the nature and extent of it is spirituall for it forbids the sins of the spirit not only externall sins it forbids thy spirit pride thy spirit envie Even as God is the father of spirits so is the Law the law of spirits Hence it 's compared by James to a glasse which will shew the least spot in the face and will not flatter but if thou hast wrinkles and deformities there they will be seen so that there is no such way to bring Pharisaicall and Morall men out of love with themselves as to set this glasse before them 8. In respect of the use of it and that to the ungodly and to the beleever 1. To the ungodly it hath this use 1. To restrain and limit sin And certainly though it should not reach to renovation and changing of mens hearts yet here is a great deale of good that it 's an outward whip and scourge to men whereby they are kept in honest discipline and this made the Apostle say The Law was added because of transgressions The people of Israel by their being in the wildernesse having forgotten God and being prone to Idolatry the Lord he added this Law as a restraint upon them Even as you see upon mad-men and those that are possessed with devils we put heavie chaines and fetters that they may doe no hurt so the Lord laid the Law upon the people of Israel to keep them in from impietie The Apostle useth a word shut up as in a dungeon but that is to another sense It was Chrysostomes comparison As a great man suspecting his wife appoints Eunuchs to look to her and keep her so did God being jealous over the Jewes appoint these lawes 2. To curse and condemne and in this respect it poureth all its fury upon the ungodly The Law to the godly by Christ is like a Serpent with a sting pulled out but now to the wicked the sting of sinne is the Law and therefore the condition of that man who is thus under it is unspeakably miserable The curse of it is the sore displeasure of God and that for every breach of it and if men that have broken onely mens lawes be yet so much afraid that they hide themselves and keep close when yet no man or Judge can damne them or throw them into hell what cause is there to feare that Law-giver who is able to destroy soul and body Therefore consider thou prophane man are not thy oaths are not thy lusts against Gods Law You had better have all the men in the world your enemy then the Law of God It 's a spirituall enemy and therefore the terrours of it are spirituall as well as the duties Let not your lives be Antinomians no more then opinions Oh that I could confute this Antinomianisme also such a mans life and conversation was against Gods Law but now it 's not 2. To Beleevers it hath this use 1. To excite and quicken them against all sinne and corruption for howsoever the Scripture saith Against such there is no law and The Law is not made to the righteous yet because none of the godly are perfectly righteous and there is none but may complain of his dull love and his faint delight in holy things therefore the Law of God by commanding doth quicken him How short is this of that which God commands not that a man is to look for justification by this or to make these in stead of a Christ to him but for other ends Hence Psal 1. and Psal 19. and 119. who can deny that they belong to the godly now as well as heretofore Have not beleevers now crookednesse hypocrisie luke-warmnesse You know not only the unruly colt that is yet untamed but the horse that is broken hath a bit and bridle also and so not only the ungodly but even the godly whose hearts have been much broken and tamed doe yet need a bridle Lest they should cast off the Spirit of God that would govern them Nè Spiritum sessorem excutiant And if men should be so peremptorie as to say they doe not need this it 's not because they doe not need it for they need it most but because they do not feele it 2. To enlighten and discover unto them daily more and more heart-sinne and soul-sinne This use the Apostle speaketh of Rom. 7. per totum for how should a man come to know the depth of originall sinne all the sinfull motions flowing from it but by the Law and therefore that is observed by Divines the Apostle saith he had not knowne sinne but by the Law intimating thereby that the Law of nature was so obliterated and darkened that it could not shew a man the least part of his wickednesse Seneca who had more light then others yet he saith It is thy errour to think sins were born with thee no they afterwards came upon thee Erras si tecum vitia nasci putas supervenerunt ingesta sunt And so Pelagius his assertion was that We are born as well without vice as virtue Tam sine vitio quà m sine virtute nascimur And you see all Popery to this day holds those motions of heart not consented to to be no sins but necessary conditions arising from our constitution and such as Adam had in innocency Therefore the people of God see and are humbled for that wickednesse which others take no notice of This will satisfie man but not Gods Law 3. To drive them out of all their own power and