The harmony of the Law and the Gospel with regard to the doctrine of a future state

Front matter

**

Oo cP'

bo'

Chapter I. The Subject Of Inquiry Stated

X HE volume of holy Scripture unfolds to the knowledge of mankind a wonderful scheme of redemption, which has been appointed by God as the means of their deliverance from the penalties incurred by sin. This scheme is represented to have taken its rise immediately after the first transgression, and to have received its accomplishment in the publication of the Gospel. Its beginning, the progressive stages of its advancement, and its completion, are discovered to us in many successive revelations, which have been, at different periods extending through a long tract of time, communicated to the world by men divinely inspired and authorized.

Whatever variety may exist as to the time and circumstances of these several communications, it may reasonably be expected, that they should all agree in their reference to one great design of benevolence to the human race. And this expectation will not be disappointed by an examination of the holy Scriptures ; provided that such examination be conducted with that attention, that candour, and that deep humility, which are justly due from a creature in contemplating the ways and counsels of the all-wise and perfect Governor of the world. The reference for which we contend may not, indeed, on a separate consideration of each distinct

B portion of these writings, be always equally manifest ; but the truth of the principle will be readily acknowledged, if we bear in mind, as we ought to do, that every revelation of the divine will which is therein recorded, however partial and restricted in its primary aspect, is to be regarded as having a connexion, nearer or more remote, with that comprehensive purpose of mercy to fallen man which was to receive its completion in the Gospel.

Viewing, then, the several communications of divine truth which compose the body of Scripture, as having one common end, and all of them uniting ultimately in the same design ; we might, on the principles of natural rehgion, be led to suppose, that the substance of each revelation would be the same. Such an expectation might arise from considering, on the one hand, the attributes of God, who is the author of revelation ; and on the other, the nature of man, for whose benefit the revelation is intended.

As to the former, natural religion would teach us the unchangeableness of the Deity; it would dispose us to believe in his absolute perfection ; and would consequently lead us to regard him, as exempt from those capricious movements, and that irregularity of conduct, which result from the frail and disordered constitution of human minds. Hence, from a contemplation of the divine nature, might we frame an inference, that the benevolence of God to his rational creatures, and his provisions for their welfare, would be at all times perfectly unvaried and uniform.

Then, again, with respect to the nature of man : that would occur to our own observation and experience, as wearing the same complexion in all ages of the world, deriving its happiness from the same sources, susceptible of the same incitements to duty, endued with the same capacities, subjected to the same dangers, and in need of the same consolations. Hence it would appear reasonable to conclude, that religious truth, in the fullest extent of its discovery, would be at all times equally influential on his practice and conducive to his welfare.

On this combined regard to both the dispenser and the recipient of divine revelation, we might frame an expectation, that every communication from God to man, in which the general interests of man are concerned, would be the same, as to the matter, degree, and extent, of the knowledge conveyed ; however such communications might be diversified as to the time and manner of their being imparted.

Such are the expectations which might arise from viewing the subject simply in itself, and abstractedly from that information which we possess respecting the actual proceedings of the Deity. But here we meet with a striking example of the incompetence of human reason to frame an estimate of the methods, which, under any given circumstances, would be adopted by the Supreme Being, in order to the accomplishment of his wise and merciful designs. For it is undeniable, that the measures of knowledge afforded by divine inspiration to various ages of the world have been very unequal.

This inequality discovers itself as to many points in which the happiness of man is very deeply interested. At various epochs in the progress of the sacred history, the light of divine revelation hath

B 2 opened into greater degrees of clearness ; the views which it has unfolded to one age, have been far more full and distinct than any discoveries which had been made to foregoing generations ; till at length it burst forth in its greatest splendour in the sunshine of the Gospel, laying open a scene of joy, consolation, and hope, which before that time had either been wrapped in total darkness, or else imperfectly beholden through the medium of type and prophecy.

This observation applies with particular force to the doctrine of a future state of reward and punishment. If man is destined for eternity ; if he shall hereafter be judged according to his works ; if the present life be a state of probation, on which the happiness or misery of a future will depend ; can it be disputed that he is deeply concerned in the knowledge of these truths? Is it not most highly important to him, that he should regulate his conduct with an eye to that retribution which awaits him ? that he should be aware of the great interest which he has pending, and alive to the awful necessity of securing it ? His future and eternal condition, whether of reward or of punishment, must appear to depend in some degree on the previous knowledge which he has respecting it. Even if we look no further than the present life, still the unspeakable value of this doctrine must be manifest ; whether we regard the restraint which it imposes upon wickedness, the firm support which it yields to innocence and virtue, or the consolation it administers under the sufferings and sorrows incident to our mortal state.

