A77854:662
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.
But, saith the Author, under the Gospel it is said, The blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin. Now, if the Jews would have brought all their estates to have been admitted, to bring a sacrifice for such or such a sin, they could not have done it. I reply: What if they could bring no sacrifice, could they not therefore have pardon? Why then doth God proclaim himself to them, a God gracious, forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin? Why doth he, Isai. 1. call upon Jerusalem to repent of her whoredoms, murders, saying, If their sins were as scarlet, they should be made as white as snow. This error is such a dead fly, that it is enough to spoil the Authors whole box of ointment. Besides, was not that true ever since Adams fall, as well as under the Gospel [Christs blood cleansing from all sin] I cannot see how any but a Socinian will deny it.
But, saith the Author, under the Gospel it is said, The bloud of Christ cleanseth us from all sinne. Now, if the Jewes would have brought all their estates to have been admitted, to bring a sacrifice for such or such a sinne, they could not have done it. I reply: What if they could bring no sacrifice, could they not therefore have pardon? Why then doth God proclaime himselfe to them, a God gracious, forgiving iniquity, transgression and sinne? Why doth he, Isai. 1. call upon Jerusalem to repent of her whoredomes, murders, saying, If their sinnes were as scarlet, they should be made as white as snow. This errour is such a dead fly, that it is enough to spoile the Authors whole boxe of ointment. Besides, was not that true ever since Adams fall, as well as under the Gospel [Christs bloud cleansing from all sinne] I cannot see how any but a Socinian will deny it.
4. Another difference that the Author makes about remission 1of sins to them, and us under the Gospel, is as strange, and false as the former: It is this, God did not give the grace of remission of sins to any under the old Covenant, but upon antecedent conditions; they were to be at cost for sacrifices. (How doth this agree with his former reason, if he mean it universally?) They were to confess their sins to the Priests, yea, in some cases to fast: but now under the Gospel there is no antecedent doing of any thing to the participation of the Covenant. But in this difference also there is much absurd falsehood, and contradiction to himself: Contradiction (I say) for he bringeth