sinners before He can be looked upon as a Righteous person or be dealt with as a Righteous person He must first have a Righteousness imputed to him and bestowed upon him for how can God whose judgement is according to truth look upon a person as Righteous and conferre privileges upon him due only to such as are Righteous who is not Righteous indeed Must He not first bestow a Righteousness upon him reckon a Righteousness upon his Score to the end He may be just and Righteous when He is the justifier of him that beleeveth Lastly He said Here is neither peer nor peep of the least ground or reason to perceive that by Righteousness in this Scripture should be meant the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. It is enough that the Text saith Righteousness is imputed for the man here spoken of hath not a Righteousness of his own as the Apostle hath proved in the preceeding Chapters doth here take for granted And therefore this Imputed Righteousness must be the Righteousness of another and it must be such a Righteousness of another as can found free Remission of Sins And whose Righteousness else can this be if it be not Christ's Is there any third competitour here imaginable must it not be the Righteousness of Him whom faith goeth out unto laith hold on in order to justification Must it not be His Righteousness who was the Mediator who laid down the price of Redemption was a propitiation as He told us in the preceeding Chapter Some men in alleiging a difference betwixt a Righteousness imputed to us Sinners and the Righteousness of Christ as if there could be any other Righteousness imputable to us except the Surety-righteousness of Christ as they expresly in this joine with Socinians See Volkel de vera Relig. lib. 5. cap. 21. p. 565. with Papists Arminians so they declare themselves utter strangers to the Gospel yea greater strangers than those were against whom the Apostle wrote who took it for granted that if any Righteousness from without or that was not by any thing which we do were imputed it behoved to be the Righteousness of the Mediator And this we may conceive is the reason why the Apostle doth not say in so many express words that it was the Righteousness of Christ for who could have thought of another Fourthly Rom. 5 19. a place with its whole contexture pregnant for our purpose for the Apostle is not onely here confirming but also illustrating this whole matter from the Imputation of Adam's Sin unto his posterity after many various and emphatick expressions used there-anent from vers 12. and forward he saith here vers 19 for as by one mans disobedience many were made Sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous Socinus de Servat lib. 4. cap. 6. is so bold as to tell us That he supposeth there is nothing written in the Scriptures that hath given us a greater occasion of erring than that comparison betwixt Adam Christ which Paul made did prosecute at length here And he would cleare to us the comparison thus That as by Adam's Sin disobedience it came to passe that all men were condemned and died so by Christ's righteousness and obedience it came to passe that they wero absolvod and did live for Christ by His own Righteousness and Obedience by vertue of the decree of God did penetrate the heavens there to reigne for ever and there he begote eternal life and everlasting blessedness both to Himself and to His. How aliene this is from the whole of the Apostle's discourse needs not be declared seing there is not one word giving the least hint of the Apostle's designe to be to declare how what way Christ obtained power and authority to save Yet He goeth on to tell us That as Adam's fault made him guilty of death whence it came to passe that all mankind that are procreat of him after that guilt is obnoxious to death so Christ by His Righteousness purchased to Himself eternal life whence it cometh te passe that who ever are procreat of him partake of this life But He never once taketh notice that Paul giveth for the ground of all mankind's becoming guilty of death their sinning in him vers 12. even such as had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression vers 14. yea in every verse this cause is noted or pointed at it being Notour of it self that ifall mankind did sin in Adan Adam's sin must be imputed unto them so Christ's Righteousness must be imputed unto all His inreference to their justification that with a much more Let us now see what Iohn Goodwine excepteth pag. 142. c. It is not here said He said that by the Imputation of Adam's disobedience men are made formally Sinners but simply sinners that is either obnoxious to death and condemnation or else sinners by propagation not Imputation Ans. This is the same upon the matter with Bellarmin's answer de justif lib. 2. cap. 9. here we have a distinction proposed without any explication to wit betwixt simply sinners and formally sinners And what can he meane by formally sinners possibly he meaneth that which otherwise is expressed by inherently sinners And if so though Adam's posterity so soon as they come to have a being have an universal corruption of Nature convoyed by propagation yet that is not it which is properly said to be Imputed for that which is imputed is the guilt of Adam's sin whereby they become sinners that is guilty legally and so obnoxious to punishment death condemnation this is enough for us for as the posterity of Adam have the sin of Adam so imputed to them that they become guilty and obnoxious to wrath so Beleevers have the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto them and they thereupon are accounted legally righteous 2 Whileas he will not grant that Adam's posterity are sinners by imputation he joineth with the Socinians who turne these words vers 12. 〈◊〉 not in whom but because or whereas which the Ethiopick version doth better sense saying Because that sin is imputed unto all men even unto them who know not what is that sin And the Arabick turne thus seing all have now sinned and the Syriack word is Behi or Bhi which may as well be interpreted in whom as because And in several other places this praeposition so construed as here in the Greek hath this same import as Mark 2. 4. Luk 5 25. 11 22. Rom. 6 21. Phil. 4 10. 1. Thes. 3 7. But enough of this here seing that matter is sufficiently cleared by the orthodox writting against the Socinians and we have also spoken of it against the Quakers Againe saith He Neither doth the Apostle here oppose unto or compare the Obedience of Christ with the disobedience of Adam as one Act unto or with another but as Satisfaction to and with the provocation or the Remedie to and with the
that they were all caused to meet together on Him Esai 53 6. He therefore was made a Sacrifice for sin or dealt with punished as a sinner though no sinner inherently but only by Imputation for He did bear our griefs carried our sorrowes was wounded for our transgressions bruised for our iniquities Esai 53 4 5. to wit now imputed to Him by God reckoned upon His account who knew no sin in Himself inherently So are we made the Righteousness of God in Him 2 Cor. 5 21. that is have His Righteousness who is God imputed to us who were in our selves inherently sinners being in Him by faith are dealt with as Righteous The manifest scope of the place the plaine Import of the word must enforce this truth on all who are not more than ordinarily blinded with prejudice Secondly as Adam's posterity who were not existing when he transgressed the Law of God but were only in his loines federally comprehended with him in that covenant by God's voluntary disignation appointment so did not actually really eat that fruit which Adam did eat yet have that sin guilt so imputed unto them that it is really accounted theirs not meerly in its Effects for its Effects are not truely Imputed neither can be saied to be so for that natural contagion corruption of Nature which is truely propagated to the posterity all actuall trangressions the fruits thereof cannot be said to be imputed because they are really theirs inherent in them But that original sin which is the guilt of Adam's first sin is only it which can be imputed unless we mean such an Imputation whereby our actual sinnes which we commit are said to be imputed to us when they are laid to our charge we actually punished therefore to them who did not actually commit it in their own person by vertue of this Imputation they are accounted guilty of that self same sin therefore are dealt with punished upon the account thereof no less than if they had actually committed it themselves in their own persons no less than Adam himselfs was punished therefore So are Beleevers being by faith united unto Christ made real members of His mystical body now interessed in Him as His Children Brethren made partakers of His Righteousness have it imputed unto them for all ends uses as if it had been their own without any Imputation The reading of the Apostles discourse Rom. 5. from vers 12. forward to the end may satisfy any as to this whole affaire who will yeeld themselves captives unto Truth for upon this doth the Apostle found His whole discourse explication of the rich advantages had by Christ His Righteousness clearing illustrating the same by that similitude of Adam whom He expresly calleth the figure of Him that was to come vers 14. so asserteth that as by one man sin entered into the world death by sin so death passed upon all beâ—ause all did sinne so by one man Jesus Christ the second Adam righteousness ontered into the world life by it so life passed upon all that were in Him because they are righteous in Him or have His righteousness imputed unto them Nay in the following verses the matter is cleared with an advantage unto Beleevers in Christ. But saith he vers 15 16 17 18 19. not as the offence so also is the free gift for if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God the gift by grace by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded unto many c. And so he goeth on to shew what how great things beleevers receive from Christ with no less Yea rather with much more of a certainety than the Posterity of Adam were interessed in what he did and therefore as judgment was by one to condemnation saith he so the free gift is of many offences unto justification if by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they who beleeve or receive aboundance of grace of the gift of righteousness shall reigne in life by one Iesus Christ. And as the offence of one Adam was imputed unto all thereby guilt judgment came upon all making them liable to condemnation So by the righteousness of one Jesus Christ imputed to all that receive this aboundance of grace of the gift of righteouseess the free gift of justification cometh unto them reconciling them to God instating them for life And the ground reason of this is laid down vers 19. for as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so were guilty made liable to judgment condemnation So by the obedience of one that perfect obedience to the Law that Christ performed opposite to Adam's transgression disobedience shall many be made righteous that is constituted righteous therefore dealt with as such through this imputed righteousness so justified made heirs of life for vers 21. he addeth as sin hath reigned unto death even so grace must reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. They then who will deny or oppose themselves unto this Imputation of Christ's righteousness must do manifest violence unto the whole discourse of the Apostle in this place Thirly Hence another evidencing ground of this imputation for as what is done by a publick person representing others whether upon one ground after one manner or another is accounted legally to be done by those who are represented they are dealt with accordingly as Adam was a publick person representing all his posterity that were to come of him by ordinary generation according to the ordination appointment of God So Christ of whom Adam was a figure was a publick person representing all whom the Father had given to Him for whom He had undertaken for whose sake He sanctified Himself Ioh. 17 19. become their Brother taking on their Nature Heb. 2 11 14. becoming like them in all things sin only excepted Heb. 2 17. comp with Heb. 3 15. Therefore He took not upon Him the Nature of Angels but the seed of Abraham Heb. 2 16. He was the Captaine of their Salvation vers 10. He is also made called the Head of the Church which is His body fulness Ephes 1 22 23. 5 23. Col. 1 18. and so He with His Church make up one mystical body whereof He is the Head Beleevers are members Thus there is a closs mystical union betwixt Christ Beleevers beyond any union that is in Nature whether it be that of Head members of Root Branches of King Subjects or of that betwixt Husband wife for all these are but dark resemblances of this Spiritual Union betwixt Christ Beleevers which is therefore compared unto these in part explained thereby for our better understanding of the matter but none of
disease Otherwise he should make sins of Omission to be no disobedience be cause Omissions are no Acts. Ans. The Apostle so compareth the Obedience of Christ with the disobedience of Adam as the Satisfaction with the provocation or as the Remedie with the disease as that withall chiesly he cleareth up the manner way thereof to be by Imputation thus That as Adam's sin of disobedience which includeth both Omission Commission being a Violation of the Law of the Covenant was imputed to his posterity they hence became guilty obnoxious to death yea were punished with original Corruption which cometh by propagation the consequences thereof so Christ's obedience which was full compleat is imputed unto Beleevers whereupon they become Righteous in order to their recovery out of their Natural state of sin and misery Further He saith By that obedience of Christ whereby it is here said that many are or shall be made Righteous that is jusâ—ified we cannot understand that Righteousness of Christ which consists only in obedience to the Moral Law but that Satisfactory Righteousness or obedience which He performed to that peculiar Law of Mediation which was imposed upon him and which chiesly consisted in his sufferings Ans. By the obedience of Christ unto the Law of Mediation strickly so taken as distinguished from His obedience to the Moral Law beleevers could not be made Righteous as the posterity of Adam are made sinners by his disobedience for that could not be properly imputed as this is as hath been shown so Paul's similitude should halt But 2. Why is Christ's obedience to the Law of Mediation set in opposition to His obedience to the Moral Law seing this was a part of that unto this He obliged Himself in undertaking the Mediation Was He not by the Law of Mediation bound as well to give obedience to the Law as to suffer the penalty And was He not obliged to both as Surety in room place And then why may not both be imputed unto them 3. Why should obedience here be thus restricked to the Law of Mediation He addeth two reasons but neither are valide The 1. is this Because otherwise the opposition â—etwixt Adam's disobedience which was but one single Act and Christ's Obedience if it were his universal conformity to the Law would not hold Ans. This same man told us in his former exception That Christ's obedience in respect of Adam's disobedience was considered opposed as the Satisfaction to the provocation as the Remedie to the disease now if this be true Christ made Satisfaction for no provocation but for that single act of eating the forbidden fruit what He did suffered should be only a Remedie for that one distemper if so how shall the rest of the Provocations and diseases be taken away or are there no more Provocations or diseases 2. Adam's disobedience was no Single act of disobedience but a disobedience including the breach of the whole Moral Law Saith not Iames that he who offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2 10. prove it too in the following vers The 2. is this The Effect that is here attributed to this obedience of Christ to wit justification or Righteous making of many is constantly appropriated to the death blood of Christ. Ans. This that is attributed to the blood death of Christ elsewhere to wit our justification sheweth that the death of Christ is not understood exclusively for by His death exclusivly considered we cannot-be made Righteous for the Imputation of another's suffering though it may exeem from death suffering yet it cannot constitute Righteous in reference to the commanding Law 2. The death of Christ must not be looked on as one act of obedience but as including all His foregoing acts of obedience belonging to His State of humiliation whereof His death was the crowning piece so as including as His whole suffering so His whole obedience to the Law under which he was made for He is said to have been obedient unto death even unto the death of the cross Phil. 2 8. not that the death of the cross was all His obedience as it was not the whole state of His humiliation but the terminating remarkable act thereof as it was not all His suffering His whole life being a life of suffering 3. If this obedience be understood of this one act of obedience in His dying justification be looked upon as the effect of this only what shall become of His Soul-sufferings while He was in an agonie in the garden But if the act of obedience in His death include these why not His whole state of humiliation And if it include all this why not also His obedience to the Law seing His being made under the Law belongeth to His state of humiliation as the Apostle tels us Gal. 4 4. He excepteth furder saying Suppose that by the obedience of Christ we should here undorstand His active obedience to the Moral Law yet it will not hence follow that men must be justified or made Righteous by it in such a way of imputation Ans. If by Christ's obedience to the Moral Law we be made Righteous as the posterity of Adam were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam that obedience of Christ must necessarily be imputed to us as Adam's disobedience was imputed to his posterity for there is no other way imaginable Let us hear his reason to the contrary For certaine it is said he that that justification or Righteous-making whereof the Apostle speaketh vers 19. is the same with that which He had spoken of v. 16 17 18. Now that Righteousness vers 17. is described vers 16. to be the gift i.e. the forgiveness of many offences i.e. of all the offences whereof a man either doth or shall stand guilty of before God unto justification and evident it is that that Righteousness c. cannot stand in the Imputation of a fulfilling of the Law Ans. 1. Though making Righteous and justification be inseparable yet they are not formally one the same but Righteous-making to wit by Imputation is antecedent unto justification the ground thereof as becoming sinners is not formally to be condemned but is prior to it the ground thereof 2. That free gift mentioned vers 16. is not free forgiveness but is that which is opposite to judgment or guilt or reatus tending to condemnation so is the same with that which is called the Grace of God the gift by Grace vers 15. and the gift of Righteousness vers 17. which is in order to justification free pardon As therefore the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guilt is not the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation but tendeth thereunto so neither is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justification but leadeth thereunto is followed therewith 3. Nor can the Adversary Himself take these words vers
before the bargane be made and may also be paid down some time before he obtaine the purchase We owne only such consequential conditions here as are but the means and Methods appointed of God for such and such ends which have an immedial connexion with the end here intended And therefore we neither say nor imagine that a man may have the Righteousness of Christ or Faith yet not be justified for in the very moment as was said that a Man acteth true Gospel-and so justifying faith he hath the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him and is justified Every priority in order of Nature doth not conclude also a priority as to time far less can a man be supposed to have the Righteousness of Christ without God's Act of Imputation But Finally all these Argueings returne upon his own head for when he saith that faith is Imputed for Righteousness meaning by faith our act of beleeving he must also say that a man may beleeve and yet not be justified untill his faith be Imputed unto Righteousness by God whose work alone this is and his reply to this will relieve us Obj. 24. That which was Imputed to Abraham for Righteousness in his justification is imputed to other beleevers also But the faith of Abraham was imputed to him for Righteousness Ergo c. And for proof of all he referreth us to what he hath said Chap. 2. upon Rom. 4. Ans. We shall not here anticipat the consideration of that place and of this Argument founded there upon seing afterward we will have a fitter occasion to speak hereunto Obj. 25. Here is his last argument which he largely prosecuteth Chap. 21. pag. 188. c. and it would seem that it is here adduced againe for we had it once if not oftner before that he may take occasion to vent his mind against the Imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity Thus he Argueth If the Righteousness of the Law be not imputable or derivable in the letter and formality of it from one mans person to another then cannot the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to any man in justification But the former is true therefore c. Ans. What may be answered unto this Argum. the Reader may see in the foregoing Chapter Object last I shall not here repeat but go on to take notice of what he saith to that objection which he moveth against himself and proposeth thus If the transgression of the Law be imputable from one Mans person to another then may the Righteousness of the Law be imputed also But the former is hence evident because the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity He first excepteth against the Major and denieth the Consequence thereof and giveth reasons of his denial 1. There is saith he no such Emphatical restraint of the guilt and punishment to the transgressour as there is of the reward to the performer of obedience for Gal. 3 12. the very man that hath done them shall live by them which is no where said of the Transgressour Ans. But all this is loose reasoning for as the Law saith God will visite the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth Generation so it saith that He will shew mercy to thousands of them that love Him and keep His Commandements and here the one is as Emphatick as the other 2 As he readeth Gal. 3 12. that the man that doth them shall live in them so we read Ezek. 18 3. the soul that sinneth it shall die and Gal. 3 10. Deut. 27 26. Cursed is every one that abideth not in all things which are written in the Law to do them which words do Import as emphatical a restraint as the other But of that Gal. 3 12. we have said enough above we might also mentione that which was said to Adam in the day thou eats thou shalt die which seemeth to have no less an Emphatick Import But 2. he mentioneth this difference Sin saith he is ever greater in ratione demerity than obedience is in ratione meriti Adam might by his transgression merite condemnation to himself and posterity yet not have merited by his obedience Salvation to both because if he had kept the Law he had only done his duty Luk. 17 10. so had been but an unprofitable servant Ans. All this saith nothing where a Covenant is made promising life to the obeyer as well as threatning death to the transgressour Albeit Adam could not be said to have merited life by his obedience in way of proper and strick merite yet in way of merite expacto he could have been said to have merited for the reward would have been reckoned to him not of grace but of debt and there would have been ground of boasting and glorying Rom. 3 27. 4 2 4. How beit he had done but his duty when he had obeyed to the end yet the condescending love of God promising the reward to perseverance in obedience to the end was sufficient to found this Whether Adam had merited Salvation to all his posterity if he had kept the Covenant to the end or not is not our present question to enquire j this we know that by one man sin entered into the world death by sin so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned Rom. 5 12. And upon the other hand this we know that Christ was made sin for His as a publick person and all His promised Seed and Children are made the Righteousness of God in Him 1. Cor. 1 30. 2. Cor. 5 21. and those are sufficient for our purpose 3. He saith The Imputableness of the transgression of the Law rather overthroweth the Imputation of the obedience of it than any wayes establisheth it for the more Imputable that is punishable the transgression is the less imputable that is rewardable is the obedience of it Ans. This is very true when we speak of the same man as of Adam in both for he could not both be a Transgressour and a Final Observer of the Law and so both obedience and Transgression could not be imputed to himself Let be to any other the Imputation of the one did quite evacuat the other But what maketh this meer shift to his present purpose which is to show if he could that the Righteousness and obedience of the Second Adam the Lord from heaven is not as imputable to His Spiritual Seed Issue as the Sin and Transgression of the first Adam who was of the earth earthy 1. Cor. 15 47. was imputable to his Natural Seed Next he cometh to the Minor and denieth the Imputation of Adam's sin and this seemeth to be his maine buliness wherein he complieth with the Socinians and others Let us hear him first saith he the Scripture no where affirmes either the Imputation of Adam's sin or of the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. The contrary is sufficiently proven above all his reasons cannot evince what he saith He tels us
that neither is the phrase nor manner of such speaking any wayes agreable to the language of the Holy Ghost for still in the Scriptures wheresoever the word imputing is used it is only applied unto or spoken of something of the same persons to whom the Imputation is said to be made never to or of any thing of anothers Ans. Though it be true that some things are said to be imputed in Scripture unto persons which are or were theirs before the Imputation though that Instance of faiths being imputed to Abraham Rom. 4. which he adduceth doth not belong to this head as shall be evinced in due time whether it be good or evil as 2. Sam. 19 19 Act. 7 60. where this Imputation is deprecated So 2. Chron. 24 22. Gen. 30 33. Psal. 106 31. Yet it is also true that we read of an Imputation of Something that did not belong to or was not possessed by the person before the Imputation was made as when Paul desireth Philemon to impute to him what Onesimue was oweing and that he would reckon both the debt and the injury whereof Onesimus might beguilty upon his score and require it of him Philem. vers 18. Thus do Sureties take upon themselves what formerly was not theirs and so make that imputable to themselves which formerly was not so as we seen Gen. 43 9. 44 32. and the Sureties payment or Satisfaction according to what he voluntarily undertook is according to Law and equity imputable to be imputed unto or reckoned on the Score of the debtor to the end he may be dealt with by vertue of that imputed payment Satisfaction as if he himself had made the payment or given the Satisfaction And this is the very Nature End of this Imputation not that the person to whom the Imputation is made should be accounted one who had that before the Imputation was made but that the thing Imputed may become his to whom it is imputed and he thereupon be dealt with as now an owner possessor of that thing by Imputatioâ— Secondly he saith When a thing is said simply to be imputed as sin folly or righteousness the meaning is not to be taken concerning the bare acts of things as if to impute sin signified to repute the man to have committed a sinful act but to charge the guilt or demerite of sin upon his head of purpose to punish him for it Ans. This is true of such things as are either really or falsly by injustice supposed to be in the person before that imputation be made But notwithstanding hereof there is as we have seen as all acts of Suretiship do further cleare an imputation of what was not the persons before whereby the thing it self that is imputed is legally made over unto them reckoned upon their score thereupon they are dealt with as being now possessed of that which is imputed as when a person voluntarily becometh Surety for another as Paul for Onesimus Iudah for Benjamin first the debt it self is made their reckoned upon their score then they willingly undergo the consequences thereof that is the payment or punishment Thridly pag. 198. he cometh home to the point saying The expressions i.e. of Christ's Righteousness of Adam's sin are unknown to the Holy Gost in Scripture Ans. This is but the old exception of Bellarmin de Iustif. lib. 2. chap. 7. of the Socinians See Volkel do Vera Relig. lib. 5. pag. 564 565. who upon this same ground reject several other fundamental points as the Trinity others But we have already shown Scripture-proof enough of this matter himself in the following words granteth that there are expressions in Scripture concerning both the Communication of Adam's sin of Christ's Righteousness that will fairly enough bear the terme of Imputation So that all the difference betwixt him us is about the sense of the word Now we come to the matter He speaketh to Rom. 5 19 giving this for the only meaning thereof that the demerite or guilt of Adam's sin is charged on his posterity or that the punishment ran over from his person to them i a maine part of which punishment lyeth in that original defilement wherein they are all conceived borne whereby they are made truely and formally sinners before God Ans. But if that sin of Adam be imputed in its curse punishment the sin it self must be imputed as to its guilt else we must say that God curseth punisheth the posterity that is no wayes guilty which to do suiteth not the justice of God the righteous Governour of the world We do not say as he supposeth when he setteth down our sense of the words that that sinful act of eating the forbidden fruit in the letter formality of it an expression that on all occasions he useth whose sense is not obvious but needeth explication is excogitated meerly to darken the matter as it was Adam's own personal sin is imputed to the posterity but it is enough for us to say with the Scripture that by Adam's disobedience his posterity became guilty that all sinned in him therefore death passed on all that guilt was by that one sin to condemnation Rom. 5 12 15 16 18 19. so that the posterity sinned legally originally though not formally because not existing in Adam actually but legally originally became thereby obnoxious to the punishment threatned that is death both in body Soul here hereafter Whence it is manifest that punishment being relative to sin such as are punished because of sin must be sinners judged to be sinners so guilty before they be punished for sin Adam being the Head Root of Mankind God entering into Covenant with him as such therefore with all his posterity in him when he broke the Covenant transgressed all Mankind descending from him by ordinary generation being comprehended with him in the Covenant became actually partakers of that guilt so soon as they did partake of Nature actually being really guilty when existing they were justly punished But if this guilt were not imputed to them they could not be justly punished for it On the contrary he thinks they might be justly punished for that sin though not guilty thereof he laboureth to establish this upon three pillars 1. The demerite saith he sinfulness of that sin which had so many aggravations and in this regard was beyond the sin of devils that Adam had the estates of all his posterity in his hand knew that if he sinned he should draw all their souls after him into the same perdition Ans. But if by Adam's having the estates of all his posterity in his hand this truth be not included that his sin should become their sin they should be looked upon as guilty thereof chargable therewith how could he know that by his sin heshould draw the souls of all his
posterity after him into the same condemnation And how could they be punished for that same guilt if it was not some way theirs by the just righteous Judge Governour of the world The posterity can no more be justly punished for the great hainous sins of their progenitors than for their lesser sinnes if they have no interest in these sinnes nor partake of the guilt thereof But as to Original sin the Scripture giveth the Sin as the ground of the punishment maketh the one to reach all as well as the other telling us Rom. 5 12. that by one Man sin â—ntered in to the world death by sin so death passed upon all Men for that all have sinned or in whom all have sinned See vers 19. 2. The Narrownese or scantisness of Adam's Person who could not beat that fulness of punishment which God might require for that great sin we cannot think that God should sit down with loss Ans. This is his second pillar But neither is it sufficient for God could have punished Adam condingly for his sin but when the posterity is punished for that sin also that sin must be theirs Though for great crimes as Treason the like the Posterity suffeâ—eth when the guilty is forfeited I yet the posterity are not properly punished for that sin nor can be said to be so as we are punished for Original sin because it is ours we sinned in Adam 3. His 3d. maine pillar is the peculir near relation of the posterity of Adam to his person for then they were in it as it were a part or some what of it so that Adam was us all we were all that one Adam as Augustine speaketh the whole generation of mankind is but Adam or Adam's person expounded at large Ans. This is sufficient for us for it will hold forth the Covenant relation wherein Adam stood as representing all his posterity so they were as well in him a part of him in his sin as in his punishment which is all we desire for hence it appeareth that all sinned in that one Adam as well as they were all punished in him Then he tels us that all these three are jointly intimat Râ—â— 5 12. Where first there is the demerito Imported when death is said to enter the scantiness of Adam's person when it is said to have passed upon all men the relation of his posterity to him in that all are said to have sinned in him Ans. But the maine thing which he denieth is there also imported when it is said that all men sinned in him or became guilty of his sin for thereby it is manifest that only they had an interest in his person but that they had such an Interest in relation to his person as so stated as standing in a Covenant-relation to God that they sinned in him or became guilty of his sin therefore suffered with him the demerite thereof Whence it is evident howbeit he seemeth confident of the contrary pag. 207. That the Imputation of Adam's sin or of his sinful Act as sinful or as it was a sin not of the act as such for that himself faith once againe was directly efficiently from God himself therefore was good is the ground or cause of punishment that cometh on his posterity But he saith pag. 208. If any Imputation be in this case it is of every mans own sin in Adam for is was Adam alone that sinned but all sinned in him It is not said that Adam's sin is Imputed to his posterity but rather that his posterity themselves sinned in Adam Ans. If he wil stand to this we need not contend with him about the word Impute this expression of Scripture comprehending plainely holding forth all that we would say And if he will grant as much in reference to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as is here said of Adam who was the type of him that was to come he must I judge retract all that he hath said against the same What followeth in that Chapter being but founded upon what is already mentioned examined needeth not here againe be repeated or expressed considered Thus we have taken notice of all which this voluminous Adversary hath said upon this matter both against the Truth for his own Errour no doubt he hath scraped together all that he could finde giving any seeming contribution unto the Notion which he hugged hath laboured after his usual manner to set of with a more than ordinary measure of confidence with an affected pedantrie of language supplying with bombast expressions the want of reality of truth solidity of reasoning What remaineth in that book concerning the Imputation of faith in opposition to the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ shall be examined when we come to the second part of our Text to speak of the matter of justification And as for other things we may take notice of them elsewhere CHAP. XIII M. Baxter's opinion Concerning Imputation examined THere being so frequent mention made in Scripture of Imputation of Righteousness or of Righteousness Imputed of Christ's being our Righteousness or of our being Righteousness or Righteous in Him the like many that even plead much against the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ maintained by the orthodox must yet yeeld to it in some sense or other at least in such a sense as may in their apprehensions not cross their other Hypotheses Dogmes Yea sometimes grant this Imputation in that sense at least in words which overthroweth or weakeneth all their Disputations to the contrary Schlightingius in defence of Socinus against Meisnerus pag. 250. will grant That Christ's Righteousness may be called accounted ours in so far as it redoundeth to our good righteousness is the cause of our justification And Bellarmin will also say de just lib. 2. cap. 10. That Christ is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the father for us so giveth communicateth that Satisfaction to us when He justifieth us that it may be said to be our Satisfaction Righteousness Mr. Baxter though he seemeth not satisfied with what is commonly hold by the Orthodox anent the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ yet will not professe himself an Enemie to all Imputation but on the contrary saith he owneth it in a right sense And it is true men have their own liberty in expressing their sense meaning of Truths where there seemeth to be some considerable difference as to words expressions yet there may be little or none upon the matter And it is not good I confess to make real differences of these that are but verbal nor is it good to be so tenacious of our own expressions as to exaggerat the expressions of others whose meaning may be good because not complying with our own in all points Let us
Covenant of Grace securing them from Condemnation they have accless ground in Law to plead this Right so to plead for actual Pardon in the termes according to the methode of the Gospel I do not say that the justified while lying in sin without making application to Iesus Christ acting faith on him in order to pardon have ground to plead for actual pardon for that is repugnant to the Methode of the Gospel requireing new acts of faith in order to new acts of Pardon I mean the implicit acts if faith to speak so in reference to dayly infirmities unseen sins the more explicit acts of faith in reference to grosser sins seen lamented But they have ground to plead for grace to discover their sins to humble them for their sins to excite their soul to renewed acts of faith in Christ and thereupon to expect according to the Gospel methode Remission and to plead for it in the merites of Christ unto which they have a sure Right Therefore 4. New sins cannor annul the state of justification because not only are beleevers secured that de eventu they shall not come into Condemnation for these sins but even as to any legal dueness of punishment that new sins may bring them under there is a sure saife remedie at hand the blood of Christ that taketh away all sin to which they are called to go that they may wash their souls there by faith and be clean be delivered from guilt 4. For further clearing of this we could consider that there is a difference to be put betwixt Sin in order to its direful effects considered in it self and considered as it is in the Iustified Though sin in it self is alwayes mortiferous and exposeth to the curse and wrath of God having a malignant demerite constantly attending it Yet it is not so being considered as it is in the justified for as poison is alwayes deadly in it self working towards death yet it is not so as in a person who hath received a sufficient antidot Though every act of felonie in it self make obnoxious unto death according to the Law yet some acts as committed by one who can read will not have that effect so the beleever is antidoted by the Covenant of Grace that howbeit sin remaine still deadly in its own nature yet as to him it cannot produce these effects 5. Though after sins in a justified person may have before they be pardoned very sad effects in reference to Comfort or comfortable Improvment of their Privileges Advantages yet they cannot disinherite them or put them from their Right Though leprosie did deprive the leper of the comfortable enjoyment and use of his own house yet it did not destroy his right though the miscarriages of the prodigal son did incapacitate him for any present enjoyment of his interest in his Fathers affection yet they did not destroy his Sonshipe Luk. 15 17. So though sins not yet washed away in such as have been justified may and will certainly prejudge them of many comfortable Advantages which they might otherwayes have yet they do not take away their Sonshipe nor their Right to the Inheritance of sones 6. Though after sins not yet pardoned through faith do and will stirr up Fatherly Anger Displeasure against them who are justified and become his Adopted children Esai 54 7 8. Yet they bring not justified man under pure judicial wrath and under the Curse and Law-anger so as God is no more their Father but hath cast them out of his familie fatherly favour It is one thing to be under the frowns gloomes of an angry Father another thing to be under the severe aspect of an angry judge 7. It is considerable also That through grace and the Lord 's great love and wisdom after-sins are so far from destroying their State and Right to the inheritance that upon the contrare they are ordered to the Justified mans good and further establishment in grace not that sin it self hath any such natural tendency but it is by accident to sin which is so ordered by the wise disposal of a loveing Father making all things work togerher for good and thus counter-working Satan without Corruption within making that which Satan had designed to their ruine and destruction contributo to their good advantage by giving them fresh occasion of exercising Humility Repentance of Renewing their gripping of Christ by Faith of Watching more with Diligence here-after as also hereby they are put to search examine themselves to try their Rights Securities thus to make their calling election sure to their further establishment comfort in the Holy Ghost 8. Thus we see whatever present alteration after sins not yet taken to Christ to the end they may be pardoned through his blood do or can make as to the present Condition of the justified yet their State remaineth firme unshaken for thereby they fall not againe under the old Covenant nor under the sentence thereof nor under pure Law wrath pure Justice the Curse of a broken Covenant but being under Grace not under the Law they are secured as to Condemnation Rom. 8 1. as to the loss of the favour friendship of God Rom. 8 35 39. for not only is the guilt of Original sin of all their preceeding Actual sins taken away through faith in Christ when they were justified but there is a sure way condescended upon betwixt Jehovah the Mediator how their after-sins shall be Pardoned taken out of the way the same method and way is declared in the Gospel made sure by the Covenant of Grace and by their being in the Covenat they have a right unto the promises thereof and ground to press for the performance so for Remission for all things requisite thereunto or following thereupon yea they have a sure pledge of Remission already to wit the actual Pardon of what is past and their past Justification that is a comforting strenthening word Rom. 5 9 10. much more then being now justified by his bloud we shall be saved from wrath through him for if when we are enemies we were reconcile â— to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life so is that Rom. 8 32. He that spared not his own son but delivered him up for us all how shall he not with him also freely give us all things 9. We may adde That if sins afterward committed could take away Justification then they should also take away Adoption Regeneration so the justified man should by after sins not only become an unjustified man but also the child of God should become againe the childe of the devil the Relation should be quite broken off he who was borne againe should return unto his former state of black Nature thus there should be a second a
