Robert Harris was a member of the Westminster Assembly. A brief biography of his life can be read here.
This extract is taken from the following work:
Robert Harris, The Workes of Robert Harris, (London: J. Bartlet, 1635) 580.
As usual, I have slightly modified some of the spelling to fit modern conventions in the interests of readability. Note especially his insistence that "the covenant with the Patriarkes and the people of Israel" is a covenant of grace. The latter is clearly a reference to Israel as a nation in the time of the Exodus, in distinction from Israel under the Abrahamic covenant. Harris is clearly giving his assent to the majority consensus position that the Sinaitic covenant was a covenant of grace, not a covenant of works.
Thus in the general you may see the goodness of God in this covenant: which will yet further appear, if we look a little to particulars, and compare it with such covenants as God made of old. And first, with that covenant that was made with Adam in the state of innocency: it was a favor to that first man that God would take him into fellowship and communion with himself, and become his debtor, but this was a covenant of works, not of grace; it was, win it and wear it, etc. Again, that was a covenant of amity, not of reconciliation, for there was no breach made before, as now there is between us and our God. 3. That first covenant Adam was to make good of himself, and by his own power, he was to stand upon his own bottom, and to trust his own strength, but here God undertakes to enable us to walk in his statutes, etc. 4. In that covenant, God took the very first forfeiture, upon the first breach Adam died for it, and then the covenant was at an end; but it is not so here: for though we break often with him, yet he taken not the advantage against us, as he might, but repairs our breaches, and confirms us in the covenant, so that we are, you see, upon better terms with God, than Adam was. Come on in the next place to God’s Covenant with the Patriarkes and people of Israel; that was a covenant of grace too, as well as this with us, and the very same in substance with ours, but yet we have very great advantages that they wanted. For, first they looked upon things as they were to be done hereafter: Christ the Savior of the world was promised indeed, but not yet exhibited, but now we look upon all as done, dispatched, and finished. It is not now (as Austin [Augustine] says) Christ shall be born, Christ shall die, Christ shall rise again, etc. but it is already done. Next, their seals were more painful and chargeable than ours are, which in comparison of theirs, are cheap and easy. Circumcision was a painful Sacrament: the Passover, and other sacrifices were costly, and chargeable, besides the trouble of them too, for they were tied to take long journeys at certain times of the year up to Jerusalem. Lastly, our writing is far more clear, and more fairly written than theirs was; their was done more darkly, ours is apparent and conspicuous. They had a mediator, Moses, Christ is a Mediator of a better testament, and in a more heavenly manner: they had the blood of Christ too, but shadowed only in the blood of bulls and goats, etc. but we have the very blood of Christ itself, to seal up unto us this covenant of grace. |