Here then arises a question. Why, in those many various revelations which are recorded as having been imparted in the earlier ages of the world to the patriarchs and the chosen people of God, are those clear assurances of a future state withheld, which are now afforded to ourselves under the Gospel ?

To offer a few considerations which may possibly conduce to the solution of this difficulty, and help us to trace the footsteps of divine wisdom in the proceeding to which we refer, will be the design of the following treatise. Before, however^ we proceed further in our inquiry, there are two observations which it will be right to premise.

My first observation is, that nothing is here assumed respecting the silence of the Mosaic code on the subject of a future life, further than the absence of all express declaration on that head. Explicit declaration is only one out of a great variety of modes by which truth may be made known. That a future state is not thus directly taught in the Pentateuch, is all that is at present asserted as the groundwork of the argument which is to follow. Whether this important doctrine may be gathered in the way of inference from the Mosaic writings ; whether those writings were designed to favour such an inference, and to cherish the hope of a triumph over the grave ; these are points which will properly offer themselves for discussion in the progress of our inquiry.

Secondly, We shall consider as separate parts of one entire dispensation, all those various revelations contained in holy Scripture, in which God at sundry times and in divers manners hath spoken to

B 3 the world, from the fall of our first parents, down to the sealing up of the vision and prophecy under the Messiah. At the same time, it forms no part of the design of this inquiry to take in the whole scheme of revealed religion : its object being limited to a particular provision of the Mosaic law, for the purpose of illustrating the wisdom of that provision in its adjustment and adaptation to the general plan of which it forms a part. The scheme of man's redemption will be contemplated as it is set forth in holy writ ; and nothing further is proposed, than to prove, from a general view of this mysterious economy, that the specific point selected for consideration, is perfectly consistent with the design of the whole, wisely adapted to promote its success, and perfectly agreeable to the divine attributes of goodness and mercy. If any thing further should be offered, it will be only incidentally, as occasion may happen in the course of our inquiry to suggest reflections, tending to vindicate the ways of Providence, to strengthen the obligations of piety and gratitude, and to silence the cavils of ignorance and presumption.

This last observation has been deemed important for the following reason. While vindicating from objection one provision of the scriptural scheme, we may have occasion to shew, that a departure from that provision Avould have been ill adapted, either to the general character of the scheme itself, to the established course of Providence, or to the natural constitution of human minds : all of which we refer to God as their author. Yet if this shall be made satisfactorily to appear, it may still be objected : but why was this scheme framed as it is ? or, why was not the course of events differently ordered ? or, why were not the minds of men otherwise constituted ? To such objections we profess not to give any distinct reply : as indeed they are capable of none, but that which dismisses the objector with an admonition respecting his ignorance^.

To reason thus looks as if we would take the government of the world out of God's hands into our own. The system of religion which we profess to vindicate is, and must be, imperfectly comprehended by us. Enough is revealed for all the purposes of our happiness ; but much more is unrevealed^. To work contradictions cannot be expected even of Omnipotence : yet we doubt not, that the demands of human pride and inconsideration, such as we have now stated, would appear replete with contradictions to a mind, capable of embracing all those possibilities, relations, and consequences, which lie open to the contemplation of the Supreme Intelligence. It will suffice for us to shew, that the system itself is, with regard to the subject of our present consideration, free from inconsistency and self-contradiction : though, even in this limited point of view, we protest against admitting, as a real inconsistency, that which may appear such to us, whose mental vision, unaided by a light from heaven, can penetrate little further than the surface of the objects which lie immediately around it.

» *' Our ignorance, as it is the common, is really a satisfactory, " answer to all objections against the justice and goodness of " Providence." Butler's Analogy, part i. chap. vii.

^ See Butler's Analog)^ pt. ii. ch^iv. as also pt. i. ch. vii.

B 4

Chapter II

REASONS WHY THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE STATE IS NOT EXPRESSLY TAUGHT IN THE WRITINGS OF MOSES.

Arnohius adv. Gen. II. 65.

In examining a complex piece of mechanism, if we would form a right judgment of the structure of any of its component parts, it is requisite that we should have in view the end and purpose which is to be answered by the operation of the whole machine : otherwise it will be impossible to frame a just estimate of the skill with which that component part has been framed to the performance of its subordinate office.

