament, he means the blessings peculiar to the New, as the truth is opposed to the type, and what is permanent to the shadow, that was to evanith. And salvation with him denotes complete falvation. He has found an interpreter and apologist in a divine of very great name, who, with great confidence, tells us, that this affertion is, for the most part in fcripture terms; which might have been better understood by divines, if they had taken as much pains to read and meditate on the writings of God as of men: and he endeavours to shew, that some of the things peculiar to the New Testament, as such, are sometimes held forth by the name of salvation, and of true and permanent benefits. For this purpose he quotes, Heb. ii. 3. where salvation is faid, " at the first to have begun to be spoken by the Lord:” that is, the work of salvation, which Christ now began to perform : or even that clear and effectual doctrine of the gospel, which calls us to salvation. He further observes, that those benefits are sometimes called true, which are opposed to those which were typical, as John i. 17. “ the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ :” and as the blotting out the hand-writing, which was against us, and that glorious degree of adoption, mentioned, Gal. iv. 5. are said to be true benefits ; he asserts, that they are justly called permanent, in contradistinction to the covenant of grace, as it was a covenant with the Israelites, which was neither faultless, nor permanent, Heb. viii. 7, 9. From all which he concludes that is to speak agreeable with the scriptures, to say, that true and permanent benefits, and falvation itself were not bestowed on, and discovered to Ifrael.
X. These things require a particular confideration. It is my real judgment and persuasion, that these learned men would have acted a far more prudent and generous part, if sometimes for the sake of truth, they had abandoned those, whom they have set up as heads of their party; confessing both that they were men, and that sometimes their thoughts and discourses were less accurate ; and not first to excuse every thing, however uncautiously spoken, with great confidence, and then to defend it as moit genuine, and, most exactly agreeable to fcripture language, though but with very indifferent success, and at the expence of the reputation of their brethren.
XI. But let us consider the constant tenor of the facred writings. These call the spiritual blessings of the soul, só cambivér the true, Luke xvi. 11. in opposition to the unrighteous mammon, or the false riches of this world : and the grace granted to the elect, as such, they caneñ zegov rô ésố “ the true grace of God, wherein they stand," 1 Pet. v. 12. Whether.we understand this of the doctrine of grace, or of that saving grace itself, which by that doctrine is offered to, and conferred on the elect, which ver. 10. was called the eternal glory of God, it is very evident, that true grace is opposed to any false persuasion whatever concerning salvation. They are also expressly called permanent blessings, Heb. x. 34. “ knowing in yourselves, that ve have in heaven a better and an enduring substance," which is not opposed to types and shadows, but to the good things of this world, which are fading, and subject to spoiling or rapine. Ypações prévoura, 'enduring substance, answers to the Hebrew words run and o", which fignify, a true solid and permanent substance. But this what the supreme wisdom has, from the beginning, promised to, and bestowed on those who observe her, Prov. ii
. 7. he layeth up found wisdom (substance) for the righteous, and Prov. viii. 21. to cause those that love me, to inherit fubstance. Our Lord calls these very benefits “ treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through and steal," Mat. vi. 20. Now the believing Israelites wereundoubtedlyadmited to the possession of these. The learned author himself writes, Jadagnt. Natur. Sabbat. 5. 4. that “ holy persons, who believed the promise and expected salvation had, the ornament of a meek a quiet fpirit. Which no one doubts, are permanent. In a word what does salvation itself more commonly signify, than that happiness of the soul, which is begun here upon earth, and will be perfected in heaven, and is the end of our faith? Of which, i Pet. i. 9. “ receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of
fouls.” The salvation of the soul is its deliverance from the condemning and domineering power of sin, and its delighting in God as the fountain of happiness. And this is the end of faith, not only under the New, but also that which obtained under the Old Testament, which was, indeed, discovered to Jacob, and by him to his children, when he said, “I have waited for thy salvation, O Jehovah," Gen. xix. 18. As therefore fpiritual blessings are :lled in fcripture true, permanent, and lalvation itself; and
the brethren dare not refuse that these were granted and difcovered to the ancient Israelites: muft we not acknowledge, that whoever, fays, that true and permanent benefits, and falvation itself were not granted and discovered to the Israelites, does not speak according to scripture ?
