Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
duty_n day_n law_n sabbath_n 1,963 5 9.4513 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

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

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

this was wholly from Moses and could be no other way And this is further evident by James chap. 2. 8 10. in his Epistle which is generall and so to Gentiles converted as well as to the Jews Now mark those two expressions v. 8. If you fulfill the royall Law according to the Scriptures that is of Moses where the second Table containeth our love to our neighbour and then v. 10. He that said Do not commit adultery said also Do not kill where you see he makes the Argument not in the matter but in the Author who was God by Moses to the people of Israel And if you say Why should these Commandments reach to them I answer because as it is to be shewed in answering the objections against this truth the Jews and we are looked upon as one people Observe that place 1 Cor. 10. The Apostle writing to the Corinthians saith Our fathers were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and sea c. Now how could this be true of the Corinthians but only because since they beleeved they were looked upon as one The third Argument is from the obligation upon us to keep the Sabbath day This is a full Argument to me that the Morall Law given by Moses doth binde us Christians for supposing that opinion which is abundantly proved by the Orthodox that the Sabbath day is perpetuall and that by vertue of the fourth Commandment we cannot then but gather that the Commandments as given by Moses do binde us For here their distinction will not hold of binding ratione materiae by reason of the matter and ratione ministerii by reason of the ministry for the seventh day cannot binde from the matter of it there being nothing in nature why the seventh rather then the fifth should oblige but only from the meer Command of God for that day and yet it will not follow that we are bound to keep the Jewish seventh day as the Learned shew in that controversie Now then those that deny the Law as given by Moses must needs conclude that we keep the Sabbath day at the best but from the grounds of the New-Testament and not from the fourth Command at all And howsoever it be no argument to build upon yet all Churches have kept the morall Law with the Preface to it and have it in their Catechismes as supposing it to belong unto us And when those prophane opinions and licentious doctrines came up against the Sabbath Day did not all learned and sound men look upon it as taking away one of the Commandments Therefore that distinction of theirs The Morall Law bindes as the Law of Nature but not as the Law of Moses doth no wayes hold for the Sabbath day cannot be from the Law of Nature in regard of the determinate time but hath its morality and perpetuity from the meere positive Commandment of God The fourth Argument from Reason that it is very incongruous to have a temporary obligation upon a perpetuall duty How probable can it be that God delivering the Law by Moses should intend a temporary obligation only when the matter is perpetualy As if it had been thus ordered You shall have no other gods but till Moses his time You shall not murder or commit adultery but till his ministry lasteth and then that obligation must cease and a new obligation come upon you Why should we conceive that when the matter is necessary and perpetuall God would alter and change the obligations None can give a probable reason for any such alteration Indeed that they should circumcise or offer sacrifices till Moses ministry lasted onely there is great reason to be given thus Austin well answered Porphyrius that objected God was worshipped otherwayes in the Old-Testament then in the New That is no matter saith Austin if that which be worshipped be the true object though it be worshipped divers waves when appointed by him no more then when the same thing is pronounced in divers Languages The fifth Argument If the Law by Moses do not binde us then the explication of it by the other Prophets doth not also belong unto us For this you must know that Moses in other places doth explane this Law and Davids Psalmes and Solomons Proverbs as also the Prophesies of the Prophets so farre as they are Morall are nothing but explications of the Morall Law Now what a wide doore will here be open to overthrow the Old-Testament If I bring that place Deut. 32. 