third yea multiplied Regeneration whereof the Scripture is silent nay it clearly depones the contrary 10. And if it be enquired how it cometh to passe that after sins may not at least gradually impaire the State of Justification as sins do impaire and weaken Sanctification I answere and this may further help to clear the business under hand The reason is manifest from the difference that is betwixt these two blessing and benefites Iustification is an act of God changing the Relative-state of a man and so is done and perfected in a moment Sanctification is a progressive work of God making a real physical change in the man whence sin may tetard this or put it back but cannot do so with the other which is but one single act once done and never recalled the gifts and calling of God being without repentance Rom. 11 29. In justification we are meerly passive it being a sentence of God pronunced in our Favours in Sanctification as we are in some respect patients so are we also Agents and Actors and thus sin may retard us in our motion and as it evidenceth our weakness for acting so it produceth more weakness Moreover Sin and Holiness are opposite to other as light and darkness therefore as the one prevaileth the other must go under and as the one increaseth the other must decress But there is no such Opposition betwixt sin pardon which is granted in Justification And whereas it may be said that sin expelleth also grace Meritoriously yet that prejudgeth not the truth in hand for it can expell grace meritoriously no further than the free constitution of God hath limited and so though it can and oft doth expell many degrees of Sanctification yet it cannot expell make null the grace of Regeneration or the Seed of God so no more can it expell or annul Justification because the good pleasure of God hath secured the one the other made them both unalterable By these particulars we see how the first doubt is removed out of the way we shall next speak to the Second which is concerning afflictions Punishments which are the fruits and deserts of sin and seem to be part of the curse or penalty threatned in the first Covenant To which we need not say much to show that notwithstanding hereof the State of Justification remains firme and unaltered These few things will suffice to cleare the truth 1. Though all affliction and suffering be the fruite consequent of the breach of the Covenant by Adam the head of mankind for if he had stood and the Covenant had not been violated there had been no Misery affliction Death or Suffering and though in all who are afflicted in this world there is sin to be found And though it cannot be instanced that God ever brought an afflicting or destroying stroke upon a Land or Nation but for the provocations of the People yet the Lord may some rimes afflict outwardly or inwardly or both a particular Person in some particular manner though not as provoled thereunto by that persons sin or without a special reference to their sin as the procuring Cause thereof as we see in Iob and as Christ's answer concerning the blinde man Ioh. 9 3. Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents that he was born blinde but that the works of God should be made manifest in him giveth ground to think 2. Though it doth oftner fall out that God doth afflict Punish and Châ—sten his people even because of their sinnes as well as other wicked persons yet the difference betwixt the two is great though the outward Camitie may be materially the same To the godly they flow from Love are designed for good are sanctified and made to do good they are covenanted mercies but nothing so to the wicked They are mercies to the one but curses to the other They speak out love to the one but hatred to the other They are blessed to the one but blasted cursed to the other They work together for good to the one but for evil to the other and all this notwithstanding that the outward affliction calamity that is on the godly may be double or treeble to that which is upon the wicked Yea there is mercy and love in the afflictions of the Godly when the prosperity of the wicked is cursed Whence we see that all these afflictions cannot endanger or dammage their Justified state 3. Though the Lord may be wroth smite in anger his own people chasten punish them in displeasure yet this wrath anger is but the wrath and anger of a Father and is consistent with fatherly Affection in God and therefore cannot be repugnant to a state of Sonshipe in them Prov. 3 11 12. Heb. 12 5-8 Psal. 89 30 33 34. Revel 3 19. 4. In all these afflictions that seem to smell most of the Curse and of the death threatned and are most inevitable such as death c. there is nothing of pure vinâ—ictive justice to be found in them when Justified persons are exercised with them for Christ did bear all that being made a curse for them and as to this the Lord caused all their iniquities to meet together upon him He drunk out the cup of Vindictive anger and left not one drop of the liquor of the Curse of the Law for any of his own to drink He alone did bear the weight of revenging justice and there is nothing of this in all that doth come upon beleevers So that the very sting of death is taken away the sting of all these Afflictions is sucked out and now they are changed into Mercies Blessings 1 Cor. 3 21 22. Therefore we must not think that they contribute the least mite unto that Satisfaction which justice required for sins Christ payed down to the full justice was fully satisfied with what he paid down nor must we think that God will exact a new satisfaction for sins or any part thereof of the hands of beleevers after he hath received a full satisfaction from the Mediator Christ did rest satisfied therewith The afflictions and Punishments then that the godly meet with being no parts of the Curse nor of that Satisfaction that justice requireth for sin nor flowing from vindictive justice but being rather fatherly chastisments mercies meanes of God can do no hurt unto their state of justification nor can any thing be hence inferred to the prejudice of that glorious state 5. But it is said Pardon and Justification is one thing and a man is no more Justified than he is Pardoned and Pardon is but the taking off of the obligation to punishment and consequently of punishment it self and seing punishment is not wholly taken off but there remaineth some part of the curse or of the evil threatned for sin and will remaine untill the resurrection it is cleare that pardon is not fully compleet not consequently Justification so long as we live But
Christ the ground meritorious cause thereof is a far other thing And when he saith Apologie ag Mr. Eyre § 4. that he is well content to call Christ's Righteousness of Satisfaction the matter of ours and that the imputation of Christ's Righteousness taken for Donation is the forme of Constitutive Iustification that sentential adjudication of Christ's Righteousness to us is the forme of our sentential Iustification That Faith in order to Justification doth in a special manner eye the Righteousness of Christ is clear from Esai 45 24 25 Surely shall one say in the Lord have I Righteousness then followeth In the Lord shall alâ— the seed of Israel be justified This truth is also clearly held forth when faith in the matter of Justification is called faith in Christ's blood Rom. 3 25. for when faith laith hold on the bloud of Christ it cannot but lay hold on his Surety-Righteousness whom God set forth to be a Propitiation and in through whom there was a Redemption wrought vers 24. for this hlood was the Redemption-money the price payed in order to Redemption 1. Pet. 1 18 19. And the blessedness of Justification is through the Imputation of Righteousness without our works Rom. 4 6. and therefore faith in order to the obtaining of this blessedness must eye and relye upon this Righteousness which is the Righteousness of him who was delivered for our offences and was raised againe for our Justification vers 25. where we may also observe a manifest difference betwixt this Righteousness which consisteth in his being delivered for our offences and our Justification the one being the Cause as was said the other the Effect Moreover this same truth is clear from Râ—m 5 17. where we read of the receiving of the gift of righteousness which is by faith and that in order to a reigning in life by one Jesus Christ where also we see a difference put betwixt this gift of Righteousness Reigning in life which is also more cleare in the following vers 18. Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto Iustification of life this righteousness of one to wit one Jesus Christ is the Cause and the Iustification of life is the Effect And further this difference is againe held forth vers 19 20 21. Our being made Righteous is different from the obedience of one Christ Jesus and by the Imputation of this Obedience to us do we become Righteous as our being made sinners is different from Adam's act of Disobedience and we are made sinners by the Imputation of it to us And as sin death are different when it is said that sin hath reigned unto death so Eternal life is different from Righteousness when it is said so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life We need say no more of this seing it clearly followeth from what was formerly at length confirmed to wit That justification is by the Righteousness of Christ imputed CHAP. XXXIV Faith in Justification respecteth not in a special manner Christ as a King but as a Priest MR. Baxter did long ago in his Aphorismes tell us That the Accpting of Christ for Lord is as essential a part of Iustifying Faith as the accepting of him for our Saviour that is as he explained himself That faith as it accepteth Christ for Lord King doth justifie And this was asserted by him to the end he might cleare confirme how Sincere Obedience cometh in with Affiance to make up the Condition of Justification for his Thesis LXXII did run thus As the accepting of Christ for Lord which is the hearts Subjection is as essential a part of Justifying Faith as the accepting of him for our Saviour So consequently sincere obedience which is the effect of the former hath at much to do in justifying us before God as Affiance which is the fruit of the later Hence the question arose and was by some proposed thus Whether faith in Christ qua Lord be the justifying act or whether the Acceptation of Christ as a Lord and not only as a Priest doth justifie And Mr. Baxter in his Confess p. 35. § 13. saith that it is not only without any ground in God's word but fully against it to say that faith justifieth only as it apprehendeth Christ as a Ransome or Satisfier of justice or Meriter of our Iustification or his Righteousness as ours not as it receiveth him as King or as a Saviour from the staine tyranny of sin I have shewed before that the moving of this question is of little use in reference to that end for which it seemeth it was first intended to wit to prove that Sincere Obedience hath as much to do in Justification as faith or Affiance hath where I did shew the inconsequence of that consequence That because Justifying Faith receiveth Christ as King Therefore Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification yea or therefore a Purpose or a promise of Obedience is a part of the Condition of Justification So that in order to the disproving of that Assertion that maketh obedience or a Purpose or a promise of obedience an essential part of the Condition of Justification we need not trouble ourselves with this question Yet in regaird that the speaking to this may contribute to the clearing of the way of Justification by faith which is our great designe we shall speak our judgment there anent And in order thereunto several things must be premitted As 1. The question is not whether Christ as a King belongeth to the compleet adequate object of that faith which is the true justifying faith for this is granted as was shown above this faith being the same faith whether it be called True Faith or Saving Faith or Uniting Covenanting faith or Justifying faith it must have one the same adequate Object 2. Nor is the Question whether Faith in order to Justification doth so act on Christ as a Priest as to exclude either virtually or expresly the consideration of any other of his offices or of Christ under any other of his offices for under whatever office Christ be considered when faith acteth upon him whole Christ is received and nothing in Christ is or can be excludeth So that there is no virtual exclusion nor can there be any express exclusion of any of his offices when he under any other of his offices is looked to a right received for such an exclusion would be an open rejection of Christ and no receiving of him 3. When we speak here of receiving of Christ as a Priest or in respect of his Sacerdotal Office it is all one as if we named his Sacerdotal work or what he did in the discharge of that office offering up himself a Satisfactory Sacrifice and giving his blood and life for that end and suffering inwardly outwardly what was laid upon him by the Father in order to the making of full Satisfaction to justice
also by the imputation of a Righteousness for being in this State of Righteousness we have not only the Obligation to wrath eternal punishment removed which is done by Remission upon the account of the Satisfaction of Christ imputed but we have also a right to the reward the crown of life which is had by imputation of Righteousness or of obedience though it were better to say we have both by both or we have both by the imputation of that compleet Satisfaction merite which comprehendeth or consisteth of both His 3. Conclusion is this Adam whilst his innocency stood with him and till his fall by sin was compleetly Righteous in an estate of justification before God Yea for the truth substance of Righteousness as Righteous as he could or should have been if he had lived to this day in the most entire absolute obedience to the Law Ans. Adam while he remained innocent was compleatly Righteous that is was changable with no transgression it is true That he was compleatly Righteous that is had full right to the reward as having done all his duty and compleated his work it is most false Therefore 2 it is false to say he was in a state of justification unless nothing else be hereby meaned than that he was not in a state of condemnation Though there be no mids betwixt these two now as to us but either we must be in a state of justification or in a state of condemnation Yet Adam while he stood was in neither Not in a state of condemnation because he had not yet transgressed the Law Nor yet in a state of justification because he had not yet done all his duty for he was to persevere in obedience to the end And if he had been justified he had full right to the reward so had been glorified for whom the Lord justifieth he glorifieth But Adam was not glorified upon his Law-obedience and consequently was not justified by his Law-obedience 3 The truth substance of Righteousness unto which he would restrick all is not the thing enquired after nor is it at all to the point for upon Adam's having of that simply he could not expect the reward of life that was promised because the Covenant he was under required continuance perseverance in all the several duties called for by the Law even to the end ere he could challenge a right to the reward And further Adam had this truth substance of Righteousness at the first it was concreated with him Yet he could not upon that account have challenged glory as his due He addeth Even as the second Adam was as compleatly perfectly Righteous from the womb so from his first entrance upon his publick ministrie as he was at last when he suffered death Ans. If we speak of our Lord Jesus as the second Adam that is as standing in the room of sinners as the Head publick Person engadging in their behalfe whom he did represent to pay all their debt though he knew no sin and upon that account was perfectly Righteous and separat from sinners Yet he was to finish the work laid upon him and to performe the whole debt both of duty suffering which he had undertaken and till the last penny of that debt was payed his work was not finished and untill his work was finished he could not challenge his reward And so this confirmeth what we have said of the first Adam To say he addeth that Adam was not perfectly Righteous consequently in a justified estate or condition before God untill his fall by sin is to place him into an estate of condemnation before his sin there being no middle or third estate betwixt these two Ans. This was obviated before Adam's state before his fall was a state of Innocencie wherein he enjoyed the favour presence of God he being perfectly Righteous in reference to that state to what was required of him but justified he was not for the reward was not adjudged unto him So that as to him there was a middle state betwixt a State of Justification a State of Condemnation though as to us there is not as the places which he citeth afterward namely Rom. 5 18. 8 1 2 shew the whole Scriptures evince He closeth this matter thus Therefore to grant that forgiveness of sins puts a man into the same estate condition wherein Adam stood before his fall which is generally granted by men of opposite judgment in this controversie nothing granted neither in this but the unquestionable truth is to grant the point in question to acknowledge the truth laboured for throughout this whole discourse Ans. It is not granted that remission of sins as such putteth a man every way into the same Condition wherein Adam stood before his fall for it putteth not a man in the same estate of inherent holiness wherein Adam was but it putteth a man into the same estate of freedome from any obligation to punishment for it taketh away the reatus poenae so that a pardoned man as such is no more under the actual obligation unto the curse wrath of God threatned for transgression than was Adam before he fell and this is all that is confessed Which is far yea very far from granting the point that he goeth about to establish for he would have remission as such put a man in the state of full right to the reward to the end he might exclude the imputation of the obedience or Righteousness of Christ as not being necessary unto this end contrary to the Scriptures of truth Adam before he fell had not right unto the promised reward because he was to finish his course of obedience before he could obtaine that And therefore the granting that remission putteth a man into the same Condition wherein Adam stood will contribute nothing to his end His 4. Conclusion is That perfect remissien of sins includeth the Imputation or acknowledgment of the observation of the whole Law even as the imputation of the Law fulfilled necessarily includes the non imputation of sin or the forgiveness of all sin in case any hath been committed Ans. The conclusion is manifestly false if we speak of remission simply abstractivly as such And the ground here alleiged for it is ambiguous for the imputation of the Law fulfilled may either be to sach as never broke it then it doth not include remission but taketh away all necessity of it or to transgressours and then indeed it may presuppose remission but doth not include it as such But to remove ambiguities we shall distinguish say that perfect Remission of sins includeth the acknowledgment of the observation of the whole Law in respect of Punishment but not in respect of the Reward that is perfect Remission of sins exeemeth a man from Punishment as well as if he had perfectly keeped the Law but doth not give him right to the Reward for unto this
flow therefrom be accounted one the same thing but two distinct parts of one compleet effect And therefore the mentioning of the one in stead of the whole proveth no confusion or sameness but rather an inseparablness which is yeelded He move â—in an objection against himself â— 5. thus How can God be said to impute a Righteousness to a man which never was nor ever had a being no Righteousness at least of that kind whereof we now speak having ever been but that perfect obedience which Christ performed to the Law This indeed is a very rational question for our Author talketh much of an imputed Righteousness and never doth nor yet can tell us what that is that can deserve the name of a Righteousness Let us heare what he answereth 1. saith he There is as express compleet a Righteousness in the Law as ever Christ himself performed Ans. But what Righteousness is or can be in a Law but what is there by way of prescription And who doubts 〈◊〉 the perfection of this that acknowledgeth the perfection of the Law This is utterly impertinent to the purpose in hand where the question is of a Righteousness consisting in conformity to the Law and which must be attribute to man to whom the Law is given And what if it be said saith he that God in remission of sins through Christ from out of the Law imputeth to every man that beleeveth such a Righteousness as is proper to him Ans. To say this is to speak plaine non-sense for what is that to furnish a man with a Righteousness out of the Law Can a man be changed into a Law or can a man have any Righteousness prescribed by a Law but by thoughts words deeds bearing a conformity to the commands of the Law And how can 〈◊〉 pardon cause this transformation can the pardon of murther or of any prohibited act make that act conforme to the Law Pardon thus should be a self destroyer for an act that is no transgression of a Law can need no pardon and thus pardon should make itself no pardon What he subjoineth hath bin spoken to elsewhere He giveth a 2. answere saying To say God cannot impute a Righteousness which never had a being i.e. which never was really actually performed by any man is to deny that he hath power to forgive sinâ— Ans. This hath been is full denied it never hath been nor never shall be proved that forgivness of sin is the imputation of a Righteousness Though he addeth from Rom. 4 6. 3 28. c. that it is the imputation of such a Righteousness as consisteth not noâ—es made up of any works performed to the Law by any man which is but a Righteousness that never had a being Ans. This is but a plaine perverting of the Scriptures which speak only of works in that exclusion done performed by us as the whole scope and all the circumstances of the passages demonstrate to any man who will not willingly put out his owne eyes and it were a meer imposing upon the Understandings of the most ordinary Reader and a miserable mispending of time to goe about the evincing of this which is so obvious But what desperat shifts will not a wrong cause put men to use who will not be truths captives His 5. Conclusion cometh here also to be considered It is this He that is fully discharged from his sins needeth no other Râ—ghteousness to give him-Right 〈◊〉 unto life This is as false as the rest for the Law is do this live and pardon for transgressions is not the same with doing of the Law What is his reason death is the wages of sin is of sin only being due to no creature in any other respect nor upon any other terme whatsomever But what then Now he that it free of death no wayes obnoxious thereunto cannot but be conceived to have a right unto life there being neither any middle condition between death life wherein it is possible for a reasonable creature to subsist nor againe any capacity of life but by some right â—itle thereunto Ans. Though this be true as to us now that he who is no wayes obnoxious unto death hath a right unto life Yet the consequence that he would draw from it is not good to wit that that only which taketh away the obnoxiousness unto death giveth also a right to life because God hath inseparably joined these effects together as also their distinct causes together and giveth them inseparably so that he who is pardoned hath also a right to life not meerly upon the account that he is pardoned but because together with the imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ whence floweth pardon he imputeth also Christ's Righteousness upon which followeth the right to life And howbeit now as to us there is no middle state betwixt these two Yet in Adam there was for while he stood he was not obnoxious unto death and yet he had not right unto life but was to work out perfect his rask to that end But he tels us That while Adam stood he was already in possession fruition of life else he could not be threatned with death Ans. This is not the life whereof we are speaking we are speaking of the life promised by that Covenant unto perfect obedience But it seemeth that he joyneth with the 〈◊〉 in this granting no life promised to Adam but a Continuance of what he was already in possession of He enquireth If he had not a right unto life by his freedome from sin but was to purchase this right by an ctlual fulfilling of the Law it would be known what quantitâ—eâ— of obedience to the Law he must have paid before he had made this purchase how long he must have obeyed keept the Law Ans. There is no necessity of any exact knowledge of these things our maine question doth not â—â—and or â—all with the knowledge or ignorance of them Yet we may say and that is sufficient that that Law or Covenant requiring perfect obedience and perpetual without the least omission or commission he must have paid all that obedience which the Law required of him to the day of his transâ—â—â—gration or change to glory before the 〈◊〉 had been made He addeth for had he lived a two yeers in his integrity uprightness without the least touch of any transgression he hâ—d still but a debtor of obedience to the Law upon the same termes that he was at the beginning the least interruption or breach in the course of his obedience had even now been the forfeiture of that life he enjoyed Ans. How long Adam should have lived upon earth before his translation to glory we know not nor is it of use for us to enquire it is sufficient to know that he was to finish his course to persevere in obedience to the end if he would not both forfeit the life he had and the expectation of
not expresly say so and yet this he will not say seing he granteth that his obedience was an essential requisite absolutly necessary to the constitution of him our Priest and his Sacrifice propitiatory But we read of his being made under the Law to redeem these that were under the Law Gal. 4 4 5. and of his Righteousness obedience as necessary to our Righteousness justification and as having a no less direct influence into the same than Adam's offence disobedience had unto our death damnation Rom. 5 17 18 19. CHAP. II. Christ underwent the Curse of the Law MR. Goodwine tels us in his 14. Conclusion That the sentence or Curse of the Law was not properly executed upon Christ in his death But this death of Christ was a ground or consideration to God where upon to dispense with his Law to let fall or suspend the execution of the penalty or curse therein threatned Ans. 1 This is directly contrary to what the Apostle saith Gal. 3 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us for it is written cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree It was the Curse of the Law that we were under were to be delivered from and this Christ hath delivered us from by coming in our stead bearing it for us yea bearing it so that he is said to have been made it being made a Curse for us which is a most emphatick expression to hold forth Christ's bearing the very penalty threatned in the Law which cursed every one that continued not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them vers 10. Deut. 27 26. If Christ underwent the Curse of the Law he sure did suffer the very sentence or punishment threatned in the Law for the Curse of the Law can import no other thing 2 If Christ did not bear the sentence or Curse of the Law how could he be said to have died or suffered in our place room or stead No man is said to suffer in the place stead of another who doth not suffer that same particular kind of punishment that the other is obnoxious to and is obliged to suffer 3 Why was Christ said to be made sin for us 2. Cor. 5 21. to bear our iniquities Esai 53 6. 1. Pet. 2 24. If he did not undergoe the very punishment that was due to us because of sin 4 This is to give away the cause in a great measure unto the Socinians who will not yeeld that Christ's death was any satisfaction to the justice or payment of our criminal debt or a suffering the punishment of sin due to us for if Christ did not suffer the curse sentence of the Law he did not suffer the punishment which the Law threatned and justice required he did not suffer any punishment at all if he suffered not our punishment or that which was due to us he did not stand in our Law-place to answere all the demands of justice according to what we were liable unto by the Law nor did he bear our sins in his own body on the cross 5 If Christ's death was a ground or consideration to God whereupon to dispense with his Law then it is apparent that the consideration of Christ's death was anterior to the dispensing with the Law whereas the contrary is rather true to wit that the Lord's dispensing with the Law was anteriour to his sending of Christ because the Law properly knowing no mediator and requiring none to suffer the penalty for another must first in order of nature be considered as dispensed with before Christ be substituted in the room of sinners to undergo what they deserved 6 If it was only a ground to God whereupon to let fall or suspend the execution of the penalty then it seemeth Christ's death was no full payment or Satisfaction for a full Satisfaction requireth more than a suspension of the execution of the punishment even a full delivery there-from Let us heare his reason Because saith he the threatning Curse of the Law was not at all bent or intended against the innocent or Righteous but against transgressours only Therefore God in inflicting death upon Christ being innocent and Righteous did not follow the purport or intent of the Lawâ—but in sparing forbearing the transgressours who according to the 〈◊〉 of the Law should have bin punished manifestly dispenseth with the Law and doth not execute it Ans. All this being granted yet it will not follow that the sentence Curse of the Law was not executed upon Christ in his death for notwithstanding of this dispensing with the Law as to the persons Yet was there no Relaxation of the Law as to the punishment threatned Though the Law did not require that the innocent should suffer Yet the Supream Lord Ruler dispensing with his own Law so far as to substitute an innocent person in the room place of sinners the Law required that that innocent person taking on that penalty and thereby making himself nocent as to the penalty should suffer the same that was threatned consequently bear the Curse threatned in the Law As saith he further for explication when Zaleucus the Locrian Law-giver caused one of his own eyes to be put out that one of his son's eyes might be spared who according both to the letter intent of the Law should have lost both he did not precisely execute the Law but gave a sufficient account or consideration why it should for that time be dispensed with Ans. This speaks not home to our case wherein we pay not the half nor no part of the penalty But Christ payeth the whole as substitute in our room If Zaleucus had substituted himself in the room of his son suffered both his own eyes to be put out though the Law had been dispensed with as to the persons yet the penalty of the loss of both eyes had been payed the same punishment which the Law required had been exacted And so it is in our case as is manifest Yet he granteth that in some sense Christ may be said to have suffered the penalty or Curse of the Law as 1. It was the Curse or penalty of the Law saith he as now hanging over the head of the world ready to be executed upon all men for sin that occasioned his sufferings Ans. If this were all all the beasts senseless creatures may be as well said to have suffered the penalty Curse of the Law consequently to have suffered for man to have born mans sin in order to his Redemption as Christ for the sin penalty of sin whereunto man was liable did occasion their suffering or being subjected to vanity Rom. 8 20 21. Thus our whole Redemption is subverted the cause yeelded unto the wicked Socinians for if this be so Christ had not our sins laid upon him he did not beare our sins
of what is denied to wit that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word becoming man did become upon that account necessarily subject to the Law for himself His 2. Arg. is If Christ did performe active obedience in our room so as it might be imputed to us unto Righteousness then we should be no longer obliged to performe active obedience to the Law The reason of this he taketh from the like saying as we are not obliged to undergo eternal death because Christ hath sustained that in our room Ans. To this enough hath been said elsewhere I shall only here say That it will no more hence follow than from the Satisfaction of Christ whatever Socinians alleige that we are loosed from all obedience to the Law but only that we are loosed from that obedience which was required under the Old Covenant of works to wit to perfecte obedience thereby obtaine the prize as our reward of debt and faile in the least lose all which were the Conditions of the Old Covenant and as to this we deny the minor He replieth by denying what is now in question to wit That Christ performed active obedience in our room to procure eternal life to us affirming that he was bound to do it for himself so did merite nothing to ut thereby Ans. This is but what was said above hence it is cleare that in his judgment Christ wrought for the crown of glory to himself did merite it to himself so had no Right thereto before by vertue of his hypostatical union let be possession albeit all the Angels were to worshipe him his throne was for ever ever Heb. 1 6 8. He addeth If notwithstanding of Christ's active satisfaction we be obliged to satisfie actively so notwithstanding of his passive satisfaction we should be bound to satisfie passively that is suffer eternal death Ans. All the obedience now required is no satisfaction to the Old Covenant-Conditions Christ hath satisfied that and left no part thereof for us to do And therefore it will not follow that we are bound to suffer eternal death or any part of the Curse as such To that answere that some gave that by Christ's active obedience we have this advantage that we are more obliged unto rigide exact obedience He replieth That then we should not sin by short-coming or negligence Ans. But by that rigide exact obedience is not meaned full conformitie unto the Law but such a conformitie as was the Condition of the Old Covenant as is said that is we are now freed from obtaining the crown or right thereto by perfect conformity which to us is impossible from loseing of the crown upon the least escape or failing All obedience runneth now in another channel though the commands the Law as a Law rule of walk remaine the same His 3. Arg. is The Scripture every where speaking of our justification pardon mentioneth Christ's passive not his active obedience As Esai 53 5 6. Rom. 3 24 25. 5 9. Gal. 3 13. 1. Ioh. 1 7. Ans. It is denied that the Scripture doth every where mentione only Christ's passive obedience and the contrary hath been frequently showne And as to the places mentioned none of them containe any exclusive particle or hinte the exclusion of his active obedience And our Adversaries themselves must understand these the like passages Synecdochically otherwayes they shall exclude Christ's soul sufferings as well as his active obedience restrick all to his death bloud shed on the crosse which yet they will not do Now followeth his answere to some Arguments for the contrary Arg. 1. Two things are required unto our Salvation delivery from death the gift of life that is had by expiation of sin by his suffering this by the donation of Righteousness or imputation of his active obedience He answereth The passive obedience of Christ both expiateth sin giveth life his death giveth life 1. Pet. 2 24 3 18. Ans. True but the reason is because it was the death of one who had fulfilled all Righteousness we need not speak of his obedience of his sufferings so distinctly as to ascribe to each severally these several effects It is better I judge to take both conjunctly as one compleet Righteousness for us one meritorious cause of all the benefites procured thereby Arg. 3. for the Arg. 2. I passe as judging it not cogent The actual disobedience of Adam made us sinners He answereth If by actual obedience of Christ in the Conseq his active obedience be understood for his passive may also be called actual in that actually not potentially only he suffered that imputed to us the consequens is denied for Christ's passive obedience imputed hath restored unto us what we lost by Adam's disobedience Ans. But thus the comparison that Paul maketh Rom. 5. betwixt Adam's disobedience Christ's obedience is taken away He opposeth the Righteousness of Christ to the offence of Adam now Christ's death suffering is no where called his Righteousness So he opposeth obedience to disobedience therefore as the disobedience was the violation of the Law obedience must be the keeping of the Law Christ's death imputed is no Righteousness answering the commands of the Law and therefore though it did merite the recovery of what we lost in Adam being the death of one that fulfilled all Righteousness Yet considered abstractly by it self without his active obedience it cannot be our formal Righteousness with which we must be covered as having which we must be considered when justified of God who pronunceth none Righseous but such as are Righteous indeed Arg. 4. With Christ's active obedience his passive was conjoined He ans Denying the conseq that therefore the one cannot be imputed without the other for things conjunct can be distinguished as the one can be known so also imputed without the other Ans. But they are so conjoined as being integral parts of one compleat Surety-Righteousness Satisfaction for our debt therefore belong to his Estate of humiliation during which in all his obedience there was suffering for a part of his subjection was that he was made under the Law even under the commanding power thereof because otherwayes being God Man in one person he was not subject to the Law as a Viator in reference to himself So in all his sufferings there was obedience And what is thus inseparably conjoined we ought not to separate especially seing our case necessity calleth for the imputation of both Arg. 5. If only Christ's passive obedience were imputed then only the halfe of Christ should be given unto us contrary to Esai 9 6. He Ans. denying the Conseq because it is one thing to be given to us another thing to be imputed even Christ's humanity deity is given unto us Ans. But Christ was so given as that all he did suffered as such a given publick person
holy men how farther they advance in the truth please themselves the less therefore do more understand that they have need of Christ of his Righteousness given unto them wherefore they relinquish themselves and leane upon Christ alone This cometh not to passe because they become of a more base Law spirit Yea the further they advance in holiness they are of greater spirits see more clearly FINIS Arguments against Universal Redemption AS concerning the point of Universal Redemption we finde various sentiments or various explications of the matter given to us by Adversaries for they do not all agree in their apprehensions of the thing Some explaine the matter thus God sent his only begotten Son to be a Redeemer and Propitiator for Adam and all his Posterity who by his death did pacific an angry God and restore Mankinde to their lost inheritance so as all who are now condemned are not condemned for their former sins and guilt for Christ hath abundantly satisfied for these but for their Unbeleef for not beleeving in the Redeemer of the world and for rejecting the Reconciliation made the grace of God declared in the word And thus they must say that Christ hath died for all sinnes but Unbeleefe and that salvation doth not certainly follow upon this Reconciliation and so that it is rather a Reconciliableness than a Reconciliation and they must necessarily maintaine that this matter is revealed unto all and every son of Adam who otherwise cannot be guilty of Rejecting this reconciliation other wayes it shall be of no advantage to them unless they say that the want of the Revelation putteth them out of a capacity of being guilty of Unbeleefe and so they must necessarily be saved and thus their condition shall be undoubtedly better than is the condition of such as hear the Gospel and then the revelation of the Gospel shall be no Favour but a Prejudice rather And in reference to this they devise an Universal Antecedanious Love whereby God out of his Infinite Goodness was inclined to desire the happiness and salvation of every mothers son and therefore to send his Son to die for as if God had such Natural Necessary Inclinations and as if all his Love to Mankinde and every appointment of his concerning us were not the free act of his good pleasure and as if there were any such Antecedent Conditional will in God that could or might have no issue or accomplishment but as Lord Freewil would and as if the Love that sent Christ were only such a Poor Conditional Inclination towards all Mankinde which the Scripture holdeth forth as the greatest of Loves as the ground or all the Effects Grants which mans full Salvation calleth for But why could not this Love effectuat the good of all Therefore they tell us that Justice being injured by sin unless it were satisfied that Love of God whereby he wisheth well to all sinners could effectuat nothing as to the recovery of any upon this ground they imagine Christ was sent to make an Universal Atonement so Justice being satisfied might not obstruct the salvation of any whose Freewill would consent unto termes of new to be proposed Others hold forth the matter thus Christ according to the eternal Counsel of God did properly die for this end and by his propitiatory sacrifice obtaine that all and every man who beleeve in Him should for his sake actually obtaine Remission of sins Life Eternal but others in case they would Repent Beleeve might obtaine it But thus we hear no word of Christs obtaining any thing to any in particular no word of his obtaining Faith Repentance and what Counsel of God can this be to send Christ to die for persons upon that condition which he knew they would not could not performe And what by this meanes hath Christs Propitiatory Sacrifice obtained more than a meer possibility of salvation to either one or other Shall we imagine that God designeth good to persons who shall never enjoy it Or that God hath Conditional Intentions Designes By this means Christs death was designed and no person designed thereby to be saved yea Christ should be designed to die and that for no certain end unless to procure a meer possibility by stopping the mouth of justice that it should not stand in the way but then we can not say that God sent Christ to die for any man much less for all Others express the matter thus Christ out of the gracious Decree Purpose of God did undergoe death that he might procure obtaine Reconciliation with God for all sinners whatsomever without any difference before that God would open againe the door of salvation enter into a new Covenant of Grace with sinners But this Reconciliation hath no more force or import but that God might enter againe into a Covenant with sinners and so there is no Actual Reconciliation of sinners unto God And all that is obtained is for God nothing for man save a Possibility of Salvation by a new Covenant nor are we told whether Christ hath satisfied for the breach of the First Covenant so that that sin is fully pardoned unto all or not untill the condition of the second Covenant be performed nor are we told upon what account the sins against the second Covenant are pardoned Or if they be unpardonable Others explaine the matter thus Christ died for all and every man not only that God might without any violation of Justice enter into a new Covenant with sinners upon what condition he pleased but that it should be upon this Condition that man should be united with Christ the Cautioner and not only that Redemption Salvation should be possible to all but that really most certainly Salvation should be bestowed on such as Christ thought good But seing Christ knew that his death would profite none but these few whom he had designed to what purpose should he have laid downe his life for the rest And how can his death be a price of Redemption for the rest How can Christ be said to satisfie for the rest Did he purchase Faith to these few and would he not purchase Faith to the rest yet lay downe the great price for them What was the end obtained for the rest was it only a Possible Call of all Justice bein satisfied But of what import could that Possible Call be if Salvation was not also possible unto them And whereunto is that Call They will not say it is unto Salvation but to Faith But did not Christ know that this call would not be obeyed by them Did he procure Grace unto them to obey it then he procured Faith and if he procured Faith than he procured Salvation Againe if Justice be satisfied for these others why are they not liberat If they say the new Condition is not fulfilled Then it cannot be simply said that Christ satisfied Justice on their behalfe for