righteousnesse And this is another good consequence for when they see all to come short of the Law that the earth is not more distant from heaven then they from that righteousnesse this makes them to goe out of all their prayers and all their duties as you see Paul Rom. 7. he consented to the Law and he delighted in it but he could not reach to the righteousnesse of it and therefore crieth out Oh wretched man that I am How apt are the holiest to be proud and secure as David and Peter even as the worms and wasps eat the sweetest apples and fruit but this will keep thee low How absurd then are they that say The preaching of the Law is to make men trust in themselves and to adhere to their own righteousnesse for there is no such way to see a mans beggery and guilt as by shewing the strictnesse of the Law For what makes a Papist so self-confident that his hope is partly in grace and partly in merits but because they hold they are able to keep the Law God forbid saith a Papist that we should enjoy heaven as of meere almes to us no we have it by conquest Whence is all this but because they give not the Law its due 4. Hereby to quicken them to an higher price and esteem of Christ and the benefits by him So Paul in that great agony of his striving with his corruption being like a living man tyed to a
Gospel that all sins are forgiven to the justified person at once He is indeed put into a state of justification whereby no condemnation will fall upon him yet his sins are not forgiven before they are committed and repented of And for this purpose we pray for the daily pardon of them which is not to be understood of the meer declaration or assurance of the pardon but for the pardon it self But this shall be on purpose spoken to in the matter of Iustification The forenamed Author hath some other differences but they are confuted already for the substance of them LECTVRE XXVI ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the law of faith WE have confuted the false differences and now come to lay down the true between the Law and the Gospel taken in a larger sense And first you must know that the difference is not essentiall or substantiall but accidentall so that the division of the Testament or Covenant into the Old and New is not a division of the Genus into it's opposite Species but of the subject according to it 's severall accidentall administrations both on Gods part and on mans It is true the Lutheran Divines they do expresly oppose the Calvinists herein maintaining the Covenant given by Moses to be a Covenant of works and so directly contrary to the Covenant of grace Indeed they acknowledge that the Fathers were justified by Christ and had the same way of salvation with us only they make that Covenant of Moses to be a superadded thing to the Promise holding forth a condition of perfect righteousness unto the Iews that they might be convinced of their own folly in their self-righteousness But I think it is already cleared that Moses his Covenant was a Covenant of grace the right unfolding the word Law and Gospel doth easily take away that difference which seemeth to be among the Learned in this point for certainly the godly Iews did not rest in the Sacrifices or Sacramenrs but by faith did really enjoy Christ in them as well as wee in ours Christ was figured by the Mercy-seat Now as both the Cherubims looked to that so both the people of the Jews and Gentiles did eye and look to Christ For although Christ had not assumed our flesh then yet the fruit and benefit of his incarnation was then communicated because of the decree and promise of God 1. Pet. 1. 20. 2. This difference is more particularly seen in respect of the degrees of perspicuity and clearness in the revelation of heavenly objects Hence 2 Pet. 1. 19. the light in the Old Testament is compared to the light in the night time and that in the New to the light of the sun in the day The summ of all heavenly doctrine is reduced to these three heads credenda things to be beleeved speranda things to be hoped for facienda things to be done Now if you consider the objects of faith or things to be beleeved they were more obscurely delivered to them The doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation of Christ and the Resurrection these things were but in a dark manner delivered yet according to the measure of that light then held forth they were bound to beleeve those things so that as Moses had a vail upon him thus also his doctrine had and as the knowledge we have here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of that in heaven so that in the Old Testament may be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of that in the New As it is thus for the credenda things to be beleeved so it is also for the speranda things hoped for The opinion of the Socinians and others is very wicked which makes them before Christ only to hope in temporall good things and the notion of the Papists observing that the Church under the New Testament is called Ecclesia but never