his people now in heaven is an Ocean of infinite comfort LECTURE IX JER 50.20 In those dayes and at that time the iniquity of Judah shall be sought for and there shall be none c. I Shall now conclude with the last sort of Arguments which are from those Scriptures that speak how God is affected with his people when they have sinned which affections do necessarily imply Gods seeing of sin so as to be angry with them yea in some respects Gods anger is more to them then others and we say in some sense God doth more see and take notice of the sins of believers then others The places of Scripture which speak in what manner God takes the sins of believers are these Ephes 4.30 Grieve not the holy Spirit of God c. where the godly in their sins are said to grieve Gods Spirit Now can the Spirit of God which is also God be grieved to speak after the manner of men at our sins and not take notice of them certainly if they grieve God they ought to grieve us let us not neglect that which the Spirit of God is so offended with This place seemeth to be taken out of Isa 63.10 They vexed his holy Spirit So that it is such a grieving as doth vex and imbitter the holy Spirit of God O what a dreadfull consideration should this be against all falshoods in this point Doth not God doth not the Spirit of God take notice of thy corruptions yet it is grieved and vexed at them furthermore the aggravation of this sin is seen in that it is against the Spirit that doth seal us to the day of redemption A Metaphor saith Zanchy in loc from Merchants who having bought such goods seal them as their own that so leaving others they may transport them Now for the godly to sin it is to deface this seal and if it be so great an offence to violate humane seals how much more divine Observe likewise that passage of God to Moses Ex. 4.14 where Moses out of the sense of his infirmity refusing the office God called him to twice or thrice it is said The Lords wrath was kindled against him In the Hebrew it is very emphatical The fury of the Lord was angry against Moses and the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which expression was signified God was not lightly but grievously angry with him So Ps 74.1 the Church crieth out Why doth thine anger smoke against the sheep of thy pasture and in many other places Now can God be angry and that in so high a degree with that which he doth not see or take notice of It is true Isidor Pelus l. 1. ep 144. will not suffer that notice and affliction which God layeth upon us to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but then anger is to be taken in a strict sense for punishment by way of satisfaction but otherwise the Scripture doth frequently use this word and that of God to his own people yea vengeance which is more Ps 96.8 But that it may the better appear how great the guilt of sin in believers even in the sight of God is and what his account is of it take notice of these particulars First What the Scripture stiles them 1 Sam. 2.29 There God reproveth Eli in his indulgence about his sons with this remarkable expression Thou honourest thy sons above me Is not this an aggravation which God taketh notice of and yet Eli did reprove his sons but because he failed in the measure of zeal therefore is God thus angry with him so that God doth not only see the grosse sins committed by his people but a lesse measure of their graces and is angry for that So Rev. 2. because the Church abated in her first love and her works were not perfect therefore doth God threaten her As the godly are said to honour the creature above him when they sin so they are likewise said to despise God and can God but be offended with them that despise him 1 Sam. 2.13 They that despise me shall be lightly esteemed saith God again to Eli. Thus likewise to David 2 Sam. 12.9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the Lord God cannot but take notice of that which is a despising and contemning of him As their sins are a despising of God so are they said to displease God which cannot be if God see no sin for if God see no sin it is all one in reference to God whether a believer wallow in the mire of sin or whether he live holily so that this Doctrine must needs eat and consume like a Gangrene Is God as well pleased with Peter denying Christ as Peter repenting as much pleased with David in his adultery and murder as when making his penitential Psalm The Papists indeed would fasten such prodigious consequences upon the Protestants Doctrine but they abhor it whereas it followeth naturally from the Antinomian assertion Indeed the Orthodox say David and Peter in their lapses did not fall from the state or grace of Iustification but wherein the Antinomian and they differ is hereafter to be shewen That God is thus displeased with justified persons when they thus sin is plain 2 Sam. 11.29 where what we translate displeased according to the original is was evil in the eyes of the Lord where you see expresse Scripture That God did see sin in David because that which he had done was evil in Gods eyes so again 1 Chron. 21.7 Davids numbering of the people is said to be evil in the eyes of the Lord. Thus the very letter of the Scripture is against them Lastly Their sins are offences against God and can God be offended with that which he doth not behold Elihu speaks true and excellent Doctrine Iob 34.32 though he erred in the application Surely it is meet to be said unto God I have born chastisement I will offend no more where he acknowledgeth That chastisements are for sins and that sins are offences If then the sins of Gods people are a dishonour to him a despising of him a displeasing of him they are evil in his eyes and an offence to him it cannot be but that he must see sin in his people Secondly The Scripture describeth Gods threatning and upbraiding of them with all his kindnesses he did to them so that God doth not only take notice of them but in the several aggravations of their ingratitude and unkindnesse unto him in all that they offend Thus observe Gods dealing with Eli 1 Sam. 2.28 Did not I choose thy father out of all the Tribes of Israel to be my Priest to offer upon my Altar Did I not give unto thy father all the offerings by fire of the children of Israel wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice What a cutting sword must this needs be in Eli's heart and because the children of God have a Spirit of love in them these upbraidings must needs wound their heart the
