Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n justification_n meritorious_a righteousness_n 3,361 5 7.8167 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30248 The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially Antinomians in XXX lectures preached at Lawrence-Iury, London / by Anthony Burgess ... Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664. 1651 (1651) Wing B5663; ESTC R21442 243,318 299

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

with drossy errors or the childrens necessary food mingled with destructive poyson Truth is a Depositum Aristotle doth rationally conclude That it is a greater injustice to deny a little thing deposited then a great summe that we are indebted for because he that depositeth any thing in our custody trusteth in us as a faithfull friend the other expecteth only justice from us Now of all points of Divinity there is none that with more profit and comfort we may labour in then in that o● Justification which is stiled by some articulus stantis cadentis ecclesiae The Church stands or fals as the truth of this is asserted and a modest sober vindication of this point from contrary errors will not hinder but much advantage the affectionate part of a man even as the Bee is helped by her sting to make honey Gods way of Justification is for the truth of it above naturall reason and therefore there is required a supernatural Revelation to manifest it Insomuch that the Divine Authority of the Scripture is in nothing more irradiant then in the discovery of this glorious way of our Justification But it hath been a stumbling block and a rock of offence to many mens hearts who look for a Philosophicall Justification or righteousnesse of works either wholly issuing from our free will as they suppose or partly from it and partly from the grace of God and on this hand have erred the Pelagians Papists Arminians and Socinians But while the Orthodox have been diligent to keep this fountain pure from the filth those Philistims daily threw in There arose up another error on the right hand which the Apostle Paul in his Epistles doth many times Antidote aga●nst viz. such a setting up of Free-Grace in Justification that should make the Law as to all purposes uselesse and while it extolleth pr●viledges debases duties That as the Arminians on the one side think it most absurd that the same thing should be officium requisitum donum promissum a duty required on our part and yet a gift promised on Gods part So on the other side the Antinomian cannot at the same time see the fulnesse of Grace only in blotting out our sins and yet at the same time A necessity of repentance without which this Justification could not be obtained Hence it is they fix their Meditations and Discourses upon the promissory part of the Scripture not at the same time attending to the preceptive part But whether it be their weaknesse or their wilfulnesse they seem to be upon those passages of Scripture which speak of Gods grace and Christs satisfaction as David in Sauls arms which were an hinderance not an advantage to him Men destitute of sound knowledge and Learning should be afraid lest they doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 3.16 wrest the Scripture and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to their own destruction It is no lesse a sin saith Oecumenius to torture the Scripture by perverse interpretation then it was to torment and Crucifie the very bodies of the Apostles but to how many ignorant men attempting beyond their strength in Controversies of Divinity hath that faln out which did to one Lucian speaks of who finding Orpheus his harp consecrated to Apollo in a certain Temple bribed the Priest of the Temple thinking to make the same melody which Orpheus used to do which he attempting through his ignorance made such an horrid sound that it inraged all the dogs neer him which presently fell on him and tore him in pieces It is therefore good for men in all humility and modesty not to think of themselves above what they ought or to affect to be Doctors before indeed they have been Disciples But to my matter in hand I shall briefly give an account of my method in this Treatise Whereas in Justification many things are considerable the efficient and impulsive Cause Gods grace the meritorious Cause Christs satisfaction the instrumentall Cause Faith and ev●ry one of these hath many Debates upon it by Learned men Yet I have insisted upon that where●n the nature of it doth consist and because that is made by some two fold partly in remission of sins partly in imputation of Christs righteousnesse this Discourse is wholly upon the former indeavouring to clear all the Doctrinal and Practical doubts that are of greatest consequence in this matter And if God should blesse this part with any good successe to establish the mindes of those that waver I shall with Gods assistance proceed to the other point viz. The Imputation of Christs righteousnesse the mistaking of which point is no mean cause of Antinomianism I am not ignorant how subject to blindnesse and severall imperfections the best of men are whereby through after-thoughts they see such an argument might have been more strongly managed and such expressions better ordered insomuch that most men may say as Luther said of his Books He could like Saturn eat up his own children It is also to be considered how difficult it is with pure ends and godly intentions aiming only at the glory of God and edification of others to undertake such a businesse as this is therefore in all these exercises it is good to go out of our selves depending upon the strength of God only and not to boast as if we had not received Tutius vivitur quando totum Deo damus Et in nihilo gloriandum est quia nihil nostrum est One thing more I am to inform thee of which is that in the former part of this treatise I have more remisly spoken of Justification in the generall because that will more pertinently be handled in the other point of imputed righteousnesse and have indeavoured more vigorously to prosecute the other part which is wholly spent about pardon of sin These things premised I leave thee to the Lord who teacheth his children to profit Thine in Christ Jesus Anthony Burgess THE CONTENTS WHy the doctrine of justification ought to be kept pure pag. 3 2 Propositions clearing the nature of justification 3 4 3 What is implied in justification 6 7 4 What cautions are to be observed to conceive the nature of justification 14 5 Wherein justification consists 17 6 Propositions for the understanding remission of sins 18 7 How sins may be said to be forgiven ibid. 8 How sin is to be considered when it is said to be forgiven 19 9 What it is to have sin forgiven 20 10 How afflictions come upon Gods people after their sin is pardoned 24 11 Whether God corrects his people for sin 26 12 How the Antinomians prove that God doth not chastise his people for their sins 34 13 Whether any absurdities follow upon that doctrine that God doth correct his people for their sins 39 14 What errors the Antinomians hold concerning remission of sinne 43 15 How it may be proved that God doth see sin in a beleever so as to be offended with it 53 16 How great the guilt of
