66

66

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 "6 THEIR LIVES BY THE PRECEPTS OF CHRIST." Mofh. vol. i. p. 69. Which faid precepts are fuppofed to be the precepts of one who oppofed himself 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 fwarm, not a swarm of useful and industrious bees, but a fwarm (17— a mixture) like that in Egypt, Exod. viii. 24. which was grievous, and corrupted the land. Here is to be seen those peftilential infects from whence fprung* Arianifm-Socinianifm -Mahometifm

*The famous Dr. Samuel Clarke, fully afferts, that "the fcripture, or the known open public books of the "New Teftament, are the real and only rule of truth σε among Chriftians." Introduction to the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, p. 4. as cited by Whiston in the Life of Dr. S. Clarke, p. 48.- Whifton is for removing us ftill farther from the Old Teftament, and infifts upon it, that the traditionary doctrines -the traditionary creed, and the traditionary preaching of the Apostles, which are either authenticly preferved in the Apoftolical Conftitutions, or no where, or, however, the fcriptures as interpreted according to them, were ever in the firft times owned the only certain foundations of the Chriftian fettlements, &c. Whifton, ib.48,49.which, by the way, is no fmall proof, of the truth with which I have obferved the early feparation of the New

Teftament

-Mahometifm-Antinomianifm

Neonomian ifm, and all the ims which have plagued, harraffed, and diftreffed, divided, and difgraced the church ever fince.

Such is the picture of the Cerinthians. Surely we cannot furvey it attentively, without recognizing a fimilitude of fome of the features, at least fomething 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 Teftament (that is, by "the GOD of the Jews) but forbidden by "the law of CHRIST," which is contrary to both.

If it be poffible to produce a fingle law of CHRIST, which opposes the law of the Old Teftament, all his claim to the character of the Meffiah is at an end; for the Meffiah was to be made of a woman made under the law. Gal. iv. 4.-fubject to its every precept, obedient to its every command-and doubtlefs therefore to that folemn command, which, for the greater folemnity, is repeated twice overYe shall not ADD to the word which I command you, neither fhall ye DIMINISH aught from it. Deut. iv. 2. xii. 32. How could the BLESSED JESUS be faid 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 Pfalmift, Pf. xl. 8.

Teftament from the Old Teftament, and treating them as fyftems totally diftinct from, and independent on each other.

Lo

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 Mofes, or DIMINISHED from it? How could he be faid to obferve the law in ALL THINGS-how give that holy challenge to the Jews, John viii. 40 16. 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 inftance, and fet up a law of his own in oppofition to it?

The falfe CHRIST of Cerinthus and of the Socinian, and the true CHRIST of GOD, are difcernable by this effential difference-The first oppofed himself with vigour to the GOD of the Jews-required that his difciples fhould abandon the law given by Mofes, and regulate themselves by fome new precepts of his own.The Holy CHRIST of GOD declared—that not a jot or tittle was to pass from the law-that He came not to deftroy, 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 Teftament. He finished the tranfgreffion-made an end of fins-made reconciliation for iniquity—and brought in (by his finless, perfect, and meritorious obedience) an everlasting righteousness, for the juftification and falvation of his people to all eternity.

"But what fhall we fay of the ordinances " of Baptifm and the Lord's fupper, are not thefe CHRIST's own inflitutions, established

by his own authority?"-To this I anfwer that these two facraments were to fucceed circumcifion and the pasover, which were the two facramental ordinances of the Mofaic difpenfation, the whole of which was to ceafe and vanish away on the coming of the Meffab.

Another priest was to arife, not after the order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchizedeck, (Pf. cx. iv.) and this, according to the prophecies which went before. Now, as the excellent Bishop Hall obferves," fome "actions are prophecies," and he inftances in the hiftory of the brazen ferpent the truth of his position; he might have inftanced in many more: and among the rest, in the hiftory of Melchizedeck, of whom it is faid, that he was a priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the flaughter of the kings, and bleffed him. Heb. vii. 1. In Gen. xiv. 18. it is faid-And Melchizedeck, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine, and bleffed Abraham, ver. 19. In this prophetical action is exhibited a type of CHRIST, the priest after the order of Melchizedeck (fee Pf. cx. 4.) exhibiting, under the facramental bread and wine, his body broken, and his blood Shed, for the life of the world. So that after the fimilitude of Melchizedeck there arifeth another prieft. Now all this was foretold, because ordained to happen in the fulness of time; therefore the inftituting the receiving of bread and wine, in remembrance of the facri

fice

fice of CHRIST, as emblems of his body and blood, was no new law of CHRIST, but as really foretold in the Old Teftament, as was the facrifice and death of CHRIST upon the crofs. CHRIST our passover being Jacrificed 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. iii. 7.) by exhibiting his body and blood to their faith, under the emblems of bread and wine, as Melchizedeck (whom fome learned men fuppofe to be CHRIST Himself appearing to Abraham in an human form, as he often did under the Old Teftament, in token of his future incarnation) bleffed the father of all the faithful, by exhibiting to his faith the future great facrifice under thofe emblems which were to be the appointed figures to represent it under the gofpel difpenfation. Thus, (as the Apoftle speaks, Heb. vii. 12.) as the priesthood was to be changed, there must be of neceffity 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 muft bear equal date, in the intentions and defigns 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 facrifices, which, together with the Levitical priesthood, were all to be done away on the facrifice of the death of CHRIST.

7

SQ