seven Arguments which if need had required might have been seventie Now I will answer the Objections An Answer to Argument VII IF we are not justified in his sight before we believe a then we are unjust sinners workers of iniquity Answer So we are As we have shewed out of Ephes 2.2 Where we are said to walke after the course of the world to be guided by the Spirit that ruleth in the children of disobedience and to be children of wrath as well as others till we be in Christ by faith v. 4 5 6 7 8. So 1 Cor. 6.9.10.11 But then saith the obiection If we be workers of iniquity God hates us Psalm 5. 1. Answ We know no middle between Gods love and hate And the text saith plainly that till they be called they are in regard of actuall love a people not beloved Rom. 9.24.25 ☞ Some reply that this is meant of the Gentiles To which 1. We reply that that is all one In the Gentiles we see those that were not beloved afore the call are beloved after 2. That the text names Jewes and Gentiles and brings that of Hos to prove it with which if we go on to end of 3. chap. of Hos it is fully proved Chapters are of late invention Besides that 9. of Rom. we alledge that Ezekiell 16.8 It was a time of love This text is urged against us but you may see it is for us For it should seeme it was not the time of love till God passed by her and spread his skirt over her the righteousnesse and excellency of Christ In order of nature she lay in her blood before justified and loved But in order of time at the same time yea minute of time she was in her blood was justified and loved At the same time the soule is created in man But in order of nature the understanding acts before the will And whereas it is said Esau have I hated not Jacob But Iacob have I loved This the Apostle applies peremptorily to Election and reprobation Now Election is every where in Scripture called a purpose If any where it be called a love we must be forced to ioyn both together unlesse we will set the Scriptures together by the eares and say It is a purpose of love Now a purpose is not an act nor an act a purpose Gods decree is not the execution nor the execution the decreeing 2. Answ Isay 1.13 Your incense is abomination to me the calling of Assemblies I cannot away with it it is iniquity even the solemne meeting your new moones and your appointed feasts my soule hateth c. And all because their hands were full of blood But ver 18. Come now let us reason together though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow See here is as much said of hating those that should be pardoned ver 25. as of Sodom and Gomorrah ver 10. God cannot hate the essence of the Devill being his creature but onely his manners So of the iustified before iustified as we have shewed Answ b What absurdity can be conceived by one principled with Divinity For though man could fall in the first Adam yet he cannot fall from the second Adam being once in him For the gifts and calling of God Rom. 11. are without repentance We can perfectly sinne being out of Christ and so deserve to be hated But we being in Christ have a perfect righteousnesse in him that saves them to the utmost that is for ever that come to God by him seeing he ever lives to make intercession for them Heb. 7.25 So that as he breaks the power of corrupt nature that it cannot sinne perfectly with a full will Rom. 7. so he perfectly pardons all sinne that there is no condemnation Rom. 8.1 Objection 1. We are justified by Faith therefore not before Faith Answer First it should have concluded not before the act of beleeving a Secondly I denie the consequence and say we may be justified both by it and yet before in a different sense This Proposition We are justified by Faith is very ambiguous He was not a Foole who an hundred years since said that this Proposition was one of those things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do other Scriptures to their own destruction 2 Pet. 3.16 I would our Age had not proved it true that the misunderstanding of this Proposition hath turned upside down the Doctrine of Justification amongst pudling preachers There is in this Proposition two words ambiguous and doubtfull The first Justified which sometimes in Scriptures signifieth to be reputed reckonned or accounted Just as It is God that iustifieth Sometimes it is taken for to be declared or manifested to be Just as By workes a man is iustified James 2.24 If you take Justified in the first sense we say we are not reputed or reckoned Just by the act of believing If you take Iustified in the second sense I say we are justified that is declared to be Iust by believing Faith manifesting to our consciences that we are Iust before God By Faith we understand that God hath freely iustified us in his Son Another word ambiguous in this Proposition is Faith which is diversly taken sometimes for the act of Faith or believing and sometimes for the obiect of Faith the thing believed as Faith was reckoned unto him for righteousnesse Rom 4. that is the obiect of faith So that it is all one as if he had said God or Christ was reckoned to him for righteousnesse If we understand the act of Faith then I say as before we are not reckoned Iust by the act of our faith if by faith we understand the obiect of our faith then I say we are reckoned or reputed Iust by God in by or through Christ Jesus our Faith An answer to your reply to the 1. Obiection We are iustified by faith therefore not before faith Your Answer is 1. That the conclusion should be not before the act of believing We reply the conclusion