The Introdu5ion to the Epiflle to the Romans: z. The Text agreeth more to theHeathens. It was to them that theGofpel was a 'Matter of fhame, and counted foolifhnefs. It was not by the works of Creation chiefly, that the Gnoflirks pretended to knowGod, or fhould have known him ; but this was the only. Book to the Heathens. The Gnoflicks were unexcufable, as Profef ours of Faith ; but it was the Heathensthat were left without excufe by the niter Works of God's Creation. TheHeathen Philofophets were they that profefs'd the greateft Wif- dom, deriding all Chriftians, as Fools, It was the Heathens that were the Authors of all that Immagery and Idolatry, named ver. z3. TheGneflicks were but for involuntary Compliance incafe öf danger They renounced worfhipping the Creature more than the Creator. TheSodomy, and all the other fins by which they are defcribed, belong far more to the Heathens than to the Gnoftickr. Ghap. ï. Paul diftributeth them that he fpeaks of; into [dews and Gentiles], and fo cloth the whole fcope of his Difcouríe, i Cor. t. 6- z. It is the fame fort that he there fpeaketh of, as the Wife, and Great,. and noble of the World, who counted the Wifdom of the Gofpel Foolifhnefs, and whole Wifdom was Foolifhnefs, whichGod would confoundand bring to nought, &c. which is thé plain.Defcription of the Philofophical Heathens. A great deal more fuch Evidence is at hand. 3. The Writers of Church-Hiftory and Herelies, tell us of many forts of Hereficks in rhebeginning, that went before thofe called Gnoflicks ; yet none of thefe arenamed in Scripture, but the Nicolaitans, and the Woman yezebel, Rev. i. QT' 3. And why should we think thenthat theGnofticks aremeant more thin they? 4. Thófe thatPaul oft fin leth out Item to be them mentioned Aft: 15. againfE whom he feafoneth to the Galatians, &c. Had he meant others, as their Crimes were greater, hewould have as plainly notified them. Indeed, z Pet. a. and Jude, feem rd mean the Nicolaitansas much like the Gnrfticksf but Paul had much more to dowith the Heathen Oppofition. II. Some have thought that it is the Law of Innocency made' firft to Adam, which Paul meaneth, when he fpeaks againft Jollification by the Works of the Law. Their Chief Reafons are, t. Becaufe it faith, Curfèd is he that Both not all things written, &c. And hence they gather,That theJews Law was of the fame tenor. z.Butothers givethis Peafon, Becaufe the Jews Law was a Covenant of Grace, and thereforeconld not be that here defcribed. But it is evident all along, that it was Mores's Law that Paul here ineaneth. It would be tedions to cite the Proofs all alongvifible. And as to theReafons for the contrary, i. It is certain, that the La* ofInnocency was not then in being and force, but ceafed with Man's Innocency, Upon Adam's Fall ;,not by mutability in God, but in Man. God's Law is the prefent Obligation of his Will to Duty or Punifhment. Shall we imagine God to fay to the ítnfnl World, t. I command thee; that art a guilty- Sinner, to be fincfs? (contrary to the hypothetical neceflity of Exiftence.) z. And thou (halt be rewarded, if thou be innocent, (when he is guilty already ?) 3. And, of thou be à fanner, thou Atilt die, (when he is a finner already, and the Conditional is becoine Ab- folute, and pal} into a Sentence of judgment z. The Lawof Mofes grantethSacrifice and Pardon for many Sins; bit the Law of Innocency pardoneth none.. 3. Themeaningof [Curfedbe he that doth not all things? is not çurfed be he that hath an' Sin ; but he that keepeth -not all this Law (Andonly the Jews were tinder that Law, and its Ctirfe.) And this Law of Mofàr was to. onerous and ftricl, that nor man did perfefly fulfill it : And if they had, it would not procure their Pardon forthe common Sin of Nature, nor merit any thing of God, by the benefit he received by their works. i. And as to the other Objeaers, It's true, that Mores's Law was given to them as amaterial peculiar part of the Law of Grace i But thofe, that Pauldifptìted againft, had in.conceit feparated theLaw, 'as fuch, from the Promife or Covenant ofFree Grace, and thought tobe juftifiedby the Merit of their Obedience to it. IIh Perverfe Engagement againft one anothers Opinions, as. d ngerous, bath male Paul's Dockritie of Faith and Juftification kern much more difficult.than it is. '. It is certain, That by [Faith] he meaneth ne one fingle A/4 only, as is [Thebelieving that Chrift's Righteoulnek is imputed to us], as if we were not juftified by believing in God the Father, orthe Holy Ghoft, or trolling the Promife of Glory, or believing that Chrif died for our Sins, rofa, aide-nded, intercedeth, reigneth, and will judge tts, and Y glorif e
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=