X. The law of Sacrifice.

(X v4)
The 1st chapter of Leviticus, from the beginning. I think that in the remarks on the law of Moses; which are to employ us to day, it is better to enter upon Leviticus, as the book which contains more specifically the details of the lawof sacrifice, which is the very foundation of the Mosaic economy. We shall first consider the doctrine of atonement here, & then follow it up to its antitype, the death of Christ. Now this is a real form of sacrifice, and a simple form. It is not for a confirmation of testimony nor announcement, not instruction

(X r5)
to be communicated, The priest takes the sacrifice in silence,  in the open court before the tabernacle. where the altar for sacrifice was placed. he slays it and sprinkles the blood round about upon the altar, Now ther is nothing here, that would lead us to infer any thing mroe, than a simple form of sacrifice. But. in the 4 verse, we are informed, that the man laid his hand on the head of the burntoffering and it was accepted for him to make atonement for him. Now, nothing can be more clear, than that we have here a sinner laying his hand on the head of the sacrifice, in order to communicate the load of his sins and his wickedness to the animal  The victim was then substituted for him, it bore his punishment, and was accepted for him to make atonement for him. Can anything be clearer, than that this was merely a scene of sacrifice and of atonement. 
But we have also another intimation. The sacrifice must be appropriate. Every victim or any victim that the man might choose to give, would not suffice. It must be pure, chosen out of the flock, a male without blemish, or it will not be accepted. And the last intimation is, that the sacrifice must be offered, of the mans own voluntary will. There was no legal authority. that could compel the man to bring the sacrifice, he was only in case that he withhold it debarred from certain religious privileges, which were withheld by God from him who sacrificed not, but he was compelled to sacrifice no further then by being threatened with Gods high displeasure, if he refused. It is through these three points that I wish to follow up the shadow of sacrifice to its substance, Christ. 
For. the law was raised up, in order to throw forward a shadow to another economy. which other economy, was, we see shadowed forth by sacrifice. & this is explained in the beginning of the 10th chapter,  of Hebrews, where it is said that the law, having a shadow of good things to come and not the very image of those things, can never with sacrifices, make the comers thereunto perfect, & it goes on to say that the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sin

(X v5)
Now, if it is impossible, that blood can take away sin, can we suppose, that these momentous ordinances, were only for show, for ceremony. Can God institute any thing of no moral worth certainly not. Then as the law threw forward a shadown to another economy these sacrifices must be to intimate that sacrifice is necessary in the other economy and sacrifice, which shall be capable of taking away all sin. Now if in the Gospel this sacrifice of anim[als(?)] is done away with, and yet we know that we must have sacrifice of some sort, we are shut up to the death of Christ as the very essence of atonement  The law sacrifices derived their value only because they referred to the gospal. and if this be correct, the view. which we have taken of them, must be referred to Christ. 
In the first place, Christ has some times been erroneously held up, as a mere martyr to truth, and it has been affirmed, that he died only to confirm the truth of his testimonies. and not to take away our sin. But he confirmed the truth of his testimony by miracles, not by his death, he died as a sacrifice, for his death alone could not have confirmed his truth  Pagans have died for their religion yet that does not prove the truth of Paganism. Mahametans have died for their religion yet that does not prove the truth of Mohamedanism. Atheists have died for their no religion, yet that does not prove there is no God. Their death proves only their attachment to their system, not the truth of that system. The word of God in no place brings forward the death of Stephan as an evidence of the truth of Christianity. The death of Christ must then be regarded, not as a confirmation of his testimony, but as a sacrifice for the ungodly.
Again, as the law is a shadow of good things to come, and as a sacrifice is the foundation of the law we have a striking proof of the efficacy of the atonement of Christ. Now, the victim to be presented in the old law, was to be appropriate, and we find that 

(X r6)
the Savior was thus fitting for the atonement he had to make. He had to take upon himself the burden of the world, and he was able to do so, he had to take away moral guilt, which no creature could do, and a creature victim would therefore have been rejected; he was able to do this also. We should rememberthat when we wish to offer to the Almighty a sacrifice for our sins, we have to consider. of what value the victim will appear in his eyes. Now could any creature have value in the sight of the Almighty. Are not the highest of them the mere result of his fiat, from the least even unto the greatest of them they require the same effort of power to create them; the crawling reptile, and the most exalted archangel, are equally valueless as a sacrifice in the sight of God, because he could speak a world of such beings into existence in a moment. All things are valued by their scarcity & there is no value whatever attached to that which is in rich abundance. Gold is valued because it is scarce, but the rock in which it is found is not valued, because it is plentiful. As God therefore can call every creature into existence with equal facility no creature can be of value in his eyes. and we are compelled to seek a sacrifice beyond creatures, which sacrifice must be Christ. And his death could not be held up, unless he were the son of God  He must be God, or he could not meet the character of the dispensation  There is likewise another characteristic. the man must do it of his own free will, and this finally gives us the whole character of the new testament dispensation. for the sacrifice of Christ is not one to which authority can press us, nor with which we can be compelled to connect ourselves. We must have our mind enlightened by the demonstrations of the spirit and the power of God. There must be enlightening, before we can lay hold on the sacrifice of Christ. Now the next question which must necessarily occur to us, is, have we done this, and have we done it of our own free will  For it will not suffice if we have only been induced to 

(X v6)
confess Christ by the influence of our relations, Influence, or custom are not our own free will. And unless we are found voluntarily resting on the new testament atonement, we are as guilty as Nadab and Abihu, we offer strange fire before the Lord and we must take heed, lest their punishment should also light upon us. we are as much guilty of [us(?)]ery of the Lord, as that man would have been, who should have brought the victim to Moses, not of his own free will. Now, is not this a solemn thing, to lay our hand on the sacrifice of Christ which if we do of our own free will, we shall be found in the presence of God accepting the offering which he has valued because it was not that of a creaturehe invites us to draw near and rest on, this atonement, the substance of the [shad(?)]ow of the Mosaic dispensation, which if we do we shall be washed from all our sins and made white in the blood, of the Lamb.