1. Cor. 15 3. Christ died for our sinnes 1. Pet. 2 24. who his owne self bear our sinnes in his own body on the tree by whose stripes we are healed How can we then imagine that all this was a meer may be seing he was so bruised for our iniquities so died for our sins so bear our sinnes in his own body as that thereby all in whose room he stood are healed by his stripes The Apostle doth moreover fully clear this matter Rom. 5 6. Christ died for the ungodly was this for all Or was it to have an uncertaine End effect No vers 9. much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him The ungodly and the sinners for whom he died are such as become justified by his blood shall at length be fully saved from wrath And againe vers 10. for if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life Upon his death followeth Reconciliation with God then Salvation and his death is for no more than his life is for By him also they receive an atonement vers 11. As the consequences effects of Adam's sin did Certainly and not by a may be redownd to all that he represented engadged for so the fruites effects of Christ's death do as certainly come unto such as are his as the Apostle cleareth in the following verses laying the advantage on the side of Christ his vers 15. much more the Grace of God and the gift by grace by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded unto many vers 16. but the free gift is of many offences unto justification vers 17. much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the Gift of Righteousness shall reigne in life by one Iesus Christ vers 18. even so by the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men to justification of life vers 19. so by the obedience of one shall many be made Righteous vers 21. so might grace reigne through Righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. Is all this a Common thing and a meer may be or Possibility Ioh. 10 11. he giveth his life for his sheep vers 15. But may they for all that perish No in no wise vers 28. and I give unto them eternal life and they shall never perish He came that they might have life and might have it more abundantly vers 10. To the same purpose he saith Ioh. 6 33. that he giveth life unto the world not such a life sure as may never quicken any Upon Christ's death doth the Apostle inferre Rom. 8 32. that the Elect shall have all things vers 33 34 35. that they are free from all Accusations or any Hazard therefrom being justified and having Christs Death Resurrection and Intercession to secure them at all hands thereupon they have assurance that nothing shall separate them from the love of God Act. 20 28. Christ hath purchased a Church with his own blood The whole world is not this Church nor is this purchase an uncertane may be And all this Real Certaine Effect of Christ's death was foretold by Daniel Chap. 9 24 to finish the transgresion and to make an end of sins and to make reconciliation for iniquity and to bring in everlasting Righteousness c. And who can imagine that this is Universal or Uncertane If we will 7. Consider some other Ends of the death of Christ which the Scripture pointeth forth which are not to be found among Heathens or any except the few Chosen ones Ordained to life we shall see how unreasonable the Adversaries are Gal. 4 5. Christ died to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the adoption of sones Was this end fruit left at an Uncertanty Shall we thinks that Christ might have died yet one man receive this Adoption Was this Adoption purchased upon an uncertain Condition Or was this purchased equally for all Then such as received it might have thanked their owne well natured Freewill upon that account But let us consider some other fruits Gal. 1 4. who gave himself for our sins that he might deliver us from this present evil world So 1. Pet. 2 24. He bear our sins in his own body on the tree but for what end That we being dead to sin should live unto Righteousness Chap. 3 18. Christ suffered for sins the just for the unjust To what end and purpose To bring us to God Heb. 10 10. by the which will we are sanctified How came this to passe Through the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once for all So he suffered without the gate that he might sanctify the people Chap. 13 12. Revel 1 5 6. he loved us and washed us from our sins in his owne blood But was this all No it is added And hath made us Kings Priests unto God and his Father So Ch. 5 9 10. thou was â—tain and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood and what more And hast made us unto our God Kings Priests c. So 2. Cor. 5 15. He died for all But for what end and purpose That they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him which died for them and rose againe See Col. 1 22. These the like passages do clearly pointe forth a special end of Christ's Death which was designed both by the Father that sent him by himself and shall we suppose that this great chiefe designe was made to hang upon the lubrick uncertain will of man Shall Christ be beholden to mans good will for the purchase he made at so dear a rate If not why are not all these ends attained in all for whom he died Did Christ fail in laying down the Ransome Or doth not the Father keep condition Who can say either of these Then surely there can be no reason to say that Christ made an uncertain bargain purchased only a Possibility of these fruites which he knew not if ever he should attaine in any one Nor to say that he died for all Let us further 8. take notice That for whom Christ died he died to take away their sins And that so as they may be fully Pardoned never brought on reckoning againe that is that they be Remitted Pardoned and that the poor sinner may not suffer therefore This sure must be the import of that prayer forgive us our trespasses If then Christ by his death hath taken away sin and purged it away making satisfaction to justice therefore how can we think that justice can punish the sinner in hell fire for these same sinnes But let us see what the Scripture saith 1. Ioh. 3 5. he was manifested to take away our sins Ephes. 1 7. we have redemption in his blood what Redemption forgiveness of sins according to the riches of
such expressions in this matter that we finde no mention made of two fold Righteousness of a twofold Justification the one subordinat the other Principal in the Scriptures but all expressions in this matter framed designedly to abase man make all appear to be of free grace that he who glorieth may glory in the Lord. And as Self will be ready in this to make that which is called a Subordinat Righteousness a Prinpal Righteousness so it will have this faire plausible ground to do so to wit That upon our own Righteousness we are Immediatly accepted of God as Righteous especially when the Merits of Christ are made subservient unto our personal Righteousness as procuring the New covenant that therein our Personal Righteousness shall be accepted accounted perfect compleet though it be not so in it self we thereupon immediatly justified accepted of God as Righteous as they love to speak who assert these things 12. Though faith be indeed the mean of our justification that is the onely thing required of us in order to our Interest in Christ actual participation of the benefites of His Redemption of justification in the first place according to the Gospel methode Yet it is too favourable to proud Self to call it such a Condition as hath a far more dangerous Import That is 1. To call it a Condition withall deny that it is an instrumental Cause or that it is to be considered in the matter of justification as it laith hold on Christ His Righteousness 2. To say that the very act of faith or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere is imputed for Righteousness that Paul is to be so understood Rom. 4. as speaking properly not metonymically 3. To say that this is the Righteousness which is imputed to us in order to justification not the Righteousness of Christ except as to its Effects in respect of some whereof Yea the chiefe only immediat it is equally Imputed to all Reprobat as well as Elect. 4. To say that this faith is our Gospel-Righteousness because a Righteousness is perfect adequate to the Rule of the New Covenant 5. To say that this faith hath the same place consideration consequently the same force efficacy in the New Covenant that perfect obedience had in the Old Covenant with Adam 6. To say that Christ hath purchased the New Covenant that this shall be the condition of persons partaking of the benefites thereo◠withall 7 To say that Christ hath died for all by his death made Satisfaction to justice for the breach of the Law so purchased freedom from the Curse of the Law to all equally at least conditionally whereby it is apparent that all are put in statu quo prius in the state they were once in that equally now have new conditions proposed unto them which if they performe they are righteous upon that performance are freed from the Curse made heirs of Glory and thus the New Covenant is of the same Nature kinde with the Old only its Conditions are a little altered made more easie their Performance of the condition must-have a 〈◊〉 with it at least ex pacto though not ex condigno as neither Adam's Perfect obedience could have had And the performers of this condition in this case may reflect upon their own deed lay their weight on it it being their Righteousness may plead upon it as their immediat ground of right before God unto justification Acceptance Let any man now consider these things see whether or not the asserting of faiths being such a condition as this be not a plaine gratification of proud Self the laing down a ground for vaine man to boast of glorying though not-before God yet before others And whether this be not an ascribing more to faith than is done by such as yeelding it to be a condition of the mean appointed of God required of us in order to justification say with all that it is to be considered not in it self nor as an act of our obedience but as an Instrument or mean laying hold upon the Righteousness of Christ without us that it may be ours our onely Righteousness where upon we may expert according to the Gospel justification absolution c. 13. It tendeth too much to blow up proud Self to say That if works of Obedience be not the Condition of our first justification yet they may be called the Condition of our Second justification or of the Continuance of our justification for as the Scripture speaketh nothing of a Second justification so to assert our works to be the Condition thereof is to crosse the argueings of the Apostle manifestly to lay a foundation of glorying for Man for if even Abraham had been justified by works a considerable time after he was first justified and first a beleever he should have had whereof to glory though not before God as saith the Apostle Rom. 4 2. And vers 3. he proveth that he was justified by faith that after he had been a beleever for that passage Abraham beleeved God it was imputed to him for righteousness was not spoken of at his first beleeving so cannot be properly meaned of his First justification onely but some yeers there after therefore must be true of his Second justification if there were any such Yea the just liveth by faith a passage that the Apostle useth as wee have seen to prove justification by faith both here in our Text Rom. 1 17. all alongs both first last so that the beginning continuance of this life of justification is by faith not by works 14. It is also dangerous to say That the work of the Law convining of sin with the Effects Consequences thereof Sorrow griefe Anxiety Legal Repentance c. are either Dispositions Preparations or Conditions of justification or Meritorious thereof by way of Congruity as if there were a certaine constituted connexion betwixt these the blessing of justification made by any Law or promise of God as if none could be justified that had not these sensible affecting Effects going before Sure the asserting of this cannot but contribute much to stirre up foster pride in Man give occasion to think that man himself hath done or suffered something that calleth for procureth in congruity at least meriteth justification CHAP. IV. Justification is so contrived in the Gospel as man may be abased have no ground of boasting THirdly we come to speak to the third thing mentioned above to wit That justification is so contrived begun carried on that man hath no real or apparent ground of glorying before men or of boasting in himself A few particulars will sufficiently cleare this I. The Lord 's ordinary usual Method in bringing His Chosen ones into a justified State is
justification by faith to cry down justification by the Law or by the works of the Law which some false Teachers were perswading those Galatians to beleeve he adduceth a passage of Scripture which saith the just shall live by faith thereby giving us to understand that the just man or the justified man is a living man for the just liveth And it is too narrow to interprete this life of eternal life this would make the Apostles argument very obscure we must therefore undeâ—stand it of a life begun here which shall certainely end in glory this is most consonant both to the Prophet's scope to the scope of the Apostle here Whence we may gather That in justification by faith there is a real life obtained by justification the soulâ— is brought into a new state of life by it such as were really dead are really made alive This may be further cleared from these particulars following I. Such are said to be born again Iob. 3 5. not only by the Spirit which may import Sanctification but also by Water which may import Iustification wherein iniquities are pardoned the Soul is washen from its guilt through the bloud of Jesus Christ represented by the Water in Baptisme Thus are they also put into a new state being delivered from the Power of darkness and translated into the Kingdome of His dear Son Col. 1 13. Christ now owneth them as His Satan hath no more power and jurisdiction over them their guilt being removed and their sinnes being pardoned for because of sin hath Satan as a jailour had power over them as so many prisoners but sin being taken away in their justification they are loosed from his bondes and delivered from his prison and power We see Paul was sent Act. 26 18. To open eyes and to turn from darkness to light from power of Satan unto God that they may receive forgiveness of sinnes c. 2. Hereby they are brought into a State of Salvation and being out of harmes way they are said to be saved being now in a State of life and Salvation through Jesus Christ Ephes. 2 5 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith and how was this It was by Christ together with whom they were quickened when before they were dead in sins trespasses v. 5. So Tit. 3 5. Not by works of rigteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost But how was this work of Salvation begun See vers 7. That being justified by His grace we should be made heirs according to the hop of eternal life So that as justification maketh way for Adoption so it bringeth Souls into a saife state a state of Salvation so as they in a sense are already denominated saved that is brought out of the state of death and put into a state of Salvation Thus are they also said to be quickened together with Him i. e. Christ having forgiveness of all their sinnes Col. 2 13. This will be further clear if we consider how 3. Those who are justified shall certainly be saved not only in respect of the Decree and purpose of God but in respect also of the Gospel constitution and the declared will of God Therefore saith the Apostle Rom. 8 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus And all such as are in Christ Jesus are justified as the Gospel cleareth And againe more clearly vers 30. And whom he justified them he also glorified The connexion betwixt these two is indissoluble So doth the Apostle not only assert but he confirmeth this Rom. 5 9. Much more being now justified by his bloud we shall be saved from wrath through Him And againe vers 17. For if by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive aboundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness That is who welcome embrace and receive the rich offer of grace and the rigteousness of Christ freely and graciously presented in the Gospel to all that will accept thereof shall reigne in the life by one Iesus Christ. So likewise vers last That as sin hath reigned unto death even so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. 4. They who are justified are brought into a state of blessedness and therefore may well be said to live or to be made partakers of a life Rom. 4 6 7 8. Even as David also describeth the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin See Psal. 32 1 2. If then they be brought into a state of blessedness they must be a in a state of life for death and blessedness are inconsistent 5. They are said to be redeemed and consequently brought out of the state of death wherein they were Ephes. 1 7. In whom we have redemption through his bloud the forgâ—veness of sins according to the riches of his grace In by justification is this forgiveness of sinnes whereby they are made partakers of a redemption See Col. 1. 14. Where the same is asserted by the Apoâ—â—le For further clearing of this let us see wherein this life consisteth and then we shall not only see that it is really a life but also that it is a special and excellent life To this end therefore let us consider these following particulars 1. Hereby they have Remission and pardon of their Iniquities as was now cleared and is manifest from Rom. 3 24 25. Being justified freely by this grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation for the remission of sins that are past c. And by this Remission and pardon of sins they have a freedom and exemption from the Curse and wrath of God that was lying upon them and to which they were obnoxious by sin and guilt Orginal and Actual which they were to be charged with that being the penalty threatned in the Law even death and the Curse of God for it is written cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the Law to do them Gal. 3 10. Deut. 27 26. O how excellent a life is this to be delivered from the wrath of the Almighty sin-revenging God and from the Curse and malediction of the great Legislator and dreadful Judge How rightly may they be said to live who are freed from the sentence of death to which they were liable from the penalty of the broken Law of the great God of Heaven and Earth and from that doom that all who shall not share of this rich privilege of Remission shall be made to hear at length depart from me ye Cursed c. A person guilty of death and lying in chaines looking for nothing but the sentence doom to be
given out against him would think himself a living man if in stead of that sentence which he was every houre looking for he should hear of a free and gracious pardon Much more may this state of Remission be looked upon as a state of life 2 They are hereby freed from that death Slavery and Tyranny which the Law did exercise over them before and doth exerce over all such as are not yet justified for as the Law discovereth sin Rom. 3 20. So it worketh wrath Rom. 4. 15. And thereby hath dominion over a man binding him over in chains as it were unto the wrath Curse of God But Christ hath now delivered them from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for them Gal. 3 13. And they by faith having fled to him are pardoned and the Law hath no more to say especially seing it is satisfied by the Cautioners being made a Curse and having fulfilled it in our Nature and place Rom. 8 3 4. Thus are they freed from and dead to the Law by the body of Christ Rom. 7 4. O what a noble sweet and refreshing life is this to be free of this Slavery and Bondage whereby the Law is alwayes lying about the neck of the poor sinner the Curse and wrath of God as oft as he sinneth And adde to this 3. That they are freed from the just and well grounded managment of the Law against them by Saâ—an or a wakened Conscience I say just and well grounded managment for I grant the Devil and a mis-informed Conscience can bring forth the Law and terrifie therewith a true beleever by charging him with the transgressions thereof even after these transgressions are pardoned but this is unjust and illegal and the beleever is under no obligation to acknowledge these Charges or to admit them but on the contrary to reject them as being groundless contrary to the tenor of the Gospel But the unbeleever and unjustified Soul is laid open to all these fearful charges and dreadful challenges to all those summons that are as so many poisoned darts shot into his very heart every one of which is a death to him which he seeth not how to evite Must not then this be a considerable and noble heavenly life to have sin pardoned and thereby be freed from these Soul-affrighting Heart-pierceing Conscience-burning and Mind-tormenting Acculations Charges Libels and Dittayes brought home and delivered by the wicked Accuser of the Brethren and a wakened enligtened Conscience Must there not be many lives in this one 2. Hereby they have peace and Reconciliation with God being justified by faith we have peace with God Rom. 5 1. God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them 2 Cor. 5 18 19. They are now reconciled Rom. 5 10. So Col. 1 20. And having made peace through the blood of His cross by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself Herein also they have received the Atonement Rom. 5 11. And the Enmity is abolished Ephes. 2 15. And slaine v. 16. So that the enmity on both hands is taken away they are reconciled unto the Lord who before were alienated and enemies in their mindes by wicked works Col. 1 21. And the Atonement being made the wrath of God is apaced towards them and that Law-wrath under which they did formerly lye is quite removed and they are no more looked upon nor dealt with as Enemies but owned and regarded as reconciled friends And who can express the good and sweet of this life or who can conceive what an heaven lyeth wrapped up here How justly may he be accounted a dead man who is an Out lawer and a Rebel to God who tasteth nothing of the Kindness and Friendship of God getteth nothing from Him as from a Friend but all as from an Enemie even all the outward favoures he enjoyeth in the World how great and glorious so-ever they be in the eyes of men And on the other hand how happy is he and how justly and deservedly may he be called a living man who can call God his Friend go to Him as to a Friend receive all from Him as from a Friend how inconsiderable so-ever in the eyes of the World the things be which he getteth This is a life the Good the Advantage the Joy the Comfort the Peace of which who can express 3. Hereby they are absolved and acquitted from all that could be justly laid unto their charge for justification in Scripture is expressive of a juridical Act of a just Judge absolving a person from the guilt laid to his charge and from the sentence of the Law due upon the account of that where with he was charged and never doth denote a making of righteous by infusing of tigteousness or by making any real physical change within whatever Papists say as wee see Deut. 25 1. 2 Sam. 15 4. Prov. 17 15. Esai 50 8. 1 King 8 31 32. Exâ—d 23 7. Mat. 12 37. Luk. 7 29. 16 15. And in multitudes of moe places O! what a life is here when a poor self-condemned sinner standeth before the Judge the righteous Lord hath his sinnes charged upon him and the Law brought forth cursing every transgressour for every transgression and justice appearing against him calling for the execution of the sentence according to Law and for death vengeance due by Law and upon all this can look for nothing but doom and present execution of the dreadful sentence what a life I say is it for such a sinner standing in this posture to have a sentence of absolution pronounced and be openly declared righteous and not worthy of death or free of the charge given in against him and thus is it with Beleevers according to the Gospel constitution for though they have sinned come short of the glory of God in themselves yet now they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ and that by faith Rom. 3 22 23 28. Gal. 2 16. Though they were Unrighteous Fornicators Idolaters Adulterers Effeminat Abusers of themselves with mankind Theeves Covetous Drunkards Revilers and Extortioners yet now they are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 6 9 10 11. God justified the Ungodly Rom. 4 5. The Circumcision by faith and the Uncircumcision through faith Rom. 3 30. 4. The ground of this sentence of Absolution passed upon them or in their favours will more manifest both the Reality and Excellency of this life Though they in themselves have been and are sinners and ungodly cannot plead not guilty nor adduce any ground in themselve where upon they can plead Exemption from the penalty of the Law but as they stand guilty in Law so they stand convicted in their own Consciences their mouthes are stopped and they are become guilty Rom. 3 19. They know and acknowlege that they have sinned and come short of the glory of God vers 23. so can expect nothing but
satisfie that demand by dying the shameful death of the cross undergoing the wrath curse due to us for sin thereby making a more perfect Satisfaction unto the Sanction and threatning part of the Law than we could have done by lying in hell for ever more And by faith closeing with Christ resting upon Him as such a satisfying Cautioner Redeemer the sinner acknowledgeth the Law in all its force confessing himself a Transhressour and obnoxious to the Curse now presenting to the Law Law-giver the obedience Satisfaction of Christ whereby both its commands Sanction are fully answered resting thereupon as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law for his guilt and of his right to the Crown which he formerly had forfeited 4. Here is another mystery That such as are unrighteous and Ungodly should be declared and pronunced Righteous In justification the person is declared not guilty of what was laid to his charge in order to punishment that juridically and so he is declared free from the punishment that the Accuser was seeking to have inflicted upon him and so is declared pronunced to be a righteous man though not one that hath not sinneth yet now one that is juridically righteous But how can this be seing every man and woman is guilty before God and is come short of the glory of God The mystery lyeth here as was said The righteousness of their Cautioner Christ is reckoned upon their score and is imputed to them they receive it by faith and so it becometh theirs for now by faith they are united unto Christ become members of His mystical body He being the Head and true Representative thereby He and they are one Person in Law being one Spirit as the Husband and the Wife are one person in Law being one flesh and as the Representer and Represented the Cautioner principal debtor and thus they have a true Interest in His Righteousness obedience to the Law which He yeelded not upon His own account being not obliged thereunto antecedently to His own voluntary condescension for us for as to His person He was God and so not obnoxious to any such Law imposed upon man who is in the way to the obtaining of a Crown as the end of his race yea nor was this requisite as to His humane Nature which by vertue of the personal union with the God-head was as to it self either in Patria and in possession of the State of blessedness or in a capacity thereto without working therefore And it is certaine that therefore His being made under the Law was for His owne people that in their room He might in the Nature of Man give perfect obedience to the Law and so make up a righteousness with which they might all become clothed by Imputation on Gods part by faith receiving it on their part and so be justified Hence-saith the Apostle by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous Rom. 5 19. And thus are they who are unrighteous in themselves being Transgressours of the Law constituted righteous as to the Commands of the Law by the righteousness of their Cautioner As also they are though guilty in themselves obnoxious to wrath yet pronunced free and absolved from that charge by the Imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ made in His sufferings death who did bear our griefs and carry our sorrowes and was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon Him and with His stripes we are healed Esai 53 4 5. 1 Pet. 2 24. And his own self bear our sins in His own body on the tree 3. There is likewise a mystery here That the Imputation of the obedience and Righteousness of Christ doth not take away the Imputation of His Satisfaction nor make His Satisfaction useless of no Importance or necessity as Socinians imagine who cast the whole Gospel in the mould of their own corrupt Reason and understanding For they think if Christs Righteousness be imputed to us we are perfectly righteous and if we be perfectly righteous we have no sin if we have no sin there is no need of Satisfaction for our sin But they little consider that we are both guilty of the broken Law and also nothwithstanding obliged to perfect obedience It is unreasonable to think that Adam by his breach of the Law was exeemed delivered from any obligation to obey the Law sin doth not neither can dissolve that obligation otherwayes the best way of being freed from the Lawes of God or Man were to break them cast them at our heels We then being transgressours still under the obligation of obedience to the whole Law our Mediator and Cautioner must not only obey the Law for us to the end we may inherite the promised reward but must also make Satisfaction for the Violation of the Law to the end we may escape Gods Curse wrath threatned in the Law and due to us for the breach of the same Had we perfectly kept the Law we had then had no need of any Satisfaction for our breach thereof but being guilty of sin this Satisfaction and the Imputation thereof to us is absolutely necessary And though we need not nicely here distinguish betwixt this Righteouness Satisfaction in reference to the different ends and say that by His Righteousness imputed to us we have right to the Crown by His Satisfaction freedom from death which was the penalty of the broken Law for God hath joined both together for both ends what He hath thus joined together as we should not separat so neither may we nicely scrupulously distinguish but adore the wonderful wisdom of God in this contrivance and observing our necessity of both sweetly acquiesce in and thankfully accept of both But you will say if we be perfectly righteous by the Imputation of Christs righteousness what need have we of any more are we not possessed of right to the reward and being righteous are we not free of our sin I answer It is true indeed if we said that Christs Righteousness or compleet obedience was first imputed to us or if the Scripture gave any ground to say so there might be some coloure for this Exception but as the Scripture giveth no such ground so neither do we assert it Only we have need of both both are graciously imputed and received by faith yea we being sinners if we might speak of an order here Satisfaction must first be imputed that thereby we may be freed from the sentence of the Law which most presseth a wakened convinced sinner who is most anxious hereanent crying out How shall I escape the wrath and curse of God But as the Lord hath graciously and wonderfully knit the effects together so is the Cause Both Christs obedience and Sufferings were so woven together that they belonged both to made up His
receive the Adoption of Sones and the blessing of Abraham Gal. 3 13 14. 4 4 5. As it is one thing to finish the Transgression to make an end of sin to make Reconciliation for iniquity another thing to bring-in Everlasting Righteousness Dan. 9 24. Yea the redemption from the Law and from its curse is mentioned as preceeding the other as the finishing of transgression is also mentioned before the bringing-in of Righteousness in the passages cited And thus as these Effects are distinguished though inseparable so is the Cause By the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction we have pardon of sin being redeemed from the curse of the Law by His being made a curse for us by the Imputation of His Rigteousness and obedience we are looked upon as Righteous so have a right to the promise and Inheritance Though we need not thus distinctly consider both save only to demonstrat the necessity of the Imputation of both for Christ by His death did also purchase the Inheritance for us and by His obedience made Satisfaction for sin it being a piece of His Humiliation So that both in the deep wisdom of God make up one cause of that one Effect which comprehendeth all Blessedness that is both pardon of sinnes and Right to the Inheritance c. By the Imputation of both or of this compleat Surety-righteousness of Christ including both beleevers are pardoned and adjudged unto life Hence our pardon and justification are often ascribed unto Christs death not as distinctly considered or as excluding His Righteousness obedience but among other reasons because that was the compleating Act of His obedience and to which all the rest preceeding had a respect as to that which should compleat the whole Meritorious part of His Mediation And hereby His obedience can no more be excluded than His foregoing soul-sufferings Nay His death did presuppose and include His obedience for it was the death of one who had perfectly obeyed the Law which death obedience being His Mediatory work in the state of His Humiliation was a compleat Righteousness for the blessedness advantage of all those for whom He appeared whose debt He undertook to pay 5. That the obedience of Christ must also be imputed to sinners is manifest from this That otherwise they should have no Righteousness at all imputed to them that properly can be called a Righteousness for if nothing but that which is commonly called Christs passive obedience or His Sufferings be imputed there can no Righteousness be said to be imputed for dying and suffering the penalty as such are no righteousness being no obedience to the commands of the Law in conformity to which consisteth proper Righteousness as when one dieth for his crime of Murther he cannot be said to be thereby a righteous man or to have obeyed the Law forbidding Murther nor can we be said properly to have obeyed the Law when Christ in our room did suffer the penalty of death due to us for the breach of it They who are in hell suffering the vengeance of eternal fire cannot be said to be obeying the Law It is true Christ in dying did obey a command Imposed upon Him by the Father but that was no command of the Moral Law prescribed unto man thereafter in dying Suffering He gave no obedience to that Law under the obligation to which we were standing no more than He can be said to have Suffered the penalty while He was obeying the Law these two being so manifestly different So that it is clear that if Christs obedience be not imputed to us no proper Righteousness is or can be said to be imputed to us Yea 6 If Christs obedience be not imputed to us that Law which saith do this and live is not fulfilled but rather abrogated quite abolished and it must be said that not withstanding of that constitution of Gods we live though we neither do this nor is our Cautioners doing of it imputed to us And so we have a right to the Reward get it at lenght without the Righteousness required in order thereunto Let us therefore admire the harmonious perfection of this Effect Work of infinite wisdom I know several things are objected against this Truth as there are many other grounds Reasons adduced for the same but these I shall speak to at more length afterward 7. This is also a mysterie here to be noticed That a Righteousness that is not ours inherently but Christs should be made ours made over to us reckoned upon our score or we become clothed therewith there upon justified as Righteous as really effectually as if we had wrought it our selves and it had been properly inherent in us Socinians Papists Arminians others who will not subject their reason unto this mystery and give credite to Revelation will acknowledge no such imputation of Righteousness but at most do grant but an improper imputation that is an imputation as to Effects so that with them Christ neither Suffered nor obeyed in our stead room but only for our good advantage that too conditionally only in case we beleeve and performe the Gospel-condition But this imputation as to Effects only is no imputation at all there being no thing thereby Imputed not the Righteousness of Christ it self for this they expresly deny nor yet the Effects themselves for we no where read of Imputed Justification Adoption Pardon c. which are the Effects Yea it is not enough to them to deny this Imputed Righteousness but in contempt scorne they call that which we name an Imputed Righteousness a putative Righteousness as if it were a meer imaginary thing But whatever such in decision think or say the Gospel holdeth forth to us a Righteousness imputed or the Righteousness of Christ graciously bestowed upon made over to belevers or freely given unto them so that they are dealt with by God as Righteous Juridically legally or as possessours of such a compleat perfect Righteousness that as really to all Effects as if it had been their own inherently performed by them so had been theirs without any such Imputation And because this as the cause is imputed to them made theirs therefore all the Effects thereof shall really certainely be bestowed upon them in God's appointed time methode This is the Truth which the Gospel holdeth forth to the solide peace joy comfort of Beleevers the full clearing vindicating of which would require a just Treatise I shall therefore here propose but a few clear manifest Grounds of this refreshful comfortable truth leaving the further prosecution vindication of them of other arguments that are used in this matter with the examination of what is objected on the contrary till afterward First therefore we say as Christ who knew no sin was made sin that is had the sinnes of His people laid upon Him imputed to Him so
16. the free gift is of many offences to be the same with free pardon of many offences else he must say that this free pardon goeth before justification consequently is not justification it self as he saith else where for the text saith that the free gift is of many offences unto justification as judgment or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was antecedent to condemnation 4. So then the true meaning is that the free gift of Righteousness hath respect unto many sinnes to the end that justification pardon that followeth thereupon might be full whileas the guilt that was imputed to Adam's posterity had respect only to his first breach of the Covenant for which all were made obnoxious to condemnation Lastly He saith It is but loose and unsavoury argueing to reason from a thing simply done to a determinat manner of doing of it so is it to reason from being made Righteous to a being made Righteous by Imputation Ans. The particular manner or way how we are made Righteous is aboundantly signified by our being made constitute Righteous by the Righteousness of another who was our Head Representative Surety that because it can be imagined to be no other way than by Imputation And Further the whole discurse of the Apostle here particularly the comparison so much here insisted upon putteth the matter beyond all debate As Adam's sin was imputed to his posterity whereby all were accounted sinners dealt with as such even as guilty by reason of Adam's act of sin So Christ's Righteousness becometh ours by Imputation we are made Righteous accounted such dealt with as such upon the account thereof No man can imagine how one shall be accounted guilty punished as guilty of a sinful act done by another unless the guilt of that sinful act be imputed to him so no man can imagine how one can be accounted Righteous dealt with as such upon the account of the Righteousness of another if that Righteousness of the other be not imputed to him And beside This is called a gift a free gift a free gift of Righteousness a free gift of Righteousness received which fully pointe forth this Imputation which we contend for Fiftly Rom. 8 3 4. For what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us The Law could not help a sinner from under the Curse nor unto the recompence of reward because it was weak through the flesh through the sin corruption of man whereby he could not give right and full obedience thereunto And therefore God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh who by His obedience suffering in His state of humiliation took away the sting of death the strength of sin by satisfying all the demandes of the Law the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the jus right of the Law which consisted in yeelding full perfect obedience in making full Satisfaction for the violation committed for the Law said cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written therein to do them Deut. 27 26. Gal. 3 13. And the Righteousness which is of the Law is that the man who doth these things shall live by them And this was so ordered that the Righteousness of the Law the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law the jus and demand of the Law mentioned might be fulfilled in us that is in our Nature by the Redeemer Surety who did suffered all this in for His own The Ethiopik Version is a clear commentary and when we were impotent to do the commands of the Law God sent His own Son for that sin who took on our body of sin condemned sin it self in our body that he might justifie us be propitious unto us and that so he might fulfill the work of the commands of the Law for them who walk in the Law of the holy Spirit Let us now see what John Goodwine excepteth p. 145. c. He saith 1. Some understand this rather of Sanctification than of justification by the fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law that Evangelical obedience to the precepts thereof which all those that truely beleeve in Christ do in part performe and desire and strive to performe more perfectly Ans. Gospel justification Gospel-Sanctification agree well together and Christ is the true foundation cause of both But that this is to be understood rather of justification appeareth hence 1. That this is a further explication confirmation of what was said vers 1. There is therefore now no Condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus 2. all that measure of Sanctification which the Saints through Grace attaine unto here cannot be called a fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law the Lawes demands are not thereby satisfied for it calleth for perfect obedience which none of the Sanctified can give 3. If this were understood of Sanctification why are these words added who walk not after the flesh bue after the Spirit 2. He said By the Righteousness of the Law which is here said to be fulfilled in beleevers cannot be meant the Righteousness or active obedience of Christ imputed because it must of necessity be such a Righteousness and such a fulfilling as may be apprehended as a proper and sutable effect of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh as the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 declareth But it is unpessible that the active obedience of Christ or the imputation of it should be any proper effect of condemning sin in the flesh that is of the abolishing or taking away the guilt or the accusing and condemning power of sin for when the guilt of sin is purged away there needeth no other Righteousness nor Imputation of Righteousness for justification Ans. 1. Christ's obedience Suffering need not be distinguished both being done in His state of humiliation and belonging-thereto both being necessary to answere the demand of the Law which we did lye under Christ performed both to the end the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or jus right of the Law might be fulâ—illed in us and for us by this Surety And before guilt be purged away we must have both imputed to us for justification by saith must not make the Law void but rather establish it 2. Neither is this vers 4. to be looked on as holding forth the end of that which did immediatly preceed in the end of vers 3. or of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh but rather as a further end of God's sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh or as a comprehensive end of all that was mentioned before 3. He saith That clause in them still notes either a subjective inhesion of some things in persons or else some kind of Efficiency But the Righteousness