A mode of inquiry analogous to what has now been described, is that which it will be right for us to pursue in the consideration of our present subject. The whole body of revelation must be viewed as one entire dispensation, receiving its full and complete developement in the Gospel. Of this whole, so much as relates to the Israelites under tlie Law is to be regarded as a subordinate part, liaving only a relative connexion with the great and final purpose. When therefore we inquire. Why was the knowledge of a future state afforded to the Israelites, so slender in comparison with that which Christians now enjoy? the measure is to be contemplated, not simply as it may have affected the condition of that single people, but as having an ulterior reference to that glorious redemption, which God had decreed to accomplish in the fulness of time for the benefit of all the children of men. In other words, we must see whether we can discover, in this particular provision, a consistency with the final purpose, to which this and all the other subordinate parts of revealed religion are professedly accommodated.

Let us advert, then, to that great fundamental principle of pure Christianity, that the atonement of Christ is the only warrantable foundation on which a human creature can establish his hopes respecting a future life. Such being the case, would not any explicit declarations respecting a future state, or any clear assurances of the felicity which in that state is prepared for the faithful : would not such declarations and assurances, I say, have been premature, if they had been conveyed antecedently to the performance of that meritorious sacrifice ; or, at least, before a distinct explanation had been furnished to mankind of the only ground on which they could entertain any well founded hopes relating to another world? We know, that all expectations of the divine favour which stand upon the basis of human virtue and obedience, are utterly incompatible with the plan of our redemption, and that the plea of merit is one on which no flesh will be accepted before God. But would not a hope of this nature, offensive as it is to God, and utterly unwarrantable in itself, have been fondly cherished by the pride and ignorance of man, if at any earlier period he had possessed that distinct infor-

10 IVJiy a future state is not explicitly

mation respecting future rewards and punishments which the Gospel unfolds ?

It becomes not us to scrutinize the propriety of that appointment, which ordained so late a period of the world for an event of the most momentous influence on the condition of the human race. It was a decree of that unsearchable wisdom, which is alone competent to select the most suitable means for the accomplishment of its ends, and so to frame the plans of divine mercy and benevolence, as to give to them the fullest and most extensive effect of which, in the nature of things, they are capable. Such, however, is the fact : that event to which we are indebted for our redemption and recovery, was not to take place till many ages after the introduction and prevalence of the evil which it was designed to remedy. The crucifixion of our Redeemer was about four thousand years after the transgression of Adam. Of the long intermediate space between the introduction of sin and the atonement for it, but a few centuries had enjoyed any distinct and intelligible communications respecting the mode in which the restoration of mankind was to be accomplished. The prophecy contained in the fifty-third, and part of the foregoing, chapters of Isaiah, may be considered as the earhest prediction of a suffering and dying Messiah, which could have been distinctly and generally understood before its fulfilment''. Earlier intimations, indeed, we have.

c " From that prophet, justly called evangelical, who was the ''first commmioned to lift up the veil that covered the mystery of " our redemption, and to draw it forth to open view from beneath *' the shade of Jewish ceremonies and types, through which it

The Book of Psalms contains many a picture in which the humiliation and death of the Son of God are circumstantially delineated. We have the symbolical representations of the Levitical ritual. We have also various transactions of an emblematical character in the earlier stages of the sacred history. These are, each in its kind, clearly illustrative of the scheme of mercy which had been progressively carried on from the beginning. They are corroborative testimonies to the evidence by which Christianity is supported. But nothing of earlier date than the passage referred to, can be justly interpreted as a distinct and perspicuous announcement of the mystery of man's redemption through the vicarious sacrifice of the Messiah. The date of this prophecy must be fixed within considerably less than eight centuries before the death of Christ.

Thus long did a state of ignorance prevail, not only among mankind in general, but even among the peculiar family of God, as to the means by which the forgiveness and salvation of man were to be effected. In this state of things, what would have been the natural consequence of conveying in the Law of Moses any clearer discoveries respecting a future world ? The Israelite who lived under that Law, might derive from it, indeed, a general faith in the Messiah, together with a persuasion that his ad-

" had been hitherto but faintly discerned, we have a description " of that great propitiatory sacrifice, whereby our salvation has " been effected, as plain as it is possible for language to convey •' it." Abp. Magee on Atonement and Sacrifice, vol. ii. p. 15. Dublin, 1809. The words quoted relate to the prophecy referred to in the text.

