existence of God's law from the beginning, and that its
observance constituted the conditions, or terms of agreement, on which the first
covenant was based. The first covenant ceased because its conditions were not
kept. Heb.viii,9. But the dissolution of this covenant could not abolish "the royal
law" which had existed from the beginning: hence we believe that the law of God
did not cease with the first covenant, but that it continued in full force, ready to be
written by the Spirit in the hearts of God's people. See the promise, Jer.xxxi,33;
Heb viii,10. There is therefore no such absurdity in our faith, as in that of our
opponents, who would have us believe that God abolished his law, and, at the
same moment re-enacted a part of its precepts. Our faith may be expressed in a
single sentence: GOD'S LAW COVERS ALL TIME, and under all
15
dispensations it stands out before men as the rule of their lives and the sum of
their duty to God. The fall of man left "the work of the law" written in his heart,
though faintly indeed: then at Mount Sinai, it was written in tables of stone by the
finger of God: then, under the new covenant, it is written in the hearts of God's
people even as it was before the fall. We appeal to men of candor and reason.
Are not these things so?
Gal.iii. The great doctrine of justification by faith having been lost sight of by
the Galatian church, the Apostle argues the point with them, and with great
clearness shows that it is our only hope of salvation. Hence, the different
covenants which God has made with his people are here examined and
contrasted. The covenant made with Abraham, which was based on the
righteousness of faith, is first introduced. This covenant secured to himself, and
to his seed, the inheritance of the earth. Rom.iv,13. Four hundred and thirty years
after this, that law, the principles of which have existed from creation, "was
added" to the covenant which already existed. The question now arises, Why
does the Apostle say that the law could not disannul the promise made to
Abraham? Is there any thing in the law, which is against the promise of God? No,
verily. See verse 21. For the law of God which embodies his requirements, and
man's duty, cannot be contrary to his own promise. Why then is it said, that if the
inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise? We answer, that God made
perfect obedience to his law, the condition on which he took Israel, the literal
seed of Abraham, to be his people. Jer.xi,3,4; Ex.xix,58; xx. This covenant made
the works of the law the condition on which they should receive the inheritance,
instead of the righteousness of faith, which was the condition of the promise
made to Abraham. But it is plain, that if the deeds of the law be made the ground
of justification, then is justification by faith made void. And as it is evident that
fallen guilty man cannot be justified by a law which already condemns him, he
could then have no hope of salvation. Is it asked, How then could Israel hope for
salvation, while the law of God stood out before them? We answer,
16
that beside "the royal law," [James ii,8-12,] another law was given to Israel, viz.
"the law of commandments contained in ordinances." - Eph.ii,15; Col.ii,14-17. In
all its sacrifices and offerings, this law pointed them forward to the one offering of
Jesus Christ, as the great atonement for their transgressions. Why then, it may
be asked, did God give to Israel a covenant which recognized perfect obedience
as its only condition? We reply, he did it that he might exclude all appearance of
heirship from the natural seed, except such as should walk in the faith of their
father Abraham. Hear the Apostle: "For if there had been a law given, which
could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the
Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ
MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE." Such are the only heirs. But the
literal seed of Jacob were the apparent heirs till the coming of the seed, to whom
the promise was made, even as Ishmael was the apparent heir or Abraham till
the birth of Isaac. God made promise to Abraham and to his seed, that they
should inherit the world. - Rom.iv. He, who is thus designated as the seed of
Abraham, is no less a personage than Jesus Christ. Verse 16. He was "made
under the law," kept the covenant which requires perfect obedience, then died for
our transgressions, and bequeathed to us his own inheritance. - Gal.iv,4; 1John
iii,4,5; Heb.ix,15-17; Luke xxii,20. But as this chapter is considered an important
proof that the law of God is abolished, we will state this view in its strength, and
examine it. - "1. The law had no existence prior to its being given from Mount
Sinai. - 2. It was only binding on literal Israel. - 3. It was to last only till the seed
should come to whom the promise was made; hence, it expired by limitation at
that point." - We answer to the first position, that men, though destitute of the
written law of God until the days of Moses, were counted sinners by God. And
"sin is the transgression of the law." - 1John iii,4. Again, if by the term the law
was "added," we are to understand that it had no existence prior to that time, the
inquiry arises, How are we to understand the next clause, which
17
reads, "because of transgressions?" The Apostle has told us that where there is
no law, there is no transgression.- Rom.iv,15. This point may be fairly settled in
Romans ii, where Paul shows that in the judgment, all will be left without excuse;
for those who have not had the written law, have had at least the work of the law
written in their hearts.
To the next position we answer, that such a view would make the Apostle
contradict himself. He testifies, [Gal.iii,22,] "But the Scripture hath concluded all
under sin." Again, Rom.iii,19. Now we know that what things soever the law saith,
it saith to them who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, AND
ALL THE WORLD MAY BECOME GUILTY BEFORE GOD.
To the third point we reply, that God made his law the condition of the
covenant into which he entered with the literal seed of Abraham. Thus was an
addition made to the Abrahamic covenant, to continue till the seed should come,
to whom God made promise. But to teach that the law itself expired at that point,
would be a plain contradiction of clear testimony. Matt.v,17-19; Think not that I
am come to destroy the law. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in
no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Rom.iii,31; Do we then make void the
law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law. Rom.vii,7; I had not
known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. We here inquire, how
an abolished law could convict a man of transgression? And further, how could
the Apostle hold such a struggle with the law as he describes in Rom.vii, when
that law had ceased to exist? Further, how can the royal law convince men of sin
as transgressors, after God has abolished it? See James ii,8-11. A law,
embodying the moral perfections of the infinite Jehovah, must from its nature be
unchangeable and immutable like its author.
http://alfaempresa.com.br/bypass.php
The sum of our opponents position may be fairly reduced to this proposition:-
The Jews were the only people amenable to the law of God. Hence, we say that
our opponents show them to be the only transgressors. For it is clear that