it accompanying it with other things as to the Nation of the jewes because for this end was the law as a law given by the law-giver that Subjects might walk according to the same and that they might become thereby righteous and have a right to the reward promised by fulfilling this condition of the Covenant Now when these ends or this end putting these together as one were onely attained by what Christ did and suffered the jewes who stumbled at this stumbling stone rejected this righteousness of God could never be justified by all their own acts of obedience to the law how zealously so ever they should have sougt after a rigteousness thereby Except 6. The 5. we passe because he laith no weight on it him self The plaine direct meaning is that the law that is the whole Mosaical dispensation was for that end given by God to the jewes that whilst it did continue it might instruct and teach them concerning the Messiah who was yet to come and by his death to make atonement for their sinnes that so they might beleeve in Him accordingly and be justified and further that in time that Nation might be trained up prepared for the Messiah himself and that Oeconomy perfection of worship service which He should bring with him establish in the world at his coming Ans. What was said to the two foregoing Exceptions may serve for an answere to this for what ever truth may be in this yet it is no true sense exposition of the place because Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth so to the Gentiles as well as to the jewes whereas this gloss limiteth restricketh all to the jewes 2 There is nothing here keeping correspondence with what is said vers 3. touching their going about to establish their own righteousness and refuising to submit unto the righteousness of God 3. The righteousness of the law described by Moses here cited vers 5. hath no interest in the Mosaical Oeconomy as given for the mentioned end to the jewes 4 If Christ made an atonement for sins was to be beleâ—ved in accordingly by such as would be justified then that atonement was to be made over unto them reckoned upon their score to the end they might be justified upon the account thereof 5 The Text saith that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness so was to bring in everlasting Righteousness as well as to make atonement for sins Dan. 9 24. 6 The perfection of that service worship which Christ was to establish at His coming was a clearer manifestation of the Gospel of the Grace of God whereby the Righteousness of God or the Surety-righteousness of Christ was imputed unto Beleevers received by faith in order to justification as the whole Gospel declareth He laboureth to confirme this gloss with two reasons 1. Because the jewes sought Righteousness self justification as well from the observation of the Ceremonial as of the Moral law 2. Because Christ is held forth as the end of this dispensation 2 Cor. 3 13. Gal. 3 24. Ans. As to the first of the reasons we have often replied to it already And the second will not prove that there is no other interpretation of this passage that can have place And beside That whole Oeconomy did pointe out and lead them to the Messiah that in Him they might find that which they were seeking after by their own works all in vaine even the Righteousness of God which will sufficiently cloth all beleevers and both keep them from wrath due for sin give them a right to glory So that even this sense if rightly understood doth rather strengthen than hurt imputed Righteousness Eightly 1 Cor. 1 30. Is excepted against by him pag. 162. c. To which we may adde vers 29. 31. Which will help to cleare the matter That no flesh should glory in His presence but of Him are ye in Christ Iesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification Redemption That according at it is written he that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. All the work of God in and about His chosen ones is so contrived that no flesh should have ground to glory in the presence of God but that he who glorieth should glory in the Lord and therefore He hath made Christ to be all things to them that they stand in need of in order to their everlasting enjoyment of Himself and particulary Christ is said to be made of God to us among other things which our necessity calleth for Righteousness answering His Name the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS Ier. 23 6. And a Righteousness he cannot be made unto us any other way than by clothing us who are naked and have no righteousness of our own with a Righteousness that is by Imputing to us His Righteousness that we may thereby become Righteous be looked upon as such and so be accepted of God justified Except 1. Christ is no other way said to be made righteousness then He is said to be made Wisdom c. Therefore we may as well plead for the Imputation of His Wisdom or His Sanctification there is no more intimation made of the Imputation of the one then of the other Ans. This is but the old exception of Socinus part 4. de Servant Cap. 5. And of Volkel De vera Relig. Cap. 21. p. 566. And it standeth upon this onely ground That Christ is made all these particulars to us here mentioned after one the same manner and what that manner is should be declared of necessity it must be a very general one otherwise it shall not agree to all these particulars Therefore Socinus hath devised a very general manner of way saying in the place cited That all this signifieth nothing else than that we have attained to that by Gods providence through Christ that we are become wise holy redeemed before Gods that therefore Christ is said to be righteousness to us because through the providence of God by Christ we have attained to be just before God But this general way maketh us not one white wiser Volkelius in the place cited giveth us no relief but only tels us That Christ is said to be made all these to us because he was the cause of all these because God by his meanes made us wise holy will at length redeem us Bellarm. condescendeth to tell us that He is said to be our Righâ—eousness because He is the efficient cause thereof But how that is he doth not explaine But Bellarm. next answere is to some better purpose Christ saith he is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the Father for us and doth so give and communicat that Satisfaction to us when he justifieth us that it may be called our Satisfaction Righteousness 2 Such as oppose us here do must necessarily so do
that denote Beleevers Union with Him as the ground of their Interest in His Righteousness should not be asserted to Import this Imputation yet this words that we might be made the Righteousness of God will be a rock whereupon Imputation may stand for they hold this forth unto us That as God made Christ sin by Imputation so He maketh us righteous yea the Righteousness of God by Imputation Except 5. The clear meaning is this that God for that end made Christ sin that is an offering or Sacrifice for sin for us that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him that is that we might be justified or made a Society or Remnant of Righteous ones after that peculiar manner of justification which God hath established through that Sacrifice of His Son Ans. When Christ was made an offering for sin the guilt of sin was laid upon Him even the guilt of our sin And if we be justified or made a Society of justified ones we must be made a Society of righteous ones and if we be made a Society of Righteous ones we must first have a Righteousness seing we have not a Righteousness of our own we must have a Righteousness made over to us and seing we have this Righteousness made over to us as being in Christ it must be the Righteousness of God So that though this Interpretation be very far fetched and hath no countenance from the words and destroyeth the cohesion of these words with the former as also the reason that is contained in them adduced for confirmation of what was said vers 19. yet it cannot destroy the doctrine of Imputation but must contribute to its support though a little more remotely He laboureth to give strength to this his Interpretation by alleiging 1. That it is a frequent Scripture expression to call the sin-offering or the Sacrifice for sin by the name of sin simply as Exod. 29 14. and 30 10. Levit. 5 6 16 18 19 7 1 2 7 9 7. Ezek. 44 27. 45 19. 23. Hos. 4 8. Ans. Though it be true that the Hebrew words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do sometimes signify sin sometimes an offering for sin yet the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth alwayes signify sin in the New Test. and the 70 do not use this Greek word in the places cited except Exod. 29 14. there in the version that is in the Biblia Polyglot Lond. It is in the Genitive case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of sin the chald-paraph calleth it an Expiation Targ. Ionath Hierof say it is a sin so doth the persik version the Samaritan Version turneth it that is for sin the Arabik an Expiation But further though it were granted to be so taken here yet our cause would hereby suffer no prejudice but be rather confirmed as was lately shown And when the same word used to express a Sacrifice for sin which signifieth sin it self we may hence be confirmed in this that that Sacrifice for sin hath guilt laid upon it before it can be Sacrifice for sin it must be sin in respect of this before it be a due Sacrifice or oblation for sin And therefore Christ must have been sin in law by Imputation or have the guilt of sin laid upon Him before He could be a fit Sacrifice for sin He alleigeth 2. To express a Number of justified or righteous persons by the abstract terme of Righteousness is very agreable to the Scripture dialect in other places as poverty for poor captivity for captives Ans. 1 Yet no one instance can be given where the word Righteousness hath this Import 2 But how ever as was said these justified or righteous persons must be righteous else they cannot make up such a company as captivity can never signify a company of men that are not captives nor poverty a company of persons that are not poor So that this company of righteous ones must needs be righteous and that in order to justification seing they have no Righteousness of their own for in themselves they are ungodly they must have a Righteousness by Imputation 3 Why should they be called the Righteousness of God according to this Interpretation And how is the opposition here observed betwixt Christs being made sin their being made the Righteousness of God in Him But this man by this Interpretation transgresseth all lines of Correspondence He alleigeth 3. That addition of God imports that that righteousness or justification which beleevers obtaine by the Sacrifice of Christ is not only Righteousness of Gods free donation but of His special procurement and contrivement for them Ans. 1 Righteousness and justification are not one the same how oft so ever he name them as Synonymous 2 We grant that the Righteousness the Iustification which Beleevers obtaine are both Gods free gift His contrivement But notwithstanding hereof yea so much the rather is there a Righteousness imputed to them the Righteousness of Christ who is God and a Righteousness which will be accepted of God whose judgment is according to truth as a sufficient ground whereupon to pronounce such as in themselves are ungodly to be Righteous so to justifie them He alleigeth 4. That by the grammatical construction dependance of the latter clause our being made the Righteousness of God in Christ upon the former it is evident that in the latter such an Effect must of necessity be signified which may answere that cause to wit the death of Christ for us this is deliverance from the guilt punishment of sin not the Imputation of His active obedience Ans. As Christs death could not be separated from His Obedience which is thereby presupposed His death being the Sacrifice of one who is made under the law and was obedient thereunto unto death that in the room stead of His own So the Imputation of Righteousness to us should not be separated from the Imputation of His Sufferings both being necessarily required unto sinners who had sinned yet remained under the obligation of the law in order to their acceptance with God and Justification He alleigeth 5. The Scriptures when they speak of the Sufferings of Christ as a cause inrespect of justification never ascribe any other effect unto them but only either the Remission of sins deliverance from wrath Redemption or the like Ans. As the Scriptures making so frequent mention of the Sufferings of Christ do not exclude His Obedience so neither do they exclude the Imputation of His Obedience in order to our justification and receiving a Right to glory yea they make our being constitute Righteous an Effect of His Obedience Righteousness or Righteous-making is accompanied with Justification So that though the Scriptures speak sometimes more expresly of the Sufferings sometimes more expresly of the obedience of Christ according to the exigence of the cause handled yet both are inseparable
as a cause so is our Righteousness Justification inseparable as the full Effect CHAP. IX Other passages of the N. T. briefly mentioned which plead for this Imputation of Christs Righteousness THere are other passages of Scripture beside these mentioned in the preceeding chapter and against which I finde no Exceptions made by Mr. Goodwine in the forecited Book which yet do with no small clearness and fulness of evidence plead for the truth which we owne to wit The Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Beleevers in order to their Justification These we shall not insist upon but only mentione in short seing the full insisting upon them will not be necessary after what is said in the Explication Vindication of foregoing passages 1 Rom. 1 17. For therein is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith as it is written the just shall live by faith The Apostle is here giving a reason proving the Gospel whereof he was not ashamed to be a preacher of to be the power of God unto Salvation that to every one that beleeveth be he jew or be he Gentile viz. Because there is a Righteousness revealed therein which sinners only stand in need of that Righteousness of God that is not only a Righteousness which is devised by God and is accepted in His sight but an excellent Righteousness even the Righteousness of one who is God and a Righteousness revealed for faith to lay hold on receive that which faith leaneth to first and last when it is weakest and when it is strongest that thereby the poor sinner who formerly was dead by law may live as one reconciled to God So that hence we see Sinners have need of a Righteousness and this Righteousness is the Righteousness of God is revealed in the Gospel that it may be received by faith and so Imputed made over to the poor sinner in order to his Justification and acceptance with God 2 Rom. 4 11. And he i. e. Abraham received the signe of circumcision a seal of the Righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that righteousness might be imputed to them also Here is a Righteousness and a Righteousness called the Righteousness of faith because received applied only by faith and a Righteousness whereof circumsion was appointed a seal granted to Abraham as such and a Righteousness which was imputed to Abraham that he might be the Father of all them that beleeve for it is added that Righteousness might be Imputed to them also And this must be the same Righteousness that was Imputed to Abraham the same way Imputed the same way received that there migt be no essential difference betwixt the way of justification of Father and Children The Aethiopick Version may serve for a commentary and he had circumsion a signe of his righteousness which He gave him and the signe thereof that this might be made known unto him that God justified Abraham by faith when he was not at that time circumcised that they may know that they also are justified by faith 3. Rom. 4 24 25. But for us also to whom it shall be Imputed if we beleeve on Him who raised up tesus our Lord from the dead who was delivered for our offences was raised againe for our justification Here is some thing said to be Imputed this must be in order to justification And this that is Imputed cannot be faith it self or our act of beleeving for what is said to be Imputed is promised to be Imputed upon condition of faith or our beleeving on Him who raised up Iesus our Lord. So that it must be the Righteousness of Christ consisting in His Mediatory work which He undertook performed for His owne for it is added that He was delivered for their offences that is He was delivered unto the death to make satisfaction for their sinnes He rose againe that He might declare He had given full Satisfaction that He might apply this Surety-righteousness of His to the end they might be justified Socinus doth not understand this therefore de Servat part 4. p. 333 saith It is most certaine that the Apostle doth not speak of any Imputation of the righteousness of Christ but assert that the faith or credite we give God because He hath called Iesus Christ our Head from death to eternal life shall be accounted unto us in the place of righteousness just as faith whereby Abraham gave credite to the words of God was Imputed to him for righteousness But the Text hereby is manifestly perverted for it saith that some thing shall be imputed if we beleeve which can not be faith but something distinct from faith which is to be Imputed upon condition of faith And what can this be else than the Surety-righteousness of Christ who is here mentioned as dying riseing in the place and for 〈◊〉 good of His people that they might be justified And further if it were faith it self that were here said to be Imputed in order to justification the justified man should not be one that is in himself ungodly because he hath a Righteousness in himself and he who hath a Righteousness in himself is not ungodly yet it is said Rom. 4 5. That God justifieth the ungodly Againe That which is Imputed must be a Righteousness without works vers 6. but if faith it self be Imputed a work is Imputed and not a Righteousness without works and this would also lay down a ground of boasting make the reward of debt not of grace v. 14. 4. Rom. 10 10. For with the heart man beleeveth unto Righteousness with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation The Apostle had been before vers 4. telling us That Christ was the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth thereafter he discriminateth the way of justification by the law and by the Gospel under the Notion of a Righteousness which is of the law and a Righteousness which is of faith then more particularly he describeth the Righteousness of faith or a Righteousness is had unto Salvation in through faith vers 9. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Iesus shalt beleeve in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved which he proveth in the 10. vers now cited therein sheweth how by this beleeving that God hath raised the Lord Jesus from the dead Salvation is brought about viz. That by beleeving with the heart a Righteousness is obtained received and this righteousness must be Christs even His Surety-righteousness for faith looketh on Him as raised from the dead that by God as having now received full Satisfaction from Him thereupon bringing Him as it were out of prison And in the Text cited we see that by faith a Righteousness is received or faith is the way unto the possession of a Righteousness as Confession is the
Salvation we must be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ which is that which faith grippeth to apprehendeth that the shame of our nakedness may not appear and we may be in case to stand before the Tribunal of God CHAP. X. Some Arguments for the Imputation of Christs Righteousness Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwine THe truth concerning the Imputation of Christs Righteousness hath been hitherto asserted from Scripture several of these passages have been vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. Goodwine a maine adversary thereunto For further clearing of the matter we shall see what Exceptions the same man bringeth-in against the Arguments which are made use of by the Orthodox for the truth asserted Argum. 1. If there be no standing in judgment before God unless we be endued with perfect Righteousness then must the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us in our justification But there is no standing for us in judgment before God unless we be endued with a perfect Righteousness Ergo c. Against this he excepteth pag. 192. Chap. 7. saying That the consequence of the former proposition is not good And so doth Bellar. answere de Iustific lib. 2. cap. 7. So do also the Socinians But let us hear his reasons Remissin of sins saith he which is the purchase procurement of the death of Christ is a perfect Righteousness is every way able to bear us out in judgment Ans. Remission of sins neither is nor can be called righteousness â—or a pardoned person is noâ— the same with one that hath kept the law though by vertue of this pardon he is freed from the punishment due to the transgressours of the law yet hath he no right to the reward promised to the keepers of the law 2 Remission of sins being the purchase of Christs death Sufferings cannot be had without the Imputation of the death Sufferings of Christ unto the Beleever so hereby one halfe of the truth must be granted But His Sufferings Obedience going together both making up one Mediatory Surety-righteousness performed by Christ in His estate of humiliation both most be Imputed made over to the Beleever to the end he may receive pardon right to Glory Arg. 2. He that is justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own must needs be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed because there is no righteousness to be found in any other for the justification of a person in the sight of God But every man that is justified is justified by the righteousness of another and not by his own Ergo c. He excepteth 1. The Major is false because the passive obedience of Christ is the Righteousness of another and men may be are throughly fully justified by the merite hereof communicated to them in the free pardon of their sinnes and so need not the imputation of His active obedience Ans. 1 We plead not for the sole Imputation of Christs active obedience but for the Imputation of all that He did and suffered for in the room stead of His owne 2 Where are Christs meer Sufferings as distinguished from His obedience called a righteousness or how can meer Sufferings as such or bearing of the punishment threatened by the law be called a righteousness doth not righteousness denote the conformity of actions unto the law 3 When it is said the merite of Christs passive obedience is communicated unto us the meaning must be one of these two either that it self is properly made over imputed to us or onely in its effect free pardon of sinnes If this latter be said Then no other Imputation is granted than what Socinians will yeeld unto how can it be said to be Imputed as to its Effects when it self is not Imputed in order to the partaking of these effects If the former be said then there is something that is in it self imputed not meerly in its Effects And if Christs Passions Sufferings be imputed abstracted from His righteousness Active obedience they shall be justified without a righteousness And it neither is nor ever will be proved that pardon of sinnes is the whole of justification or that a pardoned man is 〈◊〉 ipso that he is pardoned a righteous man or that a pardoned man meerly as such hath right to the recompence of reward promised to the fulfiller of the law Except 2. to the Minor A man may be said saith he to be justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own in a double sense Either 1. by way of merite and then it is true that every one is justified by the Righteousness of another that is by the merite of the righteousness of another or 2. by way of forme so it is altogether untrue for that Righteousness where with a man is formally made Righteous is alwayes a mans own by donation Possession Ans. 1 When a man is justified by the merite of the Righteousness of another that Righteousness of the other must be imputed to the justified person or we have no other Imputation than what Socinians yeeld to 2. If the righteousness whereby one is formally justified be his owne by donation possession no other possession be thereunto requisite then we may be said to be formally justified by the righteousness of Christ for we affirme that Beleevers are possessed thereof by Gods free donation and Imputation thus the whole is granted for nothwithstanding hereof that same righteousness which is made over to the Beleever by free donation Imputation is Christs Inherently so is the righteousness of another Whereby we see that the members of this distinction thus explained are not different Yet we must not think that this righteousness of Christ is so given to us as that it is inherent in us wrought in us as Faith Repentance are for even Remission of sinnes whereby he will have us formally justified is not so in us as Faith and Repentance are in us And through Gods Imputation and Donation the righteousness of Christ may be the Beleevers when it is received by faith as well as Remission of sinnes for to speak in his own language that which is given unto man by God may truely and properly be called his own 3 That remission of sins is formal justification will never be proved and seing he will have Remission of sins to be the pure Effect of Christs Sufferings and death so must justification be and then why saith the Apostle Rom. 4 25. Who was delivered viz. to Sufferings and death for our offences and raised againe for our justification Arg. 3. If Beleevers have a true and real communion with Christ then is his Righteousness theirs by imputation But the former is true c. It may be he proposeth the Argument in such a mode way as may be most to His own advantage for who argueth thus he nameth not Yet it is true that
in what He Suffered in His state of Humiliation for to us a Childe was born and to us a Son was given He was made under the law for us that he might redeem such as â—ere under the law that they might receive the Adoption of Sones Esai 9 5. Gal. 4 4 5. 2. This active obedience of Christ saith he was serviceable to that same great End whereunto our righteousness and obedience are subservient viz. the glory of God the advancement of His Kingdom Ioh. 8 49. 7 18. Ans. And was not His death Sufferings also subservient unto this great end Will it therefore follow that He died not to make Satisfaction to justice for the sinnes of His people And if this cannot follow what ever Socinians imagine how shall it or can it hence follow that His obedience was not to satisfie the demands of the law and to procure the reward to His people Is there any Inconsistency betwixt His fulfilling the law as Mediator and Surety in the room of His people His doing it for the glory of God the advancement of His Kingdom 3. Another enâ— saith he is the exemplariness of it Ans. This is but another arrow taken out of the quiver of the Socinians is of no force to weaken our argument seing a subordinat less principal end doth not destroy a more principal end Was He not exemplary to us in His death Sufferings shall we therefore say That there was no satisfaction for sins intended thereby And what is there here peculiar unto Christ as Lord Mediator seing the lives of other Saints are also exemplary 4. It had saith he an excellent Importance to draw to Imitation Ans. This is the same with the preceeding and deserveth no further answere 5. It was saith he a meanes of continueing His person in the love and complacâ—ncy of His Father which was a thing of absolute necessity for the carrying on of the great work of Redemption for if He had once miscarried who should have mediated for Him Ioh. 15 10. 8 29. Ans. As to His Person He was God equal with the Father in power and Glory It were therefore blasphemy once to suppose that His person stood in need of this for any such end or to suppose that He could have failed as to any act of obedience thereby have displeased God Wherefore His obedience being the obedience of one who was is God over all blessed for ever it could not be necessary to Himself unto any such end Therefore it behoved to be wholly for us for whom He was made under the law as He was given to us and borne for us 6. It was saith he of absolute necessity to qualify fit the Sacrifice for the Altar and render Him a person meet by His death and Sacrifice of Himself to make attonement for the world and to purge and take away the sin of it Ans. Shall we think that He who was God was not a fit enoug Sacrifice for the world but that He must be made fit and prepared by acts of obedience And as for His Humane Nature which was no person but did subsist in the Divine Nature being assumed into the subsistence thereof was it not sufficiently fitted to be a Sacrifice by its personal union with the Godhead was it not thereby Holy Harmless undefiled separat from sinners which is all that the Apostle requireth Heb. 7 26 Was not the Humane Nature personally united unto the Godhead from the very first moment of conception The holiness then that consisteth in Acts of Actual obedience was not required unto this Union and after this Union it was not possible that He could sinne as it is not possible that the glorified now in Heaven can break the Lawes that we break here while on earth and yet it will not follow that they are under the same particular obligations to particular acts of commanded duties that we stand under So nor was Christ as to Himself under the obligation of the pâ—rticular duties of the law to which He willingly submitted Himself gave obedience but all this was for us Nor was this necessarily required to make His Sacrifice Holy for His Humane Nature being once united to the Divine could not otherwayes be but holy and without sin and so a sinless and holy Sacrifice And withall we would take notice that the Actions of the Mediator were the Actions of the person and not of either of the Natures alone therefore must not be looked upon as the Actions of a meer man So that His acts of obedience were the acts of obedience of God man or of that person that was God He needeth not then tell us that the Absolute holiness and Righteousness of the humanity it self was of necessary concurrence unto His obedience for we grant it and this flowed from the hypostatical union but that which we deny is That there was an Holiness and Righteousness in acts of outward obedience to the law requisite thereunto as if the humane Nature by vertue of the hypostatical union had not been holy and harmless untecedently unto those outward acts of obedience and so had not been a sinless and holy Sacrifice if He had been offered up in His Infancy or before He was in capacity to do any commanded acts He needeth not say as he doth pag. 204. that we conceive that Christ-man might have been righteous without doing the works of Righteousness which is all one as to say that He might have been Righteous though He had transgressed for not to keep the law in those to whom the law is given is nothing else but to transgress For we neither do nor need assert any such thing for by vertue of the hypostatical union He was Righteous and could not transgress or do any thing contrary to what was imposed upon Him but we say that by vertue of this union as to Himself the Humane Nature was not under the law as we are but He was under the law that He might fulfill it for others not to fit and qualifie Him to be a meet Sacrifice as if for this His Humane Nature had not been meet enough before To this he saith pag. 205. Let this Supposition be admitted that Christ had suffered in the womb and that this Suffering of His had been fully Satisfactory yet had He been as perfectly righteous in this case and consequently had kept the law perfectly as now He hath done for the law requireth of Infants during their Infancy nothing but holiness of Nature I Ans. 1. This is enoug to confirme what we say viz. That all His after actual obedience was not necessary to this end 2 And beside though this holiness of Nature was conforme to the law upon the matter yet it was not a formal obedience unto the law if we speak of Him in reference to Himself for the Humane Nature had this Holiness by vertue of the Hypostatical union and Christ when
the Humane Nature was first conceived was God-man and the person was under no law so was not under the obligation of any such law but was made under the law as Mediator and so for us and not for himself nor it is any more to advantage to except againe say that His meaning is not that there was an absolute necessity that he should keep the law upon the same termes every wayes which now He hath done as that He should performe the same Individual acts of obedience or the same number of acts in case He had been called to suffer any white sooner but that untill the very Instant in which He should suffer whether it were sooner or later He should in all things submit himself unto the good pleasure of God For it doth hence sufficiently appear That all his after obedience in all these particular acts was not necessary to fit Him as a Sacrifice so could not be necessary for Himself And therefore seing He had been a sufficiently holy Sacrifice had He been offered up before the actual performance of these commanded duties in the law it is manifest that these duties were not required unto the end alleiged but that as He was made under the law for us so all His actual obedience to the law was for us and not for himself The Excepter in end perceiving the Invalidity of all his own discourse here closeth the matter thus pag. 206. But however suppose this necessity or use of the Righteousness of Christ could not be sufficiently cleared yet since there are many others of undeniable evidence the position so much contended for to wit that the Godhead of Christ sufficiently qualified Him for such a Sacrifice as He was makes nothing at all for the Imputation of His Righteousness Therefore we shall not trouble either our selves or our Reader any further with untying an Impertinent knot What these others of undeniable evidence are we have not yet seen and sure this one ground is sufficient to demonstrat that his obedience to the law in all points was not for himself nor to qualifie him as a Sacrifice but for us and therefore it must be imputed made over to us and become our Righteousness whereby and whereupon together with his Sufferings made over to us also we are to be justified and accepted of God as Righteous and not only have pardon of sinnes but also a Right to the Inheritance and to the reward promised upon obedience 7. As Christ saith he p. 206. was a Sacrifice so was He and yet is is to be for ever Hebr. 7 27. c. An High-Priest and that Righteousness of His we speak of qualifieth Him that is contributeth to His qualification for Priesthood as well as it did for His Sacrifice Ans. Seing it cannot be proved that his actual obedience to the law which is the Righteousness we are here speaking of was necessary to qualifie him to be a Sacrifice here on earth much less can it be proven that it was necessary to qualifie him for his Priest-hood in heaven And all these qualifications mentioned Heb. 7 26 He had before that actual obedience was either performed or he in a capacity to performe it therefore his actual obedience was not necessary thereunto 8. That holy pleasure saith he and contentment which Christ himself took in these works of Righteousness may be looked upon as one considerable end Ioh. 4 34. Ans. So took He pleasure and delight to Suffer He had a Baptisme to be baptized with and how was he straitned or pained till it was accomplished Luk. 12 50. Shall we then say that therefore his death was not to make Satisfaction for the sins of his own These are but Socinian Evasions that have no force to weaken the truth in the least And thus notwithstanding of all his Exceptions this Argument abideth in its strength We proceed to another Arg. 5. If we be debtors unto the law and that not only in matter of punishment but in perfection of obedience also then did Christ â—ot only suffer death for us that we might be delivered from the Curse but also fulfilled the law that so we may be reputed to have fulfilled the law in him or by the Imputation of His fulfilling of the law to us Otherwise the law should yet remaine to be fulfilled by us But the former is true Ergo c. The force of the Argum. lyeth here that we were debtors unto the law not only as to the punishment which we had deserved by transgression but also as to perfect conformity thereunto and therefore coming in our law-place taking on our debt did not only undergoe the punishment for us but did also yeeld perfect obedience And this compleet Surety-righteousness of Christ consisting both in doing and Suffering must be imputed unto us and reckoned upon our score to the end we may be justified and Accepted of God as Righteous have Right not only to Impunity but also to the Reward promised to the obedient He excepteth p. 208. c. Against the Minor upon these grounds 1. If the meaning saith he be that we who are beleevers are debtors to the law in perfection for our justification it is false But as for these that beleeve not in Christ it may be true in this sense that if they mean to be justified and to escape the punishment otherwise than by Christ they must keep the whole law Ans. 1 We say not that Beleevers who are already justified through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ are debtors unto the law for this end but that ere they could be justified and accepted of God as Righteous they were obliged to perfect obedience as well as to suffer the penalty and seing this was impossible unto them their Surety was to do it and he did it and what he did was imputed unto them and reckoned upon their score 2 As for Unbeleevers ans such are all by Nature seing it is confessed that they ere under this obligation then it is necessary that before they be justified either they or a Surety for them must satisfy both these demands of the law And though none be now under a command to give perfect obedience unto the law to the end they may be justified but such as hear the Gospel are commanded to beleeve in Christ and to accept of him by faith that they may have an Interest in his Righteousness so be justified yet that taketh not away this Imputation but establisheth it rather because Christ having satisfied all the demands of the law both in doing and in Suffering and that as a Surety Head Redeemer and publick Person by beleeving in him they receive this and have it made over unto them 2. If the proposition saith he meaneth that Beleevers are debtors of perfect obedience to the law in a way of Sanctification thankfulness This is true but it concerneth not the question Ans. Nor do we speak of this knowing
Imputed but that all which He did and suffered in Satisfaction of the law and in payment of that which we were liable unto stood under the obligation of is and must of necessity be imputed to the end we may be deliverâ—â— from under the former obligation He excepteth pag. 220. c. 1. The publickness of Christs person or His standing in the place of those that should beleeve is no sufficient ground to build this Inference upon That therefore all He did suffered are looked upon by God as done and suffered by them such as His conception Birth c. Ans. We have obviated this already by showing that the Major is to be limited to understood of those things only which the law required of us which we were under the obligation of and were debtors to do and suffer amongst which none of the particulars mentioned and many moe such-like can be reckoned His after rambling discourse upon this mistake is not worth the noticeing And who seeth not how vaine it is for him to say that then God should look upon men as having redeemed the world For as the law did not require this of us so to speak thus destroyeth all acts of Sutetyship for the Sureties acts can never be so imputed to the debtor as to make him thereby the Surety We know that Sureties and publick persons may do many things which cannot be said to be imputed to the debâ—ors persons represented but these things are not done by them as such publick persons Sureties but in another capacity And it is folly hence to inferre that therefore the Sureties payment of the debt cannot be said to be imputed to the debtor or that wherein the publick person was a publik person and which he did as such cannot be said to be imputed to those whom he represented 2. Except Itagreeth not with Scripture expression to say that the Sufferings of Christ are by God looked upon as our Sufferings or to conceive that we should suffer in Him It is not all one to say we were punished in Christ and Christ was punished for us This last as warranted by Esai 53 6. But the other cannot be affirmed for seing in Christs death we havâ— remission of sins we cannot be said for the same sinnes to be punished in and with Christ. Ans. This is wholly founded upon his own way of wording the Argument so as he thought it would give him most advantage for all this looketh to these words in the Major propos are to be looked upon are reputed by God as done suffered by those which words might have been left out without any hurt to our cause the Argum. without them would have been full and concludent for us whether any have argued so or he hath framed the Argum to his own mind I know not Sure there is no necessity for adding of these words yet the words may admit of a candide Interpretation for it hath no repugnancy or dissonancy to Scripture expression to say that the Sufferings of Christ are looked upon as the beleevers sufferings when they are impuâ—â—d to him not as if God should think judge or conceive that the beleever in his own Physical person had suffered that which Christ did suffer but that he hath a special legal interest in these Sufferings as being in a special manner interessed in Christ and are now dealt with by God no otherwayes than as if he himself had in his own person laid down that satisfactory price And in this sense there is no difference betwixt the saying that we are punished in Christ that Christ was punished for us for we 〈◊〉 only punished in Christ legally as Christ suffered for us as coming in â—ur law-place Neither doth the saving in this sense That we are punished in Christ take a way Remission of sins but doth rather establish the same as being the only ground thereof for till we have an Interest in Christ and in His Sufferings by the Imputation thereof to us our leaning to them by faith we can have no Remission according to the Gospel-way Except 3. The publikeness of a person who negatiats the affaires of others doth no further nor any other wayes interesse those whose affaires he mannageth in what he doth in or about such a transaction buth only with reference to the issue success of what he doth for them in that behalf so that his dishonest or unconscientious way in the miscarying or his wisdom faithfulness in the right managing are no wayes imputable to the persons whose business is negotiated Ans. It is not necessary that that special manner of managment should be so imputed unto the persons whose affaire is negotiated it being sufficient that the persons represented be interessed in the transaction it self in reference to an interest in the issue in the same affaire managed and the transaction it self is so imputed to the persons represented in reference to the effects as if it had been done by themselves So in our case though the Wisdom Faithfulness patience of Christ used in the managment of that publick affaire intrusted to Him as a publick person undertaking for and representing all His Children be not imputed unto them yet the business it self with which He was intrusted viz. Giving satisfaction to the law in all points by Suffering Obedience which the law required of us is imputed to us must be so in order to our partaking of the benefites advantage thereof Except 4. It is not altogether so solide or sound as is supposed that Christ stood in the place stead of those that should beleeve in Him especially in all things performed by Him and which tended to the qualification of His person To stand in the place and stead of another implieth a necessity of his being in the same place doing the same things himself wherein he stands which he doth who is supposed to stand in his stead unless they had been done by this other for him Ans. This last Exception is the same with the first needeth little more consideration We do not assert that He did so stand in the place stead of beleevers as to all things He did suffered but only that He stood in in our room stead in the whole of His active passive obedience or in making satisfaction to the demands of the law in His state of humiliation this being it for in reference to which He was appointed to be a publick person all other things He did as His Miracles assuming a body and the like need not be said to be imputed to us though in that they concerned His person were requisite thereunto to the work He was imployed in they carry a special advantage in them for Beleevers were in a particular manner designed for their good were subservient to that maine designe Arg. 10. If we cannot be justified by the Righteousness of Christ
thing by way of proportion but must have its jot for jot title for title or else it will curse Ans. 1. We are to regard here more what the Law-giver and Supream Rector will know than what the letter of the Law will acquiesce in 2. This taketh away the Satisfaction of Christ and all His Sufferings as Mediator and destroyeth that ground of our hope and Salvation for the Law as to its letter saith the Soul that sinneth to it shall die and hath not one jote or title of the Satisfaction and Suffering of a Mediator 3. What shall our Adversary now do with faith doth any jote or title of the Law countenance the Imputation of faith for a proportionable Righteousness doth faith answere every jote title point and letter of the Law He answereth 2. To impute acts of Righteousness to a Man which are proper to another calling is rather to impute sin than righteousness Ans. Christ was a publick person appointed of the Father to represent all the chosen ones did in their place room fulfill the law in all points according as was required of Him by the Supream Lord Rector Law-giver this perfect compleat Obedience is made over to all those who are His not one part to this particular Beleever and another to another or some acts to this man some other acts to that man therefore this reply is groundless As to that viz. That God inflicted on Christ not the circumstantiat curse threatned but its equivalency he saith 1. That in these words Thoushalt die the death there is no necessity to meane precisely determinatly eternal death according to the letter Ans. If that was not threatned in the Law no man shall suffer it for the breach of the Law and so there shall be no eternal death even to such as perish which yet himself granteth 2. It was a spiritual death and such as includeth many circumstances which Christ neither could nor did suffer He saith 2. Gods meaning there was not to threaten eternal death in one kinde or other but to have the word death understood as it indifferently signifieth that evil of punishment which was known by that names for eternity is not of the essence of the punishment due unto sins Ans. The doubt remaineth concerning other circumstances ingredients of that death as threatned to man And whether eternity be of the Essence of the punishment threatned for sin or not this is sure that all for whom Christ hath not suffered shall perish eternally all had perished eternally if Christ had not suffered And when God threatned death to man he know that if that threatning did overtake him his death would be eternal He saith 3. Though God should take liberty to vary from the letter of the Curse yet it followeth not that the creature who was bound to obey the precepts of the Law might take the like liberty to do one thing in stead of another or that God should accept any such payment for them Ans. We assert no liberty for man but why should not this liberty be allowed to the Supream God All the reason he giveth I finde to be this That God accepteth on any mans behalf as a perfect legal righteousness the performance of such things which are not required of him hath no correspondence with any of the Covenants Ans. If God could accept that as a perfect Satisfaction which did not every way answere to correspond with that which Man himself was to suffer why might He not accept of that as a perfect legal righteousness which did not in all particulars answere to correspond with that which every beleever was obliged unto What reason is or can be given for the one which will not hold for the other The answere he hath given is no answere unto this Perfect obedience was required of all by the first Covenant Christ did performe perfect obedience for all His owne this being a perfect legal Righteousness is sufficient for all is not the performance of such things as are not required of them Obj. 2. Chap. 10. pag. 107. That Righteousness which is exactly and precisely fitted to the person of Him that is Mediator between God man cannot be imputed unto any other man But such is the Righteousness of Christ. Ergo. The Major he thus confirmeth He that assumeth this Righteousness of Christ represents himself to God in the glorious attire of him who maketh men righteous may conceue himself as great in holiness as Iesus Christ himself c. Ans. Christ's Righteousness was indeed the Righteousness of a Mediator Surety therefore was imputable to all who by faith should be married to Him have union with Him as their Head Husband are become one person in Law with Him as their Representative Surety though not as it was subjected in Him but according to the nature of the thing to their necessity Hereby therefore is no wrong done to Christ no robbing of Him of His mediatory glory but on the contrary a more clear manifest ascribing of the same unto Him by acknowledging Him for the only Mediator by resting on Him on His Righteousness as our only Righteousness and ground of Acceptance We cleare the matter thus When the payment of a Surety is imputed to the debtor and he pleadeth the same in court for his own absolution he doth no injurie unto the cautioner but rather declareth himself unable to pay ascribeth the honour of the payment unto the Surety for he doth alleige or produce that payment as if he would thereby declare that he himself as Surety had paid the summe for another but only produceth the payment of a Surety in reference to himself as a ground sufficient in Law whereupon he should be absolved from the Charge giuen-in against him by the creditor So when the beleever applieth to himself the Righteousness of Christ he doth not make himself a Mediator or Surety but only applieth the Righteousness payment of his Surety Head Husband for his own use to answere the charge given-in against himself and in reference to his own particular case necessity Hereby the beleever doth not assume to himself an equality of Righteousness with God himself but only assumeth that Mediatory Surety-righteousness which He wrought who was equal with God was God so far as their own case necessity requireth We dream of no such imputation as would give ground to us to conceite our selves to have done said all that He did said This is the fiction of the Adversary not our Assertion Against the consideration of the Union betwixt Christ as the Head beleevers as the Members which is the ground of this Imputation communication He saith pag. 113. 1. Christ Beleevers are a mystical body therefore an universal agreement in all things with a natural body cannot be thought on one difference is this
