baptize Infants I would desire no stronger Argument to manage against Infant-Baptism than your Principle of Conditionality of the Covenant And as for the Lord's Supper it holds forth Christ's Body freely given and his Blood freely shed for us and that his Blood was a Seal and Ratification of the New Covenant where-by it becomes a Testament Neonom 1 Pet. 3.21 Baptism that saves us is not the putting away the Filth of the Flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God i. e. Vpright consent of Heart to the Vow and Profession Antinom The Words are thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To what was Baptism an Antitype Was it not to the Waters of Noah that saved Persons by bearing up the Ark when the rest of the World were drowned What condition was there of God's saving those Eight Persons And to bring it home the Apostle tells us the mere Element in Baptism and external Administration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the washing away External or Levitical Uncleanness as it was used by the Jews but as it signifies the Blood of Christ reaching to the purifying of the Conscience from Guilt Heb. 9. 10. and thence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ as it signifies the carrying or washing away our Sins by the Blood of Christ and our rising again wherein we were fundamentally Justifyed and the application of both by Faith whereby our present Sence of God's Wrath and Condemnation is removed To talk that it signifies a Vow or upright Consent is very Jejune against the Stream of Interpreters Neonom An Elect Person known by Revelation to be so while unregenerate is not entitled to the Lord's Supper Antinom He that hath that Revelation I suppose will have something more revealed But in the mean time I wonder why you that stand upon such strict moral Qualifications for an Interest in Covenant-Benefits and so sparing of Gospel Grace stand upon so slight Terms for admission to the Lord's Supper and are so lavish of Covenant-Benefits upon such easie Terms I am sure you may know some of them are not Regenerate without Revelation Neonom Vnbelief and whatever Sins are contrary to the Terms of the Covenant are the only hinderances to a Sinners Interest in the Benefits of the Covenant and by these we are said to reject and refuse the Covenant The Scripture lays Men's want of Forgiveness on their Vnbelief as the culpable cause c. Antinom Then the great Business of the Covenant of Grace is to save Sinners and give them Life being dead in Sin and Unbelief and the Gift of God is eternal Life begun in Remission of Sins and Faith in Christ's Blood which God gives freely unto those that are altogether uncapable to perform any Conditions for it he gives these Gifts to unbelieving rebellious ones And if Unbelief should hinder these Gifts of God's Grace there 's none could be saved And as Unbelief doth not hinder Fundamental Covenant Right which they have by Christ's Imputation so it hinders not God's Application when he will work for then nothing shall hinder You seem also to hint as if some Sins were more venial than others and some more consistent with your Moral Conditions of the Covenant of Imperfection and know that no culpable Cause shall hinder the Forgiveness of those for whom Christ died Neonom The Gospel-Promise being the way which Christ appoints to dispense saving Benefits to Believers must have the same Rules with the Covenant of Grace Antinom Yea for the Covenant of Promise and the Covenant of Grace are the same and saving Benefits are dispensed only by way of Gift which is performance of the Promise and no other way Neonom The Gospel is his Testament and a Covenant cannot be a Disposition contrary to this Gospel Antinom The Covenant of Grace is a Testament because confirmed by the Death of Christ and there 's no adding to it if it were but a Man's Testament and last Will as the Apostle saith and therefore there 's no bringing in any after-terms or conditions of it And the Gospel is a Declaration of this Promise and Seal and addeth no further Terms Neonom This Promise tells us 1. That there is a Promise of the first Grant made to Christ for the Elect and by vertue of that Promise the Elect do consent to the Covenant Antinom Promise and Grant are in a manner one and this made to Christ for the Elect it's better to the Elect in Christ but that will do for the present and by vertue of that Promise the Elect do consent I suppose you mean the first Consent which you will sometimes have the Condition of their receiving benefit by the Promise I hope it 's this a great Benefit and absolute Gift of the Promise and of this then there 's no Condition but Christ by your own Consession Neonom 2. That Gospel or Covenant is the means whereby that Faith is wrought Antinom Very good then the Covenant is the condition of Faith and not Faith of the Covenant Neonom This Gospel commands and by the Power of the Spirit works that Faith in order to saving Benefits which Benefits it promiseth to such as do believe and no other D. W. p. 66. Antinom I thought but now you were got above your Covenant of Imperfections but I find you are working down again These Conditions are heavy bulky things they will weigh a Man down do what he can And is Faith wrought only in order to saving Benefits How often shall I tell you it 's one of the principal saving Benefits of any Grace wrought in us And Faith is promised to Unbelievers else they would never have it Neonom This Gospel invests Believers in those saving Benefitt Antinom And it invests Unbelievers in the saving benefit of Faith and therefore the Gospel is the condition of Faith Neonom It secures the perseverance of Believers in the true Faith and the necessary Effects and thereby secures those Benefits as unforfeited Antinom Then they are not under an uncertain Trial all this Life that it is not determined whether they shall be saved or no as you suggested Neonom But Christ never bequeathed or promised in the Gospel a Pardon or Salvation to Vnbelievers Antinom That 's a Riddle Was it not in Christ's Testament to save Sinners to justify the Ungodly Did he not pray for them that should believe Doth not the Gospel tell us He came not to save righteous but to bring Sinners to repentance that he came to seek and to save them that are lost Doth not Christ say He is the Resurrection and the Life and that we are quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins c. The main Tenure of the Gospel If it be as you say there 's none should be saved for if Men are not saved by vertue of the Promise they will never be saved What a miserable Condition are all in if believing and promising Mercy be not bestowed upon
become most abominable as if God stood in need of something that we have To depart from Iniquity or to labour in Holiness in order to express our Thankfulness unto God for his Mercies in Jesus Christ is most grateful and most forcible Again Love unto God for all his Glorious Excellencies especially for his Mercy in Christ Jesus is the best Principle of Holiness and our departing from Iniquity and this Love is begun and flows from God's Love first He that Acts according to any of God's Commandments out of hope to Merit by them may Act out of Love indeed but it must be then Self-love to obtain as he vainly thinks by his Obedience Eternal Happiness Our Love of God should exceed Self-love as far as God himself exceeds which is Infinitely Our Love of God is a Vertue and the Foundation of the rest Our Love of our selves thus taken is a Sin a Mother Sin the cause of all the rest of our Sins c. I am mistaken if I find not this Doctrine of working for Life according to your sence exactly in the Council of Trent Decree XVI Grace proposeth to the Just the Exercise of Good Works by which Eternal Life is gained as Grace promised by the Mercy of God and a Reward due to Good Works by the Divine Promise And it concludeth This Doctrine doth not establish any Righteousness of our own refusing the Righteousness of God but the same is said to be in us and of God being infused by him for the Merit of Christ Calvin But Mr. Neonomian saith in his Reply It 's vain and false Mr. Antinomian that you say that you are only against setting Graces and Holiness in the place of Christ Antinom He that reads my Sermons must needs see the Truth of that Assertion I have nothing to say to such as only depend upon Mr. Neonomian's report Neonom He reckons they are put in Christ's place though they be affirmed but as Means and Conditions antecedently necessary by Divine Appointment to obtain any Blessing for the sake of Christ's Merits Antinom And well I may if Men must be gracious and holy antecedently to any Blessing for the sake of Christ's Merits and by vertue of that Antecedent Grace and Holiness do obtain Blessings for the sake of Christ's Merits I think you outstrip the Papists here in the Doctrine of Merit Neonom His Principles are That Faith is not so much as an Instrument whereby we are united to Christ or Justified P. 616. Antinom He speaks not there of Faith as an Instrument but he doth speak of it as such P. 597. where he saith Faith is not the Instrument Radically to unite Christ and the Soul together but rather is the Fruit that flows from Christ the Root being united before-hand by the Spirit to the Persons that do believe Neonom 2. That Christ brings us all good things when we are ungodly so it 's in vain to do any thing to obtain these P. 41. Antinom He speaks there of Justification by Faith alone without Works And we are delivered from Wrath before we step a step into Duties and we do not the Duty to be delivered but we do the Duty because we are delivered and seeing all these are settled by Christ for us of Free Gift all we do is for Christ himself I say that we do we do for Christ and not for our selves Neonom He saith Obedience is not the way to Heaven and Sanctification is not the way to a Justified Person Antinom No Sanctification is not the way of Justification he speaks of the way of Justification we are not according to his Divinity Justified by Inherent Holiness or Righteousness though we are according to yours And he tells you Sanctification is our business in Christ the Way for whatever Duty is performed acceptably must be wrought by Faith in Christ Jesus we are Sanctified in Christ Christ is the true way of Sanctification Neonom He saith He should not have the least Thought in his Heart of promoting or advancing himself or any end of his own by doing what he doth Antinom You know this thing is no new Doctrine It use to be one of the signs and marks of Truth of Grace when we Act in Duty singly for the Glory of God and not for selfish and sinister ends and designs but this is spoken to sufficiently before DEBATE XV. Of the Way to attain Assurance Neonom THE next Errour that I have to charge Mr. Antinomian with is his Doctrine of Assurance Errour Assurance is not attained by the Evidence of Scripture marks or signs of Grace or by the Spirits discovering to us that he hath wrought in our Hearts any Holy Qualifications But Assurance comes only by an Inward Voice of the Spirit saying Thy Sins are Forgiven thee and our Believing thereupon that our Sins are forgiven D. W. p. 161. Antinom What evidence do you bring of your Charge Neonom You say if you would know that the Lord hath laid your Iniquities on Christ you must know it thus 1. Is there a Voice behind thee in thy self Thy Sins are forgiven thee Dost thou see this Voice agree with the Word of Grace i. e. Dost thou see it held out to most vile and wretched Creatures as thou canst be And upon this Revelation of the Mind of the Lord by his Spirit according to that Word doth the Lord give to thee to receive that Testimony of the Spirit to sit down with it as satisfied that upon this thou makest full reckoning thou hast propriety in this particularly to thy self If thou dost receive that Testimony according to that Word here is thy Evidence thou hast thy Propriety and Portion in this Dr. Cr. p. 491. Calvin And do you Banter this Doctrine as Erroneous Stuff I would wish you to have a care it 's a tender Point Antinom I will acquaint you with a little of my foregoing Discourse Let us see what kind of evidencing believing gives it is not a Revealing Evidence Dr. Cr. p. 491. nor an Effecting Evidence these the Word and Spirit are but it is a Receiving Evidence or it is an Evidence as it doth receive that Testimony which the Spirit holds out applying it to the Heart as the Eyes receive the light and the Ears the sound and if we ask a Man how do you know such a thing he will say I saw it with my Eyes and heard it with mine Ears It is an evidence as an Officer in Court that speaks nothing of his own knowledge but produceth Records and testifieth the Authentickness of the Records The Life of Evidence is materially in the Records themselves but the Officer is an Evidence as he doth assert the Truth of such Records It is even so with Faith The Spirit of the Lord makes the Records and speaks the Records to the Heart Now Faith comes in and receives what the Spirit of the Lord hath written In brief Faith is an Evidence as it doth take Possession of
from his first Charge I doubt not but that our Sins were all at once laid on Christ Paul's Sins were on Christ in the heighth of his Rebellion and Persecution and Christ came upon him effectually to convert him as the Fruit thereof even in the midst of his Rebellion He saith the grace of laying sin on Christ is applied to sinners while they are departed from God and is the cause of the gift of converting-Converting-grace plain Instances whereof were Saul and the Jaylor whom the covenant-Covenant-grace took hold on in the heighth of their Rebellion But all this reacheth not the Proof of your Charge which you call Error here Neonom But he saith God hath not one Sin to charge upon an Elect Person from the first moment of Conception to the last moment of Life no nor Original Sin is not to be laid upon him the Lord hath laid it on Christ already D. W. p. 171. from D. Cr. p. 364. Antinom You have been harping on this string already I shall only repeat my words as spoken D. Cr. p. 364. I said it is true an elect person not called is never able to know individually of himself that he is such an one that God hath nothing to charge upon him because till calling God gives not unto persons to believe and it 's only believing which evidences to men of things not seen Things that are not seen they are hidden and secret and shall not be known I mean the things of God's love to men shall not be known to particular men till they do believe But considering their real condition in foro Dei the Lord hath not one sin to charge an elect person with from the first moment of his life till the last minute of it there is not so much as original sin the ground is the Lord hath said it on Christ already See Rom. 8 1 Joh. 1.7 Heb. 16.14 Was there by one act the expiation of sin and all at once that were committed from the beginning of the World to the end thereof how comes it to pass that this or that sin should be laid upon elect persons when they were laid upon Christ long before I deny not but according to the sense of the Law and in foro conscientiae they are charged and sin is laid to their charge but I speak of their real standing in the Eye of God's Justice their sins were laid on Christ and carried away by him Neonom He saith It 's a Voice of a lying Spirit in your Hearts that saith that you that are believers have yet Sin wasting your Consciences and lying as a Burden too heavy for you to bear c. D. W. p. 171. from Dr. C. p. 298. Antinom The Voice is not of the true Spirit and therefore must be of the lying Spirit 1. If he lye under Conscience walâ—ing Sin it seems to be a lying Spirit that tells him he is a believer 2. If he be a real believer and sin lye so heavily upon his Conscience it 's a sign that his Faith is very weak that it hath not reached the Blood of Christ to the purifying of his Conscience and that he lyes under the Spirit of Bondage quite contrary to the Spirit of Adoption Neonom He saith Was not David a justified Person and did not he bear his own Sin After several things he answers I must tell you all that David speaks here he speaks from himself and all that David speaks from himself was not truth Antinom Why do you not tell those several things My Answer to the Objection as to the sum of it was this I know this Objection seems unanswerable as in several passages Asaph speaks to that purpose and in that particularly where he saith Hath God forgottâ—n to be gracious Hath he shut up his loving-kindness And will he be gracious no more First I would fain know whether now under the times of the Gospel there be not many tender-hearted religious People that cry out of their own Sins and the weight and burden of their own Sins upon their own Spirits as well as David I must tell you all that David said from himself was not truth And is it truth when a sincere-hearted believer through the power of temptation and infidelity â—alls into despairing Expressions Did Asaph speak well in these Passages to charge God that he had forsaken him for ever David might mistake then that God should charge sin upon him and it may be he might charge sin upon himself without any Warrant or Commission from God to do it And doth not Asaph upon recollecting himself in that Psal 77.10 acknowledge that to be his Infirmity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my Sickness or Spiritual Disease that I should think or speak at this rate of God And are you so offended that I say it was Asaph's mistake It was by some mistake that those words were said to be David's when Asaph's Doth not the Spirit of God in Asaph say that it was not only his mistake but sin of infirmity Calv. I think you have given a sufficient Answer to that Allegation of his I pray let 's hasten as much as may be Neonom I must confess I have not much to say against the Answer But he saith Before a believer doth confess his sin he may be as certain of the pardon of it as after confession D. W. p. 172. from Dr. C. p. 213. Antinom Speaking of Christ's free welcom to all comers this Objection among others was spoke to But must not he confess first Dr. C. p 213. and be afflicted in his Soul before he can think he shall be received if he come For answer I said 1. I deny not but acknowledge when a believer sins he must confess his sins and the greatest end and ground of this confession is that which Joshua speaks concerning Achan Josh 7.19 My Son confess thy faults and give glory to God A believer in the confession of sin gives glory to the great God of Heaven and Earth and that must be the glorious end of confession of his sin that God may be owned as the sole and only Saviour Except we do acknowledge Sin we cannot acknowledge Salvation we cannot acknowledge any Vertue in the Works and Sufferings of Christ Christ might have saved his labour and never come into the World all that Christ did couâ—d not be acknowledged to be of worth to us if there had not been sin from which Christ should save us He that doth indeed confess his sin doth indeed confess he had perished if Christ had not died for him nay he confesseth that nothing in the World but Christ could save him 2. I grant that a believer should be sensible of sin i e of the nature of sin But my main design is to shew you that Confession of Sin is not the procuring Cause of the Pardon of Sin A believer i. e. a true believer may certainly conclude even before confession of sin that reconciliation is made
insisted so much upon the Conditionality of Works and wherein it 's said they continued not viz. In the Mount Sinai Covenant which God gave them when he brought them out of Egypt Heb. 8.9 4. In regard of that sort of Promises which they stood encouraged by to the performance of this External Obedience they were usually Temporal Blessings only and the Threats and Curses denounced against Disobedience was usually in rsepect of outward things though under all this Cloudiness and Conditionality the Covenant of Promise was applied in its Absolute Nature as at first revealed to Adam and Abraham which was to all the Elect living before Christ the Ministry of the quickning Spirit and a Savour of Life 15. The Original Contract of this Covenant before the World was is by some called the Covenant of Redemption and distinguisht from the Covenant of Grace but such do greatly mistake for both the Original Contract and the Manifestation thereof are one and the same Covenant there 's no Specifick Difference that which is is but secundum adjuncta Ordinis Manifestationis Neonom Next to the Doctrine of Imputation which I think I have sufficiently cleared up according to my Scheme and fully and rightly stated Truths and Errours in those Points Let us now Debate the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace This being a Point of Great Concern I shall premise an Enquiry nto some particulars for the explaining this Subject Q. 1. What is the Covenant of Grace D. W. C. 8. p. 53. A. 1. It is not the Covenant of Redemption between the Father and Spirit as one Party and the Eternal Word the Lord Jesus as the other Party Antinom Who ever put the Father and Spirit on one Party in the Covenant of Grace it's New Divinity and secondly you are very Magisterial in this Negative Position Quadam confidentia non est Virtus ut audacia Methinks the Judgment of the Reverend Divines should have weighed so much with you as not to have blowed it off at one Puff In the Larger Catechism Q. 30. Doth God leave Mankind to perish in a state of Sin and Misery A. God doth not leave all Mankind to perish in the Estate of Sin and Misery into which they fell by the Breach of the first Covenant commonly called the Covenant of Works but of his meer Love and Mercy delivereth his Elect out of it and bringeth them into a state of Salvation by the second Covenant commonly called a Covenant of Grace Q. 31. VVith whom was the Covenant of Grace made A. The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his Seed You say That the Covenant Agreement made with Christ was not the Covenant of Grace You call it a Covenant of Redemption as another thing from the Covenant of Grace I acknowledge the Covenant of Grace is a Covenant of Redemption and the Covenant you call the Covenant of Redemption is the Covenant of Grace and therefore shall not incumber our Discourse with a Debate about Names but shall affirm that there is no such thing as an Essential Difference between the Covenant of Grace and Redemption the distinction made between them is but Novel at least that it was but lately so generally received for it appears by what is here spoken in this Answer of the Assembly so plainly and positively that they owned but two Covenants that of Works and that of Grace They are only distinguished between the making and manifesting this Covenant of Grace A Covenant hidden or secret and manifest is but distributio ex adjunctis therefore after they had told us that this Covenant of Grace was made with Christ the second Adam and with all the Elect as his Seed They enquire next Q. 32. How is the Grace of God manifest in the second Covenant A. The Grace of God is manifested in the second Covenant in that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator and Life and Salvation by him c. So that the Covenant of Grace contains all Grace and Mercy Redemption and the offer and application thereof Neonom Were this Covenant understood I think many well meaning People would be undeceived In that Covenant i. e. of Redemption all the Causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured all Satisfaction and Merit are on Christ as his undertaking c. Antinom It seems then this well-meaning Assembly was deceived and many Able Divines besides who have not admitted of this Novel Distinction between the Covenant of Redemption and that of Grace 2. You talk at least very improperly that the causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured in the Covenant of Redemption which placeth it before Election for I take the Grace of Election to be the first adjusting and securing cause of Mens Salvation and not so only but of the Covenant it self made with Christ I thought all the causes were sufficiently adjusted in the Councel of God's Will and that by the purpose of Grace they were secured to us and Redemption too Christ's Undertaking the charge of Satisfaction and Merit is a cause of our Salvation not adjusting and securing it they were adjusted and secured before Neonom Yea it 's provided there that the Elect shall obey the terms of Life and certainly possess Salvation Antinom 1. It 's manifest that you esteem not Redemption one of the Terms of Life but some other Terms distinct from it I had thought that Christ's Righteousness had been the great condition of our Life and Salvation but it seems it 's but provision for the performing the Terms of Life 2. I thought it had been provided in Election that all the Elect should certainly believe and obey the Gospel but it seems by what you say here they were only conditionally Elected and provision made in the Covenant of Redemption that they should perform the Condition and obey the Term very improper it's to perform the Terms Now what is in such a Covenant of Grace more than Adam's would have had if he had stood for God must have provided that he should obey or perform the Terms of Life which were to him very small and easie no more than giving a Pepper-corn or not so much only to forbear plucking and eating an Apple when he had enough besides There 's no Essential Difference in your Opinion for where-ever the Creature performs a Condition of a Covenant of God's making God must provide for that performance by Grace given and confirmed Neonom Yea as that Covenant was not made with the Elect though for the Elect so they have nothing to do as a Condition of this Covenant Antinom Rare Divinity Mens tua sublimis supra genus eminet ipsum 1. You say that Covenant was not made with the Elect. The Assembly say it was made with the second Adam and his Seed but you I suppose deny Christ to be a second Adam a publick Person and a Spiritual or Mystical Root 2. I would fain
strong or weak so our Assurance is strong or weak Now that Faith still carries with it a Hypostasis or Demonstration of the thing believed grounded upon the Certainty Truth and Infallibility of God I am fully satisfied from that Portion of Scripture that evinces it undeniably Heb. 11.1 And as now for other grounds of Comfort and Assurance which arise from the Visibility of the Grace of God and the Fruits of the Spirit in the Heart and Life I highly value them as subordinate grounds of Comfort and Confirmation in Assurance these are seen by the reflection of the Soul upon it self being able in regenerate man to reason in a spiritual manner from Causes Effects Subjects and Adjuncts c. which he finds in himself according to the Rule of the Word of God This I call Experimental Assurance and this is that which is so long attaining to and when it is had may be lost again in a great measure as Comfort therefore And because many Believers take this to be all the Assurance they must look for and their Teachers tell them so therefore they go mourning all their dayes and are only supported by what degrees of Assurance is in their Faith which they take not to be any and their Teachers tell them that Faith hath nothing of Assurance in it but do suggest as if it were but the roving of the Mind in uncertainties and Probability and that it is Presumption for them to believe to Confidence and Assurance though the Spirit of God doth command and encourage it again and again and that doubting is rather their Vertue than Sin whereas so much as there is of Doubting mingled with their Faith so much there is of Sin and Unbelief In true Faith there is the Promise more or less believed i. e. the Truth and Goodness because a Promise reached forth a Truth which carries Goodness in it to us-ward is received the â—eason of which reception is the certain Truth and Faithfulneâ—â— of him that promiseth Hence there is believing a Word and believing a Person Hence believing hath three things in it according to the Apostle Heb. 11. 1. The Object falls not under the measure of Sense and Reason therefore called Things not seen and Things hoped for 2. There is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. an express Image Heb. 1. of the things not seen and hoped for brought to us in the Promise 3. There is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Demonstration or Argument of the Reality and Certainty of those things and intention of bestowing them taken from the Truth and Faithfulness of him that promiseth Faithful is he that hath promised Now that God hath promised in general and indefinitely to save Sinners and that he is able and willing to perform it in his time and to whom he pleaseth may be a common Faith only and such as the Devils have But for a Sinner to take up with the Promise for himself is the work of the Spirit peculiarly Because there is no man spoken to by Name in the Promise which advantage Abraham had and the want thereof must be supplyed by the Spirit 's â—aying to the Soul more or less plainly This Promise belongeth â—nto thee whereby the Soul is enabled to exert fiducially a believing the Promise and staying on the Promiser for himself And here lyes the difficulty of Believing and the usual workings of Unbelief It 's a marvellous thing to me Mr. Neonomian that you can have the Impudency to quote the Assembly for your Assertion Confess Ch. 18. viz. That there is no other grounds of Assurance but Signs and Marks Whereas they say so expressly That a Believer may be assured in this Life that he is in a State of Grace and this Certainty is not a bare conjectural and probable perswasion grounded on a fallible Hope but an Infallible Assurance of Faith founded on the Divine Truth of the Promises of Salvation the inward evidence of those Graces unto which those Promises are made the Testimony of the Spirit of Adoption witnessing with our Spirits So that they make three grounds of Assurance 1. The infallible Assurance of Faith 2. The inward Evidences of Graces 3. The Witness of the Spirit of Adoption When you quoted this place you had either forgot what you had wrote or you quote it retaining the Assembly first least it should be brought against you There are three great Graces spoken of by the Apostle 1 Cor. 13.13 Faith Hope Love Mr. Caryl on Job 13.13 And the Scripture holds forth an Assurance in reference to every one of these First The Assurance of Faith Heb. 10.22 Let us draw near with a true Heart in full assurance of Faith This Assurance of Faith hath a double respect 1. To our Persons 2. To our Services that in both we are pleasing to God Secondly There 's an Assurance of Hope Heb. 6.11 Faith hath an Eye to the Truth of the Promise Hope to the Good of the Promise and the Assurance of Hope is that we shall certainly receive that Good Thirdly There 's an Assurance of Love 1 Joh. 4.48 Perfect Love casts out Fear How is Love made Perfect and how doth it cast out Fear v. 17. Herein saith he is love made perfect that we may have boldness in the day of Judgment because as he is so are we in the World i. e. As his Love is sincere to us so is ours to him according to our measure even in this life and this gives us boldness our Assurance that all shall go well with us in the day of Judgment so this Love casteth out all fear of Condemnation in that day which Fear where it remains hath Torment than which nothing is more contrary to Assurance In perfect Love there is no Torment because there is no Fear and there is no Fear because there is an Assurance of the Love of God in this love the Soul doth repose rest and delight it self There is a Fourth thing spoken of which is a full assurance of Vnderstanding This is Clearness of our apprehension about the things which we do believe and upon which we fasten by Faith and Love The Light of the Understanding shining upon the Mysteries of the Gospel and mixing with our other Graces bottoms the Soul upon the strongest Foundation and raiseth it up to the highest Pinnacle of Assurance We may say of Assurance in reference to these four Graces as Philosophers do of the Heavens in reference to the four Elements That they are neither of the four Elements but a Quintessence of a fisth Essence So we may say of Assurance it is neither Faith nor Hope nor Love nor Knowledge but it is a fifth thing sublimated and raised either out of or above all those i. e. when Assurance is raised to the highest pitch that it is a full Assurance from whence our Joy is full all a Christians Sails are filled being under a full gale and having fair weather Rom. 8.16 The Spirit