46. Set your hearts upon these words which I testifie to you this day because it is your life c. to urge Christians to keep the Commandments of the Lord it may be replyed What is that to us we have nothing to do with Moses The matter indeed doth belong to us as it is in the New-Testament but as it is there written so we have nothing to do with it And by this meanes all our Texts and proofes which are brought in our Sermons may be rejected And therefore Dominicus à Soto who is among the Papists for the negative expresly saith lib. 2. de Just jure quaest 5. Art 4. that no place can be brought out of the books of the Old-Testament unto Christians as in respect of the obliging force of it This is plainly to overthrow the Old-Testament Now let us consider what are the chiefest Arguments which they bring for the support of this opinion that the Law as given by Moses doth not binde Christians And first they urge the Preface I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of Egypt This doth not belonge to us because we nor our fathers ever were in Egypt say they further The temporall Promise to keep the Law doth not belong to us therefore Ephes chap. 6 2. when Paul urgeth that Commandment with Promise he doth not keep to the Promise particularly that thy life may be long in the land the Lord thy God shall give thee but speakes generally first by adding something that it may be well with thee which was not in the first Promise then secondly by detracting saying only that thou mayest live long upon the earth in generall Now to the Preface some answer thus That we may be said literally to be in Egypt and they goe upon this ground that we are made one with the people of the Jewes and they bring the eleventh of the Romanes to prove this where the Gentiles are said to be graffed in so that they become of the same stock And it is plane that the Beleevers are Abrahams seed and then by this interpretation whatsoever mercy was vouchsafed unto them we are to account it as ours This cannot well be rejected but yet I shall not pitch upon this Others therefore they say That this bondage was typicall of our spirituall bondage and the deliverance out of it was typicall of our deliverance from Hell But this is not so literall an interpretation as I desire though I think
if the Antinomists in all their Books and Sermons while they set up grace and the Gospel would make to themselves this objection with Paul Do we then make void the Law God forbid Certainly if you take away the condemning power and the commanding power of the Law there will not so much remain of it as did of Jezebels corps when the dogs had gnawn it Therefore stand fast indeed in the liberty of the Gospel but study again and again whether that be Gospel-liberty or prophane Licence that thou pleadest for certainly he that sets up the Gospel in a scripture way and not a fancy-way will go no further then the bounds of the Scripture do not use Gospel-grace as a cloak for thy more secure and loose walking I tell thee there is a great danger in those expressions I have had enough of the Law the time was I dared not omit time of prayer I was strict on the Sabbath day and in all family duties but now I understand my liberty better Oh know this is a Gospel of thy own making Free-grace of thy own minting I deny not but that the people of God may by the Devil be kept among the Tombs as that Demoniack was in sad thoughts and slavish fears which are opposite to the promise I grant also that a Minister may as unseasonably press the Law upon some humbled Christians as if the Samaritan had taken salt instead of oil and poured it into the wounds of that man of Jericho But for all this the unskilfulness of the Physitian may not derogate from the medicine and as there is a time when the Law may be unseasonably preached so also there may be a time when the promises should not be prest 2. Then is the Gospel or grace set up contrary to the Law when Christians are wholly taken off from humiliation for sin or from the threatnings that are in the Law What a dangerous expression is that of an Antinomian that the Law hath no more to do with a believer then the law of Spain or France with an Englishman There is nothing more ordinary even in the New-Testament then to awaken Believers with sad and severe threatenings Take heed therefore lest that condition which thou so blessest thy self in by Gospel light be not worse and more dangerous then that wherein thou groanedst under the Law I speak not this as if the people of God ought not to seek for a spirit of adoption and to strive for an Evangelicall temper which certainly is most heavenly and holy but to take heed of temptations and being drunk with this sweet wine Let therefore from hence both Ministers and people make an harmonious accord of the Law and Gospel in their practical observations If on the Mount of transfiguration Christ was in glory and Moses in glory and yet both together without any opposition so may the Law be a glorious Law and the Gospel a glorious Gospel in thy use and to thy apprehension LECTVRE XVII EXOD. 20. 