Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
duty_n command_v law_n obedience_n 2,379 5 7.3973 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30249 Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians in XXX lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London / by Anthony Burgess ... Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664. 1647 (1647) Wing B5667; ESTC R21441 264,433 303

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

added unto it and so it did necessarily require justifying faith for it cannot be conceived that when God commanded the people of Israel by Moses to worship him and to acknowledge him as their God but that his will was they should beleeve on him as a Father But more of this when we speak of the Law as a Covenant 2. In love and this is so much commanded by the Law that Christ makes the summe of the Law to be in these two things love of God and of our neighbour Therefore I wonder at the Antinomian who is so apt to oppose the doing of things in love and doing of them by the Law together for doth not the Law of God command every duty to be in love to pray in love to God Yea by the law we are to love God because hee hath given Christ for us for the Law commands us to love God for whatsoever benefits he bestoweth upon us now if we are to love him for temporall benefits much more for spirituall It is true the dispensation of the Law was in a terrible way and did gender to bondage but the doctrine of the Law that was for love and the more any Jew did any thing in love to God the more conformable he was to Gods Law 4. It required such an heavenly heart that we are to love God more then any thing else It did not only require love to God but also it commanded it in such a preheminency as that none under the times of the Gospel can do an higher duty or expression of love than then was commanded suppose a man be a Martyr will lose his life for Gods cause this is an obedience to the first Commandement When our Saviour saith He that loveth father or mother more then me is not worthy of me he commands no higher thing of any Christian then every Jew was bound to do hence Levi was so commended because in executing of Justice he knew not father or mother and it must needs be so for what can be more then all and yet God requires all the minde all the heart all the strength not that we are bound to love God in quantum est diligibilis for God can only can love himself but nihil supra aequè or contra 5. It required spirituall motives for all our solemn addresses unto him There are some men who look upon all the Jewes under the Old Testament as so many bruit beasts that did only minde earthly things and that as children are allured by Apples and Nuts rather then by a great Inheritance so they were only invited to duties by carnall and temporall motives not by any spirituall considerations Now how false this is appeareth by the Prophets generall complaints that when they fasted it was not to him even to him and so they howled because of their miseries but not becase God was offended And thus David though he had received the pardon of his sinne yet how kindly and spiritually doth he mourn Against thee thee only have I sinned Thus Micah 7. I will beare the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him What can be more spirituall 6. It required joy and contentednesse in him more then in any creature yea to the contempt of all creatures doth the Gospel-administration rise higher in any command We judge those very spirstuall expressions Reioyce in the Lord alwayes and set your affections on things above and Our Conversation is in Heaven but doth not David go as high when he saith Whom have I in heaven but thee and none in earth in comparison of thee Did not David preferre the Word of God above gold and honey Did not his heart faint and yern within him What a sweet strain is that of him when banished he doth not wish for his kingdome nor outward estate but to see God in the beauties of holinesse Therefore howsoever the dispensation was not so cleare and manifest yet those that were diligent and blessed by God did arise to such excellent tempers 7. Yea it required all perfection But what need I runne further in perfection seeing it comanded all perfection Perfection of the subject the man ought to be in minde and soul and affections all over holy Perfection in the object there was no duty or performance but the Law requireth it Perfection in degrees it did require love without any defect without any remissenesse at all so that there cannot be a more excellent doctrinall way of holinesse then the preaching of the Law 8. God ●●d work grace in us by this as well as by the Gospel I a 〈…〉 this particular lest any should say All this terrifieth the more because it only commands and doth not help I answer That God doth use the Law instrumentally for to quicken up grace increase it in us as David Psal 119. doth at large shew It is true the Law of it self cannot work grace no more can the Gospell of it selfe work grace only here is the difference we cannot be justified by any works of the Law that we are inabled to do only we are justified by Faith not as it is a work for so it s commanded in the Law but as an instrument applying Christ Therefore Gods spirit doth graciously accompany us in the pressing of these duties and hereby we become like a living Law neither doth this exclude Christ but advance him the more Use Of Instruction How necessary a duty it is for a Minister of Iesus Christ to be diligent in preaching and explicating of the Law of God We see Christ here the first and the longest Sermon that ever he preached was to vindicate the Law and to hood forth the excellency of it and if we be legall Preachers in so doing then Christ also is so to be accounted And indeed some have not been affraid to speak so of Christ But to speake the truth the preaching of the Law is so necesstry that you can never be spirituall heavenly heart-Christians unlesse these things be daily set before your eyes Can the boy ever learn to write well unlesse an exact Copy be laid before him Therefore you can never advance the Law too much or heare of it too much if so be it still be propounded as a Rule as a Doctrine Indeed when it is made a ground for our Justification then we turne the precious Manna into corrupt wormes Therefore be so farre from condemning or disputing against the Law as that you would earnestly desire to have more and more of this excellent Rule laid downe before your eyes How proud will be my best humility How carnall will my best heavenly-mindednesse be if so be that I go to this Rule Where will formality and customary duties appeare if so be that we attend to this guide Oh know there is a great deale of unknowne sinfulness in thy heart because the Law is unknown to thee LECTVRE XIX MATTH 5. 21 22. Ye have heard