Synagoge the meeting of the Jews called always Synagoge but never Ecclesia doth suppose that the Jews were gathered together as so many beasts rather then called together as men But this notion is judged false and they instance Heb. 10. and James 2. where the Church of the Christians is called Synagoge although Cameron Praelect de Eccles pag. 66. doth industriously labour to prove that the Apostles did purposely abstain from the word Synagoge in reference to Christians but his reason is not that the Papists urge for howsoever the good things promised were for the most part temporal and carnal yet these figured spirituall and heavenly It 's Austins observation shewing that the Jews should first be allured by temporal mercies and afterwards the Christians by spiritual As saith he first that which is animal and then that which is spiritual The first man was of the earth earthly the second man was of heaven heavenly Thus we may say of the Jew and the Christian That which was animal was first and then that which is spiritual Hence Heb. 11. 16. Abraham and others are said to seek an heavenly country so that although it be true which Austine as I remember said though you look over the whole book of the Old Testament yet you shall never find the kingdome of heaven mentioned there yet we see David making God his portion and professing that he hath nothing in heaven but him which argueth that they looked farther then meer outward mercies These good things promised to the Jews were figurative so that as a man consisteth of a soul and body thus also doth the promises there is the kernel and the shell but the Jews for the most part looked only to the outward Hence Christ when he opened those things to his Disciples did like a kind father that breaketh the shell and giveth the kernel to his children In the third place there are facienda things to be done Now although it be true as I have proved that Christ hath added no new command to the Law of Moses and whatsoever is a sin now in moral things was also then yet the doctrine of these things was not so full penetrating and clear as now under the Gospel There is a dangerous book called The Practicall Catechisme that venteth much Socinian poyson and in this particular among other things that Christ added to the Law and perfected it filled up some vacuities in it Certainly the Law of God being perfect and to which nothing must be added cannot be said to have vacuities in it and Christ is said to fill the Law in respect of the Pharisees who by their corrupt glosses had evacuated it And one of his reasons which he brings to prove his assertion makes most against him viz. Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees c. This maketh against him because our Saviour doth not say Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Law and the Prophets which he must have said if
relates who called it folly to put confidence onely in Christs bloud We know no godly man satisfieth his own heart in any thing he doth much lesse can hee the will of God Wee cannot at the same time say Lord forgive me and Pay me what thou owest yet these good works though imperfect may be a great comfort unto us as the testimony of Gods eternall love to us Thus did Hezekiah 2 Kings 20. 3. Hezekiah is not there a proud Pharisee but a thankfull acknowledger of what is in him and some consider that this temptation might fall upon Hezekiah that when he had laboured to demolish all those superstitions and now became dangerously sick that hee had not done well therefore he comforts himselfe in his heart that hee did those things with not that he meant an absolute perfect heart but a sincere and comparatively perfect Hence it 's observed the word I have walked is in Hiphil I have made my selfe to walke implying the dulnesse and sluggishnesse and aversnesse he found in his heart to that duty so that prayer being as one calls it well Speculum animi the soules glasse you may gather what was a comfort to him Thus Paul 2 Tim. 4. I have fought a good fight c. It is true those words A crown of Righteousnesse The just Judge and Render doe not prove any merits in Paul as the Papists plead but yet Paul declareth this to keep up his heart against all discouragements We are not therefore to take comfort from them so as to rest in them but so as to praise God thereby It 's a good way nesciendo scire that so wee may praise God for them and sciendo nescire that so we may be humble in our selves 11. They are necessary in respect of God both in that hee is hereby pleased and also glorified When we say They are necessary in respect of God we understand it declaratively to set forth his glory for when God is said to be the end of all our actions and goodnesse he is not finis indigentiae an end that needs them but finis assimilationis an end that perfects those things in making them like him Now two waies they relate to God 1. God is hereby pleased so the Apostle Hebr. 13. Hee is well pleased So that as Leah though blear eyed yet when shee was fruitfull in children said Now my husband will love me so may Faith say Now God will love me when it abounds in the fruits of righteousnesse for our godly actions please God though imperfect onely the ground is because our persons were first reconciled with God Secondly they referre to God so as to glorifie him as his name is blasphemed when we walke in all wickednesse It 's true it 's Gods grace to account of this as his glory seeing it 's so defective 12. They are necessary in regard of others Matth. 5. 17. Let your light shine before men Hee doth not there encourage vain-glory but he propounds the true end of our visible holinesse for godlinesse being light it ought not to be under a bushell Hence both in the Tabernacle and Temple the light was placed in the midst and it ought to extend to others that hereby they may glorifie God in heaven As when we see an excellent picture we doe not praise that so much as the Artificer who made it Wee ought so to walk that men should glorifie God who hath made us so heavenly so humble so mortified Hierome said of Austin that he did diligere Christum habitantem in Augustino so ought we to walk that others may love Christ dwelling in us 1 Pet. 3. 1. it 's an exhortation to wives so to walke that their husbands may be won to the Lord. Thou prayest for thy husband in a carnall condition thou wouldst have him go heare such a Minister and such Sermons see that thy life also may convert him The Apostle by the phrase without the word meaneth the publique preaching so that the wives life may preach to him all the day and that same phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth imply 1. the great price that every mans soule is worth 2. the delight that they ought to take in converting of others even the same that merchants doe in their trade 13. Holinesse and godlinesse inherent is the end of our faith and justification and that is the meaning of our Divines who say Charity or Love of God is the end of faith because God hath appointed this way of justification by faith till he hath brought us into eternall glory and there we have perfect inherent holinesse though even then the glory and honour of all that shall be given to Christ Now indeed it hath pleased God to take another way for our acceptation then shall be hereafter not but that God might if he had pleased have given us such a measure of grace inherent whereby we might have obtained eternall life being without sin and conformable to his will but this way hath pleased his wisdome that so Christ and Grace may be exalted and wee for our sins debased in our selves Therefore good is that of Anselme Terret me tota vita mea namapparet mihi aut peccatum aut tota sterilitas My whole life terrifieth me for I see nothing but sin or barrennesse Only this may make for the excellency of Sanctification that therefore is Christ and Grace and Justification and all that at last we may be made perfectly holy Now some Divines have gone further but I cannot goe along with them As 1. Those that doe give them causality and efficiencie of our justification and salvation And if they should use the word Efficiency in a large sense it might be true but dangerous but otherwise to take Efficient strictly they cannot for so was the covenant of works at first Adams obedience would not have meritoriously but efficiently procured his happinesse Hence by the Apostle faith is not included as works are rejected for they are rejected as efficients of our salvation but faith is included as the instrumentall and passive receiving of it 2. Some learned men have said Though good works doe not merit eternall life for that is wholly purchased by Christs death yet say they accidentall degrees of glory our godlinesse may obtaine but that is not safe for first it 's questioned by some whether there be such degrees at all or no but grant it yet even that must be of grace as well as others Lastly some hold our temporall mercies to come to us by a covenant of workes but not our spirituall this also is hard for we may have these good things either by Christ or else by the forbearance of God who doth not take the advantage against us for our sins I shall say no more of this then by answering a main doubt Object If good workes be still necessarily requisite why then is not the covenant of grace still a covenant of works not as at first in