the difference is not 1. It is not whether God ceaseth to love a Believer when he sinneth Antinom That is the thing which we say That God hath an unchangeable love to the Persons of Believers and cannot love and hate at the same time and to ascribe changeable Passions or Affections unto God is a kin to the Heresy of Anthropomorphites Neonom Nor whether the Afflictions that befal a Believer proceed from the vindicative Justice of God as an Enemy Antinom We agree with you in it why do you condemn us as erroneous This is the great thing we plead for Neonom Nor whether God can bless the sorest Judgments for Sins to the future good of a Believer This I affirm Antinom I do not only say he can but that he doth so always and not only for his future but present good tho' the Believer may not yet know it for the present Neonom Tho' were it not for our sins God would effect that good a milder way Antinom This is strange talk for the good is the taking away or rooting up of our sins if you understand by and for sin from sin we differ not as I weed my Garden why for the Weeds i. e. from the Weeds to pluck them out were it not for Weeds it would not weed it but if you say its revenge upon the good Herbs it 's false it 's for their good Neonom And I doubt whether every good Man may be said to get profit by all sorts of Afflictions for every degree of Good is not equivalent to the hurt and sometimes God punisheth sin with sin D. W. p. 191. Antinom Now instead of a Believer it s a good Man some of your good Men that have as much Faith as they brought into the World with them nor by all sorts of Afflictions it seems there 's some can't have good in them towards God's Children and every degree of good may not be equivalent in the same kind as the gaining a greater measure of Contentment Weanedness from the World submission to the will of God you say it 's not equivalent to the losing my House and all my Goods by Fire in an instant And what if God suffers his People to fall a first and second time and third too how can you dare to say that the hurt it doth them is greater than the good It 's enough that God's rectoral Rule of Government of them is that all things shall work together for their good and tho' Sin hath no good in it self yet through Gods wise disposal it shall work for good Neonom Nor whether some sensible Calamities may fall on a good Man not so much in a way of Rebuke for Sin as to try his Graces prevent Sin or bring glory to God by a Testimony of Truth Antinom These are very good Reasons you have added let me add For his increase and growth in grace Neonom Yet I believe the very Martyrs did not so glory in the joyful cause of their Sufferings as always to neglect an humble Reflection on what sin of theirs might justifie God as a hidden cause of their hardship Antinom There 's none of God's Children but as they own themselves less than the least of his Mercies so own that by the Last of their sins they have deserved the greatest Calamities but truly a Martyr could never go joyfully to Sufferings if he thought God call'd him to it to punish him for his sins to expiate some hidden sins this would be sad Martyrdom No the Apostles rejoyced that they were counted worthy to suffer for the Name of Christ they had no suspicion it was a punishment of them for their Sins As to a humble reflexion upon sin and what it deserves in it self yea and we for it if God should deal with us according to our sinful Deserts I think others of God's professed Children as well as Martyrs have it or else they have little grace in their Hearts and little Acquaintance with the pardoning grace and mercy of God Neonom I will shew you the real difference whether God be at all displeased with Believers for their Abominations This I affirm and the Doctor denies D. W. p. 192. Antinom You should have told us what you mean by God's being displeased whether you mean an immanent displeasure of his divine Justice or a providential Carriage towards them which they are apt to call God's displeasure through Temptation 2. When you speak of God's displeasure towards Believers whether you mean their Persons or their Sins we say God is never displeased with their Persons they being reconciled unto God by the death of his Son and in Christ God is fully and everlastingly well pleased with them Indeed in the way of your Scheme there 's something in what you say the righteousness of the new Law being imperfect and therefore there is room left to expiate our Sins and Imperfections in obedience by our Sufferings 3. You make strange kind of Believers such it seems as fall ordinarily into great Abominations act and live in I suppose sins of the greatest magnitude the Doctor means a better sort of Believers Neonom Whether God at any time or by any Afflictions expresseth his displeasure against his People for their sins This I affirm and the Doctor denies Antinom You need have made but one Whether of both these unless you distinguish between God's displeasure and expressing his displeasure as between immanent and transient Acts and what signifies your affirming or denying when there 's no consistency in yourself and all your Affirmations and Denyals are in equivocal Expressions For you grant God casts not Believers out of Covenant favour he ceaseth not to love them when they Sin Nor do Afflictions proceed from his vindicative Justice That he can make Afflictions for their future good We say he doth do it and for their present good too And that they may fall upon a Believer to prevent Sin and try his Graces we say they do so always more or less Let all this be told a Believer in an Affliction and he will say Blessed be God I find all this that befalleth me is from a gracious God in Covenant God is not displeased but deals with me as a tender Father Neonom I will confirm the Truth You must know that there is none of all this but Dr. C. meaneth it of the unconverted Elect for their Sins are off from themselves as much as Believers their Sins do them no hurt nor is God angry with them tho' God saith He is angry with the Wicked every day Antinom Solomon saith Prov. 14.22 Do they not err that devise evil And that Violence covereth the Mouth of the Wicked Ch. 10.11 And that he that hideth Hatred with lying Lips and he that uttereth a Slander is a Fool vers 18 You thought by that time all your Concessions were put together that the Error you charged the Doctor with was dwindled away and it would not blacken him enough according
the Works of it and therein is a Neonomian and the rather because by that Rectoral Rule of Government which he hath usurp'd to himself and the Rule of Sin he hath judicially Sentenced all his Opposers to the Name of Antinomians or Abetters of them Insomuch that all our first Protestant Reformers and any known by the Name of Calvinists fall under his severe Censure as Ignorant Setters up of the Name of Christ and his Grace against his Government I thought it meet to call in the long-ago deceased Doctor also under what Name or Title soever he is pleased to call him whom he carries about to scare Children with and as a Trophy of his pretended Triumph that he might be made speak and the World may hear what he hath to say for himself and be acquainted how he is abused and that he may be hereafter permitted to rest quietly in his Grave and not used as Wickliff was i. e. Burnt for an Heretick so many Years after be hath been dead In a Word Shall we stand still with our Fingers in our Months in such a Day of Peace and Liberty while we are Brow-beaten or wheadled out of the great Fundamental Points of Eternal Life and Salvation which in all Ages of Antichristian Tyranny have triumph'd over the smartest Persecutions through the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of his Testimony in the Faith and Patience of the Saints who have not loved their Lives unto Death in the Heroick Defence of them against the very same sort of Opposition And who I pray will harm us now if we as strenuously defend the Truth as it is audaciously attack'd Have any of us suffered to the spoiling of our Goods in the Defence of Truth of a subordinate and subservient Nature to these and shall we suffer all this in vain and cast our selves tamely at the Feet of such a confident Invader of our most choice and precious things in the World yea our very Life in Christ What is it that affrightens us Doth the Scripture Law or Learning terrify us If so little a Foot-man can run us out of Breath how do we think to contend with Horses Dragooners I mean if they should come And if in the Land of Peace we are wearied what shall we do in the Swelling of Jordan If Popery should ever over-run us again which God forbid and we should be called to bear Testimony to these Truths at Fire and Paggot as the Famous Martyrs have done It 's to be feared now that many Protestants would provide for their Safety by flying to the Neonomian Asylum But to conclude however we shrink from the despised Truths of Christ shuffle and cut with him and sometimes huff and bounce at him or some Truth of his I am fully assured the God of Glory and all Grace who hath hitherto preserved the pure Doctrine of his Gospel not only from the impure Mixtures of Pretenders to Holiness the crafty Methodists of Satan as an Angel of Light but also from his open Rage as a roaring Lion will continue yet to maintain it against all the bâ—ting Winds of False Doctrine That Christ hath his Fan in his Hand and will thoroughly purge his Floor and that if any Man lay any other Foundation than what is laid which is Jesus Christ and continues so to do his Root shall be Rottenness and his Blossom go up as Dust I. C. Some of the Paradoxes contained in the Neonomian Scheme 1. SINS of the Elect are not forgiven immediately upon nor meerly by Christ's Enduring Sufferings but there were by Divine Appointment to interpose a Gospel Promise of Pardon the Work of the Spirit for a Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the Person to be pardoned and a Judicial Act of Pardon by that Promise on the Person thus conformed to the Rule thereof 2. The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive Part of the Law than the Covenant of Works had Though nothing be abated in the Rule of Sin and Duty yet Blessings are Promised to Lower Degrees of Duty and a continuance in a state of Death with a Barr to the Blessing are not threatned against every Degree of Sin as the Covenant of Works did 3. This Change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience wherein God hath provided for his own Glory while he promiseth Life by Forgiveness to Imperfect Man and yet insists on some Degrees of Obedience to which of his meer Grace he enableth us 4. The Degrees of Obedience the Covenant of Redemption secures to the Elect tho' the Grant therein is pleadable only by Christ as the stipulating Party for us and our Personal Claim depends upon the Gospel Covenant whereof Christ is Mediator 5. The Gospel-Sanction determins as certain a Rule of Happiness and Misery as the Law of Works did tho' it be not the same for while it promiseth a Pardon to all believing repenting Sinners and declares a Barr to Pardon to the Impenitent Rejecters of Christ and Gospel-Grace it fixeth true Repentance and Faith unfeigned to be the Terms of Pardon 6. When it promiseth Heaven to the sincerely holy persevering Believer it fixeth sincere Holiness and Perseverance in Faith as the Terms of possessing Heaven 7. Hence the use of Faith and Holiness as to those Benefits is not fron the Conformity to the Precept but their Conformity to the Rule of the Promise 8. Our applying Christ's Righteousness and relying on it would no more Justifie us than our Holiness would Save us were it not for the Gospel-Promise God will justifie for Christ's sake all such as believe 9. God in dispensing Gospel-promised Blessings doth judicially determine a Conformity to this Rule of the Promise When he forgives he judicially declares a Man hath true Faith when he admits to Heoven he judicially declares a Man sincerely holy and persevering 10. The Wedding-Garment Matth. 22.11 is true uniting Faith 11. Forgiving Adopting Glorifying and Conveyance of every Gospel-Benefit given on God's Terms are Judicial Acts of God as a Rector if not he doth blindly and promiscuously dispense them without any regard to our being Believers 12. With respect to what is declared the Gospel is a Law of Faith and it especially insists on that Sincerity of Grace and Holiness which the Rule of the Promise makes necessary in it's Description of the Person whom it makes Partaker of it's included Benefits 13. The Merits of Christ are the Cause of this Gospel-Ordination his Righteousness Imputed is the Cause for which we are Justified and Saved when we do answer the Rule of the Gospel 14. The Righteousness of God Phil. 3.9 principally intends the Gospel Holiness of a Person justified by Christ's Righteousness both which by Faith in Christ all his Members shall be perfect in 15. The Grace of God is hereby stated as free as is Consistent with his Government and judicial rectoral Distribution of Rewards and Punishments THE Ancient Gospel
the Stomach and that the whole Mass of Blood is infected with ill Humours or the Morbid Constitution of some Parts Out of the abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh saith our Saviour our great Physician Is it not sad when there is a poysonsom Juyce under the Lips and a Mouth full of Bitterness Rom. 3. You first charge the Ministry of some and most hereabout know what sort of Men you mean with being the Cause of Men's Security in Sin And why Because they preach the Doctrine of the Gospel in a free Justification of a Sinner by Faith without the Works of a Law according to the Apostle Paul and preach down your Doctrine of Justification by Works But you express the Effects of this dangerous Doctrine to lie in these things 1. Security in Sin A Doctrine that quickens Men that are dead in Trespasses and Sins one part of which Death is Security in Sin doth not cause Security in Sin But the Doctrine of Free Grace in Justification of a Sinner without Works of any Law doth so Eph. 2. I shall not now enlarge upon you 2. Another ill Effect is you say That it causes the mistaking the Motions of sensible Passions for Conversion This is rather the Effect of your own Doctrine wherein you lay the whole Stress of Justifying and Saving Grace upon Sensible Passions and set Men wholly to judge of their State thereby It 's marvellously to be wondred at that any Man should have the Impudency to charge those Effects upon an opposite Doctrine to his which are the natural and palpable Effects of his own and he sees so to be 3. You charge upon it the general Abatement of an exact and humble walking This Charge is likewise of the same Nature Whereas the Spirit of God hath disclaimed any true Cause of exact walking beside the Grace of God that brings Salvation and then teacheth it as hath been proved As for Humble walking what is a greater Inducement thereto than the Doctrine of Faith which ascribes all to the Gift of Grace empties us of every high Imagination and Thought It exalts Christ and makes him all and in all Whereas yours is the contrary no Doctrine tends more to the lifting up of the Creature than that of Neonomianism next to that of the Papists And no wonder say you when so many affirm such and such things Where are the many or the any that you can charge with saying these things in the same Sence you put upon them Many Expressions that taken together with their Connexion in the explained Sence of him that speaks are not only true but safe and sound but abstracted and wrested may be made to look as black as Hell You may say David saith That there is not an honest Man upon the Face of the Earth Psal 12. That he saith There is no God Psal 14. That Moses affirms God to be a Man Exod. 15.3 And in a Thousand Places in your way and manner it 's easie to charge Blasphemy upon the very Scriptures And how often Lying if Hyperbole's be not allowed to be used without Wrong to the Truth As to the particular Charges I shall speak to each in it's proper place and lay open your Prevarications Errors and false Imputations to the World Neonom In this present Testimony to the Truth of the Gospel I have studyed Plainness Pref. D. W. p. 3. and to that end oft repeated the same things in my Concessions to prevent the Mistakes of the less Intelligent tho' I could not think it fit to insist anew upon all Antinom Your Testimony is against the Truth as shall be made appear and is not to be accounted a Testimony For a Testimony is a credible Witness or Evidence As the Apostle Paul saith Our Testimony among you was believed 2 Thes 1.10 And this Testimony is with a good Conscience 2 Cor. 1.12 And Paul testified the Gospel of the Grace of God Acts 2.24 1. Your Testimony is not to the Gospel of the Grace of God but against it and therefore not materially true 2. Your Testimony is formally naught it being not accompanied with a good Conscience but with a purpose and design to deceive You pretend to do Good but you manifestly design Evil to blast the Honour of God's Free Grace as if it were a Sin-teaching Doctrine and blacken a Holy Servant of Christ who is now in Glory for Preaching the Gospel your Testimony can't be believ'd because of your manifold Prevarications Equivocations and False Teachings in this Treatise of yours And whereas you say you have studied Plainness if you mean that in some places is no better than plain Falshood in others plain Error it 's true enough Or if you mean Plainness in respect of Style it 's homely enough and hardly plain Sence But if you mean Plainness of Simplicity without double-tonguedness I utterly deny it For when you speak of things that one would think at first Glance you intend Truth by it 's nothing so No Jesuite in the World can out-do you at Equivocation and there lies your Natural Excellency You have impertinent Repetition enough your Concessions every where fall about your own Ears in your glozing Oppositions to the Truth you deny You design the rectifying the Mistakes of the Non-intelligent This is false it 's manifest you design the blinding of them more else why do you quote Dr. Owen and the Assembly for countenancing those Errors which you know they directly oppose Let but the Mistakes of the less Intelligent be removed their Stomachs will rise sufficiently against you and your Book too Neonom I have in nothing misrepresented Dr. Crisp 's Opinion nor mistaken his Sence Antinom This must be true or false and here is the turning Point of the whole Book Either Dr. Crisp was or you must be If you have not misrepresented him then according to your Representation he was so If you have misrepresented him and unjustly blackened him what are you But that which we have in hand is Falshood and Lying As to this Assertion of yours we shall prove you guilty of Falshood throughout the Book that though you have repeated some of Dr. Crisp's Words from time to time yet you have only repeated such part of his Words as might render him odious not those that give a true and can did Sence of what he intended and herein you misrepresented him and that on purpose Now the Spirit of God lays the Formal Nature of a Lie upon an Intention to deceive or to deal injuriously with others as in the Case of Doeg Though I do not design now to come to Particulars I will give one Instance wherein you in your Book and your Party do frequently expose Dr. Crisp and his Abettors such as you call Divers as also Crispians and Antinomians that he and they do assert Sin can do no hurt and you would have Men understand that he means That no Person in Christ need fear to commit Sin and that Sin
odd things Sanctification is no Blessing with you but only a Condition of getting Blessings Neonom He saith that on the Cross all the Sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ and ceased ever to be theirs Antinom Then there was something more needful to our Title to Blessings than the Electing Decree viz. The transferring our Sins to Christ on the Cross It is a Truth that our Sins were laid upon Christ and that but once and after the manner of Imputation in foro Justitiae Divinae they shall never be laid upon us This I will prove against you when you please and indeed it s this Doctrine viz. of Imputation that you are still bantering it 's that you have the greatest Pique at Neonom That at the first moment of Conception a Title to all those Decreed Blessings is personally applyed to the Elect and they invested actually therein Antinom If that be his particular Judgment in that Point he saith something for it and I know not that you can disprove him If God doth secretly and invisibly apply his distinguishing Fruits of Electing and Redeeming Love upon the Elect as is manifest in Jeremiah John the Baptist yea Paul and without Dispute in the Instance of Jacob that he gives Is any Man the worse for it Must he therefore come under your Anathema for an Heretick Yea is not the Blessing thus applyed to all the Elect dying in Infancy Neonom Hence he saith the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of those Blessings nor ought they to intend the least Good to themselves by what they do Sin can do them no harm because it is none of theirs nor can God afflict them for any Sin Antinom You may erect such a Scheme upon Paul's Epistles after this manner and take the Apostle James to prove it in your way He saith The Elect can do nothing in order to an Interest in Eternal Blessings nor when they have Eternal Life bestowed upon them and the Grace of Sanctification as an undoubted part of it ought they to put their Graces and Duties in the place of Christ or design the procuring or deserving so much as de congruo in what they do and that sin can't harm them as to it 's Penal and Vindicative Effects He saith therefore it can do them no real harm and so he explains himself And therefore Gods afflicting them proceeds not from Vindicative Justice he doth not afflict them so as to execute Justice upon them for Sin but to reform them His Term is from Sin i. e. to purge Sin out of them and make them Partakers of his Holiness As the Apostle saith Heb. 12. Neonom And all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Christ enervating his Laws and Pleadings obstructing the great Designs of Redemption opposing the very Scope of the Gospel and the Ministry of Christ and his Prophets and Apostles Antinom It 's strange a Holy Man as you own he was should do Christ so much mischief Here 's a swinging Bill of Costs but that 's not fair before we have a Hearing and Tryal Your Word is a Law Ego ipse dixi is enough if you pass the Sentence there 's nothing but Death and the Cobler But you say all his Doctrine is link'd together as in a Chain That 's like the Analogy of Faith not like a Scheme that must be erected a new every Minute or else it will not agree with the Heavens Nowmenians or Neonomians must be often erecting new Schemes Your Opinions are so far from Consistency and linking together that they hang together like a Rope of Sand and like Particles of various Shapes that are always justling one another till they break each others Shins Doth this Doctrine incur all this Damage By what Law Nay all this Damage is excluded by the Law of Faith And your boasting too of Works Doth the Apostle Paul's Doctrine preached Eph. 1. 2. Ch. and Rom. 4. and Gal. 5. where he testifies That Christ is become of none effect to whomsoever is justified by a Law dethrone Christ and enervate his Laws and Intercession Doth he plead your Works Doth it obstruct the great Designs of Redemption in advancing him in all his Offices and the Glory of God's Free Grace Your Bill of Costs will never be allowed you till you have confuted Paul's Epistles or by your Canons made them no Canonical Scriptures Neonom The Dr. had not entertained these Opinions if he had considered that God's Electing Decree is no Legal Grant nor a formal Promise to us The Decree includes the Means and the End in order to the last And as it puts nothing in present being so it bars not God as a Governour to fix a Connexion between Benefits and Duties by his Revealed Will. Antinom Here I see I must have a Care of my Crown The Dr. Seraphicus holds up his Fist Well Dr. Cr. you should go to School to learn new Principles in Divinity if you lived in our Times You did not consider that God did not legally Elect you But Sir is not this a very insolent thing of you to say that the Purpose of God in Election was not a Legal Grant Was it a Grant or no Or was it an Election without a Grant Is not God's Designation of Good a Grant so far as designed Is not a choosing in Christ before the Foundation of the World that we should be holy and without Blame before him in Love A granting that we should be holy and without Blame before him in Love and predestinating us to the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his Will A Granting that we should have the Adoption of Children But you say this was not Legal What! Was it not lawful for God to do this according to the good Pleasure of his Will That we usually mean when we say a thing is not Legal Or do you mean God did not elect by a Law If he had been bound by a Law to Elect he had not Elected freely For a free choice implies a Person under no Obligation external or previous to his own intention and purpose 2. You say nor a formal Promise i. e. Explicit you mean It 's enough that it's an unchangeable purpose to make a formal Promise and as there was an Eternal Election so there was an Eternal Promise the Covenant of Grace between the Father and the Son being eternal And it 's expresly said that God's Purpose and Grace was given us in Christ before the World began 2 Tim. 1.9 Tit. 1.3 We were no sooner efected but the purpose and Grace of it was given us in Promise Election eternal the Promise eternal both equally eternal in puncto Eternitatis though in Nature Election is before the Promise and the Cause of it 3. You say the Decree includes the Means and the End Do you think Dr. Crisp did not know that Yes how to
express it better than you do He would have said The Decree was of the Means and the End and he would not have said Willing the first i. e. The Means in order to a Will of the End but willing the End to be brought about by the Means Quod primum est in Intentione uttimum in Executione as to our Conception 4. You say it puts nothing in present being I say it puts the Promise in an Eternal Being And if you mean as to Created Beings and the manner of them it puts them into a determinate Futurition 5. You say it barrs not God of his Government No it 's not fit nor possible his own Pleasure should barr him of it neither is it possible it should barr him of what he would have neither is he the more barred because you are pleased to find Fault and it was his Pleasure to govern as he willed to govern and all the Connexion of Events so as they come to pass in a way of Necessity and Contingency But he determined absolutely and nothing that falls out is contingent to him for he judgeth not of Events as probable by Opinion but as certain to his Knowledge and therefore knows them because he willeth them to come to pass according to his Counsel and Purpose in himself Neonom So if the Dr. had animadverted that Christ's Sufferings were the Foundation of our Pardon but not formally our Pardon For them our Sins are forgiven whenever they be forgiven Without them Sin can't be forgiven and they were endured that the Sins of all the Elect when Believers should be forgiven Antinom There 's no doubt but the Dr. was so Learned and Wise that he animadverted as much as you can tell him and undoubtedly what was the main of his Judgment that he insisted upon was not from Inanimad version Ignorance or Mistake But you have found out it seems some subtile Distinction that he thought not of You say he should have said That Christ's Sufferings were the Foundation of Pardon All that he saith and means is that our Sins were fundamentally pardoned in Christ But your fundamentally is only a remote Causality as Election is to Creation and Redemption for that 's the Foundation of both If you had not intended so why had you not said the Material Cause seeing you deny them to be the Formal but you 'l have them to be neither and you say For them our Sins are forgiven Take heed how you touch there Be careful you come not too near Christ It 's a tender Point For them our Sins are forgiven How For them For them as an End Or how for them As a satisfying Reason to the Law and offended Justice of God Or only as a Benefit procured For them remotely or for them immediately For them alone or for them in conjunction with other things All that we have at present of your Meaning of for them is that without them Sin cannot be forgiven A poor Causa sine qua non As a Judge gives Sentence upon a Malefactor or acquits him Why doth he sentence or acquit him For his coming to the Judgment-Hall For say I unless the Judge had come to Court the Prisoner could not have been condemned or acquitted Christ is beholding to you for what you give to his Sufferings But we shall see more of this hereafter Neonom But yet they are not forgiven immediately upon nor meerly by his enduring those Sufferings Antinom But you mean by something else besides them not by an immediate Application of them but mediate and remote a causa fine qua non but not causa solibitaria suo genere Neonom But there was by Divine Appointment to interpose a Gospel-Promise of Pardon Antinom Now we come to the Nicety of the Point We shall split a Hair here with a Beetle and Wedges There 's the Curiosity of it What! The Promise come after Christ's Sufferings to interpose between us and Christ's Sufferings Was not the Promise the Cause of Christ's Suffering in the hidden State and Mystery of it before the World was Tit. 1. Was not the Promise declared and promulgated before Christ's Sufferings to Adam Abraham c. And was not Christ in all his Sufferings and Triumphs the great Gift of the Promise as well as the Condition of the Covenant But you 'll have Christ to be provided as an Indefinite good Medicine to stand in the Apothecaries Shop for some body or other when the Physician prescribes it Nay it 's not an absolute sick Patient neither that must have this Medicine it 's one that the Apothecary hath in a manner cured before But there 's some ugly Chronical Symptom or other remains which the Physician must be sent to for Before the Person be pardoned he must be in a very sound and safe Condition I suppose you mean Neonom There must be a work of the Spirit for Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the Person to be pardoned and a Judicial Act of Pardon by that Promise on the Person thus conformed to the Promise Antinom The plain English of this Position is that there must be an Inherent Righteousness in the Person to be pardoned upon the condition whereof he is to be pardoned and that the Use of Christ's Sufferings are to compound with God for Sinners upon the Account of the Old Law and put a Bar upon his Proceedings according to that and procure another Law by the Righteousness whereof we are justified which Righteousness is our own inherent Righteousness and not Christ's This I affirm hath two things in it First the Abrogation of the Old Law That we have nothing to do with it at all it 's altogether out a-doors This is Antinomianism higher than ever Dr. Crisp affirm'd or any of his Abettors as you call them Secondly Here is Erection of a new Law of Works for our Justification which is Neonomianism Neonom To clear this Point consider 1. The Law is sometimes taken for the Perceptive part of God's Will with the Sanction of the Covenant of Works Antinom The preceptive Will of God with the Sanction of Rewards promised upon Performance of the things required and Threats of Punishment upon the Non-performance is always a Law or Covenant of Works Neonom In this Covenant Life was promised to sinless Obedience and Death was threatned against every Sin without admitting Repenance to Forgiveness Antinom To talk of any other Obedience to a Law besides sinless in respect of that Law in it's preceptive part is Nonsence For sinful Obedience which you are going to plead for is Disobedience and whereas you say Life was promised in that Law to Adam's sinless Obedience That 's a Supposition but there was no explicit Promise in the Sanction neither was there any need there should For a Sovereign may command a Duty or make a thing a Duty to a Subject upon a Penalty without promising a Reward And whereas you say Death was threatned without admitting Repentance to
Head to another in respect of that there is a reality of making Christ to be Sin when one Man becomes a Debtor in another Man's Room Legally and by Consent this Surety that doth become the Debtor is not barely supposed to be the Debtor but by undertaking it and legally having it pass'd upon him he is as really and truely the Debtor yea hath the same Debt upon him as he was who was the principal before I say as really and truely the Debtor So that there is an absolute truth and reality in God's Act of passing over Sins to Christ and laying Sins upon him There must be in Criminal Cases of necessity a present desert upon a Person on whom he inflicts Punishment he must not inflict Punishment upon a meer Supposition Mr. Calvin I do not see but that he hath given a very clear and distinct account of his Notion but I find you will condemn whatever Mr. Antinom saith right or wrong Neonom No no I will lay open his mistakes more plainly before you I will assure you he knows not what he saith I will convince you both immediately The Ground of his Mistakes are these 1. He seems to speak of Sin as a positive material thing and doth not distinguish between God's laying our Sins on Christ as a Physical Act and as a Moral Act and thinks God took our Sins as a material Burden and laid them upon Christ D. W. p. 13. Calvin Sir I must tell you then that you mistake him I doubt wilfully for he no where speaks of Sin as a Physical Act but as a Moral Transgression Doth he not say as plainly as may be the contrary to what you suggest viz. Here is a real Act of God God doth really pass over Sin upon him still keeping this fast that Christ Acted no Sin Doth he not plainly here deny the Physical Act to Christ And doth he speak of Sin as a material Burden when he saith Christ bore it as a Fault Debt Law-Breach c. D. C. p. 283. He speaks of it as a Moral and Judicial Burden and so doth the Spirit of God speak of it Psal 38.4 Mine Iniqui-quities are gone over mine Head as an heavy Burden they are too heavy for me And Christ bore them as a Burden in his Body on the Tree it was not sweet and pleasant naturally to him Neonom He seems not to Apprehend what the true Notion is of Imputing a thing to another in Law in Criminal Cases Calvin Nor do you understand that of Mr. Antinomian I suppose he means you were never used to the Crown Bar you only have been exercised at the Nisi Prius side Antinom I am no Lawyer but yet am fain to use some Law terms that the Scripture useth and most Men are acquainted with in this matter and most Divines hold necessary to explain these Mysteries by though Mr. Neonomian will not understand them nor allow them any otherwise than in his own Sense contrary to all received meanings of them Do not I talk of Sin as a Criminal Case when I say David's Murder and Adultery was Imputed to Christ and the Sin of those and such like Actions Imputation is of the same Nature whether the Default be Debt or Criminal nature both Debts of Money and Fellonies are Moral Transgressions nay both are the breach of one Law Theft and not paying anothers or his own Money due upon Bond or Rent-Charge or the like is breaking the Eighth Commandment Thou shalt not Steal and is not Theft a Criminal Case See Dr. Cr. p. 288 289. Neonom God's laying Sin on Christ is a Moral Act of God as a Rector i. e. he Agreed and Appointed that Christ should in his Person stand obliged to bear the Punishment of our Sins that we might obtain pardon and that Punishment was Actually laid upon him and suffered by him Antinom What do you mean by a Rector do you mean as a Rector under a Law for the Rule of his Moral Obedience or was God bound by his Moral Law to appoint Christ to bear Sin What do we with this diminutive word Rector methinks you might Entitle God our Great King Soveraign Lawgiver who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords and doth whatever he pleaseth in Heaven and Earth and you make him little Moral Rector and as such he Covenanted with his Son to bear Sin Did God Act in a way of Government and Dominion over his Son as his Rector when he said If thou shalt make thy Soul an Offering for Sin c Isa 53. Or as with one that counted it no Robbery to be equal with God Phil. 2.6 Was it not when he was with him one brought up with him his Delight his Delight his Fellow And was agreeing with Christ to bear Sin and Actually laying it upon him the same Act whereas one was Immanent and the other Transient God in laying Sin or charging Sin upon Christ or executing the Punishment upon him freely submitting himself to be dealt with in a way of Justice did Act as a Great Judge the Judge of all the World in foro Justitiae Divinae Why must we have this mean Title for God Rector God did not Covenant with his Son in a way of Judicial proceeding though that Covenant was executed in a way of Vindictive and Remunerative Justice And you say the Punishment of Sin was laid on Christ but not Sin it self What Justice is it in a Judge or as a Rector as you call him to punish him for Sin that is not justly charged with Sin its Transgression charged is the only Meritorious Cause of Punishment where there is no Law there 's no Transgression and where there 's no Transgression there can be no Punishment though there may be Sufferings they cannot be Penal Sin and Punishment are Relata in Logick as well as Law And you say he was obliged to bear the Punishment that we might obtain pardon cunningly worded indeed this is an answer to a Bill saving all Advantages that hereafter may be taken You mean Christ hath bore the Punishment of our Sins that we may hereafter by the Righteousness of another Law obtain pardon Neonom Again also because a Man that is bound in a Bond of Money becomes a Debtor therefore he thinks because Christ suffered to save the Idolater or Blasphemer therefore Christ must be the Idolater and Blasphemer D. W. p. 14. Antinom But pray Sir shew first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies propter Rom. 4.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for these things comes the Wrath c. Eph. 56. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath the same force 1 Cor. 15 3. Pro peccatis nostris Gal. 1.9 Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Sins 1 Pet. 3.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 use to signifie no less the Impulsive Cause than the Final Cause See Rom. 15.9 2 Cor. 1.11 Eph. 1.16 2 Cor. 5.21 Grot. de satisfact Vlciscipio Injuriis Sceleris poenas
