« PreviousContinue »
"ers, that they should ABANDON THE LAW"! GIVER OF THE Jews, whom he looked
upon as the creator of the world; that “ they should retain a part of the law given by
Mofes, but should nevertheless employ their principal attention and care to REGULATE
BY THE PRECEPTS OF " Christ.” Mosh. vol. i. p. 69. Which said precepts are supposed to be the precepts of one who opposed bimself with vigour to the God of the Jewish people, and whose disciples were to abandon the lawgiver of the Jews, though they were to admit him to be the Creator of the world!
Here then, reader, I have lifted up the hive, and out has flown the swarm, not a swarm of useful and industrious bees, but a swarm (29– a mixture) like that in Ægypt, Exod. viii. 24. which was grievous, and corrupted the land. Here is to be seen those pestilential insects from whence sprung * Arianism-Socinianism
* The famous Dr. Samuel Clarke, fully asserts, that " the scripture, or the known open public books of the “ New Teftament, are the real and only rule of truth “ among Christians.” Introduction to the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, p. 4. as cited by Whiffon in the Life of Dr. Š. Cla: ke, p. 48.- Whiston is for removing us still farthes from the Old Testament, and insists upon it, that the traditionary do&trines - the traditionary creed, and the traditionary preaching of the Apostles, which are either authenticly preserved in the Apoftolical Constitutions, or no where, or, however, the scriptures as interpreted according to them, were ever in the first times owned the only certain foundations of the Christian settlements, &c. Whiston, ib.48,49.which, by the way, is no small proof, of the truth with which I have observed the early separation of the New
- Mahometism– Antinomianism -- Neonomian, ism, and all the ilms which have plagued, harrassed, and distressed, divided, and disgraced the church ever since,
Such is the picture of the Cerinthians. Surely we cannot survey it attentively, without recognizing a similitude of some of the features, at least something which may be called a strong family likeness to the idea of
polygamy's being allowed by the law of “ nature and of the Old Testament (that is, by “ the God of the Jews) but forbidden by " the law of CHRIST,” which is contrary to both.
If it be poflible to produce a single law of CHRIST, which opposes the law of the old Testament, all his claim to the character of the Mesah is at an end; for the Messiah was to be made of a woman made under the law. Gal. iv. 4.--Subject to its every precept, obedient to its every command—and doubtless therefore to that folemn command, which, for the greater solemnity, is repeated twice overYe mall not ADD to the word which I command you, neither mall ye DIMINISH aught from it. Deut. iv. 2. xii. 32. How could the blessed Jesus be said to fulfil all righteousness, by a perfect conformity to all things which are written in the book of the law to do them-how fay, as He doth by the Pfalmist, Pf. xl. 8.
Testament from the Old Testament, and treating them as systems totally distinct from, and independent on each other.
Lo I come to do thy will—not mine own.- John vi. 38. I am content to do it—THY LAW is within my heart—if he either ADDED to the rule of life given from God by Moses, or DIMINISHED from it? How could he be said to observe the law in ALL THINGS-how give that holy challenge to the Jews, John viii. 46. Which of you convinceth Me of fin ?-if he abrogated the law, the rule given as touching the moral actions of men, in any one instance, and set up a law of his own in opposition to it?
The false CHRIST of Cerinthus and of the Socinian, and the true CHRIST of God, are discernable by this essential difference-The first opposed himself with vigour to the God of the Jews-required that his disciples should abandon the law given by Moses, and regulate themselves by some new precepts of his own.The Holy CHRIST of God declared- that not a jot or tittle was to pass from the law-ihat He came not to destroy, but to fulfil it-His whole teaching, practice, and example, magnified the law, and made it honourable. Therefore He exactly answered to the character given of Him in the Old Testament. He finished the transgression-made an end of fins—made reconciliation for iniquity—and brought in (by his finless, perfect, and meritorious obedience) an everlasting righteousness, for the justification and falvation of his people to all eternity.
« But what shall we say of the ordininces “ of Baptism and the Lord's supper, are not " these Christ's own institutions, established
by his own authority ?”-To this I answer -that these two facraments were to succeed circumcifon and the pasover, which were the two facramental ordinances of the Mosaic difpensation, the whole of which was to cease and vanish away on the coming of the Meffab.
Another priest was to arise, not after the order of Aäron, but after the order of Melchizedeck, (Pf. cx. iv.) and this, according to the prophecies which went before. Now, as the excellent Bishop Hall observes,
66 some “ actions are prophecies,” and he instances in the history of the brazen serpent the truth of his position ; he might have instanced in many more: and among the rest, in the history of Melchizedeck, of whom it is said, that he was a priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. Heb. vii. 1. In Gen. xiv. 18. it is faid-And Melchizedeck, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine, and blessed Abraham, ver. 19.
In this prophetical action is exhibited a type of CHRIST, the priest after the order of Melchizedeck (see Pl. cx. 4.) exhibiting, under the facramental bread and wine, his body broken, and his blood Med, for the life of the world. So that after the fimilitude of Melchizedeck there ariseth another priest. Now all this was foretold, because ordained to happen in the fulness of time; therefore the instituting the receiving of bread and wine, in remembrance of the sacri
fice of CHRIST, as emblems of his body and blood, was no new law of Christ, but as really foretold in the Old Testament, as was the sacrifice and death of Christ upon the cross. CHRIST our passover being sacrificed for us (1 Cor. v. 7.) there was an end of the typical ordinance of the pafchal lamb. And the priest after the fimilitude of Melchizedeck, was to bless the children of Abraham (Gal. ji. 7.) by exhibiting his body and blood to their faith, under the emblems of bread and wine, as Melchizedeck (whom fome learned men suppose to be. Christ Himself
appearing to Abraham in an human form, as he often did under the Old Testament, in token of his future incarnation) blessed the father of all the faithful, by exhibiting to his faith the future great sacrifice under those emblems which were to be the appointed figures to represent it under the gospel dispensation, Thus, (as the Apostle speaks, Heb. vii. 12.) as the priesthood was to be changed, there must be of necessity also a change * of the law. But ail this was pre-ordained and foretold ages before it happened, and therefore is not to be looked upon as a mere law of the New Teftament, but must bear equal date, in the intentions and designs of God, with the plan of redemption itself.
* It appears from the whole context, that the moral law is not here meant, but the typical or ceremonial law of sacrifices, which, together with the Levitical priesthood, were all to be done away on the sacrifice of the death of CHRIST.