his soule was made sinfull This is vehemently opposed by Papists and by Socinians now they both agree that man should not actually have dyed but for sin only they say he was mortall as the Socinians or immortall by a meere supernaturall gift of God But a thing may be said to be immortall severall wayes as the Learned observe 1. From an absolute necessity either inward or outward in this sense God only is said to be immortall 2. When there is no inward materiall cause of dissolution though outwardly it may be destroyed and thus are Angels and the soules of men 3. A thing may be said to be immortall by some speciall gift and appointment of God as the bodies glorified and as some say the heavens and maine parts of the world shall have only a qualitative alteration not a substantiall abolition 4. That is immortall which hath no propensity to death yet such a condition being put it will die and thus Adam was therefore in some sense he may be said mortall in another immortall But because he is commonly called mortall that is obnoxious to death therefore we say Adam before his sin was immortall and this is abundantly confirmed by this sentence of commination And therefore though Adam would have eaten and drunk though his body was elementary and the originall of it dust though he would have begotten children yet none of these can prove him mortall because the righteousnesse in his soule would have preserved the fit temperament of his body especially having Gods Promise made to his obedience 8. Whether upon this threatning Thou shalt die can be fixed that cursed opinion of the mortality of the whole man in soul as well as body Of all the errours that have risen up there is none more horrid in nature and more monstrous in falshood then this so that if it could be true of any mans soul that it was not an immateriall substance but onely a quality of the temperament it would be true of the Authour of that Book which seemeth to have little sense and apprehension of the divine authority in the Scriptures concerning this matter What an horrid falshood is it to call the doctrine of the immortall soul an hell-hatched doctrine And what a contradiction also to call it hell-hatched when yet he holdeth there is no hell But certainly you would think for a man to dare to broach such an opinion he must have places of Scripture as visible as the Sun But this Text is his Achilles and all the rest shrowd under this from which he frames his first and chiefest argument thus What of Adam was immortall through innocency was to be mortaliz'd by transgression But whole Adam was in innocency immortall Therefore all and every part even whole man was lyable to death by sin But what Logician doth not see a great deale more foisted into the Conclusion then was in the Premises Whole Adam was to be mortaliz'd therefore all and every part What a non sequitur is here That is true of the whole as it is the whole which is not true of every part If I should say Whole Christ dyed for death is of the concrete the person therefore all and every part of Christ died therefore his divine nature died this would be a strange inference yet upon this fallacy is the frame of all his arguments built Man is said to be mortall whole man dieth therefore every part of man dieth There is difference between totum and totalii as the whole and every part of that whole It 's true death doth bring the compositum the person to a non-entity but not every part of that compositum to a non-entity Besides that which was immortall is mortalized according to their natures the soule dieth a spirituall and an eternall death But see how the devill carries this man further and sets him upon the pinacle of errour and bids him throw himself head-long because he doth evidently say that if the souls were destroyed as well as the bodies then there would be no heaven nor hell as yet he is bold and confesseth there is none till the resurrection Now if this be so then how shall that be true that the heaven must contain Christ till he come This doth exceedingly puzzle him but he takes the heaven for the place where the Sun is and concludes peremptorily as if he had been in the same also that Christs glorified body is in the Sun Without doubt saith he pag. 33. he must be in the Sun and saith he pag. 34. The Sun may be called well the right hand of God by which through Christ in him we live and move and have our being and there speaketh nothing but darknesse about light as that the Sun is the vaile to keep off the light of Christs body from us which otherwise would be so glorious we could not see it and live But how dare any man make this interpretation The heavens must contain him that is he must be in the Sun till he come to restitution of all things The naming of these things is confutation enough onely this I brought as in a passage meerly to see what cause we have to pray to God to keep us from our selves and our own presumptuous thoughts Use 1. Of Instruction that a law may be made even to a righteous man and that threatnings may be menaced to a man who yet is not under the actuall curse and damning power of the Law Use 2. To see the goodnesse of God that tryed Adam but with one positive precept This should be a caution against multitude of Church precepts how did Austin complain of it and Gerson in his time Use 3. How the devill doth still prevaile over us with this temptation of knowledge There were Hereticks called Gnostici and Ophitae This desire to eate of the tree of knowledge hath brought much ignorance and errour I know there are many people so sottish and stupid that the divell could never intice them with this temptation They account it a trouble even the knowledge of meere necessary things to salvation but when men desire to know above that which is written this is a dangerous precepice Use 4. To take heed of our selves If Adam thus perfect did faile in a command of tryall about so little a matter take heed where you set gun-powder seeing fire is in your heart Compare this of Adams with that of Abraham what a vast difference Austin thanks God that the heart and temptation did not meet together LECTURE XII GEN. 1. 