Mediator. Peace could not be restored between God and his rebellious creatures, without atonement and intercession. For this purpose the 'Lamb of our salvation' is said to have been slain from the foundation of the world,' Rev. xiii. 8. This was figuratively and prophetically intimated to our first parents by the promise, that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent,' Gen.iii. 15.

Thus the true and great sacrifice, whereby the new covenant was procured and ratified, was, from the fall of man, devoted, and in effect, offered up, that men, now prone to sin, might find means of forgiveness, and not abandon themselves, through despair, to all manner of wickedness. But, till the fulness of time should come, in which the great Sacrifice was to be actually offered, the benefit thereof was applied to them by vicarious and representative sacrifices. That those offered by Abel were instituted with this view, we cannot doubt; first, because they were accepted on account of his faith in Christ Jesus, as St. Paul plainly intimates, Heb. xi. 4, and probably for this reason also, that they were of the bloody kind, and therefore more agreeable both to the institution and the end, than those of Cain, which were only the fruits of the earth; secondly, because mankind could never have thought of such a practice, had it not been prescribed; thirdly, Because the 'blood of beasts could not, of itself, purge sin;' fourthly, Because the same sacrifices under the law appear to have been only typical of the great sacrifice; and, lastly, Because they ceased, when that was slain for the sins of the world. Hence, probably, arose the general prevailing custom of confirming all manner of covenants between kings and nations by sacrifices.

In the covenant which God gave to Noah, after the sins of mankind had brought on the flood, he promises him, and all his posterity, exemption from the like judgment for the future; and forbids them to commit murder, or to eat the blood of beasts, as that which maketh an atonement for the soul,' Lev. xvii. 11, by representing the blood of the true sacrifice, or of the covenant; Heb. x. 29, God seems to speak of his dispensation to Noah as of a covenant not altogether new; for he says, 'With thee will I establish my covenant,' Gen. vi. 18. He does not say, I will make a covenant with thee (which is the proper expression to intimate

a covenant not yet heard of); but he says, I will establish my covenant;' that is, one should think, I will renew and confirm with thee my covenant of mercy which I gave to mankind after the fall, which they broke, and were therefore destroyed; but whereas you alone have observed it, with you therefore only, and your posterity, will I ratify it. This appears to be that everlasting covenant,' which, Isaiah says, the inhabitants of the earth had almost universally broken,' Isa. xxiv. 5. We see by what St. Paul says, Heb. xi. 7, ‘that Noah became heir of the righteousness which is by faith; that righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all,' Rom. iii. 22. His sacrifices were accepted, it is to be presumed, on account of his faith in the great sacrifice, which alone could recommend them in the sight of God, and give them their sweet savour,' Gen. viii. 20, 21.

For the faith of Abraham, who looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God,' Heb. xi. 10, the Lamb, or he that was to bruise the head of the serpent,' and to be the blessing of all nations,' was promised particularly to his family, Gen. xxii. 18. Here God promised to Abraham by a covenant, confirmed with an oath, that the great sacrifice should descend from him; and he accordingly went on, applying to himself the benefits thereof by the practice of those vicarious sacrifices, which had been used with that view from the days of Abel. Well might Christ therefore say, ' Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad,' John viii. 56.

To this covenant, thus carried down, the Mosaic was afterward added, as St. Paul expresses it, Gal. iii. 19. this is a matter of great consequence, let us hear the apostle's explanation of it in the passage referred to: 'To Abraham, and his seed, were the promises made,' ver. 16.'But the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ [viz. to Abraham], the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul,' ver. 17. Wherefore, then, serveth the law? It was added [to the promise, or covenant] because of transgressions, till the seed should come, to whom the promise was made,' ver. 19. Abraham, we see, was by covenant a Christian; for, as the Apostle

says, ver. 8, 'the gospel was preached to him.' Hence we must conclude, that Moses and the Israelites under the law, were, or ought to have been, Christians also; for the promise was still extant in their books, and well understood by their lawgiver and teacher, who wrote them. Nay, the law itself was calculated to instruct them in the knowledge of Christianity it was their schoolmaster to bring them to Christ,' ver. 24. That whole dispensation was so contrived, as to prefigure the Christian, and to serve as 'the shadow of good things to come,' Heb. x. 1, under Jesus, who was made a surety of a better testament, or covenant,' Heb. vii. 22. To shew the analogy of every particular, would take up too much time. It is enough to observe, that the piacular sacrifices of the law, more especially the paschal lamb, and the scape-goat, were virtual and efficacious types of Christ. This covenant, it is plain, was made not only with the Israelites then in being, but, through them, with all the succeeding generations of that people.

