All these Things are what Dr.T. himself confesses and asserts. He says, that the Law of God requires perfect Obedience. (Note on Rom. vii. 6. P. 391, 392.) God can never require imperfect Obedience, or by his holy Law allow us to be guilty of any one Sin, how small soever. And if the Law as a Rule of Duty were in any Respect abolished, then we might in some Respects transgress the Law, and yet not be guilty of Sin. The moral Law, or Law of Nature, is the Truth, everlasting, unchangeable; and therefore, as such, can never be abrogated. On the contrary, our Lord Jesus Christ has promulgated it a new under the Gospel, fuller and clearer than it was in the Mosaical Constitution, or any where else;—having added to its Precepts the Sanction of his own divine Authority. And many Things which he says, imply that all Mankind do in some Degree transgress the Law. In P. 228. speaking of what may be gathered from Rom. vii. & viii. he says, We are ⟨p. 13⟩very apt, in a World full of Temptation, to be deceived, and drawn into Sin by bodily Appetites &c. And the Case of those who are under a Law threatening Death to every Sin, must be quite deplorable, if they have no Relief from the Mercy of the Lawgiver. But this is very fully declared in what he says in his Note on Rom. v. 20. P. 378, 379. His Words are as follows; Indeed, as a Rule of Action prescribing our Duty, it (the Law) always was, and always must be a Rule ordained for obtaining Life; but not as a Rule of Justification, not as it subjects to Death for every Transgression. For if it COULD in it's utmost Rigour have given us Life, then, as the Apostle argues, it would have been against the Promises of God.mdash;For if there had been a Law, in the strict and rigorous Sense of Law, WHICH COULD HAVE MADE US LIVE, verily Justification should have been by the Law. But he supposes, no such Law was ever given: and therefore there is Need and Room enough for the Promises of Grace; Or as he argues, Gal. ii. 21. It would have frustrated, or rendered useless the Grace of God. For if Justification came by the Law, then truly Christ is dead in vain, then he died to accomplish what was, or MIGHT HAVE BEEN EFFECTED by Law it self, without his Death. Certainly the Law was not brought in among the Jews to be a Rule of Justification, or to recover 'em out of a State of Death, and to procure Life by their sinless Obedience to it:
All these Things are what Dr.T. himself confesses and asserts. He says, that the Law of God requires perfect Obedience. (Note on Rom. vii. 6. P. 391, 392.) God can never require imperfect Obedience, or by his holy Law allow us to be guilty of any one Sin, how small soever. And if the Law as a Rule of Duty were in any Respect abolished, then we might in some Respects transgress the Law, and yet not be guilty of Sin. The moral Law, or Law of Nature, is the Truth, everlasting, unchangeable; and therefore, as such, can never be abrogated. On the contrary, our Lord Jesus Christ has promulgated it a new under the Gospel, fuller and clearer than it was in the Mosaical Constitution, or any where else;—having added to its Precepts the Sanction of his own divine Authority. And many Things which he says, imply that all Mankind do in some Degree transgress the Law. In P. 228. speaking of what may be gather'd from Rom. vii. & viii. he says, We are ⟨p. 13⟩very apt, in a World full of Temptation, to be deceived, and drawn into Sin by bodily Appetites &c. And the Case of those who are under a Law threatning Death to every Sin, must be quite deplorable, if they have no Relief from the Mercy of the Lawgiver. But this is very fully declared in what he says in his Note on Rom. v. 20. P. 378, 379. His Words are as follows; Indeed, as a Rule of Action prescribing our Duty, it (the Law) always was, and always must be a Rule ordain'd for obtaining Life; but not as a Rule of Justification, not as it subjects to Death for every Transgression. For if it COULD in it's utmost Rigour have given us Life, then, as the Apostle argues, it would have been against the Promises of God.mdash;For if there had been a Law, in the strict and rigorous Sense of Law, WHICH COULD HAVE MADE US LIVE, verily Justification should have been by the Law. But he supposes, no such Law was ever given: and therefore there is Need and Room enough for the Promises of Grace; Or as he argues, Gal. ii. 21. It would have frustrated, or rendred useless the Grace of God. For if Justification came by the Law, then truly Christ is dead in vain, then he died to accomplish what was, or MIGHT HAVE BEEN EFFECTED by Law it self, without his Death. Certainly the Law was not brought in among the Jews to be a Rule of Justification, or to recover 'em out of a State of Death, and to procure Life by their sinless Obedience to it:
