of God, it is also established that He, at the same time,
wrote it on the tables of Israel's heart. But that which is thus
implied in the matter itself, is confirmed by the testimony of history.
In the Law itself, circumcision is designated as the pledge and seal of
the bestowal, not merely of outward blessings, but of the circumcision
of the heart, of the removal of sin attaching to every one by birth; so
that man can love God with all his heart, all his sold, and all his
powers, Deut. xxx. 6. This circumcision of the heart which, in the
outward circumcision, was at the same time _required_ and promised by
God (comp. Deut. l. c. with x. 16), is not substantially different from
the writing of the Law on the heart. _Farther_--If the Law of the Lord
had, for Israel, been a mere outward letter, how could the animated
praise of it in the Holy Scriptures, _e.g._, in Ps. xix., be accounted
for? Surely, a bridge must already have been formed between the Law and
him who can speak of it as rejoicing the heart, as enlightening the
eyes, as converting the soul, as sweeter than honey and the honeycomb.
That is no more the Law in its isolation which worketh wrath, but it is
the Law in its connection with the Spirit, whose commandments are not
grievous; comp. my commentary on Ps. xix. 8 ff. A _new_ heart was
created under the Old Testament also, Ps. li. 12; and not to know the
nature of this creation was, for a teacher in Israel, the highest
disgrace, John iii. 10. Yea, that which is here promised for the
Future, a pious member of the Old Covenant expresses, in Ps. xl. 9, _in
the same form_, as being already granted to him as his present
spiritual condition: "I delight to do thy will, O my God, and thy Law
is in the midst of my bowels,"--words which imply the same contrast to
the Law as outward letter, as being written on tables of stone, comp.
Prov. iii. 1-3: "My son, [Pg 439] forget not my law, and let thine
heart keep my commandments ... bind them about thy neck, write them
upon the table of thine heart;" compare my commentary on Psalms, Vol.
iii. p. lxvii.--But how is it to be explained that the contrariety
which, in itself, is relative, appears here under the form of the
absolute contrariety,--the difference in degree, as a difference in
kind? Evidently in the same manner as the same phenomenon must be
explained elsewhere also, _e.g._ John i. 17, where it is said that the
Law was given by Moses, but mercy and truth by Christ. By o