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

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63017	The re-assertion of grace, or, Vindiciæ evangelii a vindication of the Gospell-truths, from the unjust censure and undue aspersions of Antinomians : in a modest reply to Mr. Anth. Burgesses Vindiciæ legis, Mr. Rutherfords Triall and tryumph of faith, from which also Mr. Geerie and M. Bedford may receive a satisfactory answer / by Robert Towne.	Towne, Robert, 1592 or 3-1663.; Bushell, Seth, 1621-1684.; Towne, Robert, 1592 or 3-1663. Monomachia, or, A single reply to Mr. Rutherford's book ...	1654 (1654)	Wing T1980; ESTC R23436	205,592	262

the consent or opinion of Divines as the best yea sole reason and warrant you have for this whereas you regard not their concurrence in other things 4. Your inference is as strange viz. That there must then necessarily be grace included in the morall Law for suppose your reducement be true yet the same grace was still contained and kept in the ceremoniall as before and it could import no whit of its native vertue or as a physicall ingredient infuse its spirit strength or force to alter and qualifie the Law of works for then grace were no more grace nor works no more works If you make the morall so capacious as to receive into it the other as a greater Orbe the lesser or as your Chest doth a box of oyntment or the Ark the Pot of Manna yet there is no necessity of any influence from one into the other or of any thing to be poured out of one vessell into another but all that grace of remission of sins c. was still preserved and kept in the ceremoniall Law and so no grace in the morall 4. If the Apostle did speak as much against the ceremoniall as morall Law was it not because the people had no further respect then to the act observance or thing done resting in the bare use without faith in Christ the onely treasure hid and propounded in and by them and so they made that to be worke which was grace and so no difference between ceremoniall and morall things Sincere accep●● non sunt pro●●ie opera ho●●num sed ●●ei nam ni●●l agimus sed ●●ferimus nos ●●eo ad recipi●●ndam ejus ●●vatiam Cal. And being thus perverted the continuance and use of circumcision and the sacrifices did oppose Christ and grace though they did not so as they were instituted and commanded by God to be used Sacrifices and Sacraments be Gods Ordinances which rightly understood and taken and purely used are not properly mans works but Gods He propoundeth and commendeth thereby unto us his grace and the work of redemption by Jesus Christ the sole object that our faith is to look at and to be exercised about in the use of them If we handle them sincerely we bring no work nothing for acceptation with God but onely are receivers of what he freely giveth unto us It s an easie and too common an errour to turn all into works even Baptism and the Lords Supper whereby the simple nature and verity of them is extinguished and lost Christ profiteth none but such as despairing of Law and works do by faith she onely unto the promise of his grace If a man seek help or comfort in any one act or work he is then bound to seek the same in all the works of the Law and so is a debter to fulfill the whole Law and is quite fallen from grace so is it Gal. 5.2 3 4. Behold I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised namely in that perswasion that that act will avail you any thing Christ shall not profit you at all c. 5. Lastly This say you hath been alway a strong Argument to perswade you c. And there appeareth no strength in it but it is as weak silly and poor as any and whereas you say alwaies I understand you thus viz. since you entertained that conceit that the Law of works is a Covenant of grace by a mistake herein you might be confirmed in that errour but what bred or occasioned that opinion at first And we now having the same morall Law how is it if the ceremoniall be included in that second Commandment that it doth not bind us also to sacrifice be circumcised c. as it did the Jews else we have not all in the Law Mr. B. This will appear from the visible seal to ratifie the Covenant Argn. 5 which was by sacrifices and sprinkling the people with blood and this did signifie Christ the Mediatour of this Covenant Answ Interpreters vary about the meaning of that Covenant-book or Testament that was sprinkled with blood Exod. 24. If you will contend it was the Law largely taken even for what was delivered on Mount Sinai In which large acceptation that Law blood of sprinkling and other ceremonies then used were typicall and shadows of future good things Heb. 10.1 then you exclude the Morall Law strictly taken as a rule of righteousness for it was not typicall And now what have you gained by making this a Covenat of grace which the Jews lived under or where or what grace is found in the morall Law But when Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people and said Behold the blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you Exod. 24.8 your Marginall note telleth you It was to signifie that the Law being broken by us could alone be satisfied by the blood and death of Christ Let Moses be typicall Mediatour yet it followeth not that it was not a covenant of works if you take it for the Law morall but contrarily that it was no other for a Mediator was therefore needfull because by the Law the people were convinced that there was dissention and variance between God