Vindiciæ legis

This Text is already explained; and there are two Observations do naturally arise from it, as first, That it is an ¹hard thing so to set up Christ and grace, as not thereby be thought to destroy the Law. Thus was Paul misunderstood by some; and so the Antinomians, not rightly understanding in what latitude the Orthodox in their disputations against Popery did oppose the Law to the Gospel, were thereby plunged into a dangerous error. But on this point I will not insist. The second doctrine is that which I intend, namely, That the doctrine ²of Christ and grace in the highest and fullest manner, doth not overthrow, but establish the Law. And this doctrine will directly lead us to lay our hands on the chief pillars of that house, which the Antinomians have built. 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. And this Question I will answer by several propositions, that may conduce to the clearing of the truth: for it would seem, as if the Scripture held out contradictions in this point. In my Text it's denied, that the Apostles do [Greek or Hebrew] make void the Law; yet 2 Cor. 3. 11. The Apostle speaking of the Law hath this passage, [If that which be done away, [Greek or Hebrew]] where the word is expressly used, that yet here is denied: so Ephes. 2. 14. Christ is described [[Greek or Hebrew]] that maketh void the hand-writing against us. And in that place the Apostle useth the word [Greek or Hebrew], when yet Mat. 5. he denied that he came [Greek or Hebrew], to dissolve the Law. Grave therefore and serious is, Ghimnitius his admonition, In all other things general words beget confusion, and obscurity; but in the doctrine of the ⟨p. 203⟩abrogation of the Law they are very dangerous, unless it be distinctly explained, how it is abrogated.

THis Text is already explained; and there are two Observations doe naturally arise from it, as first, That it is an