Several remarks, pertinent to our present purpose, that is, to the imputation of Adam's sin, and of Christ's righte ousness, are to be made on these contracts, or covenants.

In the first place, Large bodies of men, of whom few, in comparison, were yet in being, covenanted in a single representative; and were as absolutely tied to the conditions, as if every particular man had personally stipulated for

himself.

Secondly, In each covenant, the contracting parties on both sides were so bound, as to become debtors to each other for the articles respectively promised, in case of due performance on the other side. God became debtor to the family or people for certain privileges or blessings, provided they acted up to their engagements, Rom. iv. 4; and the family or people became debtors jointly, as well as severally, for the observation of that which they had promised, Gal. v. 3; and forfeited the benefits of the covenant, as often as they failed of performance.

Thirdly, These covenants, being great and distinguishing blessings, were freely bestowed, and, by the absolute commandment of God, imposed on the other contracting parties, as appears plainly in every one of them, and ex

pressly in that through Joshua at Jericho: Israel hath sinned,' saith God, and they have also transgressed my covenant which I commanded them ;' Josh. vii. 11.

Fourthly, The representative might forfeit, as in the case of Adam, or secure, as in the case of David, the benefits of the covenant, as well for the people he represented, as for himself.

Fifthly, Every covenant, excepting the first, the parties to which were previously at peace, was ratified by sacrifices, all of them representing the grand sacrifice, whereby the pardon of sin promised, and the peace commenced or renewed, were obtained.

Lastly, The benefits of each covenant, procured by the sacrifice, were restrained to those who embraced that covenant, and, by so doing, entered into an enclosure, or church, from which all recusants were excluded. This God intimates, Psal. 1. 5, where he saith, Gather my saints together unto me, those that have made a covenant with me with sacrifice.'

As the choice of this conditional method, whereby God was pleased to dispense his favours, was a pure act of goodness and mercy in him, the persons, with whom it was taken, had not only no pretence to dislike the manner of it, but all the reason in the world to be thankful, because it put them on a better footing than formerly, when they were under no contract at all. It was on this footing they received life and being, with all the happiness thereby rendered possible to them, and, if it was not their own fault, easily attainable also. They must therefore have been extremely wanting to themselves, had they not joyfully received the favours of God on the terms he was pleased to grant them, since he might have justly granted none of them on any terms at all.

But now, as to the covenant with Adam, and his posterity, it is to be observed, either that God actually made, or, without injustice, might have made, man naturally mortal; but, as a free act of grace, promised him immortality, in case he should keep the covenant. The covenant, therefore, put him on a better footing than his nature had done, or than any claim he could form, as the creature of God, could do. When he transgressed, he justly forfeited what had been only conditionally promised; and, instead of con

tinuing to be an object of grace and favour, and consequently of living for ever, he sunk into an object of justice, and died, like other animals, the death his nature seems to have marked him out for. If it was a free act of goodness in God to annex eternal life to the observation of his covenant, it was surely but an act of justice in him to resume the grant from all men, on the disobedience of their representatives; and the rather, because they also became disobedient, and seconded what he had done by their own actual sins.

Howsoever we may be obliged to answer to the Deists for the reasonableness of this doctrine, there can certainly be no room for a debate about it among ourselves. Are we not agreed, that Adam was created innocent; that he was placed in paradise, that is, in a state of worldly felicity; that he held his tenure of life, and that happiness, on the covenanted condition of obedience; and that he forfeited his tenure, at least for himself, by transgression? But how came his children, yet unborn, to be shut out of paradise? If he did not forfeit for them, as well as for himself, why were they not all admitted, and blessed with that happy condition, till their own sins expelled them? Is not that infant, who hath as yet committed no sin, a fit inhabitant for paradise? If he is, why was not that happy place reserved for him? Paradise was not made for, nor the covenant established with, Adam alone. Had not Adam sinned, he had been alive, and happy in that garden of delights, to this day, with all his posterity about him, in case they likewise had all of them kept the covenant. But, instead of enjoying this happy state, or even having the benefit of a trial for it, our right to either was nulled, and paradise itself demolished, long before we were in being. Nay, what is worse, all men are become subject to miseries of a thousand kinds, to sickness, and to death (to say nothing of that which introduces death), and that by a necessity of nature, which they cannot possibly elude; a necessity of nature, some way or other brought upon them ere they can distinguish good from evil. If paradise was destroyed, only because God. foresaw no human creature should be so pure from sin as to deserve admission there, how came this to pass? Did the sin of Adam corrupt all his posterity? Or do they cor