and them in that they were proved to be transgressors of that his Law and the enmity was to be slain and abolished and a reconcilement made by a middle person Argn. 6 The residue of this Section I leave as dubious and obscure of whom you mean I know not Mr. B. If the Law was that same Covenant with that Oath God made to Isaac then it must needs be a Covenant of grace But c. Therefore God remembers what he had promised to Abraham Deut. 7.2 It shall come to pass if ye hearken to these judgements and do them that the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant and mercy which he sware unto thy Fathers Answ Nothing is more evident by this place then that the Law requiring these judgements to be hearkened unto and done was a distinct doctrine from that Covenant made with them in their Fathers For 1. God requires of them the doing of the one but promises that he himself will keep the other the Covenant and the mercy so that this wholly rests and relyeth on him 2. He calls and commendeth himself first to be the Lord their God not upon condition of their doing or obedience but before he required it and as the ground of commanding it 3. The Covenant and mercy was made long before and confirmed by Oath in the dayes of their Fathers these stand all in that text fully against you and for us Yet he dealing with them as a Father with his Children is willing to manifest his faithfulness and love in keeping Covenant and promise made long before in that way of their obedience and dutifulness but that he made that Covenant the same with the Law is denied as utterly false If you say to your Child he shall find you a loving and kind

Answ Here you wrong your adversary he speaks of a power and you of an act The Law may actually condemn where and when it cannot actually justifie as it condemneth every transgressor but can justifie onely the innocent and yet the power for to do both is equally in it as a Law Why do you not answer the ensuing Question viz. Can you put your Conscience under the Mandatory power and yet keep it from under the damnatory The Law bids you love your neighbour though your enemy and presuppose you are obedient thereunto yet do you do it so perfectly that the Law hath no power to reprove and condemn you in that particular If the Law condemn you not away with humiliation Confession Repentance Justification and all living by Faith in Christ For now you can so walk according to the rule of the Law that it cannot subject you to the curse and death you are not reproved and judged in your self for any thing your peace and safety is by your just life the Law being curbed and restrained or rather exauthorized or dis-invested of all power to condemn and your life and comfort is not by your Faith in the Son of God who loved you and gave himself for you as Gal. 2.21 There is no condemnation unto you not because you are in Christ as Rom. 8.1 but the reason is in that the Law though a rule yet wanteth power to reign to death We often meet with this groundless and false assertion and now see what is the chief stone that you stumble at Let this now suffice M. B. The same Author again pag. 5. He dare not trust a believer to walk without his keeper c. they are onely kept within compass by the Law but are no keepers of it Answ The word they relates not to believers if you look the place as here you do intimate You onely repeat what we write but confute nothing M. B. The same Author at another time calls it a slander to say they deny the Law who can reconcile such contradictions Answ I see no contradiction nor shew of any you might tell your Reader wherein it lyeth for all are not so quick-sighted as your self But is not this a contradiction in you who say that we grant the Law to be a rule and that a believer is a free keeper of it and yet that we hold and teach the abolition of it Here the task to reconcile is now yours Also that we deny the Law abideth still a slander for which the Law is against you See the the ninth Commandment The Lord layeth it not unto your charge M. B. p. 52. The second interpretation is of the damnatory and cursing power of the Law the Law is not made to a believer so as he should abide under the cursing and condemning power of it Answ You might remember that right now you said The Law a believer is under hath no power to condemn and curse what need he or how can he then be freed from the cursing power See your own instance If the fire had no power to burn what need was there that God should hinder the act You would saign such a fire as is without all power to burn and tell us of such a Law as wanteth power to condemn who will now fear either or rather who can credit such vain words Your sword cuts the throat of the owner for from the removal or restraint of the act or operation the Argument doth not hold for the removal of the thing or the power to condemn but rather on the contrary it strongly and necessarily inferreth and concludeth that there is such a condemning power in the Law in that it is restrained and hindered from the actual doing of it But secondly here is no such miracle wrought upon the Law as was there upon the fire which kept it from burning the three worthies Dan. 3.23 25. though more abundant mercy be shewed for Christ was made under the Law to redeem us from under it Gal. 4.4 Not to take the curse from the Law but to redeem us In what sense and to what end Christ was under as our surety in the same sense are we freed but he was under