Of the fathers the apostle himself affirms, that they were svayyskouevos gospelised, or that the gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us, Heb. iv. 2.

XXXIV. When it is written, Heb. ix. 8. "That the way unto the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing;" the apostle indeed intimates, that the manner of obtaining salvation was, in some measure hid, in comparison of the brighter lustre of the gos pel. For then, doubtless, the way to life was clouded with much pomp of ceremonies and figures; which being now. dispelled, we behold with open face, and ardently desire, heavenly and spiritual things. But from this it no ways follows, that those, under the Old Testament, had no knowledge of salva tion, any more that it can be concluded we know nothing of our glorious state, because John says, "it doth not yet appear what we shall be," John iii. 2. We may almost in the same manner, answer the other objections advanced by our adversaries. But it is no part of our design to examine each in particular.

XXXV. Now let us proceed to the second thing, which we undertook to prove; that in Christ, and in virtue of his suretiship, the fathers of the Old Testament also obtained salvation even as we. Which Peter declares almost in so many words, Acts xv. 11. " but we believe, that, through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved even as they." Where the pronoun they is to be referred to the fathers, on whose neck an insupportable yoke of ceremonies was put, as appears both from the grammatical consideration of the gender, and from the connection and the force of the apostle's argument. For, since xdxsor is masculine, and 7a va, the Gentiles, mentioned v. 7. is neuter, it is not so properly referred to the Gentiles, as to the fathers. And we are not here, without necessity, to have recourse to an enallage of gender. And then too, what method of commenting is it, to imagine so wide an hyperbaton, or transposition, and to bring from verse 7. a noun, to which, after the interposition, of so many other things, a pronoun shall at length answer in the 11th verse, and which yet does not answer; because, in the words immediately preceding, you may find a noun with which the pronoun in question may be very well joined? In fine, it will either be nonsense, or very inspid, if the words be so constructed. For, what manner of reasoning is it, if we suppose the apostle to have said, "The yoke of ceremonies ought not to be put on the necks of the Gentiles, because we Jews and apostles believe, that we shall be saved in the same

1

manner as they, by the alone grace of the Lord Jesus Christ ?" For besides this, it was improper to propose the Gentiles, to the Jews and apostles, as a pattern of salvation, because it appears, that the contrary should be done; and we could only conclude from that position, that the apostles and Jews were not bound to circumcision, and the other ceremonies any more than the Gentiles. But that was not the thing in dispute. But according to our interpretation, the apostle argues in the strongest manner: "You ought not to put the yoke of ceremonies on the necks of the disciples, who are converted from among the Gentiles, because the fathers themselves, who were under that yoke, really felt the uneasiness of it, but did not find salvation in it, and yet they were saved, not in consequence of these ceremonies, but by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. Neither are we, nor any of the human race, to take any other way to attain salvation. They there fore are under a mistake who tell the disciples, if you will be saved, you must be circumcised, and keep the law of Moses." To sum up the whole, then, in short, the apostle here declares three things. 1st. That the fathers were saved. 2dly. By the very same covenant that we are. Sdly. Through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ: intimating likewise by all this reasoning, that there can possibly be but one way of sal

vation.

XXXVI. This is likewise confirmed by that famous passage, Heb. xiii. 8. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." In the foregoing verse the apostle admonished them, to keep fresh in their memory "the word which their guides had spoken unto them, whose faith they should follow." Now, he gives this for the reason of that admonition, because "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever;" constantly preached by all the teachers of the truth, believed on by all, and to be believed on by those that come after, if they will imitate the faith of their predecessors. The same doctrine therefore is always to be retained, because Christ, who was always both proposed, and believed, as the author of salvation changeth not. But the particles, yesterday, to-day, and for ever, denote all the dif ferences of times. Nor does yesterday here signify something of a late date, as we usually say, yesterday or lately; but all the time past: as the phrase to-day, denotes the time of grace under the New Testament. For this is compared to some one present day, as chap. iii: 13. " while it is called today" and chap. iv. 7. again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, to-day; of which 2 Cor. vi. 2. behold,

now is the accepted time, behold, now is the day of salvation.” As therefore Christ is to-day, under the New Testament, ac knowledged the alone author of salvation, and will be acknowledged as such for ever; so in like manner, yesterday, under the Old Testament, which day is now past, he was the same, and as such was declared and acknowledged.

XXXVII. Let us also add what we have in Heb. ix. 15. "and for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament, that, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgres sions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Where we have an open declaration, that the death of Jesus Christ was effectual for the redemption of transgressions committed under the Old Testament. For thus the apostle proceeds. He supposes that the fathers of the Old Testament were saved notwithstanding their sins, which Socinus with his followers dare not deny. He says further, that the blood of bullocks, and of goats, and consequently of all sacrifices whatever, could not really, and before the tribunal of God, expiate sin, and purify the conscience. Yet, since as he declares, without shedding of blood, there can be no remission, verse 22. he concludes, it was necessary, that the death of Christ should indeed be undergone, in order not only to the establish ment of the New Testament, but by virtue of which the res demption of former sins might also be obtained. This is the genuine meaning of the sacred writer.