doctrine extreamly derogating from the full satisfaction of Christs death as the Orthodox shew against the Papists Therefore in the third place the truth is this That God when he forgiveth a sin or sins he doth likewise take off all temporal punishment properly so called viz. in order to any vindicative justice as if a further supply were to be made to Christs sufferings by what we indure yet we say withall that God indeed doth take notice of the sins of those that are justified and doth correct them for them so that when he chastiseth them it is in reference to their sins they are the occasion or the impulsive cause as we may say though improperly when we speak of God Although the final cause and the end why God doth so is not to satisfie his justice but for other ends It is doubted whether we may call them punishments or no but we need not litigate about the word I see Chemnitius and Rivet cals them so And if we make a distinction in Gods end why he afflicts the godly for their sins from that when he punisheth the wicked though both for their sins we speak the truth fully enough though we call them punishments and certainly the words punish or punishment used Hos 4.19 Ezek. 9.13 Levit. 26.41 do not take the word punishment in such a strict sense The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used of the damned Angels and men 2 Pet. 2.9 Mat. 25.46 and this word seems not applicable to the afflictions of Gods people for their sins and so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemeth to be an act of some Judge who doth not attend to mercy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Suidas in voc But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Iudge is attributed to God when he doth correct his children 1 Cor. 11.31 where the Apostle useth three words in an elegant paronomasia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so then when God doth afflict his people he may be said to do it as a Iudge and afflictions are called judgements 1 Pet. 4.17 only when God doth thus correct and punish his people he is paternus Iudex a fatherly Judge But the most expressive word of these afflictions is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denoteth God afflicting his people as a father his childe and although he doth it because of their faultslts yet he hath tendernesse in what he doth This is the truth and for the proving of it consider these Propositions First That God doth not afflict any but where there is sin in the subject for so was the threatning at first in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die By death is meant all kinde of evil and punishment so that had there been no sin going before there had no curse either upon man or creatures followed after Hence it is that Divines say The very hunger and thirst which Adam had while in the state of integrity was without that pain and provocation as it is in us So that the state of man in righteousnesse was like the heavens that admit of no corruptive alterations As for that dispute Whether God may not by his absolute Soveraignty adjudge man without the consideration of sin to everlasting misery the affirmative decision of it will not much incommodate this truth seeing that even then they say God doth this per modum simplicis cruciatus by way of a meer naked trouble and pain not per modum poenae by way of a punishment As for Christ he though innocent was a man of sorrows because our sins were laid on him Secondly That God may and sometimes doth afflict yet not in reference to sin Thus God doth exercise Job who though he was not without sin yet God seemeth not to do it for sin Therefore such calamities were rather exercises of his graces then correctives of his sins they were to him what a storm or a tempest is to a skilfull Pilate what a valiant adversary is to a stout Champion and to this purpose is that answer of our Saviour when the question was Whether the parents or the blinde man himself had sinned that he should be born blinde speaking according to the opinion of some Philosophers that was now also received among the Jews as learned men think viz. That there was a prexistency of the souls before they were united to their bodies our Saviour returneth this answer Neither hath this man sinned because he had no being before his birth nor his parents viz. some grievous sin for which God would punish the childe but only that the works of God may be made manifest This also must be granted Thirdly That all afflictions and crosses are to be reduced to the Law We may acknowledge this truth also if so be by Law we mean strictly whatsoever doth command and threaten and the Gospel to be only promissory though if largely taken the Gospel hath its curses and afflictions so God threatning or afflicting of a godly man doth so far use the Law as an instrument to make him sensible of his sin and therefore this is a sure Argument that the Law is not abolished as to all uses to the Believer because still there do befall afflictions to the godly not only from sin as the Antinomians speak but for sin only as the Law without the grace of God worketh all evil so do all afflictions likewise to men that are not godly Therefore wicked men in afflictions are as garlik or any ill-smelling herb the more it is pounced the worse smell it sends forth so that there must be teaching as well as chastening to make that affliction blessed Fourthly That in the calamities which fall upon the godly there is a great difference some are common and absolutely determined others more special and not necessary This distinction must be attended for God hath so peremptorily and irrevocably concluded upon some miseries as the fruits of sin that no repentance or humiliation can ever take them off Thus though a man should have as much faith as Abraham as much meeknesse as Moses as much uprightnesse as David as much zeal and labour for the Church as Paul yet all this would not free from death nor could it remove the curse that is upon the ground so a womans holiness and humiliation cannot take away the pains and throbs in childe-bearing for these are absolutely decreed But then there are special calamities which many times by turning unto God are taken away yea and God very frequently when he pardoneth sin he taketh also away those outward miseries as we see in many whom he healed both in soul and body at the same time So that we say not God is bound alwaies when he doth pardon sin outwardly to afflict for it Fiftly There are again some calamities that come upon them because of sin others for other ends We acknowledge it as clear as the sun that many troubles upon
the godly are by way of tryal and temptation upon them and because of the good that is in them of these the Apostle James speaks when he bids them count it all joy when they fall into divers temptations of these Paul speaks when he saith he will rejoyce in his infirmities so that the persecutions and miseries which come upon them are an Argument of the good in them more then of the evils as the tree that is ful of fruit hath its boughs more broken then that which is barren and the Pyrates watch for the ship that is fraughted with gold And thus a martyr comforted himself That though he had many sins for which he deserved death yet he thanked God that his enemies did not attend to them but to the good that was in him and for that he suffered so then all the grievances upon the godly are not of the same nature Sixtly The afflictions for sins upon the godly do differ much from those that are upon the wicked This we also grant that when God doth punish the godly and the wicked for their sins though the punishment for the matter of it may be alike yet they differ in other respects very much as in the cause from which one cometh from a God hating their persons the other from anger indeed but the anger of a father Hence secondly they differ in the fittedness of these afflictions to do good God doth moderate these afflictions to his people that thereby grace may be increased but to the reprobate they are no more to their good then the flames of hell-fire are to the damned The Butcher he cuts the flesh far otherwise then the Chirurgion saith August Again in the end they differ All afflictions to the godly are like the beating of cloathes in the Sun with a