both the rule and raign of it Yet it will not follow that believers are in no state of subjection and obedience or being enlarged and set at liberty do not run the way of Gods Commandments For they do it though by another efficient from a new principle and for a different end then that of the Law Do and live They are under Christ and moved and led by his Spirit who is the head and husband of his Church But of this more afterwards M. B. Consider some parallel places of Scripture Gal. 5.23 speaking of the fruits of the Spirit Against such there is no Law the Law was not made to these to condemn them Answ And if you refer it to the fruits of the Spirit the Spirit produceth his fruits of himself and of his own accord no outward Law commanding and directing M. B. And if because the godly have an ingenuous free Spirit to do what is good he need not the Law directing or regulating it would follow as well he need not the whole Scripture Answ You would still bear men in hand that we are against the use of the Law which yet we do stand for if lawfully used as your Text requireth and that in all the Authority and Offices of it and this we can and are ready to make good upon occasion yet since this is so often inculcated by you I wish you would give satisfaction in these few things First If the Spirit make the will and affections free to what is good doth it alter and enlighten the understanding also to know what is truth and good and effectually encline move guide and lead aright without the direction and regulating of the Law doth the Spirit which is light and giveth all light and directive power to the Law need the Law in his work 2. You are to prove and cleer better then yet you have done that the Law is instrumental to the Spirit in the works and ways of sanctification 3. Where do you finde that the moral Law doth give help or power unto any jubet non juvat 4. Whereas you say we are flesh and not all spirit c. It may be replyed that by Scripture and all experience sin the wickedness of our nature is rather irritated and strengthened by the Law then weakned and mortified It is such a desperate disease that it makes head more strongly against any legal plaister and application Rom. 7.5 c. M. B. You say it will follow as well that he needed not the Gospel to call upon him to believe Answ Your reason is much unlike for first the Doctrine of the Gospel is not onely the object of Faith but the outward instrument and ordinary means the Spirit useth both to implant faith and to increase it to

heard 3. True prayer is for the fulfilling of his promise in his own way and not in ours M. B. If the Ceremonial Law the Sacraments and Sacrifices were blessed by Gods Spirit while they were commanded to be used for the strengthening and increase of grace notwithstanding the deadly nature of them now then the Moral may be blessed c. seeing it stands still in force Answ While those ordinances were in use they were effectual to increase faith and so to quicken confirm and cheer the heart against inward temptations from sin Satan the fear of death of judgement c. for they were instituted for that purpose and fitted also in that they held forth and shadowed Christ Crucified the body and substance life and thing signified If you can prove that the moral law was either ordained or so fitted for that end you say something else water is not so weak as is this Argument M. B. Let the use of them be c. Answ The Lord let you see your error and failing and give you a right use of what is said Indeed the law is holy yet it is manifest that maketh neither heart nor life full of holiness though you abound in legal performances M.B. What is regeneration but the working of the moral law in the heart that is the Image of God Answ Regeneration giveth a new being birth and estate as well as a new Image It maketh us both Sons and also like our heavenly Father but the law is the instrument for neither but the word of truth which is the Gospel of salvation Jam. 1.18 as is cleared before You seem to have a zeal but not according to knowledge and so would lead and hasten on your hearers in a wrong way LECT XXI Rom. 3.31 Do we then make void the Law c. M. B. Let us consider a great mistake of the Antinomian Author in the Assertion pag. 171. where he makes the very ground why they are charged with Antinomianisme to be because they do not hold the law to be used by God instrumentally for the conversion of men certainly this is a great mistake for there are many learned men who hold the work of the law to be no more but preparatory Answ Sir It is no mistake at all for both Dr. Tailor and many others upon that ground have so concluded and condemned us And if your words will sufficiently satisfie the world that this our Opinion and Tenet is so Orthodox and free from Antinomianism as you are enforced to do lest otherwise you should unavoidably as you see and say bring many yea all the learned into the same condemnation with us except your self who yet in so doing might put your owne neck into the coller I doubt not then but the truth will also clear and free us in all other out assertions And so in despight of all ill-will our innocency which hath so unjustly suffered and been so unworthily aspersed a long time by you and others will at last come to light and we shall mirabile dictu stand recti in curia Plead thou our cause O God of our righteousness M. B. Yet for all that they do peremptorily maintaine the use and obligation