be Punishment yet it 's not so by necessity of Nature 7. Hence obligation to Punishment is from the Will of the Law-giver and the Nature of the Law not from the Sinner the Law hath tyed Sin and Punishment together and it 's not Sin to be obliged to Punishment but it is for Sin obligation to Punishment is part of the Wages of Sin and not Sin in it self nor the guilt of Sin a Murderer that is cast he is guilty before Sentence or Execution not because the Law will Sentence him but because he hath committed the Fact which the Law hath forbid and therefore hath annexed a Penalty to it There 's a Privative Nature in Sin which is a contrariety to the Goodness of the Law which is the Fault therefore the Law to avenge it self makes it worthy or deserving such a Punishment and upon Tryal binds over the Sinner to it there 's hardly to be found a difference between reatus culpae poenae as Dr. O. saith but Sin committed or justly charged upon some account or other is in it self by vertue of the Constitution of the Law an obligation to Punishment being the Meritorious Cause thereof Neonom I own Christ was esteemed by Men a Transgressor and Arraigned as such Antinom If it were only so he bore Sin no otherwise than the Saints and Martyrs who also were accounted Transgressors by Men Arraigned and Condemned as such but it seems you will not own him accounted a Transgressor by God and therefore no Sin was laid upon him nor any Punishment and here you fall in roundly with the Socinians Neonom We grant also that Christ's Sufferings were as Effectual to put away Sin as if our very Sins had been transacted on him Antinom I doubt not but you will ascribe as much to your Gospel as Paul did to his there was never any Coyners of new Doctrine Papist Quaker Socinian or Arminian all Well-wishers to your Divinity in some part or other of it but will still each of them cry up your Doctrine and decry the Truth for Error and this Truth of laying Sin on Christ as vehemently as you especially in the Sence that you do Neonom But I say he became obliged as Mediator to bear the Punishment of our Iniquities Antinom If as Mediator then to take up the difference between God and us for it's Sin makes the difference and not punishment this is but the effect of the difference the High-priest the Typical Mediator was to bear the Iniquities of the People and offer a Sacrifice on which they were charged Neonom He did bear those Punishments to the full satisfaction of Justice Antinom Unless Sin be taken away in a Law sence Justice is not satisfied bearing Punishment only doth not satisfie for Sin the Law will have the Sinner or the Sin taken away therefore the Damned must suffer to Eternity because they cannot take away Sin by Suffering but Christ did more than suffer he put an end to Sin by the Sacrifice of himself Neonom Yea and to our Actual Remission when we believe Antinom It seems there 's Fundamental Potential Remission before and I doubt you will not suffer this Remission to take place without a new Law and the Righteousness thereof Neonom The Real difference lyes in these things 1. Whether Sin it self as to its filth and fault was transacted on Christ This you affirm and I deny 2. Whether Christ was made and accounted by the Father the very Transgressor the Adulterer the Blasphemer This you affirm and I deny D. W. p. 10. Antinom You might have put the Questions into one and stated it as it lyes between the Apostle Paul and you Whether God Imputed Sin to Christ at all Neonom I go on to confirm my Positions 1. To transact our Sins on Christ as opposed to Guilt is impossible for it would argue either a mistake in the Divine Mind to account him the Committer of our Sins or a Propagater of our corrupt Qualities to him which is impossible and any other way besides Imputing the guilt there is none Antinom This Argument I judge is to prove both Positions As to the First it runs thus That which is impossible cannot be done but to transact Sin as to it's Fault is impossible Ergo. As to the Major I judge the Impossibility is meant in respect of the Nature of God or the Constitution of God otherwise I know not why a Fault may not be taken away as well as Obligation to Punishment when as Fault is that for which a Man is obliged to bear Punishment For if the Fault remain the Punishment is still due The Minor you prove thus It would argue a mistake in God or suppose him a Propagator of Sin 1. It doth argue a Mistake in you to say that 's transferred from us which was never in us For the Obligation to Punishment in it's active consideration is subjectively in the Law and that cannot be taken from it it 's the Debt which the Law owes to the Sinner by reason of it's Sanction and the Punishment is the Payment 1 Joh. 3.3 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Wages of Sin is Death For Punishment is not the Sinners Debt but the Law 's Debt and the Sinner's Due The Sinner's Debt is doing the Duty the Law requires His Disobedience is an Offence to the Law a Fault blamed by the Preceptive part of the Law and this is Guilt Reatus culpae to which Meritum poenae doth by vertue of the Constitution belong There 's two respects in Sin 1. To the preceptive part of the Law and that is Fault 2. To the Penal part and that is Meritum Now these by reason of the Justice of the Law and the Connexion made by it's Institution between the Accusing and condemning part are inseparable before God and being but two different respects of the same individual Act it is a Fault and a Merit and a Merit because it is a Fault the Merit is a Result from the Fault and are such relata that they cannot be parted in Judgment Now then will not your Argument rebound upon your self Would it not argue a Mistake in God to lay the Merit of Punishment upon a Person that hath not any meritorious Cause of it in no respect If the Fault be not imputed how can the Merit There can be no Merit without a meritorious Cause and this is our Sins and not Christ's by way of Perpretation In laying Sin on Christ there are these things 1. The Spirit of God says it's Sin and doth not confound Sin and Punishment And it 's absurd if it should for Punishment is not Sin 2. It saith It 's our Sins not Christ's 3. That these Sins are Juridically imputed and accounted to Christ The Payments by Christ's Sufferings is his own Money not ours the Debt is imputed not the Payment A Surety is charged with and takes upon him the principal Debt but doth not take Money from him to pay
it the Money is his own the Debt is the Principal 's transferred to him but the Payment is the Surety's subjectively and properly Therefore to say the Payment is imputed to the Surety is Nonsence The Spirit of God speaks expresly that our Sins were laid on Christ no less than Three times in Isa 53. and expressed by three different Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 12. It 's express 1 Pet. 2.24 the Apostle plainly there speaking after the Prophet says He bore it as a Sin-offering Heb. 9.28 Was made Sin 1 Cor. 5.21 Therefore we neeed not fear to say Christ bore our Sins let the Sence be what it will which the Spirit means it was certainly so as to take away the Charge of Sin which is Fault and Blame from before God 1 John 3.3 4. To take it away as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is so to take it away as to set a Man right in the Eye of Justice Your next Branch of Proof to the Minor is That to impute Sin to Christ would argue him a Propagator of Corrupt Qualities What could be done or said more by a Socinian to load the great Truths of the Gospel with reproachful Consequences 1. Sin is no positive Quality as such but only privative 2. All Qualities of a pernicious Nature to the Sinner consisting of Natural Causes are Subjecta peccati not Peccatum it self and they are separable from Sin in it's Moral Consideration There were in Christ himself Effects of our Sins in Infirmity Sorrow Reproach c. They were very uneasie Qualities though not corrupt 3. God himself tells us He laid Iniquity upon him and made him Sin and yet saith Positively He was no Committer of Sin And you charge the Spirit of God with Nonsence and Contradiction For you say it 's impossible to impute Sin to Christ any other way than punishing of him it 's to mistake and make Christ the Committer which Punishment is not sin therefore what the Spirit saith is false Sin was not laid on Christ at all and yet the Spirit speaks it expresly 4. You will inferr these Absurdities 1. That Sin cannot be laid on Christ but by Transfusion wherein you deny Imputation 2. That Christ must be corrupted thereby Whereas the Spirit of God tells us he bears Sin as a Lamb without Spot You will have it that he had the Macula fixed on him by bearing it 3. You will have God by laying Sin on Christ to become a Propagator of Sin The Spirit of God says he appeared to take away our Sins and in him is no Sin 1 John 3.5 How audacious is our Carnal Reason to set upon Divine Mysteries Neonom It was needless to the Ends for which our Sins were laid on Christ Antinom You should have said what 's needless Your Argument should have run thus Laying Sins on Christ is needless to the ends for which they were laid on Christ and therefore those Scriptures that say so are needless Neonom Sins were laid on Christ that he might make Atonement by suffering for them and so release us who had transgressed Antinom Now Sir you say something you speak like a Divine if you can hold there Now you own something laid on Christ besides Punishment for the Atonement was made by being punished and say well now that Sin was laid on him that he might make Atonement for them viz. by being punished For bearing Sin is one thing and making Atonement is another but are inseparable relata and therein contraria affirmantiae Neonom Now Christ by submitting to the Guilt as an Obligation to Punishment according to the Terms of the Covenant of Redemption was sufficient to this End and all that was needful Antinom That Christ bore the Desert or Demerit of our Sin which is done only by a Judicial Charge and Accusation in our stead is sufficient What is Sin after the Fact is committed but reatus culpae Guilt is the Fault declared and applyed somewhere in a way of Judicial Proceeding And this is often the Conscience of Sin and is not removed but by Faith on Christ crucify'd who bore our Sins before God Neonom All that endangered us was the Threatning of the Law and the Punishment included in the Threat Antinom Where there is true Godly Sorrow it 's more upon this Account that he hath sinned against a Holy God and broke his holy just and good Law than for fear of the Threats of Wrath. I thought I had better understood the Nature of Sorrow for Sin that it had been the nature of Sin in Contrariety to God had more grieved than the Fear of Punishment Neonom The Obliquity of the Fact as against the Precept shall not hurt where the Sanction of the Law is answer'd Antinom I think this is that you call Antinomianism with a Witness you shall hear of it again e're long only observe That this is as much a Doctrine of Licentiousness as any you charge on me Secure but your self from Hell and you need not regard the preceptive part of the Law you may live as you list See how you 'l clear your self when you charge it for a great Crime upon me in saying Sin will do no hurt in some Sence c. Neonom And he that suffers as Sponsor for another need not sustain in himself the filthiness of the Crime to make him capable of giving Satisfaction Gen. 44.13 Phil. 18. Antinom No that 's true upon your Hypothesis there 's no need of a Sponsor for the Filthiness of Sin is too foul for Christ to bear the Sinner must be his own Expiator and carry away his Filth himself or if he keep it it will not hurt See 1 John 7.9 Neonom This transacting of the Filthiness of our Sins on Christ is blasphemous Antinom Friend that 's a cruel Bomb to shoot at a good Man to charge him with Blasphemy But where 's the Blasphemy to say Christ bore the Filth of Sin in a Sence Is not Sin filthy under all Considerations Doth not the Spirit of God call it filthy and abominable in all respects 1. Is not the Guilt of Sin Filth and abominable in God's Sight And is it not so when it lies upon the Conscience I think the Spirit of God represents it always as the greatest Foulness and Uncleanness I say a Conscience polluted with Sin to those that are defiled and unbelieving and can't by Faith fetch and derive cleansing Vertue from the Blood of Christ into their Consciences to such nothing is clean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1.15 Now this is the very Rooot and Foundation of a Defilement And what is it that takes it off but Faith in the Sin-cleansing Vertue of Jesus Christ The great Contrariety of Sin to the Holy Law is the Filthiness of Sin And the Apostle tells Heb. 9.14 How our Consciences come to be purged from dead Works it 's no other way than
by the offering of Christ without Spot to God This spotless Sacrifice whereon he bore Sin and was not defiled And hereby the Conscience of Sin i. e. the Guilt of Sin which is no other than Sin charged upon the Conscience is taken away and thence the Levitical Services could not make any perfect as pertaining to Conscience but it 's the Blood of Christ that sprinkles from an evil Conscience Heb. 10.22 2. A condemning Conscience without which we stand but loathsomly before God yea while for want of Faith we apprehend God deals with us out of Christ we are very loathsom and all our Works and Services dead God loaths and abhors them Is not the Vertue of Christ's Blood compared to a Fountain to wash us in and intended especially of Justification and Pardon and the Saints to betake themselves to it under the Notion of it's cleansing Vertue in that Sence 1 John 1.7 Rev. 1.5 Guilt of Sin then is as great a Pollution as belongs to Sin It 's no other than Sin lying upon the Conscience with an Accusation 1 John 3.20 21. Greg. Nysson saith He bore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Filth of our Sin Dr. O. p. 42. Again Wherever Sin is to be purged out by Sanctification it is to be rid away by Justification but all Filth is to be rid by Sanctification that indwells Now it is manifest that the cleansing Vertue of the Blood of Christ applyed by Faith is the first Gospel-effectual Means of Sanctification and it must be the great Cause of Mortification wherein we are planted together in the likeness of his Death Rom. 6. And what did Christ in his Death but destroy the Body of Sin by carrying it away 2 Tim. 1.10 He hath by carrying away sin abolished Sin and Death slain the Enmity that lay in Hatred of God Pravity and Dominion of sin Whence was it that David was cleansed from Blood-guiltiness Was it not from it's being laid on Christ Was it not that very Filthiness of his Sin Psal 51.14 Doth he not pray to God to be washed throughly from his sin and to be cleansed from it Was not that by the Application of the Blood of Christ Doth he not mention all his Pravity Original as well as Actual from which he would be purged as with Hyssop and made whiter than Snow And wherein lies this Washing Is it not in respect of sin not in respect of Punishment he mentioneth not he explains what he means it is that radical Washing ver 9. Hide thy Face from my Sins and blot out mine Iniquity i. e. From the Face of God's Justice Then follows the Creation of a clean Heart He gave himself for us to redeem us from all Iniquity Tit. 2.14 There is no Pravity Defilement Pollution of Sin what-ever that is so but because of it's contrariety to the preceptive part of the Law must first have it's Foundation of cleansing from Christ's bearing of it away and this Faith applying purifies the Heart from the indwelling Macula in us Whence that Promise Ezek. 36.25 The clean Water there is the Spirit working in Application of the Blood of Christ and therefore Gospel-cleansing lies chiefly in Application of Promises 2 Cor. 7.1 Neonom He took care his Body should not see Corruption Acts 2.3 he would much more abhor to take in our Pollution He was holy harmless undefiled c. Antinom All this we say over and over that he bare Sin but was not defiled with Sin nor corrupted in his Nature but the Spirit of God is not to be believed See Christ's taking away of Sin by Atonement is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 1.3 Neonom It was Condescension enough that he agreed to be treated as a Sinner But how odious is it to load him with Sin it felf To spit that in his Face that the worst of Men abused him with and it would justifie his Persecutors who punished him if he was really the Person your Principles renders him to be Antinom The Spirit of God renders him to be the Person that my Principles renders him to be It saith he bore our Sins in his Body on the Tree the Lord laid Iniquities on him he was made Sin for us and yet how dare you reproach the Spirit of God in such a manner To say that it 's an odious thing To say be bore the Load and Weight of all the Sins of the Elect that it is spitting in the Face of Christ doing that which the worst of Men did to him and justifying his Murderers I am surprized with great horrour to hear such things out of the Mouth of a Man that is called a Gospel Minister I pray God give you Repentance and lay not these things to your Charge But Sir you have here declared your defiance of the Date of the Imputation of our Sins to Christ and yet would pretend you hold that Doctrine by saying God laid the Punishment of Sin only upon Christ The meer Punishment of Christ I must tell you was not the bearing our Sin for the bearing the Punishment was the payment of the Debt and was his Righteousness which is Imputed unto us if Imputation of our Sins to Christ lay in nothing else they were not Imputed at all to him Punishment was laid upon him and he bore it by way of Suffering in his Humane Nature and was that Righteousness that is Imputed to us in Justification the Argument against you is this That which is Imputed to us was not Imputed to Christ but Punishment of Christ to Satisfaction for our Sins is his Righteousness Imputed to us Ergo not the Imputation of our Sins unto him If your rooted prejudices will suffer you to consider I pray weigh well that Argument you will have more by and by But you still say if Christ bore Sin he must be polluted with Sin Ans It argues not that Sin was his by perpetration or Infusion but only by Imputation they were our Sins by Perpetration and Inhesion which he bore by Imputation The Spirit of God tells us he was a Sinner in one respect and no Sinner in another as the Church of Smyrna was Poor in one respect and Rich in another Omnia diversa natura sua abstractâ sunt opposita as Poverty and Riches Sin and no Sin tamen eidem attributa ratione tantum dissentiunt as a Man may be Rich and Poor Wise and Foolish in divers respects And as to the filthiness of Sin it could not stain him he remained untouched in his Holy Nature but yet I must tell you as bearing Sin by the Sacrifices caused a Typical Uncleanness insomuch as the Bodies were Burnt without the Camp and they that Burnt them and gathered up the Ashes became Unclean such a Judicial uncleanness was Jesus Christ our Sacrifice under wherein he answered those great Types and we are not without ample proof of it especially from Heb. 13.11 Neonom Arg. 2. Had he been Esteemed the very Transgressor his
Atonement had been unavailable for he could not Atone for himself D. W. p. 11. Antinom You should have said had he been the very Transgressor he was a reputed Transgressor and stood instead of the actual Transgressor he therefore was a becoming High-priest because he needed not to Offer for his own Sins but did at once Offer for us when he Offered up himself Heb. 7.25 27. All the places you mention are against you that especially 1 Pet. 3.18 and that of Heb. 9.14 above all as we have shewed before Neonom Christ then suffered for his own Sins Antinom So far as they became his own by Imputation To conclude because you will have it that in pleading for the Imputation of our Sins to Christ I must hold that Christ was the very Transgressor See what I said There is a certain transacting of Sin on Christ so real that indeed a Believer though an Actual Transgressor is as absolutely and truely discharged of his Sins as if he himself had not committed them As a Debtor when a Surety hath taken the Debt on him and the Debtor receives an Acquittance and Discharge he is as free of the Debt now as if he never run into the Debt So I say it is with a Believer Christ being made a Surety of a better Testament and thereby becoming really and truely the Debtor instead of the Believer he so bears all the Debts himself that they are altogether released and discharged as if they had never been in Debt Still I say this hinders not but there is an Acting of Sin and Committing of Sin every day by a Believer but still the vertue of Christ's Suretiship takes off the Sin as soon as it is committed nay he hath a Proviso or Stock in Bank to satisfie it as soon as it is Committed Dr. Cr. p. 289. Calvinist If this be Mr. Antinomians Judgment I see not but it is sound and according to the Scriptures and you have little reason to make such a noise as you have done and load him so invidiously with your loathsom Consequences and misrepresent him so hideously to the World as if he were a Person of no Divinity Logick Religion Brains or common Sense I must confess I think you have given a great deal of Ground of just offence in wresting the words and sence of so good a Man besides your taking advantage to insinuate to us Errours for I apprehend your Spleen is most especially vented at the Doctrine of Imputation it 's that which you principally aim at to Wound and cast to the Ground Laying Sin on Christ no other than that whereby Christ becomes accountable to God for our Sins and there is in it these things very easie and plain to be understood 1. Christ's Offering himself freely to be accountable to God for our Sins because none can be forced to be accountable for the defaults of another 2. His answering the Will and Pleasure of the Law-giver the Judge of all therein being called thereunto and accepted in so doing in the room and stead of the Delinquents 3. Hence it is for our Sins and not his own that he is accountable 4. Our Sins are the Material and Meritorious Cause of his Sufferings which he takes upon him our very Faults in non-conformity to the Law our Sins in the delinquency our very Sins in opposition to Punishment our Sins in their greatest foulness under the greatest Aggravations they are the very offending meritorious Causes and whereas when we are without Christ they are accounted the offending and the meritorious Cause of Suffering to us so Christ being substituted in our room they are the very offending meritorious Causes of Suffering to him Sin hath a double respâ—ct as a Fault and Demerit but as a fault is a demerit To be accountable is to stand under the demerits of Sin and indeed that is Guilt or reatus culpae which the Orthodox mean when they say Christ bare the guilt of Sin and it 's no other than the charge of Delinquency Dignitas poenae obligatio ad poenam is the same thing and there 's little weight in the distinction between Reatus Culpae and Reatus Poenae for Reatus Culpae is nothing else but Dignitas Poenae propter Culpam D. O. 280. And hence they say there 's no difference between Guilt and the Sin it self for Sin is no positive thing but privative and that which is remaining besides the Physical Act of that which is a Moral Guilt or just Charge of Abberration from the Rectitude and Duty required in the Law for which Men must be accountable to God and according to the sanction of the Law give satisfaction and that is in this case by receiving the Wages of Sin and in so doing the Payment is made And I shall now prove by many Arguments that it 's our Sins and our Sins in the highest degrees and aggravations that Christ was accountable to God for and that he bore them in this sence by way of Imputation though none of the macula or stain by way of Inherent pollution or defilement fell upon him nor could cleave unto him And we defend the Position as the Spirit of God every where states it That it was Sin as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Christ bore and in bearing took away from before God it 's said to be laid on Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. That which is the Radical Cause of God's displeasure against a Sinner was laid upon Christ to take away but Sin was the Radical Cause of God's displeasure Ergo Sin in the radical Nature of it as it 's a Fault and blamed of God as such Now obligation to Punishment is not the Cause of God's displeasure but the effect of it that which renders a Person abominable in the sight of God is Sin as it 's against the preceptive part of the Law as to the Major it 's plain unless the Radical Cause of God's manifesting displeasure be taken away God cannot be reconciled to us it 's called the Enmity Eph. 2. even on God's part which is upon the default of Sin and it's Enmity on ours 2. That which Christ bore in his Body on the Tree was Sin it self our Blame as well as Demerit for there 's no demerit where there 's no blame He that suffers for a fault bears the fault the fault stands and claims the Meritoriousness of Sufferings The Apostle is express in it That he bore our Sins on the Cross 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 2.24 This is the Punishment only you will say but the Holy Ghost will tell you he bore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Nature of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not the Punishment of Sin but Sin it self 1 John 3.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and mark what follows ver 5. and ye know that he was manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he might bare away Sin in bearing it and notwithstanding this saith
Answer And would it be so absurd to say a Believer may be discharged before the Death of Christ were not the Faithful under the Old Testament discharged before the Death of Christ We say when the Charge of Sin is taken off from one and laid upon another there is a discharge real in one sence or another Generaliter but not particulariter here is a blotting out of Sin quoad Deum though not quoad Conscientiam Christ took away Sin by way of Suretiship before he did it Actually and so the Faithful before his Coming were saved Neonom If this Errour hold the Gospel Notion of Forgiveness by the Blood of Christ is destroyed D. W. p. 19. Antinom You mean I suppose if this be Truth No It confirms Gospel Forgiveness by the Blood of Christ but prove that it destroys it Neonom Forgiveness denotes a Person guilty it is a Judicial Act of God as Rector Acting by a Gospel Rule Antinom The Apostle saith He justifies by free Grace through the Redemption of Christ that he may appear just also in so doing because his Justice is satisfied He shews God justifies sitting on a Throne of Grace Grace is the Impulsive Cause so far as it consists in the Pardon of a Sinner but it is through the Righteousness of Christ to shew forth his Righteousness and in forgiving in and through the Righteousness of Christ he hath the high concurrence of Justice therein that as he is a Gracious Justifier so he is justified as Righteous by doing it in this way and whereas you say It 's a Judicial Act of God Acting by a Gospel Rule I think you should rather say It is a Gracious Act of God Acting according to the Rules of Justice therein for so the Apostle clearly describes it Rom. 3.24 25. And methinks you turn my Stomach to hear you give so pitiful a low and mean Title to God as a Rector as if he were but a Mayor of a Corporation or some little Earthly Prince Neonom And this supposeth the full and perfect Atonement made by Christ and the Grant made in Vertue thereof Antinom What have we been Disputing about all this while I am glad to see Mr. Neonomian's Ingenuity that now he grants all we Dispute about only differs in naming a thing you say the Atonement of the Wrath of God by Christ for Sinners which is in my sence Fundamentally and Really Pardon quoad Deum is full compleat and perfect and that Forgiveness supposeth it and the Grant made in the Vertue thereof if you had said it had been the Grant made in the vertue thereof I take it you had spoken your own sence fuller than to say it supposeth the Grant made in the vertue thereof unless you mean the Grant made to Christ as our Representative which comes more to our sence but let these Mistakes in Expression pass You seem to distinguish between a Discharge and a Discharge so do we you distinguish between an accepted Atonement for us and giving out the Grant and Patent to us and so do we between Impetration and Application and so do we between Forgiveness in foro Dei and Forgiveness in foro Conscientiae or Evangelii but as to that first I find you do not Love to call it Forgiveness though you think it carries the Nature of Forgiveness in it why should you represent me as such an Heretick to scare People from my Ministry upon the meer naming a thing by a word which by your own terms contain the Nature and Substance Neonom But Forgiveness supposeth a Person Guilty Antinom Christ's bearing Sin supposeth all the World is become Guilty before God and the Elect as well as others and therefore he became a Propitiation for Sin to God that we who are by Nature under the Law and thereby Condemned as Children of Adam and in our own Consciences and thereby guilty might receive Forgiveness of Sins or an Atonement both signifying the same thing by believing A Man is reus quoad Deum reus quoad Ministrationem Legis in Conscientiâ and in this sence shut up under the Law till Faith comes and then is his Personal and Particular Discharge through the Blood of Christ and this last I apprehend to be the Justification by Faith which the Apostle Paul speaks so frequently of neither do I say that this or that Man hath any part in Christ or Pardon any more than in Election and Redemption till he doth believe Neonom But you are of Opinion a Person is never guilty Antinom I never had any such Opinion if you distinguish right concerning Guilt Neonom You say Man that Sins were laid on Christ before we were Born and therefore never upon us Antinom How old are you Was not Christ's Death and Suffering almost 1700 years ago And do you not say Sins were laid then on Christ and if they were then laid on Christ they cannot return to us in the sence as they were taken off from us and therefore they are never upon us in the same manner as they are on those that are not Elect and this must be in respect of Guilt quodamodo some kind of guilt distinguish then of guilt there is guilt in respect of the Righteous Judgment of God in foro Dei and guilt that accompanies the Letter of the Law setting in with our Consciences and in that sence the Law worketh Wrath. Sins were laid upon Christ and they lye upon us but not both in the same Manner nor for the same End Neonom A Judicial Act by a Rule there is none Antinom What your new terms of Art mean I will not trouble my self my Scheme as you term it of Justification imports that God graciously pardons in a way of Manifestation of his Justice and all God's Acts are according to the Rule of his good Pleasure and Will and that 's enough Neonom For the Gospel Grant of Pardon is not to the Elect as Elect but as penitent Believers neither is the Atonement of Christ supposed to our Forgiveness Antinom Pardon as to the Nature of it belongs to Sinners as such eo nomine Faith and Penitency is given together with Remission of Sins and how can you have the Face to say I do not suppose Atonement in Forgiveness or belonging to it when it 's upon that account that you have fell so foully upon me because you think I lay too great a stress on Atonement and give too much to it in Forgiveness Neonom You own the laying of our Sins on Christ before the making of Atonement and without our Sins lay on Christ he could not justly be punished Antinom And do not you own that it's first in Nature to making Atonement and how could Christ be justly punished without he had the Merit upon him either by his own Sins or by the Sins of others but I find you own a Man may be justly punished that deserves it in no sence whatever Neonom So that our Discharge being a
