Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A30739
|
An enquiry whether the Lord Jesus Christ made the world, and be Jehovah, and gave the moral law? and whether the fourth command be repealed or altered? by Tho. Bampfield.
|
Bampfield, Thomas, 1623?-1693.
|
1692
(1692)
|
Wing B629; ESTC R10575
|
118,081
|
148
|
Offerings v. 26. And yet these Texts speak of the Law in general but cannot be understood as meant of the Ten Commands because the Ten Commands were not in dispute The Law which concerned Circumcision and Purifications with their Offerings which were all ceremonial was that only then in question and so becomes applicable to that Law in question and not at all to the Ten Commands or any jot or tittle of them which were not in question which as before stand fully established And this Difference the Occasion and Context do best explain and this in Acts 21 is an Instance may open divers Expressions about the Law in some of the Epistles for Paul in those Primitive Times when the Ceremonial Law was fresh in memory and the Gospel newly preached had much ado to remove the first converted Jews from Circumcision and other Ceremonials as we find in his Epistles 1 Cor. 9. 19 20 where in the 20th Verse Law as I think referrs to the Ceremonial Law where to the Jews he became as a Jew and in the 21st Verse Law referrs to the Moral Law which unto Christ Paul was under And in other Cases Paul to preserve the Liberty he had in Christ Jesus says Titus was not compelled to be circumcised Gal. 2. 3 4 Acts 16. 3. a Liberty which Christ has purchased for his People to be no longer in Bondage to the Ceremonial Laws And upon this Difference we find Paul withstanding Peter to the face Gal. 2. 11 12 which in a good case may still be done to others though otherwise never so eminent And as to this Case of Circumcision Paul effectually lays that aside by saying that if ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing Gal. 5. 1 2 3 4 for those who were for Circumcision were Debtors to the whole Law i. e. to all the Ceremonial Law and therefore he there advises them to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and not to be entangled again with that Yoke of Bondage It may be also some amongst the Jews had Conceits Justified not by the Law of being justified by the Law of such Paul says they were fallen from Grace and that Christ was become of none effect to them Gal. 5. 4 which Saying of Paul is true Let their conceit referr to what Law it would for if Righteousness be by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 21. It seems some of the Jews thought if they were circumcised and observed the external and ceremonial part of the Law they should be sure to go to Heaven and if they were that which we call Morally Righteous and as concerning the Law as Paul said of himself blameless they thought then as the Romanists do now that their Works would save them And the Romanists think also they may supererrogate whence arises the Doctrine of Merits of the Saints and Indulgences whereas true Justification is and ever was only by Faith viz. by Christ and his Righteousness by Faith in whom Abraham was justified Rom. 4. 3 9 Gal. 3. 6 Jam. 2. 23 to whom the Gospel was before preached by that word In thee shall all Nations be justified Gal. 3. 8. And yet all this Doctrine about Justification by Faith doth no way hurt or touch the Doctrin of Obedience to Christ's Ten Commands nor set any man at liberty to sin in any thing as some weakly and others maliciously would inferr for of that true Faith universal and sincere conformity to the Laws of Christ i. e. to the Ten Commandâ— is the Evidence and constant inseparable Companion and so by works Faith is made perfect Jam. 2. 22. And 't is by Faith a Believer goes when God commands him Heb. 11. 8 and this I write also to avoid Slanders And on this Subject the generality of Protestant Ministers have written very well and if any dream that Paul made void the Moral Law by preaching up Faith God forbid or be it nor as the Greek imports Yea he established the Law Rom. 3. 31. And 't is as I have thought observable in the 2 Pet. 3. 15 16 17 Peter speaking of Paul and his Epistles says in which are some things hard to be understood which they thâ—t are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures Beware therefore lest ye also being led away with â—he errour of the Wicked i. e. the Lawless the Greek is Athesmâ—n from Thesmos a Law fall from your own stedfastness And about the Law there are many Errours and this is an Age wherein Anomy or Lawlesness as to God's Commands abounds which Anomy is rendered Iniquity Mat. 7. 23. 13. 41 and in many other Texts in the New Testament Mat. 23. 8 Rom. 6. 19 Antichrist is called that Lawless one the Mystery of Anomy 2 Thes 2. 3 to 10 and the Law i. e. the Moral Law is good and is made for the Lawless 1 Tim. 1. 8 9. And certainly it behoves us no longer to yield to this Lawlesness because the Lord Jesus Christ gave himself for his People that he might redeem them from all Anomy or Lawlesness Tit. 2 13 14 from all manner of Contrariety in Principle or in Practice in whole or in part to Christ Laws i. e. to the Ten Commands which Paul consented were all without excepting the Seventh day holy just spiritual and good in which after the Inner man he delighted and which he served i. e. yielded Obedience to it which Commands he that keepeth without excepting the Seventh day loveth Christ John 14. 21 1 John 2. 3. Which Commands some laying aside hold the Tradition of Men and the Commandments of Men and so lay aside the Commandments of God Mark 7. 7 8. The Law our Lord has given us in the Ten Commands is excellent which absolutely requires in All all manner of true Love to GOD and Man on which Two Commands which include the Commands of both Tables i. e. all the Ten Commands hang all the Law and the Prophets Mat. 22. 37 38 39 40. Obj. As for such as think that the Blessing and Sanctification in the Fourth Command are not appropriated to the Seventh day but to the Sabbath day because of the words there Wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it and so think the change of the Seventh day to be thereby insinuated Ans The express words of the Command Exod. 20. 10 are The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God and so the Seventh day was that day and that Sabbath day which he blessed and sanctified Read the Command and Judge and the Seventh day is there twice named These I take to be the great Objections and were it not that the First day hath got possession of the Names which belong not to it and had we not been generally educated in this Mistake wherein also some of us have lived long and so are rivetted and this defended by Writers of Renown in the World I see
