A77854:622
Vindiciæ legis
Vindiciæ legis: or, A vindication of the moral law and the covenants, from the errors of papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX. lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London. / By Anthony Burgess, preacher of Gods Word.Vindiciæ legis: or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the errours of papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians. In XXIX. lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London. / By Anthony Burgess, preacher of Gods Word.
London: printed by James Young for Thomas Underhill, 1646
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.
Some make the Law to be a Covenant of grace, but very obscurely; and therefore they hold the Gospel and the Law to be the same, differing only as the acorn while it is in the husk, and the oak when it's branched out into a tall tree. Now if this should be understood in a popish sense, as if the righteousness of the Law and the Gospel were all one; in which sense the Papists speak of the old Law and the new, it would be very dangerous and directly thwarting the Scripture.
Some make the Law to be a Covenant of grace, but very obscurely; and therefore they hold the Gospel and the Law to be the same, differing onely as the acorne while it is in the huske, and the oke when it's branched out into a tall tree. Now if this should be understood in a popish sense, as if the righteousnesse of the Law and the Gospel were all one; in which sense the Papists speak of the old Law and the new, it would be very dangerous and directly thwarting the Scripture.
Some explain it thus: God (say they) had a primary or antecedent will in giving of the Law, or a secondary and consequent: His primary will was to hold out perfect and exact righteousness, against which the Apostle argueth, and proveth no ⟨p. 223⟩man can be justified thereby: but then God knowing mans impotency and inability, did secondarily command repentance, and promiseth a gracious acceptance through Christ; and this may be very well received, if it be not vexed with ill interpretations.
Some explain it thus: God (say they) had a primary or antecedent will in giving of the Law, or a secundary and consequent: His primary will was to hold out perfect and exact righteousnesse, against which the Apostle argueth, and proveth no ⟨p. 223⟩man can be justified thereby: but then God knowing mans impotency and inability, did secondarily command repentance, and promiseth a gracious acceptance through Christ; and this may be very well received, if it be not vexed with ill interpretations.