Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
work_n ceremonial_a law_n moral_a 5,536 5 9.9611 5 false
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
A35308 A solemn call unto all that would be owned as Christ's faithful witnesses, speedily and seriously, to attend unto the primitive purity of the Gospel doctrine and worship, or, A discourse concerning baptism wherein that of infants is disproved as having no footing nor foundation at all in the Word of God, by way of answer to the arguments made use of by Mr. William Allen, Mr. Sidenham, Mr. Baxter, Dr. Burthogge, and others for the support of that practice : wherein the covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai ... : together with a description of that truly evangelical covenant God was pleased to make with believing Abraham ... / by Philip Carey ... Cary, Philip. 1690 (1690) Wing C742; ESTC R31291 244,449 284

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Therefore that Covenant could be no other than a Covenant of Works Ninthly That Covenant that is plainly and in direct terms opposed unto Grace cannot be a Covenant of Grace But the Law is by the Apostle directly opposed unto Grace Rom. 6. 14. Sin shall not have Dominion over you For ye are not under the Law but under Grace Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Grace Tenthly That Covenant that was not onely by the Jews Estimated as a Covenant of Works but was so by Gods own Appointment must needs be a Covenant of Works But the Law was not onely by the Jews so Reckoned but by Gods own Appointment it was expresly so designed Lev. 18. 4 5. Deut. 27. 26. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 10 12. Therefore that Covenant must needs be a Covenant of Works Eleventhly That Covenant through which Abrahams Inheritance was not derived could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle doth expresly tell us That if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise But God gave it to Abraham by Promise Gal. 3. 18. Therefore the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twelfthly That Covenant through which had the Inheritance been conveyed would have made void Faith and made the Promise of none effect could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith But the Apostle doth expresly tell us That if they which are of the Law be Heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none effect Rom. 4. 14. Therefore the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith Thirteenthly That Covenant from the Curse whereof we were Redeemed by Christ could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Apostle Informs us That Christ hath Redeemed us from the Curse of the Law himself being made a Curse for us Gal. 3. 13. chap. 4. 4 5. Therefore the Law could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Fourteenthly That Covenant that is set forth by the Apostle as a Ministration of Death and Condemnation could be no other than a Covenant of Works But the Apostle doth assure us that the Law Written in Stones was a Ministration of Death and Condemnation 2 Cor. 3. 7 9. Therefore it could be no other than a Covenant of Works Fifteenthly That Covenant in which 〈◊〉 the Hand writing of Ordinances contained was against us and contrary to us which is therefore now Blotted out and taken out of the way being Nailed to the Cross of Christ could be no other than a Covenant of Works But such is the Nature of the Law Col. 2. 14. 2 Cor. 3. 6 7 8 9. Therefore it could be no other than a Covenant of Works Sixteenthly That Covenant which when it comes Revives Sin and kills the Sinner And which though it was Ordained to Life is by Experience found to be unto Death could not be a Covenant of Grace But Paul doth expresly tell us That when the Commandment came Sin Revived and he died And the Commandment which was Ordained to Life he found to be unto Death Rom. 7. 9 10. Therefore that Covenant could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Seventeenthly That Covenant that is a Bondage Covenant which gendereth to Bondage all whose Children also are in Bondage cannot possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle doth Expresly Inform us that Mount Sinai Covenant is a Bondage Covenant that is gendereth to Bondage and that her Children also are in Bondage Gal. 4. 21 22 23 24 26. Therefore Mount Sinai Covenant could be no other than a Covenant of Works Eighteenthly That Covenant that admitted not of Faith in the Redeemer nor Repentance of Sin Since Pardon of Sin and Curse for Sin are Inconsistent could not be a Covenant of Grace But the Scripture doth expresly assure us That as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is Written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are Written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Nineteenthly That Covenant that had not Christ for the Mediator of it could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle speaking of the Legal Covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai tells us That Christ hath obtained a more Excellent Ministry by how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant which was Established upon better Promises Heb. 8. 6 7 8. 