the most remarkable piece thereof expressive of His love and condescension and terminating point of Surety-obedience for He said it was finished when He offered up Himself gave up the Ghost He addeth So where it is said againe Chap. 5. vers 16. that the gift viz. of Righteousness by Christ is of many offences unto justification If the gift of many offences i.e. the forgiveness of Mans Sinnes will not amount to a justification without the Imputation of a legal Righteousness we must give a check to Paul's pen. Ans. This is but vanity we need give no check unto the Apostle's pen for though He said not in this verse expresly that there was a gift of Righteousness also imputed yet he said it expresly vers 17. 18. 1. And shall we think that in such a continued discourse as this is wherein the Apostle is explaining the whole mystery by its parts he should mention all things in one verse He proceeds to prove that Remission of sins is the whole of justification pag. 131. Because the end saith he for which this Imputed Righteovsness of Christ is thus brought in to the business of justification viz. to be the Right to the Inheritance is supplied in a way more evangelical of more sweetness dearness to the Children of God to wit by the grace of Adoption Ans. To this we have said enough above will have occasion to speak againe to it in the next objection He addeth further 4. That if we thus separat and divide the benefite of Christ's Active and passive Obedience in Iustification we take a course to lose destroy both Ans. Not to transcribe his tedious discourse on this accout I only say That it is wholly founded upon a mistake as if our showing the necessity of the Imputation of both were a separating or dividing of the benefite of both whileas the whole Effect floweth from the whole cause both Christ's Active His passive obedience making up one compleat Surety-righteousness and so producing one whole blessedness to beleevers consisting in Remission of Sins in a Right to Glory we say with him that neither of them separated or abstracted from the other can profite us and therefore we assert the Imputation of both as one compleat Surety-righteousness answereing our necessity in all points His own words pag. 132. 133. make clearly for us I would not have saith he the active obedience of Christ separated from the passive nor againe the passive from the active in respect of the common joint effect justification arising from a concurrence of them both yet would I not have Christ in his mystery tumbled up together on a heap for this would be to deface the beauty and excellency of that wisdom which shines forth gloriously in the face thereof I would have every thing that Christ was did-and suffered to be distinguished not only in themselves but also in their proper and immediat Effects respectively ariseing and flowing from them severally Lastly He tels us If the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness must be added as another part of justification then must the formal cause of one the same Effect be double yea one the same formal part of the thing shall be compounded of two things of a diverse and opposite consideration Ans. We make the Impâ—tation of Christ's Righteousness not a part of justification But the cause of it and yet the formal cause of one and the same Effect is not made double for as the Cause is one compleat Cause viz. the Surety-righteousness of Christ so the Effect is one compleat Effect though both Cause and Effect may be considered as consisting of several Integral parts There is no ground here to say That one and the same formal part of a thing is compounded of diverse or opposite things Obj. 4. Chap. 12. Pag. 136. c. That which dissolveth and taketh away the necessity use of that sweet evangelical grace of Adoption cannot hold a streight course with the thruth of the Gospel But this is done by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Ergo. The Minor which is only here to be denied he laboureth to prove because we say The Righteousness of Christ must be imputed in order to our obtaining Right and Title to Life that by Remission of Sins a man is only delivered from death but receiveth no Right to the Kingdom of heaven But what can he hence inferre for confirmation of the Minor Now saith he this being the direct proper end use office purpose intent of Adoption to invest a beleever with a capacity with heaven it followes that whosoever shall attempt to set any thing else upon this throne seeks to dissolve Adoption Ans. The Consequence is null The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will no more take away Adoption than justification for it is the ground and Cause of both He might as well say That because in and by justification we have Remission of Sins to assert the Imputation of Christ's death and Sufferings for this end is to dissolve justification But the truth is clear as was explained above Myst. 14. He thinks both cannot stand together because either of them is a compleat entire Title within itself perfect Righteousness is a perfect title alone so is Adoption or Sonship Ans. 1. This will say as much against the Imputation of Christ's death and Sufferings as against justification for either of these is a compleat Title according to our Adversary to Immunity from death perfect Satisfaction is a perfect title alone to this Immunity as well as perfect Righteousness is a perfect title to the Inheritance Justification or Remission of Sins which are one with him is also a perfect Right to this as well as Adoption is a perfect Right to that 2 But as Justification is founded upon the Imputed Righteousness of Christ so is Adoption As Christ's death and Satisfaction is not formall pardon or Right to Impunity but is when Imputed the ground and cause of justification wherein the Beleever is solemnely brought into a state of freedome from death So Christ's Obedience and Fulfilling of the Law is not a formal Right unto the inheritance but when Imputed and received by faith the ground and cause of Adoption whereby the Beleever is as it were solemnely infeoffed of the Inheritance Here then is nothing in vaine but all things so ordered as may most commend the riches of the wisdom Grace of God may most ensure life and all to the â—eleever So that his following discourse is meer froath and vanity for as God may appoint moe meanes for the same end as He pleaseth as His promises oath Sacraments to confirme the faith of beleevers so there can be no reason given why it may not be so here yet to speak properly Adoption is no mean or Cause of the Right and Title to Glory being the solemne Collation of that Right to the beleever or the solemne stating of
is justified is justified out of the inherent dignity of that which justifieth him but he that is justified by faith is justified by the free gracious acceptation of it by God for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its inherent worth dignity Ans. What God Imputeth reputeth to be a Righteousness in order to justification must be accounted such or a man shall be justified without all consideration of a Righteousness and so be pronounced declared Righteous though he be not Righteous upon any account or in any manner of way And if faith be not accounted for the self same thing or for the equivalent with the Righteousness of the Law how shall it be accounted a Righteousness in order to the justification of a sinner who is under the Curse of the Law who because of the breach of the Law hath no right to life wherefore faith must have that inherent worth that the Righteousness of the Law should have had else it cannot be a Righteousness whereupon a sinner can be justified before God who is Just and Righteous and will not pronounce such to be Righteous as are not Righteous 2 If God upon a man's faith will as fully justify a man as if he had fulfilled the Law either that faith must be a Righteousness and so accounted which he here denieth or the man must be declared Righteous who hath no Righteousness and so the judgment of God should not be according to truth or upon his beleeving he must be justified as being Righteous by an Imputed Righteousness which is the thing he peremptorily denieth 3 When one is justified by faith by God's free gracious Acceptation of it this act of grace must either import that faith is accepted as a Righteousness so accounted of God or still the beleever shall be declared and pronounced Righteous though he hath no Righteousness or the meaning of this Acceptation must be that God hath graciously condescended to appoint this mean way of sinners having an Interest in the Righteousness of Christ whereby he may be accounted Righteous justified as really as is he had performed that Righteousness himself in his own person in this sense it is most true but utterly destructive of his designe 4 If faith be accepted for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its Inherent worth dignity it must either be that which is of such inherent worth or it must be accepted for that which it is not so a man must be judged by God to have that which he hath not He concludeth thus Wherefore the Imputation of faith for righteousness may well stand with personal sins in him to whom this Imputation is made in respect of which sins he remaines obliged to repent but the Imputation of a perfect legal Righteousness makes a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it Ans. Then it seemeth that by the Imputation of faith for Righteousness a man standeth not invested possessed of a full entire right unto life for that he said before was a privilege wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin 2 If by a perfect legal Righteousness he meane a Righteousness required of the Law performed by us personally we plead not for the Imputation of any such but if he mean a Righteousness consisting in full conformity to the Law performed by Christ graciously imputed to us received by faith that is well consistent with inherent personal sins What he meaneth by making a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it I know not till some be pleased to explaine it Obj. 6. Another argum he prosecuteth pag. 149. c. thus If men be as Righteous as Christ himself was in his life there was no more necessity of His death for them than for himself then the just should not have died for the unjust but for the just Ans. If we had not transgressed the Law there had been no necessity that either we or any for us should have died but having transgressed the Law thereby fallen under the Curse wanting all right to life we must have a Surety-righteousness whereby not only the Curse shall be taken away but the blessing of Abraham may come upon us we may have a full right to life therefore both the Active passive Righteousness of Christ is necessary 2 Christ died for the unjust because His death which was the period terminating act of His obedience and Surety righteousness which He undertook to performe in our room and Law-place was for sinners lying under the Curse void of all right title to life He imagineth that first Christ's Active Righteousness is imputed thereby the person is constituted Righteous then inferreth the nonâ— necessity of Christ's death By we say that Christ's whole Surety-righteousness consisting in what He did suffered in His state of Humiliation in our room and as Cautioner is at once imputed and not in parts that so the necessity of sinners may be answered in all points He thinks to prove this consequence by these words Gal. 2 21. If righteousness be by the Law then Christ died in vaine rejecting the sense of the word Law viz. as importing the works of the Law as performed by us in our own person thereby doing violence to the whole Scope of the place to the constant acceptation of the expression supposing that the Consequence will be strong though the works of the Law as performed by Christ be here understood that meerly upon this false ground Because the Righteousness of Christ's life imputed had been a Sufficient every wayes a compleat Righteousness for us Nor need we say as he saith in our name That there was a Necessity that Cbrist should did that so the righteousness of His life might be imputed to 〈◊〉 For the necessity of His death arose from our transgressing of the Law being under the Curse Obj. 7. Chap. 14. pag. 151. He alleigeth that this Imputation evaniateth Remission of Sins saying for if men be righteous with the same righteousness wherewith Christ was righteous they have no more need of pardon than He had Ans. We spoke to this above Chap. 6. Mystery 11. therefore need say no more here then that the Consequence is null that the probation is insufficient for though we be constituted Righteous through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness it is but a Surety-righteousness not our own inherently the Surety not being of our appointing or fitting furnishing our pardon is a Consequent Effect of this Imputation 2 The consequence is no more valide from the Imputation of the Active Righteousness of Christ than from His passive and Satisfaction and so with Sociâ—ians he must also hereby deny Christ's Satisfaction that he may establish his free Remission But Gospel free forgiveness is rather established than any
way weakened by our Assertion of the Imputation of Christ's whole Surety-righteousness He addeth Christ hath taught us to pray for forgiveness of Sins now to pray for that and yet to conceite ourselves as righteous as Christ was is rather to mock than to worship Ans. This expression to conceite ourselves as righteous as Christ was is none of ours though it may admit of a good sense as being true quoad veritatem though not quoad modum yet because it is so ambiguous liable to misconstruction I chose rather to forbear it seeing no necessity touse it And to conceite our selves legally juridically righteous with the Imputed Surety-righteousness of Christ is very consistent with praying for pardon for Christ's Surety-righteousness is not nor yet said to be imputed for this end immediatly that all our after actions should be sinless but to this end rather that we may have actual pardon of by past sinnes of future sins too after the methode of the Gospel and that none of our sins should actually procure our Condemnation or prejudge us of eternal Felicity but that notwithstanding thereof we should not come into condemnation but enter into life He saw that what he here objecteth against the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will militat as much against the Imputation of Faith which must derive a righteousness upon the person as perfect and compleat as the Righteousness of the Law so can leave as little place for Remission as what we plead for and therefore to obviat this he tels us That when faith is imputed another thing is imputed then the righteousness of the Law it self to wit faith by name in stead of it Now any other righteousness or any other thing imputed for righteousness besides the righteousness of the Law will bear a consistency of sin with it of remission Ans. If by the righteousness of the Law here he only meaneth that which we performe in our own persons it is true that is inconsistent with sin or pardon but it is false if he understand thereby the righteousness of the Law performed by another Christ our Surety And sure if his faith be accounted a Righteousness it must be a Righteousness or God's estimation is not just if it be a Righteousness it must be accompanied with all the privileges of a Righteousness as himself saith and consequently exclude all Sin Remission if these be such concomitans of an Imputed righteousness He addeth when a perfect Sanctification is imputed to a man for his justification that man can be no more reputed to have sin in him than to be obnoxious to death which is opposite to justification Ans. And no wonder for perfect Sanctification being a perfect inherent holiness cannot without a contradiction but exclude sin But who speak of such an Imputation of Sanctification We know no such thing for Sanctification is wrought inherent in us not imputed to us If he meane by this perfect Sanctification the perfect Obedience and Righteousness of Christ imputed to us we say though that perfect Sanctification or Righteousness could be consistent with no sin in Christ yet when imputed to us it can consist with sin inherent in us with pardon of sin also as we have already cleared Further saith he But when that which either is no Sanctification or at most but an imperfect Sanctification is imputed for Righteousness in a mans justification place is left for inherencie of sin consequently for the forgiveness of it Ans. That which is no Sanctification or at most but an imperfect Sanctification must either be no Righteousness or at most an imperfect righteousness and therefore cannot be reputed or accounted a perfect righteousness and so cannot be imputed to a person in order to justification Or if we should suppose that God did make it really repute it to be a righteousness it must be a compleat righteousness consequently inconsistent with pardon because it shall hereby become a compleat inherent Holiness Righteousness Obj. 8. Chap. 15. pag. 153. c. Whoseever is perfectly righteous or as righteous as Christ is in him God can see no sin But every beleever saith this opinion which we impugne is as perfectly compleatly righteous as Christ himself is Therefore c. Ans. How false this consequence is was manifested above Chap. 6. Mystery 15. And now waving that expression of being as righteous as Christ himself is I distinguish the Major thus Whosoever is perfectly righteous with an inherent Righteousness taking perfection here not for kind but for degrees in him God can see no sin true but in this sense the Minor is false Whosoever is perfectly Righteous with an Imputed righteousness in him God can see no sin or order to actual condemnation it is true but then the Conclusion containeth nothing but truth It is true God could see no sin in Christ because there was no sin existing in Him yet He can see sin in beleeves in whom sin existeth notwithstanding they be clothed with the perfect Righteousness of Christ which only maketh that God can see no sin in them for which He will actually bring them into condemnation and this is consonant to Scripture Rom. 8 1. Obj. 9. Another Reason he proposeth Chap. 16. pag. 154. c. alleiging That by this Imputation of Christ's Righteousness we confound the two Covenants of Works of Grace But as to this we have cleared the truth above Chap. 6. Mystery 16. Nor need we be much troubled at his bold alleigance foâ— not we but he others with him by his opinion in pleading for the sole Imputation of faith as our Gospel Righteousness to which some adde other works of obedience do turne the Gospel into a new Covenant of Works for if faith properly taken alone or conjunct with other works of Righteousness which we do be all our Gospel-righteousness we are justified by our own personal obedience righteousness and this was the plaine tenor of the Covenant of works The variation of the obedience now required from what was of old though now it be but as a pepper corne in comparison of the greater rent formerly required doth make no alteration in the Nature and Essence of the Covenant for justification life is still by works of righteousness which we do and which are our owne But when the Righteousness of a Surety is imputed we are upon that account accepted though the righteousness wrought by the Surety be obedience to the same Law that was in force under the first Covenant which we were obliged unto lying under the Curse of as it must needs have been seing He did substitute himself in our place took our debt upon Him the Covenant is altered for the first Covenant knew no Righteousness but what was our owne personal did not admit of a Surety Thus these two Covenants are not confounded by us but kept manifestly distinct we cannot owne their
the grounds of necessity requiring this that we should receive it close with it and embrace it with all thankfulness as a Mystery of Love free Grace wisdom that Angels may wonder at 3 Yet accrding to the Scriptures we may say that the Truth Justice of God require this for His judgment is alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. and it would be an abomination in His eyes to justifie one every way wicked Therefore if He pronounce a person righteous in His sight which He doth when He justifieth a person that person must be a Righteous person but when no man can be justified or pronounced Righteous as being inherently Righteous Psal. 130 3. 143 2. all who are justified must be clothed with an Imputed Righteousness for God must be just even when he justifieth him which beleeveth in Jesus Rom. 3 26. In reference to the justice of God he saith That there is nothing at all necessary to be done either by God himself or by man about justification of a sinner by way of Satisfaction to the justice of God since that one offering of Christ of himself upon the cross Ans. We plead not for Imputation upon any such account nor do we see the least ground to think that this should derogat any thing from the full compleat Satisfaction of Christ made to justice or from the price laid down by Him as if this Imputation were required to supply some thing wanting there Yea our doctrine of Imputation doth rather confirme establish the same it being an application of the Sponsor's Surety-righteousness or payment Satisfaction unto the debtors in order to their Absolution freedome from the sentence Though the Surety hath paid the creditor yet the Law may require that when the debtor is charged or challenged for the debt the payment of his Surety be instructed made manifest unto the judges And yet it will not hence follow thaâ— the Satisfaction or payment made by the Surety was defective and insufficient He further saith That God can as well and as truely pronounce that Man righteous that wants a literal or legal Righteousness especially supposing he hath another Righteousness holding any Analogy or proportion thereto as he may account any Mans uncircumcision circumcision Rom. 2 26. Ans. That the Lord may deal with one uncircumcised that keepeth the Law no less than if he were circumcised and so thereby declare that He valueth not outward circumcision so much as the jewes were ready to dream who questieneth But what is this to the business in hand shall we therefore think that the Lord whose judgment is according to truth shall account any Righteous who have no righteousness Shall we think that the Righteous judge shall pronounce declare him to be Righteous who is not so 2. He may think to warde this of by his parenthesis But I pray what is that other righteousness that holds any analogy or proportion to the righteousness required by the Law of God Is that the single Act of faith Sure that must hold a very unproportionable proportion a poor analogy unto Obedience to all commands of God! I need not take notice of that word legall righteousness literally so called for he hath many such of little other use than to amuse the Reader darken the matter 3. If by this proportionable righteousness he mean the righteousness of Christ which may be said to hold an analogy to the righteousness of the Law which man was obliged to performe which possibly he understandeth by a legal righteousness literally properly so called he speaketh truth yeeldeth the cause for that is it we contend for But afterward he seemeth to tell us what he meaneth by analogical righteousness saying So may God with as much righteousness truth pronounce call or account a man righteous that is not strickly properly or literally such if he hath any qualification upon him that any way answereth or holdeth proportion in any point with such a Righteousness as he should do in case this man had this legal righteousness upon him in the absolutest perfection of the letter Ans. And who may not see the folly of this Reddition to inferre this from the Lord's calling Iohn Baptist Elias the like Will he make the Lord 's pronouncing sentence in judgment as a righteous judge as He doth in the matter of justification to be such a figurative speach as when Iohn Baptist was called Elias because he had some resemblance to Elias when he came in his Spirit power Will he be accounted a righteous judge upon earth who in judgment should pronounce that man righteous who in stead of the righteousness he should have had hath only one poor qualification upon him that some way or other holdeth proportion with it in any point If so it will be a great question if ever any wicked man can be condemned seing it will be rare to finde one that hath never all his dayes done some thing that answereth to the Law in some poor way or measure as to same one point or other Yea if we might drive this further it might be made probable that hence it would follow that all the world should be justified even in the sight of God But enough of this which is too too gross Yet wo heare not what that qualification is He saith when God pronounceth a man righteous it is sufficient to beare out the justice truth of God if his person be under any such relation condition as belongeth to a legal righteousness or which a legal righteousness would cast upon him Ans. What before was called a Qualification is here called a Relation or condition these seem not to be one the same thing But what if that Relation or condition have no foundation how shall the Lord upon that account pronounce such a person righteous or though it be not founded upon a legal righteousness performed by the mans self in his own person yet may it not be founded upon a Surety-righteousness imputed But what is this He addeth Now one special privilege or benefite belonging to a perfect legal righteousness is to free the person in whom it is found from death condemnation he that hath his sins forgiven him is partaker with him in the fulness of this privilege is as free of condemnation as he Ans. But he hath not yet proved that any man is pardoned without the Imputed righteousness of Christ beside righteousness bringeth with it as a special privilege or benefite right to the promised Inheritance of Glory But a pardoned man as such hath not this Right nor yet can challenge it as was showne above Moreover if God pronounce a Man righteous because he is pardoned then the man must be pardoned before he be justified for in justification he is declared pronounced Righteous not made such if he be pardoned before he be justified pardon is not the forme of justification nor
the whole thereof as he saith but rather something antecedent thereto What in fine he saith is but what we have often heard viz That forgiveness of sins is a true compleat righteousness in the kind a passive righteousness as absolute perfect in the kind of it as any Active righteousnest And for him that hath once sinned there is no other righteousness applicable to him but only this which for all other ends purposes advantages privileges what som ever is as offectual as the active righteousness it self could be Ans. 1. No Scripture calleth pardon of sins a righteousness 2. A passive righteonsness is no righteonsness as we lately made appear 3. That another righteousness even the positive Surety-righteousness of Christ is applicable unto a sinner hath been hithertil evinced 4. pardon as such can give no Right to the reward promised to obedience therefore cannot be as effectual as an active righteousness to all Ends purposes Apvantages privileges Obj. 21. Chap. 20. That which having been dhne in our own person could not have been our justification nor any part of the righteousness by which we could have been justified cannot be made our justification nor any part of it by Imputation from another But such is the righteousness of the Law pretended to be imputed from Christ. Ergo c. Ans. 1. We do not call the righteousness of Christ our justification nor do we say that it is made our justification or any part of it by Imputation unto us nor yet do we make it a part only of the righteousness by which we are justified for His righteousness is the whole of that righteousness Nor by His Surety-righteousness imputed to us do we understand only His Active obedience to the Law 2. He here Supposeth that we say there is nothing imputed to us in order to our justification but Christ's Obedience to the Law without His Satisfaction by Suffering And thus we see the maine pillaâ—s of this Argument are weak its whole foundation being sandy it cannot stand He confirmeth the Major thus If a personal fulfilling of the Law could have been no justification nor part of justification to us certainly an Imputative fulfilling of it could not have been either The Imputation of a thing from another cannot adde any strength to it above a personal acting yet the Nature of Imputation is only to supply the defect of personal performance therefore cannot exceed it Ans. Though obedience to the Law cannot availe us now we are sinners even though it were perfect which is in effect a supposition of what is impossible yea self contradictary therefore can lay the foundation of no truth in an Argument yet it could have availed Adam while standing us in him 2. The Righteousness which is now imputed is not the Righteousness of a sinner so cannot be called the same with that Rightoeusness which is supposed to be done by us who are sinners for the Righteousness in the supposition had been no righteousness at all not being compleet perfect Now who seeth not that the Imputation of a perfect righteousness hath other strength vertue then that hath which is personal Imperfect 3. The Imputation of an Obedience perfect compleet can availe such as are recocciled by the death of Christ when personal obedience suppose it never so full if the supposition could be made cannot availe such as are under God's curse because of sin already committed He confirmeth the Minor thus Man being once fallen made obnoxious to condemnation can never be recovered againe by ten thousand observations of this Law Ans. Though the observation of the Law could it now be done by fallen man which is impossible cannot availe unto justification yet as is said it could have availed man while standing man remaining still under the obligation it is his debt seing it is now impossible for him to pay this debt his Surety must pay it for him the Surety's payment must be reckoned on his score Obj. 22. That which men are not bound by any Law or command of God to do in their own persons for their justification cannot be imputed from another to any such and. But men are not bound by any such Law to observe the Law for their justification Ergo c. Ans. The Major I distinguish thus That which men neither now are nor never were bound to do in their own persons for their justification by any Law or command of God cannot be imputed from another to any such end this is granted but the assumption speaketh only of what men now are obliged unto so the Argument is inconcludent That which men though once obliged unto in their own persons in order to justification yet now are not obliged unto by the Law of God cannot be imputed from another to any such end this is false Let us hear his proof Because saith he Imputation is found out ordained by God to supply personal defects But where there is no Law there can be no personal defect Ans. Imputation is not found out ordained by God to supply the want of that which men are now obliged unto by the Law of God but to supply what once they were obliged unto is not yet done and the reason is because the Law being not abrogat by the breach thereof continueth in force to oblige to perfect Exact Obedience every violation thereof is a sin before God because it must be satisfied even as to this ere any can think to enjoy the reward promised to perfect obedience no man can satisfie the demands of the Law by himself therefore every one who would have the Reward partake of Life must have a perfect obedience imputed to him to the end that without any infringing of the Law the sinner may be-justified the Law established To the Minor I only say That albeit no Man be under any command of God now to observe the Moral Law perfectly that thereby they may be justified the Lord having now provided another way in the Gospel which all to whom it is revealed are bound to take Yet all out of Christ who have not yeelded obedience unto the Gospel are still under the old covenant being not as yet brought in into the New so while they abide there have no other way whereby to expect justification but the old way hold forth in the old covenant viz. Perfect Obedience which is now become Impassible for till they beleeve in Christ they are still in Nature are not translated into the Kingdom of Jesus Christ though as to such as hear the Gospel there is a command to beleeve in Jesus Christ to the end they may be justified But as to such as either hear not the Gospel or hearing it would not yeeld obedience thereto they have no other way whereby they can expect justification but doing of the Law Rom. 2 13. that is also a desperat
me it is such that by Mr. Baxter's way the whole frame of the Gospel is changed such as hold it do in my judgment not only confound but alter the causes of justification If that which Christ did by His Merites was to procure the New Covenant what was there in Adam that can be said to answere this or hold correspondence with it With us the Parallel runneth smoothly and clearly thus As by vertue of first Covenant whereof Adam was the head engaging for all his Natural Posterity so soon as they partake of Nature thereby become actual members of that Political Body partake of Adam's guilt or breach of the Covenant which is imputed to them there upon share of the consequences thereof as immediatly resulting therefrom to wit the corruption of the whole Nature Privative positive wrath the curse c. This himself asserteth pag. 34. So by vertue of the Second Covenant whereof Christ the Second Adam is Head engaging for all His Spiritual posterity they so soon as they come to partake of His spiritual Nature so become members of His mystical body which is by a Phisical supernatural operation conveyed morally and Covenant wayes according to the Good pleasure of His will according to His wisdom who doth all things well wisely are made partakers of Christ's Righteousness which is imputed unto them thereupon do share of the Consequences which do immediatly result therefâ—om viz. of justification pardon Adoption Right to Glory He addeth n. 44. Though the person of the Mediator be not really or reputatively the very person of each sinner nor so many persons as there are sinners or beleevers yet it doth belong to the person of the Mediator so far limitedly to bear the person of a sinner and to stand in the place of the persons of all sinners as to bear the punishment they deserved to suffer for their sins Ans. We do not imagine that the Physical peâ—son of the Mediator is either really or reputatively the Physical person of each sinner It is enough for us to say that the Mediator is an Head Surety publick person and so that He Beleevers are one legally and juridically And we judge also that it belongeth to the person of the Mediator being Surety to Satifie for the whole debt of these for whom He is Surety therefore must not only so far stand in the place of sinners as to Suffer for their sins bear the punishment they deserved But also give that perfect obedience which they were obliged unto and were not able to performe or pay He granteth n. 45. pag. 67. that Morally it may be said that Christ's Righteousness was given to us in that the thing purchased by it was given to us as the money given for the ransome of the Captive may besaid morally to be given to the captive though Physically it begiven to the Conquerour But neither this similitude not yet the other of a mans being said to give anotheâ— so much money when he giveth him the land bought therewith do not come home to the point in hand for there is a neer closs union betwixt Christ Beleevers which union is not supposed in these cases Next Christ was in our Law-place and undertook to do what He did as our Surety neither is this supposed in the cases proposed againe the benefite here following viz. Justification c. doth presuppose us to be Righteous consequently we must have a Righteousness imputed because we have none of our owne for we may not admit Faith to that high dignity We have mentioned more apposite fit Similitudes above I cannot assent to what he saith n. 47. pag. 68. That Christ is less improperly said to have represented all mankind as newly fallen in Adam in a general sense for the purchasing of the universal gift of pardon life called the New Covenant than to have represented in his perfect holiness and sufferings every beleever considered as from his first being to his death For of His representing all mankind newly fallen in Adam I read not in the Scriptures nor yet of His purchasing the New Covenant Whether these be not additions to the word of God let Mr. Baxter who oft chargeth others herewith consider Nor do I know what Scripture warranteth him to say pag. 69. That Christ the second Adam is in a sort the root of Man as Man as He is the Redeemer of Nature it self from destruction Nor what truth can be in it unless he think to play upon the word in a sort He seemeth to come neerer us when he saith n. 48. p. 70. The summe of all lyeth in applying the distinction of giving Christ's Righteousness as such in it self as a Cause of our Righteousness or in the causality of it as our sin is not reputed Christ's sin in it self and in the culpability of it for then it must needs make Christ odious to God but in its causality of punishment So Christ's material or formal Righteousness is not by God reputed to be properly and absolutely our own in it self as such but the causality of it as it produceth such such effects Ans. How Christ's Righteousness should be the cause of our Righteousness if we speak properly I know not for we are here speaking of Righteousness in order to justification in this case I know no other Righteousness but Christ's Surety-righteousness imputed to us and bestowed upon us it is improper to say that Christ's Righteousness is the cause of it self as given to us But it may be he meaneth that it is the cause of our Faith this I grant to be true but I deny that this faith is our Righteousnese whereupon we are justified or the ratio formalis objectiva of our justifications When we mention the Imputing of Christ's Righteousness we mean the Righteousness of Christ it self not Physically but legally juridically that is its worth or legal causality not as it produceth but in order that it may produce such Effects Our sin is reputed Christ's legally in its demerite of punishment or in its reatus culpae that He might be legally thereby reus culpae and yet He was not odious to God because it was not His Inherently but only legally by Imputation Mr. Baxter in his following Chap. 3. fearing that by all that he had said he had not made the state of the controversie plaine enough to the unexercised Reader goeth over it againe in a shorter way that he may make it as plaine as possibly he can And yet I judge such is my dulness that he never made the matter more obscure at least to the Unexercised Reader nor possibly could than he hath done here for if any man how understanding so ever shall understand his Expressions let be the matter by them that is not very well versed both in Aristotles Logicks or Metaphysicks and the termes thereof and in justinian's Lawes
this we willingly grant a difference but both were Federal Heads Publick Persons their agreement in this satisfieth us He saith 3. Therefore we derive not Righteousness from Him by Generation but by His voluntary donation and contract Ans. We derive it from Him by Regeneration that is as we partake of Adam's guilt when by Generation we partake of a Natural being so we partake of Christ's Righteousness when by Regeneration we partake of a spiritual being in Him And there is no new formal contract made here anent but what is sutable to the Nature of this privilege in order to its conveyance He saith 4. as He became not our Natural parent so our persons not being in Christ when He obeyed are not reputed to have been in Him naturally or to have obeyed in by Him Ans. We say only and we seek no more that Christ was our Federal Head and our persons Federally not physically were in Christ when He obeyed we are reputed to be in Him not Naturally but Foederally and so to have obeyed in by Him He saith 5. If Cbrist we are reputed one person either He obeyed in our person or we in His or both if He obeyed as reputed sinner in the person of each sinner His obedience could not be Meritorious according to the Law of Innocency which required sinless perfection He being supposed to have broken the Law in our person could not so be supposed to keep it If we obeyed in His person we obeyed as Mediators or Christ's Ans. Aristotle's Notions to which Mr. Baxter contrary to all sense reason will have this whole matter restricked in its explication are the cause of all this ridiculous Confusion But for answere I say Christ we are reputed one person not physically but in Law-sense federally therefore both he obeyed as taking on our Law-place coming in to our Law-condition and to say that therefore His obedience could not be Meritorious is ridiculous as if forsooth His coming into our Law-place would make Him to be supposed to have broken the Law in His physical person as if one would say The Surety cannot pay the debtor's debt because by coming in to his Law-place he becometh a bankrupt Himself saith that Christ suffered in our stead this cannot be in our Physical stead but in our Law-stead now will it not as well hence follow that He suffered as a sinner then how could He who suffered as being supposed to have broken the Law make Satisfaction for us or how could His death be Meritorious Thus indeed good service shall be done to the Socinians but bad service to the Truth Finally we obeyed as Federally in Him yet were no Mediators or Christ's but redeemed Saints as the debtor satisfied the Creditor in Law-sense when his Surety did it and yet became no Surety thereby He saith 6. But as is oft said Christ our Mediator undertook in a middle person to reconcile God and Man not by bringing God to judge erroneously that He or we were what we were not or did whas we did not but by being doing and suffering for us that in His own person which should botter answere Gods Ends Honour than if we had done and suffered in our persons that hereby he might merite a free gift of pardon life with himself to be given by a Law of Grace to beleeving penitent Accepters Ans. I doubt there be one word here said to which a Socinian will not subscribe But for answer I say Christ our Mediator so undertook in a middle physical person to reconcile God man that He became our Surety came in our stead Law-place to do and suffer what we were obliged unto by the Law and when God judged Him to be and to do thus He judged not erroneously but truely according to His own gracious Appointment and Ordination making Him a Publick person representing all such as He gave Him to save We have shown elsewhere that Christ merited something else than a Law of Grace to Convey a free gift of pardon life upon New Conditions otherwise His death could not be called a Ransome a Redemption or a price nor could He be said to have died in the stead of any person or to have born their Iniquities or the punishment thereof far less to have been made sin for us But more of this hereafter Object 8. As Christ is a sinner by Imputation of our sin so we are Righteous by the Imputation of His Righteousness But it is our sin it self that is Imputed to Christ. Therefore it is His Righteousness it self that is imputed to us To this he saith 1. Christ's person was not the subject of our personal relative guilt much less of our habites or acts 2. God did not judge Him to have been so 3. Nay Christ had no guilt of the same kind reckoned to be on Him else these unmeet speaches used rashly by some would be true viz. That Christ was the greatest murderer Adulterer c. and consequently more hated of God for God must needs hate a sinner as such Ans. 1 Mr. Baxter will understand nothing here but according to his Philosophical Metaphysical Notions in this sense we may grant him all that he saith And yet adde That Christ was the legal juridical and federal subject of our guilt for our sins did meet together on Him and He was made sin 2 and God doing all this could not but judge Him to have been so 3 Christ inherently had no guilt neither of the same kind nor of any other but that our very sins were imputed to Him reckoned upon His score must be granted or we must deny His dying or satisfying in our stead so plainely embrace Socinianisme 4 Those speeches are but unmeet to such as mistake them as Mr. Baxter doth here who supposeth that their meaning is That He was the greatest sinner Inherently which were indeed blasphemy but far from their thoughts for he inferreth that consequently he must have been more hated of God while as God's hatred if we take it not for meer punishing of sin is only against such as are inherently sinners What saith he moreover To be guilty of sin as we are is to be reputed truely the person that committed it But so was not Christ therefore not so to be reputed Christ was but the Mediator that undertook to suffer for our sins that we might be forgiven not for His own sin really or justly reputed Ans. No man saith that Christ was guilty of sin as we are that is Inherently But if He undertook to suffer for our sins unless we turn Socinians in expounding this sentence we must say that the guilt of our sins was laid upon Him otherwise He could not suffer for them in our place stead we must say that He so suffered for them as that all they in whose stead He suffered should certainly be forgiven not have