sin in the beleever is in the sight of God 69 17 How Gods anger manifesteth it self upon his children when they sinne pag. 75 18 What kinde of sins God is displeased with 79 19 How God manifesteth his displeasure against his people in spirituall and eternall things 82 20 How the Antinomian would prove that God doth not see sinne in a justified person 88 21 How the Antinomian distinguisheth between Gods knowing and seeing of sin ibid. 22 How seeing is attributed to God 89 23 How Gods knowledge and ours do differ ibid. 24 How the Antinomians are contrary to themselves 93 25 How farre Gods taking notice of sinne so as to punish it is subject to the meer liberty of his will 95 26 How freedome may be extended to God 96 27 How the attributes of God and the actions of them differ in respect of freedome 97 28 How Gods justice essentially and the effects of it differ 100 29 How Christ satisfied God 101 30 How afflictions on Beleevers can agree with Gods justice ibid. 31 Why sins are called debts 105 32 What in sin is a debt ibid. 33 What is meant by that petition Forgive us 113 34 Whether we pray for the pardon it self or for the sense thereof only 4 Reasons proving the affirmative 116 35 What is implied in the petition Forgive us our debts 121 1 In the subject who doth pray ibid. 2 In the matter praied for 126 3 In the person to whom we pray 128 36 How sin a considered 130 37 How all sin is voluntary 132 38 Whether sin be an infinite evil 138 39 What remission of sin is 139 40 Why repentance and faith is pressed as necessary 146 41 How our repentance consists with Gods free grace in pardoning of sin 147 42 How many doe mistake concerning repentance p. 150 43 Why God requires repentance seeing it is no cause of pardon 157 44 Why repentance wrought by the spirit of God is not enough to remove sin in the guilt of it 161 45 Why repentance should not be as great a good and as much honour God as sin is an evil 163 46 What harm comes to God by sin ibid. 47 What kinde of act Forgivenesse of sin is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance 166 48 Whether justification precede faith and repentance 176 49 Whether infants have actuall faith and are Beleevers 181 50 How we are sinners in Adam 185 51 How an elect person unconverted and a reprobate differ and what kinde of love election is 188 52 Whether in that petition Forgive us our debts we pray for pardon or for assurance only 196 53 Why God doth sometimes pardon sinne not acquainting the person with it 200 54 What directions should be given to a soul under temptation about pardon of sin 203 55 Whether a Beleever repenting is to make difference between a great sin and a lesser 205 56 What is meant by covering of sin 216 57 How God by pardoning sin is s●id to cover it 217 58 Whether the phrase of Gods covering sin imply that he doth not see it 219 59 How sins being in justified persons can stand with the omnisciency truth and holinesse of God 220 60 How God doth see sin in beleevers when they have the righteousnesse of Christ to cover it 221 61 How a face is attributed to God 226 62 What sins Gods children may fall into 230 63 How the sinnes of Gods people and of the reprobate differ 234 64 How farre grosse sinnes make a breach upon justification 236 65 Why the guilt of new grosse sinnes doth not take away justification p. 245 66 Whether God in pardoning doth not forgive all sins together 246 67 Wherein the compleatnesse of the pardon of sin at the day of judgement consists 262 68 Whether the sins of Gods people shall be manifested at the last day 264 69 Whether we are justified in Christ before we beleeve as we are accounted sinners in Adam before we actually sinned 186 70 Whether reconciliation purchased by Christs death doth necessarily inferre justification before faith 190 OF JUSTIFICATION LECTURE I. ROM 3.24 25. Being justified freely by his Grace c. THE Apostle in the words precedent laid down two Propositions to debase man and all his works that so he might make way for the exaltation of that grace of justification here spoken of The first Proposition is that By the deeds of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight where two things are observable 1. That he cals every man by the word Flesh which is emphaticall to beat down that pride and tumor which was in the Jews 2. He addeth in his sight which supposeth that though our righteousnesse among men may be very glorious yet before God it is unworthy The other Proposition is that All come short of the glory of God Some do make it a Metaphor from those in a race who fall short of the prize Whether by the glory of God be meant the image of God and that righteousnesse first put into us or eternall life or which is most probable matter of glorying and boasting before God which the Apostle speaks of afterwards is not much materiall Now the Apostle having described our condition to be thus miserable he commends the Grace of God in justifying of us which is decyphered most exactly in a few words so that you have in the Text a most compendious delineation of justification First There is the benefit set down being justified Secondly The efficient cause Gods Grace and here we have a two-fold impulsive cause one inward denoted in the word Freely the other outward in the meritorious cause Christs death which is further illustrated by the appointment of God for this end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some understand this of Gods manifestation as if it were spoken to oppose the propitiatory in the Ark which was left hidden some to the whole polity in the Old Testament which in the Legal shadows and the Prophets predictions did declare Christ Others upon better ground refer it to the Decree of God This death of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denoteth both the action it self as also the effect and benefit which cometh by it Chrysostome observeth that it is called redemption and not a simple emption because we were the Lords once but by our sins became slaves to Satan and now God doth make us his again In the third place you have the instrumentall cause Faith in his bloud this is that Hysop that doth sprinkle the bloud though it be contemptible in it self yet it is instrumentall for a great good and hereby is denoted That Faith hath a peculiar nature in this work of Justification which no other grace hath for none saith Love in his bloud or Patience in his bloud Lastly here is the final cause To declare the righteousnesse of God for the remission of sins past Some observe those words sins past as implying no sinne is
foundation is extrinsecal as when a mans debt is discharged by his Surety he hath his real benefit is discharged and released out of Prison as if it had been his own personal payment Now when God doth this he goeth not against that text To Justifie the ungodly for its an abomination to do so because it 's against Law but when God doth not impute sin because of the satisfaction of Christ intervening that is most consentaneous and agreeable to Justice There is one word more equivalent and that is reconciliation some indeed make this an effect of Justification some make reconciliation the general and remission of sin a particular part but we need not be curious where Justification is there is reconciliation and this doth suppose that those who were at discord before are now made friends and where can friendship be more prized then with God Having laid down these introductory Propositions which describe most of the matter or nature of Justification I shall now come to shew wherein it doth particularly consist wherein the true nature is onely let me prem●se two or three Cautions 1. We must not confound those things which may be consequent or concomitant to justification with justification