of the law in respect of believers therefore they are not in that respect condemned for that error Answ Surely if I understand any thing neither they nor yet your self will be so peremptory as to maintain the use and obligation of it to believers quatenus tales To faith or in the state or things of faith there is no obligation nor use of the law If the law be useful to the working Abraham as Luthers phrase and distinction is yet here they all and you also must do so at the last unanimously confess that the law hath power actually to condemn him in all his works and wayes so that by his faith he ever retireth in spirit and returneth to Christ his righteousness that so he may enjoy and preserve his peace freedom life and comfort your best performances need remission of sins much more you for these your Lectures Again if the learned be not condemned for this errour in this respect yet you account it an errour in them and cannot prove it so or else how is it so intolerable in us are you become partial and inequal judges M. B. The question is not whether by the power of the law we come to obey the law but whether Grace may not use the precepts or law preached for the inflaming of our affections so in love with the things commanded that we are thereby made more holy And thus I interpret those Authors that deny the law to be instrumental to holiness that is not animated by Gods Spirit or separated from it An. Now you should address your self to encounter and you begin to shrink in diffidence doubtless of your cause which you perceive so unjustifiable that no advocate will be found to patronize it for did not you in pag. 187. say that you suppose Christ Jesus hath obtained by his death that such efficacy and vertue should go forth of the ministery that whether it be law or Gospel the souls might be healed and converted And now you seem to be no longer of that minde that by the power of the law we come to obey the law which as you mean it is all one with conversion If we come not by the power of the law to obey then it is by the power of the Gospel onely and so we agree If you reply You mean by no power inherent in the law I say There is no inherent or physical vertue neither in the Gospel to effect our conversion 2. Now the question must be onely whether Grace may not use the law c. This is the liberty you can allow your self to alter and to state the question as best liketh you If you misliked the form and terms wherein you found it why became you opponent And now your expressions in this be so uncouth and improper as that grace may use the precepts c. and your meaning in the residue so obscure and doubtful and I so unwilling to wrong you the least jot that I had rather forbear then meddle any further I shall deliver my minde how pertinent to your question or satisfactory to your self it shall prove I know not thus This word of God which revealeth the riches of grace and exceeding kindness in giving righteousness and salvation to the soul is the true and proper instrument for the inslaming of the affections in love both to God his law and all the things of God and the law neither maketh to love God nor its owne commands And here you so mince it that your expression onely is to make us more holy as if already you granted now that the law doth not instrumentally initiate or work sanctification at first but increase it afterward consider this well Lastly Those Authors you mean are not beholden unto you for your so gross and

faith to the everlasting Kingdom You thus swerve from the truth and the old and good way LECT XXII ROM 3.31 Do we then make void the Law Here you tell us It is hard to set up Christ and grace and not thereby to be thought to destroy the Law But it is easie with who was never suspected 2. You say Your Antinomians still are mistaken in this point and plunged into a dangerous errour You should make your words good and discover the errour if not help them out we expect this from you 3. But now like blind Sampson unto whose fact you allude you have raised a doctrine which will lead you to lay your hands on the chiefe pillars of the Antinomian edifice Mr. B. The question then at this time to be discussed is whether the Law be abrogated or no by Christ to the believers under the Gospel Answ Who would question it for Christ came not to destroy the Law but taught that every Apex or lota of it is imperishable Matth. 5.17 18. Indeed your doctrine is the Law is deprived of all power to justifie accuse or accurse but who can receive it If these be no tittle or part of the Lawd understand nothing And yet you tell us often of promises of great rewards for your legall obedience and good works cherefore there is a power to justifie command and bless established by you or else which I rather think your tenets be inconsistent and mutually overthrow each other Mr. B. If we would speak exactly and properly we cannot say in any good sense that the Morall Law is abrogated at all Answ If you would keep there denying according to the truth of the Scripture any mitigation at all either totall or partiall we might soon agree shake hands and lay down our weapons Mr. B. We may say it is mitigated Answ It is then because your Tongues are your own or that you will speak before God say so and so without your Warrant Such teaching of mitigating and Evangelizing the Law of Gods accepting the will for deed c. hath occasioned such dangerous confusion of Law and Gospel these sad controverfies in