rod to get out the dust and moths but it is not so with the wicked many other differences practical Divines prove out of the Scripture Seventhly Yet God doth in reference to the sins of his people though forgiven sometimes chastise them This is proved 1. From the Scripture that makes their sin the cause of their trouble Thus of David Because thou saith Nathan 2 Sam. 12.14 hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme the childe also that is born of thee shall die Thus God speaks to all the godly in Solomon 2 Sam. 7.14 15. I will be his father and he shall be my son if he commit iniquity I will chasten him with the rod of men but my mercy will I not take away In these places sin is expresly made the cause of those afflictions and it is a poor evasion to say this was in the Old Testament for was not the chastisement of the godly mens peace in the Old Testament laid upon Christ as well as in the New but their folly herein and their contradiction to themselves will be abundantly shewed in answering their objections 2. In the places that do assert Gods judging of his people and rebuking of them and they are divers 1 Cor. 11. For this cause many are sick and weak where again you have not only the affliction but the cause why viz. irreverent prophaning of that Sacrament Thus James 5.14 Is any man sick Let him call for the Elders and let them pray for him and if he have committed sins saith the Text they shall be forgiven him There is none but hath committed sins yet the Apostle makes such an if because he speaks of such sins that may provoke God to lay that sicknesse upon him Thus in the Old Testament Psal 99.8 Thou forgavest them though thou tookâ—st vengeance on their inventions Here the Psalmist cals the chastisements upon those whose sins were forgiven vengeance as in other places his anger is said to smoak against the sheep of his pasture but we must not understand it of vengeance strictly so called as if God would satisfie his justice out of their sufferings 3. From the incouragement to duties by temporal Arguments and threats of temporal afflictions If the godly have these goads then certainly as they may conclude their temporal mercies to be the fruit of their godlinesse which hath the promise of this life and the life to come so they may conclude that their afflictions are the effects of their evil waies which have the threatning of this life and the life to come only here is this difference that the outward good mercies are not from their godlinesse by way of merit or causality but their afflictions are so because of their sins Hence the Apostle urgeth the godly Heb. 12.19 with this that even our God is a consuming fire Thus 1 Pet. 3.10 11. He that will love life and see good daies let him eschue evil and do good So that the Scripture pressing to holinesse because of outward good mercies and to keep from sin because of external evils and pressing these to the godly doth evidently declare this truth and certainly the Apostle speaking of the godly Rom. 8.10 saith the body is dead because of sin for by body Beza doth well understand our mortal body and not the mass of sin as some interpret it 4. From the comparison God useth concerning his afflictions upon his people and that is to be a father in that act correcting of them Thus Heb. 12.6 7 8 9 10 11 12. compare this with Rev. 3.19 As many as I love I rebuke now rebuke is alwaies for some fault and this is further cleared because he makes this conclusion be zealous therefore and repent therefore sin was precedent Now in these places God compareth himself to a Father and beleevers to children and we all know that fathers never correct but for sin it would be ridiculous to say the father whips the childe from sin not for sin It is true he doth it from sin by way of prevention to the future yet for sin also The Antinomian saith this is spoken of many beleevers together where some were not converted but this is weak because the persons whom he reproveth God is said to love them and they are children not bastards Again he saith There is no sin mentioned therefore it was not for sin But I answer the very comparison of God with a Father correcting his childe doth evidently argue it was for sin though it be not expressed 5. From the command not to despise or to make little account of Gods afflictions but to humble our selves and search out our waies Why should this be spoken but because they are for our sins Heb. 12.5 Despise not the chastening of God neither faint when thou art rebuked of him Where two things may seem to be forbidden though some make them all one one not to faint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a metaphore from those who faint in the race through languor and dissolution of minde The other is in the other extream not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to despise or to
The sense of Gods displeasure as a father may well stand together with an assurance that for all this he is no enemy A childe that bitterly crieth out because of his fathers chastisements yet even then hath that hope and comfort which he would not have if fallen into the hands or rage of an enemy that would kill him Hence it is that we presse all believers though sorely punished for their sins as their own hearts can tell them yet they must never pass such a sentence Now God is become my enemy he deals with me as with a Judas as with a Cain these we say are sinful inferences but they may conclude thus God though a loving father is now very angry and much displeased with me Distinguish then between a peace that doth oppose the hatred of God to a sinner as an enemy and a peace which doth oppose only the frowns of a father and this objection is answered I will acknowledge the people of God are apt under his sore displeasure not to discern between a father and an enemy They have much adoe to keep up this in their hearts God he smites he frowns he chides yet he is a father still but this is their temptation and weaknesse and we are apt to endeavour some kinde of compensation to God in our troubles for sin therefore it was a most blessed thing when God at the Reformation out of Popery caused this truth to break out That punishments for sin were not satisfactory to God but fatherly chastisements Thus you have this answered and as for that which followeth we glory in tribulations the Apostle must be limited to those which fall upon us for professing of Christ and his truth In these we may glory as the souldier doth of his marks and wounds he hath received in the wars for a good cause and to this purpose we told you in one Proposition That there was a great difference between those troubles that fell upon us because of the good in us and those which come upon us because of the evil in us What glory is it saith Peter 1 Pet. 2.20 if ye be buffeted for your faults Now who can deny but that even a godly man may fall into some hainous crime for which he may receive a sentence of death This man though he may rejoice in God who doth pardon the sin to him yet he can no more glory of this tribulation then a childe doth of whipping for his faults Another place of Scripture is Isa 53.5 The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed This Text of Scripture is again and again pressed by them and certainly it is more sweet then the Honey or Honey-Comb but truly they do with it as the thieves with the man of Jericho leave it half dead and much wounded First Let us open the place and then see how far they are from the meaning The Prophet Isaiah in this Chapter may be called as we said before the fifth Evangelist for he seemeth rather to write an History of Christ then make a prophecie of him Among other passages these two are to our purpose 1. That the chastisement of our peace was upon him by Peace here Calvin doth well understand not that of quietnes in the conscience but a reconciliation made with God through his sufferings And it is observed by some how emphatical the Scripture is in that Pronoun He He hath born and He hath been wounded The second follows With his stripes we are healed Some think that this is spoken to debase that condition Christ so voluntarily put himself in that so his love might appear the more to us it being an allusion to the State of servants who used to be chastised by their lords The phrase is the same with that He hath born our griefs or diseases which Matth. 