should not have more termes in it then the premises 2. That if a man hath the habit of faith he cannot but be actually in Christ For it is part of Christ 2. You answer That you deny the consequence We reply That which is said to be done by an instrument inferres it is not done without the instrument 3. You reply that a man may be iustified by faith and yet be iustified before faith in a different sense distinguishing of the reputation of one iust and the manifestation of one iust And of Fides quâ fides quam of faith and its obiect What is all this to the purpose when your own former replies do intimaredly confesse that you took the Argument to mean iustification it selfe not the manifestation and faith the quality not the obiect For the Apostle doth not mean Rom. 5.1 that Christ is the instrumentall cause but the meritorious cause And faith the
all did originally commit it All our natures were at and in the committing of it which natures we lineally derive from him And that you say we are made sinners in the first Adam simply and absolutely before we have done evill the Scripture saith no such thing but the contrary that in him we are all sinners Therefore to retort the Argument upon you we are not made righteous in the second Adam till we partake of his nature that is his Divine nature as 2 Pet. 1.4 which is that by which we escape corruption through lust A part of which is faith after reckoned up and commended to them to whom Peter writes in verse 5. immediately following To that you urge out of 2 Cor. b 5.19 I answer the Scripture is no friend to universall redemption And then what will follow on your behalfe Surely no more will follow or can follow but this that in Gods ordinary way of Gospell administration God is in Christ reconciling them of the world to himselfe that are perswaded by him to believe and receive the word of reconciliation So evidently immediately before and after that 19. verse Yet you say c This Argument did so wring Cardinall Bellarmine that he confessed Christ may be put on without a proper act of our soule Surely then the saddle was closer and harder put on him by some other then you have tackied it or he was more artificially wrackt then you here stretch him But I am willing to imagine the urmost you would or could make of this Argument It may be you have this in your thoughts that as in Adam children are accounted sinners though they cannot act sin so in Christ children may be accounted righteous though they cannot act faith To which I answer As there is a naturall habit of corruption in infants that makes a foundation of a just relation of Adams sinne to them For where there is no habituall corruption of nature there is no imputation of Adams sinne as we see in Christs conception and humane nature He was not accounted a sinner in himselfe but is for them that are saved by him but in himselfe he was and accounted most holy So there is habituall faith in elect infants dying in their infancy through which they are accounted righteous in Christ as we have reasoned to the 1. Argument But that I am loath to wade too deep that little ones should not follow more might be said If it might be said in some sense Christ can be apprehended without a proper act of our soule that is as it is a meere peculiar act of our soule yet not without an act of Gods grace in that soule Till that be put into the soul no more is done in any particular elect person then what was done in the eternall election which the Scripture calls a purpose Rom. 9. And a purpose is not the practise of the thing purposed and of that act of grace the soule of the youngest elect infant is in a faire capacity For the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intelligere the naked act of understanding depends not on the organs of the senses So the Artists that handle of the nature of the reasonable soule no nor doth the representing of an intelligible object to the understanding depend upon the senses when God will in the darke or in a dreame represent as in a vision of the minde the species or images of some spirituall thing that sense never apprehended How much lesse doth the acts of grace in this act of understanding depend upon the body or senses So that though the body be a childe great may be the actings of the gratiated soule Argument VI. VVHere there is full satisfaction made and the party offended accepting that satisfaction and contented to rest in it there must needs follow perfect remission of sinnes But in Christ crucified before we beleeved was full satisfaction made and God was contented to rest in that satisfaction Therefore there will follow perfect remission of sinnes c. First a that there was full satisfaction made in Christ is proved Heb. 10.11 12 13 14. vers For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified But the second that God is therewith contented to rest in that satisfaction we have the witnesse of the Father Matth. 3.17 This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased Acquiesco saith Beza See Esay 53.11 He shall see the travaile of his soule and shall be satisfied An Answer to Argument VI. YOur sixth Argument as you prove it will answer it selfe That Heb. 10.11 a 12 13 14. shews expresly that though Christ did make ready the satisfaction for the common nature of men before they knew of it that after should beleeve yet it is not brought home and made available to any particular person but to the sanctified The sanctified ones for ever in all ages and for eternity have the satisfaction not onely prepared but perfected to them See you Pareus c. on the place whether I deale not clearly with the place That place also Matth. 