Fourthly. Covenanting should be engaged in with sincerity, and with a resolution to perform the engagement made. Dreadful are the denunciations uttered against such as swear falsely. The Lord swears in truth: he will not turn from it. And how daring on the part of any is it to swear falsely in making a covenant! In an oath given falsely, God is defied, his power to punish is challenged, and the stroke of his indignation is impiously invoked to descend upon the guilty juror's head. "If any man trespass against his neighbour, and an oath be laid upon him to cause him to swear, and the oath come before thine altar in this house: then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness."[134] The people of God swear, "The Lord liveth," in truth, in righteousness, and in judgment. With David they can declare, "I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments."[135] Each of them may be denominated, "He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully."[136] And firm will be their purpose to keep their pledge given in vowing unto God--"Thine are we, David, and on thy side, thou son of Jesse."[137] Fifthly. In the first ages, the exercise was accompanied by sacrifice. The phrase (כרת ברית), which is most commonly employed to designate the making of a covenant, consists of two terms, each of which conducts us to the sacrificial rite. The latter of these, (ברית, a covenant,) would appear to be derived from a verb which, according to circumstances, bears the significations, _to cut, to choose, to eat_. The connection between all these and an expression which means _to purify_, is not obscure, nor is their relation to a word (בר), with which that so rendered is intimately connected, difficult to be traced. That which is eaten is made choice of for its purity, or because that by cutting, it is separated from what is less fitted for food, or even during the process of eating is cut. It is an opinion held by one class of commentators, that the reason why that term is put to signify _a covenant_, is, that it may be deduced from the verb bearing the meaning _to choose_, and to which there would appear no objection, provided that that meaning were reckoned to be secondary to the signification _to eat_. The idea implied in the verb _to choose_ is essentially abstract. Not so is that included in either the verb _to cut_, or the verb _to eat_. From one of these, which may be considered as collateral primary meanings, it must therefore be deduced. And since it cannot be deduced from the one without the other, it must consequently be derived from the latter. But since, on the occasion of entering into covenant, feasts were wont to be kept, and since the flesh of animals slain for sacrifice was not seldom partaken of by those