9. From whence it plainly follows that Christ was not the Mediator of the Legal Covenant Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twentiethly That Covenant that was not Confirmed by the Blood of Christ which alone can cleanse us from all unrighteousness but onely by the Bloud of Bulls and Goats and Calves and the Ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean which onely Sanctified to the Purifying of the Flesh and could never take away Sins nor make him that did the Service perfect as pertaining to the Conscience could not be a Covenant of Faith But the Ceremonial Law was of this Nature and the Sacrifices thereof wherewith alone it was Dedicated Heb. 9. 9 10. 11 12 13 14. Chap. 10. 1 2 3 4 c. Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twenty first That Covenant that was not confirmed by the Bloud of Christ No nor so much as by the Bloud of Bulls or Goats or Calves which was plainly Typical thereof could never be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Law Written in Stones was so far from being confirmed by the Bloud of Christ that it was never that we read of Dedicated with any other sort of Bloud whatsoever Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Twenty second That Covenant that is Represented to us in the Scripture as a Fiery Burning Law the Proclamation also whereof was attended with dreadful Thunderings and Lightenings with Blackness and Darkness and Tempest And such a Voice of Words as could not be endured which made Moses himself exceedingly to quake and tremble could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But such was the Nature and Quality of the Legal Covenant at Mount Sinai Exod. 20. 18. 19. Deut. 33. 2. Heb. 12. 18 19 20 21. Therefore that Covenant could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twenty third That Covenant that is just opposite to the Gospel Covenant which the Scripture represents unto us as a Covenant of Peace and Liberty making a Joyful found and speaking with a small still comfortable and alluring Voice in the Ears and to the Hearts of Sinners that hath also Jesus for the Mediator thereof and speaketh better things than the Bloud of Abel Proclaiming the Lord the Lord God Gracious and Merciful Abundant in Goodness and in Truth forgiving Iniquity
and the Law Written in Stones that was not so Dedicated How strangely doth he Confound and Obscure the word and truth of God which ought to have been cleared and distinctly to have been declared to those he had Preached or Written unto For first he seems to take it for granted that there was no other Covenant made with Israel at Sinai but what was Confirmed by Bloud And Secondly That that Covenant which wa● so Confirmed must of necessity have been Confirmed also by the Blood of Christ Typified thereby and therefore not a Covenant of Works But both these are no other than ungrounded suppositions that want a Foundation § 4. For first It hath been already proved That the Law Written in Stones had not been so much as received from God when the Ceremonial Covenant was so Confirmed And accordingly it was so far from being Confirmed by the Bloud of Christ that we do not read that it was ever Dedicated with any other sort of Bloud whatsoever It is indeed suggested that the Law Written in Stones by Gods own Finger had been also Written by Moses in the Book of the Covenant wherein the Statutes and Judgments were contained when the Bloud thereof was sprinkled on the People Since we are told Exod. 24. 3 4. That Moses came and told the People all the Words of the Lord and all the Judgments And Moses Wrote all the Words of the Lord and took the Book of the Covenant and Read in the Audience of the People and took the Blood and Sprinkled it on the People saying Behold the Blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these Words But if we duly attend unto the Scope of the Spirit of God in these passages we shall find it utterly Improbable that the Ten Commandments that had been Written in Stones with Gods own Finger were at all contained in the Book of the Covenant when the Blood thereof was Sprinkled on the People Forasmuch as God afterwards calls up Moses into the Mount saying I will give thee Tables of Stone and a Law and Commandments which I have Written that thou mayest teach them Ver. 12. Which clearly Implies that the Ten Commandments which was the only matter contained in the two Tables of Stone had not been Written by Moses in the Book of the Covenant wherein the Statutes and Judgments were contained and which he had accordingly Read in the Audience of the People For then it had been altogether Improper to say I will give thee Tables of Stone and a Law and Commandments that thou mayest teach them Since according to this Reckoning Moses had already done it When we are told therefore that Moses came and told the People all the Words of the Lord and all the Judgments c. We are plainly to understand it according to Deut. 4. 13. 14. where having Informed us that the Lord himself declared unto them his Covenant which he commanded them to perform even Ten Commandments and he Wrote them upon two Tables of Stone He Expresly adds The Lord Commanded me saith he at that time to teach you Statutes and Judgments And accordingly Exod. 24. 