from our consciences as a covenant of life not to see or feare any condemnation for sinne or any sinne able to take away life But will it hence follow that a justified person must see no sinne by the eye of faith nor any law as his rule to walke by to discover sinne and is this the end and fruit of Christs death too Surely this doctrine if it be not blasphemous yet it may be knowne to be very false and pernicious by the old rule of judging false Doctrines viz. if either they tend to extenuate sinne in man or to vilifie the precious grace of Jesus Christ as this Doctrine doth Thesis 83. If sinne be the transgression of the law which is a truth written by the Apostle with the beams of the Sunne 1 Iohn 3.4 then of necessity a Beleever is bound to attend the law as his rule that so he may not sinne or transgresse that rule Psalme 119.11 for whoever makes conscience of sinne cannot but make conscience of observing the rule that so he may not sinne and consequently whoever make no conscience of observing the rule doe openly professe thereby that they make no conscience of committing any sinne which is palpable and downe-right Atheisme and prophanesse nay it is such prophanesse by some mens principles which Christ hath purchased for them by his bloud for they make the death of Christ the foundation of this liberty and freedome from the law as their rule the very thought of which abominable doctrine may smite a heart who hath the least tendernesse with horrour and trembling Porquius therefore a great Libertine and the Beelzebub of those flies in Calvins time shuts his sore eyes against this definition of sinne delivered by the Apostle and makes this onely to be a sinne viz. to see know or feele sinne and that the great sinne of man is to thinke that he doth sinne and that this is to put off the old man viz. Non cernendo amplius peccatum i. by not seeing sinne So that when the Apostle tels us that sinne is the trangression of the law Porquius tels us That sinne is the seeing and taking notice of any such transgression surely if they that confesse sinne shall finde mercy then they that will not so much as see sinne shall finde none at all A Beleever indeed is to dye unto the Law and to see no sinne in himselfe in point of imputation for so he sees the truth there being no condemnation to them in Christ Jesus but thus to dye unto the law so as to see no sinne inherent in himselfe against the law this is impious for so to see no sinne and die unto the law is an untruth if the Apostle may be believed 1 Iohn 1.10 Those that so annihilate a Christian and make him nothing and God all so that a Christian must neither scire velle or sentire any thing of himselfe but he must be melted into God and dye to these for then they say he is out of the flesh and live in God and God must bee himselfe and such like language which in truth is nothing else but the swelling leaven of the devout and proud Monks laid up of late in that little peck of meale of Theologia Germanica out of which some risen up of late have made their cakes for the ordinary food of their deluded hearers I say these men had need take heed how they stand upon this precipice and that they deliver their judgements warlly for although a Christian is to bee nothing by seeing and loathing himselfe for sinne that so Christ may bee all in all to him yet so to bee made nothing as to see know thinke feele will desire nothing in respect of ones selfe doth inevitably lead to see no sinne in ones selfe by seeing which the soule is most of all humbled and so God and Jesus Christ is most of all exalted and yet such a kind of annihilation the old Monks have pleaded for and preached also as I could shew abundantly from out of their own writings insomuch that sometime they counsell men not to pray because they must be so farre annihilated as nihil velle and sometimes they would feigne themselves unable to beare the burthen of the species of their own pitchers in their cels from one end of them unto another because forsooth they were so farre annihilated as neither to velâ—â— so neither to scire or know any thing beside God whom they pretended to be all unto them and themselves nothing when God knowes these things were but braine bubbles and themselves in these things as arrand hypocrites as the earth bore and the most subtle underminers of the grace of Christ and the salvation of mens soules Thesis 84. A true Beleever though he cannot keep the law perfectly as his rule yet he loves it dearely he blames his owne heart when he cannot keep it but doth not find fauâ—l with the law as too hard but cries out with Paul The law is holy and good but I am carnall hee loves this Coppy though hee can but scribble after it when therefore the question is made viz. Whether a Beleever be bound to the law as his rule the meaning is not whether he hath power to keep it exactly as his rule or by what meanes hee is to seek power to keep it but the question is whether it bee in its self a Beleevers rule for to be a rule is one thing but to be able to keep it and by what meanes we should keep it whether by our own strength or no or by power from on high is another Thesis 85. If the Apowle had thought that all Beleevers were free from this directive power of the law he would never have perswaded them to love upon this ground viz. because all the law is fulfilled in love Gal. 5.13 14. for they might then have câ—st off this argument as weak and feeble and have truely said if this principle were true what have wee to with the law Thesis 86. There is the inward law written on the heart called the law of the Spirit of life Rom. 8.2 and there is the outward law revealed and written in the holy Scriptures now the externall and outward law is properly the rule of a Christian life and not the internall and inward law as some conceive for to outward law is perfect in that it perfectly declares what is Gods will and what not but the inward Law as received and writ in our hearts is imperfect in this life and therefore unfit to bee our rule The inward law is our actuall yet imperfect conformity to the rule of the law without it is not therfore the rule it selfe The law within is the thing to bee ruled Psal. 17.4 Psalme 119.4.5 The outward law therefore is the rule The law of the Spirit of life which is the internall law is called a law not in respect of perfect direction which is essentiall to the rule but in
being shusted into the Decalogue and so might ceremonialls also Thesis 38. There were three sorts of laws which are commonly knowne and which were most eminently appearing among the Jewes 1. Morall 2. Ceremoniall 3. Judiciall Thesis 39. The morall respected their manners as they were men and are therefore called morall The ceremoniall respected them as a Church and as such a kinde of Church The judicial as a Common wealth and as that particular Common-wealth Morall laws were to govern them as an human society Ceremoniall as a sacred society Judiciall as a civill society Thus the Learned speak and being candidly understood are true Thesis 40. The morall law contained in the Decalogue is nothing else but the law of nature revived or a second edition and impression of that primitive and perfect law of nature which in the state of innocency was engraven upon mans heart but now againe written upon Tables of stone by the finger of God For man being made in the Image of God he had therefore the law of holines and righteousnes in which Gods Image consisted written in his heart but having by his fall broken this Table and lost this Image neither knowing or doing the will of God through the law of sinne now engraven on it Hence the Lord hath in much pitty made knowne his law again and given us a faire copy of it in the two Tables of stone which are the copy of that which was writ upon mans heart at first because the first Table containes Love to God in holinesse the second Love to man in righteousnesse which holinesse and righteousnesse are the two parts of Gods Image which was once engraven upon mans soule in his primitive and perfect estate Ephes. 