1. And God spake all these words saying c. WE have already considered those historical Observations which are in the delivery of the Law and improved them to the dignity and excellency thereof I now come to the handling of those Questions which make much to the clearing of the truths about ithat are now doubted of And first of all it may be demanded To what purpose is this discourse about the Law given by Moses Are we Jews Doth that belong to us Hath not Christ abolished the Law Is not Moses with his Ministery now at an end It is therefore worth the inquiry Whether the ten Commandments as given by Moses do belong to us Christians or no And in the answering of this Question I will lay down some Propositions by way of Preface and then bring arguments for the affirmative First therefore Though it should be granted that the Morall Law as given by Moses doth not belong to us Christians yet the doctrine of the Antinomians would not hold for there are some learned and solid Divines as Zanchy and Rivet and many Papists as Suarez and Medina which hold the Law as dilivered by Moses not to belong to us and yet are expresly against Antinomists for they say that howsoever the Law doth not binde under that notion as Mosaicall yet it binds because it is confirmed by Christ so that although the first obligation ceaseth and we have nothing to do with Moses now yet the second obligation which cometh by Christ is still upon us And this is enough to overthrow the Antinomian who pleadeth for the totall abrogation of the Law Thus you see that if this should be granted yet the Law should be kept up in its full vigour and force as much as if it were continued by Moses But I conceive that this position goeth upon a false ground as if our Saviour Matth. 5. did there take away the obligation by Moses and put a new sanction upon it by his own authority as if he should have said The Law shall no longer binde you as it is Moses his Law but as it is mine Now this seemeth to overthrow the whole scope of our Saviour which is to shew that he did not come to destroy the Law And therefore he doth not take upon him to be a new Law-giver but an Interpreter of the old Law by Moses This I intend to handle God willing in that Question Whether Christ hath appointed any new duties that were not in the Law before Only this seemeth to be very cleare that our Saviour there doth but interpret the old law and vindicate it from corrupt glosses and not either make a new Law or intend a new confirmation of the old Law Secondly Consider in what sense we say that the Law doth binde us in regard of Moses And First this may be understood reduplicatively as if it did bind because of Moses so that whatsoeveer is of Moses his ministery doth belong to us and this is very false and contrary to the whole current of Scripture for then the Ceremoniall Law would also binde us because à quatenus ad omne valet consequentia so that you must not understand it in this sense Secondly you may understand it thus that Moses as a Pen-man of the Scripture writing this down for the Church of God did by this intend good to Christians in the New-Testament and this cannot be well denyed by any that do hold the Old-Testament doth belong to Christians for why should not the books of Moses belong to us as well as the books of the Prophets Thirdly therefore we may understand it thus that God when he gave the ten Commandements by Moses to the people of Israel though they were the present subject to whom he spake yet he did intend an obligation by these Laws not only upon the Jewes but also all other Nations that should be converted and come to imbrace their Religion And this is indeed the very
his opinion were true but of the Scribes and Pharisees who had corrupted the text with their false glosses I will not consider his other reasons for they are so weak that he seemeth to be afraid of them And certainly it would be strange Divinity to say that a Jew might have lusted after a woman in his heart and not have sinned but now it would be sin in a Christian The second particular difference is in respect of the measure of grace Hence the Scripture speakes as if they had under the Old Testament none at all meerly because there was not such a plentifull effusion of his Spirit upon them not but that if we consider some particular persons they might have such degrees of grace that few under the Gospel can be compared unto them as Abraham and David but this was not according to the ordinary dispensation of his graces then So that as one starre differeth from another in glory thus did the Church of the Jewes from that of Christians They had drops but we have the fountaine they had glimmerings but we have the sun it selfe Now as these are priviledges so they are also great engagements for more eminent knowledge and holiness then was in those dayes But all that the Prophets reproved in their people ignorance selfe confidence resting upon externall duties c. the same may we in our hearers 3. Their condition was more servile All things did press more to fear and bondage then now among us Hence the Apostle Gal. 4. 