3. Moses came and told the People all the Words of th● Lord and all the Judgments That is all the Statutes and all ●he Judgments not the Ten Commandments For that God himself had already declared unto them with his own Mouth So that it is evident that it was the Statutes and Judgments only that Moses had then in Commission to declare unto the People And accordingly it is as evident that it was the Statutes and Judgments only that were contained in the Book of the Covenant when the Blood thereof was sprinkled on the People Though afterwards it is plain that upon the Receiving of the two Tables of Stone wherein ●he Ten Commandments were Inserted he had a fresh Commission to teach them the Ten Commandments also as appears by Verse 12. And which we find was accordingly performed by him Deut. 5. in the Several Ten Branches or Particulars thereof § 5. It is therefore a great mistake for any to affirm that the Law written in Stones was not a Covenant of Works because confirmed by Blood and Sprinkling whereas when it comes to be duly examined there appears no such matter but instead of being proved thereby to be a Covenant of Grace it is the more convincingly proved to be as it is indeed no other than a Covenant of Works In which respect Mr. Sedgwick's forementioned Argument may more justly and truly be thus formed That Covenant that was not confirmed by the Blood of Christ which alone can cleanse us from all unrighteousness no nor so much as by the Blood of Bulls or Goats or Calves which was plainly typical thereof could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Law written in Stones was so far from being confirmed by the Blood of Christ that it was never that we read of confirmed by any other sort of Blood whatsoever Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Worlds § 6. Secondly Whereas the Apostle Heb. 9. speaking of the Ceremonial Covenant which was dedicated by Blood and Sprinkling doth plainly represent it unto us under the denomination of the first Covenant that had a Worldly Sanctuary vers 1. Opposing it to Christ as the Figure to the Substance vers 9. Calling the Statutes and Judgments therein contained by the name of Carnal Ordinances and such as could not make him that did the Service Perfect as pertaining to the Conscience vers 10. Another Building vers 11. And the First Testament as it 's Contradistinguish'd from the New-Testament and Christ the true and only Sacrifice thereof vers 18 19. Besides what he had told us in the 8th Chap. concerning this same First or Old-Testament that it was of a faulty decaying vanishing nature vers 7 13. From all this it plainly appears that even the Ceremonial Covenant it self could be no other than a Covenant of Works as well as that written in Stones And accordingly the Apostle informs us Gal. 3. 10. That as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them Which Book of the Law here spoken of must of necessity be the Book of the Covenant written by Moses himself wherein the Statutes and Judgments or the Ceremonial Precepts were contained In respect whereof it is evident that though the Sacrifices and other things thereunto belonging pointed at Christ and the way of Salvation by him yet such was the severity of the Divine Sanction thereunto annexed that if those under that Administration had wrought never so hard and kept themselves in a Path of perfect and Universal Obedience to the multitude of those Ceremonial Precepts all their days which was impossible yet if at last cast there happened
o● Intended that any should obtain Life and Righteousness by their Personal Obedience to it yet even in this Respect also it was a● much a Covenant of Works as that made with our first Parent For God never intended that Adam himself should obtain Life and Righteousness by his Obedience to that Covenant For if he had the purpose or intention of God in that respect must of necessity have been accomplished And accordingly Adam should have stood and Life and Righteousness should that way have been derived unto him and not only unto him but unto all his Off-spring also But it is evident that Man that was in Honour abode not but fell and we all in him and accordingly a New Covenant takes place whereby Life and Righteousness was to be derived both unto him and all his Elect Offspring § 3. So that if that Covenant at Sinai was materially a Cove-of Works though God intended not that Life should be that way derived unto us so it was in respect of Adam's Covenant also For as in the Legal Covenant God doth now plainly tell sinners That the Man that doth these things shall live by them that is if you can perform a steady perfect Obedience Life and Salvation shall be your Reward thus and no otherwise was our first Parent himself dealt withal For this was all the stipulation or agreement that we find God made with him Gen. 2. 16. The Lord God commanded the man saying of every Tree of the Garden thou maist freely eat But of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil thou shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Carrying with it an implicite conditional Promise that if he forbore it both Himself and Posterity should live For God never that we can find made any absolute Promise of Life to him only implicit and conditional And since it cannot with any shadow of truth be affirmed that God ever made any absolute Promise of this nature unto him Neither therefore can it be justly affirmed that God ever intended that Life and Righteousness should be conveyed unto him by his Obedience unto that Covenant Nay rather it is clear that God foresaw he would fall and consequently designed that Life and Righteousness should not that way be derived unto HIm or to any of his Offspring From whence it plainly follows the Sinai Covenant was as much a Covenant of Works as that made with our first Parent not only since it is materially the saine but in this respect intentionally also SECT XI BUt whereas it is further objected That if God never since the Fall published the Covenant of Works with a design to justifie any man by it and yet in the Sinai Covenant hath given it materially Considered a Second Edition and Promulgation It must needs follow that it was done in Subserviency to Christ and the Covenant of Grace or done in vain as to the Elect. To set it forth in opposition to the Covenant of Grace can never be imagined To make it a Co-ordinate way of Salvation with Christ is proved impossible Therefore it must be subordinate or not at all there being nothing else left us And this say they the Scriptures fully assert and confirm Rom. 10. 4. Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that believeth Are the End and Means contrariant Or must not the means be always subordinate to the end This is plain and clear Reasoning not easily Answered So Gal. 3. 24. The Law it as our School-master to bring us to Christ that is to bring us to a Conviction of his Necessity as it did Paul Rom. 7. after Christ was come and thousands more since Paul Again Gal. 3. 23. It shut us up to Christ or Faith as our only Remedy This was and still is its use and design and will be so to the end to all that come to Christ As to others it hath another end even to Judge and Condemn them that continue under it as a Covenant of Works Rom. 2. 12. But to Believers it is subservient to Christ both to bring them to him at first and regulate their Lives as a Moral Rule ever after And therefore the two Tables are put into the Ark Heb. 9. 4. to shew their subserviencie to him and in this sense its consistence with him § 2. For Answer whereunto We do indeed acknowledge the subserviencie of the Law to Christ and the Covenant of Grace in which respect it is also true That the Means is not Contrariant to the End but is always subordinate thereunto But it doth not therefore follow that the Law is a Covenant of Gospel-Grace for that is the only Point we are Contending about or Enquiring after It hath indeed a plain subserviencie or subordination thereunto as Hagar the type of the Bondage Covenant had unto Sarah the type of the Gospel Covenant But yet neither is the Handmaid the Mistress nor the Mistress the Handmaid These two are still distinct The Law is not the Gospel nor the Gospel the Law And therefore though the one of them is plainly subservient to the other yet they ought not to be mixed ●●ended or confounded the one with the other as if they were but one and the same Covenant and no difference to be made between them only in respect of the Different Degrees of the Discovery of Gospel Grace as hath been suggested § 3. 'T is true the Law is appointed as our School-master to Christ for so the words run in the Original Text as your selves have acknowledged that is to shew us the Nature of Sin together with the Holiness and Righteousness of God's Nature and Being to Convince us of our Sin and Misery without Christ and our Necessity therefore of a Saviour And in all these respects it hath Indeed a plain subserviency to drive us to Christ and to induce us to fly with the more earnestness to lay hold upon New-Covenant-Grace wherein Christ is plainly exhibited unto us for our Relief But then it doth not therefore follow that the Law it self is subserviently a Covenant of Gospel-Grace or that it is such for the substance of it as both Mr. Sedgwick Mr. Roberts and many other worthy Divines affirm it is A subserviency in any thing to promote the Ends of something else doth not make it to be the thing it self the Ends whereof are promoted thereby The temptations of Satan and the persecutions of Wicked Men have a plain subserviency and that by God's own appointment through his Over-ruling Providence to promote the Ends of the Covenant of Grace and to make us fly the more earnestly thereunto for Succour yet it would be too absurd to affirm that either of these are the Covenant of Grace or subserviently such So it is in our present Case For though the Law is in it self against us and contrary to us as being a Ministration of Death and Condemnation as the Apostle witnesses it is
differe●h nothing from a Servant though he be Lord of all But it under Tutors and Governours until the time appointed of the Father Even so we when we were Children were in Bondage under the Elements of the World But when the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to Redeem them that were under the Law that we might Receive the Adoption of Sons So that upon the whole it is plain matter of Fact evident and undeniable Resolve we the Mystery thereof how we will That the Jews even the whole Body of that People without exception of any were for the time appointed of the Father under the Dominion and Tiranny of the Law and that as a Covenant of Works or a Bondage Covenant when yet it is equally as evident that at the same time all the Elect among them were under a Covenant of pure Gospel Grace whereby they were saved § 3. Wherefore we must grant that God's People were then under two distinct or essentially different Covenants We say we must do so provided always that the way of Reconciliation and Salvation was the same under both But it will be said and with great pretence of Reason for it is that which is the sole Foundation they all build upon who affirm the Legal and the Gospel-Covenants to be only a twofold Administration of the same Covenant That this being the Principal End of a Divine Covenant If the way of Reconciliation and Salvation be the same under both then indeed they are for the Substance of them but one And we grant that this would inevitably follow If it were so equally by vertue of them both If Reconciliation and Salvation by Christ were to be obtained not only under the Old Covenant but by vertue thereof then it must be the same for substance with the New But this is not so For no Reconciliation with God nor Salvation could ever be obtained by vertue of the Old Covenant or the Administration of it For by the Deeds of the Law there shall no Flesh be justified in his sight as our Apostle disputes at large Rom. 3. 