truly the opposition that seemeth to be in those words It hath been said to them of old but I say unto you makes me incline to the former way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the dative case It is also demanded who are meant by those of old to what age that doth extend Some referre it to those times only that were between Esdras and Christ but I rather think it is to be extended even unto Moses his time for we see our Saviour instanceth in commands delivered then and thus the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generally except Act 21. 16. referreth to the times of Moses or the Prophets Secondly Whether those Precepts which are said to be heard of old be the Law and words of Moses or the additions of corrupt glossers And that most of them are the expresse words of Moses it is plain as Thou shalt not kill or Commit adultery but the doubt lyeth upon two places The first is ver 21. Shall be in danger of judgement Here is say some a two-fold corruption 1. By adding words which are not in the Scripture for they speake peremptorily He shall dye whereas these words seem to be obscure and doubtfull He shall be brought before the judges to be tryed whether he be guilty or no. The second corruption they conceive in the sense and that is as if the Pharisees did understand the Commandment only to forbid actuall murder but not murderous thoughts affections or intentions And this last seemeth clearly to be the truth as is to be shewed afterwards but for the former I do something doubt because though that addition be not exprest in so many words yet there seemeth to be that which is equivalent for Numb 35. 30. there we read the murderer who was to be put to death was to be tryed by witnesses which argueth there were Judges to determine the cause The second particular is that ver 43. Thou shalt hate thy enemy where some learned men observe a three-fold depravation 1. An implyed one as if a friend were only a neighbour 2. A plain omission for Lev. 19. it 's added as thy self which is here omitted 3. A plain addition of that which was not only not commanded or permitted but expresly prohibited as Exod. 23. 4. Prov. 25. 21. And this may probably be thought an interpretation of the Scribes and Pharisees arguing on the contrary that if we were to love our neighbours then we were to hate our enemies yet there are some who would make the sense of this in the Scripture that is in a limited sense to the Canaanites for they think that because they were commanded to make no Covenant with them but to destroy them and not to pity them therefore this is as much as to hate them and thereupon they understand the two fore quoted places that speak of relieving of our enemies to be only meant of enemies that were Jews their Country-men and not of strangers And the Jews thought they might kill any idolaters Therefore Tacitus saith of them there was misericordia in promptu apud suos mercy to their own but contra omnes alios hostile odium hostile hatred against all others yet this command of God to destroy those Nations some understand not absolutely but limitedly if so be they did refuse the conditions of peace I therefore incline to those who think it a perverse addition of the Scribes and Pharisees yet am not able to say the other is false 3. Whether our Saviour do oppose himself here to others as a Law-giver or as an Interpreter cleansing away the mud and filth from the fountain And this indeed is worthy the disquisition for this chapter hath been taken by the Manichees and Marcionites of old and by other erroneous persons of late to countenance great errours for some have said that the Author of the Old-Testament and the New Testament are contrary some have said that the New-Testament or the Gospel containeth more exact and spirituall duties then the Old Hence they conclude that many things were lawful then which are not now and they instance in Magistracy resisting of injuries swearing and loving of our enemies and many counsels of perfection added And this is a very necessary Question for hereby will be laid open the excellency of the Law when it shall be seen that Jesus Christ setting aside the positive precepts of Baptisme and the Lords Supper c. commanded no new duty but all was a duty before that is now Now that our Saviour doth only interpret and not adde new Laws will appear 1. From that protestation and solemn affirmation he makes before he cometh to instruct the hearers about their duties Think not that I came to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Now although it be true that Christ may be said to fulfill the Law diverse wayes yet I think he speaks here most principally for his doctrinall fulfilling it for he opposeth teaching the Law to breaking of the Law and if this be so then our Saviours intent was that he came not to teach them any new duty to which they were not obliged before onely he would better explicate the Law to them that so they might be sensible of sin more then they were and discover themselves to be fouler and more abominable then ever they judged themselves Thus Theophylact As a painter doth not destroy the old lineaments only makes them more glorious and beautifull so did Christ about the Law In the next place Christ did not adde new duties which were not commanded in the Law because the Law is perfect and they were bound not to adde to it or detract from it Therefore we are not to continue a more excellent way of duty then that prescribed there Indeed the Gospel doth infinitely exceed in regard of the remedy prescribed for afflicted sinners and the glorious manifestation of his grace and goodnesse but if we speak of holy and spirituall duties there cannot be a more excellent way of holinesse this being an idea and representation of the glorious nature of God 3. That nothing can be added to the Law appeareth by that Commandment of loving God with all our heart and soul Now there can be nothing greater then this and this command is not only indicative of an end which we are to aime at but also preceptive of all the means which tend thereunto And lastly our Saviour saith not Except your righteousnesse exceed that of Moses his Law or which was delivered by him but that of the Scribes and Pharisees implying by that plainly his intent was to detect and discover those formall and hypocriticall wayes which they pleased themselves in when indeed they never understood the marrow and excellency of the Law Question 4. What was the opinion received among the Pharisees concerning the Commandments of God That you may know the just ground our Saviour had thus to expound the Law it will be manifest if you consider the generall opinion
received among the Jews about the sense of the Commandments and that was The Law did onely reach to the outward man did only forbid outward acts and that there was no sin before God in our hearts though we delighted in and purposed the outward acts if they were not outwardly committed And this we may gather by Paul that all the while he was bewitched with Pharisaicall principles he did not understand inward lust to be sin and as famous as it is false is that exposition brought by the Learned of Kimchy upon that Psalm 66. 18. If I regard iniquity in my heart he will not hear he makes this strange meaning of it If I regard iniquity onely in my heart so that it break not forth into outward act the Lord will not hear that is hear so as to impute it or account it a sin And thus it is observed of Josephus that he derideth Polybius the noble historian because he attributed the death of Antiochus to sacriledge onely in his purpose and will which he thought could not be that a man having a purpose onely to sin should be punished by God for it But the Heathens did herein exceed the Pharisees fecit quisque quantum voluit its Seneca's saying And indeed it s no wonder if the Pharisees did thus corrupt Scripture for its a doctrine we all naturally incline unto not to take notice or ever be humbled for heart sins if so be they break not out into acts Oh what an hell may thy heart be when thy outward man is not defiled Good is that passage 2 Chron 22. 26. Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart Certainly as God who is a spirit doth most love spirit-graces so he doth most abhor spirit-sins The Schools do well observe that outward sins are majoris infamiae of greater reproach but inward heart-sins are majois reatûs of greater guilt as we see in the devils And from this corruption in our nature ariseth that poisonous principle in Popery which is also in all formall Protestants That the commands of God do onely forbid the voluntary omission of outward acts whereas our Saviours explication will finde every man to be a murderer an adulterer c. Now our Saviours explications of the Law go upon those grounds which are observed by all sound Divines viz. 1. That the Law is spirituall and for bids not onely the fruit and branches of sin but even the root it self and fountain And 2. that wheresoever any sin is forbidden and in what latitude soever the contrary good things are commanded and in that proportionable latitude This therefore considered may make every man tremble and be afraid of his own heart and with him to cry out Gehenna sum Domine I am a very hell it self Let us not therefore be afraid of preaching the Law as we see Christ here doth for this is the great engine to beat bown the formality and Pharisaisme that is in people And thus I come to raise the Doctrine which is that The Law of God is such a perfect rule of life that Christ added no new precept or duty unto it But even as the Prophets before did onely explicate the Law when they pressed morall duties so also Christ and the Apostles when they urge men unto holy duties they are the same commanded heretofore I do not speak of Sacraments or the outward positive worship which is otherwise then was in the Old-Testament they had circumcision and we have Baptisme but of the Morall duties required of us It is true in the Old-Testament many things were expressed more grosly and carnally which the people for the most part understood carnally yet the duties then commanded were as spirituall as now There is onely a graduall difference in the manifestation of the duties no specificall difference of the duties themselves And that this may appeare the more to the dignity and excellency of the Law I will instance in particulars First The Law of God required the heart-worship and service That this may be understood take this for a generall rule which is not denied by any That when there are any Morall duties pressed in the Old-Testament the Prophets do it as explainers of the Law they do but unfold and draw out that Arras which was folded together before This being premised then consider those places in the Old-Testament that call for the heart Thus Pro. 3. 1 Let thine heart keep my commandements So Pro. 23. 26. My sonne give me thine heart So that all the duties then performed which were without the heart and inward man were not regarded God required then heart-prayer and heart humiliation It s true the people for the most part understood all carnally and grosly thinking the outward duty commanded onely and that is no marvell for do not people even in these times of the Gospel look to the externall duty not examining whether they pray or humble themselves according as the Word speaks of such duties Thus David was very sensible of his heart-neglect when he prayed Unite my heart to feare thy Name and are not the people of God still under the same temptations They would pray they would humble themselves but oh how they want an heart That is so divided and distracted that if after any duty we should put that question to it as God did to Satan From whence commest thou it would returne Satans answer From compassing the earth 2. It preferred duties of Mortification and Sanctification before religious outward duties This you shall see frequently pressed and inculcated by the Prophets Isaiah 1. how doth God abhorre there all their solemne duties making them abominable even like carrion and all because they did not wash them and make them clean So David saith A broken and contrite heart it was more then any burnt offering now under the times of the Gospel This is an high duty and few reach unto it Doth not the Apostle reprove the Corinthians for desiring gifts rather then graces and abilities of parts rather then holinesse So that this is an excellent duty prescribed by Gods Law that to be able to mortifie our affections to have sanctified natures is more then to have Seraphicall knowledge and Cherubinicall affections in any duty Who then can be against the preaching of the Law when it is such an excellent and pure rule holding forth such precious holinesse 3. It required all our duies to be done 1. In faith for who can think that when God required in the first Table having him for their God that hereby was not commanded faith and trusting in him as a God in Covenant who would pardon sinne How could the Jewes love God or pray unto him acceptably if they had not faith in him Therefore the Law is to be considered most strictly as it containeth nothing but precepts of things to be done in which sense it is sometimes though seldom taken And 2. more largely as it had the Preface and Promises
God may make the opening of the Morall Law instrumentally to concur thereunto onely this cometh by Christ The second thing which I premise is this that howsoever the Law preached may be blest to conversion yet the matter of it cannot be the ground of our justification or adoption so that when a man doth repent turn unto God from his sins he cannot have hope or consolation in any thing he doth but it must be in the promise of the Gospel so that the difference of the Law and Gospel lieth not in this as some do assigne that one is the instrument of grace and the other not for God useth both as I shall shew but in this that the holinesse wrought in us by preaching of the Word of God whether it be Law or gospel doth not justifie us but this favour is in an evangelicall manner by forgiving whatsoever is irregular in us and communicating Christ his righteousnesse to us Therefore let us not confound the Law or Gospel nor yet make them so contrary in their natures and effects that where one is the other cannot be To these two there is also a third thing to be premised and that is how the word of God in generall is a medium or instrumentall to our conversion For the clearing of this well must needs discover that the Law of God being part of Gods word doth convert as well as the Gospel and this must needs be the opinion of all sound Divines whatsoever may fall from them at other times as appeareth by their common answer to the Papists Question If the Law and the commands thereof be impossible to what purpose then doth he command them why doth he bid us turne to him when we cannot Then we answer that these commandements are not onely informing of a duty but they are practicall and operative means appointed by God to work at least in some degree that which is commanded Hence those commands are compared by the Learned to that command of our Saviour to Lazarus that he should rise up and walk It doth also further appeare in those ends they assigne of Gods revealing the Law viz. to make us see as in a glasse our Deformity to be humbled before God to be affrighted out of our selves to seek for grace in