they are used as equivalent terms, implying one and the same thing. But we cannot understand here, either by one or the other, the ceremonial law. 'Tis not the ceremonial law, whereof the apostle says, in the words above recited, I had not known sin but by the law: this is too plain to need a proof. Neither is it the ceremonial law which saith, in the words immediately subjoined, Thou shalt not covet. Therefore the ceremonial law, has no place in the present question.
2. Neither can we understand by the law mentioned in the text, the Mosaic dispensation. 'Tis true, the word is sometimes so understood: as when the apostle says, speaking to the Galatians, (c. iii. v. 17.) The covenant which was confirmed before (namely with Abraham the father of the faithful) the law, i. e. the Mosaic dispensation, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul. But it cannot be understood so in the text; for the apostle never bestows, so high commendations as these upon that imperfect and shadowy dispensation. He no where affirms, the Mosaic to be a spiritual law: or, that it is holy and just and good. Neither is it true, that God will write that law in the hearts of them whose iniquities he remembers no more. It remains, that the law, eminently so termed, is no other than the moral law.
