« السابقةمتابعة »
hypotheses advocated also, respecting the Sinai covenant, the dispensation by Moses generally, and the constitution and character of the community of Israel. Some very respectable and learned divines among the Pedobaptists have adopted the idea, that this community was of a mixed character, and have called it a Theocracy. Among the many advocates of this opinion are Lowman, Doddridge, Warburton, Guise, and the late John Erskine. These Divines supposed, that the legation of Moses could be best defended against the cavils of unbelievers, by placing God at the head of the community of Israel, as a civil governor, surrounding himself with the regalia, and managing his subjects with the penalties and largesses, of a temporal sovereign.
The Antipadobaptists have found this hypothesis so convenient a refuge from the attacks of their opposers, as to incorporate it, with great affection, and as a radical principle, into their system of reasoning. They have gone farther, and entirely accommodated the hypothesis to their peculiar notions. They insist, that this community was not, either in fact, or in the original plan of the institution, spiritual, and religious; but civil and carnal; and that, of course, the christian church is specifically different, and an entirely new society.
It is the opinion of the Author of the following Treatise, that this hypothesis has been adopted unwarily; and not only without, but against evidence...
In view of this diversity of sentiment, and the obscurity which seems yet to lie over these subjects, it was his opinion, that a distinct and accurate view, if one could be given, of the Hebrew economy, as established by Jehovah, from its rise in the call of Abraham, and the covenant entered into with him, to its consummation in the Christian Church; deduced, not from the fallible theories of men, but from the Bible itself, was a great desideratum in the science of theology. Such a view he has attempted to furnish. Of his success the public must judge. Though he cannot but entertain the hope that he has succeeded, as to the main principles, he would be adventurous indeed to avow a confidence, that his work is with
out error: Circumstantial errors however, whether they re`spect the matter or the manner, the reader is requested to remember, will not invalidate the truth of the leading principles. If these principles can be shewn to be wrong, the writer will be constrained to confess he has altogether failed of his object.
Refpecting the different meanings of the term Covenant, as it is used in the Scrip-
Containing feveral interesting deductions and addresses.
The reader is referred to the Poftcript for several explanations
On a review of this work, feveral typographical errors are difcovered. The greater number are to be found in the forepart of the book. Here alfo the punctuation is most incorrect. So far as the accuracy of the Author feems to be implicated, he has an apology in an indifpofition, of which he was subject while this part of the book was paffing through the prefs.
The errors which the reader is requested to correct are these. In page 21 For Pfalms, in three inftances, read Pfalm.
Sixth line from bottom, for convenant read covenant.
95 Eleventh from bottom, for pachal read pafchal.
150 The top line of first note, for tautologus rend tautologous,
and in the fecond line below, for interpratations read interpretations. 160 Sixth line from bottom, for days read days.
173 Sixteenth from bottom, for fucceffive read fucceffive.
175 In two inftances, for Ifreal read Ifrael.
Here are two omiffions near the bottom, his, and ed, which the reader will supply.