26. And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness YOu have heard of a two-fold law given to Adam one by outward prescript for tryall and exhortation of his obedience the other by implantation which was the Morall Law and of that at this time When God had made all other things then man the immediate and proxime end was created it being Gods goodnesse to make no living creature before he
be under the Law as a School-master that so they may be prepared for Christ and thus it is a good argument to Christians under the Gospel that their lives should be fuller of wisdome and grown graces then the Jewes because they are not under a School-master as children As if one should say to a young man that is taken from the Grammar school and transplanted in the University that he should take heed he doth not speak false Latine now for he is not in a Grammar schoole now but in an University Thus you see the chief notion of a School-master is to prepare and guide his correcting is accidentall yea if we may believe Qintilian a master in this kinde he is against the School-masters beating of boyes as that which would make them of a servile disposition But Solomon giveth better rules Grant therefore that this is to be understood of knocks and blows which they had what can we say under the Gospel that we are children freed from the rod Though we have not a Shoolmaster yet we have a father to correct us Heb. 12. 5 6 7 8. Do we not in that place finde a plain contradiction of this doctrine For the Apostle doth there alleadge a place of the Old Testament to us now under the Gospel And certainly afflictions are as necessary to the godly now as fire to the drossy vessell and filing to the rusty iron As the scourging and beating of the garment with a stick beateth out the mothes and the dust so do troubles and adversities corruptions from the children of God The fourth reason why God saw sin in them war Because they were not made perfect according to the conscience Heb. 9. 13 14. Who would not think that the author were some Papist or Socinians for if the text prove any thing to his purpose it will evince that the godly then were made partakers of no more then a legall bodily cleansing But as for the place that is miserably arrested for the Apostle his intent is to shew that the godly then could not obtain righteousness by any of those sacrifices and therefore the good they enjoyed was from Christ the true sacrifice so that unless he will deny Christs blood to be effectuall and operative in the Old Testament this reason must fall to the ground Other reasons he brings which are to the same purpose and therefore may easily be overthrown as that God saw no sin in them because their preachers did not open the kingdome of heaven but he seeth none in us because the least of our Ministers do bring us into this Kingdome Every-one may see the weakness here for it supposeth that God did not so fully pardon and forgive because the doctrine of these things was not so clearly preached If the Authors arguments had been that Christ died not so fully for them or that Christ his righteousness was not so fully imputed unto them then there had been some probability Thus you see this false difference also I do not medle with that opinion Of seeing sin in the beleevers because it is not the proper place I find other differences between the Law and the Gospel made by another Antinomian and they are in a Sermon upon the two Covenants of grace where the Authour hauing truely asserted that God did transact with the Jewes in a Covenant of grace yet he makes that Covenant and this under the Gospel to be two distinct Covenants They are not saith hee pag. 45. one and the same Covenant diversly administred but they are two distinct Covenants His arguments are because they are called Old and New But those names inforce no essentiall difference The Commandment of love is called an old Commandment and a new yet it is the same for essence so likewise the termes of a good and better do imply no more then a graduall difference in their excellency But that which I shall especially animadvert upon is the differences he giveth between these two Covenants of grace so really distinguished as he supposeth and in this matter the Authour speaketh much error in a few lines The first difference assigned by him is in respect of remission of sinnes but he goeth on other grounds then the Hony-combe doth They had not saith he a plenary remission of all sorts of sinnes There were sacrifices for sinnes of ignorance but notfor other sinnes that were done presumptuously and if no sacrifices were admitted then consequently no pardon obtained but under the Gospel Christs blood cleanseth from all sin pag. 54. Now here is an heape of falshoods First that all the legall sacrifices were only for sinnes of meer ignorance This is also an errour among Socinians but Levit. 