4.24 Nor indeed doe I see how that popish Argument will be otherwise answered pleading for a possibility in man to keep the law perfectly in his lapsed and fallen estate in this life for say they God makes no lawes of impossible things it being unjust for God to require and exact that of a man which hee is not able to doe to which it is commonly and truely answered That man had once power to keep the law in his innocent estate and hence though man be not able to keep it now yet God may require it because hee once gave him power to keep it and that therefore it is no more unjust to exact such obedience which hee cannot performe than for a creditor to require his money of his broken debtor or spend-thrift who is now failed as they say and not able to repay Man therefore having once power to keep the law and now having no power this argues strongly that the law of the Decalogue contains nothing but what was once written as a law of life upon his heart in his innocent estate for I see not how Gods justice can be cleared if he exacts such obedience in the Decalogue which is impossible for man to give unlesse the very same law and power of obedience was written upon his heart at first and therefore it is a wilde notion of theirs who thinke that the Covenant of works which God made with Adam is not the same for matter with the Covenant of works exprest in the morall law for wee see that there is the same Image of holinesse and righteousnesse required in the Tables of stone as the condition of this Covenant which was once written upon mans heart and required in the same manner of him Now this law thus revived and reprinted is the Decalogue because most naturall and suitable to humane nature when it was made most perfect therefore it is universall and perpetuall the substance also of this law being love to God and man holinesse toward God and righteousnesse toward man Matt. 22.37 39. Luke 1. Hence also this law must needs bee morall universall and perpetuall unlesse any should bee so wicked as to imagine it to be no duty of universall or perpetuall equity either to love God or to love man to performe duties of holinesse toward the one or duties of righteousnesse toward the other Hence again the things commanded in this law are therefore commanded because they are good and are therefore morall unlesse any shall think that it is not good in it selfe to love God or man to be holy or righteous and which is still observable there is such a love required herein and such a lovelinesse put upon these lawes as that by vertue of these all our obedience in other things which are not moral becomes lovely for there were many ceremoniall observances in which and by which the people of God exprest their love to God as Mr. Primrose truely concludes from Deut. 6.1 2 3 4 5 6. and Matth. 22.37 38 40. but yet this love did arise by vertue of a morall rule for therefore it was love to worship God in ceremoniall duties because it was lovely to worship God with his own worship of which these were parts which is the moral rule of the second Commandment And hence Master Primrose may see his grosse mistake in making one law of the Decalogue ceremoniall because the summary of the Decalogue being love to God and love to man and our love to God being shewne in ceremoniall as well as in morall duties because our love is seen shewn in our obedience to all the Commandments of God ceremonial as well as moral For though there be love in ceremonial dutys it is not so much in respect of themselves as in respect of some morall rule by vertue of which such duties are attended Thesis 41. The ceremoniall law consisting chiefly of types and shadowes of things to come Heb. 8.5 and therefore being to cease when the body was come Col. 2.17 was not therefore perpetuall as the law morall but temporary and of binding power onely to the nation of the Jewes and their proselytes and not putting any tie upon all Nations as the morall law did Every ceremoniall law was temporary but every temporary law was not ceremoniall as some say as is demonstrable from sundry judicials which in their determinations were proper to that Nation while that Jewish polity continued and are not therefore now to be observed Thesis 42. The Iudiciall lawes some of them being hedges and fences to safeguard both morall and ceremoniall precepts their binding power was therefore mixt and various for those which did safeguard any morall law which is perpetuall whether by just punishments or otherwise doe still morally binde all Nations For as Piscator argues a morall law is as good and as precious now in these times as then and there is as much need of the preservation of these fences to preserve these lawes in these times and at all times as well as then there being as much danger of the treading downe of those lawes by the wilde beasts of the world and brutish men sometimes even in Churches now as then and hence God would have all Nations preserve these fences for
these things because commanded let him then quit himselfe from hypocrisie and himselfe from being a deep hypocrite in all these if he can Surely those who straine at this gnat viz. not to doe a duty because commanded will make no bones of swallowing down this camell viz. not to forsake sinne because 't is forbidden and whosoever shall forsake sinne from any other ground shewes manifestly hereby that hee hath little conscience of Gods command I know the love of Christ should make a Christian forsake every sin but the last resolution and reason thereof is because his love forbids us to continue in sinne for to act by vertue of a command is not to act onely as a creature to God considered as a Creator but by vertue of the will and commandment of God in a Redeemer with whom a Beleever hath now to doe Thesis 101. To act therefore by vertue of a command and by vertue of Christs Spirit are subordinate one to another not opposite one against anotherâ— as these men carry it This caution being ever remembred that such acting bee not to make our selves just but because we are already just in Christ not that hereby wee might get life but because we have life given us already not to pacifie Gods justice but to please his mercy being pacified toward us by Christ already for as Iunius well observes a great difference between placare Deum and placere Deo i. between pacifying God and pleasing God for Christs bloud onely can pacifie justice when it is provoked but when revenging justice is pacified mercy may be pleased with the sincere and humble obedience of sons Col. 1.10 Heb. 13.21 When a Beleever is once justified hee cannot be made more just by all his obedience nor lesse just by all his sins in point of justification which is perfected at once but he who is perfectly justified is but imperfectly sanctified and in this respect may more or lesse please God or displease him be more just or lesse just and holy before him It is I confesse a secret but a common sinne in many to seek to pacifie God when they perceive or feare his anger by some obedience of their own and so to seek for that in themselves chiefely which they should seek for in Christ and for that in the Law which is onely to be found in the Gospel but corrupt practises in others should not breed as usually they doe corrupt opinions in us and to cast off the law from being a rule of pleasing God because it is no rule to us of pacifying of God For if wee speak of revenging not fatherly anger Christs bloud can onely pacifie that and when that is pacified and God is satisfied our obedience now pleaseth him and his mercy accepts it as very pleasing the rule of which is the precious law of God Thesis 102. They that say the law is our rule as it is given by Christ but not as it was given by Moses doe speak niceties at least ambiguities for if the Lord Christ give the law to a Beleever as his rule why should any then raise a dust and affirme that the law is not our rule For the Law may be considered either materially or in it selfe as it containes the matter of the Covenant of works and thus considered a Beleever is not to be regulated by it for he is wholly free from it as a covenant of life or it may be considered finally or rather relatively as it stood