alter one day of the week and the World of Christians be thereby concluded and bound to observe such alterations I know no Bolts or Locks strong enough for such a Door to keep it from letting in upon the Churches of Christ whatsoever pleaseth those in Power in any part of the World whether it do concern God's immediate solemn Worship or Matters of Doctrine Discipline or Conversation Men may as well take the other six as one day as the Romanists for many weeks in the year do and they may as well make any other alteration in the Essentials of Christianity if such Gapps be laid open and by the like reason lay as great Burthens upon the Christian Churches as were upon the Jews of old or as are now upon the Romanists such as are utterly inconsistent with all Instituted Worship and all true Liberty wherein Christ by his Word has made his Churches free in which Liberty we are to stand fast Gal. 5. 1 which Liberty eminently consists in a Freedom not only from the Ceremonial Laws of old contained in Ordinances which are laid aside by Christ which Liberty is purchased by him but also in a Liberty not to be entangled with a new Yoke of Mens Devices and Inventions whereof there is no end Christ has left Laws enough for the well governing of his Churches to which Laws of his if we yield entire subjection we have certainly no need farther to trouble our selves and whilst no man has yet shewn us from the Scriptures any Institution of the First day nor any Alteration of the Seventh after One thousand Six hundred and Ninety years elapsed I do not now expect it for places have been already searched by many Writers and not being yet found I think we may conclude that Change never will be found Obj. This change of the Seventh day to the First some have endeavoured to find in John 20. 19 26. In the 19th Verse it is said That the same day at Evening viz. the Evening after his Resurrection being the First day of the week when the Doors were shut Jesus stood in the midst and said unto them viz. to the Disciples Peace unto you Whence some gather because Christ rose upon the First day and appeared to the Disciples in the Evening therefore we must observe the First day And in the 26th Verse it is said And after eight days his Disciples within and Thomas with them came Jesus the doors being shut and stood in the midst and said Peace unto you Now say some after eight days signifieth here the Eighth day from the Resurrection counting the day wherein Christ rose for one as we call those third days Agues which have but one days intermission Tertians and those Agues which have but two days intermission Quartans and so the Disciples having met on the Resurrection day met again that day Sevennight Answ 1. All which if we do admit here is no Institution of the First day nor any pretence of laying aside or altering the Seventh which I take to be an Answer sufficient to all the Objections that I ever met with upon this Question viz. The First day has no Word-Institution Answ 2. But more particularly the First day John 20. 19 26 is understood by Expositors to be the same day mentioned in Luke 24. 13 29 where two Disciples travelled to Emmaus and Christ with them which Emmaus was about seven miles and an half according to our computation from Jerusalem and so more than a Sabbath-days Journey which they say was about two miles So then these two Disciples did not observe the First day the day of the Resurrection nor assemble to worship nor rest upon it but travelled as far as does appear to us about their ordinary occasions upon the same day that Christ rose Luke 24. 1 13. and Christ travelled with them also upon the same day and how that day was observed by him or them as a day of Rest and Travel too that is to journey and to rest at the same time is very hard for me to conceive Obj. And as to that in John 20. 26 where Jesus is said to come again after eight days when the Disciples were within with Thomas Answ First It is not said they were assembled about any Religious Worship whatsoever is affirmed of that nature is meerly guessed it 's said only that they were within with Thomas with them it 's probable the Persecution against them being then hot upon the crucifying of our Lord they lay concealed from the Jews and locked the Doors and were seldom abroad and at that time were certainly within when Christ miraculously stood in the midst and appeared to them But then Secondly That this second appearing was upon the First day of the week is gratis dictum freely said but is not there written the Text says It was after eight days say these Objectors It was the Eighth day including the former First day that is the day sevennight after his Resurrection So the Text says it was after eight days say they 'T was after six or seven days which seems to me impossible for let any man tell eight upon his Fingers and if he do not find that day after eight days to be Monday or Tuesday as we now call the days then I misreckon and this being an account easie to be cast up I leave it But for men to say that after Eight is after Seven or Six days and must be so understood because some would fain have it so and thereupon to build this Change seems to me contrary to all Sence and further Answer to this I think needless And as to that which they offer from Mark 8. 31 I find divers learned Expositors understand that Mark reckons the time from his first being betrayed and apprehended and that Matthew speaks only of the time that he lay in the Grave which was but part of three days other Answers are given but this part of the Objection seems not to be over-ingenious for that those who make it seem to go about to shake the day of his Resurrection if they could rather than want some Pretence for the First day weekly But however this or that in John 20 be understood yet here is no Institution of the First day nothing of the Worship the Disciples were met about either the one or the other of these Days and consequently little Colour for such a Conceit And as to the Resurrection it is so fully proved by many Eye-witnesses throughout the New Testament as I need to add no more to that Obj. Some fancy the day which Christ says to the Jews that their Father Abraham rejoyced to see and saw and was glad John 8. 56 was the day of the Resurrection and therefore the First day of the week as the day of the Resurrection must be for ever kept holy Ans Which day that Abraham saw others think referrs to the day of his Incarnation and thence inferr the Observation of Christmas-day