the promises of the new ane, are better than those of the old, it must unavoidably follow, that they are equally absolute. Since, therefore, God gave the typical inheritance to Abraham by promise, an unconditional promise, Gal. iii. 18. Heb. xi. 8, 9. it must also follow, that he gives the true, the eternal inheritance, in the same manner! If the promises of this last were strictly conditional, instead of being better promises than those of the former, they would not be so good; as a conditional promise, can never be set on a level with an absolute, Rom. iv. 16.

The first promise of the new daßnen runs in these words, "I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts." A most absolute promise indeed. Not the shadow of a condition to be seen here. And a hardy Arminian must he be, who supposes any condition as understood. If any is, it must be to this purpose, "I will put my

laws

into their mind, and write them in their heart," if they be willing or desirous that I should. But such dispositions are the consequences of the inscribed law, not the causes of inscribing it. To be willing or desirous that God should put his law into our hearts, is a proof that our enmity against him is slain. For so long as we retain the carnal mind, we can have no such desire, Rom. viii. 7, 8. To say that he promises such blessings, only if we sincerely desire them, amounts to this, that he will give us them, if we already have them. That is, he will give us sight, if we see; faith, if we believe; and take away the stony heart, on condition that we make us hearts of flesh.

What absurd, what uncomfortable dogmas these!

1

The God of all grace does not simply promise blessings to his people, provided they be willing, Isa. i. 19. but also, that they shall be willing, Deut. xxx. 6. Psal. cx. 3. Phil. ii. 13. To teach, that he will not put his laws into our mind, till first we be willing, is saying, in effect, that the great Physician will not come nigh us, till our recovery begin; and that what he came to remove, is the cause why he stands aloof. According to his own word, however, he "Cometh down as rain upon the grass, that tarrieth not for man, nor waiteth for the sons of men," Psalm. lxxii. 6. Mic. v. 7. The Redeemer comes not only with his consolations unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, Isa. lix. 20. he also comes with his converting grace, and turns away ungodliness from Jacob, Rom. xi. 26.

As the first promise is absolute, so is the second. "I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people." No conditional clauses here. It is not, I will, if they will. No, no. But I will be to them a God:" there is sovereign grace. "And they shall be to me a people:" there its necessary effect. I will, and they shall. I will in grace. They shall, in duty. Their taking the Lord for their God, and of consequence, devoting themselves to him as his people, is the native and necessary effect of his putting his laws into their mind. The very first of which is, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me," Exod. xx. 3. What though faith be a condition of connection, introdueing to some blessings, as that of the new heart did to it? This militates nothing against the absolute nature of the testamentary promises; inasmuch as

faith itself, the fruit of the Spirit, is a precious legacy, bequeathed to all the elect, Hag. ii. 5.; and unless so, they could never obtain it, Eph. ii. 8.

But this suggests the third thing in favour of our sentiment, viz. the controverted passage itself, -where the Apostle tells us, "Christ is the me-diator of the New Testament-that they who are called, might receive the promise of eternal inheritance, whereupon, neither the first testament was dedicated without blood," Heb. ix. 15.-18. The inheritance, the promised, and the called, are all words pointing out a testament, as much at least, if not more, than a mutual covenant. What is bequeathed? Is it not an inheritance? This is the more conclusive, when it is observed, that the inheritance here, the eternal inheritance, was typified by that of the earthly Canaan, called the land of promise, chap. xi. 9. Now as that inheritance was not of the law, or given upon the conditional terms of obedience, as founding a title to it; but was given to Abraham by promise, an absolute promise, Gal. iii. 18.; so is the case with the eternal inheritance. It is undeniable, that an absolute promise bears a great affinity to a testamentary deed. And equally so,

that the called are the same with the heirs, Compare chap. iii. 1. xi. 8, 9. When receiving the promise of the inheritance, i. e. the promised inheritance, they receive it, not as purchasers, or in virtue of their covenant-keeping, as founding their title to it; but as heirs, in virtue of the mediator's right, or of his gratuitous promise. They are frequently styled heirs, and four times in this Epistle, chap. i. 14. vi. 17. xi. 7, 9. An heir is confessedly a relative

term, refering both to an inheritance, and to a testament, founding his title to it. Nor does it bear any prejudice to this, that Christ is called an heir, Rom. viii. 17. Heb. i. 2. as his title, and that of the co-heirs, turn on very different tenures; he being a son by nature, they children by grace. If the inheritance of the called, presupposes that they are heirs, and if heirs imply a testament, then must this last suggest the idea of a testator.

Let us hear the learned Limborch a little on this subject. That able Arminian, having retained the words testament and testator, both in his version and paraphrase of this passage, expresses himself in his commentary, as follows: "It is known, that a testament, properly speaking, is the declaration of one's last will, by which he appoints who are to be the heirs of his goods, after his decease. To that appointment, are sometimes added certain conditions, which the testator prescribes to his heir: if this be the case, then the testament bears some resemblance to a covenant; and we may say, it is a certain kind of covenant; because the inheritance cannot be entered upon, unless these conditions be, fulfilled. In this sense, the word diaman seems to be taken here."- -The author considers the testament as bearing some resemblance to a covenant; because, he says, a mediator interposes in it, who has no place in a testament, but in a covenant, where some middle person interposes between the contracting parties: while the testator himself disposes of his goods. Nevertheless, when he adds certain conditions to the appointment of his heir, then, by a figurative manner of speaking, a certain

mediatory act may be atributed to him, by the intervention of which, the inheritance devolves to the heir. Limborch in Locum.

Permit me to add, that our translators are far from being singular in using the words testament and testator here. So do Pasor, Leusden, Bengelius, Beza, and Tremellius. Cloppenburgh affirms, that scarce any other place than Heb. ix. 15.-17. seems to require the word testament, and that not by virtue of the word ♪ann, but because mention is made before, of receiving the inheritance. The Geneva version renders the word in this place, testament; though in chap. xii. 24. xiii. 20. reads covenant. The words testament and testator, are used here by the Dutch translators in their version, which in point of accuracy is without a parallel. This passage is also adduced by the Westminster Assembly, in proof of there position, that the covenant of grace is frequently set forth in scripture by the name of a testament, in reference to the death of Jesus Christ the testator, and to the everlasting inheritance therein bequeathed, chap. vii. 4. Memorable was the saying of Gomarus, "The covenant of grace is a testamentary covenant and a federal testament." Leydekker's Vis Veritatis, p. 5, 16.

No. 26.-Page 163.

To deny, that in new obedience, we should have any view to our own happiness, is to annihilate at once, the use of all the promises; and in a great measure, the exercise of our graces. The use and end of all the promises is for good to us; and viewing that good as in the glass of these promises, we