it self for many things may necessarily be together and yet one not be the other so Justification is necessarily joyned with Renovation yet a man is not justified in having a new nature put into him The water hath both moistness and coldness in it yet it doth not wash away spots as it is cold but as it is moist We will not enter into dispute as some of the Schoolmen have and concluded affirmatively Whether God may not accept of a sinner to eternall life without any inward change of that mans heart It is enough that by Scripture we know he doth not 2. To place our justification in any thing that is ours or we do is altogether derogatory to the righteousnesse and worth of Christ. Some there are who place it partly in our righteousness and partly in the obedience of Christ supplying that which is defective in us some of late have placed it in our Faith as if that were our righteousnesse and not for any worth or dignity of Faith but God out of his meer good pleasure say they hath appointed Faith to be that to man fallen which universal righteousnesse would have been to Adam and hence it is that they will not allow any trope or metonymie in that phrase Abraham beleeved and it was imputed to him for righteousness But here appeareth no lesse pride and arrogancy in this then the opinion of the Papists and in some respects it doth charge God worse as is to be shewed in handling of that point Therefore let us take heed how by our distinctions we put any thing with Christs righteousness in this great work 3. In searching out the nature of Justification we must not only look to the future but that which is past For suppose a man should be renewed to a full perfection in this life yet that absolute compleat holiness could not justifie him from his sins past Those committed before would still presse him down though he were now for the present without any spot at all Therefore though now there were no defects no frailties in thee yet who shall satisfie the Justice of God for that which is past though there were but the least guilt of the least sin there is no Sampson strong enough to bear the weight of it but Christ himself 4. The Orthodox sometimes make the nature of Justification in remission of sin sometimes in imputation of Christs righteousness which made Bellarmine charge them though falsly with different opinions for some make these the same motion it 's called remission of sin as it respecteth the term from which but imputation of righteousnesse as it respecteth the term to which even say they as the same motion is the expulsion of darknes and the introduction of light But I rather conceive them different and look upon one as the ground of the other remission of sin grounded upon the imputation of Christs righteousnesse so that his righteousnesse imputed to us is supposed to be in the order before sin forgiven and although among men where righteousnesse is imputed or a man pronounced just there is or can be no remission of sin yet it is otherwise here because righteousness is not so imputed unto us as that it is inherent in us so among men the more a man is forgiven the lesse he is Justified because forgivenesse supposeth him faulty yet it is not so in our Justification before God Lastly We must not confound Iustification with the manifestation and declaration of it in our hearts and consciences This is the rock at which the Antinomian doth so often split he supposeth Justification to be from all eternity and that therefore a man is Justified before he doth beleeve Faith only justifying by evidence and declaration to our consciences but this is to confound the decree of God and its execution as shall be proved Hence it is a dangerous thing though some excellent men have done it to make Faith a full perswasion of our Justification for this supposeth Justification before Faith It is one thing to be Justified and another thing to be assured of it It is true we cannot have any peace and comfort nor can we so rejoyce in and praise God though we are justified unlesse we know it also LECTURE III. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. JUstification consisteth in these two particulars Remission of sin and Imputation of righteousnesse Indeed here is diversity of expressions among the learned as you have already heard some thinking the whole nature of Justification to be only in Remission of sin and therefore make it the same with Imputation of righteousnesse others make one the ground of the other some make Imputation of righteousnes the efficient or meritorious cause of our Justification and Remission of sin the only form of our Justification others make Remission of sin the effect only of Justification But howsoever we call these two things yet this will be made plain that God in Justification vouchsafeth these two priviledges to the person justified First He forgiveth his sins Secondly He imputeth righteousnesse or rather this latter is the ground of the former as I shew'd before That Justification is remission of sins is generally received the great Question is about imputation of Christs righteousnes but of that afterwards only here may be a Doubt how we can properly say That Justification is pardon of sin for a man is not justified in that he is pardoned but rather it supposeth him guilty It is true Remission of sin doth suppose a man faulty in himself but because Christ did take our sins upon him and we are accepted of through him as our Surety therefore may remission of sin be well called Justification Indeed
many other places do abundantly prove that there is not forgivenes but where there is repentance Therefore look upon all those doctrines as false and dangerous which make justification to be before it Not that we do with Papists make any merit or causality in repentance or that we limit it to such a measure and quantity of repentance nor as if we made it the condition of the Covenant of Grace but only the way without which not the cause for which remission of sins is not obtained neither can there be any instance given of men forgiven without this repentance and the same likewise is affirmed of faith though faith is in another notion then repentance this being the instrument to apply and receive it But of this hereafter 9. This remission of sin is not limited to persons times or the quantity and quality of sins Indeed the sin against the holy Ghost cannot be forgiven we will not explain that cannot by difficulty as if indeed it might be forgiven but very hardly The ordinary answer is that therefore it cannot be forgiven because the person so sinning will not confesse humble himself and seek pardon God is described by pardoning iniquity transgressions and sins Christ is said to take away the sin of the world David and Peters sins were voluntary yet God forgave them LECTURE IV. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. THe Doctrine about remission of sin being thus particularly declared we come to that great Question How afflictions come upon the godly after the pardon of their sins For the Antinomian goeth into one extremity and the Papist into another so true is that of Tertullian Christ is alwayes crucified between two thieves that is Truth suffers between two extream errors Therefore in prosecuting this point which is of great practical concernment I will lay down First What the Antinomian saith Secondly What the Papist And lastly What the Orthodox The Antinomian in his book called the Honey-Comb of Justification explaineth himself in these particulars by which you may judge that his Honey is Gall. Having made this Objection to himself That the children of God are corrected by God therefore he seeth sin in them maketh a large Answer Distinguishing first of afflictions calling some Legal and some Evangelical and then he distinguisheth of Persons making some unconverted others converted the unconverted again he makes to be either such as are reprobate or else elected now saith he the legal crosses have a two-fold operation either vindicative or corrective Vindicative are such afflictions as God executeth upon the wicked and reprobates in which sense God is called the God of vengeance Corrective are such lashes of the Law as are executed upon those persons that are the children of God by election but not yet converted and so under the Law therefore these afflictions are not in wrath to confound them but in mercy to prepare them to their conversion for God seeing sins in them layeth crosses upon them Now these elect persons he cals unconverted actively and declaratively in a very ambiguous and suspicious manner as if conversion were from all eternity as well as Justification so that as they say a man in time is justified only declaratively being indeed so from all eternity thus he must be said to be converted and if this be true then it will likewise follow that a man in heaven is glorified likewise onely declaratively but actually and indeed glorified from all eternity even while he is in this miserable house of clay In the next place he comes to Evangelical crosses which fall upon them that are actively and declaratively as he cals it converted and these he denieth expresly to be for their sins for this were saith he to deny Christs satisfactory punishment because by his death we have not one spot of sin in us therefore he makes them to be only the tryal of their faith and to exercise their faith so that by his divinity when a godly man is afflicted the flesh would indeed perswade a man hath sin in him but this is to try whether thou canst beleeve thou art cleansed from sin for all these afflictions Therefore if any man yield to this temptation viz. that he hath sin in him when he is afflicted what is this saith he but to deny Christ and his bloud Think you this to be the voice of the Scriptures Hence he laboureth to shew that twelve absurdities would follow from this doctrine of Gods afflicting his children for their sins the strength of which shall be in his place considered I have now only laid down his judgement and he makes the Doctrine of the Protestants opposing this to be Popish and confounding the Law and the Gospel together Hence intending the Protestant Authors and Ministers he saith They paint God like an angry father ever seeing sin in us and ever standing with a rod and staff in his hand lifted up over our heads with which by reason he seeth sins in us he is ever ready though not to strike us down yet to crack our crowns and sorely to whip us whereas the Gospel describeth him to be not only a loving Father but also our well-pleased Father at perfect peace with us so that the upshot of his position is to shew that they are taskmasters and do degenerate to the legall teaching in the Old Testament whosoever preach that God doth correct Believers for their sins and I have saith he somewhat the more largely hunted this Fox because it is so nourished not only by the Papists but also some of us Protestants who by lisping the language of Ashdod do undermine the very roots of the Lords vine And that you may see it is not one mans judgement amongst them see what their great General saith in a Sermon pag. 162. Know this that at that instant when God brings afflictions upon thee he doth not remember any sin of thine they are not in his thoughts towards thee Again whatsoever things befall the children of God are not punishments for sins they are not remembrances of sin and if men or Angels shall endeavor to contradict this let them be accounted as they deserve Thus the Antinomian The Papist goeth into another extremity for thus they hold Bellar de poen lib. 4. cap. 1 2. That when God hath forgiven a sin yet it is according to his Justice that the sinner should suffer or do something to satisfie this justice not in respect of the sin as it is against God for although some say so yet others reject it but in respect of some temporal punishment either in this life or in the life to come which is the ground of Purgatory And that this may be made good they say When God doth forgive a sin he doth not presently remit the temporal punishment therefore men may by some satisfactory penalties voluntarily taken upon themselves rescue themselves from these temporal punishments Now this is a
do not make to the internal Happinesse of God yet he is pleased with this and commands it of men and threatens to punish where it is denied him and certainly we may not think the Scripture doth aggravate sin●e under this title as an injury to him as that which offends him and is disobedience unto him if so be there were not some Reality Besides the Necessity of Christs death by way of satisfaction doth necessarily argue That sinne is a reall offence and dishonour to him And lastly a sinner as much as lieth in him depriveth God of all his inward happinesse and glory insomuch that if it were possible God would be made lesse happy by our sins It is no thanks to a sinner that he is not but it ariseth from his infinite Perfection that he cannot Let the first Use be To commend Repentance in the necessity of it if ever we would have pardon God hath appointed no other way for thy healing Never perswade thy self of the pardon of sinne where sinne it self hath not been bitter to thee Besides where godly sorrow is there will be earnest prayer and heavenly ascensions of the soul unto God for his pardon Hence Zech. 12. The spirit of Prayer and Mourning is put together and Rom. 8. Prayer and groans unutterable As the fowls of the Heaven were at first created out of the water so do thy heavenly breathings after God arise from thy humbled and broken soul It is presumption to expect pardon for that sinne which hath not either actually or habitually been humbled for by thee If a man should expect health and life yet never eat or drink would you not say he tempted God and was a murderer of himself So if a man hope for pardon and yet never debase or loath himself repenting of his sins will you not ●●y he is a murderer of his soul And be encouraged to it because God hath annexed such a gracious Promise to it He might have filled thee with sorrow here and hereafter It might be with thee as the damned Angels who have neither the grace of repentance nor the mercy of pardon 2. Not to trust in repentance but after all thy humiliations still to depend only upon Christ Though Christ died and was crucified yet he did not lose his strength and efficacy This was represented in that passage of Gods providence That a bone of his was a broken Relie therefore upon Christ wounded for sinne not upon thy own heart that is wounded use this but trust only in Christ Dependance upon Evangelical graces doth evacuate Christ as well as confidence in the Law A man may not only preach the Law and the duties thereof to the prejudice of Christs glory but also the duties and graces of the Gospel If a man relieth upon his repentance and believing he maketh Justification and Salvation to be of works though it be of faith for he makes his faith a work and gives that glory which belongs to