Therefore it is said, The soul that sinneth shall die; and which the victim that was slain on the great day of atonement fully proved. But if otherwise, had Christ's life of obedience, as living under the law, satisfied justice, such a sentiment would prove to a demonstration, that if he died, he must have died in vain; because why endure the penalty of death to obtain a reconciliation for sin, which he could otherwise have obtained by the obedience of a holy life? It is then obvious that such an obedience would altogether have superseded the necessity of his death. But the apostle has fully determined this point, when he saith, But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.

In distinguishing the life of Christ under the law from that of a resurrection life of justification, we observe in reference to the former, that the perfection of that life only qualified him to become a legal sin offering, that is, the antitype of an unblemished lamb, and which was ordained to represent a perfect, or an unblemished character; the nature and extent of which perfection is most strikingly illustrated by our Lord himself; who when using another figure which is expressive of the same thing, saith, Except a grain of wheat die, it abideth alone; therefore however perfect it may be as seed, (and perfect it must be to germinate) except it die it abideth alone. The perfect obedience of any individual, however dignified, is only equal to a perfect law; and is alone profitable to justify the individual, who as an unblemished character obeys it. Except then Christ had died, he might have remained an unblemished lamb, or a perfect grain of wheat for ever; and nothing beyond his own personal justification would have resulted from it; as such he would have been personally perfect; but personally alone, like the grain of wheat in that perfection; and from which there would have arisen no overplus of merit or work of supererogation; but when our Lord, who individually considered as being perfect, ought to have lived by the law, dies under it, then it is, that as the sinners substitute dying the just for the unjust, he obtains redemption from the curse of sin, and through death,

I

like the perfect grain of wheat that dies to germinate, brings forth much fruit in the resurrection. Therefore the apostle saith, He was delivered for our offences, (that is unto death) and raised again for our justification; and further to show that the scriptures always begin with the death of Christ, as the first cause of atoning merit. He saith again, In that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God: likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ. He does not say that believers were to reckon themselves justified or alive, because he lived a perfect life of obedience to the law as some have taught by the active as well as the passive obedience of Christ; but exhorts them to date their death unto sin in his death, and their life of justification, in his resurrection from the dead. But a question may be proposed; Had not the congregation a union with him as that perfect or unblemished character, as being the subject of a law righteousness previous to that of his death; and as their representative did not a union of persons give a communion of property in his justification as an unblemished lamb? We reply, most certainly a union of persons gives a communion of property where property is possessed; but that property must first be obtained before it can be imparted. obedience of Christ under the law was only sufficient to justify himself as a righteous man; but this was not the point, he had to do that which would justify the ungodly; and this could not be obtained without an atonement, and no remission of sin, either in part or as a whole, could be obtained without shedding of blood, therefore however perfect in a law of righteousness, like the perfect grain of wheat, except Christ had died he would have remained alone. If then we look at the life of Christ for justification, we must look at that life which succeeded his death, and not that which preceded it, hence the apostle saith, If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his son, much more being recnociled, we shall be saved by his life.

The

In adverting again to the subject of distinguishing the

life of Christ under the law from that of a resurrection life, I would observe that the revealed mystery of God, in reference to salvation, is to divide between the nature of the first Adam in the person of Christ, as being made flesh, and that of being a quickening spirit by his resurrection from the dead; in these his character stands distinct, in which is divided two distinct ministrations or covenants, the first of which being a ministration of death, for that nature which was under it, it necessarily follows that if Christ died, as being the sinners' substitute, he must die under it also, and which was shadowed out under the law, by slaying the sin offering at the door of the tabernacle, Lev. i. 3, but not inside that building. If we would rightly distinguish, we must divide were God has divided, otherwise we confound life and death, but in the economy of redemption we find the most perfect order. Hence each dispensation had its distinct order of priesthood and law; the one a ministration of death, the other a ministration of life; therefore as these are often confounded by bringing the priesthood of Christ under the law, or that of being such prior to his death, we shall proceed to show that his Melchisedec chararacter, or order of priesthood, only originated, and was established by his resurrection from the dead; and for which I shall offer the four following reasons.