in relation and reference unto the people of the God of Abraham who were already under Abrahams Covenant which was a Covenant of free-grace viz. To be his God and the God of his seed Gen. 17.7 And in this latter respect the law as it was given by Moses was given by Christ in Moses and therefore the rule of love toward man commanded by Moses is called the law of Christ Gal. 6.2 For the law as it was applyed to this people doth not run thus viz. Doe all this and then I will be your God and redeemer for this is a Covenant of workes but thus viz. I am the Lord thy God viz. by Abrahams Covenant who brought thee out of the land of Egypt and house of bondage Therefore thou shalt doe all this If therefore the law delivered by Moses was delivered by Christ in Moses then there is no reason to set Christ and Moses together by the eares in this respect I now speake of and to affirme that the law not as delivered by Moses but as given by Christ is our law and rule Thesis 103. The law therefore which containes in it selfe absolutely considered which Luther cals Moses Mosissimus the Covenant of works yet relatively considered as it was delivered by Moses to a people under a Covenant of grace which the same Author cals Moses Aaronicus so it is not to bee considered onely as a Covenant of workes and therefore for any to affirme that the law is no Covenant of works as it is delivered on Mount Sion and by Jesus Christ and that it is a Covenant of works onely as it is delivered on Mount Sinai and by Moses is a bold assertion both unsafe and unsound For if as it was delivered on Mount Sinai it was delivered to a people under a Covenant of grace then it was not delivered to them onely as a Covenant of workes for then a people under a Covenant of grace may againe come under a Covenant of works to disanull that Covenant of grace but the Apostle expressely affirmes the quite contrary and shewes that the Covenant made with Ahraham and his seed which was to be a God to them Gen. 17.7 and which was confirmed before of God in Christ the law which was foure hundred and thirty yeares after cannot disanull Gal. 3.17 Now that the people were under a Covenant of grace when the law was delivered on Mount Sinai let the Preface of the ten Commandments determine wherein Gods first words are words of grace I am the Lord thy God c. and therefore thou shalt have no other Gods but mee c. I know Paraeus Zanchy and others affirme that the law is abrogated as it was in the hands of Moses but not as it is in the hand of Christ but their meaning is at sometime in respect of the manner of administration of the Law under Moses and when they speake of the morall law simply considered yet it never entred into their hearts that the law as delivered on mount Sinai was delivered onely as a Covenant of works as some would maintain Thesis 104. But there is a greater mystery intended by some in this phrase as given by Christ for their meaning is this to wit As Christ by his Spirit writes it in our hearts not any way a rule as written by Moses A Beleevers heart saith Master Saltmarsh is the very law of Commands and the two Tables of Moses and in this respect it becomes not saith he the glory of
Christ to be beholding to any of the light upon Moses face It seemes then that the law written is not to be a Christians rule but onely so farre as it is written in the heart a most accursed assertion for how and why did Christ Jesus himselfe resist temptation to sinne was it not by cleaving to the written word Matth. 44.10 and was not this done for our imitation why did David and Christ Iesus delight to doe Gods will was it not this because it was written of them that so they should doe Psa. 40.7 8. Did not the law in their hearts make them thus cleave to the written law without Why did Paul perswade Children to honour their parents was it not because this was the first Commandment with promise Ephes. 6.2 had it not been more Evangelically spoken to perswade them rather to look to the law of Moses written on their hearts within to direct them hereunto rather than to be beholding for any light upon Moses face to direct them herein how comes it to passe that Paul preacheth no other thing but what was in the old Testament of Moses and the Prophets who were onely the Interpreters of Moses Acts 22.20 How is it that Christ himselfe borrowes light from Moses Psalmes and all the Prophets to cleare up his resurrection and suffering Luke 24.27 32 if no light must bee borrowed from the face of Moses if indeed wee were perfect in this life as wee shall bee in heaven there would then bee no need of the writings of the Apostles Prophets or Moses of Law or Gospell but we being but imperfectly enlightned it 's no lesse than extreame ingratitude and unthankfulnesse to preferre our owne imperfect and impure light before that perfect spotlesse and heavenly Law and counsels of God without us which when the most perfect beleever doth see he may cry out with Paul The Law is holy but I am carnall what is this but painted Popery to make the spirit within to be the supreame Iudge and superiour to the Spirit of God in the written word without onely they shrine it up in the Popes private Conclave and Kitchin or somewhat worse but these in a company of poore imperfect deluded and perhaps corrupted men it 's true the Covenant of grace strictly taken in the Gospel needs not to borrow any light from the Covenant of works in the Law but yet for all this the grace of God appearing in the Gospel will have us to walk worthy of God unto all well pleasing according to the Law Tit. 2.12 13. and to mourne bitterly that we are so unlike the will and image of God revealed in the Law Rom. 7.23 24. Thesis 105. The Apostle Paul as he sometimes condemnes works and sometime commends them so he sometimes rejects the Law and sometimes commends the Law sometime hee would have Beleevers dye to the law and sometime hee exhorts them to live in all holy obedience to it the Apostle therefore must speak of the Law under various considerations or else must speake Daggers and flat contradictions and therefore of necessity wee are to consider the Law not alway under one respect but variously for consider the law as a Covenant of workes or as the way unto or matter of our justification and so works are condemned and the Law is rejected and abrogated and so we are to die to the Law but consider the Law as a rule of life to a person justified already and so the Law is to be received and works are to bee commended and we are to live thereunto Thesis 106. When the Gospel nakedly urgeth Beleevers to good workes and obedience to the Law it is then considered onely as a rule of life but when wee meet with such Scriptures as set the Law and Christ the Law and grace the Law and promise the Law and faith c. at opposition one against another then the Law in such places is ever considered as a Covenant of life from which we are wholly freed and unto which we should be wholly dead that weâ— may be married unto Christ Rom. 7.4 hence therefore their arguings are feeble and weak who would prove a Christian to be wholly free from the directive power of the Law because a Christian is said not to be under the law but under grace Rom. 6.14 and because the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ Iohn 1.17 and because the inheritance is not by the law but by promise and by faith Gal. 3.12.18 for these and such like Scriptures speake of the law as standing in opposition to Christ and therefore speake of it as of a Covenant of life by which men seek to be justified from which we grant a Beleever is wholly freed and unto which hee is not bound nay hee is bound to renounce it and cast out this bond-woman but all this doth not prove that he is free from it as his rule of life Thesis 107. The Law and mans sinfull heart are quite opposite one to another Rom. 7.9 10 11 13. but when through the grace of Christ the heart is changed so as there is a new nature or new man in a beleever then there is a sweet agreement between this new nature and the Law for saith Paul I delight in the Law of God in my inner man it is therefore a most false assertion