Christ to his own repentance LECTURE XX. MAT. 6.12 And forgive us our Debts IT hath already been demonstrated at large How God doth remit or forgive sins We come now to shew What kinde of act forgivenesse of sin is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance Both these Questions have a dependency one upon another and therefore must be handled together The first Doubt is What kinde of act in God forgivenesse of sin is Whether it be an immanent act in-dwelling and abiding in God or transient working some reall effect and change upon the creature Now in handling of this I shall not trouble you with that perplex Question so much vexed by the Schoolmen Whether a transient action be in the Agent or in the Patient but lay down some differences between an immanent action and a transient action only you must take notice that we are in meer darknesse and not able to comprehend how God is said to act or work For on the one side we must not hold that there are any accidents in God or that he can be a subject recipient of such because of his most pure and simple Essence so that whatsoever is in God is God And yet on the other side the Scripture doth represent God doing and working such mercies and judgements as seemeth good to him Only this some conclude of wherein others with some probability dissent that Gods knowledge and will is the cause of all things that are done so that there is not an executive power besides them whereby he doth this or that As we see there is in man though an Artificer wils such a thing to be done yet that is not existent till he hath wrought it but now God worketh all things by a meer command of his will as appeareth Gen. 1. God said Let there be light and there was light Here was Gods will to have it so no executing power distinct from that will Therefore it is a sure truth De Deo etiam vera dicere periculosum est It is dangerous to assert things though true of God and Tunc dignè Deum aestimamus cum inaestimabilem dicimus then do we rightly esteem of him when we judge him above our thoughts or esteem We must not therefore apprehend of God as having a new will to do a thing in time which he had not from eternity as Vorstius and others blaspheme but his will was from all eternity that such a thing be in time accomplished by his wisdome As for example in Creation God did not then begin to have a will to create but he had a will from all eternity that the world should exist in time and thus it is in Justification and Sanctification not that these effects are from eternity but Gods will is And if you ask Why seeing Gods will to create or justifie is from eternity Creation and Justification are not also from eternity The answer is because God is a free Agent and so his will is not a necessary cause of the thing for then it would be immediately as the Sun beams are necessarily as soon as the Sun is but it is a voluntary principle and so maketh the effect to be at the time he prescribeth As if there were an Artificer or Carpenter that could by his meer wi● cause an house to be reared up he might will this to be done in such and such a year long after his will of it to be So God when the world is made when a sinner is justified willed these things from all eternity and when they come to have a being these effects cause an extrinsecal denomination to be attributed to God which was not before as now he is a Creator and was not before now he justifieth and did not before There is no change made in God but the alteration is in the creature But of this more in its time Let us come to give the differences between an immanent action and a transient and then we
may easily see which of these two Justification or Remission of sinne is The first and proper difference is this An immanent action is that which abides in God so that it works no reall effect without As when God doth meerly know or understand a thing but a transient action is when a positive change is made thereby in a creature as in Creation c. So that we may conclude of all Gods actions which do relate to believers only predestination is an immanent act of God and all the rest Justification Regeneration Glorification are transient acts for Predestination though it be an act of God choosing such an one to happinesse yet it doth not work any reall change or positive effect in a man unlesse we understand it virtually for it is the cause of all those transient actions that are wrought in time Howsoever therefore Justification be called by some an immanent action and so made to go before Faith and Repentance as if Faith were onely a declaration and signe of pardon of sinne from all eternity yet that cannot be made good as is to be shewed A second difference floweth from the other An immanent action is from eternity and the same with Gods essence but a transient action is the same with the effect produced Hence the Orthodox maintain That Gods decrees are the same with his nature Hence when we speak of Gods willing such a thing it is no more then his divine Essence with an habitude and respect to such objects Gods Decrees are no more then God decreeing Gods will no more then God willing otherwise the simpliciy of Gods nature will be overthrown and those volitions of God will be created entities and so must be created by other new volitions and so in infinitum as Spanheimius well argueth only the later part seemeth not to be strong or sufficient because when man willeth he doth not will that by a new volition and so in infinitum and why then would such a thing follow in God Besides its no such absurdity in the actings of the soul to hold a progresse in infinitum thus far that it doth not determinately pitch or end at such an act It is one thing to have things distinguished in God and another thing for us to conceive distinctly of them The former is false The later is true and necessary But with transient actions it is otherwise they being the same with the effects produced are in time And this is a perpetual mistake in the Antinomian to confound Gods Decree and Purpose to justifie with Justification Gods immanent action from all eternity with that transient which is done in time Whereas if they should do thus in matters of Sanctification and Glorification it would be absurd to every mans experience whereas indeed a man may as truly say That his body is glorified from all eternity as that his sins are forgiven from all eternity And certainly Scripture speaks for one as well as the other when it saith Whom he hath justified them he hath glorified By these two differences you may see That pardon of sin is a transient action and so Justification also partly because it leaveth a positive real effect upon a man justified he that was in the state of hatred is hereby in a state of love and friendship he hath peace with God now that once was at variance with him Now when we say There is a change made in a man by Justification it is not meant of an inward absolute and physical one such as is in Sanctification when of unholy we are made holy but morall and relative as when one is made a Magistrate or husband and wife partly because this is done to us in time whereas immanent actions were from all eternity and therefore it would be absurd to pray for them as it is ridiculous for a man to pray he may be predestinated or elected Some indeed have spoken of Predestination as actus continuus a continued act and so with them it is good Divinity Si non sis praedestinatus ora ut praedestineris If thou beest not predestinated