8.17 is applied to Christs healing of diseases and 1 Pet. 2. to that suffering upon the Crosse And well may this be because the outward healing of diseases was a Symbole or Testimony of his inward healing Although Grotius observeth That Christ is therefore said to bear our diseases when he cured them because of the great pains and travell he took therein for it was after Sun-set and the multitude did much throng him so then by the words you see the whole price of our peace laid upon Christ and by him all evils both temporall and spirituall removed but what is this to the purpose Yes say they here our chastisements are laid upon Christ therefore we have none for sin but 1. if this proved any thing it will be more then the Antinomians will yield for it would infer that there are no chastisements at all either for sin or no sin now the Antinomians cannot deny and experience confuteth them but that the godly have afflictions though as they say not for sin and this will inevitably follow by their argument for as they would prove from hence they have no sin at all not only sin that will not condem as the Orthodox say but even no sin so it will by the same reason follow that believers have no chastisements at all I do not say not for sin but none at all But Secondly The Antinomian in that place pag. 129. doth fully answer himself All chastisement saith he for sin needfull for the making perfect peace between God and his justified children was laid upon him very true Therefore say we though these chastisements be for sin yet they are not upon the godly as upon Christ they are not to satisfie Gods justice to work a reconciliation but only to humble them in themselves and make them the better feel how much they are beholding to Christ who bore so much wrath for them To say therefore as the Papists Christ by his death did only remove the spirituall evil and we by our sufferings must take away the temporall punishment this would indeed be derogatory to Christ and take off in a great measure from his glory A Third place brought in to maintain their errour is James 1.2 3 4 5. Count it matter of all joy when you shall fall into divers temptations therefore saith he they are not for sin because they are matters of joy and mark how he baptizeth goeth on the Author crosses and afflictions as it were with a new name taken from the nature of the change of them through the Gospel calling them temptations and trials But mark the ignorance of the adversary rather then the name of afflictions for Is it peculiar to beleevers under the Gospel that their afflictions are tryals what then will he return to that place Deut. 8.2 God saith the afflictions upon the people of Israel for fourty years in the wildernesse and they were not all beleevers much lesse beleevers under the Gospel were to humble them and prove or try them And Jer. 9.7 God speaking of the Israelites saith He will melt them and try them See
Example God the Father is moved through the death of Christ to pardon the sins of such persons for whom he dieth This agreement is to be made good in that time they shall pitch upon in their transaction Now it pleased the Father that the benefits and fruits of Christs death should be applied unto the believer and not till he did believe though this faith be at the same time also a gift of God through Christ It is good therefore when we either call Election absolute or say Christ died absolutely to consider that Absolute may be taken as opposite to a Pre-requisite Condition which is to be fulfilled by us so that upon this Election and the fruits of Christs death shall depend or else Absolute may be taken as it opposeth any Means or Order which God hath appointed as the way to obtain the end and in this later sense it would be a grand absurdity to say Election is absolute or Christ died absolutely for if this were so the prophane Argument about Election would have truth in it If I be elected let me live never so wickedly I shall be saved And the Arminian Argument That every one were bound to believe that Christ died for him though wicked and abiding so would not well be avoided His last Argument is from the unchangeableness of Gods love If we are not justified in his sight before we believe then God did once hate us and afterwards love us And if this be so why should Arminians be blamed for saying We may be the children of God to day and the children of the devil to morrow Hence he concludes it as undoubted That God loved us first before we believe even when we were in our bloud In answering of this Argument several things are considerable First It must be readily granted That God is unchangeable Jam. 1.17 God is there compared to the Sunne and is therefore called the Father of Lights but yet is preferred before it because that hath Clouds sometimes cast over it and sometimes is in eclipse but there is change or shadow of change with him The Heathens have confessed this and so argued If God should change it would be either for better or worse for worse how could it be imagined for better then God were not absolutely perfect Most accursed therefore must Vorstius his blasphemy be who purposely pleads for mutability in God But secondly As this is easily to be confessed so the difficulty of those Arguments brought from the things which God doth in time and not from all Eternity have been very weighty upon some mens shoulders insomuch that they thought this the only way to salve all by saying That all things were from Eternity And certainly by the Antinomian Arguments we may as well plead for the Creation of all things from all Eternity as that we are justified from all Eternity for all are equally built upon this sandy foundation That because the things are done in time therefore there must be some new act of will or love in God which would imply God is mutable not loving to day and loving to morrow Therefore to avoid this they say All is from Eternity Origen who was called by an ancient Writer Centaur because of his monstrous opinions argued thus lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 2. As there cannot be a father without a sonne or a Master and Lord without a possession so neither an omnipotent unless there be those things about which this power may be exercised Now although it be true That De Deo etiam vera dicere periculosum est because of the weakness of our Understandings to perceive his infinite