to say that the old man of a Beleever is to be kept under the law but the new man or new nature is above all Law for though the new nature bee above it as a legall covenant yet it never comes to be willingly under it as a rule untill now an imperfect new nature is infinitely glad of the guidance of a holy and most perfect law Psalme 119.140 Thesis 108. It is very evident that the children and sonnes of God under the new Testament are not so under the Law as the children and sonnes of God were under the old Testament for the Apostle expressely tels Gal. 3.23 that before the faith came we i. the children of the Old Testament were shut up and kept under the Law and were under it as under a Schoolmaster verse 24. and these of whom the Apostle thus speaks are not onely wicked and carnall Jewes but the deare children of God and heires of eternall life in those times as is evident from Gal. 4 1 2 3. but the Apostle speaking of the sonnes of God in Gospel-times since faith is come and revealed speakes as expresly that we are now no longer under the law as under a Schoolmaster Gal. 3 25. and that now when the fulnesse of time is come God sent his sonne to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the Adoption of Sonnes Gal. 4.3 4 5. which though it bee true of all men by nature viz. that they are under the law yet an impartiall cleare eye will easâ—ly discerne that the Apostles dispute is not of our being under the Law by nature meerely
be set to do the same work and have the same rule given them to act by but the motives to this their work and the stripes and punishments for neglect of their work may be various and divers a son may be bound to it because he is a son and beloved a servant may be bound to do the same work because he is hired and shall have wages if the son neglect his work his punishment is only the chastisement of a father for his good if a servant be faulty he is turned quite out of doors So although Beleevers in Christ and those that are out of Christ haue divers and various motives to the obedience of the law of God yet these do not vary the rule the law of God is the rule to them both although they that be out of Christ have nothing but fear and hope of wages to urge them and those that are in Christ should have nothing but the love of a Father and the heart-bloud mercy of a tender Saviour and Redeemer to compell them the one may be bound to do that so they may live the other may be bound to do because they do live the one may be bound to do or else they shall be justly plagued the other may be bound to do the same or else they shall be mercifully corrected It is therefore a meer feeblenesse to think as some do that the law or rule is changed because the motives to the obedience of it and punishment for the breach of it are now unto a beleever changed and aâ—tâ—ed for the Commandment urged from Châ—ists love may binde strongly yea most strongly to doe the same thing which the same Commandment propounded and received in way of hiâ—e may binde also unto Thesis 112. Some think that there is no sin but unbelief which is a sin against the Gospel only and therefore there being no sin against any law Christ having by his death abolished all them the law cannot be a rule to them An adulterous and an evill generation made drunk with the cup of the wine of the wrath of God and strong delusion do thus argue Are drunkenesse whoredom lying cheating witchcraft oppression theft buggery no sins and consequently not to be repented of nor watcht against but only unbelief Is there no day of judgement wherein the Lord will judge men not only for unbelief but the secrets of all hearts and whatever hath been done in the body whether good or evil according to Pauls Gospel Rom. 2.16 2 Cor. 5.10 How comes the wrath of God to be revealed from heaven not only against unbelief but against all unrighteousnesse and ungodlinesse of man Rom. 1.18 If there was no sin but unbelief how can all flesh Jews and Gentiles become guilty before God that so they may beleeve in the Gospel as 't is Rom. 3 21 12 â—3 24 if they are all guiltlesse untill unbelief comes in There is no sin indeed which shall condemn a man in case he shall beleeve but will it follow from hence that there is no sin in a man but only unbelief A sick man shall not die in case he receive the Physick which will recover him but doth it follow from hence that there is no sicknesse in him or no such sicknesse which is able to kill him but only his wilfull refusing of the Physick surely his refusing of the Physick is not the cause of his sicknesse which was before not the naturall for that his sicknesse is but only the morall cause of his death Sin is before unbelief comes a sick sinner before a healing Saviour can be rejected sin kils the soul as it were naturally unbelief morally no sin shall kill or condemn us if we beleeve but doth it follow from hence that there is no sin before or after faith because there is no condemning sin unlesse we fall by unbelief No such matter and yet such is the madnesse of some prophets in these times who to abandon not only the directive use of the law but also all preparing and humbling work of the law and to make mens sinning the first foundation and ground of their beleeving do therefore either abolish all the being of any sin beside unbelief or the condemned estate of a man for sin yea for any sin untill he refuse Christ by unbelief for publishing which pernicious doctrines it had been well for them if they had never been born Thesis 113. One would wonder how any Christians should fall into this pit of perdition to deny the directive use of the law to one in Christ if either they read Ps. 119. with any savour or the Epistles of Iohn Iames with any faith in which the law is highly commended and obedience thereto urged as the happinesse and chief evidence of the happinesse of man but that certainly the root of this accursed doctrine is either a loose heart which is grown blind and bold and secretly glad of a liberty not so much from the law of sin as from the law God or if the heart be sincere in the main yet it slights the holy Scriptures at present and makes little conscience of judging in the matters of God according unto them for if it did it could hardly fall into â—his dirty ditch out of which the good Lord deliver and out of which I am perswaded he will deliver in time all those that are his own for I much question the salvation of that man who lives and dies with this opinion and as every errour is fruitfull so this is in speciall for from this darkning the directive use of the morall law arise amidst many others these ensuing evils which are almost if not altogether deadly to the souls men they are principally these three Thesis 114. The first is a shamefull neglect in some affecting foolishly the name of new Testament Ministers of a wise and powerfull preaching of the law to make way by the humbling work of it for the glorious Gospel and the affectionate entertainment thereof for through the righteous judgement of God when men once begin to abandon this use of the law as a rule they abolish much more readily this use of the law to prepare men thereby for the receiving of Christ I know there are some who acknowledge this use of the law to be our rule but not to prepare but how long they may be orthodox in the one who are heterodox in the other the Lord only knows for I finde that the chief arguments against the one do strike strongly against the other also It 's an easie thing to cast blocks before the blinde and to cast mists before the face of the clearest truth and to make many specious shews of new Testament Ministry free-grace and Covenant against this supposed legall way and preparing work but assuredly they that have found and felt the fruit and comfort of this humbling way for which I doubt not but that thousands and thousands are blessing God in heaven that ever they