that I speak of here I was shewing from Isa 53.6 that Christ is our great Pay-master and how sad a thing it is to have Sin lying upon our Spirits Separate Sin from the Soul and the Spirit hath Rest in the worst conditions You will never have quietness of Spirit in respect of Sin till you have received this Principle viz. By Faith that it is Iniquity it self that the Lord hath laid on Christ Now when I say thus I mean with the Prophet that it is the Fault of the Transgression c. Reckon up what Sins thou canst against thy self if thou hast part in the Lord i. e. by Faith all these Transgressions of thine became Christ's i. e. Thou seest them laid on Christ Not that they were just then laid on Christ when thou believest I would think your Divinity is not so gross as to assert that but that a Believer by Faith sees that he is one of those Elect ones whose Sins were laid on Christ What the Lord beheld Christ to be that he beholds his Members to be So that if you would speak of a Sinner supposing that Person of whom you speak to be a Member of Christ is this speaking of the Elect meerly as the Elect and no more you must not speak of what he manifests but what Christ was pag. 271. What Unsoundness I beseech you is in this Doctrine I pray speak Gentlemen The Company generally smiled but being afraid to displease Mr. Neonomian and affrighted at the Name of Antinomian which Mr. Neonomian called every one that contradicted him were silent But at last a brisk Gentleman Learned and Solid stood up and said I think you have greatly abused Mr. Antinomian and charged him unrighteously both in your misrepresenting him and in your charging him with Error and False Doctrine in the things alledged against him For saith he I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ though I see some of my Brethren here seem to be so that will not speak for the Truth when they hear a Man of Confidence run it down I say and affirm that he that hath a part in Christ is confidently to believe that Christ bore his Sin in his Body o◠the Tree Tit. 2.14 Calvin I pray Mr. Neonomian give us your Thoughts clearly what you hold and what you deny in this Point Neonom I shall tell first what is not in Dispute between us Calvin There 's 100 things are not now in Question before us I pray you to cut short that we may not lose so much time come to the very Point in Difference first Neonom You are not capable of understanding it till I have told you what is not in Dispute I 'm sure you 'll mistake the Question if I tell you not what the Question is first The Difference is not 1. Whether the pardoned Sinner shall be delivered from Condemnation D. W. p. 24. Antinom But it is whether the pardoned Sinner is not delivered from Condemnation and that Delivery the Ground and Reason of his Pardon Neonom 2. Nor whether God for Christ's sake will deal with a pardoned Sinner as if he had not been a Sinner Antinom The Question is Whether God can deal with any one Salvâ Justitiâ as if he were not a Sinner and yet be esteemed by him formaliter and in the just Sentence of the Law a Sinner and whether a pardoned Sinner be in the righteous Judgment of God a Sinner and can be a Sinner and not a Sinner at the same time and in the same respect Neonom 3. Nor whether Forgiveness doth take away Sin as to it's Obligation to Punishment Antinom If Fault in the Judgment of the Law be made the Obligation to Punishment and the Demerit of Sin lies in the Fault it is a great Question how the Obligation to Punishment can be taken away without taking away the meritorious Cause and whether if the Obligation to Punishment could be taken away without taking away the Sin in the Eye of the Law whether it were Forgiveness for Forgiveness lies formally in taking off the Fault and but consequentially in remitting the Punishment Neonom Nor whether the Atonement of Christ when it 's applyed in it's full effects will perfectly remove all Punishment and purge away all Filth and Defilement from the Elect Each of these I affirm Antinom But it is a Question whether upon the Atonement of Christ made and accepted any of the Elect were punishable for Sin in a way of Vindicative Justice even before Faith much more after So that the things which are without Dispute to you are questionable to us especially according to your ambiguous way of expressing them Neonom I shall now acquaint you with the Questions that are in debate betwixt us 1. Whether because Christ obliged himself to bear the Satisfactory Puunishment of our Sins they did therefore become the Sins of Christ Antinom You state this Question fallaciously The Question all this while between us is this Whether if God laid our Sins upon Christ in the way that he laid them they did in that way become the Sins of Christ If you will have it in the Notion of Christ's bearing Punishment only it must run thus If Christ was obliged to bear or did bear Satisfactory Punishment whether or no our Punishment or the Punishment due to us did thereby become his Both these we affirm Neonom Whether our Sins were pardoned when Christ suffered on the Cross This you affirm and I deny Antinom I affirm it in my own Sence but deny it in your false and imposed Sences Neonom Whether even they that are Members of Christ yet if they do sin are they Transgressors and Sinners and are the Sins they commit their Sins This you deny and I affirm Antinom This Question as you you state it I both affirm and deny because in one Sence a Man must be a Transgressor in another none But the Question Whether the Members of Christ while Sin remains are Sinners and in the sight of God do stand fully justified from all Sin This I affirm Neonom One would think this needed no Proof whether he that doth a sinful Fact be a Doer of it Antinom It needs no Proof I always own it to be so I tell you the Saints commit Sin and are therefore the Doers of it and I have told you 't is all that they can do of themselves and that it is my Sin my sinful Fact and yet my Debt that I contracted may become another Man's if he engageth for it Neonom Christ teacheth Believers to pray for the Pardon of Sins Luke 11.4 Antinom So they had need for Sins are pardoned when they have it not and it 's to them as if they were not pardoned at all if they have not the Comfort Neonom It would be vain to object they pray for manifestation of Pardon Antinom Why in vain Is it any more that a true Believer can pray for For he sees and knows all his Sins
are pardoned but yet continues to pray for a further manifestation of Pardon Did not David tell us what it is Psal 1.10 Restore to me the Joy of thy Salvation Neonom For were it so yet it is for our Sins it would sound strange to pray Forgive us the Sins of Christ Antinom Yes we pray for the Pardon of our Sins that were laid on Christ and though we do not pray to forgive us the Sins of Christ yet we pray to God to forgive us for the sake of Christ whose bearing of Sin and Satisfaction wrought we always plead believing But you will banter Christ's bearing Sins Neonom The Saints in Scripture esteemed them their Sins and themselves Sinners when they committed Sin and found it's Motions Jer. 14.7 Isa 59.12 Job 7.21 Psal 25.11 D. W. p. 25. Antinom So do we though they and we ought to acknowledge Sin always in Faith of the pardoning mercy of God in Christ we should ask Pardon in Faith nothing doubting but sometimes there may be but weak Faith next to none in God's Children and great Doubtings and therefore great Guilt lying upon their Consciences and from thence great Darkness in times of Temptation Thence did flow those Pathetical Expressions of many of the Faithful from God's hiding of his Face and the Weakness of their Faith as if they were reprobated ones and cast away and so it is even now sometimes And though we believe Christ hath born our Sins yet this is the greatest Ground of true Gospel-brokenness of Heart that they were our Sins and are now the Product of corrupt Flesh the Old Man remaining in us which we labour under endeavouring to get more and more into Christ by a strong Faith that the Body of Sin the Source of Corruption in us may be destroyed Therefore Repentance and Godly Sorrow is exercised even for our Sins laid on Christ Neonom 3. God reckons Sins to be their own he reproves them he forgave them 1 John 2.12 Jer. 33.8 Rev. 2.20 Rev. 3.19 2 Tim. 4.16 D. W. p. 26. Antinom Sins are Sins and our Sins we have said it again and again and therefore reprovable in us and to be forgiven in us by the Application of Pardon All this hinders not but that we be without Fault before God and our Sins cast behind his Back we have a Perfection and Fulness of Pardon and all Grace in Christ Jesus though Sin it self was never reconciled to God and therefore God sets us to the killing of it Christ destroyed Sin on the Cross as to the obstructing God's compleat Love to the Persons of the Elect so that it cannot condemn before God but it is Sin Yet in the Elect and will accuse and condemn wherever it is or at least the Law will by Reason of it and therefore it hath it's Influence this way sometimes on the Holiest Men. It 's in the Nature of Sin to condemn but God doth not condemn for Sin though he condemns Sin daily in the holiest Men and through Unbelief they are apt to think their Persons condemned of God himself When God denounceth Judgment against a sinful Church or Nation they are ordinarily hypocritical prophane and Apostate and therefore a mixt People many or most under a Covenant of Works and a People in their Sins which God awakens by Threatnings or Judgments themselves and therefore the places quoted by you affect us not The Force of your arguing lies here Those Sins that God calls our Sins and we ought to call our Sins are not laid on Christ and taken away but God calls Sins our Sins and we ought to call them so Ergo. The Major is utterly false For all places that we bring to prove that Sin was laid on Christ do call them our Sins and we speak of them as such and it's cause of Abasement in our selves and thankful Admiration of the Free Grace of God in Christ and so the Church acknowledge their Sins Jer. 14.7 8. Isa 59.12 16 17. Neonom Mark what will follow hence No Elect Members of a Church are justly censured for Offences and no Christian Criminal could be punished for they are not the Sinners the Sin is not theirs Antinom It is a shame to hear a Mininister argue in this manner Your Argument runs thus If the Sins of the Elect were laid on Christ by Imputation then no Church or Court of Judicature can proceed to condemn an Offender Ergo. Baculus stat in Angulo ergo pluit Doth Man see and judge as God doth Is there no difference between Forum Divinum and Humanum Ecclesiastick and Civil the Law before Man and his Administration of it knows no difference of Persons it proceeds secundum allegata probata Churches censures is in order to a Justification before the Church that by Faith and Repentance it may appear that God hath forgiven such an one that he belongs to Electing and Redeeming Grace and the Sinners Sin laid on Christ and when they find that they are soon reconciled to an offending Member And you say If Sins were laid on Christ no Christian Criminal can be punished A very sad Case indeed for then any Criminal condemned justly by Man's Law can never be saved For if Christ bore not his Sins he can't be pardoned nay may not a Godly Man through Temptation fall into a Crime whereby he may justly suffer in Foro humano and doth this hinder his Salvation by Christ And is it an Argument his Sins were never laid on Christ Are not these consistent a Sinner and condemned by Man's Law and an absolved Sinner by the satisfy'd Law of God Was not the converted Thief a Sinner justly condemned by Man though absolved by God because Christ bore his sins on the Cross and if he had repented before he had been hanged on the Cross would it have freed him from Man's Sentence Satisfaction to God's Law is not to Man's nor Satisfaction to Man's is not to God's Men stay not Execution of a Malefactor because he repents to Salvation but Man's Law must take it's course upon him I doubt not but the Ordinary of Newgate can teach you better Divinity than this A Man may be in one respect guilty and in another not And so likewise God deals with his Children two ways in case of their eminent Falls in a way of his common Providential Government of the World in foro mundi as he dealt with David that those Evils of Affliction Judgments in the Apprehension of the Men of the World should befall them and so in the Participation of external common Calamities there should not be any manifest difference between them and other Men. Therefore the Wise Man saith That Love and Hatred is not known by these things But notwithstanding all this the other and certain way of God's dealing with them is according to the Covenant of Grace which is the Secret of the Lord he fully pardons their Sins is reconciled to them in Christ will never leave or forsake them
Justitia Mediatoris not Justitia Mediatoria 2. You say this Righteousness is so Imputed to a true Believer as for the sake thereof he is pardoned I am sure by your so you mean another sence than we mean that we are only pardoned effective and that 's no more than we are sanctified and glorified for it's sake and this appears by your second Difference p. 39. where you say the difference is not Whether our Justification and all other Benefits when we are partakers of them be the Fruits of this Righteousness as the only Meritorious Cause So that you have no reason to quarrel with me for saying That through Christ's bearing of Sin we appear in perfect Holiness speaking there of Glory for you say Justification and all other Benefits flow from it therefore in the same manner as we are Justified by the Righteousness of Christ in the same manner we are sanctified and glorified i. e. effective in your sence 3. You say also pleadable for these Uses i. e. for all Uses in a like manner 4. As if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them your meaning is That it 's as well done as if they had done it themselves A Man may do a thing as well as another that he doth not for another in his stead yea a Man may do a thing for another and not do it in his stead as a Taylor makes a Minister a Suit of Cloaths but doth not do it in his stead because it 's not his Business to make his Cloaths but it 's another thing for a Man to come and preach for him that is to do it in his stead because it 's his proper Work Profession and Business 5. And hereby you say they are delivered from the Curse What mean you by the Curse We shall find this Curse is not the whole Vindicative Wrath of God only Eternal Curse And for our Comfort you tell us this is all the Attonenement or meriting Price of saving Benefits that God can demand of us It 's so in our stead as that God can exact no other Atonement and so a Security from God's hurting us In a Word the Description of Imputation here that you have given is but a meer piece of Sophistry that Imputed Righteousness may be any thing for all this and we shall see by and by what you will have it be Neonom Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them until Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven Antinom Now you come to the Negative part of your Description which should have been first and having said nothing of the thing at first you tell us it 's nothing at last 1. You say this Mediatorial Righteouscess Sir is not subjectively in us I know no Judicious Divine ever talked so nor would you if you understood mediatorial Righteousness as it 's apparent you do not 2. You say there 's no change of Person betwixt Christ and them You mean that the Believer becomes not Christ nor Christ the Believer We mean so too 3. You say too that Believers are not as righteous as he you mean such a Righteousness Mediatorial 4. You basely insinuate that their Righteousness in Justification is imperfect for the Spots and Blemishes we speak of is in respect of Righteousness Neonom I question not whether Christ by his Righteousness merited for all the Elect that they should in his time and way be certainly Partakers of it's saving Effects and did not only purchase a conditional Grant of those Effects viz. That Proposition He that believeth shall be saved P. 39. Antinom It seems Christ then merited a certainty of Salvation only of the Elect I thought their Salvation was made certain by Election the Foundation of God stands sure 2 Tim. 2.19 Your meaning is Christ's Merits made our Salvation certain which in respect of Election was uncertain 2. And but certain in another way viz. Of a Conditional Grant that is not yet performed and belongs to the Non-elect as well as to the Elect and there 's yet an Uncertainty remaining notwithstanding the Certainty purchased 3. It 's very odd to say Christ purchased a Proposition and a conditional one too the Condition whereof must be something not purchased to be performed by us that we may have the Gift promised For if the Certainty depend upon the Merit and Purchase then both the Condition and Promise is purchased and then the Purchase is absolute I would know whether the certainty of the Salvation of the Elect be purchased conditionally or absolutely if purchased conditionally then this Proposition The Elect shall be saved is yet uncertain in respect of the Purchase of Christ and is but a contingent Proposition and not certain which is a Contradiction If you say Christ purchased absolutely the Salvation of the Elect all your contingent Purchase falls to the Ground But Christ purchased Persons absolutely not conditional Propositions and is he that believes shall be saved a conditional Proposition indeed Neonom Nor whether besides these Effects being made ours the very Righteousness of Christ be imputed to true Believers as what was always undertaken and designed for their Salvation and is now effectual to the actual Pardon and Acceptance to Life yea is pleadable by them for their Security and is as useful to their Happiness as if themselves had done and suffered what Christ did Antinom Gentlemen you would think that Mr. Neonomian had here owned the Doctrine of Imputation but it is nothing so he doth but sham it still Mark he says Besides the Effects of Christ's Righteousness the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed as to Effects or Effectualness i. e. Pardon and Acceptance is the Effects but he tells you not that it is the proper and immediate Righteousness he will have the Righteousness of Christ to have some Effects and is imputed as to such So that Sanctification and Glorification being Effects are as much the Imputation of the very Righteousness of Christ It 's a strange thing to confound the Cause and Effects to tell us the very Cause is imputed and presently to tell us he means the Effects This is to talk Daggers for Cause and Effect are opposita But he saith the Righteousness of Christ is what was undertaken and designed for their Salvation and is effectual and in that Sense imputed Very good so that it was a subordinate means to accomplish that end as was also Creation which was by Christ Col. 1. preaching the Gospel their Calling Sanctification hence the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is but to give it a place in the order of means for our Salvation and in that order of means hath it's Effects But he saith there is a Priviledge by it as
though they are contraries yet do consist ex mutua alterius affectione and hence omnis integra relatio constat ex duabus partibus in respect of one the relatum is causa and correlatum the Effect In the respect of the other the relatum is effectum and the correlatum causa Redeemer and Redeemed are Mutual Causes and Effects and yet Contraries and the Contraries yet do Exist by the Mutual Affection that they have to each others Neonom What is all this to the purpose Antinom I would hereby give you to know that I understand the Logical Difference between Redeemer and Redeemed and if you knew it your self you would be ashamed to use this Argument to any Men of Learning but such studyed Divines take themselves to have such puzzling Pates that they can be dictators to all Men. Neonom It 's prophane Arrogance for us to pretend to his Prerogatives and it 's Blasphemy to debase him among their number who were Enemies and without Strength Antinom Logick failing it 's not amiss to betake your self to some high strains of Rhetorick some great words may make a Man look big but never affright Wise Men from the Truth Neonom My secâ—nd Argument is The Meditorial Righteousness of Christ is not subjectively in us Antsnom No nor by Imputation neither i. e. Justitia Mediatoria but Justitia Mediatoris is both subjectively in Christ and us Originalitèr in Christ Imputativè in or upon us we are the Subjects by your leave of Imputed Righteousness and Christ of Imputed Sin and this very subjectiveness cuts off both your Arguments at once because the very proposition that we are the Subjects of Imputed Righteousness denies our selves to be the Authors of that Righteousness and affirms another to be so my very saying that the Creditor took another's Bond for my Debt and delivered up my Bond to me upon his Payment doth sufficiently acquaint all rational Men that I not only ascribe the Payment to another Man but do affirm that his Money was accepted on my Account and if any should hear me say that I became a Surety because he paid my Debt they would think I were Mad but if I say that the Creditor took such an one as Pay-master in stead of me and his Money paid was reckoned to me no Man but would judge it very good sence besides Mr. Neonomian Neonom I do not speak of Inherent Righteousness of which he is not only the Pattern but also is the Cause and Worker Phil. 3.9 Antinom We would not mistake you you would be understood that we are the Subjects of Inherent Righteousness and I tell you so are we of Imputed Righteousness genere Imputationis Christ is not as Christ is the subject of our Sins genere Imputationis That which God Imputes to us and Faith Applies to us we are the Subjects of it for subjectum is cui aliquid adjungitur and here is a note of Conjugate Arguments wherein is Abstractum concretum modus Agendi Justus is subjectum Justitiae Imputatae and in this pair of Relates the adjunct is also the cause of the Subject which is a Logical Mystery that every unstudied Divine doth not understand As for Phil. 3.9 which you pervert and understand of our Inherent Righteousness we shall examine that anon I see you are very fond of your first Argument and every Argument must run into it like a Mathematical Principle that must clinch every demonstratâ—on such as this Three Angles of a Triangle are equal to two square Angles or that any two Lines not Parallel protracted will at last cut c. Now say you if Christ's Righteousness be Imputed to us who was a Saviour then we are Saviours and it runs thus if a Surety pays my Debt then I am a Surety if my Father pays my Debt I am thereby made a Father whether I have Children or no. If a Rich Merchant pay the Debt of a Poor Cobler and fetch him out of Ludgate the Cobler hereby becomes a Merchant A Justice of Peace takes off the Penalty from a Constable for some Fault whereby he hath forfeited his Office and therefore the Constable must become a Justice of Peace The absurdity of your Inference hence easily appears Imputation of the Action of one Party to another no way inferrs Physical Change or Individual Identity but signifies a Relative Change not of one into another but of both to the Law the Law takes the Surety for the Debtor and the Original Debtor to be a Pay-master in the Surety As the Sponsor becomes a reputed Debtor and the principal Debtor becomes the reputed Pay-master and note when we speak of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness we understand not the Imputation of his Offices as you would have us is not that the Commutation here meant by you Neonom It 's Inconsistent with the Nature of Gospel Imputation Antinom It is Inconsistent with our Doctrine of Imputation but must necessarily follow from your Notion of Mediatorial Righteousness and all your Inferences upon this Hypothesis is but Fighting with your own Shadow and therefore we shall leave you therein Canere tuis Musis your Arguing affects us not in the least Calvinist The Doctrine of Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us to Justification and a sweet permutation of Persons in a Law sence and relation we must assent and stand by notwithstanding all your Cavils against it the Scriptures are plain and express for it and will stand as Bulwarks to defend this Doctrine against all Papists Socinians and Neonomians and because you Mr. Neonomian quote Dr. Owen would have us to believe that he is a Patron to your Notions and Men that read him not may think so from your Authority I would disabuse them and shew you now naked how diametrically opposite to you that Learned Doctor is he saith There is in Scripture represented to us a Commutation between Christ and Believers Dr. Owen of Justific p. 39. as unto Sin and Righteousnes i. e. in the Imputation of their Sins unto him and of his Righteousness unto them In the Improvement and Application hereof unto our Souls no small part of the Life and Exercise of Faith doth consist This was taught the Church in the Offering of the Scape-Goat Levit. 16.21 22. This Goat was sent away with this Burden upon him and whether he did Live and was a Type of the Life of Christ in his Resurrection or whether he perished in the Wilderness being cast down the Precipice of a Rock c. it s generally acknowledged what was done to him and with him was only a Representation of what was done really in the Person of Christ He did not transfuse Sin from one Subject to another but transferred the Guilt of it and to evidence this translation of Sin from the people unto the Sacrifice Aaron in his Confession put and fixed both his Hands on his Head Thence the Jews say That all Israel was made as Innocent on the
him P. 47. Antinom It would take up deservedly some Paper to shew the Error and Sophistry of what you have spoken The Summ is that you deny Christ to be a publick Person and that all that Grace and Fulness that is in him by reason of the Hypostatical Union of both Natures and that Unction without measure which he received was only to qualify him singly and for himself as an Individual Person and not to be conveyed and communicated unto us and therefore none of his Fulness is received by us that the Spirit not his Spirit Neither do we live by vertue of our Union to him as a Root Head Fountain but if we partake of the Divine Nature as the Apostle Peter Eph. 2. ch 1. saith We are made Gods If we partake of the Vertues of Christ we rob him and they are no more in him You abuse the Similitude of Husband and Wife used by the Apostle Eph. 5. and would make it run on Four Feet You consider not that Adam and Eve at first was the true Type the Apostle aims at to represent Christ and his Church by Eve being taken out of Adam had her Nature in him first and was created out of him and so was Flesh of his Flesh and Bone of his Bone You must distinguish between the Individual Person and Qualification of the first Adam and his publick Capacity Headship and common Nature he had a peculiar distinct Person and Habits belonging to it as such but he had also a common Nature communicable to his Wife and to his Posterity by Propagation not only Eve's Nature but ours was in him radically And therefore the Prophet Malachy saith that God made but one at first Mal. 2.15 though he had the residue of the Spirit and could have made more as he did in the Creation of Angels but therefore one that he might seek a Seed of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now this Seed of God was found in the Seed of the Woman that was made out of Man and was but one as Adam was made but one common Person so Christ and the Church his Wife is made out of him created in him as Eve was and have a Nature common in Christ And doth it follow that because Adam had the common Nature to Eve and his Posterity 1. That his Individual Qualities were communicated taken from him and given to Eve Was Adam turned into Eve Was Adam's Wisdom Holiness his Natural or Moral Vertues taken from Adam and given to her or them The common Nature of a Genus is communicated and propagated by Individuals without robbing the Individual Mankind is propagated daily by Individuals yet those Individuals lose nothing of their proper Adjuncts If Men were not Strangers to Logick and Natural Philosophy and ordinary Terms of Law they would not make so much ado about this common Nature of Christ which in him is Mystical and Transcendent I shall not here enlarge but enquire what is the Opinion of the Protestant Divines Calv. Dr. Davenant I pray speak in this matter what your Sense is Dr. Davenant on Col. 1.19 1. There was in Christ a fulness of habitual Grace neither take we this to be Infinite seeing it was a created Qualitas and inhered in the mind of Christ which also was a Creature it could not be infinite but by fulness of Grace we understand all those Perfections to which the Nature of Grace doth extend it self 2. We consider why Christ ought to have a fulness of Grace 1. E Debito congruitatis it was due to him in a way of meetness by reason of his Union to the Word 2. It was meet that which was nearest to the influencing Cause should partake most of the Influx 3. There was Debitum necessitatis It was necessarily due from the Supposition of the End by reason of the Habitude or relation of Christ himself to the Humane Nature for Grace was conferred upon him not as a private Person but as an universal Principle from whom it is transfused into other Men you say it 's not by Transfusion p. 47. All things ought to be full and in an oneness The Evangelist shews that Grace is diffused to us Eph. 4.7 And on Colos 2.10 1. To be compleat in Christ 1. Is spoken from the Effect Christ is not only perfect in whom dwells all the Fulness of the Godhead but he makes us perfect and compleat we having all things in him and his Doctrine necessary to Salvation 2. The Second Reason is taken from his Office Christ is the Head As to the first We have perfect Wisdom right Knowledge of the Doctrine of the Gospel John 17.13 1 Cor. 2.2 2. We have compleat Righteousness for Satisfaction to the Law of God and for our Sins 3. In Christ we have Sanctification or inherent Righteousness For what is Sanctification other than the washing away of our Errours and Vices whereby we are set at a distance from God and the Susception of Gifts and Graces whereby we may draw nigh to God in his Service And this is done as we stand united to Christ by his Spirit Rom. 1.4 ch 8. 9. In eo non ex eo aut per eum solummodo In him not from him or by him only but he saith We are compleat in him to give us to understand that we have that foresaid Wisdom Righteousness and Holiness not as we behold Christ as existing far from us but as we are incorporated in Christ as we have Christ abiding and dwelling in us and we have this Grace from Christ not the Stream from the head Fountain for it 's not needful that he that will drink of a Fountain should go into the Fountain But it 's otherwise here for we cannot receive of Christ's Fulness unless we are in him As the Old Adam is in us as the cause of Corruption and Death so the New Adam dwells in us as the Cause of Righteousness and Salvation So we are said to be in Christ to dwell in him to abide in him John 15.4 5. Whatever therefore Men hope or please themselves with of Grace Righteousness Sanctification or Glorification it will prove a meer Mock and Dream if they be not in Christ and Christ in them And now Christ is in us and we in him when we are united to our Head and grafted as Branches into the Vine by the Bond of the Spirit and Faith wrought by the Spirit in our Hearts Rom. 8.9 John 3.36 Calv. Speak to this Point Dr. Horton In that Text Rom. 8.2 There are three Terms before us There 's Life the Spirit of Life there 's the Law of the Spirit of Life 1. By Life we are to understand the Grace of Holiness and Sanctification not that which is inherent in our Nature being regenerate but the full and perfect Holiness which is in the Humane Nature of Christ as the proper Subject of it this is the Fountain from which there is a continual flowing of Grace to all that are truly