lustre Yet thirdly It is well cleared by the Schoolmen That those relations which are attributed to God in time as a Creatour Father or Lord are not because of any new thing in God but in respect of the creatures so that when the world is created when a man is justified we say God who was not a Creator before is a Creator who was not a Father by grace is now by grace not because any new accident is in him but because there is a new effect in the creatures Thus if a man once the childe of wrath be now a son of Gods love the change is not in God but in the creature For the better clearing of this we are to take notice in the fourth place That it is one thing as Aquinas observeth Mutare voluntatem to change the Will and another thing Velle mutationem to Will a change By the same unchangeable Will we may Will several changes in an Object As the Physician without any change of his Will may will his Patient to take one kinde of Physick one day and another the third here he wils a change but doth not change his Will Thus God with the same Will decreed to permit in time such an elect man to be in a state of sin under the power of Satan and afterwards to call him out of this condition to justifie his person here indeed is a great change made in the man but none at all in God There is no new act in God which was not from all Eternity though every effect of this love of God was not from Eternity but in time Hence when our Divines argue against Arminians That if the Saints should apostatize Gods love would be changeable it is meant of Gods love of Election which is an absolute purpose and efficacious will to bring such a man to glory now although such a decree was free and so might not have been yet ex hypothesi supposing God hath made this decree it doth very truly follow That if that Saint should not be brought to glory God would be changeable And besides this immutability which may be called an immutability of his nature there is another of his Word and Promise whereby he hath graciously covenanted to put his fear in their heart that they shall never depart from him Now if any of the Saints should totally or finally apostatize Gods mutability would be seen in both those respects of his nature or will and of his truth and fidelity But the case is not the like when a man at his first conversion is made of a childe of wrath a childe of grace partly because there was no such absolute decree of God from Eternity that he should be for no space a childe of wrath but the clean contrary and partly because there is no such word or promise unto any unconverted person that he shall be in the favour of God but the Scripture declareth the clean contrary This duly considered will give a clear reason why it is no good Argument to say Such a man in his sins to day is a childe of wrath and converted to morrow is a son of grace Therefore God is changeable But on the other side if a man should argue An Elect man received into the state of grace may fall totally and finally Therefore God is
and gripes he had within because of sin and no wonder he did not confess it and bewail it before God If therefore God keeps thy heart in many doubts and fears giving thee no rest consider whether thou hast cast all that leaven out of thy house whether every Achan within thee be stoned or no. It is in vain to cure the wound as long as any splint of the poisoned arrow lieth within it or if thou finde no sin unrepented of search whether thy formal lazy duties be not the cause of all the blackness that is in thy heart We reade in the Canticles that the Churches laziness and her not opening the doors to Christ when he knockt was the cause of that spiritual desertion she was plunged into seeking up and down for her Beloved but not finding of him The standing pool begets the croaking Frogs not the running stream and it is the dull negligent Christian whose heart is filled with sad fears and doubts whereas the hidden Manna and white stone is promised to him that overcometh 3. Though thy soul walk thus in darkness yet exercise acts of dependency and recumbency upon Christ howsoever As David many times cals upon his soul to trust in God and not to be sinfully dejected How is that woman of Canaan commended for her faith who though our Saviour called her Dog and did in effect tell her she was excluded from pardon did yet earnestly pursue him and gave him no rest till he gave her rest And certainly this is the noblest act of Faith this is indeed to give glory to God when in the midst of all thy fears and guilt thou canst relie upon him for pardon as in wicked men who are filled with Satan as Ananiaâ— was there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a desperate boldness whereby they dare venture upon sin So in the godly there should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a confidence of Faith whereby maugre the devil and our consciences we dare throw our selves into the arms of a Promise Thus by frequent putting forth of strong fiducial applicative acts of Faith we shall at last enjoy obsignative Howsoever hereby thou wilt shew thy heavenly courage in enduring a kinde of spiritual Martyrdom As that Love is the highest Love which is carried out to enemies so those are the strongest acts of Faith which make us depend on God though he seem to kill us yea to damn us LECTURE XXIV MAT. 6.12 And forgive us our Debts ANother Question which is also of great use we are to dispatch at this time viz. Whether a Believer repenting and suing for pardon is to make any difference between a great sin and a lesse For if a man should be perswaded of the negative then would gross and notorious sins which Tertullian cals Devoratoria salutis whirlpools and gulfs wherein the party offended is plunged be no more then those sins which Austin cals Quotidiana levia daily infirmities which continually flow from the most sanctified person Again on the other side A Christian falling into such a gross sin may so far be swallowed up with sorrow as that he shall think the whole bond of friendship is dissolved between him and God that he is cast out of that spiritual Paradise he was in and that God is no more his Father nor he his childe It is therefore necessary to have a pillar of fire to guide us in this wilderness And that the whole truth of this matter may be understood observe these Propositions First Every sin even the least sin doth deserve eternal death As appeareth by those general places Cursed is every one that abideth not in all things the Law commands Gal. 3.10 Now every sin is a transgression of the Law This the Apostle speaks universally of all sin without any exception Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death And indeed this must needs be so if you consider the least sinne is an offence against an infinite God and in this respect because God is not a little but a great God so every sin is not little but a great sin Again if you consider the necessity of Christs bloud to expiate this no sinne can be thought little for if a man had no sin in the world but one of these little ones he could not escape eternall wrath without Christs mediation Therefore we cannot say any sin is venial either from its kinde and nature as Papists distinguish such they make to be officious or jesting lies or from the imperfection of the act such they make those that are committed indeliberately or out of ignorance without