3.17 is for us against you It is in whom not with whom So that it imports that he is onely well pleased with all he studes in Christ Else he doth not acquiescere rest pleased but is earnest till somewhat else be done 2 Cor. 5.20 This interpretation is as old as Augustines time whom I name because you named him But look to the Scripture which to shew that God is well pleased only with those that are actuall in Christ addes to this speech Matth. 17.5 Hear ye him to draw men into Christ that with them God may be wel pleased Till men be actually in Christ God is not well pleased with them though they be elect See a notable place Rom. 9.25 I will call them my people which were not my people and her beloved which was not beloved who were they Them whom he had called ver 24. Argument VII IF we are not iustified in his sight before we believe a then are we uniust sinners workers of iniquity then doth the Lord hate us for he hateth all the workers of iniquity Psal 5. You know what absurdity will follow if you say we must believe before God can love us But it God hate us to day b and love us to morrow let Arminius with his disciples hear this and wonder why they should be blamed that say we may be loved to day and hated to morrow Children of God to day and of the Devill to morrow when they who would seeme their greatest Adversaries will not spare to say we may be hated to day and loved to morrow the children of the Devill to day and of God to morrow But that God loved us first before we believed when we were enemies in our blood c. is so plaine that I will not willingly so dishonour you as once to conceive that you will deny it Here is an end of the
instrument And the text meanes iustifying not bare manifesting of iustification Objection 2. He that beleeveth not is condemned already John 3.18 Answer This is all one with He that believeth not shall be damned a which you must understand of finall unbeliefe which I grant to be a note of Damnation An Answer to your Reply to Obiection 2. This you say must be understood of finall unbeliefe a As if a man were not in state of damnation till the last We reply 1. What then meaneth the termes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is condemned already 2. How do you answer to the Antithesis He that believeth is not condemned that is is actually out of state of damnation by faith Ergo without faith is actually in state of damnation 3 What say you to the reason he is said to be in state of condemnation for his past infidelity because he hath not believed Objection 3. Without Faith it is impossible to please God therefore we cannot be iustified without it Answer I deny the consequence and I perceive so will you also when you please a b c d e f For you will affirme a iustified person may displease God and then why is it not possible for a man to displease God and yet be iustified To please God is so to do those things which God approves in us to be well done which we cannot doe without Faith That this is the meaning of the Apostle is plaine by his reason For he that commeth unto God must be 〈◊〉 c. We cannot come unto God before we believe but cannot God come unto us before we believe Now Justification is Gods act upon a sinner not a sinners act upon God This also answereth the fourth Obiection Whatsoever is not of Faith is sinne An Answer to your Reply to Obiection 3. You deny the consequence Before we reply a note the meaning of the word please it imports to be well pleasing or acceptable 1. So the Greeks take the word So Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abel the first that is said to be acceptable to God was a shepheard So Bud. renders it See you more instances in Greeke Authours 2. It s spoken in this 5. ver not of doing but of receiving God translated him for before his translation he had this Testimony that he pleased God which must be meant that he was well pleasing to God by faith in Christ which is the Apostles scope ver 1. ver 39. or else you will make his doings the cause of his translation 3. This 6. ver shewes that the word please must signifie to be accepted of God through faith in Christ because it is added we must believe that God is there is his essence or that he is Jehovah And that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him there is his attribute of mercy to them that come to him by faith in Christ For without faith no acceptable seeking him Rom. 10. 4. This Epistle being written in Hebrew the Hebrew renders the word please 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was a delight to him 5. Either this must be the meaning that he that pleaseth God pleaseth God by faith in Christ or else the Apostles Argument drawn from Enoch to prove the Excellency of faith which is the maine businesse of this chap. comes to nothing for this is the Apostles Argument He that pleaseth God hath faith Enoch pleased God therefore he had faith and so by faith went to heaven Now to answer to your reply you deny the consequence 1. We answer by proving the consequence He onely that is justified pleaseth or is well pleasing to God This you yeild in your 6. Argument therefore if a man be not justified by faith he cannot please God This inference is the Apostles in this 11. of Hebr. 5.6 compared with Rom. 5.1 For saith the Apostle being justified by faith we have peace with God And by faith Enoch pleased God as sure as Abel did But saith he without faith it is impossible to