30. compareth their condition to the sons of the bond-woman Hence Austine makes Timor and Amor the difference of the two Testaments God met man sinning in the Law as he did Adam with terrour charging sin upon him but under the Gospel as the father did the prodigall son coming home to him See Heb. 12. this difference considered by Paul Yee are not come to Mount Sinai c. Only you must rightly understand this The Jewes had a two fold consideration one as being servile and another of them as sonnes but under age so that they were not wholly excluded from the Spirit of Adoption yea the Apostle saith That the Promises and Adoption did belong unto thom and David doth appropriate God unto himselfe as his God in his prayer which argued he had the Spirit of Adoption inabling him to call Abba Father Now as they were more obnoxious to an inward bondage so they were under an outward bondage also opposite unto which is that Christian liberty Paul speakes of whereby the yoke of all those ceremonious burdens is taken off them and Paul doth vehemently and fervidly dispute against those that would introduce them In the asserting of this difference one scruple is to be removed which is this How could the Jewes be said to be in more servitude then the Christians meerly because of those ceremonies and sacrifices for seeing they were commanded by God and had spirituall significations they did thereby become helpes unto their faith and were exercises of their piety As under the Gospel none can say that the Sacraments are a burden and tend to bondage because they are visible signes But rather God doth hereby condescend in his great love unto us for as Chrysostome observeth if wee had been incorporeall God would not then have appointed visible Sacraments no more then he doth to Angels but now consisting of soul and body he doth institute some things in an accommodated way to helpe us and to promote our faith But this may be answered that although they were spirituall in signification yet they being many and requiring much bodily labour they could not be observed without much difficulty and therefore no priest or Levite that was spiritually minded in those dayes but would rather choose to exercise the ministery under the Gospel then to busie himself in the killing of beasts and fleaing of them which was their duty to do Therefore well did Austine observe the love of God in appointing for us Sacraments fewer in number easier in observation and more cleare in signification Again those bodily exercises did rather fit those that were children and were more convenient to that low condition then unto the full age of the Church and Sacraments though they be an help yet they suppose some imbecillity in the subject therefore in heaven there shall be none at all Only take notice that Popery having introduced so many ceremonious observations and such a multitude of Church-precepts hath made the times of the Gospel to be the times of none-age again This also discovereth that such are not spirituall that delight in ceremoniall wayes and the more men fix their heart upon sensible observations the less they partake of spirituall I will instance but in a fourth because these differences are given by most that treate on this subject and that shall be the continuance and abode of it The Law in that Mosaicall administration was to indure but till Christ the fulness came and then as the scaffolds are pulled down when the house is built so were all those externall ordinances to be abolished when Christ himselfe came A candle is superfluous when the sun appeareth A School-master is not necessary to those that have obtained perfect knowledge Milke is not comely for those who live on solid meat The chaff preserves the corn but when the corn is gathered the chaff is thrown away And when the fruit commeth the flower falleth to the ground And in this sense the Apostle Heb. 7. doth argue against it saying it could bring nothing to perfection Neither could any of those purifications work any good and spiritual effect It behoved therefore that a Christ should be exhibited which would work all those spirituall mercies for us Hence had there been no farther proceeding but we must alwaies have stayed in such offerings and sacrifices it had been impossible for ever that God should have been pleased with us It is therefore in this respect that it was to be antiquated and a better covenant to come in the room of it The Apostle calleth those things Heb. 10. a shadow Now a shadow that doth shew a man but yet the shadow that doth not live or eate or speak so those sacrifices they shadowed out Christ but yet they could not exhibite the reall benefits by Christ As Elisha sent his servant with a staff to raise up the Shunamites son but he could doe nothing then cometh the Prophet himself and raiseth him up so it 's here Moses was like the Prophets servant he went with a staff to raise up those dead in sin but could not do it without Christ Here may be one Question made upon these things and that is Why God appointed such various and different administrations This providence of God became a rock to the Marcionites and Manichees insomuch that they denyed the same God to be Author of both the Testaments To answer this certainly God if he pleased could have as clearly revealed Christ