MR. TAYLOR' S SECOND REPLY. 143 



The repeal of ^^ all the ten commandments" — indififerent. 



burden complained of by the Gentiles "can only include ivhat 

 was distinctive of Judaism. It cannot include that law of God 

 which He haspromised to 'putinto the hearts' of his people/' 

 0- 73.) 



And suppose it were conceded that "all the ten command- 

 ments, not excepting the first and seventh, are abrogated V^ 

 What then ? Can this repeal a law, thousands of years older ? 

 Can the absolute destruction of the Mosaic tables disturb "one 

 jot or one tittle" of that code inscribed by "the Spirit of the 

 living God, not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the 

 heart V* Alas ! " to what absurd results will wrong theories 

 lead intelligent men !" Is my friend so hopelessly "entangled 

 in the yoke of bondage'' to Sinai, that he can see no other 

 " stand-point" in the universe excepting "frightful" Anti- 

 nomianism ? Has he never read that his vaunted Decalogue 

 was a " ministration of deatW — " added because of transgres- 

 sions, till the Seed should come" — " the mediator of a hetter 

 covenant?" That this covenant of Horeb, so far from being 

 "faultless," " made notliing perfect," and, therefore, " decayed'^ 

 and "vanished away" before a grander code, and "the bringing 

 in of a hetter hope V Is it necessary to remind one who has 

 studied the Bible for " thirty years," that the moral precepts 

 of the New Testament include everything valuable in the old, 

 and much more? That, there being "made of necessity a 

 cliange of the Law," there is " a disannuUing of the command- 

 ment going before," and those "no longer under that law," 

 are consequently ^^ not without law to God, but under the 

 law to Christ?" That they "are his disciples indeed" — not 

 " who desire to be under the law" of Sinai — but who "con- 

 tinue in his word," and "keep his commandments?" 



Alas ! how different are the conclusions of the apostle, from 

 the Antinomian reasonings of J. N. B. ! How irreconcilably 

 opposite their " stand-points !" My friend appears not yet to 

 have learned that, his whole Christiaii dutj is to "fulfil the law 

 of Christ;" and that, if the Decalogue "was given by Moses, 