Christ now can the meer Law of it selfe do this doth not grace work this in us by the preaching of the Law and is not this the initiall grace of conversion as Austin said Tract 12. in Johan cumcaeperit tibi displicere quod fecisti inde incipiunt bona opera tua quia accusas mala operatua Initium operum bonorum est confessio malorum The beginning of good in us is the accusation of that which is bad Therefore for the clearing of this generall take notice 1. That the word of God as it is read or preached worketh no further then objectively to the conversion of a man if considered in it self Take it I say in it self not animated by the Spirit of God and the utmost effect it can reach unto is to work onely as an object upon the Understanding And in this sense it is that the Scripture is compared to a light Now we know the Sun giveth light by way of an object it doth not give a seeing eye to a blind man It is a noble Queston in Divinity Seeing regeneration is attributed both to the word and to Baptisme how one worketh it differently from the other Or If both work it why is not one superfluous Now concerning the word preached we may more easily answer then about the Sacraments viz. that it works by way of an object upon the soul of a man and were it not set home by the Spirit of God this is the furthest worke it could obtaine And this doth plainly appeare in that the word of God doth only convert those who are able to heare and understand And the word of God being thus of it selfe onely a directive and informative rule hence it 's compared to the Pilots Compasse to Theseus his thred leading us in the Circean gardens of this world and therefore take away the Spirit of God and we may say the whole Scripture is a letter killing yea that which we call the Gospel Preach the promises of the Gospel a thousand times over they convey no grace if the spirit of God be not there effectually Indeed if the communicating of grace were inseparably annexed to the preaching of the Gospel then that were of some consequence which is objected by the Antinomian But sad experience sheweth that notwithstanding the large promises of grace to overflow like a fountain whereas in the Old Testament it was by drops only yet the greater part to whom the grace of God is offered are not converted Therefore in the next place consider this Whatsoever good effects or benefit is conveyed to the soul by the preaching of the Law or the Gospel it 's efficiently from Gods Spirit so that we must not take the Law without the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel having the Spirit of God for that is unequall And by the same reason I may preferre the Law sometimes before the Gospel for I may suppose a Minister opening the duties of the Law as Christ doth here in this Chapter and the Spirit of God accompanying this to change the heart of a man and on the otherside one preaching the Gospel in the greatest glory of it yet not accompanyed with Gods Spirit there may not be the least degree of grace wrought in any hearer Therefore I cannot well understand that the Law indeed that sheweth us our duty but the Gospel that giveth us grace to do it for if you take the Gospel for the Promises preached how many are there that heare these that yet receive no benefit by them and on the other side if the Law setting forth our duty be accompanyed with Gods Spirit that may instrumentally work in us an ability to our duty and without the Spirit the Gospel cannot do it It is true if this were the meaning that had there been only Law there could never have been any grace vouchsafed but it is by reason of Christ and so the Promises of the Gospel that any good is brought to the soules and so the Law worketh as a medium to our Conversion by Christ If I say this be the meaning then it 's true but the obscure and unclear expressing of this giveth an occasion to the Antinomian errour Now that the Scripture as it is written or preached without the Spirit of God cannot convert us is plain partly because then the devils and great men of parts which do understand the letter of the Scripture better then others would be sooner converted partly because the Scripture so far as it 's a word read or preached cannot reach to the heart to alter and change that Hence the Word of God though it be compared to a sword yet
righteousnesse against which the Apostle argueth and proveth no man can be justified thereby but then God knowing mans impotency and inability did secondarily command repentance and promiseth a gracious acceptance through Christ and this may be very well received if it be not vexed with ill interpretations But lastly this way I shall go The Law as to this purpose may be considered more largely as that whole doctrine delivered on Mount Sinai with the preface and promises adjoyned and all things that may be reduced to it or more strictly as it is an abstracted rule of righteousnesse holding forth life upon no termes but perfect obedience Now take it in the former sense it was a Covenant of grace take it in the later sense as abstracted from Moses his administration of it and so it was not of grace but workes This distinction will overthrow all the Objections against the negative Nor may it be any wonder that the Apostle should consider the Law so differently seeing there is nothing more ordinary with Paul in his Epistle and that in these very controversies then to doe so as for example take this instance Rom. 10. ver 5 6. where Paul describeth the righteousnesse of the Law from those words Doe this and live which is said to have reference to Levit. 18. 5. but we find this in effect Deut 30. v. 16. yet from this very Chapter the Apostle describeth the righteousnesse which is by faith And Beza doth acknowledg that that which Moses speakes of the Law Paul doth apply to the Gospel Now how can this be reconciled unlesse wee distinguish between the generall doctrine of Moses which was delivered unto the people in the circumstantiall administrations of it and the particular doctrine about the Law taken in a limited and abstracted consideration Onely this take notice of that although the Law were a Covenant of grace yet the righteousnesse of works and faith differ as much as heaven and earth But the Papists they make this difference The righteousnesse of the Law saith Stapleton Antid in hunc locum is that which we of our owne power have and doe by the knowledge and understanding of the Law but the righteousnesse of faith they make the righteousnesse of the Law to which wee are enabled by grace through Christ So that they compare not these two together as two contraries in which sense Paul doth but as an imperfect righteousnesse with a perfect But we know that the Apostle excludeth the workes of David Abraham that they did in obedience to the Law to which they were enabled by grace so necessary is it in matter of justification and pardon to exclude all workes any thing that is ours Tolle te à te impedis te said Austine well Nor doth it availe us that this grace in us is from God because the Apostle makes the opposition wholy between any thing that is ours howsoever we come by it and that of faith in Christ Having thus explained the state of the Question I come to the arguments to prove the affirmative And thus I shall order them The first shall be taken from the relation of the Covenanters God on one part and the Israelites on the other God did not deale at this time as absolutely considered but as their God and Father Hence God saith hee is their God and when Christ quoteth the commanders hee brings the preface Heare O Israel the Lord thy God is one And Rom. 9. 4. To the Israelites belong adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the promises Now unlesse this were a covenant of grace how could God be their God who were sinners Thus also if you consider the people of Israel into what relation they are taken this will much confirme the point Ezod 19. 5 6. If yee will obey my voice you shall be a peculiar treasure unto me and yee shall be unto me a kingdom of Priests and an holy Nation which is applied by Peter to the people of God under the Gospel If therefore the Law had been a Covenant of works how could such an agreement come betweene them 2. If we consider the good things annexed unto this Covenant it must needs be a Covenant of grace for there we have remission and pardon of sinne whereas in the Covenant of workes there is no way for repentance or pardon In the second Commandment God is described to be one shewing mercy unto thousands and by shewing mercy is meant pardon as appeareth by the contrary visiting iniquity Now doth the Law strictly taken receive any humbling debasing of themselves no but curseth every one that doth not continue in all the things commanded and that with a full and perfect obedience Hence Exod. 34. ver 6 7. God proclaimeth himselfe in manifold attributes of being gracious and long-suffering keeping mercie for thousands and forgiving iniquity and this he doth upon the renewing of the two Tables whereas if the people of Israel had been strictly held up to the Law as it required universall perfect obedience without any failing they must also necessarily have despaired and perished without any hope at all 3. If we consider the duties commanded in the Law so generally taken it must needs be a Covenant of grace for what is the meaning of the first Commandment but to have one God in Christ our God by faith For if faith had not been on such tearmes commanded it had been imposible for them to love God or to pray unto God Must not the meaning then be to love and delight in God and to trust in him But how can this be without faith through Christ Hence some urge that the end of the commandment is love from faith unfeigned but because Scultetus doth very probably by commandment understand there The Apostles preaching and exhortation it being in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Apostle using the word in that Epistle in the same sense I leave it It 's true there is no mention made of Christ or faith in the first Commandment but that is nothing for love also is not mentioned yet our Saviour discovers it there and so must faith and Christ be supposed there by necessary consequence And can we think that the people of Israel though indeed they were too confident in themselves yet when they took upon themselves to keep and observe the Law that the meaning was they would do it without any spot or blemish by sinne or without the grace of God for pardon if they should at any time break the Law 4. From the Ceremoniall Law All Divines say that this is reduced to the Morall Law so that Sacrifices were commanded by vertue of the second Commandment Now we all know that the Sacrifices were evangelicall and did hold forth remission of sinns through the blood of Christ If therefore these were commanded by the Morall Law there
the scope of the Apostle who speaketh of such a Law that the Jews expected righteousness by in the performing of it which must be the Morall Law only Now when we speak of the Morall Law having Christ for the end of it then in the second place that may be considered two wayes 1. Either rigidly and in an abstracted consideration from the administration of it as it doth require perfect obedience and condemning those that have it not now in this sense Christ cannot be the scope or end of the Law but it is meerly by accident occasionall that a soul abased and condemned by the Law doth seek out for a Christ only you must know that the Law even so taken doth not exclude a Christ It requireth indeed a perfect righteousness of our own yet if we bring the righteousness of a surety though this be not commanded by the Law yet it is not against the Law or excluded by it otherwise it would have been unjustice in God to have accepted of Christ our surety for us 2. Or else the Law may be taken in a more large way for the administration of it by Moses in all the particulars of it and thus Christ was intended directly and not by accident that is God when he gave the Law to the people of Israel did intend that the sense of their impossibility to keep it and infinite danger accrewing thereby to them should make them desire and seek out for Christ which the Jews generally not understanding or neglecting did thereby like Adam go to make fig-leaves for their covering of their nakedness their empty externall obedience According to this purpose Aquinas hath a good distinction about an end That an end is two-fold Either such to which a thing doth naturally incline of it self Or secondly that which becometh an end by the meere appointment and ordination of some Agent Now the end of the Law to which naturally it inclineth is eternall life to be obtained by a perfect righteousness in us but the instituted and appointed end which God the Lawgiver made in the promulgation of it was the Lord Christ So that whatsoever the Law commanded promised or threatned it was to stir up the Israelites unto Christ They were not to rest in those precepts or duties but to go on to Christ so that a beleever was not to take joy with any thing in the Law till he came to Christ and when he had found him he was to seek no further but to abide there Now this indeed was a very difficult duty because every man naturally would be his own Christ and Saviour And what is the reason that under the Gospel belevers are still so hardly perswaded to rest only on Christ for righteousness but because of that secret selfe dependance within them Having premised these things I come to shew how Christ is the end of the Law taken largely in the ministry of Moses And in the first place Christ was the scope and end of intention God by giving so holy a Law requiring such perfect obedience would thereby humble and debase the Israelites so that thereby they should the more earnestly fly unto Christ even as the Israelite stung by a serpent would presently cast his eyes upon the brasen Serpent It is true Christ was more obscurely and darkly held forth there yet not so but that it was a duty to search out for Christ in all those administrations And this you have fully set forth in that allegory which Paul maketh 2 Corinth 3. 