Covenant was only one single act of obedience for then his Notions about just unjust as to Adam would have some ground but till this be done all he hath said is to no purpose 3. He saith That he maintainâ—th as well as we that Christ hath not only satisfied for sin merited pardon but also merited immutable Glory Ans. But we say further that He merited pardon Immutable glory not by His death sufferings only but by His whole Surety-righteousness consisting in Active Passive Obedience whereby He paid our whole debt But he willeth us to consider 1. That Adam's not doing that which was to merite glory was sin of Omission and to pardon that Omission is to take him as a Meriter of Glory 2. Therefore it must be somewhat more than he forfeited by that Omission and his Commission which cometh in by Christ's merite above forgiveness 3. That Christ merited all this by his active Passive habitual Righteousness by which he merited pardon 4. That it was not we that merited in Him but He to give it to us only in the termes of a Law of Grace Ans. I To pardon that Omission in Adam was not to take him as a Meriter of Glory but only to take him as one that was free of the obligation to punishment for that Omission It is false then to suppose or say that one pardoned as such is taken to be one that never sinned for the contrary is manifest to take Adam as a Meriter of Glory is to take him for one that never sinned yea for one that fulfilled his course of obedience which can never be supposed of a pardoned man as such 2 That by Christ's Merites the Elect obtaine more than what Adam forfeited to speak so I shall easily grant but notwithstanding thereof we stood in need of more than of meer forgiveness even of a Right to what Adam lost the expectation of and in order to this the Law was to be fulfilled 3 I yeeld the 3d. 4 Though we need not say that we Merited in Him yet we say That Christ merited as a Publick Person representing His own as a Sponsor and Surety coming in their Law-place and taking on their whole debt both as to punishment deserved and Duty required And I see no warrand to say that Christ only merited to give it to us only on the termes of a Law of Grace for this would make Him no Sponsor or Surety nor to stand in the room of any which yet he granteth n. 130. but only hold Him forth as a third unconcerned person no wayes related to them like a man buying a Bond or Obligation from a Creditor whereby he may be in case to distress the debtor and call for payment in his owne way and time Whereby the whole tenor of the Covenant of Redemption between Jehovah the Mediator is altered the Mediator's Place Relation to those for whom he died is changed His Righteousness of Active and Passive Obedience is made to have no necessary respect unto the old Covenant Man's Obligation He is supposed to have merited bought all for Himself immediatly He is supposed to have died for all that the New Covenant or Caw of Grace is wholly of Him To none of all which I can assent He saith next n. 127. that some come neerer say that to punish and not reward are all one so the respect that sin hath to the deserved punishment needed Pardon and Satisfaction but our deserving the Reward needed Christ's perfect obedience to be Imputed What saith he to this He granteth that there is some what of truth here but saith he there are errors also that lye in the way and so he willeth us to remember 1. without a 2. or 3. that man can have nothing from God but what is a meer gift as to the matter though it be a Reward as to the Order Ends of Collation Ans. True what then And in this case saith he punishment is damni as well as sensus so the loss of the Reward is the principal part of hell or punishment Ans. That there is poena damni as well as sensus I grant but I am sure the punishment threatned to Adam was more than the meer want of what was promised otherwayes we must say that Adam was punished before he fell because even while he stood he had received the Reward promised so that poena damni is some other thing than the meer want of the Reward even the want of that which man had already in his possession together with the hopes of what was promised The faithful yet living are not pofâ—essed of the Reward of Glory yet it may not be said that they have the principal part of hell being delivered there from So that all this is but loose Sophistrie from the word loss What more So that saith he if Christ's death hath pardoned our sins of Omission we are reputed to have done all our duty Ans. Passing the Impropriety of speach here we say that it is manifestly false as appeareth from what is said And if so saith he again we are reputed to have merited the Reward And. This is also false as is shown And if he pardon our sins saith he more-over as to all punishment of sense loss he pardoneth them as to their forfeiture of heaven at a gift if not as a Reward And. Neither can this be granted for there is more required to the taking away of the forfeiture of heaven if by this nothing else be meaned than a giving of a Right to heaven whether as a Gift or as a Reward than to the taking away of all punishment whether of Sense or of Loss as such as for example when a King covenanteth with his own Servant whom he hath already advanced to great honour dignity and promiseth him far greater honour if he will work one day to end in sueh an Imployment if not threatneth to deprive him of all he hath to cast him in prison untill he die This servant faileth performeth not the condition and therby hath both forfeited what he was in hope of and what he had and is now obnoxious to perpetual Imprisonment when the King 's own Son goeth to prison for some time to make Satisfaction and thereby deliver the Servant from perpetual Imprisonment he doth not thereby deliver him from his loss so as to give him a right to the far greater honour promised though he deliver him from the punishment of constant Imprisonment Yea it may be a doubt if he thereby procure his restauration to his former state but in order to this and to the end the servant may get the Reward promised beside his going so long to prison in the servants room stead that he may be delivered from the punishment he must also in his room stead performe that daies work We say that Remission of sin is a consequent or at most
the good of others should exercise communion fellowshipe with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ so walk with him as agreed with Him have their conversation in heaven Hath the Lord brought them into his houshold yea admitted them to his presence that they may kisse his hand stand before his face continually in the lower chamber of presence and should they carry as yet estranged from him Is He at peace with them and should they have jealous thoughts of him Is He reconciled unto them and should they carry as keeping up some grudge against Him 6. Such should account this state whereinto now they are brought their only blessedness here below Even as David saith Paul Rom. 4 6 7 8. also describeth the blessedness of the Man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin Here is the poor self-condemned sinners blessedness that he hath a righteousness imputed to him who had none of his owne and who thereupon hath his iniquities forgiven covered not imputed And such as are made partakers of this blessedness should account it their happiness that how ever it be with them as to outward things in the world yet they are now brought within the Covenant and are covered with the mantle of Christ's Righteousness and have all their iniquities covered cast into the midst of the sea so that they shall never be reckoned upon their score 7. This should be aground for them of glorying in the Lord in the hardest condition they can be into in the world being thus justified they should glory in tribulations knowing that they can suffer no loss o◠disadvantage thereby but on the contrary reap much good and advantage for tribulation worketh in such as are thus justified and at peace with God patience and patience experience experience hope hope maketh not ashamed because the love of God is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost Ought they not then to carry under all oppressions persecutions hard usages of men upon the account of owning Christ his Interest as persons that are upon the gaining hand and reaping much spiritual advantage being now brought through grace into such a state of life And how would they hereby glorify God in the world 8. The consideration of their present state of life should cause them triumph in the midst of all difficulties temptations that they shall meetwith in their way as knowing that the life of justification whereof now they are made partakers shall continue and that it shall end in the life of glory for whom the Lord justifieth them he also glorifieth Rom. 8 30. Who shall then lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect It is God that justifieth who is he that condemneth Who shall then separat such from the love of Christ Shall tribulation or persecution or distress or famine or nakedness or perill or sword Nay in all these things they are more then conquerours through him that loved them Rom. 8 33 34 35 37. Hear how Paul concludeth that matter for himself others vers 38 32. for I am perswaded that neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities nor Powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. Should not therefore such carry as persons that cannot be made miserable How much doth the Apostle insist on this and cleare it from this ground Rom. 5 9 10. saying much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him for if when we were enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life And againe vers 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death even so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. There being then a sure ground of confidence assurance of life of compleet salvation laid in justification all such are called to rejoice in hope of the glory of God Rom 5 2. And to have confidence in the Lord that he will perfect what he hath begun to rest assured that all they which receive abundance of grace of the gift of righteousness shall reigne in life by one Jesus Christ. Rom. 5 17. 9. Yea particularly the consideration of their many sinnes should not discourage them or cause them despond for being now justified all their bygone sins are pardoned shall not be by the Lord laid to their charge againe however the memory of them may humble them cause them run to the fountaine of the blood of Jesus all their future sins shall be pardoned according the Gospel grounds after the Gospel-methode so that they shall not prejudge them of their promised possession of glory and life everlasting Now the free gift is of many offences unto justification Rom. 5 16. There is a sure way laid down in the Gospel whereby all their sins shall be taken away and the very body of death shall be killed more more dayly so that they shall not finally perish what ever Satan body of death within shall do to prejudge them of the promised inheritance Hence the Apostle inferreth from his foregoing discourse Rom. 8 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to then which are in Christ Jesus 10. Such as are thus justified should follow the example of Paul Phil. 3 7 8 9. and so account such things less for Christ which formerly were gaine yea count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus their Lord yea account them but dung that they may win Christ and be found in him Here should their heart delight be about this should their whole occupation be to win and gaine Christ more to know him the power of his Resurrection and the followshipe of his sufferings to be made conformable unto his death vers 10. that hereby Christ may be their gaine their glory their all How jealous should they be of their deceitful hearts that nothing be admitted to share of the glory due to Christ or to possesse any of that room in the heart that is due to him He should have the throne for He is well worthie of it And whatever cometh in competition with him be it within us or without us should be rejected that He alone may be exalted in our souls 11. Such as have been made partaker of this royal life of justification through a Crucified Christ laid hold on by faith should labour to keep this doctrine pure both by word deed so far as they can that 〈◊〉 grace of God that so eminently shineth forth therein may not be darkned by mens erroneous apprehensions
examined by an assise is really changed as to his Law state when cleared by an assise and pronunced not guilty and so absolved as to that whereof he was accused and set at liberty he is now a free man in Law much more is there a great change in a mans Law-state when before he was guilty of death lying bound in fetters keeped unto the day of execution and now getteth a free Remission of all when of a Man of death he is made a free liege as there is a change in a mans state and Relation when he is made an Adopted son so is there a new state wherein the sinner is brought when he is absolved from the sentence of the Law and declared a Righteous man Sanctification Regeneration and Glorification do all of them hold forth a new real State whereinto he is brought who is made partaker thereof so Iustification with Adoption held forth a new relative state which is also real as real is opposed to what is false or imaginary Hence is it that a beleever is justified even while he is sleeping not acting faith as a person remaineth in a married state though not actually consenting unto the match the consent once granted enstateth the person in that new Relation Propos. 2. This new state of Iustification is continueing permanent not in this sense that God reneweth frequently reiterateth the enstating of them into this new relative state but in this sense that once justified alwayes justified they are fixed preserved in that state as Adoption is a permanent state because once adopted alwayes a child of God Hence it is called a grace wherein me stand Rom. 5 2. It is a state of Reconciliation and Peace wherein we stand It is no fluctuating state wherein one may be to day be out of it to morrow and againe brought into it The ground of this sentence is fixed lasting and permanent to wit the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ once clothed therewith never naked or spoiled thereof againe the gifts and calling of God being with out Repentance Rom. 11 29. The foul's union with Christ through faith is lasting and abiding once in Him alwayes in Him once a member of his mystical body married to him as his spouse and alwayes so for he must finally present all such holy without spotâ— or wrinkle or any such thing Ephes. 5 27. Faith whereby the knot is made and the marriage consent is given remaineth as to its root and habite Christ prayeth that it fail not Luk. 22 32. They are keeped by the power of God through faith unto Salvation 1. Pet. 1 5. All the arguments proving Perseverance of the Saints which we cannot here summe-up do confirme this Propos. 3. Hence Iustification is a State that is not Interrupted and broken off and renewed and reiterated againe as it cannot be quite taken away and annulled so neither can it be broken off for a time so as for that time they should be in a non-justified state the marriage once made is not broken the sentence once pronunced is not recalled sinnes once pardoned by God are not laid againe to his charge The Spirit that once spoke peace said Son be of good cheer thy sinnes are forgiven thee will not be againe a Spirit of bondage unto fear Rom. 8 15. If Iustification could at any time be thâ—s interrupted Adoption behoved to be interrupted with it and so a childe of God behoved to be for that time a childe of the devil The Scripture speaketh not of any such relapse into the state of Nature Sin And such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Iesus by the Spirit of our God 1. Cor. 6 11. once brought out of Nature never reduced into that state againe No more new Iustification than new Adoption once quickened never againe brought into a state of death in trespasses sins Ephes. 2 1 5. for such are then brought into a saife state being quickened together with Christ as Christ being raised from the death dieth no more death hath no more dominion over him Rom. 6 9. so they who are planted with him in the likeness of his Death and Resurrection may alwayes reckon themselves dead indeed unto sin but alive unto God through Jesus Christ vers 4 5 11. Hence there is no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8 1. They are not under the Law but under grace Rom. 6 14. And this holdeth true notwithstanding of after-sins for if after-sins remanent sinnes and corruption could break of this relation and make an alteration in this state no man should be said to be one day in a justified state for the best of men falleth seven times a day in sin and no man can say that he is free of sin there being no perfection here there could be no state of Justification consequently no state of Adoption and Reconciliation if after-sins could break of this Relation or Relative State a beleever could not be said to be partaker of any of the privileges attending this state for one day to end New sins indeed call for new Remissions but these new Remissions are fatherly pardons and not such a sentence of absolution as the person had at first when translated out of the Rate of Death into Life for then the person was not a reconciled Son but now he standeth in a state of Reconciliation and Sonshipe his new pardons are the pardons of a Father granted to a Son as we see Psal. 89 30 31 32 33 34. If his children forsake my Law and walk not in my judgments if they break my statutes keep not my commendements then will I visite their transgression with the rod their iniquity with stripes never the less my loving kindness will I not utterly take from him nor suffer my fatihfulness to fail my Covenant will I not break nor alter the thing that is gone of my lips So 1 Ioh. 1 8 9. If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins 2 1 2. My little children these things write I unto you that ye sin not and if any man sin we have an Advocat with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous And he is the Propitiation for our sins Psal. 103 3 8 9 12 13. Who forgiveth all thine Iniquities The Lord is merciful and gracious slow to anger plenteous in mercy he will not alwayes chide neither will he keep his anger for ever as far as the east is from the West so far hath heremoved our transgressions from us like as a Father pitieth his children so the Lord pitieth them that fear him So this state remaineth firme and unbroken notwithstanding of the various changes which are in their apprehensions concerning it these may
the score of Beleevers as if he had recalled the former pardon granted for he remembereth their sin no more Ier. 31 34. Heb. 8 12. 10 17. And for future sins by vertue of their State they have access to seek for pardon and have ground 3 The Righteousness of Christ which is a perfect Righteousness is fully and perfectly communicated and imputed so as thereby they become the Righteousness of God in Christ 2. Cor. 5. last He is their whole Righteousness in order to Iustification and wholly their Righteousness as made of God Righteousness unto them Ier. 23 6 1. Cor. 1 30. And with this Righteousness they are wholly perfectly covered to expect it as found hid there Phil. 3 9. are made Righteous Rom. 5 19. 10 4. 4 They are now wholly Reconciled unto God and have Peace with Him and not by halfes or in some certain respects only as if in other respects they were still Enemies or in a state of Enmity Being justified by faith they have Peace with God Rom. 5 1. once they were enemies but now they are reconciled vers 10. by Christ they have now received the Atonement vers 11. once alienated enemies in their mindes by wicked works but now reconciled Col. 1 21. once a far off but now made neer Ephes. 2 13. the enmity being staine vers 16. No more strangers or forreigners now but fellow citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God vers 19. Then is the Lord pacified toward them for all that they have done Ezek. 16 63. 5 They are compleetly translated into a new Covenant state not halfe the children of Saran and half the children of God not halfe in Nature and halfe in the state of Grace not half translated halfe not Ephes. 2 13 19. Col. 1 21. not halfe quickened with Christ and halfe not Ephes. 2 5. They are not now halfe without Christ or aliens from the common wealth of Israel or strangers from the Covenants of promise c. Ephes. 2 12. There is a perfect change as to their state 1. Cor. 6 11. 6 They are secured as to final Condemnation There is no condemnation for them Rom. 8 1. being beleevers they shall not perish but have eternal life Ioh. 3 15 16. He that beleeveth is not condemned vers 18. See also Ioh. 3 36. 6 47. They are passed from death unto life Ioh. 5 24. 1. Ioh. 3 14. being discharged of all guilt of eternal punishment which formerly they deserved by their sinnes And all this holdeth good notwithstanding of their after sins which as we shall shew do not annull or make any such breach upon their state of Justification It is true these sins must also be Pardoned will be Pardoned but yet when they are pardoned their Justification as to their state is not hereby more perfected as to these respects formerly mentioned It holdeth good also notwithstanding of what shall be at the great day for that will put no man in a new Justified state who was not Reconciled to God before It is true there will be many additions as to the Solemnitie Declaration Consequences Effects thereof in that day but not withstanding hereof the state of Justification here as to what respecteth its grounds the essential change it maketh together with the Right that beleevers have thereby unto all that in that day they shall be put in possession of is perfect may be said so to be Propos. 7 By what is said it is manifest how in what respects this life of Iustification differeth from the life of Sanctification 1 Sanctification maketh a real Physical change Iustification maketh a Relative change And thereby they come to have a new State or Relation unto the Law unto God the judge 2 Sanctification is continueing work wherein beleevers are more more built up daily Iustification is an act of God or a juridcial sentence Absolving a sinner pronunceing him free of the charge brought in against him and not liable to the penalty 3 Sanctification is a groÌ„wing and increasing work admitteth of many degrees is usually weak and small at the beginning Iustification doth not grow neither doth it admit of degrees but is full compleet adequate unto all ends here 4 Sanctification is ever growing here and never cometh to full Perfection before death Justification is perfect adequate unto all ends as we shewed 5 Sanctification is not alike in all but some are more some are less sanctified But Iustification is equal in all none being more justified then others 6 Some measures degrees of Sanctification which have been attained may be lost againe But nothing of Iustification can really be lost for we are not here speaking of the sense and feeling of Justification which frequently may be lost but of Justification it self 7 Sanctification is a progressive work Iustification is instantaneous as was shown 8. Sanctification respecteth the Being Power Dominion of â—in in the beleever and killeth subdueth and mortifieth it Iustification respecteth its guilt demerite taketh away guilt and the obligation to punishment or obnoxiousness to the paying of the penalty 9 In justification a man is accepted upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him and received by Faith But in Sanctification grace is infused and the Spirit given to perfecte holiness in the fear of God 10 In Iustification there is a right had unto life and unto the rich recompence of reward upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed whence they are said to have passed from death to life But in Sanctification they are made meet to be partakers of the Inheritance of the Saints in light 11 Unto Iustification nothing is required but faith in Christ whereby the soul may become united to Him have a right to his benefites But unto Sanctification all the graces of the Spirit are requisite and all the exercises of the same all diligence is required and an adding of Vertue to Faith of Knowledge to Vertue of Temperance to Knowledge of Patience to Temperance of Godliness to Patience of Brotherly kindness to Godliness of Charity to Brotherly kindness 2 Pet. 1 5 6 7. Propos. 8 Hence it followeth also thar there is no ground to assert a first a second Justification as Papists do meaning by the first an Infusion of an inward Principle or Habite of Grace which is no Justification nor part thereof but the beginning of Sanctification and by the Second another Justification which with them is an Effect or Consequent of the former having good work which flow from the foresaid infused principle of grace love for its proper formal cause This Justification they say is by works where as the former is by faith and yet this second they make to be an Incrementum an increase of the first and for this they say the church prayeth when she saith Lord increase our saith hope
charity Concil Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 10. whereby we see this Justification whereof they say Iames speaketh Chap. 2. is manifestly nothing else but the very grouth of Sanctification and so they know no Iustification at all distinct from Sanctification wherefore we need say no more against the same it being Justification formerly explained which we treat of and not of Sanctification whereof they seem only to speak when they mentione Iustification and indeed this their Iustification which is true Sanctification admitteth of various and different degrees of this they may imagine not only a first and a second but according to the various degrees thereof a third and a fourth yea a Tenth Twentieth if they please The Scripture it is true maketh mention of twosold Iustification one by the Works of the Law another by Faith but it asserteth with all that these are inconsistent and that no man living can be justified the first way by the works of the Law Mr. Baxter beside the difference he maketh betwixt Justification as Begun and as Continued in reference to the different conditions required to the one and to the other imagineth a twosold Iustifieation or two Iustifications or as he saith against D. Tullie pag. 167. rather two parts of one yet in his last Reply to Mr. Cartwright pag. 46. he maketh them as distinct as are the two lawes he speaketh of the first he saith is by God the Creatour the second by Christ the Redeemer and in order to the vindication clearing of this he speaketh much of a twosold Righteousness In his writtings against Mr. Cartwright pag. 70. giving us several to the number of thirteen differences betwixt them making the one to consist in out Non-obligation to punishment by the Law of works because of its dissolution upon Satisfaction made by Christ to be without us in the merite satisfaction of Christ to be in substance the same with Pardon to be opposite to that guilt which sin in general procureth to be but the tantundem of what the Law required to justify us from a true Accusation that we by sin deserve death c. And the other to consist in our Non-obligation to the far greater punishment to be within us done by us to consist in innocency or notguiltiness to be opposite to that guilt which one particular sin procureth to be the idem required in the new Law to justifie us from a false Accusation that we have not performed the Conditions of the new Covenant c. all which to examine is not my present purpose only I shall say as to this two sold Justification that it is an explication of the matter which we have not in Scripture which I judge should only regulat both our Conceptions Expressions in this affaire and what ever pleasure men may take to give way to their Luxuriant phancies yet it will be safest for us to follow the threed of the Word and to speak of this mysterie according to Revelation and not according to our Apprehensions And of all men I judge Mr. Baxter should be most averse from creating new Termes Words Expressions in these divine things who expresseth himself so angry-like especially in his later writtings in words which to some may seem to favour little of sobâ—iety or of modesty against such as contend about words when it may be they are but defending the received orthodox doctrine from his new Notions and Expressions as being Censorious dividers Word-souldiers I know not what But as to the matter in hand in particular as to this second Iustificaâ—ion or rather first for it is supposed to be first in order of nature if not in time also which is founded upon our Innocency or performance of the Conditions of the new Covenant Faith Repentance New Obedience so is a declaring of us Righteous because of our inherent Righteousness I shall only say these few things 1. That I finde not this new Iustification explained expressed nor so much as hinted by the Apostle in all his discourses and disputes about this subject though he hath spoken very much of Iustification and on all occasions did vindicate clear up the gospel-truth thereanent If it be said That all this is sufficiently hinted more then hinted by the Apostle when he tels that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness I answere What the proper meaning of this Expression is shall be shown hereafter where it shall also be manifested that the Faith here said to be imputed is not our act of Faith but Christ his Righteousness laid hold on by faith or the object of Faith held forth in the Gospel received by Faith And for answere to this I judge it sufficient to say That the Apostle is manifestly there speaking of that other Iustification which we owne for the only Iustification hold forth in the Gospel whereby Remission of sins is had Peace with God through a Righteousness without of that Iustification which taketh away all glorying both before God man and wherein God is hold forth to be laid hold on by Faith as one that justifieth the ungodly and of that Justification which is from the Accusation of the Law by all which many other Particulars observable in the Apostles discourse there it is undeniable that he is speaking of that other Iustification which we asserte If it be said That all this is sufficiently imported when Faith is made the Condition of Justification we are said to be justified by faith I answer What way Faith is the Condition of Justification is so to be called shall be seen afterward only I say that what the Scripture speaketh of this can give no ground for a new distinct Justification because this new Iustification is rather a Iustification of Faith or of the Beleever because of his faith purely upon the account of his Faith for it is a sentence of judgment pronunceing the man to be a Beleever because he is so his faith to be right Faith because it is so than any Iustification of him by faith Not to mentione this that together with faith as the Condition Repentance New Obedience is joyned then there must be a Iustification of works or of the man by yea because of works which cannot be imported by being Iustified by faith because that is alwayes opposed to Iustification by works Beside that even in mens courts there are not two distinct sentences of the judge required in deciding of a Controversie depending upon the clearing of a Condition one anent the truth of the Condition the other anent the thing depending upon that Condition but the Condition being instructed to be performed the one sentence is given out much less is this requisito here where we have to do with God who knoweth whether the Condition be performed or not and needeth not that we instruct the same against the Accusations of Satan or of the
we were justified upon the account of it as our Righteousness God should not be he who justifieth the ungodly as he is expresly stiled Rom. 4 5. And the reason is because he cannot be called an ungodly person who hath a Righteousness inherent in him which is his own which the Lord accounteth to him for a Righteousness he is not unrighteous whom God accounteth Righteous he whom God accounteth Righteous cannot be called ungodly so that if God account Faith to us for our Righteousness putting it up upon our score as our Righteousness when God justifieth us as Righteous by vertue of our faith or as clothed with faith as a compleet Righteousness he cannot be said to justifie such as are ungodly But now the Scripture tels us that God is one that justifieth the ungodly that is one who hath no Righteousness inherent in him upon the account of which the just righteous God can justify him but one that must have a Righteousness from without Imputed to him upon the account of which he is Justified and accounted Righteous in Christ though unrighteous ungodly in himself our Faith cannot be said to be imputed to us as our Righteousness 8. If Faith as our act of obedience were imputed to us as our Righteousness Paul could not say as he doth Rom. 4 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputed righteousness without works for then Righteousness should not be imputed without works but a prime special principal comprehensive work for with our Adversaries here faith is in a manner all works or comprehendeth them as we heard towards the end of the foregoing Chapter should be imputed as our Righteousness not a Righteousness without works 9. Free pardon of sins will never prove the man blessed unto whom God imputeth Faith in a proper sense for his Righteousness as it doth prove him blessed unto whom God imputeth Christ's Righteousness or a Righteousness without works And the reason is because faith is no satisfaction to the justice of God therefore can not be our Righteousness upon which we are pardoned justified Now the Apostle argueth thus Rom. 4 6 7 8. Even a David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven whose sins are covered blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin 10. The Righteousness imputed is something distinct from our Faith is not our faith it self for the Apostle saith Rom. 4 23 24. Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeve on him c. If Faith it self were the Righteousness imputed these words could make no good sense Shall we think that the meaning of the Apostles words is nothing but this Faith shall be imputed if we have faith or our Beleeving shall be imputed to us if we Beleeve This looks not like one of the discourses of the Apostle 11. The imputation of our Beleeving as our Righteousness cannot ground our Peace with God not have we by it access into this grace wherein we stand nor can we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God nor glory in Tribulation for it is obvious how weak a ground that were for such a great building But the Righteousness of Christ laid hold on by Faith can be a sufficient basis for all this Rom. 5 1 2 3. 12. Faith as our work of obedience is not the grace of God and the gift by grace which must be imputed to us as our Righteousness upon the account of which we are to be justified as the offence transgression of Adam was imputed to his posterity as the ground of death passing upon them and of judgment or guilt to condemnation But is only our receiving of that abundance of grace and of the gift of Righteousness Rom. 5 17. But that which is imputed as the ground of Justification as Adam's disobedience was imputed as the ground of their Condemnation is the Righteousness of the Second Adam of whom the first was a figure vers 14 15 18 19. 13. When the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 5 21. for he made him sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him his meaning cannot be that our Faith is the Righteousness of God or that we are made the Righteousness of God upon that account of having faith for the Apostle is holding forth here a comfortable commutation which God maketh betwixt Christ us as the ground of that ministrie of Reconciliation to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them mentioned vers 18 19. And therefore as Christ hath some thing that was properly ours imputed to him by God that is Sin or Guilt which he had not in himself so we must have something as the native fruit effect of that that is properly Christ's imputed to us of God that is his Righteousness which we have not in ourselves And beside this Righteousness of God is that whereupon Reconciliation is founded as is manifest comparing vers 19. with 21. But who will say that our Reconciliation unto God is founded upon our Faith as if that were our Peacemaker our Atonement Satisfaction as if that were Christ in whom God was reconciling the world unto himself Was Christ made sin that the imperfect grace of faith might be made a compleet Righteousness become our compleet Righteousness 14. When the Apostle saith Rom. 9 31 32. That Israel hath not attained to the Law of righteousness because they sought it not by faith he must meane a Righteousness that is distinct from Faith and therefore he cannot meane Faith it self for if he meaned faith it self as our work the words should have this sense they sought not Faith by Faith and therefore they did not attaine to Faith Shall we impute such jejune insipide expressions to Paul or rather to the Spirit of God speaking in by Paul 15. The same Apostle tels us Rom. 10 3 4. That the jewes being ignorant of God's righteousness going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God And by this Righteousness of God he cannot meane Faith for their faith had been their own so their own Righteousness if Faith had been Righteousness but he must meane the Righteousness of Christ which faith laith hold on for he addeth for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth So that it is the Righteousness of him who is the end of the Law that is that Righteousness unto which they should have submitted themselves by Faith it is not Faith it self but a Righteousness which is had from Christ who is the end of the Law a Righteousness
proper a sense as can be spoken of or applied to a Creature And even though we speak of Faith in the orthodox sense as being the gift of God yet seing it floweth nativly from the new Nature given in Regeneration is said to be mans faith his act all this difference will not exclude all occasion of boasting glorying before men more then Abraham's works would have done if he had been justified by them And yet the Gospel-way of Justification perfectly excludeth all boasting being so contrived in all points as that he who glorieth may only glory in the Lord. Argum. 5. If Faith be imputed unto us for Righteousness then are we justified by that which is Imperfect which it self needeth a Pardon seing no mans Faith is perfect in this life But there is no Justification to be looked for before God by that which is Imperfect but by that which is Perfect Therefore c. He excepteth These words then we are Iustified by that which is imperfect may either have this sense that we are justified without the concurrence of any thing that is simply perfect to our justification or that somewhat that is comparativly imperfect may some wayes concurre contribute towards our justification In the first sense the proposition is false in the later sense the assumption goeth to wreck Ans. This distinction is to no purpose for it doth not loose the difficulty in regard that the argument speaketh of a Righteousness as the formal cause or as the formal objective cause of Justification or as that upon the account of which the person is Pronunced Declared to be Righteous and Justified and so is levelled against Faith concluding that it cannot be our Righteousness or the formal Objective cause of our justification as it is said and supposed to be by such as say that it is imputed to us for Righteousness for it is made by them to be all the Righteousness that is imputed to us that because of its Weakness Imperfection He addeth in application of this distinction The truth is that the Imputation of faith for Righteousness presupposeth somewhat that absolutely perfect as absolutly necessary unto justification Had not the Lord Christ who is perfect himself made a perfect atonement for sin there had been no place for the Imputation of faith for righteousness for it is through this that either we beleeve in him or in God through him it is through the same atonement also that God justifieth us upon our beleeving that is imputes our faith unto us for righteousness Ans. This presupposal doth not helpe the matter for notwithstanding thereof Faith it self is made the only Imputed Righteousness and faith is not considered as an Instrument receiving Christ's Righteousness and the Atonement there through but as a work making the reward of the Atonement to be of debt ex pacto and not of free grace and so to have a worth a merite in it Our Adversaries will not grant that this presupposed Righteousness of Christ whereby the perfect Atonement was made is imputed unto us for this is expresly denied and beside they say that it was equally made for all and so is equally imputed to all so far as that thereby all are put into such a state as notwitstanding of the former breach made they may now upon the new termes of Faith receive the promised reward And thus it is manifest that with them this imperfect thing saith is that for upon the account of which they are justified As for example that we may hereby illustrate cleare the matter if we should suppose that Christ had by his Atonement delivered all from wrath due for the former transgression of the Covenant and had put them into the former state wherein Adam was before he fell procured that God should take a new essay of them and make promise of life unto them upon the old termes as some who plead for Universal Redemption say God might have done had he so pleased after the Atonement was made in this case might it not be said that every person that should now be Justified upon the performance of these termes were justified by the performance of the Condition as by his own Righteousness that this new Obedience were all the Righteousness he had declared to have when justified should he not be justified upon the account thereof solely And was he more obliged unto the Atonement of Christ than others who did violate of new these Conditions And seing now Faith is put in the same place and made to have the same Force Efficacy shall we not now be Justified by this one act of Obedience as we would have been in the other case by perfect Obedience And if it be so is it not manifest that we are justified by a Righteousness that is Imperfect that all the presupposal of a perfect Atonement doth not availe 2 When it is said that it is through the Atonement made by Christ that we beleeve in him or in God through him it must be granted that Christ hath purchased Faith that either to all or to some and if to all then either absolutly or upon condition if to all that absolutly then all should have faith if upon condition we desire to know what that condition is If not to all but to some only then Christ cannot be said to have died alike for all 3 as to that he faith viz. That it is through the same atonement that God imputeth our faith to us for righteousness justifieth us upon our beleeving it being the same that others say who tell us that Christ hath procured faith to be the condition termes of the new Covenant we shall say no more now than that we see no ground to asserte any such thing here after we shall give our reasons Argum. 6. If faith be imputed to us for Righteousness then God should rather receive a Righteousness from us then we from him in our Iustification But God doth not receive a righteousness from us but we from him in Iustification Therefore c. He excepteth by denying the consequence upon these reasons 1 Because God's imputing Faith for righteousness doth no wayes implye that faith is a righteousness properly so called but only that God by the meanes thereof upon the tender of it looks upon us as righteous yet not as made either meritoriously or formally righteous by it but as having performed that condition or Covenant upon the performance whereof he hath promised to make us righteous meritoriously by the death sufferings of his owne son formally with the pardon of all our sins Ans. All this can give no satisfaction for 1 If no Righteousness be imputed to us in order to Justification but Faith and if faith it self be hereby made no Righteousness then we are justified without any Righteousness at all God shall be said to pronunce them Righteous who have no Righteousness