pray that thou maiest be but this is corrupt doctrine and much opposeth the Scripture which doth frequently commend election from the eternity of it that it was before the foundations of the world were laid whereas now for pardon of sinne it is our duty to pray that God would do it for us This being thus cleared we come to answer the next Question depending upon this viz. Whether God doth justifie or forgive our sins before we believe or repent and our answer is negative That God doth not Although there are many who are pertinacious that he doth and so they make Faith not an instrumental cause to apply pardon but only a perswasion that sin is pardoned and thus repentance shall not be a condition to qualifie the subject to obtain forgiveness but a sign to manifest that sin is forgiven This Question is of great practical concernment and therefore to establish you in the truth consider these Arguments 1. The Scripture speaks of a state of wrath and condemnation that all are in before they be justified or pardoned Therefore the believers sins were not from all eternity forgiven for if there were a time viz. before his Regeneration and Conversion that he was a childe of wrath under the guilt and punishment of sin then he could not be at the same time in the favour of God and peace with him Now the Scripture doth plentifully shew That even believers before their Regeneration are detained in such bonds and chains of guilt and Gods displeasure Ephes 2.1 2 3. There the Apostle speaking to the converted Ephesians telleth them of the wretched and cursed condition they were once in and he reckons himself amongst them saying They were children of wrath and that even as others were So that there is no difference between a godly man unconverted and a wicked man for that present state for both are under the power of Satan both walk in disobedience both are workers of iniquity and so both are children of wrath It is true the godly man is predestinated and so shall be brought out of this state and the other left in it But predestination as is more largely to be shewed being an immanent act in God doth denote no positive effect for the present of love upon the person and therefore he being not justified hath his sins imputed to him lying upon him and therefore by the Psalmists argument not a blessed man This also 1 Cor. 6.9 10 11. The Apostle saith of some Corinthians That they were such as abiding in that state could not inherit the kingdom of God and such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are justified Therefore there was a time when these Corinthians were not justified but had their sins abiding on them Likewise all the places of Scripture which speak of Gods wrath upon wicked men and that
that controversie The opponent it may be knoweth that there are some who say Christ or the Spirit of Christ is first in us by way of a moving or preparing principle and afterwards as a principle inhabiting and dwelling in us That as some say Anima fabricat sibi domicilium the soul makes its body to lodge in it works first efficiently that afterwards it may formally so they say Christ doth in us As the silk-worm prepareth those silken lodgings for her self to rest in So that according to the judgement of these men Christ or his Spirit doth efficiently work in us the act of believing by which act Christ is received to dwell in us And in this way Christ hath no union with us till we do believe He worketh indeed in us before but not as united to us Now according to this opinion the answer were easie That we are not in Christ till we do beleeve Though Christ be in us as working in us and upon us Yea faith would first be wrought and then Christ with his benefits of justification c. would be vouchsafed to us but there are Reasons why it is not safe to go this way And indeed that Charta magna or grand promise for regeneration doth evidently argue the habits or internall principles of grace are before the actions of grace Ezek 36.26 God takes away the heart of stone and giveth a new heart an heart of flesh which is the principle of grace and afterwards causeth them to walk in his Commandments which is the effect of grace But secondly which doth fully answer the Objection It is true our being ingraffed into Christ is the root and fountain of faith and of Justification too but yet so that these being correlates faith and Justification they both flow from the root together though with this order that faith is to be conceived in order of nature before Justification that being the instrument to receive it though both be together in time Therefore the major Proposition should be thus regulated He that is in Christ doth believe and is justified or believing is justified for Justification as our Glorification though it flow from Christ yet it is in that order and time which God hath appointed Neither is it any new thing in Philosophy to say Those causes which produce an effect though they be in time together yet are mutually before one another in order of nature in divers respects to their severall causalities Christ is in us and we in Christ Christ is in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of gift and actual working and we are in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of receiving and both these are necessary as appeareth Joh. 15.5 and both are together in time yet so that in order of nature Christs being in us is before our being in him and the ground of all our comfort and fruit is not because we are in him but he in us even as the branch beareth fruit not because it is in the Vine but because the Vine is in it communicating efficacy to it Thus also faith and Justification are together yet so as one is produced by the other we are not justified and therefore believe but we believe and are therefore justified Lastly This may be retorted upon the opponent who as was alleadged before denieth any actual reconciliation till we do believe But may not we strike the adversary with his own reason in this manner He that is in Christ is actually reconciled But we must be in Christ before we do believe Therefore we must be actually reconciled before we do believe I pass over the third and reserve the fourth and sixth Argument being all one for the next Lecture because in them is matter worthy of a large consideration I come therefore to the fifth Argument which is taken from the collation between the first Adam and second out of Rom. 5.18 19. From whence is argued As in the first Adam we are accounted sinners before any thing done on our part so in the second Adam we are to be justified before any thing wrought in us This the opponent doth much triumph in but without cause as the answer will manifest And in the first place we cannot but reject those Expositors of that text fore-quoted who understand us to be sinners in Adam only by imitation or by propagation meerly as from a corrupted fountain but we suppose it to be by imputation Adam by Gods Covenant being an universal person and so as Austin said Omnes ille unus homo fuerunt All were that one man And therefore these do not rise up to the full scope of the text who parallel Christ and Adam only as two roots Origens or fountains for there must be a further consideration of them as two common persons for our immediate fathers are a corrupted root and we are corrupted by them yet their sins are not made ours as Adams was Hence the Apostle laieth the whole transgression upon one as by one mans disobedience c. Those that deny imputation