12 JVky a future state is not explicitly

vent would be the occasion of signal benefits to his own nation, and even to all mankind. But he could not, more particularly in the early ages of that nation, frame any distinct conceptions respecting the peculiar character of that great achievement of divine wisdom and love, by which the glory of God was in after-ages to be revealed to the world ; which was to cancel transgression, and to lay open the avenues of mercy ; without which, all penitence on the part of man would be unavailing, and all obedience unacceptable. Under these circumstances, any clear assurance of immortal life would naturally have led to gross misconception of the terms on which God is pleased to offer that gift to mankind. A promise conveyed in the Law, would have been understood as a promise annexed to the ohservance of the Law. Obedience to that Law would have been consequently regarded as a requisite, and as a sufficient, qualification for obtaining from God the fulfilment of the promise. It would have been viewed as constituting a meritorious title to eternal life. Satisfaction to the divine justice, as a necessary preliminary to pardon and favour, would never have been thought of. Thus would the Israelite have been perverted in the principles of his faith. His hopes of happiness would have rested on grounds inconsistent with the eternal purpose and attributes of God. Thus would the self-righteous, bhnd to the corruption of his heart and the defects of his behaviour, have claimed the reward of immortahty as his due ; while the humble and contrite, sensible of his own transgressions, of the perfection of the Law which he had broken, and of the justice and revealed in the Pentateuch. IS

holiness of the God whom he had offended, would altogether have despaired of mercy.

But further. The wisdom of God had decreed, that the publication of the Law should be many agies anterior to that of the Gospel ; and the former was designed to be introductory and preparatory to the latter. Let us inquire, then, in what manner the success and reception of the more perfect dispensation would have been affected by any deviation, as to the point we are at present considering, from the actual provisions of that dispensation which was preparatory to it. If I mistake not, it will appear, upon examination, that the tendency of such a deviation would have been greatly detrimental to the cause of Christianity ; and that it would have created an obstacle, first, to its being received at all, and secondly, to its being received in its purity.

First, If the Law had been as explicit and declaratory as the Gospel on the subject of a future state, this circumstance must have been unfavourable to the establishment of Christianity. For the Jews, to whom this religion was first preached, would naturally have been indisposed to embrace a new charter, which contained no extension of the privileges conveyed to them in an old one which they already possessed. This position will appear supported by powerful evidence, if we take a brief view of the circumstances under which the Gospel was offered to that nation, and of the reception which it actually experienced among them.

The preaching of the humiliation and death of the Son of God was accompanied with an offer to such as should embrace the Christian covenant, of life and immortality ; which, in the language of St. Paul, "were brought to light through the Gospel^." Notwithstanding, however, this powerful recomniendation of the faith proposed to their acceptance ; notwithstanding all the mighty evidences of truth, by which the ministry of our Lord and his apostles was supported ; the cross of Christ was a stumblingblock and a rock of offence to the Jews. Few of them could be prevailed on to embrace a doctrine, which severely mortified their pride, deeply shocked their national prejudices, and brought with it a stinging disappointment to their carnal and am.bitious views.

Let us suppose now, that the promise of eternal life had been, in the preaching of the apostles, not what it now is, the peculiar distinction of the evangelical covenant ; but that it had been the mere repetition of a promise, which the Jews and their forefathers had for many ages enjoyed : in what manner would the progress of the new religion have been affected by this circumstance ? Would it not have thus been stripped of that very attraction which chiefly recommended it to the hearts of its early converts ? The advantages which it really possessed were insufficient to overpower those feelings of hostility by which it was encountered : would not then a more determined opposition, and a more general rejection, have been the probable result, if the promise of life and immortality had been annexed to a previous covenant?

An incident recorded in the history of our Lord rexjealed in the Pentateuch, 15

will serve to assist us in the decision of this question. Many of the early disciples of Christ, taking offence at the doctrine which he taught on an occasion of public discourse, withdrew from associating with him. At this time, as the evangelist informs us, " Jesus said unto the twelve. Will ye also go " away ? Then Simon Peter answered him. Lord, " to whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of " ETERNAL LIFE '^." The motive which actuated this apostle, we may reasonably suppose to have been entertained in common by all the primitive adherents of the Saviour. Would this motive have been equally cogent, if the words of eternal life had been written in the Law of Moses, in characters equally plain and distinct with those in which we read them in the scriptures of the New Covenant ? Far from it. Had the promises of the Gospel contained nothing that was new, either as to the clearness or the authority of its declarations on this most interesting subject, it is utterly improbable that its doctrines would, in that perverted state of feeling and opinion which prevailed at the time of its introduction, have met with any favourable or even serious attention.

