yond it for when the sinner brought a clean perfect creature to be sacrificed-laid his hand on its head-and shed the blood, the life, of the creature-This indeed was doing what he was commanded, but not all. The service of the mind was also required, and that was to tegard the intent of the action-To confess, that the death the creature suffered was what he deservedThat he had forfeited his life-That it was not in his own power to restore it—And that it could not be restored, but by the merits of that great sacrifice, which he hoped in, and believed would, in the fulness of time, be offered up for his sins. This was making a truly Christian confession of his faith; and this confession all worthyofferers did make; and therefore did conclude from the necessity of the type to make an atonement for sin, that the antitype must be much more necessary.

The law therefore by requiring sacrifices as absolutely necessary for the remission of sins, did plainly point out and prove, that there could be no redemption without the sacrifice of Christ: for remission of sins must be previous to redemption; and if there could. be no remission without shedding of blood, then certainly without it there could be no redemption. St. Paul applies the typical services to Christ, and the redemption under the first Testament, to the completion of our redemption by him, when he says, "That Christ "being become an high priest of good things to come, "not by the blood of the sacrifices, but by his own "blood entered once into the holy place, having ob"tained eternal redemption for us." This was perfecting and fulfilling what was typified under the law :: for when the apostle represents Christ as our great high priest-As shedding his blood for us-And offering himself without spot to God-As entering into the holy of holies-And appearing before the mercy seat, in the presence of God-There presenting to the Father the sweet-smelling sacrifice of his Son. Doth he not, by representing in this manner what Christ really completed, prove, that what the high priest did, pre

66

figured what he was to do? All the ideas in this description are borrowed from the typical services, and Christ is said to have fulfilled what they signified. What he fulfilled was our redemption by his death and sufferings; and therefore it is evident, that the typical services did signify our redemption by Christ: for when the apostles speak of Christ "putting away sin "by the sacrifice of himself-Of his redeeming us by "his blood-Of his being the Lamb of God who "taketh away the sins of the world—And of the offering himself, and thereby perfecting for ever them "that are sanctified." By using these expressions to describe the completion of our redemption by Christ, Do they not prove, that the sacrifices were types of that redemption? For, if they had not pointed out and foretold something, How could they describe what was fulfilled? The relation then between the ideas of sacrifice and Christ must have been well understood, before the same terms could have been descriptive of them both; and indeed without that relation, our redemption by Christ, being a spiritual effect, would not easily have been understood; for the sufferings of Christ, his shedding his blood, and his death, were but the visible parts of his atonement. The chief of this great action lay between God and himself, invisible to all others. And this part a man can no more conceive or express, than he could have sustained it. The weight Christ sustained was infinite, and the action was spiritual; and we have no words, for we converse with no objects from whence to take them, which can give us adequate ideas of what is infinite, or of those actions which are purely spiritual. In all such cases, the best teacher is God; and the scripture ideas are the perfectest we can have; and if our redemption by Christ be there described by ideas taken from the sacrifices, it will follow not only that the sacrifices did point out our redemption by Christ, but also that they (when rightly understood) will give us the best ideas, and of course the clearest evidence of that redemption.

The law of Moses then it appears did point out something by its types and emblems. It pointed out by them the person of Christ. Particularly it pointed him out by sacrifices, which typified what he was to do and suffer for us. The necessity of these sacrifices proved the necessity of Christ's sacrifice. And God's requiring them as necessary for redemption, proved also the necessity of our redemption by Christ; and therefore it is evident, that the law pointed out, and proved the necessity of our redemption by Christ, and purification by blood.

The only thing then remaining to be proved, is, Secondly, To shew from matter of fact, that the Gentiles did observe what the law pointed out.

And

This the apostle declares in the words of the text; he says, "They did the things contained in the law of "Moses, and shewed by so doing, that what the law "was to work and effect was written in their hearts;" and thereby they gave proof that they believed those, doctrines which the law was principally intended to point out. The text then is a full and clear argument for the truth of this proposition, and upon that footing I might rest the matter, were there not other parts of scripture which incontestibly prove this matter of fact, by shewing in what manner the Gentiles became acquainted with the things contained in the law of Moses.

Now upon the fall Moses informs us, that a revelation was made of the new terms of salvation, and that all the typical services which were to give and preserve the knowledge of this revelation were instituted; sacri fice in particular took its rise from hence: for at the end of the days, i. e. at some stated time, Abel is said to have offered through faith. Now it being impossible. that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sin by any virtue of its own, it was not likely that any means, which had no apparent connection with the end proposed, should be of human invention to atone for And there being so soon after the fall, a stated time of sacrificing, it is not probable that the time of

sin.

:

the action should have any more of human invention in it, than the action itself. And there being also faith joined to the offering, it is certain the offering had a relation to some spiritual object, and as such could have nothing of human invention in it at all: for faith being the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen, if the things hoped for and not seen, cannot be attained without faith in Christ, and faith in Christ cannot be attained without a reve lation, then it is certain Abel's offering was of divine institution because there could be no faith in Christ, where there was no revelation. The doctrine of remission of sins, through faith in his blood, could not have been discovered by unassisted reason; and yet Abel had that faith, and through it he offered. Therefore in direct consequence from each other there were revelation-faith-offering-revelation, without which there could be no faith-faith, without which there could be no acceptable offering. And an offering founded on faith, which is founded on revelation; and therefore offering sacrifice was revealed upon the fall, and as such was of divine institution.

And as in all other chief points of the law, so especially in this it is no more than a renewal, and committing to writing the same terms of salvation, which had been revealed upon the fall: for the chief things contained in it are mentioned long before the written law was given from Sinai. Offering sacrifice which was the highest act of religion among mankind, was in use from the fall downwards. The patriarchs all sacrificed. Thus did Job continually. And besides the sacrifice, all its appendages and the sacrificial rites were instituted together: for later scriptures lay near as much stress upon them as upon the sacrifice itself; so that by parity of reason, what was a necessary part of every sacrifice had an institution coeval with the sacrifices: because if God would not accept sacrifices without some particular rites, than these rites were a part of them which he did accept. And he accepted

the sacrifices of Abel, of Noah, and Abraham, before they offered there; for these rites were instituted, and of course before the written law; for it is mentioned before the written law that there was a priest who had a right to offer. His habits were appointed. A distinction of clean and unclean creatures was made. An altar was raised. And there was a stated time, at which, sacrifice, with all its rites, was to be performed. These points then being previous to God's accepting the sacrifice, and thereupon pardoning the sinner, must have had an institution prior to the offering the sacrifice, and that institution was the revelation made upon the fall.

Here then the scripture gives us a rational account, by what means the Gentiles became acquainted with, and did the things contained in the law of Moses: for the law being but a renewal of what had been before revealed, and was now committed to writing, must be known to all those who were descended from them who had revelation. Adam had that revelation. Noah and his sons had it, and consequently their children could not but learn from them those rites and ceremonies which they saw their parents practise, and in the performance of which they themselves were assistants; and if the Gentiles knew this revelation, they might do the things contained in the law of Moses, without hav ing that law in writing; they need not surely be referred to the written law to learn the typical services, when there had been an institution of them prior to that, and a period before when they were observed by all mankind.

In process of time, indeed, after the era of the law, men began to lose sight of the reason and end of these institutions, and by degrees strangely corrupted what had been revealed. But yet what strongly confirms the apostle's argument is, that they still observed the outward part; the religious ceremonies were (as far as we know) for some ages after the law, universal; for the higher we go in antiquity, they are found to be