of Adams sin as the Pelagians of old and Erasmus with others of late do not relish that translation of those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom all have sinned but prefer the other Forasmuch as all have sinned in him but both come to the same sense and howsoever Erasmus say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a dative case must be understood causally yet that is not universally true for Mar. 2.4 there is mention made of the bed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which the paralytique lay it would be ridiculous to translate that inasmuch So Act. 2. Be baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the name Heb. 9. Those ordinances consisted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meats We therefore grant That Adams sin was ours by imputation before we had any actual consent to it In which sense Bernard called it Alienum nostrum anothers sin and ours yea it is so farre from being ours by consent that if a man on purpose should now will that Adams sin should be his this would not make Adams sin imputed to him it would be a new actual sin in the man it would not be Adams sin imputed to him Now although all this be concluded upon yet it followeth not that therefore we are justified in Christ before we believe I acknowledge some eminent Divines have pressed this comparison but there is a vast difference in this very act of imputation and the ground of it for supposing the Covenant at first made with Adam all his posterity by a naturall way are involved in his guilt and so whether they will or no antecedently to their own acts they are obnoxious to this guilt Hence all men none excepted that are propagated in a natural way are thus corrupted but in Christ we are by a supernatural way and none are made his but such as beleeve in him and he doth not represent any to God as his members till
this world Hence our Saviour cals it The day of our redemption upon the coming whereof they are to lift up their heads The Observation is That a compleat and full absolution from all sin is not enjoyed till the day of judgement The Beleevers have not a full discharge till then we are in this life continually subject to new sins and so to new guilt whereby arise new fears so that the soul hath not a full rest from all till that final absolution be pronounced at the day of judgement Before we shew the grounds whereby it may appear that the remission of our sins is not fully compleated till then we must lay down some Propositions by way of a grand work First The Scripture not only in this priviledge of remission of our sin but in others also makes the complement and fulness of them to be at the day of judgement Redemption is the totall summe as it were of all our mercies and we are partakers of it in this life Col. 1.14 Rom. 3.24 Yet the Scripture cals the day of judgement when we shall rise out of our graves in a peculiar and eminent manner the day of redemption Ephes 1.7 Ephes 4.30 because at that day will be the utmost and last effects of our redemption Adoption that also is a priviledge we receive in this life yea a learned man Forbes in his book where he handleth the order of Gods graces makes adoption as I take it to be the first and to go before justification yet the Apostle Rom. 8.23 calleth the last day the day of adoption Hence 1 Joh. 3.2 the Apostle though he saith We are now the sons of God yet he saith it doth not appear what we shall be because the glory God at the last day will put upon us is so farre transcendent and superlative to what now we are Thus Mat. 19.28 the last day is also called the day of regeneration unto the people of God yet in this life they partake of that grace but because then is the full perfection and manifestation of it therefore the Scripture cals it the day of regeneration Even as the Apostle Act. 13.33 applieth that passage of the Psalm to Christs resurrection This day have I begotten thee because then was such a solemn and publique declaration that he was the Son of God No marvel then if the Scripture do also call the day of judgement a time when sins shall be blotted out because then is the publique absolution of the godly and according to philosophy motions receive their names from the term to which they tend Secondly Howsoever Justification be said to consist in pardon of sin yet there is a great difference between the one and the other for Justification besides the pardon of sin doth connote a state that the subject is put into viz. A state of favour being reconciled with God Hence it is that this state cannot be reiterated often no more then a wife after that first entrance into the relation is frequently made a wife In this sense the Scripture alwaies speaks of it as connoting a state or condition the subject is put into as well as a peculiar priviledge vouchsafed to such It is true There are indeed learned men who think Justification may be reiterated as you heard Peter Martyr and Bucer Others call it a continued action as conservation But although there is a continuance of Justification and the godly are preserved in that estate yet we cannot say God doth renew Justification daily as he doth pardon of sin There are some that think the Scripture gives a ground for a second Justification or the continuing and encreasing of it and bring those places Tit. 3.5 6 7. Rev. 22.11 The learned and excellent Interpreter Ludovicus de Dieu in Cap. 8. of the Romans vers 4. largely pleadeth for a two-fold Justification The first he makes to be the imputing of Christs righteousness to us received by faith which is altogether perfect and is the cause of pardon of sins The second he makes an effect of the former whereby through the grace of God regenerating we are conformable unto that love in part and are day by day more and more justified and shall be fully so when perfection comes of which Justification he saith these texts speak Jam. 2.21 24. Revel 22.11 Mat. 11.37 1 King 8.32 This two-fold Justification he makes to differ toto coelo from the Papists whose first is founded upon the merit of congruity the second upon the merit of condignity But the discussing of this will be more proper in the other part viz. of imputed righteousness Austin seemeth to hold Justification a frequent and continued act lib. 2. contra Julianum cap. 8. When we are heard in that prayer Forgive us our sins we need saith he such a remission daily what progress soever we have made in our second Justification He speaks also of a Justification hujus vitae which he cals minorem the lesser and another plenam and perfectam full and perfect which belongs to the state of glory Tract 4. in Joannem lib. de spiritu lit cap. ultim But the more exact handling of this will be in the place above-mentioned It seemeth more consonant to Scripture if we say That Justification is a state we were once put into which is not repeated over and over as often as sin is forgiven neither can it admit of increase or decrease so that a man should be more or less justified for even David while he was in that state of suspension was not less justified though the effects of Justification were less upon him It is true in some sense learned men say Justification may increase viz. extensivè not intensivè as they express it by way of extension when more sins are pardoned not intensively in its own nature Even as the soul of a man in its information of the body admits of no increase intensively but it doth extensively the more the parts of the body grow the further doth its information extend But of these things more in their proper place Thirdly Howsoever an absolution shall be compleated at the day of judgement yet our justification shall not abide in such a way as it is in this life Now our Justification is by pardon of sin and a righteousness without us imputed to us which is instrumentally applied by faith but this way shall then cease for having perfect righteousness inherent in our selves we shall need no covering It is true the glory and honour of all this will redound upon Christ and he shall not be the less glorified because he hath then brought us to the full end of all his sufferings I know some may doubt whether any righteousness but that which is infinite can please God and therefore as some think the Angels were accepted of God through Christ though perfect so it may of the Saints in heaven but I see no ground for this This seemeth to be undoubted That the
