Here is an excerpt:
That covenant was declared to Noah; it was still further opened to Abraham and Isaac; it was confirmed to David; Isaiah rejoiced in its sure mercies; Jeremiah was privileged to relate many of its special provisions; and Paul avers in his epistle to the Hebrews that this is the covenant, under the provisions of which the precious blood of Christ was shed: it is the blood of the new covenant. The priesthood of Christ is declared to be after the order of Melchizedec; it was, therefore, revealed in the days of Abraham. The word of the oath by which he was consecrated is communicated to us in the 110th Psalm; and so it was well known to David. In like manner, the gift of the Holy Spirit, though not bestowed till after the ascension of Christ, was explained by the apostle Peter, on the day of Pentecost, to be a fulfillment of prophecy that was spoken before the incarnation. The dispensational succession of events does not affect the covenant. If it did, then Abraham could have no more interest in the Jewish than in the Christian economy, Canaan not having come into possession of his posterity till centuries after the patriarch’s sojourn on earth had terminated. Had none of those believers any interest in the death of Christ, they must have died in their sins; but if they were interested in his death, why not in all the blessings that ensued? Is it pretended that though their welfare was deeply involved in the fact that “Jesus should die for that nation, and not for that nation only,” they are wittingly excluded from participating in the immediate consequence—”that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad”? According to the terms of the everlasting covenant, and not according to the law, nor yet according to the tenor of any transient dispensations, the Old Testament saints were justified by faith and accepted of God.
Read the whole article via There Be Some That Trouble You.-The Spurgeon Archive