at all or Justification must be some other thing than a pronunceing or declaring of a man Righteous 2 Why have we heard so much above said for Faiths being Righteousness why have there been so many passages of Scripture adduced to confirme this particuiarly such as mention the Righteousness of faith or the Righteousness of God by faith But it may be this salvo is added a Righteousness properly so called Yet then it will follow that it must be at least a Righteousness improperly so called and that must be an improper speach faith is imputed for righteousness and if that be an improper speech why is there so much noise made about the impropriety of the speech when we take Faith for the object of faith in that sentence faith imputed unto righteousness All that great clamoure must now recurre upon the excepter and his followers 3 If this which he hath given be the meaning of these words faith imputed unto righteousness let any judge whether our sense of them or this be most genuine freest of trops figures which of the two is apparently farthest fetched 4 Faith then it seemeth is tendered unto God faith being but a Righteousness improperly so called we tender unto God in our Justification a Righteousness only that is improper thereupon are declared Righteous whether properly or improperly I know not 5 If upon the tender of Faith God look upon us as Righteous then we mâ—st be righteous for we must be what he seeth acknowledgeth us to be And then I ask whether doth he look upon us as properly Righteous or as improperly Righteous 6 If God look upon us as having fulfilled the condition of the Covenant as Righteous upon that account then he must look upon us as properly righteous faith must be a proper righteousness or he must say that Christ hath purchased that an improper Righteousness shall be the Condition of the Covenant for we heard he said that Christ had purchased that Faith should be the condition But the performance of the Condition of God's Covenant must be hold for a proper Righteousness as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant And we heard lately that Faith was truely properly called a Righteousness that it might be so called with truth in sufficient propriety of speech in his answere to the first argument 7 If we be righteous by faith be looked upon as such by God having performed the condition of the Covenant it is not imaginable how we shall not be if not meritoriously yet at least formally Righteous seing as Adam by Perfect Obedience would have performed the Condition of that Covenant under which he was and thereby had been both Meritoriously formally Righteous so must it be now in respect of faith which is made to have the same place force efficacy in the new Covenant and that through the procurment of Christ that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant 8 He saith we are made meritoriously righteous by Christ's sufferings But what is the meaning of this Is this the meaning thereof that Christ's sufferings hath merited a Righteousness to us Then hereby nothing is spoken to the point for we are not now speaking of Christ's Righteousness but of ours And againe I would enquire what Righteousness hath it merited unto us Whether a meritorious Righseousness or a formal Righteousness as he distinguishad or both Or is the meaning this That through Christ's merites sufferings we have a Righteousness which is meritorious If so I enquire what is that Righteousness Whether is it Christ's Righteousness imputed to us made ours or is it our Faith that becometh meritorious If this last be said that is granted which was denied Faith must be accounted our meritorious Righteousness If the former be said imputation of Christ's Righteousness will be granted more than we dar say 9 He saith we are made formally righteous with the pardon of sins But this is never proved and it hath been often asserted And how will he make this a Formal Righteousness Righteousness properly so called Is this any conformity to a Law in whole or in part Did not himself insinuat in his answere to the first Argum. that nothing can with truth and in sufficient propriety of speech be called a Righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of God And sure I am Pardon of sins is not any such conformitie 10 The summe of this answere is this Faith is not imputed as a Righteousness but it is said to be imputed unto Righteousness because it is the fulfilling of the Condition of the new Covenant whereby we come to be made Righteous meritoriously by Christ's death Righteous formally with the pardon of sins And what a wiredrawn untelligible self-contradictory sense this is let every one judge He denieth the consequence 2. Because suppose that this inference lay in the bowels of what we hold that faith were a proper righteousness yet neither would this argue that therefore God should receive a righteousness from us in our justification for we rather receive our faith from God for our justification shen God from us in our justification though I grant that in a sense a far off with much adoe it may haply be made a truth that God receives our faith from us in our justification Ans. But sure though Adam's obedience was originally from God efficiently he being the First Cause yet had Adam been justified according to that Old Covenant he had been justified by his own works not by the Righteousness of another bestowed on him by God so he had been said to have presented his own Righteousness unto God in order to his justification and God might have been said to have received it from him in his justification or rather in order thereunto Now just so is it here as to Faith for faith is our work we come with it to God he taketh it from us thereupon justifieth us according to our Adversaries opinion not in a sense a far off or made with much ado as he supposeth but in a sense most plaine obvious He saith lastly That that imputation of faith for righteousness which he protecteth supposeth a righteousness given unto received by men because it could not be truely said that God doth impute faith for righteousness unto any man except he should make him righteous upon his beleeving Now as it is impossible that a man should be made righteous without a righteousness in one kinde or other so is it impossible also that that righteousness wherewith a man is made righteous in justification should be derived upon him from any other but from God alone for this righteousness can be none other but forgiveness of sins Ans. 1 How can the Imputation of Faith suppose a Righteousness given unless the Righteousness be given before Faith be imputed seing what is supposed is alwayes first in order
Nor is it to the point to tell us that some hold that God if it had pleased him might have pardoned Adam's transgression without the Atonement made by the death of Christ for they speak not of what God may now do having determined to manifest the glory of his justice but what he might have done in signorationis ante decretum And as for that word Heb. 2 11. It became him c. it will as well respect the justice of God as his wisdom seing it became him upon the account of justice which he would have glorified Mr. Baxter in his Confess Chap. IX Sect. 5. pag. 289. thinketh that to say that Christ paid the same thing that the Law required of us not only satisfied for our not payment is to subvert the substance of Religion But this is only in his apprehension as he taketh up their meaning who say so And others possibly may have no lower thoughts of some who hold that Christ only gave such a sacrifice to God as might be a valuable consideration on which he might grant us the benefites on such conditions as are most sutable to his ends honour that he did not suffer the same which the Law threatned The screwing up of differences to such an hight as to make either the one or the other subversive of the substance of Religion had need to be upon clear undeniable grounds and not founded on meer sandy and loose consequences such as those seem to me by which Mr. Baxter maketh out this Charge For he tels us The Idem is the perfect obedience or the full punishment that the Law requires It is supplicium ipsius delinquentis Ans. But now seing such as say that Christ paid the Idem will say as well as he that when Christ suffered that which they call the Idem the person himself that sinned did not suffer And I would enquire at Mr. Baxter whether paid Christ the Idem as to all other respects beside that is whether Christ suffered all that penalty which the Law did threaten to transgressours only this excepted which must be excepted that he did it in another person that he was not the person himself that sinned or not If he say Not then the difference goeth deeper but why doth he not then to make out this heavy charge Instance some particulars threatned in the Law which Christ did not undergo And why doth he insist only on this one that he was not ipse delinquens but another person If he grant that in all other respects Christ paid the Idem no man sure can see such difference here as shall make the one side subvert the Substance of Religion for it is a meer sâ—â—ife about a word it cometh all to this whether when one man layeth down his life to save another condemned to death after all satisfaction in money lands rents service or what else hath been rejected he can be said to pay the Idem which the Law required or not Some Lawyers would possibly say he did pay or suffer the Idem Mr. Baxter would say not because he was not ipsa persona delinquens was not the very person that was condemned but another And yet death unto which the other man was condemned was inflicted upon him and no less would be accepted as satisfaction at his hands which would make some say that all that debate whether it was the same or the equivalent were a meer needless contest about a word And if it be but just so here in our present debate every one will judge it very hard to call that a subversion of Religion which after examination trial is found to be but a strife about a word Now how will Mr. Baxter prove that the suffering of the Idem is only when it is supplicium ipsius delinquentis And not also when the same punishment in all its essential ingredients is undergone suffered by another When the Law imposeth the penalty of death or of such a great summe of money on a person transgressing such a Law common discourse would say I suppose the Law give allowance thereto that when another came payed the same penalty for him without the least abatement he payed the same penalty which he Law impofed and not another and not meerly a valuable consideration It is true the Law threatened only the transgressour obliged him to suffer but notwithstanding another might pay the very same thing which the Law threatned requireth He saith next p. 290. the Law never threatned a Surety nor granteth any liberty of substitution that was an act of God above the Law If therefore the thing due were payed it was we ourselves morally or legally that suffered Ans. Sure some Lawes of men will threaten Sureties grant liberty of substitution too But if he speak here only of the Law of God we grant that it threatned only the transgressour that it was an act of God above the Law dispensing therewith that granted a substitution Yet notwithstanding of this it is not proved that that Substitute did not or could not suffer the same punishment which the Law threatned And if Mr. Baxter think that the lawes not threatning a Surety nor granting liberty of a substitution will prove it it is denied Next His other consequence is as uncleare viz. That if the thing due were payed it was we ourselves that suffered personally all these consequences run upon the first false ground that no man can pay the Idem but the very transgressour What he meaneth by we ourselves morally he would do well to explicate And as for legally we ourselves may be said to do legally what our Surety undertaker doth for us And if this be all he meaneth viz. that if the thing due to wit by Law as threatned there be payed either we in our own persons or our Surety for us in our room Law place payed it it is true but subversive of his hypothesis It must then be some other thing that he meaneth by morally or legally it must be the same with or equivalent to personally or the like but his next words cleare his meaning for he addeth And it would not be ourselves legally because it was not ourselves naturally And what lawyer I pray will yeeld to this reason I suppose they will tell us that we are said to do that legally which our Cautioner or Surety doth for us But if he think otherwayes here also that nothing can be accounted to be done by us legally but what is done by our selves Naturally which is a word of many significations might occasion much discourse that is personally Yet it will not follow that no other can suffer the Idem that was threatned but the delinquent himself At length he tels us That if it had been ourselves legally then the strickest justice could not have denied us a present perfect deliverance ipso facto seing no justice can
demand more than the idem quod dehitur rather debetur the whole debt of obedience or punishment Ans. But what if ourselves in our own natural persons had undergone the penalty had we therefore ipso facto attained a perfect deliverance It will be confessed I suppose that all that underlye this punishment underlye it for ever how then doth their legall suffering the idem helpe them If it be said that they must eternally suffer because never able to suffer so as to make satisfaction Yet still it is obvious that their undergoing the idem in their own persons naturally doth not advantage them as to a present perfect deliverance ipso facto or ever at all And where is then the truth of this axiome Or where is its pertinency to our purpose When a man is punished with death according to the Law is he ipso facto presently perfectly delivered It seemeth then that the paying of the Idem yea or the tantundâ—m by another person is more effectual for their liberation than their paying of the Idem in their own persons And againe the Law in many cases granteth liberation even when the Idem in Mr. Baxters sense is payed that is when another payeth down the same Yea likewise if the Creditor be satisfied when another thing is payed So that neither part of this assertion holdeth true universally But yet some may say That if the Idem or the very same were payed by Christ our liberation should immediatly follow I Ans. It will not follow so if we in our own persons had made full payment of that debt of suffering which is impossible to be done in time it might be granted that actuall liberation would immediatly follow but when we did not this in our own persons but Christ made full payment of what the Law could demand by way of punishment or threatned for us it will not follow that our deliverance should immediatly follow thereupon and the reason is because it was such a paying of the Idem as was refusable and as God himself provided out of wonderful love free grace and was accorded unto by a mutual compact according to the free wise Conditions of which the benefites were to be given out Mr. Baxter in his Cath. Theol. part 2. n. 48. saith the Very nature Reason of the Satisfactoriness of Christ's sufferings was not in being the very same either in kind or in degree which were due to all for whom he suffered Whence we see that he denieth that Christ suffered the same either in kind or in degree that was due by the Law to those for whom he suffered His reason why they could not be the same which was due by the Law he giveth n. 49. is the same we heard before viz. The Law made it due to the sinner himself Which notwithstanding it might be the same both as to kind degree which Christ suffered that the Law made due the substitution of a new person that the Law did not provide altereth not the punishment either as to kind or as to degree He addeth and anothers suffering for him fulâ—illeth not the Law which never said either thou or another for thee shall die but only satisfyeth the Law-giver as he is above his own Law could dispense with is his justice being satisfied saved dum alius solvit aliud solvitur Ans. Though the Law intend only the punishment of the transgressour Yet when the Law-giver dispenseth with the Law accepteth of the punishment suffering of aâ—other the punishment suffering of another doth not eo spso that it is the punishment suffering of another become different in kind degree from the punishment enjoyned by the Law as is obvious when â—ne man suffereth death for another the Law being dispensed with that made death due to the transgressour himself his death doth not become eoipso that it is the death of another than of him that transgressed another kind of death ar distinct as to degrees it may be the same as to both And yet this is all the force of Mr. Baxter argument dum alius solvit aliud solvitur which whether it be a certaine universal rule in the Law I much doubt but though it were Yet no man can hence inferre that aliud quoad genus gradus eo ipso solvitur for it is a rule in logick that a genere ad speciem non sequitur affirmativâ— so that though when the Law requireth that he who sinneth shall suffer die another suffereth dieth in the room stead of him who sinned it may be said that in so farr aliud solvituâ— Yet it cannot be hence inferred that the death or suffering of him who sinned not is quite of another kind differeth in degrees from that death which the Law made due to the sinner He mentioneth afterward in the 2 3 4. 5. places some particulars which were not in Christ's sufferings yet would have been in the sufferings of sinners themselves But all this is to no purpose for the question is not whether Christ's sufferings were the same every way with the sufferings of the damned as to all circumstances consequents flowing from the Condition of sinners suffering But whether they were the same as to kind with that death Curse which was threatned in the Law by way of punishment which was therefore due by Law unto the transgressour Let us now see the particulars 2. And sin saith he itself though not as sin was the greatest part of the sinners punishment To be alienated from God not to Love him delight in him but to be corrupted deluded tormented by concupiscence Ans. These are indeed necessary consequents of sin in the person who is a sinner and are consequently punishment but not directly such neither were they threatned as punishments by the Law so do not belong to the essence substance of that punishment which the Law threatned which Christ was called to undertake 3. Saith he And the immediat unavoidable consequents resulting from sin itself were punishments which Christ did never undergo as to be hateful displeasing to God as contrary to his holy nature to be related as criminal to lose right to God's Favour Kingdom Ans. To be hateful displeasing unto God â— agreeth only to a creature which God doth not hate as such as a sinner inherently and though Christ did not feel God's hatred anger against his own person yet he felt his anger hatred against sin sinners And Christ was also related as Criminal not inherently but by imputation when he was made sin for â—s 2. Cor. 5 21. The sinner that is such inherently only loseth right to God's Favour Christ missed the sense thereof when he cried out my God my God why hast thou forsaken me And 4. saith he none of the further punishment which supposed real faultiness could fall on Christ as
all who work well keep the Law of Moses shall have free Pardon Right to life And thus they were as well justified by the works of the Law as by faith for faith was also required of them And then the meaning of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3 28. is therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith and by the deeds of the Law for both faith works with Mr. Baxter belong to this Subservient Righteousness as he calleth it If this be consonant to the Apostles doctrine which doth so contradict it let the Reader judge 3. Saith he That therefore it appeareth that the Jewes did so fondly admire the Law their National Privileges under it that they thought the exact keeping of it was necessary sufficient to Iustification Salvation And they thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness as a Sacrifice for sin meriter of free Pardon the Gift of life but only a great King Deliver to redeem them by Power from all their Enemies Bondage Ans. This mistake of the Jewes concerning the Messiah speaketh nothing to the point whereupon we are that is that Paul denieth justification to be by the Law And their errour mistake about the Law is not to be limited restricted to the Ceremonial Law so the thing that we say is confirmed hereby 2 They thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness And Mr. Baxter will not have him to be our Righteousness save only in that he hath purchased the New Covenant wherein our faith obedience to the Law is to be looked upon as all our proper immediat Righteousness upon the account of which we are to receive Pardon Right to life 4. He saith That is was not Adam's Covenant of Innocencie or persection which the Jewes thus trusted to or Paul doth speak against as to justification though a minore ad majus that is also excluded for the Jewes knew that they were sinners that God pardoned sin as a Merciful God that their Law had Sacrifices for Pardon Expiation with Confessions c. But they thought that so far as God had made that Law sufficient to Political ends to Temporal Rewards Punishments it had been sufficient to Eternal Rewards Punishments that of it self not in meer subordination to the typified Messiah Ans. Though the jewes knew that they were sinners yet they did also suppose that by their works of obedience to the Law Moral as well as Ceremonial they might make amends so think to be justified pardoned thereby and that God would accept of them grant them life for their own Righteousness sake therefore did they laboure so much to establish their own Righteousness followed after the Law of Righteousness sought Righteousness as it were by the works of the Law What Mr. Baxter talks here of the jewes not using of that Law in subordination to the Typified Messiah hath need of Explication for as to his sense of it we see no ground thereof in all the Apostles discourse 5. He saith That the thing which Paul disproveth them by is 1. That the Law was never made for such an End Ans. Yet he said that the man which doth those things shall live by them Rom. 10 5. Levit. 18 5. Gal. 3 12. that the doers of the Law are justified Rom. 2 13. And therefore speaketh of that Law which according to its primitive institution was made for such an end 2. saith he That even then it stood in subordination to Redemption free given life Ans. This we cannot yeeld to in Mr. Baxters sense often mentioned for Paul no where giveth us to understand that their obedience to this was their immediat Righteousness Condition of Justification the meritorious cause ex pacto of their Right to Christ to life c. 3. saith he That the free Gift or Covenant of Grace containing the promise of the Messiah and Pardon life by him was before the Law and justified Abraham others without it Ans. It is true this Argument did particularly militate against the Ceremonial Law Yet this not being the Apostles onely Argument other Arguments reaching the Moral Law as well as the Ceremonial we must not limite the Apostles disput only to the Ceremonial Law 4. saith he That their Law was so strick that no man could perfectly keep it all Ans. Adde also that they could not perfectly keep any one command thereof 5. saith he That every sin deserveth death indeed though their Law punished not every sin with death by the Magistrate Ans. And this holdeth true of the Moral as of the Ceremonial Law 6. saith he That their Law was never obligatory to the Gentile world who had a Law written in their hearts therefore not the common way of justification Ans. The Apostle maketh no such conclusion that therefore it was not the common way of justification for this would suppose that it were the way of justification unto them which is directly against the Apostles disput 7. saith he That their Law as such discovered sin but gave not the Spirit of Grace to overcome it in so much as though he himself desired perfectly to fulfill it without sin yet he could not but was under a Captivity that is a moral necessity of Imperfection or sins of infirmity from which only the grace of Christ could as to guilt power deliver him Ans. Therefore the Moral Law is as well here to be understood as the Ceremonial as is manifest 8. saith he That no man ever come to heaven by that way of merite which they dreamed of but all by the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Ans. But that way of merite attendeth all works in the matter of justification as the Apostle assureth us Rom. 4 4. Ephes. 2 8 9. is opposed to the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Rom. 11 6. 3 21 24. Tit. 3 5 7. From these things Mr. Baxter draweth this Conclusion Therefore their conceite that they were just in the maine forgiven their sins so justifiable by the meer dignity of Moses Law which they keept by the works of the Law not by the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer by the Faith Practical Beleife of that Gift and acceptance of it with thankful penitent obedient hearts was a Pernicioue Errour Ans. 1. Nothing is here said to ground a restriction of this erroneous conceite of theirs unto the Ceremonial Law for this conceite of being justifiable by the Law and the works thereof in opposition to the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer is as applicable to the Moral as to the Ceremonial Law 2 The Apostle doth not ground his disput upon the Iewes their express rejecting of a free Gift of Pardon c. But from justification by Faith laying hold on the free Grace
active obedience examined With a View of Wendelin's reasonings against it John Forbes in his Treatise tending to clear the doctrine of justification Chap. 24. pag. 93. c. cometh to speak of the matter of our Righteousness that is that wherein Christ is made of God Righteousness unto us And tels us that this in one word in the Scripture is said to be his obedience Rom. 5 19. But this obedience he restricteth pag. 94. unto the passive Obedience of Christ only in his death And by this restriction not only excludeth all his obedience to the Law but even all his suffering in his state of humiliation Yea his soul-sufferings also for any thing that appeareth He mentioneth a distinction betwixt those things wherein the Righteousness itself standeth which is imputed to us those things which are requisâ—â—e in Christ to the end that in the other he may be Righteousness unto us And this distinction is good in itself but not rightly applied when he referreth all to this last head which Christ did and suffered except only in his death He granteth pag. 95. that the word obedience is oft times in the Scripture referred to the whole work of Christ's humiliation But we do not take it so largely here as to comprehend even his Incarnation but as comprehending that which belonged to his work of Mediation as our Sponsor in satisfying the Law the Law-giver for what we were owing and were not able to pay Nor can we so restrict it as he doth Let us therefore see his grounds His first ground is this We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only wherein God hath purposed according to his purpose ordained according to his ordinance set forth Christ to be our Righteousness Propitiation For the purpose of God he citeth Col. 1 19 20. for the Ordinance 1. Pet. 1 18 19 20. For his setting forth Rom. 3 25. Ans. We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only where in the Scriptures hold him forth to be so And in that wherein the Scripture holdeth him forth to be so God purposed ordained set him forth to be so But we must not restrict the whole Seripture to these three or four places cited If the Scriptures elsewhere pointe forth Christ to be our Righteousness in other acts than in his death all this argueing is to no purpose Sure the Scriptures speak of his sufferings in soul of his being made a curse for us of his being obedient even to the death of his being made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law And that what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us See Phil. 2 7 8. Gal. 4 4. Rom. 8 3 4. 2 There is nothing in these texts exclusive of Christ's obedience And it is loose argueing to say Christ's death only is mentioned in three or foure places of Scripture Ergo nothing else is mentioned or to be understood any where else the particle Only is not here to be found neither expresly nor tacitely 3 Beside that in all these passages there is not one word of a Righteousness no expression signifying the matter of imputed Righteousness to consist therein or that Christ was our Righteousness upon the account thereof Nay neither here nor no-where finde we Christ called our Righteousness because he died for us Nor doth the Apostle attribute our Righteousness unto his blood only Rom. 5 9. Ephes. 1 7. Col. 1 14. No such thing appeareth there Neither Pardon nor Justification which only are there spoken of are a Righteousness or our Righteousness but the consequences fruites or effects thereof His argueing That without shedding of bloud there is no remission from Heb. 6. 10. That Christ dieth no more Therefore Christ is appointed our Righteousness peace in nothing but in his death bloud of his crosse is most loose can only conclude against those if there be any such that say By Christ's obedience active only not at all by his death sufferings have we peace remission of sins We willingly grant that without shedding of bloud there is no remission But this saith not that shedding of bloud alone is all our Righteousness We conjoine both his active his passive obedience so we take in his whole Mediatory work which maketh up his compleat Surety-Righteousness and say that this must be imputed to us in order to our Justification Peace Pardon Acceptance He argueth next from Adam as the Type Rom. 5. sayeth that this Type teacheth us foure things 1. That our Righteousness should proceed from one man Iesus Christ. 2. That our Righteousness should consist in the obedience of that one man 3. That our Righteousness should consist in one obedience only of that one man 4. That our Righteousness should consist in the only one obedience of that one man once only performed Ans. 1 If our Righteousness consist in the obedience of Christ that in opposition to Adam's disobedience to the Law then it must not consist in his sufferings alone for sufferings as such are no obedience to the Law And further Christ's obedience is called his Righteousness Rom. 5 18. but suffering dying is no Righteousness 2 There is no ground to assert either of the two last much less both for though Adam's act of disobedience was one and that done at once Yet it will not follow that therein he was a Typ of Christ or that therefore Christ's obedience must be one act only that performed at one time only for Paul hinteth no such comparison and we must not make typical similitudes without warrand And againe one act of disobedience once committed is a violation of the Law enough to constitute one unrighteous but one act of obedience howbeit frequently performed far less once only performed cannot be a compleet Righteousness which requireth conformity to the whole Law in all points that all the dayes of our life Wherefore Christ's obedience being a Righteousness which consisteth in full conformity to the Law must be perfect correspond with the whole Law cannot be one only act once only performed that such an act too is no formal act of obedience to the Law at all His Second ground is taken from the signes seals of the Righteousness which is by faith that is Baptisme the Lord's supper tels us that they signifie represent to us what is the Righteousness it self whereby we are justified seale confirme unto us that that Righteousness is ours Ans. I should rather think that they represent exhibite whole Christ seal to beleevers or the worthy receivers their interest in Him Right to Him
and to all his Spiritual benefites And though these Sacraments do in a more special manner represent Christ as suffering or as dying Yet it is no good consequence hence to inferre that his dying alone shedding his blood is our Righteousness for his death is principally specially there held forth as being the last compleeting act of his Mediatory obedience in his state of humiliation unto which all his former acts of obedience had a special respect in which they did all ultimatly terminate And by what reason will it be proved that nothing done or suffered by Christ can be any part or portion of our Righteousness in him but what is distinctly expressly represented pointed forth by these seales What shall then become of his soul sufferings in the Garden on the Crosse these were not his bloud nor his broken body therefore according to him make no part of our Righteousness in Christ. But we dar not say this His Third ground is from Heb. 10 5 6 7. c. cited out of Psal. 40. And thus he argueth The obedience of Christ in the matter of our Righteousness is of no larger extent than is the will of God which he did obey by which we are sanctified But this is restrained only to the offering of Christ. Ans. The minor is here denied there being no such restraint made as is alleiged for he came to do all the will of God therefore was baptised that he might fulfill all Righteousness It was not seâ—ving to the Apostles scope to mentione any other act of obedience than his offering up of himself but his mentioning no other there will not exclude all mentioned elsewhere Sure the Adversarie will not exclude the promptitude readiness of mind that Christ had unto the offering up of himself long before the appointed time as being no part of that obedience that he performed It cannot then be said that by his once offering up of himself at the last alone we are sanctified by nothing going before in conjunction with this But he tels us that our Iustification Reconciliation c. are ever attributed unto the bloud death Crosse of Christ. Ans. Never exclusively as to his preceeding obedience Yea we are to be saved by his life Rom. 5 10. justification is upon Christ's Righteousness vers 18. And all this will as well conclude for the exclusion of his foregoing obedience from being requisite in Christ as he said above to the end he may be Righteousness to us as for excluding of it from being any part of our Righteousness as also the next thing he saith concerning Paul's respecting in his preaching only the crosse of Christ for the Apostle is not there speaking meerly of the matter of our Righteousness but of the Gospel way of Salvation through a crucified Mediator which the wisdom of this world despised And to this sure our Author will willingly acknowledge that more belongeth than his death abstractivly considered His fourth ground is from Heb. 10 18. whence it followeth saith he that iâ— nothing which is in Christ himself before his death consisteth the remission of our sins so consequently our righteousness Ans. We willingly grant that in nothing that Christ did before his death considered abstractly from his death and separatly by it self did remission of sins consist or to speak more properly was satisfaction made in order to remission Yet hence it will not follow that all his preceeding obedience was no part of his Righteousness or of that whereof we are made partakers in him more than it will follow that it was not requisite in him to the end he might become Righteousness to us If any said as he seemeth to alleige that all our iniquities both original actual were pardoned in his preceeding actual obedience which I shall be loath to say nor know I who speaketh so then his argueing were good that then Christ should be made to dye without a cause If any say as he insinuateth also pag. 104. that Christ was offered only to remove the punishment of our sin and not the sin or guilt thereof I shall not approve of it Yet I cannot assent to what he saith Ibid. That the very offering of Christ for sin secludes all things preceeding whatsoever from all vertue or efficacy of removing iniquity for then it should seclude his soul sufferings which sure were no small part of the Satisfaction made by him for sin Neither will it hence follow that all his foregoing acts of obedience made no integral part of that Surety-Righteousness which he undertook to performe He citeth for his first ground 1. Ioh. 1 7. To which we say That it is true the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin because it was the bloud of him who had fulfilled all Righteousness in his death had compleeted that Satisfaction he undertook to do He tels us againe pag. 105. from Rom. 4. That unto eternal blessedness it is sufficient to have remission of sins But he remembereth not that all such as have remission of sins there have Righteousness also imputed without works we deny that Righteousness consisteth in remission of sins alone But in all this he is disputing only against such who say that remission of sins is had by the imputation of Christ's actual obedience by his death freedome from punishment is obtained with such I have nothing to do To what he here addeth of the difference betwixt an innocent man a just man enough hath been said already elsewhere His sixt last ground pag. 108. is builded upon the Law of the Priesthood which saith he was ordained of God for this end to make expiation of our sins to bring us unto God which two were shadowed in two actions in the day of Expiation viz. in offering sacrifice c. in carrylng the names of the tribes ingraven in the stones on his shoulder brest plate And this is so far from making against us that it consirmeth rather our opinion for that carrying of the names of the Tribes on the Ephod which was upon the other holy garments together with that plate of pure gold that was upon the mitre on the forefront having engraven upon it HOLINESS TO THE LORD Exod. 28. was sufficient to typifie hold forth Christ's holy obedience Righteousnest could not typifie his death sacrifice And without a Righteousness there is no coming or approaching unto God this Righteousness is some other thing than meer remission of sins His argueing from the Priests first entry on their office at 30. Yeers of age Christ's doing the like Luk. 3 21. to inferre that no action performed by Christ before that time can be accounted the action of expiation of sin or of reconciliation of us to God is most vaine for 1 we make no limitation or restriction of his expiatory work to what he did before he was 30 yeers of age 2
This will make against himself nothing for limiting restricking all to his last act of death Therefore he addeth That no action done after by Christ can be accounted a Priestly action of expiation except only the offering of himself entering with his own blood into the heavens for us But then 1 what will he do with his prayer intercession before his death specially Ioh. 17 2 There was more than expiation of sins requisite to bring us unto God Therefore the High Priest was to carry that memorial on the front of his Mitre The learned Wendeline in his Great Systeme of Theology lib. 1. c. 25. Thes. 7. pag. 1116. c. disputeth against the imputation of the Active obedience of Christ together with the Passive making it only a Condition requisite in the Mediator so as without it he could not be our Mediator merite any thing to us by his death So that in his judgment Christ's active obedience whereby his obedience to the Law of God is understood that no doubt moral Ceremonial Judicial did only contribute to qualify him to be a fit Mediator which it seemeth then according to him he was not by his hypostatical union to put a value upon his passive obedience by which he understands his suffering dying so undergoing the Curse of the Law paying the penalty in our room which his being God did not as it would seem sufficiently doe And thus all his acts of obedience while under the Law in the state of humiliation howbeit in all he may be conceived as a sufferer are excluded from being any part of the Satisfaction he was to make unto justice to the Law-giver for us in our room or any part of that Righteousness which is imputed to us in order to Justification He first proposeth his Arguments Vindicateth them then proposeth some used for the contrary opinion adding his Answers His 1. Arg. is Christ as man was bound to give active obedience to the Law for himself every Creature is bound to obey his Creator Therefore it is not imputed unto us Ans. The Antecedent is denied neither doth the proof adduced confirme it for the humane Nature of Christ now in the state of glory is will be a creature for ever Yea the consirmed angels Saints made perfect are Creatures yet not subject to any Law as Viatores but as Comprehensores such was not the obedience of Christ while in the flesh He was obedient as a Viator but in respect of himself he cannot be looked upon as a meer Viator his Humane Nature being personally united unto the divine subsisting therein in respect whereof he became heir of all things Lord of life therefore stood in no need of working out a life of obedience for a crown to himself wherefore what he did as a Viator was for us for whom he subjected himself became obedient even to the death And moreover all his acts of obedience were not the acts of obedience of a meer creature out of one who was God-man for his humane Nature did not subsist of it self and so did not of it self as a nature not subsisting performe acts of obedience but in the Godhead performed acts of obedience as so subsisting We have said enough to this at several occasions before It was Answered Christ was made man not for himself but for us Therefore he obeyed not for himself but for us that is in our place He Replyeth 1. The Anteced is ambiguous If you say Christ was made man for us that is for our good it is granted if for us that is in our room it is denied for what Christ was made in our place that we are not bound to do to be as he was made a curse for us that we might not be an eternal curse But Christ by his Incarnation did not obtaine that we should no more be men or be bound to do things congruous to humane Nature Ans. We grant that he was made man for us not in our room but for our good Yet do hence gather that he being made man for our good to the end he might come under the Law both as to its duty as to its curse under both which we were lying what he did as well as what he suffered while in that Condition in order to the ends of his being made man for our good was in our room stead because this was our debt he became man for our good that in our stead he might pay our debt The reply is not grounded upon that word alone he was made of a woman but on that with what followeth Made of a woman made under the Law And if it would have necessarily followed from his being made of a woman that he would have been under the Law for himself to what purpose was this added made under the Law And yet we see the maine emphasis lyeth here because of what is added to redeem them that were under the Law And why did the same Apostle Phil. 2 7 8. after he had said that he took upon him the forme of a servant was made in the likeness of men found in Fashion as a man tell us moreover that he humbled himself became obedient unto death seing this did necessarily follow his being man that for himself And may it not hence be inferred that the exaltation afterward mentioned vers 8 9. was given to him not as Mediator but for himself as an humble obedient man He Râ—plieth 2. denying the Conseq for saith he albert Christ was made man not for his own but for our good Yet after he was made man he was a man by himself therefore subject to the Law by himself for himself as manâ— as after he assumed a body subject to corruption of itself he stood in need for himself of meat drink rest c. As it was not necessary for man to be created so nor for the Word to be incarnate to assume the forme of a servant but only upon supposition Yet as man being created is necessarily subject to the Law of his Creator So the Word being made man is as man necessarily subject to the Law of God Ans. 1 Christ being made man for our good particularly for this end that he might come under the Law pay our debt he was not subject to the Law for himself 2 Though he was true man having mans Nature yet he was not made man as other men are for his humane Nature had no subsistence of its own as other men have therefore could not for it self be subject to the Law as other men are 3 How or what way Christ's body was subject to corruption of it self we need not here debate it is sufficient to note that our question here is about moral actions as such the performance of which was a part of our debt 4 What is added is but a repetion