observe New Moons that some time be set apart for his worship and so there was no more necessity of putting Remember to keep the Sabbath holy then to remember to keep holy the new moons And look as the commandment to observe new moons cannot in reason be accounted a morall commandment because there is some generall morality in it viz. for to observe some time of worship so neither should this of the Sabbath be upon the like ground of some generall morality mixed in it and therefore for M Ironside to say that the law of the Sabbath is set among the rest of the morall precepts because it is mixtly ceremoniall having in it something which is morall which other ceremoniall commands he saith have not is palpably untrue for there is no ceremoniall law of observing Jewish moons and festivals but there was something generally morall in them viz. That in respect of the purpose and intention of the Law-giver some time be set apart for God just as he makes this of keeping the Sabbath Thesis 139. To imagine that there are but nine morall precepts indeed and that they are called ten in respect of the greater part according to which things are usually denominated is an invention of M. Primrose which contains a pernicious and poysonfull seed of making way for the razing out of the Decalogue more laws then one for the same answer will serve the turn for cashiering three or four more the greater part suppose six remaining morall according to which the denomination ariseth For although it be true that sometime the denomination is according to the greater part viz. when there is a necessity of mixing divers things together as in a heap of corn with much chaff or a Butt of wine where there be many lees yet there was no necessity of such a mixture and jumbling together of morals and ceremonials here M. Primrose tels us that he doth not reade in Scripture that all the Commandments are without exception called morall and therefore why may there not saith he be one ceremoniall among them But by this reason he may as well exclude all the other nine from being morall also for I reade not in Scripture that any one of them is stiled by that name Morall And although it be true which he saith That covenants among men consist sometime together of divers articles as also that Gods Covenant taken in some sence sometimes did so yet the Covenant of God made with all men as we shall prove the Decalogue is ought not to be so mingled neither could it be so without apparent contradiction viz. That here should be a covenant which bindeth all men in all things to observe it and yet some part of it being ceremoniall should not binde all men in all things it commands nor is there indeed any need of putting in one ceremoniall law considering how easily they are and may be reduced to sundry precepts of the morall law as appendices thereof without such shuffling as is contended for here Thesis 140. If this law be not morall why is it crowned with the same honour that the rest of the morall precepts are if its dignity be not equall with the rest Why hath it been exalted so high in equall glory with them Were the other nine spoken immediatly by the voice of God on mount Sinai with great terrour and majesty before all the people Were they written upon Tables of stone with Gods owne finger twice Were they put into the Arke as most holy and sacred so was this of the Sabbath also Why hath it the same honour if it be not of the same nature with the rest Thesis 141. Our adversaries turn every stone to make answer to this known argument and they tell us that it 's disputable and very questionable whether this law was spoken immediatly by God and not rather by Angels But let it be how it will be yet this law of the Sabbath was spoken and written and laid up as all the rest were and therefore had the same honour as all the rest had which we doubt not to be morall and yet I think it easie to demonstrate that this law was immediatly spoken by God and the reasons against it are long since answered by Iunius on Heb. 2.2 3. but it's uselesse here to enter into this controversie Thesis 142. Nor do I say that because the law was spoken by God immediatly that therefore it is morall for he spake with Abraham Iob Moses in the mount immediatly about other matters then morall laws but because he thus spake and in such a manner openly and to all people young and old Jews and Proselyte Gentiles then present with such great glory and terrour and majesty Surely it stands not saith holy Brighâ—man with the majesty of the universall Lord who is God not only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles speaking thus openly not privately and gloriously and most immediatly to prescribe laws to one people only which were small in number but wherewith all nations alike should be governed Mr Ironside indeed thinks that the Lord had gone on to have delivered all the other ceremonials in the like manner of speech from the mount but that the fear and cry of the people that he would speak no more to them stopt him but the contrary is most evident viz. that before the people cried out the Lord made a stop of himself and therefore is said to adde no more Deut. 5.22 It was a glory of the Gospel above all other messages in that it was immediatly spoken by Christ Heb. 1.2 2.3 and so Gods immediate publication of the morall law puts a glory and honour upon it above any other laws and therefore while Mr Ironside goes about to put the same honour upon ceremoniall laws he doth not a little obscure and cast dishonour upon those that are morall by making this honour to be common with ceremoniall and not proper only to morall laws Thesis 143. Nor do I say that the writing of the law on stone argues it to be morall for some laws not morall were mediatly writ on stone by Ioshuah Josh. 8.32 but because it was writ immediatly by the finger of God on such Tables of stone and that not once but twice not on paper or parchment but on stone which argues their continuance and not on stone in open fields but on such stone as was laid up in the Ark a place of most safety being most sacred and a type of Christ who kept this law and upon whose heart it was writ Psal. 40.6 7. to satisfie justice and to make just and righteous before God all that shall be saved of all whom the righteousnesse of this Law according to justice was to be exacted what doe these things argue but at least thus much that if any Law was to be perpetuated this surely ought so to be Mr. Primrose tels us that the writing upon stone did not signifie continuance of
the Law but the hardnesse of their stony hearts which the Law writ upon them was not able to overcome and t is true that the stony Tables did signifie stony hearts but its false that the writing on stone did not signifie continuance also according to Scripture phrase For all the children of God have stony hearts by nature now God hath promised to write his Law upon such hearts as are by nature stony and his writing of them there implies the continuance of them there so that both these may stand together and the similitude is fully thus viz. The whole Law of God was writ on Tables of stone to continue there so the whole Law of God is writ on stony hearts by nature to continue thereon Thesis 144. Only morall Laws and all morall Laws are thus summarily and generally honoured by God the ten Commandements being Christian pandects and common heads of all morall duties toward God and men Under which generals all the particular morall duties in the Commentaries of the Prophets and Apostles are virtually comprehended and contained and therefore Mr. Primrose's argument is weake who thinks that this honour put upon the Decalogue doth not argue it to be morall Because then many other particular morall Laws set down in Scripture not in Tables of stone but in parchments of the Prophets and Apostles should not be morall For we doe not say that all morall Laws particularly were thus specially honoured but that all and only morall Laws summarily were thus honoured in which summaries all the particulars are contained and in that respect equally honoured It may affect ones heart with great mourning to see the many inventions of mens hearts to blot out this remembrance of the Sabbath day they first cast it out of Paradise and shut it out of the world untill Moses time when in Moses time it s published as a Law and crowned