7. I shall explain that place because it may be wrested by the Antinomian as if because that kinde of ministery which was by Moses was to be done away and evacuated therefore the preaching of the Law was also to be abrogated but that is far from the Apostles scope for the Apostle his intent there is to shew the excellency of the ministery of the Gospel above that of the Law and that in three respects 1. In regard one is the ministery of death and condemnation the other of life and righteousness Therefore the one is called Letter and the other Spirit Now this you must understand warily taking the Law nakedly and in it self without the Spirit of God and the Gospel with the Spirit for as Beza well observeth if you take the Gospel without Gods Spirit that also is the ministration of death because it is as impossible for us to beleeve as it is to obey the Law by our own power only life and spirit is attributed to the Gospel and not to the Law because Christ who is the author of the Gospel is the fountain of life and when any good is wrought by the Law it cometh from the spirit of Christ The second excellency is in regard of continuance and duration The ministery of Moses was to be made void and abolished which is to be understood of that Jewish pedagogy not of every part of it for the Morall as given by Moses doth still oblige us Christians as hath been already proved but the ministery of the Gospel is to abide alwaies that is there is no new ministery to succeed that of the Gospel although in heaven all shall cease The third difference is in regard of glory God caused some materiall glory to shine upon Moses while he gave the Law hereby to procure the greater authority and majesty to the Law but that glory which cometh by the Gospel is spirituall and far more transcendent bringing us at last into eternall glory So that the former glory seemeth to be nothing in comparison of this Even as the light of a candle or torch seemeth to be nothing saith Theophylact when the light of the Sun ariseth Now the Apostle handling these things doth occasionally open an allegory which had not Paul by the Spirit of God found out we neither could or ought to haue done it And the consideration of that will serve much for my present matter I know divers men have divers thoughts about exposition of this place so that there seemeth to be a vail upon the Text as well as upon Moses his face But I shall plainly understand it thus Moses his face shining when he was with God and coming from him doth signifie the glory and excellency of the Law as in respect of Gods counsells and intentions for although the Law did seem to hold out nothing but temporall mercies devoid of Christ and heaven yet as in respect of Gods intention it was far otherwise Now saith the Apostle The Jews were not able to fix their eyes upon this glory that is the carnall Israelites did not behold Christ in the ministery of Moses because a vail is upon their hearts The Apostle makes the vail upon Moses to be a type of the blindness and hardness of heart in the Israelite so that as the vail upon Moses covered the glory of his face so the vail of blindness and stupidity upon the heart of
righteous then Adam What God requireth of us is not greater then what he demanded of Adam in innocency Adams immortality in the state of innocency different from and short of that which shall be in heaven 1. What meant by words 2. Nothing to be added or taken from them 3. God the Author of this Law 4. The manner of delivering it Doctr. The word Law is capable of diverse senses and significations Of the division of Laws in general and why the Morall so called The Law of Moses differs from the law of Nature 1. In respect of power of binding 2. The breach of the Law given by Moses is a greater sin then the breach of the law of Nature 3. The Morall Law requires justifying faith and repentance and contains more particulars in it then the law of Nature The Law was given when the Israelites were in the wilderness and not sooner 1. Because being come out of Aegypt they were to be restrained of their impiety and idolatry 2. Because they were now to grow into a Common-wealth The Law not only was but was publikely preached in the Church before Moses The ends of the promulgation of the Law were 1. That the Israelites might see what holiness was required of them 2. That they might come to kn●w sin and be humbled 3. To shadow out unto them the excellent and holy nature of God The delivering of this Law to the Israelites 〈…〉 at m●●●● unto them The Law of Moses is a perfect rule 1. The Law was given with great majesty thereby to procure the greater authority to it There is a difference between the Morall Iudiciall and Ceremoniall Law notwithstanding they were given at the same time The Morall Law more excellent then the Iudiciall and Ceremoniall in three respects God humbled the Israelites before he gave them his Law God setled his worship before he gave them Canaan Preparation required before the hearing of the Law 1. The people must sanctifie themselves 2. They must not touch the Mount 3. Nor come at their wives 2. The Law was given with great Majesty that so the people might be raised up to reverence the Law-giver 3. The Law was written by God in Tables of stone to denote the dignity and perpetuity of it What meant by the finger of God a Iob 19. 24. 4 The Israelites notwithstanding the delivery of this Law was with power and Maiesty quickly broke it 5. Moses his abode in the Mount procured authority both to himself and the Law 6. Moses his breaking of the Tables intimates that justification is not to be had by them Moses his zeal in breaking the Tables vindicated from rashnesse and sinful perturbation of minde 7. Gods manifestation of his glory unto Moses makes for his honour 8. Though the writing of the second Tables was Gods work yet the forming and polishing them was the work of Moses 9. The extraordinary glory that was upon Moses argues the administration of the Law to be glorious 10. The preservation of the Law in the Ark makes much for the glory of it Seeing God hath put such marks of glory upon the Law let us take heed of disparaging it The doctrine of the Antinomians heterodox though the Law as given by Moses did not binde Christians The Law given by Moses doth not bind us in regard of Moses The Law given by Moses as written for the Church of God and intended for good to Christians in the New Testament is binding Though the people of Israel were the present subject to whom the Morall Law was given yet the Observation thereof was intended for the Church of God perpetually The Morall Law is binding 1. In Regard of the matter of it 2. In regard of the preceptive authority put upon it The obligation of the Morall Law perpetuall proved by severall Arguments Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Argum. 4. Argum. 5. Arguments of the Antinomians whereby they would prove that the Law as given by Moses does not bind Christians examined answered Argum. 1. Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Argum. 