A55299:398
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ,…
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ, and our union and communion with him by Edward Polhill ..., Esquire.
London: printed for Ben. Foster, 1675
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.
Though we suppose, 1that Christ as man was bound to yield obedience to the Law ⟨p. 440⟩of Creation, yet the Dr. observes, that this is the only Law he could be liable to as a man; for an innocent man in a Covenant of works, as he was, needed no other Law, nor did God give any other Law to such persons; the Law of Creation is the only Law, that an innocent Creature is liable to, with what Symbols of the Law God is pleased to add: But now Jesus Christ yielded perfect obedience to all the Laws which came upon us by the occasion of sin, as the Ceremonial Law; yea, those very Institutions that signified the washing away of sin and repentance from sin, as the Baptism of John, which he had no need of himself; this therefore must needs be for us: This looks something like, but I fear it will prove like all the rest, that is, to no purpose: I would willingly have had some proof of it, that an innocent man can be bound by no other Law than that of Creation: God, as he acknowledges, might add what Symbols he pleased to that Law; (for he remembered the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil) and I know not what these Symbols are, but positive Laws, and such the Ceremonial Laws were; and if God may require the obedience of an innocent ⟨p. 441⟩man to one positive Law, he may, if he please, enjoin twenty. And though they were at first commanded upon occasion of sin, an innocent man may observe them to good and wise purposes, as solemn acts of Worship, external expressions of Devotion, a public profession of a virtuous Life; to which purposes among others, the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the Law and Baptism of John served: And if there were no other reason, this were enough, that an innocent man should set an example of reverence to all divine Institutions: But this is not worth contending about; for the Righteousness of the Ceremonial Law could never justify any man; neither can I understand, why the Doctor should suppose, that Christ fulfilled the Ceremonial Law for all Believers, when the greatest part of them, the Gentiles, were never under the obligation of it.
Though we suppose, 1that Christ as man was bound to yield obedience to the Law