with the same honour as all other morall Laws yet then they make it to be but a ceremoniall Law continuing onely until the comming of Christ after which time it ceaseth to be any Law at all unlesse the Churches constitution shall please to make it so which is worst of all Thesis 145. Every thing indeed which was published by Gods immediate voyce in promulgating of the Law is not morall and common to all but some things so spoken may be peculiar and proper to the Jews because some things thus spoken were promises or motives only annexed to the Law to perswade to the obedience thereof but they were not Laws for the question is whether all Laws spoken and writ thus immediately were not morall but the argument which some produce against this is From the promise annexed to the fifth Command concerning long life and from the motive of redemption out of the house of bondage in the preface to the Commandments both which they say were spoken immediatly but yet were both of them proper unto the Iews But suppose the promise annexed to the fifth Commandement be proper to the Jews and ceremoniall as Master Primrose pleads which yet many strong reasons from Eph. 6.2 may induce one to deny what is this to the question which is not concerning Promises but Commandements and Laws Suppose also that the motive in the Preface of the Commandments literally understood is proper to the Jews yet this is also evident that such reasons and motives as are proper to some and perhaps ceremoniall may be annexed to morall laws which are common to all nor wil it follow that laws are therefore not common because the motives thereto are proper We that dwel in America may be perswaded to love and feare God which are morall duties in regard of our redemption and deliverances from out of the vast sea storms we once had and the tumults in Europe which now are which motives are proper to our selves Promises and motives annexed to the Commandements come in as means to a higher end viz. obedience to the Laws themselves and hence the Laws themselves may be morall and these not so though immediatly spoken because they be not chiefly nor lastly intended herein I know Wallaeus makes the preface to the Commandments a part of the first Commandment and therefore he would hence infer that some part at least of a Commandment is proper to the Jews but if these words contain a motive pressing to the obedience of the whole how is it possible that they should be a part of the law or of any one law For what force of a law can there be in that which only declares unto us who it is that redeemed them out of Egypts bondage For it cannot be true which the same Author affirms that in these words is set forth only who that God is whom we are to have to be our God in the first Commandement but they are of larger extent shewing us who that God is whom we are to worship according to the first Commandement and that with his own worship according to the second and that reverently according to the third and whose day we are to sanctifie according to the fourth and whose wil we are to doe in all duties of love toward man according to the severall duties of the second Table and therefore this declaration of God is no more a part of the first then of any other Commandment and every other Commandement may challenge it as a part of themselves as well as the first Thesis 146. It is a truth as immovable as the pillars of Heaven That God hath given to all men universally a rule of life to conduct them to their end Now if the whole Decalogue be not it what shall The Gospel is the rule of our faith but not of our spirituall life which flows from faith Gal. 2.20 Ioh. 5.24 The law therefore is the rule of our life now if nine of these be a compleat rule without a tenth exclude that one and then who sees not an open gap made for all the rest to goe out at also For where wil any man stop if once this principle be laid viz. That the whole law is not the rule of life May not Papists blot out the second also as some of Cassanders followers have done all but two and as the Antinomians at this day do all and have they not a good ground laid for it who may hence safely say that the Decalogue is not a rule of life for all Mr. Primrose that he might keep himselfe from a broken head here sends us for salve to the light of nature and the testimony of tbe Gospel both which saith he maintain and confirm the morality of all the other Commandements except this one of the Sabbath But as it shall appeare that the Law of the Sabbath hath confirmation from both if this direction was sufficient and good so it may be in the mean time considered why the Gentiles who were universall Idolaters and therefore blotted out the light of nature as Mr. Primrose confesseth
The end of daies and why may not this be the end of the daies of the week a known division of time and most famous from the beginning of the world as Râ—vet demonstrates out of the best Antiquaries rather then at the end of the moneths of the yeere But 't is not good to wrastle with probabilities of which many are given which do rather darken then clear up this cause This only may be added that suppose the Patriarks observed no Sabbath from mans fall to Moses time yet it will not follow that man in innocency was a stranger to it because man in his apostacy forgot or did not regard to keep it Thesis 172. If therefore it was a duty which Adam and his posterity were bound to keepe by a Law given them in innocency Then it undeniably follows that the observance of a Sabbath doth not depend upon great numbers of people to sanctifie it for at first creation the number was but two and yet they both were bound to observe it then nor yet is it to be cast aside through any mans freedom from worldly imcumbrances whereby he hath liberty to serve God more frequently every day for thus it was also in the state of innocency and yet the Sabbath to be observed then It is therefore unsound which M. Primrose affirms herein viz. That the consecration of a certain day for Gods service is not necessary but then only when many troop together and make up the body of a great Assembly and that therefore it may be doubted whether the Patriarks having but small families and little cumber observed any Sabbath but rather served God alike every day with great ease and assiduity and that therefore there was no need nor cause of a Sabbath till they became a numerous people at mount Sinai But beside what hath been said how will it appeare that the posterity of Seth called the sons of God Gen. 6.1 2. were not a numerous people Or that Abrahams family was so small out of which he could gather three hundred fighting men to pursue five mighty Princes in battell But suppose they were few yet have not small companies and particular persons as much need of the blessing of a Sabbath and speciall communion with God therein as great numbers and troops of people Is not the observation of the Sabbath built upon better and surer grounds mentioned in Scripture then bignesse of number and freedom from cumbers not mentioned at all Thesis 173. If Adams fall was before the Sabbath as Mr. Broad and some others otherwise orthodox in this point of the Sabbath conceive by too much inconsiderate wresting of Psal. 49.12 Iohn 8.44 yet it will not hence follow that he had no such command in innocency to observe the Sabbath before his fall For whether man had fallen or no yet the thing it selfe speaks that God was determined to work six dayes in making the world and to rest and so to sanctifie the seventh that hee might therein be exemplary to man and consequently God would have given this law and it should have been a rule to him whether he fell or no and indeed the seventh daies rest depends no more upon mans fall then the six daies worke of creation which we see were all finished before the fall the seventh daies holinesse being more sutable to that state then the six daies labour to which we see he was appointed if Gods example had any force to direct and lead him thereunto Againe if the law of labour was writ upon his heart before he was actually called forth to labour viz. To dresse and keep the