XII. Moreover should we allow, that fome benefits were peculiar to the New Testament, which may be eminently called true and permanent, and salvation itself; yet it does not follow, that he speaks truly and advisedly, according to the rules of logic and divinity, who without restriction, denies that true and permanent blessings were granted to Ifrael ; since, besides those benefits peculiar to the New Testament, there are others also which are true, permanent and saving. An universal negative proposition does not exclude some one, but every species without exception. It is one thing to say, that Ifrael had not fome degree or measure of true and permanent benefits; auother, that they had not the blessings themselves. He who would affert the former, which is true, should not use words, that signify the latter, which is abfolutely false.
XIII. But let us take a more distinct view, how well the brethren maintain their ground by scripture. ift, We allow, that the Apostle, Heb. ii. 3. by salvation understands that great happiness, whose cause was then present, and the gospel in its perfect state, wherein the salvation, now begun to be impetrated, and soon to be fully so is declared : and it is certain, salvation in that sense was not before the manifestation of Chrift; nor did the Ifraelites enjoy.it. But he, that would illustrate this, should distingush between this salvation, already impetrated, or obtained, and falvation about to be impetrated; or between salvation, and the promise of salvation : and not, as our author does, between salvation and temporal benefits. For certainly eternal salvation was given and manifested to Israel, though the cause of salvation, as it now appears, and the work of salvation, as already begun, could not be preached to them. Because, what Christ' had promised and engaged was at that time sufficient to procure salvation, to be manifested and bestowed.
XIV. 2dly, None will deny, that true benefits are fometimes opposed to typical: but this observation is altogether for reign to the case in hand; unless the brethren mean, that the Ifraelites enjoyed only typical good things, but were destitute of those true or spiritual blessings, which were signified by the typical. What we just quoted from the preface to the Psalms, and which I own, I do not sufficiently understand, seems to tend to this. But let these things país. Let us go on with VOL. II.
what is perspicuous.' Moses indeed, who was a fervant, could not besiow those true blessings. Yet Christ, who was the fame yesterday and to day, bestowed on believers even under the Mofaic economy true benefits, in and with the typical. And when they deny, that true benefits were bestowed on Israel, I cannot think, they will reckon remission of sins, and redemption, and a new creation, &c. among the number of thote, which were typical; and they own that these were bestowed on Israel. To what purpose then is the inculcating here a distinction between true and typical benefits ? But, say they, the hlotting out the hand-writing, and that glorious degree of adoption are true benefits. Are they so ? And is not also remiflion itself, the hand-writing not being yet blotted out, and adoption itself, though not in that degree, to be reckoned among the true benefits? Did the types of the Israelites only prefigure that measure of grace, peculiar to the New Testament; not saving grace itself, which is common to both dispensations ? Were their facraments signs only of this grace, which is freely bestowed on us, and not allo of that, of which they themselves were made partakers ? Let the learned authors tell me I pray, whether the new creation, redemption, remiflion of sins, adoption, friendship with God, and the salvation of the foul, both in heaven and on earth, and the like spiritual blessings, which the Ifraelites enjoyed, belong to the law, and are given by Moses, or to the truth and grace, which came by Christ? If they affirm the latter, as I imagine they will, I again beg of them to explain, what the passage quoted from John makes to the purpose : as from that it is clear, that true benefits, as oppofed to typical, were bestowed even upon Israel: which yet the words, now under examination, deny.
XV. 3dly, The main point is, that the economy of the Old Testament was not permanent and stable, like the economy of the New. In the former there is the removing of these tbings that are shaken, that, in the latter, “ those things which cannot be fhaken, may remain," Heb. xii. 27. But it is wrong to infer from this, that under a mutable economy, which was, in due time, to be changed, there were no permanent blessings either bestowed or made known. Because the bestowing and manifesting permanent benefits proceed not from those circumstances, which are mutable, but from the
very covenant grace, which is God's eternal testament. Then again granting, there is some permanent benefit under the New Testament, which was not under the Old, I cannot therefore indeterminately affirm, that permanent blessings were not bestowed on Ifrael. I shall give a palpable instance. The apostle says even to believers under