First then I presume, he could not be a priest before he was called to officiate in that capacity. We observe the same in reference to his type Aaron, Heb. v. 5. and further to show that he was not called before he was qualified, and that he was not qualified before he arose from the dead; we notice the precise order of the apostle on this point, in his quotation of prophecy. First then to show that his resurrection precedes his priesthood, he cites this antecedent testimony from the 2nd Psalm, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, see Acts, xiii. 31, 32. And then having established his resurrectiou, he cites and annexes another prophecy to prove his calling, from the 110th Psalm, and which declares the great commission, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Secondly we notice, that if Christ had officiated under the

law, as belonging to another tribe, (for our Lord sprang out of Judah) when that law restricted the priesthood to the tribe of Levi, he would in that case have been a law breaker, by which act he would have destroyed the perfection of his character, as represented by an unblemished lamb; but to show that he was not a priest under the law, he saith, I came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfil; but if otherwise such an unlawful intrusion would have been deemed an act of high criminality, a rebellious usurpation of divine authority; and for which act Uzzial King of Judah, (2nd Chron. xviii. 20.) lost his sovereign authority through leprosy, by which as an unclean person he was separated from the congregation for ever.

Thirdly, he could not be a priest under the law, because of the intervention of death; because such a circumstance would have nullified the testimony of the Melchisedec order of priesthood, which declared it to be after the power of an endless life. Therefore it would admit of no interruption for the purpose and period for which it was instituted, to deteriorate the perfection of its reign. And again he saith, Of whom it is witnessed that he liveth, Hence as a type we have no record of Melchisedec's death, therefore his exclusive order and reign admitted of no priestly geneology; because it neither needed a predecessor nor successor, through the infirmity of death.

Fourthly, he could not be a priest under the law, because when installed into that office it was established through the ministration of an oath; but the priests under the law were made such without au oath, therefore this oath might be termed a resurrection oath; and at the feast of fat things it stands prominent as the fruit of life. Observe then the order of the oath in types, as that which immediately succeeded death, and which brings us to the immutable confirmation of the covenant of life. We find then, that it was after Noah had offered up every clean beast that the Lord smelled a sweet savour and said in his heart, and which Isaiah terms an oath, chap. liv. 9, that he would no more curse the ground for man's sake. The same also to Abraham, it was after he had offered up his son Isaac, that the

Lord said, By myself have I sworn, because thou hast done this thing, and in multiplying, I will multiply thy seed, &c. And again in reference to David's antitype, Psalm, lxxxix., Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David, his seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me, and again, And I will give you the sure mercies of David. And this citation from the 55th chap. of Isaiah is applied by the apostle in Acts xiii. 33, 34, to the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ; therefore the oath which establishes immutability and seals eternal mercies to all the faithful seed, is that which resulted from the voluntary sacrifice of Christ, and constitutes the fruit of resurrection life, to which alone it stands connected.

We finally notice on the subject of the priestly character of Christ; that the terms for ever, and an endless life, and an unchangeable priesthood, are official terms; and as such, are limited to the period of perfecting a dispensation, and in no respect applicable to that of an eternal personal existence, for if as some suppose, they now apply to a termination of a dispensation still prospective, this principle of exposition is equally as necessary to explain them; therefore their official limitation, though said to be unchangeable, and after the power of an endless life, is founded upon the unique character of its order, because there neither was, or needed to be, a predecessor or successor, inasmuch as this order of priesthood both in person and service, was perfect in its nature, the termination of which is strikingly illustrated by the figure of eternal redemption obtained under the Mosaic law, as in type, so in antitype, on the great day of atonement when that service ended by the return of the high priest from within the veil, the congregation was then legally perfected as pertaining to the flesh, it needed not to be repeated the following day; nor would it have been repeated annually, or evermore; but to shew, that it did not reach the conscience in reference to the sin of Adam's nature.