the Church much instabilitie and many mistakes in the peoples minds c. Mr. B. But you must still distinguish when we speak of the Law some parts of it from the whole Some parts of it may be abolished and yet not the whole nature of it for there are in the Law these parts 1. Commands 2. Promises of life to him that doth them 3. The threatnings of eternal death to him that faileth Now the Morall Law although it be abrogated in respect of the two later to a believer yet in respect of the former it doth still abide yea and will continue in Heaven it self as we have already proved that one part of the Law may abide when the other doth not Answ Like Foundation like Building This makes all your opposition dispute and discourse so weak and soon annihilated in that your ground is so faulty and failing 1. Why are you so inconsiderate thus to distinguish where God doth not and so audacious as to mutilate his good Law which he delivered and would have still to be preserved entire and perfect 2. All this tendeth to nothing but to make the Kingdom and way of the Law so easie and tolerable that the soul may here find a requiem where to settle her abode and never enjoy nor come to Christ and dwell under his shadow and Kingdom where Grace through his righteousness reigneth to eternall life Rom. 5.21 3. What is the reason your discourse is so loose and improper did you not even now tell us that to speak properly and exactly we cannot say in any good sense the Morall Law is abrogated and have you so soon forgotten what you said or are you regardless of any good sense or propriety of words You make three parts I would know what parts they may be called Homogeneal all of them truely law as a drop of the Ocean is as verily water as the whole Sea or Heterogeneal as Timber and Stones be parts of a House but not of the same kinde and nature in themselves and the Soul and Body be two essential parts constituting the man yet the one as flesh the other as spirit and not of one of these alone but the compositum of both is the man So here I demand when you tell us we must distinguish some parts of the Law from the whole Whether these parts be essentiall and requisite to the making or constituting of the whole Law If these three be all parts then to take away two will mutilate if not destroy the whole Law the whole consisting but of three cannot be entire and perfect having lost two And the rather I ask this because pag. 139. you say but prove not for it is not your manner your Disciples and so all other must be jurati in verba Magistri that the Law most strictly taken is meer Mandative without any promises at all Now if the meer Mandative be a Law why do you call the other two there excluded as not needfull parts of it and not rather with Dr. Tailer appendices to it 4. To distinguish between part and part may be granted and usefull but as to distinguish between soul and body between Christ and his Church or between the signe and grace in the Sacrament but to separate and sunder one part from the the other you know here its intoleable and destructive and you so distinguish that you plainly separate and cut off two parts from the third as abolished And yet the whole nature of the Law remaineth if we can believe you not abrogated to the believer you have often put your Adversarie to reconcile his tenets when there was no such cause as you see here is to agree yours The Law in regard of the threats and promises say you is abrogated a very bold assertion which never can be made good When you promise eternall life unto every good work a believer doth as pag. 40. is it not a legall and conditionall promise so as no good work no eternall life and how then can you here say that the promises of the Law be abrogated to a believer And when a believer with Noah David Lot c. doth fall into open and scandalous offences do you not threaten and terrifie him that he may be moved and stirred up if he be secure to seek for healing by faith in the blood of Christ And doth not this also convincingly argue that the reproofs and threats of the Law are of force and not abrogated Lastly if the preceptive part continue in Heaven you cannot say that justice there shall be without power for the two other also what though it doth not actually condemn any Is God without power to make another World because he maketh it not And whereas you say That you have already proved two parts to be abrogated and one still abiding you either forget

to meddle with by-matters You then shew what a Covenant is And as here you say You find much difference of judgement so I say You are unhappily perswaded to incline to the most unlikely unfound and palpably erronious opinion of all others if yet you have any to travel and go with you in your way but you love cross and by-wayes that you may be better noted to become famous or infamous Mr. B. The Law as to this purpose may be considered more largely as that whole doctrine delivered on Mount Sinai with the preface and promises adjoyned and all things that may be reduced to it or more strictly as it is an abstracted rule of righteousness holding forth life upon no terms but perfect obedience Now take it in the former sence it was a Covenant of grace take it in the later it was not of grace but of works Answ This is first to be premised and we take it as granted by you that however you consider the Law yet you mean onely the moral Law Yet you will not be contented with the simple and entire law as it is an