6. 2 3. there is a sacrifice appointed for him that shall lye and sweare falsly in detaining of his neighbours goods and this could not be but a sinne of knowledge This is also aboundantly confirmed in Levit. 16. where the feast of expiation and atonement is made for all the sinnes of the people ver 16. He shall make an atonement because of the uncleaness of the children of Israel and because of their transgressions in all their sinnes So ver 21. He shall confess over the live goat all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sinnes Thus ver 30. that ye may be cleane from all your sinnes before the Lord ver 34. This shall be an atonement for the children of Israel once a yeare for all their sinns Thus you see the Scripture speakes plainly for all their sinnes yet the Antinomian speakes as boldly as if nothing were true that there were sacrifices for some sorts of sinnes only So that you are wisely to judge of such books and not beleeve every confident expression It 's true the Apostle calls these sinnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 9. 7. we translate it errours for the Apostle doth not meanesinnes as appeareth Levit. 16. but therefore are all sinnes called so because omnis malus ignorat There being no sinne which doth not proceede from some errour in the practicall judgment for although a man sin wilfully and advisedly so that there is Nulla alia causa malitae nisi malitia as Austin speakes of some of his sinnes yet there is even an errour in that mans conscience But in the second place grant that there were no legall sacrifices appointed for some sins as indeed particular sacrifices were commonly for sins either of ignorance or if wilfull not of such an high and mortall guilt particular I say for that feast of expiation was generall yet there is no consequence in the world that therefore there was no pardon to be sued out How foolish then were David and Manasses in suing out pardon for their blood-guiltiness if there were no such thing allowed by God How gross is this errour If this doctrine were true then most of those that are reckoned as godly in the Old Testament could have
Law in our souls Conversion not wrought totally by the word read or preached but is to be attributed to the Covenant of grace in Christ Instance 1â— Answer 1. Answer 2. Gerhard Instance 2. Answ Instance 3. Answ Three Errours to be taken heed of in opening Gal 3. 2. Errour 1. Errour 2. Errour 3. The Text opened The Law established three wayes by the Gospel 'T is hard to set up Christ and grace and not be thought to destroy the Law The doctrine of Christ and grace doth establish the Law Interprtation dispensation c. affections of a Law We may say that the Morall Law is mitigated as to our persons but 't is not abrogated Three parts of the Law The Law is abolished as it is a Covenant but not as it is a Rule The Law given by Moses a Covenant of grace It is an absurd contradiction to say the matter of a Law bindeth but not as a Law The Law equally abrogated to beleevers under the Old and New Testament Antinomian Arguments mostly overthrow the use of the Law both to beleevers and unbelevers The Law to a beleever is abrogated 1. In respect of justification 2. In respect of condemnation 3. In respect of rigid obedience 4. In respect of tefrour and slavish obedience 5. In respect of the increase of sin 6. In respect of many Circumstantials 7. Yet that it continues to them as a rule appears 1. From the different phrases used concerning the ceremoniall Law 2. From that holinesse that it requires of the beleever 3. In that disobedience is still a sin 4. Because it differs from other lawes in respect of causes of abrogation Three reasons why the Ceremoniall Law should be abrogated Places of Scripture seeming to hold forth the duration of the Moral Law for a time only answered * Minimum maximi est majus maximo minimi The Apostle argueth against the Law in comparison of Christ The word Law taken in a two-fold sense These Phrases of the Law Without the Law under the Law and In the Law explained A two-fold being under the Law The commonly received sense of that Phrase Not to be under this Law rejected Beza's inrerpretation of the phrase approv'd Arguments used by Moses to perswade obedience to the Law That the Law God delivered to Israel was a Covenant appears 1. In that it haâ—h the name of a Covenant 2 In that it hath the reall properties of a Covenant The judgements of the Learned different in declaring what Covenant is here meant In what sense it may be a Covenant of grace explained Arguments proving the Law a Covenant of grace Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Argum. 4. Argum. 