please God Observe and observe the word impossible and see how it can be possible for a man to be well-pleasing to God without faith 2. We answer though one justified by faith may do some displeasing act as Thomas did in doubting of Christs resurrection yet a man justified by faith cannot be displeasing to God in his person God may chasten the corruption yet love the person Revel 3.19 We hate wantonnesse and whip it but we love the child Faith brings in our Sonship 1 John 12. To your reason for deniall of the consequence b we reply thus That you seeme to inferre that because one justified may displease God in some action therefore he may a time be without faith and displease God in all his actions and yet be justified which inference is very much to be blamed both for the consequent and consequence To your definition of pleasing God in action c I demand whether God can approve of a greater thing without faith namely our persons being as you say iustified before faith comes but cannot approve of a lesse thing namely our actions without faith which seemes strange By faith our persons are united to Christ Ephes 3.17 And our actions are but by a naturall dependence united to us Therefore the person is 1. Accepted by faith then 2. Our actions are accepted because our persons the Apostle saith by faith Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice How saith the text Gen. 4. God had respect to Abel and his offering To your reason d that pleasing God in action must be the onely meaning of the Apostle I answer That from the effect the Apostle proves how a man must have faith to be well-pleasing to God in his person that so he may be well-pleasing in his practise To your demand whether God cannot come to us before we believe e I answer his making us to believe is coming in and dwelling with us Eph. 3. Before that God doth but onely purpose his coming Ephes 1. To your close that Justification is an act of God upon a sinner f not a sinners act upon God we answer that Gods putting faith into a man and by it a man into Christ is as well an act of God in iustifying him as Gods reputing him iust in Christ imputing his sinnes to Christ and Christs righteousnesse to him Obiection 5. We are by nature the children of wrath c. Answer This were of some force a if you could prove us altogether in the estate of nature as well in Gods account as in our esteeme and so quite exempred from grace untill we believe which you cannot doe for the Apostle witnesseth the contrary 2 Tim. 1.9 b According to his own purpose and grace given us before the world began If grace were given before the world began surely before ever we believed God is Alpha and Omega therefore what he promiseth shall come to passe to his c is done
AN ANTIDOTE AGAINST ANTINOMIANISME The first Dosis The unjustifiablenesse of justification before faith Prescribed and administred in a soft Answer I. To seven Arguments II. To the solutions of five Objections III. To the novell distinction of Gods reconciliation to man without mans reconciliation to God Penned plainly for the undeceiving of the plain-hearted Christian and mildely for the regaining of our mistaken brother H. D. by D. H. London Printed for G. B. and R. W. SEVEN ARGUMENTS to prove a that in order of working God doth justifie his Elect before they do actually beleeve VVith some Answers to the Objections that some make against the same For the confirmation of those that do truly beleeve b lest they should attribute any part of the Office of Christ to the act of their beleeving Ezekiel 16.2 3 4 5 6. c Son of man cause Jerusalem to know her abominations And say Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan thy father was an Amorite and thy mother an Hittite And as for thy nativity in the day that thou wast borne thy navill was not cut neither wast thou washed in water to supple thee thou wast not salted at all nor swadled at all None eye pitied thee to do any of these things unto thee but thou wast cast into the open field to the loathing of thy person in the day that thou wast borne And when I passed by thee and saw thee polluted in thine owne blood I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood Live yea I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood Live Printed in the yeere 1643. An answer to the Title In Order of Working God doth justifie his Elect a before they do actually believe So you 1. Here you do more then seem you do expresse your self to meane justification in act or actuall justification not justification meerely in Gods decree For Gods decree to justifie is not a working iustification so you flie off from that extreame of making a precedency of iustification before faith in Gods decree where indeed the decree of faith is as old as the decree of iustification yet in your dispute you oft fall on againe upon this extreame 2. Here you seem but you do but seem to wave the other extreame of holding a precedency in time of iustification before faith you seem onely to hold a precedency in order of nature because you say in order of working but you onely seem For if onely the difference be in order of nature this doth not inferre a necessity that they should be severed in time not an hour not a quarter of an hour But more is intended namely that a man may be instified many years before he believe so in the 1. Argum which is most false yea we cannot say that in order of working in the same moment when whole Christ is brought to the soule that iustification goes before faith if there be any precedency of one before