Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

3. THOUGH Christ's obedience was given to the Law in the form of a covenant of works; yet it is a pattern of holiness unto the members of the Gospel Church. That particular SCHESIS of his obedience is not for our imi

tation indeed; for no one of his people are bound to purchafe life by their works. But this can by no means preclude it from being exemplary as to its fubftance.

4. THAT fpecial act of obedience; namely, VOWING to God-covenanting with him, is for our imitation. If the fulfilment of his vow, which confifted in an uninterrupted feries of univerfal obedience, be for our imitation, as is confeffedly the fact? Why may not the making of his engagement be for our imitation likeways? His own example adds peculiar force unto the precept, Vow and PAY unto the Lord your God. Befides the vow under which the Redeemer came in his undertaking, he Vowed twice unto God in his humbled ftate; once at his baptifm, and again at the firft facramental fupper. Now, as a participation of these facraments by Chrift implied in it a profeffion of his faith in all thofe promifes which the Father made to him in the cternal covenant, on the one hand; fo likeways a profeffed fubjection unto all thofe laws which the Father laid upon him, on the other *. Thus

*On Chrift's partaking of the facrament, I hope the learned reader will find fatisfaction, by confulting F.

GOMARY'S

Thus, tho' his partaking of these sacraments had fomething in them peculiar unto himself as mediator; yet they are alfo patterns demanding our imitation: Hence, we may conclude, Though his vowing and fwearing to the Father had in them fomething peculiar to his mediatorial character, yet they are exemplary likewife; and this part of his conduct calls us to tread in his steps.

5. THE doctrine of Christ, as well as his practice, lays a good foundation for folemn covenanting under the Gofpel economy.Ask he enforced obedience unto the whole, and every precept of the moral law; and this duty is enjoined by the three firft precepts of it *.

As he enforced fuch parts of the moral law as enjoined this duty in particular: “ Again, ye have heard it hath been faid by them of old time, Thou shalt not forfwear thyself; but fhalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths+." The scope of his fermon on the mount is, to explain and enforce the moral law, and vindicate it from the falfe gloffes of the Pharifees.

GOMARUS on Matth. iii. 13. The fubftance of his differ"Ea autation is fummed up in the following terms: tem eft fœderis cum Deo, et comunionis Ecclefiæ fignificatio et obfignatio. Quod, viz. Deus fuerit ejus Deus :ipfe vero ad perpetuam obedientiæ gratitudinem, ei præftandum; obftrictus et Ecclefiæ communione adjunctus." Thefe are the reafons for Christ's being baptized.

Matth. v. 16, 17.

+ Matth. v. 33..

The

The fixth and feventh precepts of it are quoted in as many words *; and the third, as to its fcope and import, in the words above cited. To afcertain the meaning of this precept, I might fhew, from whence it is taken.-What culpable expositions of it were rejected by Chrift. -And what he declared to be the genuine import of it. As to the firft, I find authors remarkably divided, fome referring us to one place of the Old Teftament, fome to another; and others to the Jewish traditions. They judge best who confider it as refpecting more places than one; fuch as, "Ye fhall not fwear by my name falfely, neither fhalt thou profane the name of thy God t." And, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." To which may be added, "Vow and pay unto the Lord thy God §." The fenfe of all which texts is fummed

* Matth. v. 21, 27. † Levit. xix. 12. + Exod. xx. 7.

§ Pfal. lxxvi. 11. The Dutch translators, after Beza, mention the two firft of thefe, To thew, that Chrift refers to the Old Teftament, and not any tradition, faying, It may be observed, That it was the Law of Mofes, and not any traditionary system, that Chrift meant to explain: And this declaration, as well as the fixth and seventh commandment, is what had been faid to the Fathers By God; and not what had been faid BY them, as our translation has it. "That Tois apxalós is here to be rendered in the Dative, may be concluded, 1. From the words, I SAY UNTO YOU, where it is undoubtedly in the Dative cafe. 2. Because the word 'pin is always joined to this cafe, fo Rom. ix. 12, 26. Gal. iii. 16. Rev. Zzz 2

ix.

In the

fummed up in the words formerly quoted. With respect unto the culpable expofitions of this precept, which were rejected by Chrift, we may obferve, that there were two parts of their conduct which merited reprehenfion in this matter: Chrift taxed them for fwearing by creatures; fuch as, by heaven and Jerusalem, &c. by the temple and the altar, &c. and that in matters of juftice and importance; as well as in their ordinary converfation. next place, He taxed their mental refervation in these oaths; they imagined, as they had fworn only by creatures, fo they were not bound by their oaths if the name of God had not been invoked: But he gave them to know, that it was abfolutely unlawful to ratify their oaths and vows, in fwearing by any but the true God: That their diftinction between fwearing by the temple and the God of the temple was nugatory and vain; becaufe, if their oath meant any thing at all, it meant an invocation of God himself: That it was folemn trifling with God himself, to imagine they were at liberty to break their vows if the name of God was not directly invoked in the engagement into which they had entered. As to fuch oaths as were an invocation of mere creatures, it was finful

ix. 4, 11. And where mention is made of a thing fpoken By another, the phrafe is fill τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπο, Οι τὸ ρηθεν διὰ. 3. Because the words, thus cited, are spoken to them of old." Vid. FREDERIC. SPANHEIM. P. Dub. Evan. P. III. Dub, 138, GROT, in v. 1. LUDOVIC. CAPELL. ibidem,

to

to enter into them at the firft; and, if the matter of them was lawful, equally finful to break them after they had been made. Again, Chrift reprobated their fwearing by creatures, in their ordinary converfation. Their falfe

doctrine, on this head, feems to have been this, That they answered all the import of the third commandment, if they did not ufe any of God's names in their ordinary converfation; although they fware by his creatures: But the great teacher affured them, he would not beftow his glory on any creature, however glorious. The fcope of this teftimony, as explained by Chrift, feems to be, as if he had faid, "Ye have heard that it has been faid unto the fathers, by various infpired perfons, in fundry places of the Old Teftament, Ye fhall not incur the dreadful guilt of perjury, neglecting to accomplish fuch promifes as have been ratified by a folemn appeal to God: Thou fhalt, on the other hand, perform these folemn engagements in the most exact manner, and that unto Jehovah himfelf; for, as he is both the party to whom thou haft fworn and the object invoked when thou enteredft into the oath; fo he will exact the punctual accomplishment of it. ly declare unto you, that ye much narrow the meaning of the Law, if ye confine the whole import of this precept unto that fpecies of duty: Its demands are vaftly wider, as it prohibits a great variety of things in which ye in dulge yourselves; fuch as, fwearing by crea

But I folemn

tures

« AnteriorContinuar »