20 c. though all Believers were R●●onc●led Justified and Saved by vertue of the Promise whilst they were under that Covenant § 4. And how absurd soever it may seem to be to affirm that God'● People were under two Contrary Covenants at one and the same time yet as we see the Scriptures do plainly assure us they were so it is evident that the absurdity is by far the greater on the other hand to affirm that the Sinai Covenant was purposely so dispensed as to tender Life and Happiness upon two Opposite and quite Contrary Conditions viz. Works and Faith Perfect Doing and Believing as if the same Foundai●●● could at the same time yield forth bitter waters and sweet Which absurdity all those must of necessity run into that affirm the Sinai Covenant to be a Covenant of Faith in Christ Jesus As hath been already shewn SECT XIV ANd here we should have drawn up the sum of what hath been already offered on the present Subject but that there are four Arguments yet behind pretending to prove that the Sinai Covenant and that made with Adam in Paradise were not the same but widely different Covenants which remain therefore to be Answered Only by the way it must be remembred that two Arguments to the same purpose have already been dispatcht The First was That though the Sinai Covenant materially Considered is the same with Adams yet intentionally it is vastly different The Second was That the Sinai Covenant had a Mediator which Adams wanted Both which we hope have been Satisfactorily Answered in the foregoing parts of this Discourse It remains therefore that we proceed to the Consideration of those that follow The first whereof runs thus Arg. 1. Those Covenants that differ in the Subjects or Parties with whom they are made are not the same but different Covenants But so doth that at Sinai and that in Paradice The Covenant made with Adam was made with Innocent and Perfect Man able to keep it This with Lapsed Sinful Man utterly disabled to keep any one Precept of it Reply To which we Reply That the difference betwixt the Subjects makes no alteration in the Substance or Essence of the Covenants Especially since we have already by several Arguments substantially proved not only that they were Materially the same which your selves cannot but acknowledge but intentionally also And forasmuch as 't is undeniable That God hath not forfeited or lost his Right of Sovereignty or Dominion over us though we have forfeited and lost our strength and capacity of Obedience the Covenants in question therefore may very well be the same notwithstanding the difference betwixt their Subjects Arg. 2. Those Covenants that vastly differ in their Dedication are not the same but divers But so doth the Covenants with Israel and with Adam The Covenant with Adam taught no way of the Expiation of Sins by the Dedication of it so did that with Moses Exod. 24. 8. And Moses took the Blood and sprinkled it on the People and said Behold this is the Blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words Reply To this we Reply That it hath been already proved That though the Ceremonial Covenant was indeed dedicated with Blood and Sprinkling yet the Law written in Stones was no● So that if Adam's Covenant wanted Confirmation or Dedication with Blood shewing the Remission of Sins so did that written in Stones also And therefore in this respect there is no difference at all betwixt them True it is that the Ceremonial Covenant was ●o dedicated in which respect there is a plain difference betwixt that and the Covenant made with Adam But this alters not the Case For it is evident that the Law written in Stones was not so dedicated and that is enough to prove what we have all along asserted That the Covenant of Works made with our First Parent was renewed to that People in the Wilderness And though 't is true the Ceremonial Covenant being dedicated as it was did point unto Christ and the way of Salvation by him yet nevertheless it hath been already proved that it was a Covenant of Works as well as that written in Stones and therefore both of them now Repealed to make way for the New Covenant which was established upon better Promises And it having been proved that they were both no other than two several Editions of the same Covenant of Works and that neither of them can with any shadow of Truth or Justice be stiled a Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant which cannot be affirmed without contradicting the whole Scope of the Scriptures it sufficiently serves the design we level at whether there be a Perfect Identity in every Circumstance between either of these and Adam's Covenant or no. For as Dr. Owen well observes Whatever variations