another For 1. Actuall iustification is by union with Christ granted in 2. Argum. ad Phil. 3.9 Now the very instant of union is of Christs being in us by spirit of faith Ephes 3.17 1 Ioh. 3. ult Ioh. 1.12 you confesse the spirit unites in 2. Argum. e 2. If faith hath any thing to do in iustification it is an instrument but the toole is before the worke in order of nature 3. Though the King purposeth to pardon a fellon yet he doth not actually pardon and pronounce discharged till he accept and plead that pardon 4. The order of working set down Rom. 8.30 is Whom he predestinated them he called whom he called them he iustified if effectuall calling includes not faith it is not effectuall but onely that which may be in hypocrites but 2 Pet. 1.3 it s plaine calling is to glory and vertue It is a part of the office of Christ to give gifts and graces b and so that of believing to them whom he saves Iohn 1.16.17 And of his fulnesse have all we received and grace for grace For the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Iohn 17.19 And for their sakes I sanctifie my selfe that they also might be sanctified Ephes 4.7.8 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ How proves he that From an act of his Mediatorship namely his ascension Wherefore he saith when he ascended up on high he led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men Ezek. 16.2.3.4.5.6 To this we answer c that all that text doth not hold out that God iustified Jerusalem one minute before he restored her to spirituall life holines For when he passed by he said Live And when he said Live he entred into Covenant with her and washed her v. 8.9 Christs name and nature is not barely to save us in our fins but from our sins Matth. 1.21 to be as a Iesus a Saviour so to be Immanuel God with us Matth. 21.23 Now this of God being with us is applied not meerly to Gods decree but to the execution of his decree of calling iustifying and glorifying Rom. 8.30.31 Seven Arguments to prove that in order of working God doth justifie his Elect before they doe actually beleeve With some Answers to the Objections that some make against the same THis Proposition being contradicted we are iustified before God before the act of our beleeving This is the Proposition which I do now undertake to vindicate by the affistance of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ whose honour is not a little concerned in it b I will first of all lay down seven Arguments for the confirmation of the Truth and then I will answer unto five Objections brought by some against it An answer to the Preface I had thought by that touch you give upon universall Gratians as you call them in the 5. a Argum. * that you had been an opposite to the universall Redemptionists the Pelagians Semi-Pelagians and Arminians But I finde your doctrine in this point to be very consonant and neere of kinne to theirs Herein you agree with them So â—sher delivers their sense who do thus say that the benefit of Christs satisfaction is to be extended so farre as that God for his part is actually reconciled unto men and doth really discharge men from their sins before they believe You differ in this onely that they say to all men God is so reconciled and gives a discharge before faith comes you say he is reconciled to all the Elect and dischargeth them before faith comes To deny this proposition in the sense you meane it That we are justified before God before you mean in time the act of our believing doth nothing derogate from the honour of the Father or his Son b Forthe Father hath committed all the businesse of the Church to Christ Matth. 11.27 28. 1 Cor. 15. sends us
hath Christs death and resurrection and intercession and strengthening in tribulations accompanying it Argument IV. THey that have their sins taken away are iustified a But the elect have their sins taken away before they believe Ergo the elect are iustified before they believe The maior is proved Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgteen and whose sinne is covered Rom. 4.7 The minor That the Elect have their sins taken away before they believe b is proved Joh. 1.29 Behold the Lambe of God that takes away the sins of the world and Esay 35. ◠The Lord hath laid on him the iniquities of us all and 1 Pet. 2.24 Himselfe bare our sins in his own body on the Tree and Rom. 6.6 Our old man is crucified with him that the body of sinne might be destroyed Did Christ take away sinne or not Did he beare them Did he destroy the body of sinne If you say c No how will you escape the Sword of the Spirit If you say Yea I desire no more An Answer to Argument IV. YOu say a they that have their sins taken away are iustified you prove it Rom. 4.7 Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven and whose sin is covered By this you intend to prove a man is iustified before he believes But your own expressions and allegations are against that 1. Expression For sins are not taken away which is a Physicall act by Gods meere mentall thoughts of iustifying but when he pronounceth the blessing of justification he saith withall in whose heart is no guile Psal 32.1 2. which is the place the Apostle quotes Rom. 4. See reall actuall iustification take our sinnes from us and our hearts from our sins 2. Allegation And with the same breath almost with which the Apostle saith Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven he saith also To him that beleeveth on him that iustifieth the ungodly is his faith counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4.5 6 7. You