Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the moral law and the covenants, from the…Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the…

6. The arguments of the Antinomian for the greater part, which ¹they urge do not only overthrow the use of it to believers, but also unbelievers. This also is good to be attended unto; for the Apostle in many places, where he speaks of the Law as a Schoolmaster, and the continuance of it for a time, doth not speak comparatively of a believer with an unbeliever, but of the state of the Gospel, and the state of the Old Testament: so that, as a wicked man may not circumcise, or take up the sacrifices, so neither may he use the Moral Law, as commonly the Jews did, which was as distinct from Christ, and as if that of it self were able alone to save. Therefore I wonder why the Antinomians bring many of their arguments to prove that a believer is freed from the Law; for, certainly, most of those places will infer, that unbelievers also under the New Testament are; for, the Apostle, for the most part, doth argue against that state of the Church and administrations that were used formerly; as in the 1 Cor. 3. when the Apostle makes the administration of the Law to be death, and of the Gospel life. Here he speaketh not of particular persons, but of the general state under the Gospel: So in Gal. 2. and 3. Chapters he argueth against the whole dispensation of the Law, and makes it equally abrogated unto all. And it may probably be thought, that that famous expression of the Apostle [ye are not under the Law but under grace] is not only to be understood of every particular believer; but generally of the whole dispensation of the Gospel under the New Testament.²

6. The arguments of the Antinomian for the greater part, which ¹they urge do not only overthrow the use of it to beleevers, but also unbeleevers. This also is good to be attended unto; for the Apostle in many places, where he speaks of the Law as a Schoolmaster, and the continuance of it for a time, doth not speake comparatively of a beleever with an unbeleever, but of the state of the Gospel, and the state of the Old Testament: so that, as a wicked man may not circumcise, or take up the sacrifices, so neither may he use the Morall Law, as commonly the Jewes did, which was as distinct from Christ, and as if that of it self were able alone to save. Therefore I wonder why the Antinomians bring many of their arguments to prove that a beleever is freed from the Law; for, certainly, most of those places will inferre, that unbeleevers also under the New Testament are; for, the Apostle, for the most part, doth argue against that state of the Church and administrations that were used formerly; as in the