garden Gen. 2.15 why might not also the law of holy rest be revealed unto him by God and so answerably writ upon his heart before he fell or came actually to rest upon the Sabbath Little of Adams universall obedience to the Law of workes was as yet actuall while he remained innocent and yet all his obedience in time to come was writ upon his heart the first moment of his creation in the Image of God as it were aforehand and why might not thiâ— Law of the Sabbath be writ so aforehand And therefore M. Broad need not trouble himself or others in enquiring whether God sanctified the Sabbath before or after the first seventh day wherein God rested and if before it how Adam could know of the Sabbath before Gods compleat rest upon the first seventh day the cause of it for God was as well able to make Adam privy to his counsell aforehand concerning that day before Gods rest on it which was a motive to the observance of it as he was to acquaint his people with his purpose for a holy Passeover before the occasion of it fell out Mr. Broad indeed tels us that its most probable that God did not blesse and sanctifie the first Sabbath or seventh day of rest because it is not said that God blessed the Sabbath because he would but because he had rested in it but by his leave it is most proper to say that God at the end of the six daies worke had then rested from all his works and thence God is said to sanctifie and rest the seventh day his cessation from worke which is the naturall rest being the cause of resting the seventh day with a holy rest as we have shewn and therefore there is no reason to stay till the seventh day was past and then to sanctifie it against the next seventh day the first seventh day upon the ground mentioned being first sanctified and which Adam might be well enought acquainted with aforehand as hath been shewn Thesis 174. If the Scriptures may be judge of the time of mans fall which yet is not momentous to cast the balance either way in this controversie it will be found that neither Angels nor men did fall the sixt day before the Sabbath for then God looked upon all his works and they were very good Gen. 1.31 and therefore could not as yet be bad and evill by any sin or fall and now because it 's more then probable that if Adam had compleatly sanctified and stood one Sabbath he had stood immutably as I think might be demonstrated he therefoâ—e not standing a whole seventh day for then he could not have fallen and yet not being fallen the sixt day he therefore fell upon the Sabbath day that as the breach of every other command was wrapt up in that first sin so this of the Sabbath The objections against this from Iohn 8.44 that Satan was a murderer from the beginning and from Psal. 49.12 that man in honour did not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or abide one night in that estate with some other conjecturall reasons taken from some of the Schoolmens Obs and Sols are easily answered by a serious and sober minde and therefore I leave them Thesis 175. Adams soul say some did not need a Sabbath because every day was a Sabbath to him nor did his body need it
and which wee ought not to imitate viz. his omnipotency But suppose it did flow from his omnipotency and that wee ought not to imitate his omnipotency and that wee who are weaknesse it selfe cannot imitate omnipotent actions yet its obvious to common sense that such acts which arise from such attributes as cannot be imitated of us in respect of the particular effects which are produced by them yet in the actings of such attributes there may be something morally good which is imitable of us As for example though wee are not to imitate God in his miraculous works as in the burning of Sodome and such like yet there may bee that justice and wisedome of God shining therein which wee ought to imitate for wee ought to see before we censure and condemne as God did in proceeding against Sodome So 't is in this extraordinary worke of making the Word wherein although we are not to goe about to make another world within that time as God did yet therein the labour and rest of God was seene which is imitable of man which labour and rest as they are morall duties so they are confirmed by a morall example and therefore most seemly and comely for man to imitate from such an example And whereas hee affirmes that this example was not morall because it was not it self imitable being grounded onely upon Gods free will The reason is weake for to labour in ones Calling is without controversie a morall duty as idlenesse is a morall sin yet if one would aske why man is to labour here and not rather to lead a contemplative life in the vision and fruition of God immediately I suppose no reason can be given but the good pleasure of God who in his deepe wisdome saw it most meet for man to spend some proportionable time in labour for himselfe and some in rest for God whereunto he gave man such an eminent example from the beginning of the world Master Primrose cannot deny but that a convenient time for labour and rest in generall is morall But saith he if God had not declared his will by a Commandment particularly to labour six dayes and rest the seventh the Jewes would not have thought themselves bound to this observation from Gods example onely which shewes that there is no morality in it to bind the conscience for ever But it may be as well doubted whether acts of bounty and mercy to which hee thinks wee are bound meerely from Gods example in respect of the particular application of these acts to enemies of God and of our selves as well as to friends be of binding vertue meerly by Gods example unlesse we had a commandment thereunto for in morall precepts as the thing is commanded because it is good so 't is not morally good unlesse it be commanded but suppose that Gods example of labour six dayes and rest the seventh should not have been binding as other examples unlesse there had been a commandment for so doing yet this is no argument that this example is not morall at all but onely that it is not so equally morall and knowne to be so as some other duties bee for man may spend too much time in labour and give God too short or too little time for rest if therefore hee wants the light of a commandment or rule to direct and guide him to the fittest and most meet proportion of time for both is hee not apt hereby to break the rule of morality which consists as hath been shewne in that which is most suitable comely and convenient for man to give to God or man The commandment therefore in this case measuring out and declaring such a proportion and what time is most convenient and comely for man to take to himselfe for labour or to give to God for rest it doth not abolish the morality of the example but doth rather establish and make it It sets out the most comely and meet proportion of time for labour and rest and therefore such a time as is most good in it selfe because most comely and proportionable which being therefore commanded is a morall duty in man and the example hereof morally binding in God 3. Such lawes which mans reason may see either by innate light or by any other externall helpe and light to bee just and good and fit for man to observe such lawes are congruous and suitable to humane nature I say by any external helpe as well as by innate light for neither internall nor externall light doe make a thing just and suitable to man no more than the light of the Sun or the light of a Lanthorne doe make the Kings high-way to the City but they onely declare and manifest the way or that which was so in it selfe before Hence it comes to passe that although mans reason cannot see the equity of some lawes antecedenter by innate light before it bee illuminated by some externall light yet if by this externall light the minde sees the equity justice and holinesse of such a law this may sufficiently argue the morality of such a law which was just and good before any light discovered it and is now discovered onely not made to be so whether by internall or externall light And hence Aquinas well observes that morall lawes which hee makes to be such as are congruous to