go about to prove that the elects sins are taken away before they believe b by that Isa 53.8 1 Pet. 2.24 Eph. 1.29 What do you intend by these generall places would you by the two first places have it that Christ takes away the sins of all the Jewes contrary to Rom. 11.7 c. or by the third place that Christ takes away the sins of the whole world contrary to Rom. 8.30 yet either you must take them in that false generall sense or else they make nothing to prove justification before faith That place you alledge out of Rom. 6.6 is flat against you For if sinne be not destroyed till crucified then not till mortified For crucifying signifies mortifieation which is a part of sanctification Gal. 5.22 23 24. And the body of sinne signifies not the guilt but the filth and power Rom. 7. And therefore this place supposeth justification by faith even as faith is mentioned to precede that crucifying in the place last alledged Yet in the close you seeme to triumph c as if you had sheerly carried away the gerland upon the hornes of an unanswerable Dilemma Saying if we say Christ did take away sinne did bear them did destroy the body of sin you desire no more Thus you We answer Christ doth take away sinne doth bear the sins of men but for whom onely for the elect And when doth he take away sinne and make his bearing to lighten men Even when comes that justification by faith that as you say brings with it a crucifying of the body of sinne when comes that iustification mentioned Rom. 5.1 2 3 4. Argument V. VVE were made sinners in the first Adam before we had done good or evill a Therefore we are made righteous in the second Adam before we have done good or evill This consequence is proved Rom. 5.18 19. As by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousnesse of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life for as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous If you shall place the Emphasis of this Text in All and many you will cause the hearts of the * universall Gratians to leape for joy which I beleeve you would not willingly do Therefore you must be forced to place the Emphasis in As and So As we sinned all in the loynes of the first Adam So were we all made righteous in the loynes of the second Adam The Lord Christ And this agreeth with the ministerie of Reconciliation b to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe not imputing their trespasses unto them 2 Cor. 5.19 Truly this Argument was of so great force c that it did wring out of Cardinall Bellarmine this confession as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 5. That Christ may be put on without a proper act of our soule I confesse I differ from the Cardinall in his meanes of putting on Christ yet this his confession I acknowledge to be true An Answer to Argument V. IT is plaine by the place you alledge Rom. 5. c That you meane not a making of us sinners in the first Adam by Gods bare decree accounting us so And if you do not so meane but meane that we are actually accounted sinners in the first Adam since we came from his loines before we had done good or evill I admire how you dare affirme a thing so contrary to Scripture For the Apostle most evidently affirmeth in that Rom. 5. That though all that are come of Adam have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression ver 14. that is have not sinned actually in their particular persons as infants not any sinne nor any men that particular sinne of Adam yet ver 12. it is said expressy that death passed over all men for that all have sinned or the Greeke will beare it In whom all have sinned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The former part of the verse favours this reading in these words As by one man sinne entred into the world Then concludes all have sinned Which how can it be true of infants in their conception as Psal 51. unlesse they be said to sinne in Adam But however we read the same conclusion will necessarily follow that all children and all in the wombe even Jacob and Esau have sinned originally in the common nature at first existing in that publike father of mankinde I say originally As true as we have our bodies from our Grandfathers so from the first Adam we had all the same corrupt senses and appetite in him though actually in our own persons we sinned not that sinne nor do infants as Jacob and Esau actually sinne as persons of ripe years when as the Law speakes they are capaces doli can do evill and give a seeming reason for it So then in briefe our answer is That Adams sin is imputed to all because
no place Add what the said Doctor hath touching creation Ibid. cap. 8. that you may not think me singular and selfish Active creation saith he is conceived in manner of a transient action in which is alwayes supposed an object upon which the agent doth act yet is it not formaly transient but only virtuall because it doth not suppose the object but makes it So hee How much more therefore is Redemption a transient act and justification a transient act which doth cleerly suppose that praeexistent object man made already And therefore as actuall creation done in time though decreed eternally doth not inferre a change in God so nor doth actuall Redemption Justification putting us into Christ and loving us as found in him conclude that there is a change in God hereby which before was eternal but onely in the decree and purpose God from all eternitie hath the Idea and platforme of all in his minde yea his essence as understood by himselfe is the Idea of all But to say that God