absolute law in it self but do take in also unto it the preface promises and all things reduceable your extent of it is now become large indeed and to me indefinite What you draw in and reduce to it who knoweth But I smell some feare and diffidence in this great enterprize your own thoughts being apprehensive of the unjustifiableness of this strange and bold assertion you would not therefore be too narrowly kept in but will take more scope and ground then is allowable but let this pass and to come to a more particular reply Methinks the Pieface it self should have been sufficient to have stopt you in this your way or opinion Thus it is recorded Exod. 20.2 and Deut. 5.6 I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out c. out of which I collect and it is plain and undenyable That God was their God and Israel his people before the giving of the Law and that he did not in these words express his wilingness and consent to be their God if or upon condition they will keep these his Commandments which you call the first thing belonging to a Covenant therefore he saith Hear I am thy God that is I am now already thy God namely by free promise in the seed of the woman Gen. 3. or as it was made to Abraham and his posterity Gen 12.3 Gal. 3.6 To Abraham and his seed were the promises made And unto this promise or Covenant of grace then which I know no other in simple nature and essence or substance they had given and professed their consent formerly by their faith and externally by receiving circumcifion the signe of the Covenant and so avouched God to be their only God in Christ and themselves his people through him And he being their God and King it pleased him now to deliver unto them his will in this way and form of Government according to which he would rule them and they were to conform themselves to his pleasure herein 2. And this promise given by God and believed on by them so long before this promulgation and solemne delivery of the Law was entire of it self containing perfection of doctrine and holding out a free and clear way to pardon reconciliation and life And therefore it was singly made preached at first to Adam and Abraham with his posterity so that Paul saith Gal. 3.18 God gave the Inheritance that is all the blessedness belonging to a Child bylpromse denying and excluding the Law in this And hence is it that to prevent all objections against the doctrine of free grace Paul saith Rom. 5.20 Moreover the Law entered that the offence might abound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Law entered besides the promise of grace which was the prime and principall doctrine and it entered into the Church or among the people of God and yet neither to disannull nor to adde any thing unto the former Covenant or promise Gal. 3.15 as if of imperfect before it was to be perfected thereby Nor yet as if it were to be mingled with the promise and so to adulterate it but it was to be kept distinct from it as being of another nature and for another end contrary to that of the promise The Law was to uncover sin terrifie the conscience exclude the soul from Gods favour and presence the promise to cover to pacifie and comfort and to admit or give entrance again with confidence through faith in Christs blood The Law was to make sin abound that upon that occasion the ampleness and efficaciousness of the grace promised in Christ might be more abundant And as for the promises of the Law Piscator telleth you That they are to be excluded the Covenant of grace as being of a diverse nature or quality from those promises of grace The promise of grace is Nuda simplex gratuita the legall promises are Conditionales But now we will consider by what Scriptures and Reasons you would confirm it First you say Mr. B. There is nothing more ordinary with Paul in these controversies then to consider the Law so differently as take this instance Rom. 10.5.6 where he descibeth the righteousness of the Law from these words Do and live c. We find this in effect Deut. 30.16 and yet from this very chap. The Apostle describes the righteousness which is by faith And Beza doth acknowledge that that which Moses speaks of the Law Paul applieth to the Gospel Answ We might expect a more plain and clear text then this which is so knotty and difficult that it hath troubled the best commentators if yet you could produce any ●er verbum entelligit M. Legem quam Dominus voce sua promulgavit P. autom ad praedicationem Evangelii quae fuit Legis perfectio accommodat B. but your poor shift and nakedness is manifest If you stand here to Beza his words make directly against you What Moses speaks of the Law Paul applieth to the Gospel saith he Moses said thus of the Law and Paul of the Gospel Thus then by his interpretation 1. The Law is not one with the Gospel nor doth it comprehend it but containeth a doctrine in kinde differing from the Gospel or Covenant of grace 2. He seemeth to be of that judgement with many others that Paul doth but allude to that place in Moses and doth not directly and purposely cite Moses for confirmation and this is most probable in that something is added some left out and something altered Calvin thinkes the knot may easily be untied Sed totam in genere doctrinam quae ●vangelium sub se compre●endat c. thus If by the word we understand not the law but the whole doctrine of God in general as it comprehendeth the Gospel for saith he The word of the Law never cometh of it self to be in the