know whether Christ in his Humane Nature was not Elect and the Head of all the Elect therefore if we consider him but singly whether he was not the Principal Elect one and I pray was the Covenant made with him or for him I say it was made with him and for him and so it was made with the Elect in him both with them and for them or else how comes God's Purpose and Grace to be given us in Christ Jesus before the World began 2 Tim. 2.9 But you tell us that the Elect have nothing to do as a condition of this Covenant you reckon you highly honour Christ in giving all the Conditionality of this Covenant to him and what 's that It 's that he provided for our performing the condition of another Covenant and why might he not have prepared us by that condition for another Covenant condition after that But it seems your Covenant of Redemption is but a subordinate Covenant to that of Grace and its Righteousness subordinate to our Righteousness which you make the condition of the Covenant of Grace Neonom And to this Covenant of Redemption all absolute Promises and Prophesies of Grace are reducible they being a transcript hereof D. W. p. 54. Antinom What is your meaning in this it 's hard to guess whether Absolute Promises are made in the Covenant of Redemption And 2. If so whom in that Covenant they are made to to Christ You must mean so for you say we are not in it Then the Promise of giving a new Heart is made to Christ and not to us Or 3. If you mean they are reducible to it as being the Covenant of Promise and so Christ and all his Benefits are given absolutely and unconditionally to us in it this makes us concerned as a Party in the Covenant for to whom the Promise of the Covenant belongs to them the Covenant belongs as a Party concerned Neonom This Dr. Owen makes to be a distinct Covenant from the Covenant of Grace P. 268 269. Antinom It is true Dr. Owen and other Learned Divines have spoken of a Covenant of Redemption as in some respect distinct from the Covenant of Grace but make not such an ill Use of that Notion as you do The Dr. says He doth not call these Foederaal Transactions the Covenant of Grace absolutely Nor is it so called in Scripture And it may well be so for we find not the Term Covenant of Grace mentioned in Scripture and some will not distinguish between a Covenant of a Mediator and the Covenant of Grace because the Promises of the Covenant are absolutely said to be made to Christ Gal. 3.16 of which some its plain the Assembly at Westminster was And therefore it appears there have been different Apprehensions in this matter I reverence and honour both Parties as Orthodox and sound in what they intended and meant in this Point but I must adhere to the Word of God as the most infallible Guide in this and other things according to what Light I receive All the difference that I find they make is no more than respectu adjunctorum that is Hiddenness and Declaration or at most to Execution And indeed all I understand by Dr. Owen is two things 1. To shew us under how many Considerations the New Covenant comes And 2. Which of these Considerations it is the Spirit of God seems mostly to point at when it speaks of this New Covenant as a Promise Covenant of Grace or Peace And he saith It 's variously represented 1. In the Designation and Preparation of its Terms and Benefits in the Councel of God which although it have the nature of an eternal Decree yet is it not the same with the Decree of Election c. 2. It may be considered with respect of the Foederal Transactions between the Father and the Son 3. In respect of Declaration of it by Special Revelation 1 By way of Absolute Promise 2 By way of Additional Prescription of the way and means whereby it is the Will of God that we should enter into a Covenant-state with him c. 4. The Covenant may be considered as to the actual Application of the Grace Benefit and Priviledges unto any Persons c. Now all this while he makes not two Covenants a Covenant of Redemption and of Grace but gives divers Considerations of the New Covenant in it's Dispensation and under which Consideration it may most usually and properly be termed by us a Covenant of Grace And the ground of this Discourse is to disprove your Notion That the Covenant of Redemption or Surety ship is the procuring Cause of the Covenant of Grace And he shews that it is no where said in the Scripture That Christ by his Death merited procured obtained the New Covenant Dr. O. p. 266 267. or that God should enter into a new Covenant with Mankind yea that which is contrary to it and inconsistent with it is frequrnrly asserted Now he comes to shew what respect the Covenant of Grace hath unto the Death of Christ and what Influence it hath thereunto A. Supposing what is spoken of his being a Surety thereof it hath a three-fold respect thereunto 1. In that the Covenant Dr. O. p. 271 272. as to the Grace and Glory of it were prepared in the Councel of God as the Terms of it was fixed in the Covenant of the Mediator and as it were declared in the Promise was confirmed ratified and made it revocable thereby This the Apostle insists on at large Heb. 9.15 16 17 18 19 20. 2. He thereby underwent and performed all that which in the Righteousness and Wisdom of God was required that the Effects Fruits Benefits and Grace intended and designed and prepared in the New Covenant might be effectually accomplished and communicated unto Sinners 3. All the Benefits were procured by him c. Now saith he The Sum of these things is Whereas it 's affirmed the New Covenant was procured by the Death of Christ Dr. O. p. 273. if it be understood with respect unto the Actual Communication of all Grace and Glory prepared in the Covenant and proposed unto us in the Promises of it it is most true all the Grace and Glory promised in the Covenant was purchased for the Church by Jesus Christ In this fence by his Death he procured the New Covenant but as to the New Covenant it self it 's not procured All this is rather a Confirmation than a Denial of the Truth of what the Assembly affirms concerning the Covenant of Grace Neonom I say that the Covenant of Grace is not the Covenant of Redemption between the Father and the Son Antinom You should have told what the Covenant of Grace is Neonom The Covenant of Grace is the way that God hath ordained to apply to Sinners that Salvation which is prepared by Christ and which he will inable the Elect to comply with Antinom This Definition or Description I except against For first it
contains not the Genus or common Nature of a Covenant viz. to be an Agreement wherein two Parties do mutually consent nor the Parties wherein the Nature of a Covenant doth consist which is a Condition and Promise nor is there a Covenant in the more improper fence denoted viz. A Promise for if it be a Covenant of Grace it must be at least a Covenant of Promise 2. You say it 's a way ordained of God Here 's no Forma or Differentia for many things are ways and means which are not Covenants you should have said according to your Sence it's God's Agreement with Sinners upon Terms of Faith and Repentance 3. The Application of the means effectually is part of the Salvation it self 4. You say this Salvation is prepared by Christ you should have said By the Father in his Councel and Purpose for the giving his Son and blessing us with all Blessings in him The Life and Salvation is Christ and in Christ he is our Life the Father hath given us Life and this is in his Son 5. You should have said Which he hath promised to enable the Elect to comply with or else it hath nothing of a Covenant in it it carries only the force of electing Will and if he hath promised then to some or other either to Christ and then it brings in your Covenant of Redemption if to any other excluding Christ then to the Elect out of Christ For the Promise to make a Person comply must be made and must be in Nature before he doth comply Neonom I pray what do you say is the Covenant of Grace Antinom I shall tell you the Parties between whom it was made It was made by God in the Person of the Father with Man in the Person of the Son You speak improperly to talk of the Father and Spirit covenanting with the Son you should rather say The Father Son and Spirit covenanted with the Son For by this Notion you take in the Persons of the Trinity for you must take them all in the covenanting part and then there 's as much reason to take them in all in their stipitulating part because the Son is God and so the three Persons covenanted with themselves under the same distinct consideration in the Godhead But we say God essentially considered covenanted in the Person of the Father with Man in the Person of the Son His Son taking Man's part being his Representative as having his Nature in the same Person therefore as the Second Adam having all the Spiritual Seed in his Loyns and as a common Person foederally Neonom And what is a Covenant between these â—aâ—â—sks Antinom It 's the Promise of Eternal Life made to Christ and to the Elect in him to be performed in and through Jesus Christ as the great Condition to all them that shall be saved by him Covenants are denominated from either part by a Synechdoche here chiefly from the Promise as the same is sometimes from the Condition The Covenant of Grace is a great Mystery c. Rom. 16.25 Col. 1.26 1. Because it was Eternal Tit. 1.2 2 Tim. 1.9 2. That though between God and Man yet being made with us in Christ it was between Equals Phil. 2.6 3. That though it was a Covenant of Works yet a Covenant of Grace to Christ a Covenant of Works and most conditional Isa 53.10 11 12. To us absolute and free being a Promise of the Gift of Christ and all Blessings in him 4. It is mysterious in respect of the several states that it hath had 1. Hidden 2. Revealed Hidden in God before the World was Revealed since the World 1. Less manifested in the Promulgation before Christ's coming 1 In respect of the few Emanations and Discoveries of its Brightness and Lustre in Absolute Promises to Adam Noah Abraham Jacob David 2 In regard of it's Vailed state First Under the Veils of Sacrifices Types Figures Secondly Under a Legal Moral and Conditional Administration 5. It is mysterious in regard of the various Names and Titles that it hath had from it's different Dispensations that under the Law was called Old and Faulty because it made but a partial Discovery of it's Glory and Lustre In the New Testament it 's called the New Covenant in respect of the new and clear Dispensation it 's called the Promise because it appears absolutely given forth in a Promissory way it 's called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Nature of it in relation to Sinners it's good News to them It 's called a Testament because confirmed by Christ's Death Neonom But you tell me not how you prove the Covenant of Grace and Redemption are all one Antinom 1. Because I know them not spoken of any where as distinct Covenants The Scripture of Isa 53.10 11 12. is a place wherein this Covenant is so clearly described between the Father and the Son it holds forth the Covenant of Grace fully and clearly the Promise of all Grace and Benefits that are contained in the said Covenant of Grace And the Apostle tells us expresly That this Covenant-Agreement was the Will by which we are sanctified through the offering of the Body of Jesus once for all Heb. 10.8 9 10. 2. That Covenant that contains in it the whole Matter and Form in Conditions and Promises of the Covenant of Grace doth not Essentially differ from it but the Covenant of Redemption doth It contains Conditions and Promises of Grace all things that pertain to Life and Godliness and it contains in it all conditions upon which we may be partakers of any Promises Christ's Person Offices Sacrifice Righteousness Active and Passive there 's no Covenant condition of Atonement Propitiation Satisfaction unto the Justice of God but it is here Christ is the Great Fulfiller of the Law and Satisfier of it he is the End of the Law for Righteousness to every Believer Rom. 10.4 3. From the Vailed Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace before the coming of Christ their Sacrifices and their Ceremonial Administration held forth in a Figure that it is made to Christ and confirmed in him as the Great Offering and Atonement Christ is there exemplified and set forth as the fulness of the Covenant of Grace both in respect of Promises and Conditions 4. When we plead any thing of the Covenant of Grace it 's the Promises of Life made to us in Christ as Yea and Amen to us in him in respect of obtaining and performance to us 5. Our Justifying Acts of Faith is fixed on Christ as the Summ of the Covenant of Grace as Satisfying for our Sins and as to whom the Promises were made and the great thing promised as the Fountain and Meritorious Cause of all Blessings he is given us as the Covenant 6. There is all Grace to be had in this Covenant frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora there is no Grace but is given forth and
Unbelieving Sinners Neonom Nor the continuance of that Pardon or Salvation but upon supposition that this Faith perseveres And if the Gospel-promise say no such thing I am sure the Covenant did not p. 66. Antinom What Christ bequeathed he purchased but it seems all was done but upon condition of perseverance We must stand upon these uncertain conditions all our Days it would be some comfort if we could come to some certainty of our Pardon and Salvation after we are over the first brunt but we can't be sure we are pardoned or that we shall be saved till the last Gasp and if we happen to fall in the mean time our Pardon is gone Neonom The Account of the Covenant which seems most for it's Absoluteness implies this conditional Connexion of the required Grace and the promised Benefits Antinom Now all our Foederal Conditions are dwindled away into conditional Connexions only It is well some places seem to be for the Absoluteness of the Covenant if there be but one Text that is really for it I think we are bound to believe it But you say they imply a conditional Connexion God forbid that conditional Connexions should he turned out of the World if they should all things must be returned into the first Chaos and this would be a conditional Connexion and this Connection is between the required Grace and promised Benefit If you had said Bestowed Grace it had been more proper Or said Required Duty There 's no body hath so little Sence as to deny Cause and Effects Subjects and Adjuncts Arguments of all sorts in the Covenant of Grace in that free absolute Covenant and among the Gifts of it there is Christ and all his Effects the Spirit and its Effects Faith and it's Effects Adjuncts and Contraries This we call Relative Conditions or else things must cease to have a Being But that which we deny is Moral Foederal Conditions to be performed by us Such as these we say there 's none In the Covenant of Grace there 's no required gracious Act that is such a moral condition of any promised Benefit Neonom The places that seem to be for an absolute Covenant are Jer. 31.31 32 33. Heb. 8.10 11 12. Heb. 10.16 17. Jer. 32.40 Ezra 11.19 20. There be others that relate to the restauration of the Captivity Antinom You name Ezra 11. for one and Ezra hath not so many Chapters I suppose it 's an Erratum but I find it not among the Errata's As for the rest you insinuate as if they referr'd only to the return of the Captivity Neonom Yes I 'll pitch upon one Jer. 31.31 c. This is quoted Heb. 8.10 12. and ch 10.16 17. To understand this we must consider 1. Whom is this Covenant made with 2. What can be inferr'd from this Scheme of the Covenant 1. It 's made with the House of Judah and Israel not the Men in present being but Men to be hereafter It 's after those days I will make it so that it was after the Mosaick Covenant was to expire ver 32. D. W. p. 67. Antinom Hence then you refute your self in saying that it referr'd to the Restauration of the Captivity for then the Mosaick Covenant was in it's full force Neonom And it could not be the only Covenant of Grace for that had it's Being from the Fall and the sincere Israelites lost not the advantage of it Gal. 3.17 Antinom The Covenant of Grace had it's Being before the Fall and from the Fall it had it's Promulgation then was that first revealed state of it before it was the Mystery that lay hid in God But observe that as it was then manifested it was absolute as to us The Seed of the Woman shall break the Serpents Head There was no condition mentioned nor rationally supposed to be implied but Christ And it 's to be observed that this Covenant-promise was made before the Sentence was pronounced upon our Fallen Parents which Blessing was the Curse of the Serpent denounced Now as this promulgated Covenant had it's being from the Fall so it continued as the Covenant of Grace and Salvation to all the Faithful under the Old Testament The Lamb slain from the Foundations of the World or before them was looked upon as the only Foederal Condition which was exemplify'd by Sacrifices early begun in Adam's Family and continued till the Messiah came Now indeed this Covenant in the Epistle to the Hebrews is not meant in the Essential Nature of it but in the vailed state of it under the Mosaick Administration which is called by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Graven in stone 2 Cor. 3.6 7. and opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Gospel unvailed Ministration which is said therefore to be New because of the full and clear Discovery that was made by the Revelation of Christ in his Coming and Ministry which was not before And in the same Sence Mount Sinai and Mount Zion is opposed in Heb. 12. And what was seen by this last Ministration It was that Christ Jesus was the Summ and Substance of the former Ministration 1. That it was a Covenant of Free-Grace the Promise given upon the condition of Redemption by the Blood of Christ which appeared to be the true intent of all the Sacrifices 2. That though so much was conditionally required yet no Duties could expiate sin or reconcile us to God And the Reason of those Duties are given us as truly though then not so fully seen was the performance of the Covenant-condition vertually in Redemption typified by Redemption out of Egypt Exod. 20. In a word the Covenant of Grace stood vailed under the Mosaick Pedagogy which stood in a conditional Command under the Sanction of Rewards and Punishments mostly Temporal and under Types and Figures Now this ministration of the Letter stood under a double Faultiness which clouded the Glory and Beauty of the Promise First A Typical and Shadowy Administration in Sacrifices by which the great condition of the Covenant was pointed at as being not yet come and Symbolically only express'd to their Faith The other Fault was the Moral Mount Sinai Vail which called for Duty as it were in the way of Foederal Condition caused them to perform Duty as under a Spirit of Bondage and in a mercenary manner through the Encouragement of Temporal Rewards and fear of Temporary Sufferings and a seeming Attribution of Demerits to the Performances And therefore the Apostle shews that the Faultiness lay here also Heb. 8.9 Not according to the Covenant I made with their Fathers c. Because they continued not in my Covenant they could not be saved by those Legal conditional Performances but by an absolute Covenant couched under that conditional Ministration being saved even as we for the Law and Legal Ministration it was weak through the Flesh Rom. 8.3 And you speak very truly that the true Israelites never lost the Spiritual Advantage of the Covenant of Grace by reason of
God unto Salvation but not as the Cause this were to change the Covenant of Grace into a Covenant of Works our good Works are the effects of Grace the Reward of good Works are a Reward of Grace Good Works are necessary to Salvation as the Way not as an Instrument or Cause Faith is necessary to Salvation as an Instrument The Active and Passive Obedience of Christ is necessary as a meritorious Cause Calvin Mr. Antisozzo I pray do you now speak impartially to this Point Antisozzo I think I have met with his Scheme before now and as I take it it runs thus and the Question that lies before us is this What Influence the Sacrifice of Christs Death and the Righteousness of his Life have upon our acceptance with God The Gentleman that I once disputed with stated the Question so and resolved it as follows Antisozzo p. 580. All that I can find in Scripture about this is That to this we owe the Covenant of Grace That God being well-pleased with the Obedience of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of his Death for his sake entred into a new Covenant with Mankind wherein he promises pardon of Sin and eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel I think this is exactly your Scheme Mr. Neonomian Neonom Yes and something more D. W. p. 8. viz. That the Gospel barrs all Vnbelievers and dead Sinners from Pardon and Adoption and denounceth the continuance of Condemnation against them limiting it's Benefits to such as believe Antisozzo This Scheme contains three things 1. A Description of the Covenant of Grace 2. An Assertion that this Covenant of Grace is owing to the Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ 3. A Supposition that this Righteousness and Sacrifice of Christ hath no other Influence upon our acceptance with God but that for his sake he enrted into such a Covenant with Mankind 1. His Description is this A Promise of the pardon of Sin and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel Neonom You will not I hope deny this to be a true Description of the Covenant of Grace Antisozzo But I will for all your hast It is a Description so liable to Exceptions that it describes neither the whole of the Covenant nor a New Covenant nor upon the matter any Covenant at all Neonom If you prove what you say Eris mihi magnus Apollo I 'll strike out your Name from my Book and if I can be convinced I must subscribe yours Antisozzo You shall see what I can do presently 1. This Description gives us very little of a true Covenant of Grace For 1. Tho you think to put us off with a Promise of Pardon and Life to those that believe and obey the true Covenant of Grace hath given us a Promise of that Faith whereby we may believe and of that New Heart whereby we are enabled to obey the Gospel And First We have the Promise of the right Faith in the true Covenant John 6.37 Eph. 1.8 And least it should be said Faith is a common Gift as other things are the Apostle hath his reply ready Eph. 1.19 Secondly We have a direct and express Promise too of that New Heart from which we give to God new Obedience Ezek. 36. Ver. 26 27. c. 2. This Description gives but very little of the true Covenant of Grace there 's a Promise of Pardon and Life to them who believe and obey but Perseverance in Faith and Obedience is left to the Desultory and Lubricous Power of Free Will whereas in the true Câ—venant of Grace there 's an Undertaking that the Covenant shall be immutable both on God's part Jer. 32.38 4. God hath said He will not turn away from doing them good And 2ly He hath promised That they shall not depart from him c. p. 583. 2. As it describes not the whole of the Covenant so it describes not the Nature of a new Covenant 1. It describes no New Covenant in opposition to the Old Covenant of Works The Covenant with Adam promised Life upon condition of Oâ—edience and those Commands as easie as those now given to Mankind and much easier too if we consider Adam's Natural Strength 2. We are told by you that Christ hath added to the Moral Law i. e. to the Moral Duties required by the New Law Faith and Repentance which is to lay more Load on those that were overcharged before So that as you make Covenants Adam's was much the better Covenant of the two but you have wisely shuffled in a Promise of the Pardon of Sin which may seem to give this Covenant a Preheminence above that of Adam But that will not mend the matter both because it 's better to have no Sin in our Natures than such a Remedy better to have no Wound than such a Plaister and also because the Promise of Pardon as you say is suspended upon the condition of Faith and Obedience which without a Supernatural real Influx of immediate Divine Power reduceth the Promise to an impossibility of Performance 2ly This Covenant described is no new Covenant in opposition to the Old Administration of the Covenant of Grace there were the same Promises then that we have now the same Moral Precepts that we have now Though the Word Gospel come in for a Blind yet the Apostle assures us the Gospel was preached to Abraham 3. Upon the matter it 's no Covenant of Grace at all p. 584. For 1. A Promise of Pardon and Life upon condition of believing and obeying is neither better nor worse than a Threatning of Condemnation and Death to them who believe not and obey not It may with equal right be called a Threatning of Death as a Promise of Life It 's no more of Grace than a Covenant of Wrath And therefore 2ly If it be lawful to consider Man as the Word of God describes him dead in Sins and Trespasses It 's no Covenant at all to him For what is the nice difference betwixt the Promise of Life to him that obeys when it 's certain before-hand he cannot obey and no Promise at all c. Neonom Well Sir pray let us call another Cause Do you argue like a Voucher to my Book Mr. Calvinist he is a sharp Man and he doth this only for Argumentation sake he is of my mind for all this Antisozzo No do not you believe that you wheadled me in to vouch for your Book I know not how but I shall stick the closer upon your Skirts for that I have not done with you yet Calvin I will then propound one Question to Mr. Antisozzo Whether the Covenant of Grace be owing to the Sacrifice of Christs Death and so be distinct from that he calls the Covenant of Redemption Because our time now is up speak only what your Judgment is in this Point Antisozzo Mr. Neonomian I must tell you I have narrowly pryed into this Paradox That the Covenant of Grace is owing to procured by and
Iniquity the Lord hath laid on Christ God himself cannot charge one Sin on that Man and he makes a difference between a strong Believer and a weak to consist in the degree of his Perswasion Dr. C. p. 158. Antinom This was a Use that I made upon that Point of laying Sin on Christ If God have laid our Iniquity upon Christ then whosoever thou art to whom the Lord will be pleased to give the believing of this Truth that the Lord hath laid thine Iniquity on Christ that laying thine Iniquity upon him is an absolute and full Discharge to thee that there neither is nor can be any Iniquity for the present nor for hereafter that can be laid to thy Charge and then follows what he hath rehearsed And if this be not true Doctrine that every Believer that by the Grace of God sees his Sins laid on Christ hath a full pardon of all Sins past present and to come so that Sin shall never be charged on him for Condemnation before God I am to seek for the Doctrine of the Gospel I quote that place Rom. 8.33 to me a very full Proof And I do affirm that the Degrees of our Faith doth stand in the Degrees of the sight of Christ's Glory and the Perswasion we have in our Hearts of our part in him And I do not say That he is no Believer that hath not this perfectly far be it from me to say so there are that are Believers that are weak in the Faith and there are Believers that are strong in the Faith the more the Light and Glory of the Gospel shines in the true Intention of God to his People the more shall they return to their rest the more shall they have Joy and Gladness Why may not a Believer then say as David did The Lord hath been very bountiful to me that I may return to my rest God hath done every thing in Christ and taken away all things that can disturb my Peace and Comfort Dr. C. p. 158. Calvin I pray Mr. Neonom let us have your Description of Saving Faith Neonom I shall express it in the Assemblies Words ch 14. A. 2. D. W. p. 72 73. By this Grace a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word from the Authority of God himself speaking therein and acteth differently upon that which each particular Passage thereof containeth yielding Obedience to the Commands trembling at the Threatnings and embracing the Promises of God for this Life and that which is to come But the principal Acts of Saving Faith are Accepting Receiving and resting upon Christ alone for Justification Sanctification and Eternal Life by vertue of the Covenant of Grace Gentlemen weigh this Account of Faith well which if it were regarded and no essential part excluded when Faith is considered as a Condition of any Gospel-benefit One would think no man need prove that it is not saving Faith when any Essential part of it is wanting and that it must be saving Faith when we mention Faith as a Condition Antinom That Reverend Assembly do here express the Essential Parts of Faith and something more as the Effects of it I take it not to be intended for a Definition wherein only Essentials are put but a Description that takes in Subjects Adjuncts Effects c. The Definition is first given A. 1. That the Grace of Faith is whereby the Elect are enabled to believe to the Saving of their Souls After they proceed to shew the Causes of it the Word and Spirit and after that its several ways of Acting and it's Effects They do in the shorter Catechism give a briefer Account of it which may be more properly called a Definition Quest 86. What is Faith in Jesus Christ Answ Faith in Jesus Christ is a Saving Grace whereby we receive and rest upon him alone for Salvation as he is offered to us in the Gospel And if you please to turn to Quest 31. you shall see what they mean by receiving and resting There they say Effectual Calling is the work of God's Spirit whereby convincing us of our Sin and Misery enlightning our Minds in the knowledge of Christ and renewing our Wills he doth perswade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the Gospel And in the Larger Catechism you have a full Description of Faith as Justifying Quest 72. wherein there is the Genus of it a saving Grace the principal efficient Cause the Spirit the Causa ministrant the subservient efficient Cause the Word Both Causae procreantes The Subject in whom it is wrought a sinful miserable and lost Creature really so and in his own Eyes And then you have the Material Cause the truth of the Promise of the Gospel In the Confession wherein it's more largely express'd it's whatever is revealed in the Word this is the Objective part of it and Material The Form of Saving Faith is an Impression wrought upon the Soul from the proper Efficacy of the Spirit by the Word according to the acceptable Nature and Evidence thereof The Truth must have Goodness in it because we believe many things that we fear and are averse to The Word works objectively upon the Understanding perswading it to assent and set to it's Seal that the Word is Truth and from the Goodness in that Truth it perswades the Will to embrace because Voluntas sequitur ultimum dictamen intellectus and the consenting of the Will is an Effect of the assenting of the Understanding Hence then it 's not barely believing without Ground but upon some Authority In the Confession 't is said For the Authority of God himself speaking in the Word which is believing on Christ believing in God from whence follows an awful Reverence and Regard to his Word as also the resting and depending of the Soul thereon And when it 's determined to the Grace of Justification it 's as in the Larger and Shorter Catechism it receiveth Christ and his Righteousness in the Promise and resteth thereon for Pardon of Sin Justifying Grace through the Righteousness of Christ is the Object and that which it aims at is the accepting and accounting of a Mans Person Righteous in the sight of God for Salvation which is fuller express'd in the Confession shewing what saving Faith in the largest Sence designs viz. accepting receiving and resting upon Christ alone excluding all other Foederal Conditions for Justification Sanctification and Eternal Life by vertue of the Covenant of Grace Now you see how clearly they make Faith a Perswasion and that it doth all objectively by taking in the Truth and receiving it for the Understanding receiveth and embraceth by being perswaded it takes in the Light of Truth and the Will embraceth by being perswaded and the great procatarctick Cause is the Covenant of Grace Now I see you have a clean contrary Notion of making it a Condition and moral Instrument i. e. A moral Condition of the Covenant and so a Work and as such
that the Work must be pretty well over for Mortification and Vivifaction before Christ comes in before a Saving Interest in Christ may be had a Sinner must not touch him or the Preacher so much as offer Christ to teach them the Doctrine of Self-denial or to enable them through the Beauty and Excellency of his Grace and Love to renounce Idols Did you ever know any Sinner renounce Idols till he saw a ground and reason in Christ for it and felt his power in the Grace of the Gospel The Spirit saith The Blood of Christ cleanseth us from all Sin and accordingly the Promise of Christ is Ezek. 36.25 I will sprinkle clean Water upon you and you shall be clean from all your filthiness and from all your Idols will I cleanse you and you will have a vile filthy Sinner to be washed first and have his Idols removed first and exercise one of the highest Virtues in the Christian Religion to deny himself before he dare to come to Christ or before any one must offer Christ to him and if he be offered it must be upon the condition of these Gigantine performances Neonom There cannot be an Acceptance of Christ without a renouncing Sin and Idols and denying Carnal Self and our own Merits as opposite to him And on the other hands to renounce Sin and Idols and deny our selves will not avail us without an Acceptance of Christ and reliance on him Antinom This is an old Brittish way of Arguing because Acceptance of Christ is accompanied with renouncing Idols c. therefore he may not accept Christ till he hath renounced Idols and denied himself c. Because a Man hath Arms and Legs therefore a thing must have Arms and Legs before it be a Man or because a Man is Animal risibile therefore he must be Animal risibile before he is a Man and made a Man afterwards There is one and the same cause of renouncing Sin and Acceptance of Christ and Christ is held forth in the Gospel to turn Men from Darkness to Light and the power of Sathan unto God and Sinners are even the worst to be called and invited to him to come for all those Ends and Purposes for Destruction of Sin and Life of Grace and I tell you there cannot be one of these Sins mortified or Idol renounced without Faith in the Blood of Christ I say before Faith and Acceptance of Christ Neonom I mention some things as Antecedently necessary to our renouncing Sin and Idols c. Antinom This you mean Antecedently necessary to know the true God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent Neonom I mean Knowledge Assent Conviction of Sin and Misery c. these are Preparatory Qualifications not that an Interest in Christ always follows these but they dispose the Soul to a hearty acceptance of Christ in opposition to all Rival Opposites and are necessary thereto in some degree Antinom I cannot understand your meaning unless this be it that Nature and Grace differ only gradually and that some Men do grow up out of a Natural condition by these degrees and some do fall off and not come to it first there must be Conviction of Sin and humbling and then follows Self-denial and renouncing Idols and then Christ comes in at last when he can be willing and these previous Qualifications must dispose the Soul for Christ this is Popery Neonom The declared design of the offers of Christ to Sinners is that they be thus willing to Accept of Christ and partake of an Interest in him Antinom The declared design of offering Christ is not to tell them they must thus prepare themselves before Christ is of use to them but that they come to Christ and receive of his Grace to furnish them with his Spirit and all gracious Effects and Operations It is the Spirit that convinceth of Sin and all Saving Convictions and Humiliations and Renunciation of Idols are included in Repentance and Mortification which are the Effects of the true Grace of God in the Heart whereby Faith is wrought and that Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for Righteousness and Life purifies the Heart and produceth Repentance Love compliance with the Commands of Christ and they are not grievous You propound wrong Methods for the Curing Diseased Souls this way will not do Neonom You mistake me still I will tell you where the difference is not 1. It is not whether there is in Christ a sufficiency of Merit and Grace to save the worst of Sinners Antinom The question is whether the Grace and Merit of Christ be not efficient in the Saving the worst of Sinners Neonom 2. Nor whether Christ is offered to the worst of Sinners if they will accept him on the Terms of the Gospel Antinom But the Question is Whether the Sinner can accept of Christ on such Terms before Christ hath wrought in them to will and do and made them willing in the Day of his Power And whether they ought not to be Invited to Christ and to receive him in the Gospel Offers for the working this willingness by efficacious Grace Neonom 3. Nor whether Sinners are not often the Objects of Gods Effectual Calling in order to an Interest in Christ Antinom God's Effectual Call is an Interest in Christ and there 's no Effectual Call can be before an Interest in Christ it 's the putting the Soul in Actual Possession of Christ and the uniting it to Christ Neonom Nor whether there may not be Knowledge Assent Convictions Humblings and feigned Resolves and yet a Soul fail of an Interest in Christ for want of true Conversion tho' they are hopeful Signs Aninom But the Question is Whether you ought to make common Grace the Foederal Condition of special and tell Souls that they cannot receive Christ in a way of special Grace till they have attained common Grace out of Christ Neonom Nor whether the degrees of Convictions and Humblings are equal in all D. W. p. 84. Antinom You should have told us whether you mean saving or common if they be saving they are wrought as an Effect of Union to Christ if common and out of Christ it 's no great matter what degree they are of for there is nothing in an unregenerate Man though never so plausible that gives him a disposition to a new Heart no more than one that 's stone dead can have in himself a disposition to Life they that are in the Graves of Sin hear the voice of the Son of God and live he quickens them that are dead Privantia non habent media there 's no medium between Death and Life Neonom Nor whether Preparatory Qualifications do Merit true Grace Antinom You should have told us what Merit ex congruo or condigno if you deny the word you assert the thing For a Foederal Condition is a Merit Virtute compacti Neonom Yea or whether Faith or Repentance do Merit an Interest in Christ This I deny and say That their
with them he is Bone of their Bone and is not ashamed to call them Brethren Heb. 2.11 12. Psal 22.22 2. It presuppones a Legal Union between Christ and them that God made the Debtor and Surety one in Law and the Sum one so far as he laid our Debts on Christ Isa 53.6 2 Cor. 6.21 3. It presuppones an Union Federal God making Christ our Surety and to Assume not only our Nature in a Personal Union but also our State Condition and made our Cause his Cause our Sins his Sins not to defend them but to suffer Punishment for them and our Faith makes the fourth Union betwixt Christ and us whether Natural as betwixt Head and Members the Branches and Vine-tree or Mystical as that of the Spouse and Beloved Wife or Artificial as the Foundation and Building or mixed as that of the Imp and Tree or Legal between the Surety and Debtor Advocate and Client or rather a Union above all hard to determine for these are but Comparisons and this Christ prays for John 2.23 I in them and thou in me that they may be made perfect in one And something to this purpose Mr. Norton Norton p. 292. speaks The Efficacy of this Relation springs from its Foundation which is first by the Absolute Grace of God in Election and thence flowing down in the Promise according to the Merit of Christ by the Effectual Operation of the Spirit Needs must the River of Life be full ever overflowing and quickning that ariseth from and is maintained by such Fountains Norton p. 287. And he shews the form of this Union 1. In the Tertium wherein it is 2. The Bands on Christ's part and the Believers 3. The manner as to the Tertium's 1. Sameness of Spirit He that 's joined to the Lord is one Spirit 1 John 4.13 Rom. 8.9 2 Pet. 1.4 2. One Mystical Body 1 Cor. 12.12 13. The third A Spiritual Marryed Estate Eph. 5.32 Isa 54.5 Ch 62.4 4th A State of Glory John 17.22 23. See more But you will see all along how he makes Christ first in this Personal Union to Christ by the Spirit and Faith Dr. Ames Ames Med. lib. 1. c. 26. Receptio respectu hominuÌ„ est vel Passiva vel Activa Phil. 3.11 The Passive is the Reception of Christ whereby the Spiritual Principle of Grace is Ingenerate in the Will of Man Ephes 2.5 This Grace is the Foundation of that Relation whereby a Man is united unto Christ John 3.5 Neonom I 'll tell you what I take to be Truth in these Points Every Man is without Christ or not united to Christ until he be Effectually called but when by this call the Spirit of God enclineth and enableth him willingly to accept of Christ as a Head and Saviour a Man becomes united to him and partaker of those Influences and Priviledges which are peculiar to the Members of Jesus Christ D. W. p. 90. Antinom I except against what you have asserted in these Particulars 1. You say a Man is not united to Christ before Effectual Calling thereby I understand you that he is not united to Christ in any sence whereas I affirm he is united to Christ before Effectual Calling in the Senses which Mâ—â— Râ—therford doth assert before mentioned 2. I understand you mean that in Effectual Calling a Man is not united to Christ till he doth Actually accept of Christ the Head by an Act of Faith whereas the Head unites the Members to it self before they can reach up to the Head 3. You make Union to be the same with Communion and to consist in a participation of Priviledges Now as to the second thing That in Effectual Calling there is a compleat Union with Christ before the Act of Faith I do affirm upon these Reasons 1. From the utter Impotency of the Soul without and before Union with Christ to any good Act for Union standeth in indivisibili it 's a conjunction of two in one an half one is none if we put forth an Act of Faith to lay hold on Christ before we be compleatly united to him we put forth a good Act and bring forth good Fruit before we be in him and before we be good Trees but we cannot bring forth good Fruit before we be good Trees and we cannot be good Trees before we be in Christ Mat. 7.18 John 15.4 5. Therefore we do not put forth an Act of Faith before we be so compleatly united to Christ so united to Christ as to live by him John 11.26 Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never dye c. Arg. 2. In our Regeneration we are meerly Passive our Faith is not then Active but in our Regeneration we are compleatly united to Christ Ergo we are compleatly united to Christ before the Act of Faith The major is proved from Eph. 2.1 2 3. Dead Men are Passive to Regeneration and Dead Men we are till we are Regenerated The Minor is proved from the joint concurrence of Regeneration Conversion and Union with Christ which are all wrought together simul semel Arg. 3. If we be united first to Christ by an Active Faith then an Active Faith is the cause of our Union with Christ but an Active Faith is not the cause of our Union with Christ therefore by an Active Faith we are not first united to Christ Min. If Active Faith were not the cause of the Union of the Humane Nature of Christ with the Divine then it is not the cause of our Union with Christ but Active Faith is not the cause of the Union of the Humane Nature of Christ with the Divine Ergo Maj. No other cause can be assigned of our true Union with Christ than of the Union of our Nature with the Second Person viz. Divine Assumption Isa 42.1 6. As the Divine Nature assumed ours John 1. so the Person of Christ takes us to Mystical Union with him Arg. 4. If our Union with Christ be first by an Act of Faith then it is by a Work of ours though a Work of Grace but it is not by a Work of ours Ergo Min. If it be by a Work of ours it is not of Grace but it 's of Grace Ergo Maj. Rom. 11.6 These are Mr. Cotton's Arguments Neonom I 'll answer your Arguments another time pray hear mine now to confirm the Truth 1. The Scriptures expresly affirm Vncalled Vnconverted ones to be ununited to Christ Eph. 2.12 Rom. 16.7 Rom. 11.17 Antinom It 's true in respect of the Union in Effectual Calling but yet not in respect of their Hidden Federal and Relative Union which Mr. Rutherford speaks of Neonom 2. The Spirit of Christ and Faith in him are the things whereby God hath ordained us to be Vnited with Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 13. Ephes 3.17 Antinom We grant it in respect of our Union to Christ in Effectual Calling Neonom I see you will throw off all my Arguments by Mr. Rutherford 's unhappy distinction of Vnions therefore
is Actually and Absolutely procured for the Elect before Faith and shall infallibly be applyed to them all in time seemeth to reach the Scope intended by the Godly Learned whose Spirits have more particularly laboured to hold forth the whole Truth in this precious part of Soul-Reconciling Doctrine and Soul-Supporting Mystery of the Gospel To say That we are Justified by vertue of a singular Promise in the Court of Conscience and in our own Persons in which sence the Scripture constantly saith We are Justified by Faith is not that I know of affirmed by any And for this he quotes Chamier Cham. Tom. 3. lib. 12 13. Sect. 18. Nobis persuasissinum est remissa esse peccata antequam Credidimus We are verily perswaded that our Sins are forgiven before we believe for we deny that Infants do believe And Perkins Perkins on Gal. 3.16 who saith Christ is first Justified i. e. Acquit of our Sins and we Justified in him And Dr. Ames saith The Transaction between God and Christ was a certain previous application of Redemption and our discharge unto our Suâ—ety Ames Medul lib. 1. c. 24. § 3. and unto us in him which to that secondary Application to be performed in us hath the respect of a kind of Efficacious pattern so that that the Application to him is the Representation of this Application to us and this is produced by vertue of that And he saith § 3. Hence our discharge liberatio nostra from Sin and Death was not only established in God's Decree but also in Christ and granted and communicated to us in him before it could be perceived by us Rom. 5.10 11. Hence the Father and the Son are said to send the Spirit to the performing of this Application John 14.16 and 16.7 And in the Chapter of Justification Am. Med. c. 27. §. 9. He tells us what the sentence of Justification is 1. It was in the Mind of God as it were conceived by him by his Decree of Justifying Gal. 3.8 2. It was in the Christ our Head pronounced when he rose from the Dead 2 Cor. 5.19 3. Virtually pronounced in that first relation which ariseth from Faith ingenerated in the Heart Rom. 8.1 4. Expresly pronounced by the Spirit witnessing with our Spirits our Reconciliation with God Rom. 5.5 Hence it appears that the Doctrine of our Justification before Faith is not an Errour but a Great and Glorious Truth and it is no prejudice to the Doctrine of Justification by Faith but the Foundation Ground and Reason of it neither is it any Door opened to Licentiousness an unbeliever having no more Confirmation or Encouragement to persist in Sin thereby than by the Doctrine of Election which gives none but as Mr. Norton saith It 's no small part of the Ministry of Reconciliation that God Imputed to Christ the Sins of the Elect before they did believe and will never Impute them unto the Elect. Neither is my speaking of Faith's taking hold of Christ's Righteousness and saying That it brings not Christ's Righteousness to us but presupposeth it given and granted such an absurdity as you would make it For Dr. Ames saith very distinctly Justifying Faith precedes Justification it self as a cause of its Effect but Faith apprehending Justification necessarily presupposeth and follows Justification as the Aâ—â— doth the Object about which it is Conversant and this I take to be the true Notion of Justification That Great Man for Holiness and Learning Chamier saith I deny that Faith is the cause of our Justification for then our Justification would not be of Grace Cham. Parstrat Tom. 3. l. 13. c. 10. Sect. 18. but of our selves but Faith is said to justifie not because it effecteth Justification but because it is effected in the Justified Person and in another place he saith Faith doth neither merit obtain or begin our Justification Lib. 22. c. 12. Sect. 5. and Sect. 9. for if it did then Faith should go before Justification both in nature and time which may in no wise be granted for Faith it self is a part of Sanctification now there is no Sanctification but after Justification which really and in its own nature is before it I think Sir I have cleared my self sufficiently from the Charge of Errour in this Point viz. That our Justification is in being before Faith And now Sir before we proceed to the other part of your Charge concerning the manner of Faith's Justifying let us hear your Arguments against Justification in any sense going before Faith Neonom One Real Difference between us is Whether we are Justified before we believe Which I deny for 1. We are Justified by Faith is the common Language of the Holy Ghost Rom. 5.1 Gal. 2.16 D. W. p. 105. Antinom We own it and say too that we are Justified by Faith and this doth not prejudice but confirm what we assert Neon Faith is enjoyned as an effectual means of Justification by Christ Antinom We deny not that Faith required in the Gospel and wrought by the Spirit is as an effectual means of Application of Justification but therefore it follows not that it 's in being before That which is not in being cannot be applyed Neonom The Gospel denounceth and declareth all condemned till they do believe Antinom The Gospel declares only their state of Condemnation under the Law the Gospel properly condemns not and we own that every one by nature is a Child of Wrath and in the sense of the Law is a condemned Person and every one is shut up under the Law as the Apostle saith till Faith comes his New-Covenant Blessedness belonging to him is not yet made manifest nor is his Nature and State changed Neonom Vnbelief is the Cause why men are barred from Justification and remain obnoxious to Misery Antinom It is God that justifies and no Sin can barr God's Act of free Mercy in pardon of a Sinner in the Pardon of Unbelief as well as of other Sins when God will justifie It 's very absurd to say Sin barrs God's Act of Pardon It 's true Unbelief influenceth a Sinner as to his own Acts and will be charged upon him as his Fault and will aggravate that Condemnation which he hath under the Law because from his own corrupt Will and Affection he will not receive Pardon and Life that is offered in the General and Indefinite Tender thereof made in the Gospel And therefore Christ saith John 5.40 Ye will not come to me that you may have Life Heb. 3.18 19. They could not enter by reason of unbelief Unbelief on our part doth keep us from Christ but hinders not on God's part that effectually draws all the Elect justifying of them and working Faith in them Rom. 8.29 30. Eph. 1. The whole Unregenerate state is a Barr till God break it by Regeneration which is a free Work of Grace as Justification is an Act of Grace and must be found where-ever a Sinner is Justifyed by Faith and that in
Question if it be not Faith it self that is meant The Context is so far from relieving our Understandings that it contributeth to our unavoidable Deceit and Ignorance Read over the Texts and put but Christ's Righteousness every where instead of the word Faith and see what a Scandalous Paraphrase you will make the Scripture is not so audaciously to be corrected Calvin Now I shall shew you how by the Orthodox Protestants this Doctrine of Neonomanism hath been opposed as Antichristian and Destructive to the Grace of God Pemble's Treat of Justif c. 2. p. 164. fol. The Learned Mr. Pemble gives the Anatomy of this Doctrine after that he had shewed that Faustus Socinus Michael Servetus Christophorus Ostodorus and Arminius were the Forgers next to the Jesuits and Propagators of this Doctrine Armin. saith he branches out his Opinion in three distinct Propositions 1. Justitia Christi Imputata nobis Christ's Righteousness is Imputed to us 2. Justitia Christi non Imputata in Justitiam the Righteousness of Christ is not Imputed for Righteousness 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere Imputatur in Justitiam Believing it self is Imputed for Righteousness We now meddle with the last more roundly expressed Ipsum fidei Actum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere Dito Imputari in Justitiam Armin. Epist ad Hippolitum idque sensu proprio non Metonymecè The same is the Opinion of his Fellows the Remonstrants of Voetius Peter Bertius Episcopius c. with whom Bellarmine agrees in the Interp. of Rom. 4. de Justific c. 17. lib. 1. In summ their Opinion runs thus God in the Legal Covenant required exact Gbedience of his Commandment but now in the Covenant of Grace he requires Faith which in his gracious estimations stands instead of that Obedience to the Moral Law which we ought to perform Which comes to pass by the Merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect Faith to be perfect Obedience This Assertion exactly Neonomianism and in place thereof we defend this Proposition God doth not Justifie a Man by Faith properly imputing unto him Faith in Christ for his perfect Obedience to the Law and therefore accounting him Just and Innocent in his sight which we prove by these Reasons I 'll but name them 1. We are not Justified by any Work of our own though given by Grace but believing is an act of our own Ergo not by believing The Major is manifest by Scripture which teach we are saved by Grace Eph. 2.5 Tit. 3.6 Rom. 11.6 The Minor is evident that Faith is a Work of ours for though John 6.29 Christ saith this is the Work of God c. yet our Adversaries will not conclude thence that Faith is God's Work within us and not our Work by his help for they 'l say It 's not God believes and Christ repents c. They have two shifts 1. We are not Justified by any Work of our own done by our own strength but by the Aid of Grace A. This distinction of Works done without Grace and Works done by Grace was devised by one that had neither Wit nor Grace being a trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as exclude them indefinitely to our Justification c. Wherefore it s without all ground in Scripture thus to Interpret these Propositions A Man is not Justified by Works i. e. by Works done by the Power of Nature before and without Grace A Man is Justified by Grace i. e. by Works done by Aid of Grace 2. They say We are not Justified by any Works of our own i. e. by any Works of the Law but by a Work of the Gospel such as Faith is we may be Justified by there 's no ground in Scripture for this distinction nor in reason for both tell us that Works commanded in the Law and in the Gospel are one and the same for the substance of them Luke 10.27 Deut. 6.5 What Sin against the Gospel that is not a Transgression of the Law Is Charity one doth not the Law command it Is Faith one doth not the Law enjoyn the same Obj. But it commands not Faith in Christ A. It doth for that which commands us in general to believe commands us to believe whatever God shall make known to us Arg. 2. God only accounts that perfect Righteousness of the Law which is so in deed and in truth but Faith is not the perfect fulfilling of the Law Ergo Here our Neonomians will except and say They differ from the Arminians in saying That Christ only hath merited that our Imperfect Righteousness shall be accepted instead of perfect which hath worser absurdity in it as shall appear Arg. 3. We are not Justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two divers Subjects but if we are Justified by Christ's Righteousness and the VVork of Faith we are Justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two Subjects Ergo. I shall only leave with you the Opinion of the Orthodox Protestants concerning Justification by Faith who have strenuosly opposed the Papists Socinians Arminians and Neonomians in this Point He is Justified by Faith who excludes the Righteousness of VVorks Calv. Instit lib. 3. c. 111 de Justific fidei and apprehends the Righteousness of Christ wherewith being cloathed in the sight of God he appears not as a Sinner but Justified So that we Interpret Justification simply an Acceptance whereby God doth account us for Righteous Ones who are received into his Favour and we say That it i. e. Acceptio Acceptance is placed in the Remission of Sins and Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ Justification hath two parts Remission of Sins and Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Mr. Perkins in the Order and Causes of Salv. c. 37. p. 81. Remission of Sins is that part of Justification whereby he that believes is freed from the Guilt and Punishment by the Passion of Christ Colos 1.21 22. 1 Pet. 2.24 Imputation of Righteousness is the other part of Justification whereby such as believe having the Guilt of their Sins covered are accounted Just in the fight of God through the Righteousness of Christ 2 Cor. 5.21 Psal 32.1 Rom. 4. tot cap. Phil. 3.8 9. The form of Justification is as it were a kind of Translation of the Believers Sins unto Christ and again Christ's Righteousness unto the Believer by a Reciprocal and Mutual Imputation Justification is the Gracious Sentence of God whereby for the sake of Christ apprehended by Faith Ames Medul c. 27. he absolves a Believer from Sin and Death and counts him Righteous Rom. 3.22 24. § 17 18. Christ is the adequate Object of Faith as it justifies Faith also upon no other account justifies but as it apprehends that Righteousness for which we are justified and that Righteousness is not in the Truth of any Axiom to which we give Assent but in Christ alone who was made Sin for us that we may be the Righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5.21 Hence those Sermons in
with a Connexion of Promises and Threats and so performed as such only are legal and must be reckoned as belonging to the Law of Works but all Evangelical Duties are performed from a Principle of Grace and not for Reword or Fear But let us hear your Proof Neonom Who can doubt this if they consider 1. The Covenant of Innocency promised to nothing below sinless and perfect Obedience D. W. p. 104. Antinom It promised to Man upon Obedience which God required and so it is in every Covenant the Obedience required is perfect in respect of the Covenant let it be more or less that is required No Covenant admits of any Abatement or Defect in the Conditions required 2. If this be a Covenant of Innocency your Covenant opposed to it must be a Covenant of Nocency because as you say it admits of a contrary Condition viz. A sinful Obedience Neonom The Threatnings of the Covenant of Innocency admitted no Repentance or after-relief to the Guilty They did fix the Curse irrevocable in case of any Transgression Antinom Who told you the Covenant of Works would admit of no Relief for the Guilty if not how came any How came it to pass that Relief was given before the Sentence was passed upon Man Surely if the Covenant could not admit of it by Vertue of it's Constitution it could not have been just with God to have given it 2. As to Repentance it did naturally belong to the Breach of God's Law and Man's falling into Misery Indeed it did not admit of Repentance as an Expiation of the Sin and a Condition of Life no more doth the Gospel so that Law and Gospel are agreed in that 3. And as to the irrevocable fixing of the Curse grant it was so yet not without admitting a Relief provided it might consist with the irrevocable Curse i. e. That the Law might have it's full Satisfaction both to Sufferings and Obedience as it had in Christ the Sentence of the Law is not repealed or revoked in the Covenant of Grace but confirmed and fulfilled whereby the Guilty have their Relief The Law is not against the Promise Gal. 3.21 No God forbid it 's well pleased with it because it hath all that it can require The Law is not dispensed with in saving Sinners it hath it's Ends Christ being the end of the Law for Righteousness to all that believe The Gospel establisheth the Law Neonom 2. No Overture of Life or door of Hope or Argument to Conversion with Hopes of Acceptance could be framed out of those Legal Threats and Promises Turn ye Turn ye was not the Language Antinom Nor from any other upon Terms of the like Nature viz. Do and Live And why was it that no Door of Hope is open to Man fallen upon those Terms it was because he â—id not do and now is dead and he must live now before he can do till Grace give Life it 's but a Conviction to him that God faith Turn you Turn you for till God give him Life and turn him Turn you turn you is but the Triumph of the Law and all the Turnings of a poor Sinner in his Natural Estate is no more than the turning of a Dead Carcase it 's dead still there 's no returning to Life by turning till the effectual Voice of Christ prevail who is the Resurrection and the Life Neonom See any one of the Calls to Faith and Repentance or Holiness thus back'd with Promises and Threats be not Evangelical Antinom Calls to Faith and Repentance as Commands to Sinners to perform the Acts and Duties thereof upon Threats and Promises and as those Works that shall bring us into Covenant are so far from being Evangelical as they are highly Legal yea super-legal 1. Legal for it makes a Covenant of Works What matter if God require not the same Individual Act as a Condition of Life if he require another What if instead of forbearing to eat an Apple the Condition be now to forbear the eating of a Pear What if perfect Obedience was then required and imperfect now Both were Obedience only now you 'll have a Dispensation for Sin to come into the Condition which reflects upon the Holiness and Justice of God or Power of God that he did not nor could give us Life in a way of perfect Obedience and sinless but must have Recourse to sinful Likewise the only Obligation that lies upon a meer natural Man to obey God when he commands Faith and Repentance is the Law for he is under no other Law but that of Works 2. It is also super-legal 1. To bring fallen Man into Covenant upon working Conditions is more than was with Adam he did not work himself into Covenant God took him freely into Covenant without Conditions all the Condition was Perseverance for keeping him in Covenant as yours is 2. God here requires Works where there 's no Power God gave Adam the Power before he required Obedience Calvin In my Approbation Gentlemen you do but lose time Mr. Antinom argues at a mighty low rate I will take his Position and put it into right Terms and then see Mr. Antinom how you like it Salvation by Gospel-Grace is so necessary to a Sinner for the working Faith Obedience Good Works and Perseverance in the way to Heaven that without it he cannot perform them or continue in them Antinom So I like it well Neonom That 's quite contrary to my Sence For I do not say that Salvation by Grace is the Cause of sincere Faith and Obedience and Perseverance but that Sincerity in Performance of Faith and Obedience with Perseverance is necessary as a Cause of Salvation I spake before of coming into Justification by qualifying Faith and Repentance by the Government ef a Rule of Righteousness and Misery our Minds being thereby affected with Hopes and Fears I will now shew you that by this Gospel-Constitution Persevering Holiness sincere Obedience or good Works are necessary to Salvation D. W. p. 137. Antinom I have told you that if these be right i. e. True Gospel-Holiness they be a great part of Salvation and they are no more necessary than a Part is to the Whole All Graces and Duties are the necessary parts of a saved Sinner And there are two sorts of Necessaries Essentially necessary and Necessary as to well-being as Anima rationalis is essentially necessary to a Man But there are many things as to Integrity Ornaments and Usefulness Now I say as these things are in Salvation or belonging to it for being in their kind for well-being Usefulness Adorning c. so they are necessary But if you look upon them and Salvation as two distinct things they are not necessary to give you right to any part of Salvation Neonom He that made Faith necessary to Justification hath made Obedience necessary to Salvation Antinom It seems by you Justification and Salvation are specifically distinct which they are not they differ but as Genus and Spectes
them to such an end as you ascribe to them 4. Lastly You despise therein the Lord Jesus in giving that which is his place alone to your Graces and Duties Neonom All Promises and Threats in the Word directed as Motives to Obedience are foolish if we must not intend obtaining our own good by our Obedience Antinom Are they so You are not the first that hath reckoned the Gospel Foolishness and reproached the Grace of God God hath chosen these foolish things to confound such Wise Men as you are that can undertake to teach Christ a better Gospel c. Neonom How are they Arguments with the Will if we must not aim at Advantage in doing Duty Antinom It is one thing to have advantage by Gift and another thing to have such an Eye to it as to look upon our selves as Earners of it by our Work A Child that knows his Father hath settled an Inheritance upon him and will provide for him till he is of Age to take Possession is there no Motive to him to be dutiful to his Father but an intending more gain and advantage to himself Must his Father pay him for every Errand he runs and Job of Service he doth Must he look upon himself as Earning and Deserving his Dinner every day and for every Duty and Service his Father must say Oh! thank thee my Son I will remember this Service to give thee advantage for it Or else this Child will be sullen and dogged and say What pâ—ofit is there in serving my Father Such Christians as these you would make Neonom Christ calls with such Motives Mat. 11.28 Ezek. 18.32 1 Pet. 5.2 4. Antinom Mat. 11. He Invites Sinners to come to him for rest he would give it them he says not Go to your Works and Duties for Rest I am not against your taking all Motives from Christ and the Riches of his Grace but I am against Burning Incense to our own Drags as you would have us Thaâ— place of Ezekiel you mention is nothing to your purpose for turning and living there is the same thing And whereas you say What influence hath such pleas As 1 Pet. 5.2 4. 1 Tim. 2.12 Colos 3.34 Peter calls himself a Partaker i. e. by Faith of the Glory to be revealed and he chargeth other Elders to feed the Flock and take the Charge not by constraint but freely and willingly and not mercenarily but as he himself was taught by Christ Lovest thou me feed my Sheep and he saith When the chief Shepherd shall appear you shall receive a Crown of Glory which he hath purchased and promised not which they earned and gained by their working So Paul fought and ran 2 Tim. 4.7 8. not expecting to receive a Crown as due to him for Fighting and Running but as by Faith beholding it purchased for him and ensured to him in the Promise therefore he says It 's a depositum laid up for him even before his running and so for all other Believers as well as he he expected not to make an additional advantage to what he saw laid up for him already or thereby to make it surer than the Promise had already made it and as for other places where Duties are called for and ensuing Benefits promised it 's but a Connexion of the Promised Grace in the Covenant under something different Notions of particular Commands and Promises whereas Duties there are Promises and Gifts of Grace and both together Grace upon Grace from the fulness of Christ not that one hath in it a vertue to gain the other which the Spiritual Man understands and Christ dispenseth Grace in the Word of his Grace in this manner more humano which is of use to the weak many times when he teacheth them to walk as Ephraim by the Conduct of a Spirit of Bondage whilst they labour under weak and staggering Faith but such a frame and weak Understanding of the Truth ought not to be commended as a Vertue and such Weaklings are to be brought as soon as may be to more solid Understanding and higher Principles to act from and more Noble Aims and Designs to the Glory of God in Christ Neonom The Spirit of God approveth of Holy Mens regard to their own advantage Antinom Yes for the whole Gospel is a Sinners advantage or else it were sad and they must see it or else they will never embrace it but they are to see all this advantage is founded in Christ and conveyed by Promise and Free Gift to the Praise and Glory of God Eph. 1.6 7 8 12 19 20. Neonom Moses Heb. 11.26 had respect to the recompence of reward and this is given as the very cause why he esteemed the Reproach of Christ above the Treasures of Egypt Antinom I have given an account of that place already it 's said by Faith Moses did what he did by Faith refusing the World chusing and esteeming Christ his great Treasure and greater than all Riches and Honours even the Reproach and Cross of Christ for in believing he Eyed Christ himself who was his to be the great recompence of Reward he had enough to carry him through all difficulties having Christ and God in Christ and this was the reason of his Perseverance for he endured as seeing him that is Invisible he did not see him that is Invisible as a Reward of his Perseverance but he endured because he saw him Neonom Paul governed himself by these regards 1 Cor. 9.17 24. 2 Cor. 4.16 17. Antinom Paul made it his business in preaching the Gospel to obtain the Ends of the Gospel but he doth anticipate all that you would gather from his Discourse 1 Cor. 9.17 for ver 16. he saith For though I preach the Gospel I have nothing to glory of and when he speaks of his Reward ver 18. truely it is as much as to say I look for none for my Work sake not so much as from Men my Reward is that I make it without Charge that as it comes freely from Christ so also from me he much less had any Mercenary Expectations of Reward from God c. And ver 23. and all he doth for the Gospel sake that he might be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his participation of the Grace of the Gospel was as much as he looked for therefore he would not run at uncertrinty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by Faith in the Promise as looking unto Jesus the Author and Finisher of his Faith Heb. 12.2 As to that place 2 Cor. 4.16 For which cause we faint not what is the cause It 's in the verse preceding 14 15. The Spirit of Faith was the cause Whereby knowing that he that raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise us also by Jesus for all things are for your selves that the abundant Grace might through the Thanksgiving of many redound to the Glory of God for which cause we faint not viz. from the abundant Grace apprehended by the Spirit of Faith and looking at things
Antinom Very good then sure if the Spirit be an Earnest of Glory it 's an Evidence of Glory for what is a greater Evidence of a state than an Earnest Yea you say it 's also a Witness of our state if it be a Witness it is by a Testimony and if it bear Testimony and such an one as we take to be a Witness to our state it is something to this purpose Christ is thine thy Sins are Forgiven it must witness something that may beget in the Soul a joyful sence of its reconciled state there contrary to you Assurance must come in the immediate objective Revelation of the Spirit by the Spirits speaking in the Promise believed God is thy God Christ is thine thy Sins are taken away or something to this purpose Neither is this absurd to say the Spirit speaks thus ordinarily by a Voice because it is so interpretatively the Lord speaks when he causeth his Word to speak effectually unto the Heart and whatever Truth of God is made efficacious by the Spirit the Spirit speaks by it If any word of Promise become a truely comforting Word the Spirit as Comforter speaks by it you have granted us here in a manner as much as we can desire in this Point excepting an Equivocating Expression viz. as a Worker of Grace and whatever Evasion you have there this I will say that you make the Spirit an Evidence in its Efficiency it self as an Efficient whereas Signs and Marks are but Evidences as Effects And is not the Spirit received in its first sensible Efficiency in and by the Promise a great Evidence Gal. 3.3 2 Pet. 1.3 Neonom Nor whether the Spirit witnesseth by and with the Conscience in the manifestation of our Graces for Assurance Calvin It is a strange thing that you should make such a loud Cry in the World against a Man for Errour when you in a manner say the same thing and the Word of God asserts it so positively that the Spirit is the Comforter and witnesseth with our Spirits that we are his Children and you say as the Worker of Grace i. e. of all Grace and therefore of this Grace and if it works it must be by some Word of Peace that it speaks and is believed and you say it witnesses by and with the Conscience the Conscience speaking in and by the Spirit and how is the Conscience made to speak Peace more than by the sprinkling of the Blood of Christ whereby an Evil Condemning Conscience is taken away what manifestation of Grace works Peace most the manifestation of the Grace of Christ or of our Graces And these must appear to be the Graces of Christ and slow from him or else they are no Graces the Witness of the Spirit and the Intelligible believed Voice of the Spirit particularly applying the Declaration of the Gospel of Peace must be in all and is the most settled ground of all comfortable Assurance Neonom Nor whether the Spirit of God may in some Extraordinary Cases give an immediate Testimony by a Voice or some Equivalent Impressions D. W. p. 164. Antinom 1. You grant that sometimes the Spirit may witness by Voice or Equivalent Impressions 2. The Extraordinary Cases you here speak of must be meant of some not so usual in an ordinary way 3. I would know whether then the Spirit is to be believed and how its Voice may be distinguished from the Voice of a False Spirit 4. Whether when you speak of a Voice you mean an Articulate sound or such a still Voice as the Spirit speaks by which is an Impression of Gospel Truth with a particular application to the Soul this as you say is Equivalent to a Voice and it is the Eccho of the Word of Promise in the Heart and this is not an Extraordinary nor unusual way bringing Souls to settled Peace and Comfort Neonom But then there was the Truth of Grace though it was doubted before and nothing utterly inconsistent with true Grace either in the Heart nor then appeareth to the Conscience Antinom So that there is first a Witness from our selves before there 's Witness from the Spirit but how comes it that this Witness from our selves hath not Credit enough with it to be believed For if it hath whence comes doubting Here 's truth of Grace and nothing appears to the contrary and yet the Person doubts Doth any Man doubt of any thing when he apprehends nothing to the contrary And you say there 's the Truth of Grace before the Spirit witnesseth who wrought this truth of Grace do you not say that it witnesseth to our state as a Worker of Grace Neonom I will tell you where the true difference lyes 1. Whether none attain Assurance but by the Inward Voice of the Spirit pronouncing the Actual Forgiveness of Sins without manifesting their true Grace and Sanctification This you affirm and I deny Antinom You should have made the first Question whether any Assurance is attainable till Death because Perseverance is one of your Infallible Marks and all others signifie nothing unless we can take up upon that and that must run out to the last moment before we can 2. We affirm that there can be no Assurance without knowledge that our Sins are Forgiven assign an Assurance without it if you can and your Assurance from marks must come to this if it be Assurance 3. This must be by the Spirits pronouncing of it or no way when you have found all that you can it 's God must speak peace or else it will never be and Peace of Reconciliation however you Banter God's Reconciling the World and the Spirits bringing home the Word of Reconciliation 4. Who ever spake of the Spirits manifesting Forgiveness without manifestation of the whole Grace of God that brings Salvation in Sanctification as well as Justification both comes under the Witness of the Spirit and therefore you are besides the Question and state it not right Neonom The next Question is Whether the usual way of attaining Assurance is by the Conscience upon Tryal discerning and concluding through the help of the Spirit that a Man hath those Graces or Signs which describe a Man Blessed and Pardoned according to the Gospel This I affirm and you deny Antinom 1. That I deny Sanctification to be a sign of Justification is false for that which is an undoubted Effect is a sign of the Cause and an Argument of it to conclude it by 2. It 's not the Question whether it be not the usual way of attaining Assurance de facto such Gospel Preachers as you are still putting them upon this way and telling them there 's no other safe way 3. The Question is whether this be the only way Whether another way ought not to go first Neonom I will now confirm the Truth by some Arguments 1. This is the way that God appoints to attain Assurance 2 Cor. 13.5 2 Pet. 1.10 Antinom This is one way who denies it and a Duty
find it otherwise c. Answ There is not one Fit of Sadness in any Believer whatsoever but he is out of the way of Christ to which I add as follows which he mentions not I mean in his Fits of Sadness in respect of his jealousness of his present and future State he is out of the way of Christ he enjoys not him as he ought while he is in such fits therefore the Apostle puts Believers upon rejoycing always Phil. 4.4 There is matter of nothing but joy in him while theâ—e is mournings in Believers there is meltings in those mournings and more joy in mourning of a Believer than in all the mirth of a wicked Man Believers weep for joy according to the Proverb and never mourn more kindly than when they see the joy of the Holy Ghost in the freeness and fulness of the Lord Christ poured out upon them there is never any more kindly mourning for sin than that mourning when the Soul is satisfied of forgiveness of sins I say the Soul is first satiâ—fied with forgiveness of sins i. e. it ought to mourn in the faith of forgiveness if the mourning be kindly and of a Gospel-nature before there is that real kindly mouring in those that are Believers Gentlemen I crave your Pardon that I give you the trouble of hearing me repeat so much of my former Discourses but I am fain to do it for my vindication he having so rent and tore my Sermons in sunder on purpose to expose them and my Name yea I wish that were all that it be not the very Gospel-grace itself that he bears such a spleen to else sure he would never make such a scorn of solemn and serious Truths of Christ Neonom I shall not spare you for your Whining you say God doth no longer stand offended nor displeased though a Believer after he is a Believer sin often Dr. C. p. 15. Antinom I was shewing from John 14.6 that Christ is the way the only and effectual and infallible way from all the wrath of God to all that do receive him 1. From the affection of Wrath Let me tell you would to God you could receive it according to the manifest evidence of Scripture God doth no longer stand offended with a Believer tho' a Believer after he be a Believer doth sin often And where is the Believer that doth not sin often when he hath once received Christ and unto them God saith Anger is not in me Isa 47.4 and Isa 53. He shall see of the travel of his soul and he shall be satisfied i. e. pacified The travel of the Soul of Christ makes God such amends for the sinfulness of all Believers that he can no longer stand offended and displeased with them if God remain offended with them there is yet some of their sinfulness to be taken away Except God will be offended where there is no cause to be offended which is Blasphemy to speâ—k he will not be offended with Believers for I say he hath no cause to be offended with a Believer You must understand always quoad Deum as to God he being satisfied because he doth not find the sin of a Believer to be the Believer's own sin but he finds it the sin of Christ i. e. by way of Imputation so I always mean He was made Sin for us he laid the Iniquities of us all upon him the Blood of Christ cleanseth us from all Sin he bear our Sins in his own Body on the Tree but if he bear our Sins he must bear the displeasure for them nay he did bear the Displeasure the Indignation of the Lord and if he did bear the Indignation of the Lord either he did bear all or but a part if he did not bear all the Indignation of the Lord then he doth not save to the uttermost those that come to God by him Heb. 4. I say not to the uttermost because here is some offence some indignation left behind and for lack of taking of this indignation upon himself it lights and falls upon Believers so that you must say Christ is an imperfect Saviour and hath left some scattering Wrath behind that will light on the head of a Believer c. Calvin I pray Mr. Neonomian what is the Truth in this Point It is you must set us right and shew us all our Mistakes Neonom Truth The Sins of Believers have the loathsomness of Sin adhering to them which God sees and accounts the committers guilty thereby D. W. p. 170. Antinom What do you mean by the loathsomness of Sin Is not Sin in all its respects loathsom and is it not loathsom as it is contrary to the preceptive part of the Holy Law Is there any fine sweet precious part of Sin Did not Christ bear Sin of the deepest die most loathsom Sins Is it any otherwise loathsom than as a Transgression of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this was that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Christ took away 1 Joh. 3. But how not that they were subjectively removed from us but that the inherency of them in great measure remains in us and God knows it but before the eye of Justice all sin of a Believer as he stands under the Sanction of the Law is taken away i. e. as to the Condemnation and Wrath that belongs unto him he is freed from it by the Blood and Satisfaction of Christ Neonom And they ought to charge themselves with it so as to stir up themselves to repentance and renew their actings of Faith on Christ for forgiveness Antinom They ought to be always sensible of and humbled for the constant indwelling and frequent breaking forth of their Sins and Corruptions but always beginning in the Faith of the Blood and Satisfaction of Christ and therefrom exercise Repentance and Humiliation or else their Humiliation and Repentance will not be of a right nature nor attain a right end and we own such Actings of Faith and Repentance ought often to be renewed by the best of God's Children Neonom Nevertheless they ought not thereby to fear their being out of a justified state Antinom Therefore to believe they are in a justified estate and not to cast off the spirit of adoption and betake themselves to a spirit of bondage and if they ought to believe their justified state then they ought to believe their freedom from condemnation for a justified state and a state of condemnation are the highest in opposition indeed privantia the one totally expels the other Neonom They must not fear their justification further than their faults give them just cause of suspecting that sin hath dominion over them and that their first believing on Christ was not sincere Antinom As to suspicion of the truth of believing our way is not to charge sin upon ourselves as lying under the Wrath of God for it this will work in us the highest despair or such degrees of unbelief as tend thereto but in case of such
he must have a new justification upon the commitment of some sins which the first did not reach 2. Whether the general Exercise of Faith and Repentance so far as to answer the Gospel-rule be a sufficient Condition for Justification from some Sins and not from all Calvin Well now Gentlemen we have danc'd pretty fairly about this Point with your Whethers let us dance back again or else we shall be giddy and the World turn round with us Neonom My Brains are more setled than so I will lead him another dance yet Mr. Antinomian come dance with me again you know little of my mind yet I will tell you the real differences 1. Whether an elect sinner be at any time a guilty person in God's esteem This you deny and I affirm I have proved it in our Debate 1 3 7 12. D. W. p. 174. Antinom This is not fair you have taken a great leap back to begin with from a Believer to an Elect Person which you say you have proved in former Debates we have answered and therefore need not harp always on one string Neonom Whether the Remains of Sin defile us This I affirm and the Doctor denies against all Protestants who prove it of Original Sin against the Papists Antinom If you understand defilement as to our Justification I say the remains of Sin do not defile us if it be understood in respect of Sanctification you 'l see Gentlemen that I shall assert Sin 's defilement of the best of our Duties so much that it makes them as Dung and yet this Neonomian is so audacious as to say this he affirms and the Doctor denies and that he goes with the Protestants when every ordinary Christian may see that he goes with the Papists in every thing and opposeth me in this point of the Saints defilement by sin Neonom Whether a justified person falling into gross Enormities is defiled thereby and contracts guilt upon himself thereby This the Doctor denies and I do affirm Antinom You have not proved one word that was said of the guilt of a justified person i. e. it 's one thing to contract guilt of Conscience and another thing to be judicially condemned Said you not but just now that God may present to a Christian's view former sins for further humblings where he doth not judicially charge sin a Believer may have guilt then upon his Conscience and not be guilty before God 2. Do you not say a Believer ought not to question his Justification but upon such causes as make him question his state and truth of Faith 3. Where is it that I say any sin doth not defile especially gross Enormities if they need the fresh applications of the Blood of Christ by Faith they do defile and defile Conscience too but the Blood of Christ reaching the Conscience in believing washeth away this guilt and defilement where your humblings and resolves will not Neonom Whether God esteems the repeated Abominations of Believers not to be their own Crimes and they not to be sinners but they are Christ's sins This the Doctor affirms and I deny Antinom Your affirmation and negation is not worth troubling ourselves about were it not to undeceive such as are deluded by you we have told you our minds already sufficiently about that we do affirm That all Sins and Abomination of every Elect Person was laid on Christ by God and accounted his Judicially and that in justification the Justified Person hath not his sins not one from the first moment of his justification imputed unto him before God whatsoever contracted guilt he may have upon his Conscience at any time by reason of relapses is but God's presenting former or present sins to his view for his humbling without judicial charging of him in the Court of Heaven Neonom Whether a justified person upon new Provocations is charged by God and ought to charge himself as guilty and defiled so as in God's appointed way to repent believe and renew his Covenant and be earnest with God for forgiveness This the Doctor denies and I affirm Antinom In part I deny it and in part I do not 1. A justified Person upon new Provocations is not charged by God as under and liable to the condemnation of the Law under Wrath and Curse 2. It 's one thing to confess guilty to the Fact and confess a Man's self under the Sentence the former ought to be but the other ought not A Man that 's a Felon may come to the Bar and confess himself guilty when he hath the Pardon in his Pocket Do we not assert that it 's our duty to confess sin repent c. but these things must flow from Faith fix'd on the pardoning Mercy of God in Christ or else all our Humblings and Resolves what do they signifie Do we not assert Faith and Repentance renewing our Covenant is exerted in God's way and not yours Neonom Whether all Sins past present and to come are actually pardoned at once This you affirm and I deny Antinom Among all these Enquiries about the state of the Question I think you are nearest to it now for now you speak plainest and I shall speak my mind as plainly that all a justified Persons sins are pardoned at once as well those that are to be committed as they that are committed already Neonom Whether God hath required new Exercises of Faith and Repentance for their actual Pardon This you deny and I affirm Antinom He requireth not new Exercises of Faith and Repentance as federal Conditions of actual Pardon it is always in and through and for the sake of Christ at first and afterward and by Faith renewed this Grace is manifested anew unto the Soul and Repentance follows thereupon as a Fruit thereof Pardon renewed to justified ones is but in taking of the present view of their sins as you say that God hath set before them he makes them to hear joy and gladness Psal 5.8 i. e. a repeated manifestation of their Pardon in believing Neonom Whether a Believer ought to be assured of the Forgiveness of his repeated Provocations just when he hath committed them and before he hath humbled himself renewed actings of Faith on Christ repeated his Covenant prayed for Pardon for Christ's sake as after he hath thus done This you affirm and I deny Antinom This that I affirm is That there is the same ground of believing Pardon in Christ to a justified one before his Confessions and Humblings as after 2. That his assurance of Pardon after these Humblings is not grounded upon them but the Promise and his free and full Justification 3. That he is to betake himself to these Humblings in Faith of the Promise of Pardon or else all the rest will leave him as they find him 4. And after you have muddied and confounded the clear Gospel as much as you can you tell us there must be a renewing our actings of Faith in Christ and praying for Pardon for Christ's sake which
exprest he means that Justification and Eternal Salvation is the Portion of such the positive is included in the negative it 's God's condemnation only from which such as are in Christ are exempted they are nevertheless condemned and censured by Men and sometimes by their own Consciences And on Ver. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect c. Who can implead such or put in an accusation against them There is nothing to accuse them of they are justified And there is none to Accuse them it is God that hath Justified them the Supream Judge hath Absolved them This seems to be taken out of Isai 50.8 9. they were Christ's words there and spoken of God's justifying him and they are every Believer's words here intended of God's justifying them and seems to be from two reasons one implied i. e. God's electing them the other express'd God's justifying and acquitting them And on Ver. 34. Who is he that condemneth It is Christ that died c. His Death frees them from condemnation thereby he hath made a sufficient attonement and satisfaction for all their sins and which hath long ago satisfied in Heaven for the sins of all the Elect may very well serve to satisfie the Heart and Conscience of a believing sinner here on Earth such an one may throw down the Gantlet as the Apostle doth and challenge all the World let Conscience Carnal Reason Law Sin Hell and Devils let them all bring forth what they can it will not be sufficient for condemnation and that because of Christ's Death and Satisfaction Dr. Jacomb on Rom. 8.1 saith we read it no condemnation the Original will bear it if we read it not one condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such is the Grace of God to Believers and such is their safety in their justified estate that there is not so much as one condemnation to be passed upon them suppose a condemnatory Sentence for every Sin I 'm sure every Sin deserves such a Sentence and in point of merit 't is so many Sins so many Condemnations yet the Pardon being plenary and full every way adequate to the sinner's guilt the exemption of the pardoned person from condemnation must be plenary and full too so that if there be not one sin unpardoned there is not one condemnation to be feared This now is dreadful Antinomianism with some Men Jer. 50.20 In those days the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for and there shall be none 'T is an Allusion to a Man that turns over all his Bonds searcheth into all the Debt-books to see if he can find any Debt due to him from such and such a Person but upon all his searching he cannot find so much as one Debt to charge upon him so 't is with a Pardoned and Justified Sinner Imagine that God should be inquisitive to find out some guilt as lying upon him he might indeed find out enough as he is in himself but as in Christ he is Pardoned and Justified there 's nothing to be found against him therfore no Condemnation What do you think now is it an Errour to say God sees no Iniquity in his People How can any dare to Curse where God Blesseth This is to do worse than Balaam DEBATE XVII Of the Hurt that Sin may do to Believers Neonom I call to mind a most dangerous and dicentious Position of this Antinomian and that is that Sin can do no hurt to Believers D. W. p. 181. His Errour is this Errour The grossest Sins that Believers can commit cannot do them the least harm neither ought they to fear the least hurt by their own Sins nor by National Sins yea tho' themselves have had a hand therein Antinom It is strange you should charge this is an Errour upon me when as it s your own Assertion but you know the old Proverb The Thief crys Cut-purse first In the very Second Conference he had this Assertion He is there shewing that there was no need that Christ should bear any more than the Punishment of Sin saying all that endangered us was the Threatning of the Law and this upon Agreement that upon his Attonement we should be released where is the need of more The Obliquity of the Fact as against the Precept shall not hurt when the Sanction of the Law is answered and therefore he that suffers as a Sponsor for another need not sustain in himself the filthiness of the Crime to make him capable of giving satisfaction Chap. 2. p. 11. But go on to your Proof Neonom He saith they need not be afraid of their Sins they that have God for their God there is no Sin that ever they commit can possibly do them hurt Therefore as their Sins cannot hurt them so there is no cause of fear in their Sins committed c. there is not one Sin nor all the Sins together of any Believer that can possibly do that Believer any real hurt This he attempts to prove from Rom. 7. D. W. p. 181. from Dr. Cr. p. 510. Antinom He hath left out my true sense and meaning in these words on purpose as he useth to do to render my Assertions unsound Having been saying that a Believer's Sins cannot hurt them I raised this Objection Some wiâ—l be ready to say This is strange Dr. C. p. 510. all the Evils in the World that come they grow up from the sinfulness of Men. If Man be afraid of any thing he should be afraid of Sin from whence all Evils do flow A. I Answered Beloved it is true Sin naturally is a Root of all manner of Evil Fruit observe Gentlemen the wages of Sin is Death but yet I say whatever Sin in its own nature brings forth yet the Sins of God s peculiar People they that have God for their own God their Sins can do them no hurt at all and in that regard there is no cause of fear of any of their Sins that ever they have committed This may seem harsh to some Spirits that misconceive my drift that I aim at which is not to encourage any one to Sin but to ease the Consciences of the distressed there 's not one Sin nor all their Sins can do them hurt real hurt I mean they may do them supposed hurt And I suppose the Apostle Rom. 7. doth personate a scrupulous Spirit Dr. C. p. 511. that a Believer under the multitude and prevalency of Corruption who was ready to Cry out O Wretched Man that I am who shall deliver me from the Body of this Death but saith he I thank God thro' Jesus Christ q. d. till a Man look to Christ there is nothing but matter of bitterness to be seen as the certain fruits of Sin and there can be nothing but bitterness in Sin in regard of the Evil that is like to follow it but when persons can once look to Christ the case is altered What doth he thank God
Doctor intends unless you equivocate as you are want to do Neonom You do not understand me I perceive I will tell you the real difference 1. It 's whether according to the Gospel-rule if a Believer should yield up himself to the dominion of Sin he should perish This I affirm and the Doctor denies against plain Texts directed to Believers Antinom 1. A denunciation of Death and Damnation is neither a Rule nor Gospel it 's very absurd to say that is a Rule if you live after the Flesh it 's but a condemnation of what 's contrary to the Rule and a denunciation upon a supposing of that Abberration from the Rule Suppositions are not always Positions that the thing supposed is ever in being and they are used by way of Argumentation because the Antecedent can't be therefore the Consequent can't be or because the Consequent can't be therefore the Antecedent can't be vice versa There 's in this kind of Arguing A Ponere or Tollere in respect of one part of the Proposition to take away or establish the other as now in the Proposition you boast of If a true Believer for so you should say yield up himself to the dominion of Sin he shall Perish but a true Believer shall not yield up himself to the Dominion of Sin therefore he shall not perish Make but the Proposition into a Syllogism that it may argue and it will prove that a true Believer shall not Perish because he shall not yield up himself to the dominion of Sin Rom. 6.12.14 2. I deny that the Apostle there speaks Chap. 8.13 of true Believers but useth an Argument to unhinge and loose Professors from vain hopes and to shew that they are not in Christ For vers 8. he saith They that are in the Flesh can't please God to such as are in the Flesh he opposeth them that are in the Spirit and having the Spirit of Christ are his Therefore he saith All such are Debtors to live after the Spirit and not after the Flesh for if ye that are Professors to live after the Spirit do really live after the Flesh you are in a perishing state you are in the Flesh Now the Apostle's arguing looks two ways 1. To prove they that are in Christ shall not die they that shall not live after the Flesh shall not die but a Believer in Christ shall not live after the Flesh Ergo he shall not dy 2. by way of discovery He that lives after the Flesh is in the Flesh and can't please God and therefore must die in that state if it continue But you or I live so therefore the Apostle speaks it by way of trial of the Truth of our state and in-being in Christ 3. Where is it that the Doctor speaks so favourably as you would have him of the dominion of Sin You have not referred to the place The nearest is pag. 429. where he hath these words Forget every thing that seems worthy in you or done by you and let all your triumphing and glorying be in the free Grace of God in Christ and look upon yourself only in that and nothing else as the Martyr did None but Christ none but Christ If you have more ability than others in doing let it not come into your Thoughts as an inducement to think better of yourself as if you were more accepted of God or pleasing in his sight Are you sinful in respect of the prevalency of Corruption Are the Temptations of Satan mighty Let it not come into your Thoughts that you are worse or less than others for Iniquity shall not part Christ and thee if thou be once joined to him Where is here the saying that if Sin hath dominion over a Believer he shall not perish But this is all along your way to forge the Horse-shooe first and then nail it to what Foot you please Neonom Whether a Believer falling into such Sins as Idolatry Murther c. ought not to aw his Soul against Security with lively Thoughts of Damnation and if he continue long herein ought not he to suspect the state of his Soul as in danger This I affirm and the Doctor denies Thereby he renders the Gospel-threatnings as urged by the Spirit on the hearts of Believers to be all foolish Antinom Where doth the Doctor lay down this Position by way of affirming or denying It 's only a Chimera of your own We leave such Believers to your management till the Grace of God change their Hearts and teach them better things 1. It 's very rare to find such true Believers that fall into such Sins and live securely in them 2. If nothing but lively thoughts of Damnation will keep him from such Sins and Security in them I shall leave him under the Sanction of your Gospel till it shall please God to call him into his Grace And surely he ought to suspect his state if nothing rowseth him but lively Thoughts of Damnation I should rather have said killing Thoughts of Damnation for when the Law comes Sin revives and the Sinner dies in the thoughts of Damnation But this is one of your new Terms of Art the lively Thoughts of Damnation it 's like your Rule of Sin c. And such stuff is your speaking of the urging of Gospel threatnings by the Spirit on the hearts of Believers as if Threatnings were Gospel or the Spirit of Grace and Adoption did work that way upon the hearts of Believers to produce Holiness viz. by urging Gospel-threatnings I am sure your Positions are exceeding foolish and absurd Neonom Whether Christ is at liberty sharply to afflict a justified Person for provoking Sins tho' he be secured against Soul-destroying Judgments This I affirm and the Doctor denies Antinom You affirm That Christ satisfied Justice therefore as your Afflictions are not expiatory in whole or part therefore they are not for Sin in that sense that you urge for Sin And who is it that says Christ is not at liberty to afflict them for Sin in another sense Sin being the cause and the root of all evil Fruits that spring up in the Faithful Therefore there must be mortifying of it as well as satisfying for it God doth not afflict his Children for Sin by way of satisfaction but for the mortifying of it and who saith Christ is not at liberty so to do And thus you go on imposing upon us what you please Neonom Whether a Believer falling into great Sins ought to fear God's present Rebukes for such Sins This I affirm and the Doctor denies Antinom He ought patiently to bear present Rebukes it 's not proper to say he should fear them yea he ought always to maintain a filial fear of God and his Goodness not to live in a slavish fear and avoid Sin for fear of the lash he ought always to have a due Gospel fear to preserve him from Sin even when he doth not fall into great Sins and if its only the fear of punishment that
say he means not this Hurt in respect of the Nature of Sin and if so it must be in respect of the real pernicious Effects of Sin for a Believer sees Hurt in Sin and complains of it but as to its Nature which is odious in itself or to its Effects 2. It appears that you judge his meaning is such because you say that by his Doctrin of Christ beaâ—ing Sin he makes Sin innocent to the Elect Whereby 1. You make the nocency of Sin to lye in the punishment of it and thereby justifie Dr. Crisp's Expression how unproper soever it be or erroneous 2. You say totidem verbis that Penal Effects of Sin are most of the hurt that comes by it according to what Doctrin we have already charged you with supra The great sign of the truth of Grace that is usually given is the fear and hatred of Sin from the very nature of it its contrariety to God and his Law and that its the greatest sign of an Hypocrite to abstain from it only for fear of Wrath and Hell And 3. You tell us upon what Principles he goes 1. That God hath no Sin to charge upon an Elect Person tho' a Man sins God reckons not his Sin to him c. Whereby you shew where your grudge is it 's against the Doctrin of Imputation more than against the Doctor for any thing he hath said As for your Instance about poisoned Wine you say yourself he speaks not by way of Exhortation but Doctrinally therefore exhorts none to take poisoned Wine but cautions them against it again and again and as for any that have through weakness and inadvertency he tells them their Antidote as the Apostle John 1st Epist c. 2. 1. My little children these things I write unto you that you sin not and if any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is a propitiation for our sins DEBATE XVIII Of God's Displeasure for Sin in the Afflictions of his People Neonom THE next great Antinomian Errour is That none of the Afflictions of Believers have in them the least of God's displeasure against their Persons for their Sins D. W. p. 190 191. Antinom We must proceed in our ordinary Method let us know what you ground your Charge upon Neonom He affirmeth p. 15. Except God will be offended when there is no cause to be offended he will not be offended with Believers because he doth not find the Sin of a Believer to be his own Sin but the Sin of Christ Antinom But he in the next words quotes places of Scripture to prove what he saith He hath made him Sin for us he hath laid upon him the Iniquities of us all the Blood of Jâ—sus Christ cleanseth us from all Sin he bare our Sins in his Body c. and from these he Argues thus If he bear our Sins he must bear the displeasure for them and he did bear the Indignation of the Lord and if so he did bear it all or but part If he did not bear all the Indignation of the Lord then he doth not save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him as Heb. 4. I say not to the uttermost because here is some Indignation and Displeasure left behind and for lack of taking this Indignation upon himself it lights and falls upon Believers So that either you must say Christ is an imperfect Saviour having left some scattering of Wrath behind that will fall on the head of a Believer Or else you will say he is a perfect Saviour and takes away all God's displeasure then there remains none of it upon the person of a Believer Now why had you not Answered his Argument for what he said yea why had you not brought in the next Objection made to clear up his meaning but quote only so much as may leave your Reader under Prejudice Object Yet you will say Is not God displeased and offended at the Sins of Believers when they do commit them Hath Christ taken away the offence of Sin by his Death Answ No therefore do not mistake your self there may be easily a mistake for lack of serious pondering the words I speak I have not said God is not offended with the Sins a Believer doth commit but that God stands not offended with the Persons of Believers for the Sins committed by them he hath that everlasting Indignation against Sin as ever And as there is the same contrariety in Sin against his nature so there is the same contrariety in God's nature unto Sin All contrarieties have a mutual contrariety against each other as Water and Fire c. As Sin is contrary to the nature of God so there is an Abhorrency of God to that Sinfulness here see with what ground you could say that Dr. C. makes Sin Innocent but there is no Offence of God to the Person that commits that Sin because the Offence of God for that Sin hath spent it self upon the Person of Christ there remains none of it to light upon the person of a Believer Christ having born all this Offence for Sin Tho' in our Natures and in the Sinfulness of them there is matter of displeasure yet in Christ for all this God is well pleased with us And yet there is none of God's Indignation against Sin lost in all this for he is satisfied for this his Offence in his Son more than in our own Persons Neonom And he saith p. 18. But are not the Afflictions for their Sins Antinom Come I will tell you he Answers that Objection He saith I Answer No Afflictions are unto Believers fâ—om Sin but not for Sin What is the meaning of that will you say This God in Afflicting Believers doth not intend to punish them as now laying on them the desert of their Sin for that is laid upon Christ but he doth Afflict them in part to be a help to preserve them from Sin I say all Afflictions to Believers are to keep them from Sin rather than Punishment unto them for Sin Neonom P. 170. He saith That at that Instant when God brings Afflictions upon them he doth not remember any Sins of theirs they are not in his Thoughts Antinom That which he Asserts is from plain Texts of Scripture how dare you Banter and Expose so great a Truth as this it is in that great place Jer. 31.33 declared to be the great promise of the Gospel by the Spirit of God Heb. 10.16 17. God saith He remembers our Sins no more you say he doth who are we to believe God or you Neonom He saith Christ being Chastened for our our Sins there 's nothing but Peace belongs to us P. 170. Antinom The Words were thus I see the Scripture runs wholy in this strain and is so full in nothing as in this that he hath generally discharged the Sins of Believers Oh then take heed of falling into the Errour of the Papists that say that God hath taken
that I do know still I do count them but as Dung that I may win Christ p. 126. There is nothing can be done in a Man that proveth him to be out of Wrath any farther than it proveth him to be in Christ In this Argument lyes all the strength that Christ is yours and that you are Christs what other Arguments otherwise you have that will not prove this Point are all but Fallacies and your Hopes are but Ropes of Sand. Dress up yourselves in the best Attire you have Vertue Civility Learning Excellent Parts let them paint over the rotten Face of corrupt Nature never so curiously will all this prove that you shall be saved The Apostle counteth all this but Stuff and Lumber Trash Loss and Dung for Christ Can you climb Heaven by any Ladder of Nature's erecting What Ladder reacheth to Heaven but Jacob's Ladder which was a Type of Christ p. 147. Let me come to the Graces of God's Spirit They prove that you are out of the state of Wrath that you shall be saved but how do they prove it Not as the causes thereof doth your Grace that is in you satisfie the Justice of God and redeem you from the Curse and pay the Ransom Is it your Title for Salvation Do you pretend to have him upon the Worth of your Graces Like a Man that 's questioned about his Land goes about to prove the worth of the Land by the wax with which his Deeds are sealed the Seal is more than the Wax therefore the Apostle saith not only we are translated but hereby we know we are translated Now how doth Grace signifie to you that you are out of Wrath As it evidences you to be in Christ and so the Sign bringeth you to the Cause If they prove but unto you the Work of Grace in your Heart and that you are in Christ you need ask them no more they have done enough they have setled you upon a sure ground The least Dram of Grace is worth a 1000 Tun of such kind of stuff of Moral Righteousness which may be in you and not prove you to be in Christ A little Seal is worth a Cart-load of Wax because it sealeth more to me than the Wax is worth so the least Dram of Grace wrought in a Man that is in Jesus Christ is worth a World of Moral Duties because it sealeth Evidences Pardon of Sin Favour with God therefore examine yourselves that you take not a Human-Faith for a Saving-Faith c. p. 148 149 150. V. 8 9. That I may be sâ—und in him that I may know him In these two Expressions is comprized that which he calls the gaining of Christ To be found in Christ that he referreth to Justification or the making a Sinner righteous before God therefore he saith not having mine own Righteousness but the Righteousness of God which is the Faith of Christ. To know Christ referreth to Sanctification as it is expressed in three things The Power of his Resurrection the Fellowship of his Sufferings Conformity to his Death p. 151 152. That I may be found in him c. In this Verse you have two great things expressed Union with Christ that I may be found in him Righteousness with God having the Righteousness of God There is a distribution of Righteousness into two sorts Legal Evangelical These two sorts are first described what they are Legal mine own Righteousness which is of the Law Evangelical the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Christ 2. Being described they are opposed the one to the other the one is of the Law the other is by the Faith of Christ they are set contrary because they cannot be had together 3. There is a disclaim of the one not having my own righteousness which is of the Law and an adherence to the other the righteousness of God by Faith in Christ Doct. 1. In the gaining or having of Christ the first thing is Union this word in Christ notes Union as 2 Pet. 3.14 Be diligent that ye may be found in him p. 156 157. Union must be before Communion Christ is a great Mystery Christ and his People are all like one great Tree he is the Stock and Root and they are the Twigs planted in that great Stock and they two live like one great Body as the Head and Members they are alike as Man and Wife are one flesh so Christ and his People are one Spirit as Man and Wife are one Person in Law so are Christ and all that are in him they cannot be cast into Hell because the Sentence must light upon Christ before it falleth upon them Antinom How doth this agree with your Doctrin That the state of Men in this Life is not eternally decided but they are in a State-Tryal as Subjects in Tryal for Eternity p. 55. of your First Book The grossest Divinity that ever Protestant delivered before which both the true Protestant Doctrin of Election and Redemption and Union to Christ must fall to the ground if it be true R. Vines I come to the 2d thing in the words the distribution of Righteousness into Legal and Evangelical Doct. There are two sorts of Righteousness Legal and Evangelical the one of the Law the other of the Gospel for that which we call Righteousness with God is the same which we call Gospel or Evangelical Righteousness which is plain Rom. 1.17 Now do not stumble at this do not think I mean as you do Mr. Neonom that there are two sorts of Righteousnesses which a Sinner may be justified by For by one Righteousness we are justified with God Rom. 5.18 But when I say there are two sorts it is to be understood thus there are but two sorts of Righteousnesses by which Life at any time hath been attained there never was a third Righteousness whereby a Man should be Righteous with God ever propounded to Man standing or falling Where 's your subordinate Righteousness now There are there have been there can be no more the own is his own the other is that which is called the Righteousness of God Now to describe these two sorts of Righteousness see Rom. 1.17 Rom. 10.10 11. These two doing and believing are the Characteristical Words that describe these two sorts of Righteousnesses of the Law and of the Gospel The Righteousness of the Law is only for the perfect Man that never sinned because it must be doing Neonom I could shew there 's no one saving Benefit granted to a Sinner but upon Supposition of his doing D. W. p. 230. Mr. R. Vines But I tell you the Righteousness of the Gospel is for a Sinner a Sinner overwhelmed and overspread with Sins Neonom But I say throughout my Divinity That the Gospel excludes Sinners and that the Righteousness of Christ belongs to none but those that are first meet for it Mr. R. V. The Righteousness of the Law is an exact compliance with the Law of God in every Tittle the Righteousness
Soul out of Hell So you see the difference that still we have it and yet we have it not But why is our own Righteousness that is inherent in us to be disclaimed 1. Because it is a way impossible for a Sinner to go to Heaven by or to be Righteous by that Ladder is too short tho' it seem long enough to you that have some Fragments of the Law 2. Not having it why Because there is another Righteousness and not this which is called the Righteousness of God There is another Adam and that Adam hath another Righteousness for all to believe in a Gospel Righteousness which is not of the Law There is another Covenant God hath appointed whereby a Sinner must be just now because there is another not this 3. Because one of these voids the other if I have the Righteousness of God then mine own is void if mine own then the Righteousness of God is void As the Apostle saith of Grace if Works not Grace and if Grace not Works p. 192 193 194 195. Calvin Reverend Sir we must from the bottom of Hearts most sincerely acknowledge That it is a great piece of Service that you have done to Christ his Gospel Church and poor lost Sinners in this ample and distinct Testimony which you have born to the Truth not only in plainly discovering Mr. Neonomian's corrupt and illiterate Interpretation of this great Portion of Scripture and vindicating of it but also in that you have subverted his whole Scheme laid open the rottenness of the Principles he hath so boldly asserted in his Book and shew'd the dangerous tendency of them Neonom This Gentleman is much mistaken and I could shew where his Mistakes lies Antinom You shew his Mistakes Quid Rectum dignoscere curbo Neonom I believe him an able Man and that sometimes he was of my Judgment because Mr. B. dedicated his Aphorisms to him and acknowledged that he was a fit Censor of his Doctrin Antinom It 's true one would think that piece of Flattery and many others had been enough to engage Mr. R. Vines to subscribe to Mr. B.'s Opinion but it was sufficiently known that instead of so doing Mr. Vines seldom preached a Sermon wherein he did not make a strict Inquisition after the Neonomianism that lay in his way and crackt it as a Man will crack a Louse DEBATE XX. Of Gospel and Legal Preaching Neonom I Have this Error further to charge upon Mr. Antinom viz. Gospel Preaching he saith Is to teach Men that they were as much pardoned and as acceptable to God always as when they were Regenerate and while they are Vngodly they had the same Interest in God and Christ as when they believe neither can Sin any way hinder their Salvation or their Peacc nor have they any thing to do further either of them Christ having done all for them before any holy qualification or endeavour D. W. p. 208. Antinom Here is a long Charge whether it be true or no in part or whole it will appear by the Proof Neonom Page 159. he saith The more Light and Glory of the Gospel shineth in the true Intention of God to his People the more should they have Joy and Gladness why may not then a Believer say The Lord hath been bountiful to me God hath done every thing in Christ and taken away all things that can disturb my Peace and Comfort Antinom What is this to prove your Charge What is this to prove that I say a Man is as much pardoned and as acceptable to God always as when Regenerate while he is Ungodly c There 's not any part of your Charge here proved for I speak of a Believer and that God hath done all for him in Christ and dare you say otherwise But hear what I said which you hide lest your Charge should appear false at the first sight you take only the concluding Words of my Sermon on Rom. x. 2 3 4. just before that p. 158. Object You will say you know many of the People of the Lord Jesus that walk sadly and disconsolately not having this joy and gladness I answer There is nothing hinders the Joy of God's People but their Sins those as they conceive stand as a separation betwixt God and them Oh they stand as a cooling Card in all their Joys and Mirth But when they return to Zion they shall rejoice in that they see that the Blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God hath taken away all their Sins the Scape-goat having carried them away into the Land of Forgetfulness in that they see that all their Transgressions are blotted out as a Cloud c. When they shall come by the sight of the Glory of the Gospel and the Light thereof to behold this state that Christ hath brought them into then all matter of Sorrow and Sighing shall fly away and the bitterness of it shall be taken away and then that which was the occasion of that bitterness shall vanish too I do not say that he is no Believer that hath not this perfectly far be it from me so to say there are that are Believers that are weak in Faith and there are Believers strong in Faith the more the Light of the glorious Gospel shines c. Calvin Mr. Neonomian I wonder what a Gospel you Preach or would have others Preach Is not Sin the hindering-Hindering-Cause of Spiritual Joy Is it not God that blots out our Sins and remembers them no more Is not the Faith of this the Ground-work of all true Joy Have not some Believers less and some more according as their Faith is and the Light of the Gospel shines into their Hearts And do they not by virtue of this Joy and Peace in believing return to their rest And may they not say The Lord hath dealt bountifully with me as David did May they not return to their rest and sit down in the Comforts of the Holy Ghost The Lord hath done all for me in Christ who hath made him Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption Is there any thing you can rejoice in but what is done for us or wrought in us by Christ That Sin is taken away in the attonement and satisfaction of Christ the great cause of my disturbance Neonom He saith p. 186. Here is first Deliverance and then Service is the Fruit of this Deliverance not Deliverance the Fruit of Service The Tenor of the Law runs thus First do and then live The Gospel saith First live and then do do not think God gives Christ upon condition Antinom What 's all this to the proving of your Charge of Error 1. It reacheth not the Terms of your Charge if it were Error But 2dly Where is the Error Doth he not clear it from plain Scripture which you take no notice of viz. Zacharias's Song Luke 1.74 75 Do we serve God acceptably before we are delivered from Sin and Satan through Redemption and Application Can we serve God in Holiness and
Righteousness before we be delivered from our Enemies Will you run at all Scripture and Experience Is it not true that the Law said to Man that had Life and Power concreated with him Do and thou shalt live And can this be the Tenor of the Gospel to say to a dead Sinner Do and thou shalt live Can a Man dead in Trespasses do any thing Were it not madness to say to a dead Corpse Walk and thou shalt live Doth not Christ first come as the Resurrection and Life to a Sinner before he can do any thing Do you think that Christ comes to a Sinner upon condition of any thing he can do in his natural Estate What is more plain than that Life is the Principle and Cause of Action and not Action of Life Christ himself saith a Man must have Life before he can Believe it 's first in Nature Joh. 11.26 Whoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die Now is the giving of Christ for Life the condition of our having Life Or our doing before we have Christ or Life the condition on which we have Christ and Life Calvin I think you have gained nothing nor yet made any proof of your Charge unless you think it be in this that the Doctor saith we must live before we can do If you take that for an Error I pray do you try your Skill the other way to make Men do before they live and if you can attain to that Art either in Naturals or Spirituals you will be the Wonder of the World Neonom He saith p. 124. The Freeman of Christ hath this freedom Christ doth all his Work for him as well as in him c. Christ doth all for them that God requires to be done Antinom You must know it is this I said A Freeman of Christ hath this freedom Christ doth all his Work for him as well as in him He that is in bondage under the Law must do every thing himself and that he doth he must do perfectly that is an unsupportable thing and heavy bondage for a Man to have more laid upon him than he can bear The Freeman of Christ considering that he is weak poor and unable to work Christ doth all his Work for him Isa 26.12 The Holy Ghost tells us he hath done all our Works in us and in the Margin it is render'd for us See Rom. 5.19 Their freedom is that they stand righteous in the sight of God by that which Christ hath done for us that they are as righteous as if they had done it in their own persons c. Thus I treat concerning the Obedience of Christ unto a Satisfactory Righteousness on our behalf But Obj. Doth not this take off Men from all manner of Obedience and all manner of Holiness A. It takes them off from those ends that they aim at in their Obedience viz. the end for which Christ's Obedience served viz. our standing Righteousness as it concerns us in point of Justification Consolation and Salvation We have our Peace we have our Salvation only by the Righteousness Christ hath done for us but this doth hot take away our Obedience nor Services in respect of those ends for which such Services are required of Believers to glorifie God to evidence our thankfulness to profit Men as Ordinances to meet God in to make good what he hath promised so far we are called out to Services and walking uprightly exactly strictly according to the good pleasure of God and in regard of such ends of Services there is a gracious Freedom that the Freemen of Christ have by Christ i. e. so far forth as Services and Obedience are expected at a Freeman's hands there is Christ by his Spirit present with such persons to help them in all such kind of Services so that they become strong in the Lord and the Power of his Might to do the Will of God Mark what the Apostle speaks I am able to do all things through Christ strengthening me of my self I am able to do nothing but in Christ and through Christ that strengtheneth me I am able to do all things c. There 's much more to this purpose Now judge whether here 's any ground for his Accusation Dr. C. p. 126. He slanders me to the World as if I taught a Doctrin of Licentiousness and were against all Duty but it will appear otherwise plainly enough if an impartial Man reads my Sermons especially that Sermon on 1 Joh. 2.1 2. Sermon III. p. 548. Neonom He saith p. 554. Man will be mincing of this Truth and tell you if you walk close to God and if you refrain from sin especially from gross sins God will love you and then you may apply these and these Promises unto your self but God speaks plainly before they had done good or evil Jacob have I loved the Grace of God is passed over to Men as they are ungodly c. This is the Grace of God revealed he hath exhibited it freely to Men Hath the Lord given us Commission to Preach this Gospâ—l Antinom In my Discourse from 1 John 2.1 2. this Objection is answered p. 557. viz. There are many admire and adore the Doctrin of the Free-Grace of God and yet are notoriously known to live in all manner of Lewdness and Licentiousness and upon this ground Because their Sins are laid on Christ The Sum of the answer is I confess I never knew any such Monsters c. There are many taxed for such but I cannot say any thing to the truth of this Charge by mine own experience c. But it may be there are such and Paul speaks of such in his time c. But if there be such I must tell you they are the greatest Monsters upon the face of the Earth c. And I dare boldly say they are the greatest enemies to Free-Grace and that open Drunkards Harlots and Murderers come infinitely short of them in Abominations c. But admit this that the Grace of God hath been abused hath not the whole Scripture been abused Law and Gospel Is not Christ set for the fall and rising of many in Israel Is he not a Rock of Offence But in the mean time shall the Children want their Bread because the Dogs catch at it c Shall not the Gospel be preached because some abuse it Obj. But you will say it may be done with caution and limitation A. But let us not be more wary and cautions than God would have us to be to put mixtures of Mens doings to the obtaining the Grace of God while the Lord himself doth pour out his Grace to Men simply for his own sake without consideration of any thing in them Men will be mincing this Truth c. Then follows what you rehearse And what doth all this amount to but what the Apostle John expresly speaketh 1 John 4.10 and the Apostle Paul Phil. 2.13 Eph. 2.23 That God's Love and Grace is the cause of all that which we do
to your Intention and therefore now you will accuse him for his meaning that all that he speaks of Believers refers as well to the unconverted as the Elect. Now to shew the World how little like a Gentleman Scholar or Christian you carry your self see D. Crisp pag. 15. out of which you take your Charge against him in the very entrance of his Discourse what is said He shews from John 14.6 That Christ is the way from all the Wrath of God to all that do receive him 1. From the Affection itself of Wrath let me tell you God doth no longer stand offended or displeased tho' a Believer after he be a Believer do Sin oft yet I say God no longer stands offended or displeased with them when he hath once received Christ and unto them God saith Anger is not in me Isa 27.4 And doth he not expresly mention Believers in these very places you quote out of him Now I see it 's impossible to escape your Accusations for you have so addicted yourself to say one thing and mean another that whatever any saith tho' never so plainly whom you are minded to accuse you 'l say he meant another and so you run on with your Cuckow 's Note He says that Sin will do them no hurt and God is not angry with them c. Neonom I affirm God is displeased with Believers for their Abominations Antinom Some abominable Believers out of doubt some that you will have called Believers when as they themselves know in their Consciences that you slander them Neonom If he be displeased it must be for their Sins he oft affirms it and he forceth his People to own it Psal 60.1 3. Isa 5.25 Antinom There is nothing to be concluded that God is angry with the Persons of true Believers from those Expressions that refer to a National Church when there is a mixture of Believers and Unbelievers God always when he speaks to such in a way of Anger hath respect to the generality or prevailing Party according to which he doth in external ways of his Providence carry himself towards the whole Neonom God was angry with Moses Exod. 4.14 Deut. 4.21 Chap. 9.21 Antinom No Man of sense would bring that of Exod. 4.14 to prove God was angry with Moses in your sense for Moses was then in Converse with God who was calling him to a great Undertaking whereat Moses was surprized and pleaded his own Insufficiency which Plea of his when it savoured of Unbelief God rebuked not that there was in God penal Anger against his Person but he rebukes his Sin that he might not go on in the same Sin and Unbelief and it s spoken after the manner of Men and so often in Scripture God's Rebukes of Sin in his Children by Word or Providence is termed his Anger because it s so against Sin and seems to be so with their Persons by God's carriage to them many times in their Apprehensions and yet for all that whom he loves he loves to the end And so God loved the Persons of Moses and David even when they sinned as you say yourself that God ceaseth not to love a Believer when he sinneth if not then he is reconciled to their persons however his sensible dealing may be with them and all proceeds from that love And therefore why do you blame Dr. Cr. for saying that at that Instant when God brings Afflictions on Believers he doth not remember any one of their sins It must be understood thus as he explains it that God remembers not their sins in a way of judicial proceeding marking Iniquity it is called therefore God's dealings in this kind with his Children and are called in the Gospel-language Corrections and Chastisements not for Destruction or Hurt as all Penal Evils be but for Reformation and Amendments c. Doth he not speak as plainly and distinctly as may be that he doth not say God is not angry with the sins of a Believer but that he is not wroth with their Persons Neonom That place Psal 81.30 31 c. proves what I say Antinom That place is on the Doctor 's side and against you for it only holds forth thus much that God corrects his People from Sin not for Sin in a way of vindicative Wrath for its a Promise to Christ and the Seed there spoken of who are redeemed ones and believers God saith in case of Sin he will visit their Iniquities with a Rod to kill and destroy Sin in them but as for his loving-kindness it shall never depart from them You could not have mentioned a place of Scripture more directly against you Neonom There is that place 1 Cor. 11.30 and Rev. 3.19 Antinom The Church-members of the Corinthians might not be true Believers for ought you know for they were of those that eat and drunk unworthily and accordingly in the Apostle's phrase did eat and drink damnation But what hinders but a Child of God may die under an Affliction which is laid upon him to cure some Corruption or other it's not too late to partake of God's holiness upon a Death-bed in a higher measure than before And as for those that were sick and weak but recovered there 's no doubt if they were true Believers but it tended to the curing their spiritual sickness It is a strange thing that a Chirurgeon must act always as an Executioner have his Commission from Justice-Hall still when he comes to a Patient to open an Ulcer or to cut off a mortified Hand or Leg and he cannot do this in love and all tenderness and compassion to his Patient but in anger and wrath and to punish and torment the poor creature for his faults As to what is said by Christ to the Churches Rev. 2. 3. Christ speaks to Body-Politicks to mix Congregations that had many corrupt Professors among them and he speaks to them as such as were for the greatest part of many of them over-run with Hypocrisie and Formality And what is it he calls them to but Reformation So is that place Amos 3.2 it 's spoken to a professing apostatizing People Neonom The Assembly at the Savoy assert this and in the Assembly's large Catechism How doth Christ execute the Office of a King in rewarding their Obedience and correcting them for their Sins Antinom But what follows preserving and supporting them under all their Temptations and Sufferings is that in a way of Wrath and Indignation They say for their Sins so say we too in their sense if for denote the end of the chastisement causa medendi for healing but it 's not causa vindicandi for punishing in a way of vindictive Justice which is your sense or else you would never make this sputter whatever pretence to the contrary you make God's displeasure is with the Sins of Believers not with their Persons and this is Paternal Displeasure because there is love to their Persons as the cause of dealing with them in the way of any seeming
displeasure Neonom I will tell you the Doctor 's mistake Because God laid our Sins on Christ to make Attonement for forgiveness of the Elect therefore God cannot be offended with the Elect for them before they repent Antinom Your Mistakes are wilful and foul ones too or else you would not act so dishonestly 1. This Doctrin of laying Sin on Christ you are always bantering take heed it prove not of dangerous consequence to you 2. Hath the Doctor spoken one word of the unconverted Elect in this matter or of the Elect before they repent But your spleen is moved because he founds the security of Believers from the Wrath of God towards them for Sin upon Christ bearing Sin and making full satisfaction for it you cannot brook it that Christ's Righteousness should have this honour I will tell you one thing If you have no better security from Wrath than the Evangelical Righteousness you shew in this Book I can say without a Spirit of Prophecy The Wrath of God abides on you Neonom Because God doth not hate the Believer as an unreconciled God when he sins therefore he is not at all displeased with him because of the Gospel-sins Antinom Because God manifests displeasure against the Sins of his People therefore say you God is displeased with their Persons that 's your mistake it 's not in the nature of God to love and hate the same Object neither hath God such affections as we have If God hate not as an unreconciled God he can do nothing towards that person but what are the effects of love there 's few earthly Parents can correct a Child but it 's in their mind wholly to do them good and to free them of some ill habit or corruption the Child calls the Father's carriage Anger and it looks so to him in a wise Father but all this while his Heart earns toward the Child and longs to be Kissing it Neonom He thinks because a Refiner is not angry with his Gold therefore a Holy God is not angry with Rational Offenders Antinom The Persons of true Believers are precious and honourabâ—e in the sight of God 10000 times more than Gold can be and securer from the anger of God than any Gold can be from the Refiner's anger I suppose your Rational Offenders are your Abominable Believers Neonom Because God will not hate a Believer so as to damn him therefore he cannot be angry with his People so as fatherly to chastize them Antinom If God cannot hate a Believer so as to damn him then he cannot punish or afflict him in this World with the same affection wherewith he doth damn any one but all that befalls him in this World proceeds from the same affection of love that saves them from damnation as to God there 's the same cause of the afflictions and chastisements of Believers as there is of their glorification they all proceed from his Eternal and Unchangeable Love from the sure Mercies of the Covenant of Promise and therefore are all in a way of benefit and advantage towards them God loves a Child of his as much in its infancy and nonage as in its grown state tho' his carriage is different the diversity of state requiring it And as to Fatherly Chastisement if you understand it aright we deny not but such are those of God's Children but you must know the Spirit of God Heb. 12. tells us the comparison will not hold but as a small illustration of it for God's thoughts affections designs are not as Man 's a Father may correct a Child in anger and passion and so for his pleasure as the Apostle saith but God never doth so a Woman may lay aside natural affections and forget her sucking Babe yea murder it but as God cannot lay aside his innate love so he cannot forget to exercise it in all things Neonom Because God afflicts from Sin therefore he doth not afflict for Sin Antinom If you mean from Sin and for Sin in the same sense that Sin is a reason of affliction in some sense or other we deny it not but if you mean it be a judicial cause of affliction as it is in a wicked Man we utterly deny it for such must be attoning to the Law transgressed in part or in whole the Law designs not the salvation of the sinner in any of its executions but it s own satisfaction in his destruction it looks not at his amendment but ruin And therefore if you mean that God as a Father doth so afflict we deny it for to say so were to make him change to invalidate the satisfaction of Christ and make him worse than an earthly Father Neonom As if he could not rebuke for what is past if he resolve not against their amendment for time to God Antinom God resolves their Amendment and therefore chastiseth and God rebukes their Sins and shews Man that he hath transgressed that Faith be exercised the more lively on the propitiation of Jesus Christ who satisfied God for Sin and that they may the more admire the free and pardoning Love of God and that his dealings are so favourable it 's the Lord's Mercy we are not consumed because his Compassions fail not and that Sin may be made more sinful and hateful to them Neonom The Doctor was led into this Opinion by not considering that Anger and Displeasure be not Passions in God but a Will of Correcting and are denominated from the kinds and degrees of Correction Antinom Quite contrary he took up his Opinion because he believed they were not so and that God's correcting his Children is from his Love and Good-will and that whatever the Degrees are the Specifick Nature is toto genere distinct from Punishments in anger Calv. 1. There is no reason why God should exact the Debt of Sin in the suffering of Believers because Christ hath fully satisfied his Father's Justice for their Sins 2. Their Sorrows and Afflictions cannot carry a Curse in them and therefore not the Wrath and Displeasure of God for he hath born their Sorrows and carried their Grief not that they should not have Sorrow but that their Sorrows should have nothing of the Sting of Sin the Curse of the Law in them 3. They are under the Grace of Adoption therefore Chastening is the Fruit of Adopting-love Heb. 12.6 And it 's one of the good things God hath allotted to them as Children and that for many great Ends 1. To be Partakers more and more of his Holiness in general Ver. 10. for their Profit and Advantage 2. To be conformed unto Christ therein who learned Obedience by suffering Heb. 5.8 3. To fill up that which is behind of the Afflictions of Christ in his Mystical Body Col. 1.24 4. That we may have fellowship with Christ in his Sufferings and therein be conformable to his Death Phil. 3.10 5. That as the Sufferings of Christ abound in us so our Consolations may abound by Christ 2 Cor. 1.5 6.