right reason sometimes are such as not onely command such things which reason doth readily see to bee comely and meet but also such lawes about which mans reason may readily and easily erre and go astray from that which is comely and meet And hence it is that although no reason or wit of man could ever have found out the most just and equall proportion of time or what proportion is most comely and suitable or that a seventh part of time should have been universally observed as holy to God yet if any externall light and teaching from above shall reveale this time and the equity and suitableness of it so that reason shall acknowledge it equall and good that if we have sixe dayes for our selves God should have one for himselfe this is a strong argument that such a command is morall because reason thus illuminated cannot but acknowledge it most meet and equall For though reason may not by any naturall or innate light readily see that such a division of time is most suitable and yet may readily erre and misconceive the most suitable and convenient proportion and division of time it 's then a sufficient proof of the morality of such a command if the congruity and equity of it be discerned consequenter only as we lay and by externall light 4. What ever law was once writ upon mans heart in pure nature is still suitable and congruous and convenient to humane nature and consequently good in it selfe and morall For whatever was so writ upon Adams heart was not writ there as upon a private person but as a common person having the common nature of man
unworthy to come into it cannot but infinitely and excessively prize that love of Jesus Christ this day to come and enter into his rest and lie in his very bosome all the day long and as a most loving friend loth to part with them till needs must and that the day is done Thesis 18. The fourth is This holinesse ought not onely to be immediate speciall and constant but all these holy duties are thus to be performed of us as that hereby we may enter into Rest so as that our soules may finde and feele the sweet of the true Rest of the Sabbath and therefore it must be a sweete and quieting holinesse also for the Sabbath is not only called a Sabbath of Rest in respect of our exemption from bodily labour but because it is so to be sanctified as that on this day we enter into Rest or such a fruition of God as gives rest to our soules otherwise we never sanctifie a Sabbath aright because we then fall short of this which is the maine end thereof untill we come so to seeke God as that we finde him and so finde him as that we feele Rest in him in drawing neare to him and standing before him that as God after his six daies labour did Rest and was refreshed in the fruition of himselfe so should we after our six daies labour also be refreshed in the presence of the Lord That in case we want meanes upon the Sabbath yet he may be in lieu of them unto us and in case we have them and finde but little by them conveyed to us yet that by that little we may be carried on the wings of faith beyond all meanes unto that Rest which upon this day we may find in his bosome that as Christ after his labours entred into his Rest Heb 4. so we ought to labour after the same Sabbatisme begun here on earth but perfected in Heaven that after all the weary steps we tread and sinnes and sorrowes we finde all the weeke yet when the Sabbath comes we may say returne unto thy Rest oh my soule The end of all labour is rest so the end of all our bodily and spirituall labour whether on the weeke-daies of Sabbath day it should be this Rest and we should never think that we have reached the end of the day untill we Taste the Rest of the Day nor is this Rest a Meteor in the Ayre and a thing onely to be wisht for but can never be found but assuredly those who are wearied with their sinnes in the weeke and wants on the Sabbath and feele a neede of rest and refreshing shall certainly have the blessing viz. the Rest of these seasons of refreshing and rest and the comforts of the Holy Ghost filling their hearts this day Isa. 10.2 3 4. Isa. 56.5 6 7 8. Isa. 58.13 14. Psal. 36.7 8. Not because of our holinesse which is spotted at the best but because of our great high Priests holinesse who hath it written upon his forehead to take away the iniquity of all our holy Offerings Ex. 28.36.38 and who hath garments of grace and bloud to cover us and to present us spotlesse before the face of that God whom we seeke and serve with much weakenesse and whom at last we shall finde when our short daies worke here is done and our long looked for Sabbath of glory shall begin to dawn Thesis 19. Now when the Lord hath inclined us thus to Rest and sanctifie his Sabbath what should the last act of our holinesse be bvt diffusive and communicative viz. in doing our utmost that others under us or that have relation to us that they sanctifie the Sabbath also according to the Lords expresse particular charg in the Commandement Thou thy Sonne thy Daughter thy Servants the Stranger within thy Gates the excellency of Christs holinesse consists in making us like himsele in holinesse the excellency and glory of a Christians holinesse is to endeavour to be like to the Lord Christ therein our Children Servants Strangers who are within our Gates are apt to prophane the Sabbath we are therefore to improve our power over them for God in restraining them from sinne and in constraining them as farre as we can to the holy observance of the Rest of the Sabbath least God impute their sinnes to us who had power as Eli in the like case to restrain them and did not and so our Families and Consciences be stained with their guilt and bloud Thesis 20. And if superiours in Families are to see their Gates preserved unspotted from such provoking evils can any thinke but that the same bond lies upon Superiours in Common Wealths who are the Fathers of those great Families whose subjects also are within their Gates and the power of their Jurisdictions the Civill Magistrate though he hath no power to impose new Lawes upon the Consciences of his subjects yet he is bound to see that the Lawes of God be kept by all his Subjects provided alwaies that herein he walke according to the Law and Rule of God viz. that 1. Ignorant Consciences in cleare and momentous matters be first instructed 2. Doubting Consciences have sufficient means of being resolved 3. Bold and audacious Consciences be first forewarned hence it is that though he hath no power to make Holy daies and to impose the observation of them upon the Consciences of his subjects because these are his own Lawes yet he may and should see that the Sabbath Day the Lords holy Day that this he observed because he doth but see to the execution of Gods Commandement herein By what Rule did Nehemiah not onely forbid the breach of the Sabbath but did also threaten bodily punishment upon the men of Tyre although they were Heathens yet were they at this time within the Gates and compasse of his Jurisdiction Nehem. 13.21 certainly he thought himselfe bound in conscience to see that the Sabbath should not be prophaned by any that were within his Gates according to this fourth Commandement If Kings and Princes and civill Magistrates have nothing to do in matters of the first Table and consequently must give any man liberty to Prophane the Sabbath that pretends Conscience why then doth Ieremy call upon Princes to see that it be not prophaned with promise of having their Crownes and Kingdomes preserved from wrath if thus they do and with threatning the burning up and consuming of City and Kingdome if this they do not Ieremy 17.19.25.27 If civill Magistrates have nothing to do herein they then have nothing to do to preserve their Crownes Kingdomes Sceptets Subjects from fire and Bloud and utter ruine Nehemiah was no Type of Christ nor were the Kings of Israel bound to see the Sabbath kept as Types of Christ but as nursing Fathers of the Common-Wealth and because their own subjects were within their Gates and under their power and therefore according to this morall Rule of the Commandement they were bound not onely to keepe it themselves but