full consent or knowledge Or from the smalness of the matter as to steal a farthing or the like None of these sins are so small but that they deserve hell because they are the transgression of the Law of an holy and great God and our Saviour confirmeth this when he saith Of every idle word a man shall give an account Mat. 12.36 and that phrase of giving an account is not a diminutive but aggravative expression Our Saviour doth there argue from the less to the greater Thus If a man must give an account for every idle word much more for blasphemy against the holy Ghost Take we heed therefore how we bring down the weight and guilt of the sinne here also we may see why Paul found such a mountain upon him by sinful motions only arising in his heart There are two places that seem to import such a difference between sins as if some only deserved hell and others not The first is Mat. 5.22 where our Saviour speaking of three degrees of sin doth proportionably assign three degrees of punishment and the last only is guilty of hell fire But the clear Answer is That our Saviour speaks allusively to those three Courts of Judicature among the Jews the least punishment whereof was death so that the first Court punished with death the second death with a more grievous torment The third with a most grievous For that our Saviour doth only allude to these Courts and not speak of what faults the Courts punished is plain for none can think that the Court put any to death for calling his brother fool It was murder and such â—ins that they punished with capital punishments The other place is 1 Joh. 5.15 17. where the Apostle makes a difference between a sin unto death and a sin not unto death but that is clearly to be understood either of the sin against the holy Ghost which in those times when the spirit of discerning was frequent might easily be known or of such sin that did plainly discover obstinacy and impenitency accompanying of it otherwise no man might pray for another man that hath committed a mortal sin if by a sin unto death the Papist will mean every mortal sin Lay therefore this foundation That every sin is mortal in respect of its desert and guilt howsoever to the godly believing and repenting no sin is mortal
the same we can prove it is because of repentance future So that still no sin will be forgiven without repentance For suppose that were a true rule to stand upon Gods internal will to pardon is an immanent act and therefore from all eternity will it not as well follow Gods internal will to give repentance is an immanent act and therefore repentance is from all eternity If another be a true rule That God hath given us all pardon from eternity only we have the sense of it and manifestation in our own souls may we not then say that we had the grace of repentance from all eternity but it is declarative in time in our own souls For although justification be Gods act and repentance ours yet we are passive in the infusion of this as well as justification I speak not of repentance as an act which cannot so properly be said to be infused but of the frame of the soul If a third rule should be true That therefore sins are pardoned because the Covenant of Grace saith it will pardon all Doth not this hold also for repentance seeing in the Covenant God promiseth to give a repenting heart Lastly If God may be thought changeable because now he pardons and once he did not will it not as well hold because he now gives grace to such a man to repent and once he did not To conclude therefore it followeth with an equal necessity That if future sins are forgiven before they be committed That God also did accept of future repentance before it was practised or else if repentance be not received by God till actually performed so neither is sin forgiven till actually committed and repented of The result of this whole truth is by way of Use to admonish us That we make not any Doctrine about grace in the genious and natural consequence of it to encourage or harden to sin If the grace of God which hath appeared to teach thee to deny all ungodly lusts make thee love them the more If because you are under grace sin hath therefore dominion over you If there be goodness with the Lord and therefore you do not fear him then know all things work contrary to their nature and Scripture-directions All Gospel-grace is a cleansing purifying refining property it is fire to get out the dross it is water to wash away the filth it is oyl to mollifie the wounds of the soul it is wine to make the heart glad and rejoyce in God Do not while you promise your selves a liberty by grace therein become servants of corruption more especially let the children of God who have had sweet experience of the Covenant of Grace upon their souls take heed of fals and relapses If the Prodigal son after that reconciliation made with his father after all that glory and love vouchsafed to him had again wandered into far Countries prodigally consumed all his estate living with swine upon husks How unpardonable and unworthy would this fact have been No less guilty wilt thou be who hast had the ring put on thee who hast fed on the fatted Calf if after this thou provoke God by gross transgressions Some have disputed Whether it be possible for a godly man to be secure in sinning and more willing to offend because of Gods gracious Covenant which will infallibly rescue him out of that sin But what sin is not possible except that against the holy Ghost even to a regenerate man Take heed then lest thou love the Gospel because it hath alwaies glad tidings and thou canst not abide the precepts or threatnings because they speak hard things to thee There may be a carnal Gospeller as well as a Popish Legalist LECTURE XXIX ACTS 3.19 Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out THe Apostle Peter in this exhortatory discourse of his to the Jews deals like a wise Physitian First Discovering the danger of the disease Secondly Applying an effectual remedy The disease is that hainous sin the Jews were guilty of in killing of Christ the Prince of life Which sin is aggravated by a threefold antithesis 1. They delivered up and denied Christ in the presence of Pilate when he would have acquitted him 2. They denied him though he was an holy and just One 3. They desired a murtherer to be released rather then him This is their sin In the next place you have the remedy prescribed in two words Repent and be converted Repent that denotes a change in the heart and to be converted an alteration in the outward conversation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Howsoever it be generally received that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth only true and godly sorrow and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that imperfect and unsound grief which is upon hypocrites yet this is not universally true for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applied to true repentance Mat. 21.19 32. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to an outward repentance meeerly Mat. 11.21 The other word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to be understood reciprocally Turn your selves or be turned This exhortation doth not suppose free-will in us it only denoteth our duty not our ability Neither is Grotius his assertion better then Semipelagianisme when he compareth the will of a man to the mother and grace to the father so that as children are named after the father and not the mother thus good actions are denominated from grace not free-will for in our conversion free-will is neither a totall or partiall cause preoperant or cooperant but the passive subject recipient of that Vim gratiae vorticordiam as Austin called it the heart-changing power of grace This duty of repentance is urged from the profitable consequent Piscator cals it effectu utili the effect of conversion which is that your sins may be blotted out It is not an inference of causality but of consequence Blotting out is as you heard from merchants that expunge their debts or the Scribe that raceth out those letters which ought not to be in the paper or the Painter that defaceth those lineaments which should not be in the Picture In the next place you have the time when these sins shall be blotted out that is when the times of refreshing shall come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used Exod. 8.15 Some do not understand this nor that expression The times of restitution of all things vers 21. of the day of judgement but of that preservation the elect should have when the destruction of Jerusalem should be Hence it is that they expound the day of the Lord so much spoken of in Peter and other places which is said to be coming upon the beleevers of that time when God came to destroy Jerusalem but there is no cogent reason to go from the received interpretation which maketh the day of judgement to be the times of refreshing to the godly for so indeed it is because then they are eased from all those troubles and oppressions they lay under in
make little or nothing of it as it were a great fault in a childe to slight or make nothing of his fathers corrections Now let all the world judge whether the Antinomian Doctrine doth not open a wide gate to despise Gods afflictions this makes them cry down Fast-daies repentance humiliation and confession of sin yea they make it Popery and hypocrisie what is done this way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may say with Homer 6. If God hath commanded Magistrates to execute outward evils upon some godly men that have hainously offended then its Gods will to afflict them for sin but he hath done so If a godly man being through the Dalilah of some corruption perswaded to have his hair cut off his spirituall strength gone and so he fall into the sin of murder is it not Gods will that the Magistrate should put him to death for this sin and what God would have the Magistrate do is it not as much as if God himself had done and must not all say this is a chastisement upon him because of his sin Thus have I brought reasons to prove that which I think was never denied before till this age which every day like Africa bringeth forth some Monster And certainly the Doctrine of afflictions upon the godly is so sweet and wholesome a truth that none but a Spider could suck out such poison from it as the Antinomian hath done LECTURE V. ROM 3.24 25. Being justified freely by his grace c. WE come now to consider how the Antinomian can make good that Paradox of his God chastiseth not believers because of their sins and indeed the Author forementioned doth much sweat and tug in bringing in severall absurdities which he conceives will follow upon the truth asserted by us But before we examine them let us take notice of the Authours great contradiction to himself in this point and that within very few Pages Falshood is not only dissonant from truth but also from it felf for whereas in the forequoted place he makes his assertion universal that Ged seeth not sin in persons converted and therefore there are no afflictions befall them because of sin Now see how flat contrary that same Authour speaks in the same book pag. 117. for there making an opposition between the condition of believers in the Old Testament and those in the new he expresly gives this difference God saith he saw sin in them as they were children that had need of a rod by reason of their non-age but he seeth none in us as being full-grown heirs and again God saw in them and punished them for it as they were under the Schoolmaster of the Law but he seeth none in us Hence pag. 99. he makes it peculiar to the time of the Law that Moses for an unadvised word was strucken with death and Vzzah and Jonah and Ely with others temporally corrected Therefore it was saith he came those terrible Famines whereby mothers were driven to eat their own children all was because they were under the severity of the Law that if they did but a little step awry they were sharply scourged for the same Now how great a contradiction is this to his other assertion for were not the godly under the Old Testament actually converted had they not Christs righteousnes made theirs were they not elected how cometh it about then that they were afflicted for sin and not believers under the New Testament when a man can bring the East and West together then may he reconcile these assertions but self contradiction is no strange thing in that book But I come to his Arguments The first place he urgeth is Ro. 5.1 2 3. Being justified by faith we have peace with God that is all beating blows and anger are ceased saith he and hence it is that we glory in our afflictions but now if they were for our sins we had no more cause to glory in them then the childe hath in his whippings for his faults For the opening of this place consider these things some ancient Commentators reade the word imperatively 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us have instead of we have and thus they have interpreted it Being justified by Faith let us take heed how we sin again but preserve our peace with God The words taken this way would much confirm rather then debilitate our assertion but I doe not judge this so suteable to the scope of the Apostle in this verse we will take them as they are indicatively or assertively and first we may mean by peace either that reconciliation which is made with God or the sense and feeling of this which is nothing but tranquillity and security of conscience through the perswasion of Gods favour to us Now these may be separable one from the other a believer may be reconciled with God and in the state of friendship with him yet he not feel this or know this as many passages in Davids Psalms do witnesse even as the childe in the womb knoweth not the great inheritance and rich Revenues it shall be possessed of or as Agar did not see the well of water by her but thought she must perish till God opened her eyes There is a seal of the pardon of sin when yet the proclamation of it is not made in the conscience If we take peace in the first respect it is an absolute universal proposition and true of every justified person but in the latter sense it is true only of some persons and at some times for the sense of Gods favour is a separable priviledge from those that are in it If by peace we should understand the sense of Gods favour and the declaration of it in our consciences as by their arguments they must do then it proveth against their opinion as well as any others for they hold that a believer needeth to pray for pardon in the declaration or sense and feeling of sin though not for the pardon it self of sin now there cannot be at the same time a want of the feeling of pardon of sin and the tranquillity of conscience together so that this place must needs be a thorn in their side But 2ly the true and direct answer to this place is that there is a twofold peace one which is opposite to the hatred of God as he is a terrible enemy to sinners unreconciled with them in which sense he is often described in Scripture The other as it is opposite to that fatherly anger and displeasure whereby though for the main reconciled yet he may for some particular faults be displeased now the Apostle speaks of the former kinde of peace Being justified that is God being once reconciled with us in Christ he hath no more hostile enmity against us and if we do sin afterwards he will not become an enemy to us or satisfie his justice by punishing of us but as a father he may in his displeasure chastise us
