Let us return to the epiftle to the Hebrews In one place we are told, that " the good tidings of falvation (i. e. eternal life) began "FIRST to be fpoken by Jefus Chrift."

In another it is declared "that the way " into the holieft of all (i. e. Heaven) was "not yet made manifeft, while as the first ta

«born, or admitted into God's temporal kingdom. If "therefore they were admitted into the Spiritual king"dom; they must be born again: Whereas feeing the ido"latrous Gentiles never were the people of God before, "their admiffion into the Chriftian church could only be "called a being born; but could with no propriety be "called a Being born again." Dr. Benfin on Titus iii. 5.

Here we must recollect, that St. Paul often fpeaks of the work of redemption by Chrift as a new creation. Now as it must have been at least as much a new creation to the Gentiles as to the Jews, why might not the first be faid to be born again, as well as the laft?

The learned perfon feems to fancy, that the regeneration of the Jews could only be oppofed to their previous ftate of adoption under the Law. But why might it not be opposed to their natural birth? This must have been the cafe, as the regenerated ftate was ftyled a new creation in oppofition to the old one, or the natural production of things.

"That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that "which is born of the fpirit, is fpirit." John iii. 6.

66

Being born again, not of corruptible feed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." 1 Peter i. 23.

Two texts which feem entirely to overthrow the learned perfon's obfervation, concerning the new birth, or the being born again, as if the fpiritual kingdom of Chrift was opposed to the temporal kingdom of God; whereas it is the fpiritual birth which is opposed to the natural.

Heb. ii. 3.

"bernacle

"bernacle was yet standing ." The infpired writer would not' have faid, the way to Heaven was not yet made manifeft, if the Jews had been taught to expect eternal life by the Redeemer of the world, or had been inftructed in the means of falvation revealed in the Gospel.

He fays also, that "the Law had a sha"dow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things "." To justify this representation, we must suppose the spiritual bleffings, of which the Law is typical and figurative, were delineated fo obfcurely under these types and figures, as not to have been obvious to thofe to whom it was given. For had they seen that these spiritual promises were virtually contained under the temporal ones, not the shadow, but the very image and picture of the good things to come, would have been offered by the Law.

Confequently the Author of this epiftle did not believe, with the learned Prelate, that "the Law afforded a good proof of a future "life." For a Shadow, to which he confines the Jews, is a good proof of nothing, but of a Substance kept out of fight, and of

a Heb. ix. 4.

E

• Heb. x. I.

which

which they could know only this, that it was fomething.

"The Law (fays this Writer) made no"thing perfect, but the bringing in of a bet"ter hope did." The tranflation seems not to come up to the full force of the original, which does not barely say that a better hope was brought in, but that it was brought in AFTERWARDS, or after the age of the Law. How then, I afk, could the better hope, or the hope of a future ftate, be faid to be brought in after the Law, if it had subfifted all along together with the Law, and had been fufficiently revealed to the Jewish Church?

Dr. Stebbing contends, that the author of the epiftle by a better hope, "does not mean barely the hope of eternal life, but the "whole evangelical difpenfation." This is pleasant: let us give him all he asks, and fee what he will gain. If this better hope takes in the whole evangelical difpenfation, then of courfe it includes a future ftate,

• Heb. vii. 19.

* Illud e in execaywyn (introductio) significat posterius aliquid, ut in Exidialibela (Superordinat) Gal. iii. 15. et eft locutio fatis frequens, poft-introductio fpei melioris pro fpes melior poft introducta. Grotius in loc. Examination, p. 79.

which was an eminent part of the fame difpenfation. A future ftate, therefore, will still be one of those points which the author of the epistle supposes to be brought in AFTER the Law. But the Dr. vainly bufies himself in proving that this better hope does not mean a future ftate ONLY, when the fupport of his principles required him to prove that it did not mean a future ftate AT ALL.

However, he has proved, even against his defign as well as purpofe, that this better hope means ONLY the particular doctrine in queftion. For the facred Writer is fpeaking of fomething which was wanting to perfect and compleat the Law; and the Dr. asfures us, that this was nothing but the promife of life and immortality. "If the pro"mise of eternal life had been by the Law, "there would have been no need (fays he) of any "other covenant w."

W

"He (Chrift, fays the facred Writer) " also himself likewife took part of the same, "that through death he might destroy him. "bat had the power of death, that is, the "Devil; And deliver them who through fear

of death were all their life time subject to bondage *."

w Ibid. p. 81.

* Heb. ii. 14, 15.

E 2

From

From hence it appears, 1. that the Devil, before the coming of our Saviour, had the power of death. 2. That by the exercise of this power he kept the Jews all their life time fubject to bondage. Now if they had the faving knowledge of a Redeemer to come, they would have been no more fubject to bondage through fear of death, than we Christians are with the knowledge of a Redeemer past. For the profpect of life and immortality would have as effectually difpelled that fear then, as it has done fince.

St. Paul obferves, that Death REIGNED under the Lawy. Hence the author of the D. L. infers, that the doctrine of redemption and a future ftate was not revealed at this time. The inference feems to be juft, tho' Dr. Stebbing has ventured to dispute it.

Death is reprefented in fcripture in two very different states and conditions, before and fince the coming of our Saviour. In the former period he is defcribed as in his kingdom, exulting and triumphant, as reigning and tyrannizing in all the plenitude of power. In the fecond period he is reprefented as ftript and divefted of his terrors; as fubdued, and

Romans v. 12, &c.

D. L. vol. ii. p. 472, 3. depofed