If we look next on that place of Scripture in Micah 4. 2. which is not merely parallel to the forecited in Esa, but perfectly agreeing with it, we shall see it imports Christ, not as a new Legislator, to have given a new Law of Works on more moderate Terms, but to have taught a pure Doctrine of Grace. The words of Micah 4. 2. are these, And many Nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the Mountain of the Lord, and to the House of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us of his Ways, and we will walk in his Paths: for the Law shall go forth of Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem. The Hebrew [Greek or Hebrew] Torah, in our English Version translated Law, is by Junius and Tremellius, as well as by Piscator, rendered Doctrine; Out of Zion goes forth the Doctrine. And Piscator in his short Notes on the Text, critically observes, that however the word Torah is rendered by others Law, yet it will not accord with the genuine meaning of this Text, because it speaks of the Gospel. And in his brief Exposition on the next Words, [And the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem]; This, says he, is the Word of Grace, i. e. concerning the Grace toward those who believe on Christ: Which way of explaining of the former Expression Law to be the Doctrine of the Gospel, by the following Words, [the Word of the Lord] as exegetical of those other, Calvin, that Apostle of the Reformed Religion, also takes;b This (says he) is but the Repetition of the former Sentence as 'tis usual. Therefore by [Greek or Hebrew] Torah, the Prophet intended nothing else but Doctrine. But further, to show, that all but Papists, Socinians and Arminians, harmoniously agree in explaining such places, after such a manner, as may not give the least colour to the Opinion of the Gospel's being a new Law, in the sense of the three mentioned Parties, Tarnovius a Lutheran (between whom, and the Calvinists, what great, and at present irreconcilable Differences in other Points of Religion there are, all the World knows) perfectly accords with Calvin in this Interpretation of the Prophet Micah; cIt is such a ⟨p. 13⟩Law, (of which the Prophet speaks) that in the Hebrew (says he) is called [Greek or Hebrew] Torah; which word, by the Force of its Etymology, notes all and every Doctrine, since it is from the Root [Greek or Hebrew] Jarah, which in Hiphil signifies, he hath taught:
If we look next on that place of Scripture in Micah 4. 2. which is not meerly parallel to the forecited in Esa, but perfectly agreeing with it, we shall see it imports Christ, not as a new Legislator, to have given a new Law of Works on more moderate Terms, but to have taught a pure Doctrine of Grace. The words of Micah 4. 2. are these, And many Nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the Mountain of the Lord, and to the House of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us of his Ways, and we will walk in his Paths: for the Law shall go forth of Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem. The Hebrew 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 Torah, in our English Version translated Law, is by Junius and Tremellius, as well as by Piscator, rendred Doctrine; Out of Zion goes forth the Doctrine. And Piscator in his short Notes on the Text, critically observes, that however the word Torah is rendred by others Law, yet it will not accord with the genuine meaning of this Text, because it speaks of the Gospel. And in his brief Exposition on the next Words, [And the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem]; This, says he, is the Word of Grace, i. e. concerning the Grace toward those who believe on Christ: Which way of explaining of the former Expression Law to be the Doctrine of the Gospel, by the following Words, [the Word of the Lord] as exegetical of those other, Calvin, that Apostle of the Reformed Religion, also takes;b This (says he) is but the Repetition of the former Sentence as 'tis usual. Therefore by 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 Torah, the Prophet intended nothing else but Doctrine. But further, to shew, that all but Papists, Socinians and Arminians, harmoniously agree in explaining such places, after such a manner, as may not give the least colour to the Opinion of the Gospel's being a new Law, in the sense of the three mentioned Parties, Tarnovius a Lutheran (between whom, and the Calvinists, what great, and at present irreconcileable Differences in other Points of Religion there are, all the World knows) perfectly accords with Calvin in this Interpretation of the Prophet Micah; cIt is such a ⟨p. 13⟩Law, (of which the Prophet speaks) that in the Hebrew (says he) is called 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 Torah; which word, by the Force of its Etymology, notes all and every Doctrine, since it is from the Root Jarah, which in Hiphil signifies, he hath taught:
- bEst repetitio ejusdem sententiae, quae passim occurrit. Ergo per [Greek or Hebrew] nihil aliud intellexit Propheta, quam Doctrinam. Calvin. Comment. in Mic. 4. 2. in Part. 2. Tom. 2. oper. Genev. 1617.Est repetitio ejusdem sententiae, quae passim occurrit. Ergo per 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 nihil aliud intellexit Propheta, quam Doctrinam. Calvin. Comment. in Mic. 4. 2. in Part. 2. Tom. 2. oper. Genev. 1617.
- cTalis Lex, quae dicitur Hebraice [Greek or Hebrew] quae vox vi [Greek or Hebrew] omnem doctrinam notat, cum sit à Radice [Greek or Hebrew] quae in Hiphil [docuit] significat: ut frivolum sit hinc veil probare Evangelium esse novam & perfectiorem à Christo in Novo Testamento latam, cum quidem ex hoc Hebraismo Evangelium Lex vocetur Apostolo, Rom. 8. 2. sicut & à Psalte, Psal. 19. 8. sed cum restrictione; Lex vero nunquam Evangelium appellatur. Tarnov. Comment. in Mic. 4. 2. Pag. 104. Rostoch. 1626.Talis Lex, quae dicitur Hebraice 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 quae vox vi 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 omnem doctrinam notat, cum sit à Radice 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 quae in Hiphil [docuit] significat: ut frivolum sit hinc velle probare Evangelium esse novam & perfectiorem à Christo in Novo Testamento latam, cum quidem ex hoc Hebraismo Evangelium Lex vocetur Apostolo, Rom. 8. 2. sicut & à Psalte, Psal. 19. 8. sed cum restrictione; Lex vero nunquam Evangelium appellatur. Tarnov. Comment. in Mic. 4. 2. Pag. 104. Rostoch. 1626.
