the Priest who offered, and the Victim that was offered, for the sins of men.

I have thus endeavoured to give an account, first, of the ceremonial of these piacular or expiatory sacrifices, secondly, of their immediate or primary import, lastly, of their figurative or spiritual ".

z With regard to what I have said in the former part of this inquiry, should any one ask, Is there any difference between the sin and trespass offerings of the Law, (the Hebrew name of the one is no, that of the other is D,) that distinctive and peculiar appellations should be given to them? I answer, that so far as the great purpose of expiation is concerned, I have not been able to discover any difference: both are alike represented as procuring for the person offering them a reprieve from that temporal punishment to which the Law had sentenced him. However, in the ceremonial of these sacrifices, an attentive reader may perceive something like a difference. It is this: in the case of a sin offering, more especially one, where the blood had been carried within the veil of the tabernacle, no part of the flesh of the animal slain was permitted by the Law to be eaten by the priest; as it is written, (Lev. vi. 30,) "And no sin "offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the "tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the "holy place, shall be eaten it shall be burnt in the fire." On the contrary, with regard to such sin offerings as were not of this solemn description, and with regard to every trespass offering, we find this provision enacted, that all the males among the priests should eat thereof: it is most holy. Whence we may perhaps venture to conclude, that to sin offerings, properly so called, such, i. e. as were required to be offered upon the more solemn occasions of the Levitical calendar, there was attached an idea of greater imputed guilt than was conceived to belong, even after its consecration, to the trespass offering; as though in such sin offerings more

Let us then rely upon the efficacy of the blood of Christ, which we have seen to be denoted by them in this last respect, as our chief pillar of strength, our sure ground of hope, against the recollection or the imputation of our past sins. Nor let the scoff of the infidel, or the cavils of such as would be wise beyond what is written, shake our belief in this fundamental article of the Christian creed, which teaches us that the blood of Christ is every thing to us; that it justifies; that it renews and cleanses; that it redeems and saves us. It justifies, because, according to a mode of divine operation mysterious to us, the guilt of our offences having been transferred upon Him, He is therefore represented as our righteousness, and we are said to be the righteousness of God in Him. It renews or cleanses, because without the propitiatory virtue of that blood, no power from on high, which it is, strictly speaking, that sanctifies, will descend to help our infirmities. And, lastly, it redeems or saves, because even whatever final happiness is represented in the scriptures

especially, was supposed to be included all the amount of transferred guilt, which characterised the trespass offering, and something more; TOσOTOV Kaì et, of imputed sinfulness. With regard to the sin offering, which was not of that solemn character, and to the general description of the trespass offering mentioned in the books of Moses, I must confess that I have not been able to find any difference between them.

as awaiting the sanctified Christian in his Redeemer's kingdom beyond the grave, is in like manner said to have been purchased for him by the blood of Christ.

Mysterious and salutary dispensation of the divine wisdom, goodness, justice, and power, which in thus ordaining that Christ should die as a sin offering for the sins of the world, has provided that such an amount of benefit should flow to the whole human race! that by the sacrifice of that death, the evil effects of our great ancestors' disobedience to the will of God should be more than counteracted, and that the blood thus shed should itself operate in the manner we have mentioned, to procure these inestimable blessings. O the goodness and the mercy of God! may we exclaim in language not unlike that which is used by the Apostle on a similar occasion: how unsearchable is that goodness, and the utmost depths of it past finding out!

DISCOURSE THE FOURTH.

Of the sacrificial institutions of the Jewish Law;—of the sacrifices intended to evidence the piety of the Hebrew worshipper.

IN the former Discourse I observed that, besides the sin and trespass offerings of the Law, frequent mention occurs of others, which are described under the names of burnt offerings and peace offerings, and meat and drink offerings, and freewill offerings. Now as we are taught to believe that all the sacrifices mentioned in the Old Testament, and not merely the sin and trespass offerings of the Law, were of a typical import, i. e. intended to prefigure something under the Christian dispensation, that is of a corresponding nature, I shall proceed to investigate the Gospel import of these other sacrificial institutions. Before, however, I go on with this part of our subject, it may be found expedient to prefix a few observations respecting the immediate purpose and design of these ceremonies; in doing which it is not my intention to weary the attention of the reader by entering into any minute examination of the differences subsisting between them, but simply to con