doth actually justifie whiles man is not actually existent is to charge God with contradictions Or to say that God doth actually love justifie c. that which is actually nothing is to frame phantasies to our selves God made man after his own Image God lookes on us no otherwise from all eternity for matter of being but as he lookes upon his owne essence the Idea as we said and platforme of all things Therefore God in his decree cannot be said to justifie us from all eternitie unlesse you dare say God justifies himselfe There is the same reason of distinguishing of a man afore conversion and after If Gods decree be that 1. he calls effectually by the Word And then 2. justifies in Christ And 3. glorifies with grace and blessednesse Then it is impossible to conceive or say That it is done eternally afore that we are justified eternally afore loved as justified eternally afore when the Decree is That is shall not be afore we are actually called So this indeed is to defend Gods unchangeablenesse to maintaine that God doth Act all things in time place manner and degree exactly according to his eternall unchangeable purpose Your Quotation of Rom. 5.6 8. of Ezek. 16. wee answered afore The same Answer serves to that you alleage out of John 3.16 Thus God purposed actually to love some of the World And after he did actually love those of the World that were in Christ by faith So that God actually loved those that were of the world but not whiles of the World And this place of John 3.16 doth shew the order of Gods proceeding to make us actually loved 1. Hee having decreed to love 2. Prepared a Propitiation gave his Son for whom he might love 3. So actually loves all that beleeve in that Christ that he saves them If you understand otherwise of an actuall love in God towards the world before they beleeve then it will follow that God doth actually love all the world of which many never beleeve yea never were elected I wonder why you doe so contend for this expression Ephes 1.3 4 5.6.7 8. Rom. 8.28.29 Rom. 9.11 That God doth love the elect from all eternity For 1. If the holy Ghost in Scripture calls it a Love once he calls it a purpose an election a choosing a predestination a fore-ordaining a counsell a determination many times for that once And we are to follow the frequenter exposition of the holy Ghost as a commentary to that which is more rare 2 You your self will call that actual love which God beares to us when we are actually in Christ by Faith So you doe Sermon 2. p 3. p. 5. And the Scripture saith that before this Gods love is but a purpose a predestination an election c. Now a purpose and an act of love are immediate contraries no middle love between both And therefore what doe you contend for A meer imagination 3. Cui bono to what end doe you strive in this For what more effectuall argument lies in this to tell a poor forlorne sinner that God loves him then to tell him God hath elected him or purposed to save him in Christ for his Election and Purpose are unchangeable And you may as safely say the one as the other yea safer For that expression to tell him that God loves him being yet out of Christ may give an occasion of mistake whereby to neglect Christ Sure enough on their parts that use this phrase God loves sinners out of Christ many grosse expressions bud thence ☜ As that you have p. 27 28. following That we are Predestinated chosen redeemed sanctified called the heart opened and all before Conversion comes I leave you and all ingenuous men to stand and wonder at these words till I come to answer them in their order upon those pages of your Book which you see wee quote in order There you and all candid men may see how unextricably you hamper your self Pag. 21. You say neither may wee nor will Christ himself say that he purchased the Fathers Love for us Answer Here is another of those * For you see and say your self pag. 22. That you see a depth unsearchable and you cannot tell what to say to it So you thickets you rush into by understanding Gods election or purpose to love to be a love And that his eternall love containes more then a purpose For if you would keep to the frequenter expressions of the Scriptures of election purpose c. you would easily understand all Namely that as well the Son and holy Ghost as the Father doe elect and purpose to save sinners That all Three as well as one of the Persons must be pacified by merit of a Saviour God and man That all Three Persons doe purpose to love in this manner and method 1. That they will send the Second Person to take humane nature for Christ sends himself as he himself laid down his life Ioh. 10. to die and prepare a satisfaction for sinners 2. That this Christs sufferings shall be preached to sinners 2 Cor. 5.20 3. That the efficacie of the Spirit entayled on the Ministery of the Gospel 2 Cor. 3. shall make the elect by faith own these sufferings as done for them to discharge them whereby they are united to Christ Ephes 3.17 4. Then God finding them in Christ hee confesseth hee is satisfied and well-pleased with them Matth. 3. verse last Matth. 17.5 Twice spoken from heaven for the eminency of it Which in sense is all one as that Christ merits Gods actuall love to sinners And that is the reason that Christ is so oft in Scripture * Heb 9.26 Rom. 3.25 Rom. 5 11. Ephes 2.14 1 Cor. 5. called our Sacrifice our Propitation our Atonement our Peace our Passeover c. For that your dangerous Distinction That God can begin to love without Christ and after cannot continue it without the helpe of a Christ I wade not