"His

XXXVIII. And indeed Grotius shamefully shuffles, when to favour the Socinians, he thus writes on this place; death intervened for this end, that men might be delivered from those sins which generally prevailed before Christ among those called God's people." Is it really so? Would thus the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament," denote such an action of Christ, whereby succeeding ages would abstain from the like sins as were formerly committed? God forbid we should ever pervert scripture thus. Redemption is an expiation of sin, upon paying a ransom. Christ paid this for all the sins of his Elect, at whatever time they lived. And upon the credit of that payment, to be made at the appointed time, believers, even under the Old Testament, obtained redemption.

XXXIX. Moreover, since it is evident, that Old Testament saints were saved, it must likewise be evident that they were saved through Christ. For our Saviour himself says, John xiv. 6. "no man cometh unto the Father but by me." And Peter, Acts iv. 12; "neither is there salvation in any other;

1

for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Nothing can be plainer than these words, which seem to be written as with a sunbeam. Yet the itch of contradiction has found something to say, but that something is less than nothing.

XL. Our adversaries except, that these passages should be understood of those who live under the New Testament, and therefore that both Christ and Peter speak in the present, and not in the past time, of us, and not of the Old Testament saints; of the times when Christ was exhibited, and not of the Old Testament times. We answer, 1st. As both texts are expressed in universal terms, they are not to be limited without cause and necessity, as there is none in this case. For if salvation could be obtained formerly without Christ, equally as now through Christ, what need had we of Christ's coming? Or, what so very great matter do we obtain in Christ? 2dly. There are very solid reasons why they neither ought nor can be thus restricted. Because they who were "without Christ, were strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world." Eph. ii. 12. Sdly. The quibbling about the verbs being of the present time is idle, because verbs of that time, or tense, may equally refer to all times. And whatever expression had been used, whether denoting the future, or past time, there might always be room left for such cavils. Besides, no reason can be assigned why the past time should be excluded any more than the future, if that verb of the present tense is thus to be racked. If this is not false reasoning against the Supreme Being, and a childish abuse of one's genius and parts, what can be called so?

XLI. That which in the third and last place, we promis ed to prove, namely, that there is no other means of communion with Christ but FAITH, appears from that very noted passage of Habakkuk, so often quoted by the apostle, but the just shall live by HIS FAITH, or the faith of HIM, namely, of the promised Messiah, Hab. ii. 4. From which Paul, at different times, proves our justification, who live un der the New Testament, through faith. And then Moses declares concerning Abraham, "and he believed in the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness," Gen. xv. 6.; which the apostle quotes for the same purpose, Rom. iv. 3. David likewise declares the man "blessed that putteth his trust in him" (the Son), Psal. ii. 12. And Isaiah counsels the sinner to take hold of the strength of the Lord, and thus make peace with him, Isa. xxvii. 5. But what is it to take

VOL. I.

2

hold of the fortress of the Lord, but to believe in the Lord? And finally, Paul by a long enumeration of examples, which he took from the Old Testament fathers, attempts to prove this general truth, Heb. xi. 6. “ without faith it is impossible to please God."

XLII. Our adversaries object, that the passages abovementioned treat only of a general faith in God, and not of a special faith in Christ. We deny not that as Christ was then more obscurely revealed, so believers had likewise a less distinct knowledge of him; yet we boldly affirm, that they had some knowledge, and sufficient for their time, upon the authority of our Lord, who says, " Abraham saw my day and rejoiced," John viii. 56. and of Paul, who testifies concerning Moses, Heb. xi. 26. " that he esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt;" and concerning the other fathers, ver. 13. " that they saw the promises afar of, and embraced them," and lastly of Peter, who tells us, 1 Pet. i. 11. that the prophets " searched what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified before hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." Since then, these things were said of the heroes of that time, it will not be hard to determine, what we are to judge concerning other believers according to their rank and station. And the patriarchs and prophets had not acted the part of honest men, if they had enviously concealed from other believers such an excellent talent, which was committed to their trust.

XLIII. The apostle writes nothing in opposition to this truth when he says, Gal. iii. 23. "but before faith came, we were kept under the law." For it is far from the apostle's intention to deny, that faith in Christ prevailed before his coming in the flesh, because, in the same chapter, he had highly commended the faith of Abraham, and proposed it as a pattern to us all, ver. 6, 7, 9. But by faith we here understand either the object of faith, the doctrine of the gospel, as chap. i. 23. and the Lord Jesus himself, believed on in the world, 1 Tim. iii. 16. or, the faith of the redemption already actually wrought out, as contradistinguished from the hope of the Old Testament saints, who with earnest longing, as it were, expected the coming of the Lord, "waiting for the consolation of Israel," Luke ii. 25. And thus we have now shewn, that the Old Testament saints had the same promises of eternal life with us, to be obtained by the same Christ and the same faith in him, and consequently also had the same covenant of grace with us.

!