more Again see the like dealing with David 2 Sa. 11.12.8 9. I anointed thee King over Israel and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul and if that had been too little I would have given thee such and such things wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of God c. Must not this pierce into the very bowels of David Shall God upbraid his people falling into sin spread before their eyes the manifold mercies he hath bestowed upon them and all this while see no sin in them Therefore when it is said Iam. 1.5 That God upbraideth not that is to be understood in respect of his frequent and liberal giving as men use to say I have given thus often and I will give no more which kinde of giving Seneca cals panem lapidosum but if men walk unworthy of the benefits received he doth then upbraid as Mar. 16.14 He is said to upbraid the Disciples because of their unbelief Thirdly The Scripture applieth the threatnings of God to believeâ—s as well as to others making no difference between them unless they repent Indeed we say against the Papists that all the sins of justified persons are venial and not mortal that is such as in the event will have pardon but that is because the seed of grace will be operative in them so that they shall either habitually or actually repent of their sins Neither when the Orthodox say That Election is absolute do they exclude the media instituta means appointed by God in which the fruit of Election is accomplished but conditions antecedanâ—ous as if that decree did remain suspense and uncertain till the will of man had determined 1 Cor. 6.9 10. The Apostle laieth down an universal rule such and such grosse offenders shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven that is those who live so and do not repent and this is to be extended not only to those who are habitually so but actually likewise unlesse they are reformed Therefore no godly man falling into any of those grosse sins may deceive himself and think he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven without a change Godly or ungodly yet if found in the committing of such a gross sin unless they do repent God will not accept one or the other As repentance is appointed for the wicked man as a duty without which he cannot be saved so confession and forsaking of sin is prescribed a godly man fallen into sin without which he cannot have remission 1 Jo. 1.9 There is no such free grace or Gospel as faith to a believer if fallen into a foul sin whether you repent or no your sins shall be pardoned to you Hence 1 Cor. 11. the Apostle makes every man that receiveth unworthily and yet some of them were godly to receive their damnation that is their eternal damnation without repentance and reformation and after repentance their judgement though not of condemnation yet affliction and castigation How terrible likewise is Paul He. 12.29 where speaking to the godly that are to receive a kingdom that is eternal he exhorteth them to duty Let us have grace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Let us retain and keep grace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Ro. 15.4 and observe the manner with reverence and godly fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is such a fear as relateth to punishment compare this place with Ps 2.12 and thus the words following suppose for our God is a consuming fire this is taken out of Deu. 4.24 and the meaning is God is no less angry with Christians sinning against him then formerly with the Israelites it is as easy for him to destroy whom he is offended with as for the fire to destroy stubble How directly doth this place overthrow that Antinomian assertion God saw sin in believers in the Old Testament and therefore afflicted them but it is not so under the New Now when it s said God is a consuming fire this denoteth the great anger of God compare it with Deu. 9.3 Deu. 32.22 Fire is most efficacious and least capable of transmutation as other elements are for which reason the Persians worshipped fire for a god but fire might be extinguished whereas God is such a fire as consumeth all and remaineth immutable Know then brethren that as there are places in the New Testament which speak of the riches of his grace so also of his consuming anger As therefore the promises of the Scripture are for consolation hope to the godly so are the threatnings for a godly fear Between these two milstones a Christian is made dulcis farina as Luther once said and neither of these milstones may be taken for a pledge as the Law was in the Old Testament because one cannot work without the other Therefore for a man to take only those places of Scripture which speak of the goodnesse of the promises and to reject the terrors of the threatnings is spiritual theft in an high degree Doth not Paul 2 Cor. 5 excite himself to run like a Gyant in his ministerial race because of the terror of the Lord at the day of Judgement See ver 10. We must all appear so to appear as to be seen through and made manifest before the judgement-seat of God as those that are to plead a cause in an eminent place before a Judge to receive a reward sutable to his life nâ—w knowing this saith the Apostle we perswade it may relate to himself and to those whom he perswadeth Yet this apprehension of the Lords terror did not exclude love for v. 14. he saith The love of Christ constraineth us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either an expression from those who had a spirit of prophecie upon them that was very powerfull whereby they could not but speak or else from women in travell Heb. 12.15 which through pain cannot but cry out so efficacious was love in Paul 4. The sins of godly men cease not to be sins though they are justified We may not say that in Cain killing of another is murder but in David it is not We may not say denying of Christ in Judas is indeed a sin but in Peter it is not No priviledge they have by justification can alter the nature of a sin He that receiveth unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord whether he be a wicked man or a Beleever It is not with a Beleever and a wicked man as with a man and a beast comparatively If a beast kill a man it is not sin because the subject is not reasonable but a man if he do so whether godly or ungodly it is a sin because against Gods Law It is not safe to say that God doth with the Beleever and wicked as if a Magistrate should make a Law that whosoever committeth such a crime if he be a free-man he shall only be imprisoned but if a servant he shall be put to death so God whosoever murdereth or committeth adultery