in the yoke of bondage? Galatians v. 1. And has not the loose professor according to the Gospel, whilst he has striven to reduce the strict professor according to the law out of the legal path, "by promising liberty from the law, taught others, and been himself the servant of corruption?" 2 Peter ii. 19. For this cause I, though I be nothing, have by the grace of God endeavoured, in this Dialogue, to walk as a middle man betwixt them both, in showing to each of them his erroneous path, with the middle path (which is Jesus Christ received truly, and walked in answerably)* as a means to bring them both unto him, and make them both one in him; and O! that the Lord would be pleased so to bless it to them, that it might be a means to produce that effect! I have, as you may see, gathered much of it out of known and approved authors; and yet have therein wronged no man; for I have restored it to the right owner again. Some part of it my manuscripts have afforded me; and of the rest I hope I may say, as Jacob did of his venison, Gen. xxvii. 20, "the Lord hath brought it unto me." Let me speak it without vain glory, I have endeavoured herein to imitate the laborious bee, who out of divers flowers gathers honey and wax, and thereof makes one comb: if any souls feel any sweetness in it, let them praise God, and pray for me, who am weak in faith, and cold in love. EDWARD FISHER. * A short and pithy description of the middle path, the only pathway to heaven-"Jesus Christ (the way, John xiv. 6.) received truly (by faith, John i. 12; this is overlooked by the legalist) and walked in answerably,” by holiness of heart and life, Col. ii. 6; this is neglected by the Antinomian. The Antinomian's faith is but pretended, and not true faith, since he walks not in Christ answerably. The legalist's holiness is but pretended, and not true holiness, since he hath not "received Christ" truly, and therefore is incapable of walking in Christ, which is the only true holiness competent to fallen mankind. Thus, both the legalist and Antinomian are each of them destitute of true faith and true holiness; forasmuch as there can be no walking in Christ, without a true receiving of him; and there cannot be a true receiving of him without walking in him: so both of them are off the only way of salvation, and, continuing so, must needs perish. Wherefore it concerns every one who has a value for his own soul, to take heed that he be found in the middle path. A Catalogue of those Writers' Names, out of whom I have collected much of the matter contained in this ensuing Dialogue. THE MARROW OF MODERN DIVINITY. EVANGELISTA, a Minister of the Gospel. ANTINOMISTA, an Antinomian. NEOPHITUS, a Young Christian. 1 INTRODUCTION. Sect. 1. Differences about the Law.-2. A threefold Law. Nomista. SIR, my neighbour, Neophitus, and I having lately had some conference with this our friend and acquaintance, Antinomista, about some points of religion, wherein he, differing from us both, at last said, he would be contented to be judged, by our minister: therefore, have we made bold to come unto you, all three of us, to pray you to hear us, and judge of our differences. Evan. You are all of you very welcome to me; and if you please to let me hear what your differences are, I will tell you what I think. SECT. 1.-Nom. The truth is, sir, he and I differ in very many things; but more especially about the law: for I say, the law ought to be a rule of life to a believer; and he says, it ought not. Neo. And surely, sir, the greatest difference betwixt him and me, is this;-he would persuade me to believe in Christ; and bids me rejoice in the Lord, and live merrily, though I feel never so many corruptions in my heart, yea, though I be never so sinful in my life; the which I cannot do, nor, I think, ought to do; but rather to fear, and sorrow, and lament for my sins. B Ant. The truth is, sir, the greatest difference betwixt my friend, Nomista, and I, is about the law; and therefore that is the greatest matter we come to you about. Evan. I remember the Apostle Paul willeth Titus to "avoid contentions and strivings about the law, because they are unprofitable and vain," Tit. iii. 9; and so I fear yours have been. Nom. Sir, for my own part, I hold it very meet, that every true Christian should be very zealous for the holy law of God; especially now, when a company of these Antinomians do set themselves against it, and do what they can quite to abolish it, and utterly to root it out of the church: surely, sir, I think it not meet they should live in a Christian commonwealth. Evan. I pray you, neighbour Nomista, be not so hot, neither let us have such unchristian-like expressions amongst us; but let us reason together in love, and with the spirit of meekness, 1 Cor. iv. 21, as Christians ought to do. I confess with the apostle, "It is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing," Gal. iv. 18. But yet, as the same apostle said of the Jews, so I fear I may say of some Christians, that "they are zealous of the law," Acts xxi. 20; yea, some would be doctors of the law, and yet neither understand "what they say, nor whereof they affirm," 1 Tim. i. 7.