fit nisi revelante spiritu per fidem aeternum Dei propositum de sua salute Who is a righteous man but he that returneth love to God for Gods loving of him And how can this be but by Gods Spirit revealing his purpose of Election concerning the just mans Salvation Use of Instruction Doth the apprehension of great pardon breed great Humiliation then we may see the necessity of that Ministery and preaching which doth discover the depth length and breadth of sin They take the best way to set up grace and magnifie Christ who do amplifie the pollution of sin in us Now that we may come to be convinced how much God doth forgive us two points are much to be insisted upon 1. The Doctrine of original corruption for thereby we shall see our selves guilty of more sins then ever we thought of a man without this Scripture-light is like one in a dark dungeon which is full of Serpents Toads and all venemous creatures but is not able to see any of them and so thinks himself without any danger at all If therefore thou wouldst see how much is forgiven reckon up all the debts thou owest The mercy and skill of the Physician will then appear when the worst of thy disease is made manifest A second Point much to be pressed is the pure strict and exact obligation of the law which being set as a pure glass before thee all thy deformities will appear In this sense it is good to be a legal Preacher and a legal Hearer often that so knowing the holiness of the Law and our imperfection we may esteem the more of Gods Grace in pardoning so much As God in the outward passages of his providence doth therefore suffer one trouble to follow another like so many waves that so the greater their calamities have been his wisdom power and goodness may be the more conspicuous in delivering of them Thus it is also in his spiritual administrations he will not reveal the riches of Grace but to the poor in spirit nor will he give ease and refreshment but to those that are heavy laden and burdened And this is the reason why a Pharisee a formalist a moral man a self-righteous man doth not love Christ as converted Publicans and sinners do Use second of Admonition to those who have sinned much and so have had much forgiven them let such know their expences of practised grace must be according to the receipts of justifying Grace Let such know the pardon of many sins is a talent to be greatly improved As thou hast abounded in many sins and God in many pardons so do thou in much thankfulness How thankful would we be to a man who hath delivered us often from a temporal death but behold a greater love is manifested here Thou who hast it may be been the chiefest sinner of many thousands be now the chiefest Believer of many thousands If thou hast been a great sinner and art not now a great actour and spiritual merchant negotiating for God fear the truth of thy grace much love should be like much fire that consumes all dross quicken up thy self with such thoughts as these Lord who was more plunged into sin then I whose diseases were greater then mine It may be thousands and thousands for less and fewer sins then I have committed are now taking their portion in hell O Lord this thy overflowing goodness doth overcome me oh that I had the hearts of all men and Angels to praise thee FINIS THE TABLE A FIve absurdities objected by the Antinomians which they say will follow from the Doctrine that God afflicts his people for sin vindicated p. 39 40 41 What kinde of act forgivenesse is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance 166 167 There are no accidents in God ib. How afflictions come upon the godly after pardon of sin 24 God doth not alwayes afflict with reference to sin 28 The afflictions of the godly are not legal but evangelical and why 39 How afflictions on believers agree with the justice of God 101 It is a great aggravation to the sins of Gods people that they have been committed in his sight 53 54 Aggravations and diminutions of sin 206 208 The unsound Answers of the Antinomian about the afflictions of the godly 24 25 The Antinomian contrary to himself 33 34 93 Three Arguments of the Antinomian answered 34 35 36 37 The Antinomians answer to and evasion of certain Scriptures answered 53 How the anger of God is shewed toward the the sins of his people 76 77 78 The Antinomian Arguments answered 176 to 193 Arguments proving that God doth see sin in the justified so as to be offended with it 53 Seven Arguments proving our faith and repentance antecedents of Justification 169 to 172 Three Reasons proving that Assurance of pardon is apt to kindle spiritual affections in us 269 270 B Sins committed after Baptism pardonable 126 127 Christ is the advocate of Believers after Justification 66 67 Bellarmines objection answered 115 How sin is a blot in the soul 136 When sins are blotted out 158 C A three-fold cause of Justification Efficient Meritorious Instrumental 2 The people of God are not cast off for their sins 232 It is one thing to change the will and another to will a change 193 It is no derogation from Christ that sin is in a believer 40 What the bloud of Christ doth meritoriously cleanse the Spirit doth efficaciously 57 Wherein the compleatness of the pardon of sin at the day of Judgement consists 259 260 Six comfortable considerations gathered from certain Scriptures 49 ●0 It is of great consequence to have the Doctrine of Justification kept pure and why 3 A two-fold condition of faith pag. 191 192 Comfort to the children of God 263 Pardon of sin is a continued act 115 What is meant by covering sin 216 217 1 What is 2 What is not implied in that phrase of covering sin 217 218 219 How sin being in the regenerate yet covered will stand with the omnisciency truth and holiness of God 220 221 Whether God doth see sin when he hath covered it 219 220 D Eternal Death deserved by every sin 206 What in sin is a Debt 105 Sins called a Debt in a four-fold respect 105 106 There is a great difference between original and actual sin and wherein they differ 20 There is great difference in the calamities of the godly 28 The afflictions of the godly and the wicked for sin how differ 29 The difference between a godly man troubled in conscience and a man damned in hell 82 A two-fold difference between actions immanent and transient 166 167 168 An elect person and a reprobate how they are alike differ 188 Whether a difference ought to be made between great and little sins Six Propositions clearing the same 206. to 212 A Christian is to make a difference of sins six wayes 208 209 210 Four things wherein a Christian