2. Answ Though the Law given by Moses doth not belong to us in all the particulars of the administration of it yet in the obliging power of it it does Take heed of rejecting the Law as given by Moses a What is mean by It hath been said by them of old b VVho meant by those of old Those precepts said to be of old are the Law and words Moses Christ does only interpret the old adds no new laws The Pharisees were of opinion that the law did only reach the outward man and forbid out ward acts Doctr. No specificall difference of the duties in the Old Testament from those of the New but only graduall in their manifestation The Law did not only command the outward duty but required the worship of the heart 2. The Law preferred inward graces before outward duties All the duties required by the Law were to be done 1. In Faith 2. In love Love to God in as great a measure commanded by the Law as by the Gospel In all our addresses to God it required spirituall motives It required joy in God above all things else It required perfection of the subject object degrees c. The Law instrumentall to work grace in us as well as the Gospel It is the duty of Ministers to be diligent in preaching and expounding the Law Swearing neither absolutely unlawfull not universally forbidden by our Saviour with reasons why Corrupt glosses of the Pharisees touching Swaring reproved In what sense the words An eye for an eye A tooth for a tooth are to be taken Capitall punishments even death it selfe may be inflicted upon Ofsenders 1. Because commanded by God * Grotius 2. Because it is the Magistrates office 3. Because practis'd under the Gospel upon Ananias and Sapphira and so not repugnant to it Object 1. Sol. Object 2. Sol. Object 3. Sol. Warre allowed by Christ under the Gospel Two causes for which the Primitive Christians might decline warre All men naturally prone ta revenge injuries The primitive Christians held it unlawfull for a man in his own defence to kill the invader Revenge as strictly forbidden in the Old Test as in the New Private revenge unlawfull and forbidden by our Saviour The preach ing of the Law not onely preparatively but being blessed by God instrumentally works the conversion of men The Law without Christ cannot work to regeneration The Law may be blessed to conversion yet the matter of it can neither be ground of justification or consolation to us The Scripture in generall is a medium working by Christ to our conversion The word read or preached concurres obejctively onely to mans conversion All the benefits conveyed to the soul by the preaching of the word are efficiently from Gods Spirit The VVord without the Spirit cannot convert us and why Six Arguments to prove the Law and the preaching of it means of Conversion 1. 2. 3. Use Pray for the benefit of the
beleever Now it 's impossible that a man should be a beleever and his heart not purified Acts 15. for whole Christ is the object of his faith who is received not onely to justifie but to sanctifie Hence Rom. 8. where the Apostle seemeth to make an exact order he begins with Prescience that is approbative and complacentiall n●● in a Popish or Arminian sense then Predestination then Calling then Justification then Glorification I will not trouble you with the dispute in which place Sanctification is meant Now the Antinomian he goeth upon that as true which the Papist would calumniate us with That a profane ungodly man if beleeving shall be justified We say this proposition supposeth an impossibility that faith in Christ or closing with him can stand with those sins because faith purifieth the heart By faith Christ dwells in our hearts Ephes 3. Therefore those expressions of the Antinomians are very dangerous and unsound and doe indeed confirme the Papists calumnies Another place they much stand upon is Rom. 5. Christ dyed for us while we were enemies while we were sinners But 1. if Christ dyed for us while we were enemies why doe they say That if a man be as great an enemy as enmity it selfe can make a man if he be willing to take Christ and to close with Christ he shall be pardoned which we say is a contradiction For how can an enemy to Christ close with Christ So that this would prove more then in some places they would seem to allow Besides Christ dyed not only to justifie but save us now will they hence therefore inferre that profane men living so and dying so shall be saved And indeed the grand principle That Christ hath purchased and obtained all graces antecedently to us in their sense will as necessarily inferre that a drunkard abiding a drunkard shall be saved as well as justified But thirdly to answer that place When it is said that Christ dyed and rose again for sinners you must know that this is the meritorious cause of our pardon and salvation but besides this cause there are other causes instrumentall that go to the whole work of Justification Therefore some Divines as they speak of a conversion passive and active so also of a justification active and passive and passive they call when not onely the meritorious cause but the instrument applying is also present then the person is justified Now these speak of Christs death as an universall meritorious cause without any application of Christs death unto this or that soule Therefore still you must carry this along with you that to that grand mercy of justification something is requisite as the efficient viz. the grace of God something as meritorious viz. Christs suffering something as instrumentall viz. faith and one is as necessary as the other I will but mention one place more and that is Psal 68. 18. Thou hast received gifts even for the rebellious also that the Lord God may dwell among them Here they insist much upon this yea for the rebellious and saith the Author pag. 411. Seeing God cannot dwell where iniquity is Christ received gifts for men that the Lord God might dwell among the rebellious and by this meanes God can dwell with those persons that doe act the rebellion because all the hatefulnesse of it is transacted from those persons upon the back of Christ. And saith the same Author pag. 412. The holy Ghost doth not say that the Lord takes rebellious persons and gifts and prepares them and then will come and dwell with them but even then while they are rebellious without any stop the Lord Christ hath received gifts for them that the Lord God may dwell among them Is not all this strange Though the same Authour presse sanctification never so much in other places yet certainly such principles as these overthrow it But as for this place it will be the greatest adversary they have against them if you consider the scope of it for there the Psalmist speaks of the fruit and power of Christs Ascension as appeareth Ephes 3. whereby gifts were given to men that so even the most rebellious might be converted and changed by this ministery so that this is clean contrary And besides those words with them or among them are not in the Hebrew therefore some referre them to the rebellious and make Jah in the Hebrew and Elohim in the Vocative case even for the rebellious O Lord God to inhabit as that of Esay The Wolfe and the Lamb shall dwell together Some referre it to Gods dwelling yet doe not understand it of his dwelling with them but of his dwelling i. e. fixing the Arke after the enemies are subdued But take our Edition to be the best as it seemeth to be yet it must be meant of rebels changed by his Spirit for the Scripture useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Gods dwelling in men but still converted Rom. 8. 11. Ephes 3. 12. 2 Cor. 6. 16. LECTURE IV. 1 TIM 1. 8 9. Knowing the Law is good if a man use it lawfully HAving confuted some dangerous inferences that the Antinomian makes from that precious doctrine of Justification I shall at this time answer only one question Upon what grounds are the people of God to be zealous of good workes for it 's very hard to repent to love to be patient or fruitfull and not to doe them for this end to justifie us And howsoever theologically and in the notion we may make a great difference between holinesse as a way or meanes and as a cause or merit of salvation yet practically the heart doth not use to distinguish so subtilely Therefore although I intend not to handle the whole doctrine of Sanctification or new obedience at this time yet I should leave my discourse imperfect if I did not informe you how good works of the Law done by grace and justification of the Gospel may stand together First therefore take notice what we meane by good works We take not good works strictly for the works of charity or liberality nor for any externall actions of religion which may be done where the heart is not cleansed much lesse for the Popish good workes of supererogation but for the graces of Gods Spirit in us and the actions flowing from them For usually with the Papists and Popish persons good works are commonly called those superstitious and supererogant workes which God never commanded or if God hath commanded them they mean them as externall and sensible such as Coming to Church and Receiving of Sacraments not internall and spirituall faith and a contrite spirit which are the soule of all duties and if these be not there the outward duties are like clothes upon a dead man that cannot warme him because there is no life within Therefore much is required even to the essence of a godly work though it be not perfect in degrees As 1. It must be commanded by God 2. It
it true Therefore in the third place I shall answer That there may be peculiar arguments that do belong to the Jewes why they should keep the Commandments and there are genarall ones that belong to all The generall arguments are I am the Lord thy God this belongs to us and then that peculiar argument may belong to them And this is no new thing to have a perpetuall duty pressed upon a people by some occasionall or peculiar motive Hence Jerem. 16. 14. 15. God saith there by the Prophet that they shall no more say The Lord that brought up out of the land of Egypt but that brought up out of the land of the North. Where you see a speciall new argument may be brought for the generall duty And as for the particular temporall Promise I grant that did onely belong to them but Ideny the consequence that therefore the precept doth not for the Scripture useth divers arguments to the obedience of the same Command Davids Psalmes for the most part and some of Paul's Epistles as Philemon c. were written upon particular occasions yet the matter of them doth still belong to us The secoud Argument is that If the Law did oblige us as given by Moses then it did the Gentiles and Heathens also and so the Heathens were bound to those Commandements as well as the Jewes but that is not so therefore Paul Rom. 2. speaketh of the Gentiles without this Law and as those that shall be judged without it Now this may be answered It doth not follow that the Law by Moses must presently binde the Gentiles but when promulged and made known to them as at this time Infidels and Pagans are not bound to beleeve in Iesus Christ but if the doctrine of Christ were promulged to them they were then bound And I make no question but other Nations were then bound in the time of Moses his ministery to enquire after the true God and to worship him in the Jewish way so far as they could Thus we read of the Eunuch coming up to Jerusalem to worship And certainly if a whole Nation had then been converted either they must have worshipped God according to their own institution or God would have revealed unto them some different way of worshipping him from the Jews or else they were bound so far as they could for the Ceremoniall worship bound them no otherwaies to worship God in the Jewish way then appointed by him The Law then given by Moses did binde Gentiles as it was made known to them Thus the stranger in the gates was to keep the Sabbath though that be meant of a stranger that had received their religion yea Nehem. 13. 19. Nehemiah would not suffer the Tyrians that were strangers who did not submit to the Jewish Law to pollute the Sabbath Now to all this that hath been said you must take this limitation That the Law given by Moses doth not belong to us in all the particulars of the administration of it The giving of the Law in that terrible manner might be a peculiar thing belonging to the Jewes as becoming the dispensation of the Old Testament but yet the giving of the Law it self in the obliging power of it doth belong to us We all acknowledge that the Old Testament had a peculiar administration from the New it was fuller of terrour and so did gender more to bondage then the New Hence some say that the Law was given on Mount Sinai which it was so called from Seneh a bramble bush the bush God appeared in the Mountaine being full of bramble bushes representing unto us the terrible and pricking power of the Law Use To take heed of rejecting the Law as given by Moses lest at the same time we reject the whole Old-Testament for it is said of the Prophets as well as the Law that they are till John and then why should they limit the Law to Moses his hands more then others Why should they not say The Law as by David as by Isaiah and Ieremiah doth not binde And if you say they in other places speake of Christ so doth Moses also as our Saviour expresly saith So that I see not how an Antinomian can follow his principle but he must needs cast off the Old-Testament except it be in what it is propheticall of Christ LECTVRE XVIII MATTH 5. 21 22. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time c. But I say unto you c. THe Law as you have heard may be considered either absolutely as a Rule or relatively as a Covenant We are handling of it in the first consideration and have proved that as it was delivered by Moses it doth belong to us Christians I shall now handle the Perfection of it and labour to shew that Christ hath instituted no new duty which was not commanded before by the Law of Moses And this Question will be very profitable partly against the Antinomians partly the Papists and lastly the Socinians as will appeare in the handling of it That therefore I may the better come to my matter intended take notice in the generall that these words are part of Christs Sermon upon the Mount so that as the Law was first given upon a Mount so also it is explained and interpreted by Christ upon a Mount And in this Sermon is observable first that Christ begins with the end of actions Blessednesse for so Morall Philosophy which is practicall doth also begin Secondly he describes the Subjects who shall be made partakers of this and they are described by severall properties In the next place as some think ver 13. he instructs the Apostles about their peculiar Office Ye are salt not honey as one observeth which is bitter to wounds Ye are light which is also offensive to sore eyes In the next place he instructs the people though some make this only spoken to the Disciples and that first about the substance of the Precepts what duties are to be done against the false interpretations of the Pharisees and Scribes and in the next Chapter he sheweth the end Why we do the good things God requireth of us and that is for the glory of God which ought to consume all other ends as the Sunne puts out the light of the fire and the first substantiall duty of the Commandments which he instanceth in is this in my text Now before I raise the Doctrine I must answer some Questions as First What is meant by these words It hath been said by themof old For here is some difference It is understood by some in the dative case thus It hath been said to them of old and hereby our Saviour would comprehend the Auditors or Hearers that have been heretofore Others do understand it equivalent unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did answer the Ablative case among the Latines and so it seemeth our Interpreters take it and thus others that are Orthodox but