The prejudices which the Jews had imbibed in favour of their national religion, constituted a principal obstacle to the success of the apostolical labours for their conversion. Of these prejudices, one of the most deeply rooted had arisen from the high esteem and veneration with which they regarded their ancient law. By many of them, so high an opinion was entertained of its excellency and perfection, that they viewed it sufficient for the utmost needs of man. They supposed it to contain the rule of justification, together with every thing else which is necessary in order to everlasting life^. The want of any new revelation they would not admit. Nor could they be prevailed on to entertain an opinion, so degrading, as they thought, to the honour of their national code and of themselves, as to suppose, that the oracles of God, which had been intrusted to their exclusive keeping, were in their design only preparatory? to a further communication of mercy and truth, which was to be more ample in its discoveries, and more diffusively imparted. In these mistaken notions and contracted views, we discover the cause which chiefly operated in producing that general rejection which the Gospel experienced among the Jewish nation. And would not this cause have operated with a force greatly augmented, if their Law, which, being weak^, was unable to give everlasting life, had nevertheless plainly assured them of it ?

Secondly, Had the Law of Moses supplied a greater clearness of discovery respecting a future life, it

f See Macknight on the Epistles, Pref. to Rom. sect. 2 and 3 ; and Pref. to Gal. sect. 3.

g ** Before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto " the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wlierefore the law ** was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ." Gal. iii. 23, 24.

^ *' If there had been a law which could have given life, verily ** righteousness should have been by the law." Gal. iii. 21 . "What " the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God *' sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, ** condemned sin in the flesh." Rom. viii. 3.

would have thus contributed to mislead the early converts to the Gospel from an apprehension of its pure and genuine doctrines. This position will also be established by a reference to the circumstances which actually attended the first preaching of Christianity. The same prejudice, which, in its influence on one portion of the Jewish people, led to the total rejection of the Gospel, occasioned considerable difficulty in conveying to that class of them who embraced it, correct notions of its design and character. They misunderstood the intention of the Levitical ordinances, and formed an exaggerated estimate of their value and excellence. Hence arose the difficulty of convincing them, that the justification of man, which was the great requisite as a qualification for everlasting life, could be accomplished without an observance of the sacrifices, purifications, and other ceremonies, prescribed in the Mosaic ritual. " Ex- " cept/' said they, " ye be circumcised after the man- " ner of Moses, ye cannot be saved^." Now, though a future state forms no part of the Mosaic covenant, yet it is undeniable, that the belief of -that doctrine was generally entertained among the Jews in our Saviour's time : and it has been justly observed by bishop Warburton, that the superstitious attachment of the Jewish converts to the whole observance of the Law originated in an erroneous persuasion, that that doctrine formed a part of the Mosaic dispensation^. Suppose, then, that the Mosaic Law

* Acts XV. 1 .

^ ** Permit me to observe further, that this rabbinical notion *' of a future state of rewards and pimishments in the Mosaic " dispensation, which still encourages the remnant of your nation

C had actually countenanced such an opinion ; suppose that it had conveyed a plain and declaratory promise of everlasting life : would not an apparent sanction have thus been given to the misconceptions of the Jewish convert ? And would not an increased aversion to the simplicity of the Christian doctrine have been an inevitable consequence flowing from the encouragement thus given to mistaken views ?

The prejudices of the Jews in favour of their ancient Law had the effect of alienating from the Gospel the great majority of that nation. Under the influence of these same prejudices, that small portion of them who embraced the new covenant, were led to disfigure its doctrine with ritual observances, possessing in themselves no intrinsic value, and of which the relative utility had ceased. In either case, these prejudices would have drawn encouragement from any explicit statement, in the Law of Moses, respecting the ultimate purpose of God as to the future condition of mankind. ^Vith the great body of the Jewish people, such a statement would V have operated as a considerable obstruction to the acknowledgment of the Messiah. In the minds of the Jewish converts, it woidd have favoured the entertainment of opinions, utterly re-

" to persist in rejecting the Gospel of Jesus, was the verj' prc^ii- " dice which, in the first ages of Christianity, so superstitiously " attached the converts from Judaism to the whole observance of " the Law." Divine Legation of Moses. Dedication to tlie JeAvs prefixed to the Fourth Book.

That this notion was really entertained by the Jews, may he seen from 2 Mace. vii. 36. where the Law of Moses is plainly de- •signated as " God's covenant of everlasting life."

pugnant to those terms on which alone (consistently with the knowledge afforded us of the divine will and attributes) we are taught to hope for a participation in the covenanted mercies of God. On the whole, its influence must have been at variance with the character, and inconsistent with the success, of the Christian scheme of redemption.