* Nom. Sir, I make no doubt but that I both know what I say, and whereof I affirm, when I say and affirm that the holy law of God ought to be a rule of life to a believer; for I dare pawn my soul on the truth of it. Evan. But what law do you mean? Nom. Why, sir, what law do you think I mean? Are there any more laws than one? SECT. 2.-Evan. Yea, in the Scriptures there is mention made of divers laws, but they may all be comprised under these three, viz. the law of works, the law of faith, and the law of Christ; Rom. iii. 27, Gal. vi. 2; and, therefore, I pray you, * These terms are scriptural, as appears from the whole texts quoted by our author, namely, Rom. iii. 27, "Where is boasting then? it is excluded. By what law? of works? nay: but by the law of faith."—Gal. vi. 2, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ." By the law of works is meant the law of the ten commandments, as the covenant of works. By the law of faith, the gospel, or covenant of grace; for justification being the point upon which the apostle there states the opposition betwixt these two laws, it is evident that the former only is the law that doth not exclude boasting; and that the latter only is it, by which a sinner is justified in a way that doth exclude boasting. By the tell me, when you say the law ought to be a rule of life to a believer, which of these three laws you mean. Nom. Sir, I know not the difference betwixt them; but this I know, that the law of the ten commandments, commonly called the moral law, ought to be a rule of life to a believer. law of Christ, is meant the same law of the ten commandments, as a rule of life, in the hand of a Mediator, to believers already justified, and not any one command of the law only; for "bearing one another's burdens" is a "fulfilling of the law of Christ," as it is a loving one another: but, according to the Scripture, that love is not a fulfilling of one command only, but of the whole law of the ten commands, Rom. xiii. 8—10.—“ He that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." It is a fulfilling of the second table directly, and of the first table indirectly and consequentially therefore, by the law of Christ is meant, not one command only, but the whole law. The law of works is the law to be done, that one may be saved; the law of faith is the law, to be believed, that one may be saved; the law of Christ is the law of the Saviour, binding his saved people to all the duties of obedience, Gal. iii. 12; Acts xvi. 31. The term law is not here used univocally; for the law of faith is neither in the Scripture sense, nor in the sense of our author, a law, properly so called. The apostle uses that phrase only in imitation of the Jews' manner of speaking, who had the law continually in their mouths. But since the promise of the gospel proposed to faith, is called in Scripture "the law of faith," our author was sufficiently warranted to call it so too. the law of faith is not a proper preceptive law. So The law of works, and the law of Christ, are in substance but one law, even the law of the ten commandments-the moral law-that law which was from the beginning, continuing still the same in its own nature, but vested with different forms. And since that law is perfect, and sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of it, whatever form it be vested with, whether as the law of works or as the law of Christ, all commands of God unto men must needs be comprehended under it, and particularly the command to repent, common to all mankind, pagans not excepted, who doubtless are obliged, as well as others, to turn from sin unto God; as also the command to believe in Christ, binding all to whom the gospel revelation comes, though, in the meantime, this law stands under different forms to those who are in a state of union with Christ by faith,.. and to those who are not so. The law of Christ is not a new, proper, preceptive law, but the old, proper, preceptive law, which was from the beginning, under a new accidental form. The distinction between the law of works and the law of faith cannot be controverted, since the apostle doth so clearly distinguish them, Rom. iii. 27. The distinction between the law of works and the law of Christ, as above explained according to the Scriptures, and the mind of our author, is the same in effect with that of the law, as a covenant of works, and as |