5. Argum. 6. Obiections impugning the former Arguments answered The words opened The Papists corruptly glosse upon this Text. Doctr. The Law and the Gospel may be compared one with another in a double respect The different use of the word Law carefully to be observed What meant by Law taken largely and what strictly False differences between the Law and the Gospel 1. Of Anabaptists and Socinians affirming That they under the Law in the Old Testament enioyed only temporall blessings 2. Of Papists 1. That Christ hath added more perfect Laws under the New Testament 2. That the Law and Gospel are capable of no oposite consideration 3. That the Fathers that died under the Old Testament went not immedatly to heaven 3. Of Antinomians That God saw sin in the beleevers of the Old Testament not of the New 2. That the Covenant God made with the Iews this under the Gospel are two distinct Covenants 3. That Plenary remission of sins under the Gospel not so under the law because no sacrifice save for sins of ignorance Confut. 1. All Sacrifices were not only for sins of ignorance 2. No legall sâ—crifice therefore no remission oâ— sin in consequent 3. The sin against the holy Ghost under the Gospel not cleansed by Christs bloud 4. That under the old Covenant God gave not remission of sins to any but upon antecedent conditions not so under the Gospel 5 That remission of sinnes under the Law was successively and imperfect under the Gospel at once and perfect The difference between the Law and the Gospel is not essentiall but accidentall only Heavenly obiects more clearly revealed in the N. Testament then in the Old 1. It is so for the credenda 2. For the speranda 3. For the facienda The measure of grace ordinarily greater in the Gospel then under the Law The Iews under the Law were in a more servile condition then Christians under the Gospel The continuation of the Law was to last but till the coming of Christ Difference between the Law strictly taken and the Gospel strictly taken 1. The Law in some measure is known by the light of Nature but the truth of the Gospel must be wholly revealed by God 2. The Law requires perfect righteousness the Gospel brings pardon through Christ 3. If righteousness were by the Law eternall life were a debt but the Gospel holds it forth as Gods meere indulgence 4. The Law is only for those that have a perfect nature the Gospel for broken-hearted sinners 5. The Law conditional the Gospel absolute Repentance strictly taken is distinguished from Faith The Law and the Gospel are inseperably united in the Word and Ministery Faith and Repentance are wrought both by the Law and the Gospel Vnbeliefe a sin against the Law as well as the Gospel The Gospel taken strictly comprehends no more then the glad tidings of a Saviour Zeal that either wants knowledge or puffs up no good zeale Sincerity taken two waies The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth The Law as it is considered rigidly and in the abstract so Christ is not the end thereof unless it be by accident As the Law is taken largely for the administration of it by Moses so Christ was intended directly Christ is the end of intention in the dispensation of the Law 2 Cot. 3. 7. opened The ministery of the Gospel more excellent then that of the Law in three respects 1. Because it is the ministery of life and righteousness the Law of death and condemnation 2. Because of its duration it being to abide alwayes but the ministery of Moses to be abolished 3. Because the glory that cometh by the Gospel is spirituall that which shone upon Moses but materiall What signified by the shining of Moses his face 2. Christ is the end of perfection to the Law 3. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in vouchsafing us his Spirit that we may obey it 4. Christ is the end of perfection of the Law in that his obedience to it is made curs Object Aâ—sw The belâ—ever is the subject to whom Christ is made righteousness Righteousness is the end for which Christ is thus the perfection of the Law The beleever hath great cause to bless God for providing such a righteousness for him The Text opened What meant by Kingdom of heaven Doctr. The doctrines of men may either directly or covertly overthrow the Law Covertly there waies 1 When they make it not so extensive in its obligation as it is 2 VVhen they hold principles by necessary consequence inforcing the abrogation of it 3. VVhen they press such duties up on men as will necessitate them to break the commandements of God The Marcionites and Manichees the first oppugners of the Law Postions of Antinomians Antidotes against Antinomian errours 1. Be afraid of entertaining errours in doctrine as that which may damn thee 2. Look upon those places of Scripture where duties are commanded as well as those where Christ and grace are spoken of 3. Beware of affecting applause among the people 4. Get to be well grounded in the principles of Religion 5. Be not rash in publishing any new opinion 6. Antinomianisme overthrows Christ and grace