HOVAH, but an angel who personated him, who affumed his name, and fpake thefe words. There is indeed a text, Pfal. civ. 4. where the Pfalmift is defcribing the majesty of God, which might very literally be tranflated, "Who maketh the "winds his meffengers, and flaming fire "his fervants." But I do not find that any have applied this text to the present purpose. It must be observed, that the Apostle to the Hebrews, (who, I believe, was the fame Paul who wrote this,) in defcribing this awful scene, Heb. xii. 18. 19. fpeaks indeed exactly as Mofes had done before him; but not one word of angels. These he fets before us in another fort of company, verf. 22. And after all that has been faid, or, I believe, can be faid, on this view, we must leave the words just as we found them. The difficulties that arife about the Mediator, and giving the law in his hand, are almost, if not altogether, as infurmountable. Some, confidering that Jesus Chrift is the fole mediator between God and man on the Christian plan, or dispenfation of grace; and that he is the only one one in whofe hands a matter of fuch moment could be trufted, have concluded, that he must be the mediator the Apostle means. But he was the mediator of another and more excellent difpenfation, differing very widely from the legal one; and befides, even in that held another and more honourable station, as it may eafily be proved, that it was he who appeared in all the glory described by Mofes, and fpoke all the words of that law. There is only one place, Heb. ii. 2. where angels are faid to have spoken on that occafion. But the Apostle himself gives, good ground to think, that angels there fhould be translated messengers; for he makes no mention of them, chap. i. where he recounts the different ways in which God had spoken unto the fathers. On these, and fuch confiderations, the greatest number fix upon Mofes as the mediator: and he certainly bore that character in giving the law. He stood between God and the people; he received the law immediately from God, and delivered it to the people: but this was only an after part, which no angels had any concern in; and in the folemn part, God himfelf fpoke, and Mofes had no more concern in it than VOL. III. H h any any of the other Ifraelites prefent on that occafion. But, after all, the word which our translators not improperly render ordained, directs us rather to the nature of that law, as it was framed by the all-wise author of it, than to the manner in which it was given. And in this view, the particle dia, which we render by, is of a very extenfive fignification, and may be applied to any perfon or thing which has any concern in the fact one is fpeaking upon. We are certainly informed, that the miniftry of angels was much used under that difpenfation, and fuch a refpect had to them, and veneration paid them, that the Apostle found it neceffary to caution the Coloffians against it, Col. ii. 18. The Apostle likewife is at great pains to show how much they were inferior to Chrift, Heb. i. 6.; and in particular he obferves, Heb. ii. 5. that the fubjects of Chrift's kingdom, commonly called the world, or rather the age to come, was not put in fubjection to angels; which more than implies, that the then age, or the Jewish conftitution, was fubjected to them. As to what is faid of a mediator; by the μεσιτης the very frame of that law, as it was ordained and appointed of God, the high prieft was conftituted a mediator in the most proper fenfe of that word: μs is one who ftands between two parties, and by whom, whatever correfpondence they have, is managed. Such was the place and office of the high prieft; for the inferior ones were but his affiftants, in many cafes only his ministers; but in the most folemn part of his office, when he went into the holy of holies, made the atonement, and came out and bleffed the people, he was quite alone. His office was effential in that conftitution, and in his hand the law was without a figure ordered and lodged; as fully appears from the whole Old-Teftament hiftory, and is further confirmed in the New, particularly in the epiftle to the Hebrews. The Apostle's conclufion from this, verf. 20. is felf-evident, viz. that a mediator is not of one; as it is plain, where there is a middle perfon, there must be at least two; and if we carry along with us, what the Apostle had fully proved, that God himfelf made the promise to Abraham and his feed, we need not be at a lofs, either Hh 2 about about the meaning of what he adds, that God is one, or the ftrength of his reafoning; as this fingle circumftance proves an effential difference between the promife, and the law of Mofes, that they could never be defigned to anfwer one and the fame purpose, of conveying either the right to, or the poffeffion of, life. That this was the import of the Apoftle's reafoning, appears from the queftion he forefaw might be put upon it, and therefore puts it himself, in order to clear what he had faid, and introduce what he had further to fay on that fubject, verf. 21. Is the law then against the promife? which no body would ever have thought of, if occafion had not been given, by ftating the difference there was in their very nature, and, what we may call, their effential conftitution and adminiftration. This he rejects with an earnestness that fuch a fuppofition, fo injurious to the perfectly wife author of both, deserved; God forbid; and fhows, with great evidence, that though the law and the promife were fo very different, they were by no means contrary to one another, being appointed and defigned to an fwer |