A41355:230
The Marrow of Modern Divinity
The marrow of modern divinity touching both the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace, with their use and end, both in the time of the Old Testament, and in the time of the New : wherein every one may clearly see how far forth he bringeth the law into the case of justification, and so deserveth the name of legalist : and how far forth he rejecteth the law, in the case of sanctification, and so deserveth the name of Antinomist : with the middle path between them both, which by Jesus Christ leadeth to eternal life : in a dialogue, betwixt Evangelista, a minister of the Gospel, Nomista, a legalist, Antinomista, an Antinomian, and Neophytus, a young Christian / by the author, E.F. ; before the which there is prefixed the commendatory epistles of divers divines of great esteem in the city of London ; whereunto is also added, the substance of aThe marrow of modern divinity touching both the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace, with their use and end, both in the time of the Old Testament, and in the time of the New : wherein every one may cleerly see how far forth he bringeth the law into the case of justification, and so deserverh the name of legalist : and how far forth he rejecteth the law, in the case of sanctification, and so deserveth the name of Antinomist : with the middle path between them both, which by Iesus Christ leadeth to eternall life : in a dialogue, betwixt Evangelista, a minister of the Gospel, Nomista, a legalist, Antinomista, an Antinomian, and Neophytus, a young Christian / by the author, E.F. ; before the which there is prefixed the commendatory epistles of divers divines of great esteem in the citie of London ; whereunto is also added, the substance of a
London: printed by R. Leybourn for Giles Calvert, 1646
THE MARROW OF Modern Divinity.THE MARROVV OF Modern Divinity.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Ant. Surely then it seems they did not understand and consider, that the Law as it is the Covenant of works, doth not only bind the outward man, but also the inward man, even the soul and spirit, and requires all holy thoughts, motions, and dispositions of the heart and soul.
Ant. Surely then it seemes they did not understand and consider, that the Law as it is the Covenant of workes, doth not onely binde the outward man, but also the inward man, even the soule and spirit, and requires all holy thoughts, motions, and dispositions of the heart and soule.
Evan. Oh no, they neither taught it, nor understood it, so spiritually, neither could they be persuaded, that the Law doth require so much at mans hands; for they first laid this down for a certain truth, that God gave the Law for man to be Justified and saved by his obedience to it, and that therefore there must needs be a power in man to do all that it requireth, or else God would never have required it, and therefore whereas they should first have considered, what a straight rule the Law of God is, and then have brought mans heart, and have laid it to it, they contrariwise first considered what a crooked rule mans heart is, and then sought to make the Law like unto it, and so indeed they expounded the Law literally, teaching and holding, that the righteousness which the Law required, was but an ⟨p. 73⟩external righteousness, consisting in the outward observation of the Law, as you may see by the testimony of our Saviour, Matth. 5.1 So that according to their exposition, it was possible for a man to fulfil the Law perfectly, and so to be justified and saved by his obedience to it.
Evan. Oh no, they neither taught it, nor understood it, so spiritually, neither could they be perswaded, that the Law doth require so much at mans hands; for they first laid this downe for a certaine truth, that God gave the Law for man to be Justified and saved by his obedience to it, and that therefore there must needs be a power in man to doe all that it requireth, or else God would never have required it, and therefore whereas they should first have considered, what a straight rule the Law of God is, and then have brought mans heart, and have laid it to it, they contrariwise first considered what a crooked rule mans heart is, and then sought to make the Law like unto it, and so indeed they expounded the Law literally, teaching and holding, that the righteousnesse which the Law required, was but an