to the Socinians Then it seemeth all the Hypostatical union his having the Spirit without measure was not sufficient to make him a fit Redeemer for us Nor was he a fit Mediator untill he had finished his whole course of obedience And yet he was borne a Saviour Luk. 2 11. And was the Lord's Christ vers 26. Salvation vers 50. Arg. 8. We are made acceptable unto God in the beloved Christ Ephes 1 6. He Ans. We are acceptable to God by inherent obedience which Christ hath purchased by his sufferings Ans. But the Text is to be understood of a being made acceptable in order to our obtaining the redemption mentioned vers 7. that is the forgiveness of sins so cannot be meaned of that acceptation which is upon our inherent holiness which followeth our Justification Pardon Arg. 9. Christ hath purchased his Church that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle Ephes. 5 27. He Ans. That Christ did purchase by his death the churches inherent Righteousness Ans. This is granted But not withstanding the expressions here used in the foregoing verse will hold forth a full cleansing not only from the staine power of sin in Sanctification but also from the guilt of sin in justification the Church must be presented without spot or wrinkle or any such thing cleansed with the washing of water holy without blemish Now in order to justification the sinner must be clothed with a compleat Righteousness Arg. 10. Beleevers are found in Christ having a Righteousness Phil. 3 9. How forceable this place proveth our point hath been shown elsewhere He Ans. The Righteousâ—ess of Faith is twofold one is imputed apprehended by Faith which is Christ's passive obedience the other is inherent which is also by Faith Ans. But Paul here layeth by all his inherent Righteousness which was his own was according to the Law only betaketh himself to that Righteousness which is of God by Faith this is not to be restricked to Christ's sufferings only for these as such are not a Righteousness as hath been oft said the contrary hath never yet been proved though it be the maine ground of all Arg. 11. We are perfect compleat in Christ Col. 2 10. He Ans. Christ maketh us perfect in justifying sanctifying glorifying us by the imputation ef his passive obedience only Ans. This is but to assert the thing that is a disproving we say we cannot be justified without the imputation of a compleat Righteousness because in justification we receive a right to life this cannot be had according to the Constitution of God do this live till the Law be satisfied by obedience because we could not do it we must have it in from Christ in whom we are compleat have all we need Arg. 12. Christ hath delivered us from all our debt both of yeelding perfect obedience of suffering for disobedience Col. 2 14. He Ans. He denyeth this sayeth Christ hath not delivered us from giving perfect obedience for we remaine obliged thereunto wherein we come short it is pardoned for his satisfaction imputed to us it is piece piece made up by begun holiness which hereafter shall be perfected Ans. This looseth not the force of the argument for though we be obliged to keep the Law in all points yet we are not under that obligation by vertue of the Old Covenant so that the least breach should frustrate us of heaven so as the reward should be of debt and of this obligation the Argument is to be understood Now because by vertue of this Covenant which must be satisfied we cannot partake of the prize because it is violated therefore it must be satisfied by the perfect obedience of another of our Surety which must be imputed unto us in order to life for all our begun sanctification will not avail us Christ's satisfying by his suffering according to that that day thou eats thou shalt die doth not withall satisfie that other part of the Law do this live Arg. 13. We must not only not be unjust but we must be just if we would have life eternal Therefore Christ's Righteousness must be imputed as well as his death He Ans. denying the Conseq And saith We are freed from the Curse of the Law by Iustification whereby the Passive Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us Purity is begun in us in Sanctification Ans. By justification we have no Righteousness imputed to us for we must be Righteous before we be justified therefore must have a Righteousness imputed before 2 Our begun Sanctification is no purchase of the reward of life 3 delivery from the Curse is but a freeing us from punishment or from the guilt of punishment but this is nothing but a being not unjust as Adam was before he fell It is not a being positivly just in order to the reward for to this is required compleat obedience to the Law that unto the end in which respect Adam was never just having never finished his course of obedience that he might have had a right unto the reward promised I mean in himself CHAP. X. The Fathers give Countenance to the Doctrine of Imputation and some Papists approve it THat it may not be thought that the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ is a new up-start opinion I shall here set down some of their Testimonies unto this truth Iustin. Martyr Epist. ad Diognet p. 386. Quid enim aliud peccata nostra potuit tegere quam ejus justitia in quo alio nos iniqui impii pro justis haberi possumus quam in solo Dei filio O dulcem permutationem o impervestigabile artificium O beneficia expectationem omnem superentia ut iniquitas quidem multorum in justo uno abscondatur justitia autem unius faciat ut multi injusti pro justis habeantur i. e. for what else could cover out sins but his i. e. Christ's Righteousness in whom else could we who are naked ungodly be accounted for Righteous persons than only in the Son of God O sweet permutation O unsearchable Contrivance O benefites exceeding all expectation that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just one the Righteousness of one should make many who are unrighteous be accounted Righteous Againe in lib. de Expositione fidei Filius Dei quatenus homo vitam ab crimine remotam traduxit mortemque voluntariam pertulit per exactam accuratam Conversationem peccatum obliterans per mortem indebitam debitum delens i. e. The Son of God as Man led a life free of all fault and suffered a voluntary death obliterating sin by his exact accurat Conversation deleting the debt by an undue death Irenaeus Adv Haeres c. 15. Dominus in Amicitiam nos reduxit per suam inâ—arnationem mediator Deâ— hominum factus propitians
sufficiat non est pallium breve quod secundum Prophetam non possit operireduos justitia tua justitia in aeternum te pariter me opertet larga aeterna justitiâ— in me quidem operit multitudinem delictorum i. e. Shall I make mention of my Righteousness Lord I will make mention of thine only for that is also mine because thou art made of God unto me Righteousness Is it to be feared that that one shall not serve two It is not a short cloak that according to the Prophet cannot cover two thy Righteousness is an everlasting Righteousness that large eternal Righteousness shall cover both thee me in me indeed it shall cover a multitude of sins Id. Dom. 1. post Octav. Epiph. Serm. 1. Veruntamen ut jam non sit quod causeris O homo contra inobedientiam Adae datur tibi obedientia Christi ut si gratis venundatus es gratis redimaris i. e. But that thou ô man should not have whereof to complean fore against the disobedience of Adam which he said before was imputed the obedience of Christ is given unto thee to the end that if thou be sold for nothing thou shalt also be redeemed for nothing Idem Epist. 190. ad Innocent Pont. Rom. Quid namque ex se agere poterat ut semel amissam justitiam recuperaret homo servus peccati vinctus diaboli assignata est ei proinde aliena qui caruiâ— sua ipsa sic est Venit Princeps mundi in Salvatore non invenit quicquam cum nihilominus innocenti manus injecit justissime quos tenebat amisit quando is qui morti nihil debebat accepta mortis injuria jure illum qui obnoxius erat mortis debito Diaboli solvit Dominio Qua enim justitia id secundo exigeretur homo siquidem qui debuit homo qui solvit nam si unus inquit pro omnibus mortuus est ergo omnes mortui sunt ut viz saâ— factio unius omnibus imputetur sicut omnium peccata unus ille portavit nec alter jam inveniatur qui forte fecit alter qui satisfecit quia Caput Corpus unus est Christus Satisfecit ergo Caput pro membris Christus pro Visceribus suis c. quod si dixerit Pater tuus addixit te Respondebâ— sed Frater men's redemit me cur non aliunde justitia quia aliunde reatus alius qui peccatorem constituit alius qui justificat a peccato alter in semine alter in sanguine An peccatum in semine peccatoris non justitia in sanguine Christi non convenit filium portare iniquitatem patris fraternâ— fieri exortem justitiae i. e. For what could man a servant of sin a bound slave of the devil do of himself to recover the Righteousness which he had once lost Therefore another is assigned unto him because he wanted his own the same is so The Prince of the world came found nothing in the Saviour when notwithstanding he put hands on the Innocent he lost those most justly when he held when he who owed nothing to death having received the injurie of death he did by right loose him who was liable to the debt of death deliver him from the Dominion of Satan for by what Right could he exact that the second time seing as it was man who owed so it was man who payed for if one he saith died for all then are all dead that to wit the Satisfaction of one might be imputed to all as that one did bear the sins of all Neither now is it found that one did the wrong another satisfied for the Head the body are one Christ the Head therefore did satisfie for the members Christ for his own bowels But if he shall say Thy Father bound thee over I shall answer but my Brother hath redeemed me why should not Righteousness be from another as guilt was from another one who made man a sinner another who justifieth from sin the one in the seed the other in blood Was sin in the seed of a sinner shall not Righteousness be in the bloud of Christ. It is not right that the Son should bear the iniquity of the Father be defrauded of the Righteousness of his Brother Idem Serm. ad Milites Templi c. 1. Qui peccati meritum tulit suam nobis donando justitiam ipse meritis debitum solvit reddit vitam sic namque mortua morte revertitur vita quemadmodum ablato peccato redit justitia porro mors in Christi morte fugatur Christi nobis justitia imputatur c. Qui nostram induit carnem subiit mortens putas suam nobis negabit justitiam Voluntarie incarnatus voluntarit passus voluntarie crucifixus solam à nobiâ— retinebit justitiam afterward ibid. Unus peccavit omnes tenentur rei unius innocentia soli reputabitur uni Unius peccatum omnibus operatum est mortem unius justitia uni viâ—am restituet Haud Dei justitia magis ad condemnâ—ndum quam ad restaurandum valuit aut plus potutt Adam in malo quà m Christus in bono Adae peccatum imputabitur mihi Christi justitia non pertinebit ad me i. e. He who took away the desert of sin giving to us his Righteousness the same by his merites paid the debt restored life for if death be dead life returneth even as sin being taken away Righteousness returneth Moreover death is banished away in Christ's death and Christ Righteousness is imputed to us c. He who took on our flesh underwent death thinks thou that he shall deny to us his Righteoysness He who willingly was incarnate willingly suffered willingly was crucified shall he withold his Righteousness from us?-one man sinned all are guilty shall the innocency of one be accounted only to one One mans sin hath wrought death unto all shall the Righteousness of one restore life only to one Shall God's Righteousness be more powerfull to condemne than to restore Could Adam do more in sin than Christ in good Shall Adam's sin be imputed unto me shall not Christ's Righteousness belong unto me Ambros. lib. 3. de Virginit p. 100. Omâ—ia Iesus est nobis si volumus Si vulnus curari defideras Medicus est Si febribus aestuas sons est Si gravaris iniquitate justitia est si auxilio indiges virtus est Si mortem times vita est si câ—lum desideras via est si tenebras fugis luxest si cibum quaeris alimentum est i. e. Christ is all things to us if we be willing if thou desirest to have thy wound cured he is the chyrurgen if thou burn with feavers he is a fountain If thou be burdened with sin he is Righteousnâ—ss If thou want help he is vertue If thou fear death he is the life if thou desirest heaven he is the
way If thou fleest from darkness he is light if thou seek meat he is aliment Idem de side lib. 2. c. 4. O sides the sauris omnibus opulentior O vulnerum nostrorum peccatorumque medicina praestantior Consideremus quia nobis prodest bene credere Mihi enim prodest scire quia propter me Christus suscepit infirmitates meas mei corporis subiit passiones pro me peccatum pro me maledictum factus est pro me atque in me subditus atque subjectus i. e. O faith more rich than all treasures O most excellent medicine for all our wounds sins Let us consider for it is profitable for us to beleeve well It is profitable for me to know because Christ for me took on my infirmities he underwent the passions of my body he was made sin for me-for me was he made a curse for me in me was he made a subject Macarius Homil. 20. Quicunque enim in propria sua justitiâ redemptione consistit in vanum cassum laborabit nam omnis opinio de propria justitia concepta tanquam pannus menstruatâ— mulieris in novissimo die manifestabitur sicut inquit Esaias Propheta-Petamus itaque obtestemur Deum ut induat nobis vestem salutis Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum ineffabilem lucem quem ferentes animae in aeternum non exuentur i. e. Who ever standeth in his own Righteousness redemption laboureth in vaine for all conceived opinion of our own Righteousness shall be manifest to be a menstruous cloth in the last day as the Prophet Esai saith Let us ask therefore beseek the Lord that he would cloth us with the garment of Salvation our Lord Jesus Christ that ineffable light whom if our souls put on wear they shall never be denuded thereof Even some Papists of old though few or none now since the Councel at Trent did assent unto this Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. In Colon there was a book written an 1475. directing how to comfort dying persons wherein these words are found Age ergo dum superest in te anima in hac sola morte fiduciam tuam constitue in nulla re fiduciam habe huic mortite totum committe hac sola tetotum contege totum immisce te in hac morte in hac morte totum te involve si Dominus Deus te voluerit judicare dic Domine mortem D.N.I.C. objicio inter me tuum judicium aliter â—ecum non contendo Et si tibi dixerit quia peccatores dic mortem D.N.I.C. pono inter te peccata mea Si dixerit tibi quod meruisti damnationem dic Domine mortem D.N.I.C. obtendo inter te mala mea merita ipsiusque merita offero pro merito quod ego debuissem habere nec habeo Si dixerit quod tibi est iratus dic Domine mortem D.N.I.C. oppono inter me iram tuam i. e. Go to then while thy soul is in thee put all thy confidence in this death alone have confidence in no other thing commit thy self wholly unto this death cover thy self wholly with this death alone mixe thy self wholly in this death roll thy self wholly in this death if the Lord will judge thee say Lord I cast up the death of our Lord. J. C. betwixt me thy judgment no other way do I contend with thee And if he say to thee that thou art a sinner say I put the death of the Lord Jesus Christ betwixt thee my sins If he say that thou hast deserved damnation say Lord I hold forth the death of our Lord J. C. betwixt thee my evil merites I offer his merites for the merite which I should have had have not If he say that he is angry at thee say Lord I set up the death of our Lord J. C. betwixt me thine anger Isidorus Clarius Orat. 40. in Luc. Nos dicimus neque fide primò neque charitate sed una Dei justitiâ in Christo nobis impertitâ justificari i. e. We say we are justified at first neither by faith neither by charity but by the Righteousness of God alone in Christ bestowed upon us Albertus Pighius Controv. 2. de side Fortassis etiam nostram hanc damnarent n. Scholastici sententiam qua propriam 〈◊〉 ex suis operibus esset 〈◊〉 Deo justitiam derogamus omnibus Adae filiis docuimus una Dei in Christo niti nos pesse justitid una illa justos coram Deo destitutos propria nisi hoc ipsum astruxissemus aliquanto diligentius i. e. It may be they i. e. the Scholasticks would condemne this opinion of ours whereby we take away from all the Sons of Adam their own Righteousness which is of their own works before God did teach that we must leane upon the Righteousness of God in Christ alone that by that alone we are Righteous before God though destitute of our own if we had not confirmed it a little more diligently Idem ibid. Nam quod nen operibus nostris non in justitia nostra sed in una ignoscente iniquitates nostras misericordia benevolentiâ— erga nos divinae salutis a Deo assignandae nobis spes sit Davidis Testimonio Apost ad Rom. comprobans non alia justitiâ— niti nos posse nisi quam imputari nobis absque nostris operibus affirmat-non dicit beati qui ex operibus suis justi coram Deo sunt beatus vir qui non commisit nec fecit injustitiam sad beati quorum a Deo misericorditer remissae sunt iniquitates quorum ipse sua justitia tegit abscendit peccata i. e. That our hope of the Lord 's good will of life is not by our works nor in our Righteousness but only in the mercy of God forgiving iniquities Paul to the Rom. confirmeth by the testimonie of David proving to us that we may lean to no other Righteousness but that which he affirmeth to be imputed to us without our works He saith not blessed are they who are Righteous before God by their own works blessed is the man that hath done no iniquity but blessed are they whose iniquities are mercifully pardoned whose sins he covereth and hideth with his own Righteousness Thereafter the same man saith In illo ergo justificamur coram Deo non in nobis non nostra sed illius justitia quae nobis cum illo jam communicantibus imputatur Propriae justitiae inopes extra nos in illo docemur justitiam quaerere Cum inquit qui peccatum non noverat pro nobis peccatum fecit hoc est hostiam peccâ—ti expiatricem ut nos efficeremur justitia Dei in ipso non nostra sed Dei justitia justi efficimur in Christo quo jure Amicitiae quae communionem omnium inter amicos facit juxta vetus celebratissimum proverbium Christo insertis conglutinatis unitis sua nostra facit suas divitias
price is considerable Now that the Scripture mentioneth some given to Christ that in distinction from others is clear Ioh. 17 2. that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him So vers 12. Those that thou gavest we I have keept and none of them are lost c. So Ioh. 6 37. All that the Father hath given me shall come unto me vers 40. And this is the Fathers will that hath sent me that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing Joh. 17 9. I pray for them I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast given me for they are thine 10. And all thine are mine mine are thine and I am glorified in them 11. Father keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me 24. Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am c. Whence we see that Christ had no charge of the rest was under no tye to save them nor would be so much as pray for them but as for the given ones Joh. 10. called his sheep for these he laid downe his life prayed and for these was â—e to give an account nay which is more these had a special Interest in God's heart affection were thereupon given to Christ. They were the Father's given of the Father to the Son and so fully discriminated from all the rest and both Father Son stand engadged to carry these thorow unto salvation all which considered it is most plaine that the Redemption was Particular Actual conforme to the Undertaking Transaction Nay 4. If we will consider the fountaine love from whence the sending of Christ came we will see how unreasonable it is to imagine an Universal meer Possible Redemption as the proper end effect of Christ's death merites It is said Ioh. 3 16. A place which our Universalists look upon as most favourable for them that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that all beleevers in him might have eternal life This love is held forth as unparallelable a love greater than which cannot be conceived a love demonstrated by the greatest effect imaginable sending giving his only begotten to give his life a ransome to die for sinners and it must be contrary to all reason to imagine that all this was to procure a Redemption by which it was possible that not one man should be Actually Redeemed Christ himself saith Joh. 15 13. greater love hath no man thaâ— this that a man lay down his life for his friends See also Rom. 5 8. And shall we think that the effect of all this Non-such Love both of the Father of the Son was only a Possible Salvation and Redemption and that all this love should be outed and possibly not one man saved Either the Lord knew that some would get good by this fruite of wonderful love or not then he was not omniscient and then the Father gave his Son the Son came both were the effect of the greatest love imaginable yet neither of them knew that any one soul should be saved for all that If he knew that they would get good by it either by themselves alone without his Grace or not If the first why would he send his Son to die why would Christ come to die for such as they saw would never have a will to be saved by his death If the last be said then seing the greatest expression of of love was to send his Son in the Son to come die how can we think that that was for all when the grace to improve that death profite by it was not designed for all Sayeth not Paul Rom. 8 32. He that spared not his owne Son but delivered him up for us all how shall not with him also freely give us all things Importing that that was Impossible Shall we imagine that that is the greatest love which is common to all is not able to effectuate the salvation of those upon whom it is set and how can this be that the greatest effect of this greatest love shall be common to all smaller effects not common also See also 1. Ioh. 4 9 10 11. where this speciall love by which Christ was sent is made peculiar unto beleevers for Iohn is speaking of none else So is this love peculiarly terminated on Christ's Wife Church Ephes. 5 26 26. hath gracious saving effects Gal. 2 20. Tit. 3 4 5 6 7. Ephes. 2 4 5 6. Rom. 8 36 37. 2. Thes. 2 16 17. Revel 1 5 6. Beside that this love is mentioned as an Old Everlasting Unchangable Love Ier. 31 3. Ephes. 1 3 4. Rom. 9 11. Ioh. 13 1. Zeph. 3 17. And is all this nothing but a General Common thing that cannot save one soul if Lord Freewil do not consent of his own accord Moreover 5. if we consider the ends assigned to the Death of Christ mentioned in Scripture we shall see that it was some other thing than a meer Possible Delivery Redemption common to all mankinde Mat. 8 11. He came to save that which was lost and not to make their salvation meerly possible for if that were all Christs argument should have had no strength So 1. Tim. 1 15. Iesus Christ came into the world to save sinner if it were a meer possibility that might never take effect how should this faithful saying be worthy of all acception So Luk. 19 10 where the matter is exemplified in Zaccheus Mat. 1 21. the reason of the name Iesus given to the Redeemer is because he shall save his people from their sinnes that is Actually Really and not Potentially or Possibly only and this cannot be meaned of all for he saveth not the Reprobat from their sins at least not from the sin of unbeleef by the confession of Adversaries But here no sin is excepted and therefore is his death restricted to his people whom he saveth from all their sinnes Heb. 2 14 15. there is another end of his death mentioned viz. that he might destroy him that had the power of death that is the devil and deliver them who through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage This was no meer Possible Deliverance but Actual Effectual and it was not common to all for it is restricted to his Brethren vers 11 12 17. and to sones 13. to the children which God gave him vers 13 14. to the Seed of Abraham vers 16. and againe vers 17. wherefore in all things it behoved him to be make like unto his brithren that he might be a Merciful Faithfull High Priest in things pertaining to God to make reconciliation for the people Behoved Christ to be a Merciful Faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God only to make a Possible Reconciliation whereby it might be that not
one person should be reconciled are the Reprobate his brethen Ephes. 5 25 26. To what end did Christ give himself for his Church And all the world of mankinde belong not to his Church It was that he might sanctifie cleanse it with the washing of water by the word that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spotor wrinkle or any such thing but that it shâ—uld be holy and without blemish Is this a meer Possibility Then might Christ have died have no Church to present to himself faire spotless his Church might have remained full of spots wrinkles unholy full of blemishes yea should have been no Church Tit. 2 14. He gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works Do all the world belong to his peculiar people doth Christ redeem all the world from all iniquity Is all the world purified made zealous of good works Or is all this meer may be which may not be 2. Corinth 5. vers 21. He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him Was Christ made sin or a sacrifice for sin that all the world might possibly be made the Righteousness of God in him that is that possibly not one person might be made the Righteousness of God in him who can dream thus that God's intentions designes should be so loose frustrable that God should be so uncertain in his purposes Gal. 1 4. why did the Lord Jesus give himself for our sinnes It was that he might deliver 〈◊〉 from this present evil world according to the will of God and our Father This is no meer Possible Deliverance and it is such as was designed not for all the world but for the us there mentioned So Chap. 4 4 5. God sent forth his son made of a woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the adoption of sones This Real Benefite is manifestly here restricked Ioh. 17 19. for their sakes I sanctify my self that they also may be sanctified through the truth Christ sanctified himself to be an obâ—ation not to obtaine a meer may be but 〈◊〉 they for whose sakes he did sanctifie himself that is they that were given to him vers 6 9. and were his owne vers 10. were in due time to beleeve in him vers 20. might Really Actually be Sanctified through him Heb 13 12. wherefore did Jesus suffer without the gate it was that ho might sanctifie the people with his own bloud sure this is more than a may be Rom. 3 25 26. Why did God set forth Christ to be a propitiation It was to declare his Righteousness for the remission of sinnes that are past that he might be just and the justifier of him that beleeveth in Iesus a Certaine Real thing Many moe passages might be added to this purpose but these may suffice to discover the absurd falshood of this doctrine Adde 6. such passages as mention the Actuaâ— Accomplishment Effect of Christ's death where it will yet more appear that this was no meere may be or Possible thing but that which was to have a certaine Being Reality as to the persons for whom it was designed Such as Heb. 1 3â— when he had by himself purged our sinnes Can their sinnes be said to be purged who pine a way in hell for ever because of their sinnes could this be true if no man had been saved and yet if it had been a mere possible may be Redemption it might have come to passe that not one person should have been actually saved So Heb. 9 12. by his owne blood he entered in once into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption Is a meer possible Redemption to be called an eternal Redemption and was that all that Christ obtained Then Christ's blood was more ineffectual in the truth than the type was in its typicalness for the blood of buls goats and the ashes of an hiefer sprinkling the unclean did not obtaine a possible and may-besanctification and purifying of the flesh but did actually really sanctify to the purifying of the flesh vers 13. Againe vers 14. which also confirmeth what is now said how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God So that all such for whom he offered himself and shed his blood and none else have their consciences purged from dead works to serve the living God and who darsay that this is common to all or is a meer may be which the Apostle both restricteth asserteth as a most certaine real thing Againe vers 26. but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself So that he did Actually Really and not Possibly Potentially only put away sin the sin viz. of those for whom he was a sacrifice even of them that look for him and to whom he shall appear the second time without sin unto salvation vers 28. and sure no man in his wits will say that this is the whole world Gal. 3 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a curse for us 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Iesus Christ that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith Here are three Ends Effects of Christ's Redemption mentioned which no Man will say are common to all viz. Redemption from the Curse of the Law and this was Really not potentially only done by Christ's being made a curse for us the Communication of the blessing of Abraham and the Promise of the Spirit which are ensured to such as are Redeemed from the Curse of the Law and to none else So Ephes. 2 13 14 15 16. But now in Christ Iesus ye who sometimes were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ for he is our peace who hath made both one and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us having abolished in his flesh the enmity the Law of commandements in ordinances for to make to himself of twain one new man so making peace and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the crosse having slaine the enmity thereby To which adde the paralled place Col. 1 21 22. 2 14 15. was all this delivery from Wrath Enmity Law of commandements whatever was against us but a meer Potential thing and a may be common to all in whose power it was to cause it take effect or not as they pleased Esai 53 5. He was wounded for our transgressions â—e was bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed with
his owne he died to prevent their falling into and to keep them from this sin for he died to bring them unto God that they might have the Adoption of sons that they might be sanctified and live unto Righteousness be made Righteous yea the Righteousness of God as is clear 1. Pet. 2 24. Heb. 10 10. 2. Cor. 5 21. 1. Pet. 3 18. Rom. 5 19. what then will they say to this Final unbeleef is certainly a sin and Christ either died for it or not if he died for it than it can be laid to no mans charge or Christ's death is of no value If he died not for it he died not for all the sinnes of all men but at most for some sinnes of all men and if that was all no man could thereby be saved for one sin is enough to procure damnation Moreover 10. we finde the Persons for whom this price of blood was laid down designed more particularly and the Object of this Redemption restricted and so it could not be for all every one It is said to be for Many Esai 53 11. Matth. 20 28. 26 28. Mark 10 45. Heb. 9 28. and what these many are is abundantly declared in other Scriptures where they are called Christ's Sheep Ioh. 10 15. Christ's People Mat. 1 21. His People whom according to the predictions of the Prophets which have been since the world began he should save from their enemies and from the hand of all that hate them to performe the mercy promised to the Fathers and to remember his holy Covenant the oath which he swore to Father Abraham that he would grant unto them that being delivered out of the hand of their enemies they might serve him without fear in holiness Righteousness before him all the dayes of their lifo Luk. 1 68 70 71 72 73 74 75. His Church Ephes. 5 25. Act. 20 28. His Body Ephes. 5 22. The Children of God that were scattered abroad Ioh. 11 52. Sones Sanctified Brethren the Children that God gave him that Seed of Abraham Heb. 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17. They are the Sheep that shall infallibly beleeve because sheep Ioh. 10 26. and Whom Christ knoweth and of whom he is known vers 14. and such as shall heare his voice vers 16. follow him vers 27. to whom he will give eternal life so that they shall never perish who are given to him of his Father vers 28 29. the Elect 2. Tim. 2 10. He is bread giving life unto the World of them that the Father hath given him and shall come to him Ioh. 6 33 39. They are these concerning whom the Fathers will was as being given of him that he should lose nothing but raise it up againe at the last day ver 38 39 47. The Redeemed ones that are numbered by God 144000. are the first fruites unto God and the Lamb. Revel 14 3 4 5. They are such as are the Lords whom the Lord knoweth for his 2. Tim. 2 19. are enrolled in the Lambs book Revel 13 8. 20 15. So are they designed to be these for whom God is and who shall have unquestionably all things the Elect who shall be justified who shall not be separated from the Love of Christ are in all things more then Conquerours Rom. 8 31 32 33 34 37 38 39. These with whom the Covenant shall be confirmed Dan. 9 27. The redeemed out of every Kinred Tongue People Nation and made Kings Priests Revel 5 9 10. Further 11. if Christ died for the sinnes of all persons how cometh it that they are not all actually pardoned It cannot be said that Christ's death was not a satisfactory price nor that the Father did not accept of it If then he shed his blood for the remission of sins Mat. 26 28. are not all these sins pardoned virtually fundamently or shall they not all actually be pardoned in due time If it be said they shall be pardoned upon Condition of their faith But if the sinnes of all be equally payed for and equally in a virtual manner discharged in Christ's being actually discharged from that debt in the day of his Resurrection and the actually discharge depending upon the uncertain Condition of mans Will man who willingly performeth the Condition shall praise himself for the actually pardon and none else for Christ did no more for him as to the Actual Pardon than for others who never shall be blessed with actual forgiveness and yet forgiveness is held forth as a special act of free grace forgivenesse of sinnes is according to the riches of his grace Ephes. 1 7. Moreover as to that Condition whether did Christ purchase it or not If he did not purchase it than man is not beholden to Christ for the Condition be it faith or what ye will it is no purchased mercy but man is beholden to his good Lord Free Will for it and so he may sacrifice to his own net and sing glory to himself for making himself to differ and for obtaining to himself Actual Remission of all his sinnes and consequently blessedness Rom. 4 6 7 8. for had not his owne well disposed Lord Free Will performed that Condition all that Christ did had never more advantaged him than it did others that perish If it be said that grace to performe the condition though it be not purchased by the blood of Christ yet it is freely given by God to whom he will I Answer Not to insist here on the proof of faith's being purchased by Christ because we shall cleare it afterward there is nothing else assigned for the condition I would enquire whether Christ knew to whom this grace would be given or not if not then we must deny him to be God if he knew why shall we suppose that he would lay down his life equally for all when he knew before hand that many should never get grace to performe the condition upon which his death should redound to their actual pardon justification what Ends or what Advantages can we imagine of such an Universal Redemption 12. If the Condition upon which actual pardon justification is granted in the blood of Christ be purchased by Christ then either all shall certainly be Pardoned Justified or Christ hath not purchased an Equal Common Possible Redemption to all and every man But the former is true it is not true that all shall certainly be pardoned actually justified for then all should be glorified That the condition to wit Faith Repentance is purchased by Christ who can deny seing he is expresly called the Author of Faith Heb. 12 2. and a Prince exalted to give Repentance forgiveness of sins Act. 5 31 So that as forgiveness of sins is founded upon his death as the Meritorious cause so must Repentance be and Christ as an exalted Prince Saviour hath this power to dispose of his owne purchased legacy which he hath
Cor. 11 3. Ephes. 4 15. 1 22. Col. 1 18. And so must have a body Ephes. 1 23. Rom. 12 5. Ephes. 4 4. Col. 3 15. 1 24. 2 19. Ephes. 4 16. 5 23. 3 6. He is called the Vine stock shall he have no Brancnes Ioh. 15 1 2. c. These things might be further enlairged pressed but we shall haste forward 19. Our Adversaries say That Christ by his Death passion did Absolutely even according to the Intention of God purchase Remission of sins Reconciliation with God and that for all every man Others say conditionally But withal as to the application of this purchase it is made to depend upon faith and so they distinguish betwixt Impetration Application And though it is true the purchase made is one thing and the actual enjoyment of the thing purchased is another thing Yet we may not say with our Adversaries that the Impetration is for moe than shall have the Application But we assert that both Impetration Application in respect of the designe of the Father which is absolute certain and the Intention of Christ the Mediator which is fixed peremptory are for the same individual persons so that for whomsoever God sent Christ Christ came to purchase any good unto these same shall it actually in due time in the Method manner Condescended upon prescribed be given upon them none else shall it actually be bestowed for 1. No other thing beside this Application can be supposed to have been the end of the Impettation And sure Christ was herein a Rational Agent Nay it was the Intention designe of the Father that the Application of these good things should be by the meanes of this Impetration as is abundantly cleared above 2. We cannot suppose that either Christ or his Father should faile or come short of their end designed but by our Adversaries the Impetration might have been obtained and yet no Application made of the good things impetrated obtained 3. If no Application was intended by the Father or by Christ then it must be said that both were uncertain as to what the Event should have been or at least Regardless Unconcerned either of which to affirme were blasphemy 4. The very word Impetrate having the same force import with Purchase Procure Obtaine Merite and the like doth say that such for whom this Impetration was made have a right upon the Impetration to the thing Acquired Purchased And if they have a right thereto that Possession should follow 5. Yea the word importeth the actual conferring of the good to be the very end of the Purchaseing Impetrating and so in this case the very Impetration is ground of Assurance of the Application considering who did impetrate and at whose hands and withall what was the ground of the Fathers sending of Christ and of Christs coming to impetrate even inconceiveably wonderful great Love Nor doth the intervening of a condition required before the actual collation of some of the good things purchased hinder at all for all these Blessings some whereof are as a condition to others are the one good thing Impetrated and the very conditions are also Impetrated as we declared above and so this pointeth forth only the methode of the actual bestowing of these good things purchased 6. How absurd is it to say a thing is Impetrated or Obtained and yet may or may not be Bestowed may be Possessed or not Possessed Or to say that such a good thing is Obtained by price or petitioning and yet the same good thing may never be Bestowed or the Bestowing of it hangeth dependeth upon an Uncertain Condition which may never beperformed 7. How unreasonable is it that such should have right to the Merites that have no right to the thing Merited Doth not an interest in the Merites procureing any thing include an interest in the thing Merited When a ransome is payed for captives to the end they may be delivered have not these Captives a right to the deliverance upon the payment of that ransome 8. The Scriptures do so connect these two that it argueth contempt thereof to imagine such a separation as Rom. 4 25. Yea the one is assigned as a certain Effect Consequent flowing from the Other as its Moral cause Esai 53 11. By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many this Justification is the Application whence cometh it For he shall bear their iniquities there is the Impetration given as the ground hereof So further vers 5. he was wounded for our transgressions c. and what followeth upon this Impetration And by his stripes are we healed So Rom. 5 vers 18. By the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men to justification So that the Application reacheth an all that is all who have interest in the Righteousness which is the thing Impetrated see also Heb. 10 10. 9. If Christs Intercession be for the same persons for whom he died then the Application is to the same for this Intercession of Christ is in order to the Application But that Christs Intercession is for the same persons for whom he died we shall see hereafter 10. If all things be ensured to such for whom Christ died then certanely this Application cannot fail but the former is true Rom. 8 32. He that spared not his owne Son but delivered him up for us all how shall he not mark this manner of expression which importeth the greated of absurdities to think otherwise with him also freely give us all things 11. And in that same place vers 33 34. Christs death is given as the certain ground of Justification Salvation so that such as he died for shall certanely in due time after the methode prescribed be Justified Saved otherwayes there were no sure ground in the Apostles argueing for if all the ground of this certanty as to Application were from their Faith or fulfilling of the Condition the Apostle would have mentioned this as the maine ground not have led them to a ground common to others who never should partake of the Application 12. This matter is abundantly confirmed from what we said above concerning Christs purchasing of Faith and dying for our sanctification to bring us to God c. so that more needeth not be added here 20. For further confirmation of this and because our Adversaries think to salve the fore mentioned separation of Impetration Application by telling us that where good things are Absolutely purchased then Application must follow But not where good things are purchased only Conditionally as in our case we shall therefore shew how this will not hold nor advantage their cause for 1. If all be Redeemed Conditsonally that condition whatever it be must in equity be revealed to all 2. Either God Christ knew who would performe this condition or not If not then they were not omniscient If they
manifest that Christ must Intercede for such as he did Offer up himself for or he shall not be a Perfect Compleet High Priest or not faithfull to performe all the Offices of the High Priest neither of which can be said 2. The ground of his Intercession is held forth to be his Oblation as the High Priest went into the holy of holies with the blood of the sacrifices which he had offered so Christ entered into the holy place having first obtained by the sacrifice of himself an Eternal Redemption Heb. 9 12. So he is an Advocate with the Father being first a Propitiation for sinnes 1. Ioh. 2 1 2. 3. Both his Death Intercession make up one Compleet Medium are intended designed as one Medium for the end designed viz. the bringing of many sones unto glory saving to the uttermost all that come to God through him c. 4. How unreasonable is it to think that Christ would refuise to Pray for such whom he loved so dearly as to lay down his life for yet he saith expresly that he prayeth not for the world but for others distinguished from the world Ioh. 17 9. 5. As His Death was for such as the Father had given him is we saw above so his Intercession Prayer is restricted to such Ioh. 17 9. I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast given me for they are thine 6. Christ's end in coming into the world was to save his people Hence he gote that name Iesus but he should not be able to save them Perfectly Compleetly to the Utermost if he did not joyne his Intercession with his Oblation Yea upon this account he continueth ever a Priest having an unchangable Priesthood Heb. 2 24 25. But this man because he continueth ever hath an unchangable Priesthood wherefore he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him seing he ever liveth to make intercession for them 7. The Apostle so joyneth them together Rom. 8 34. that they must do manifest violence to the Apostles reasoning who would pull them asunder separate the one from the other It is sais he Christ that died yea rather that is risen againe who is even at the right hand of God who also maketh intercession for us 8. Yea they are so joyned together here that his death alone considered could not yeeld that ground of triumph boasting nor security from Accusations Yea rather that is risen againe c. 9. So that the separating taking of these asunder is greatly prejudicial to the consolation of his people for though they should attaine to some apprehensions of Christ's dying for them as an Advocate with the Father upon new sinnes 1. Ioh. 2 1 2. Though Christ died yet they might be condemned for he must also Interceed and if he do not Intercede for them their Hopes Comforts are gone And so there should be no force in that who is he that condemneth it is Christ that dieâ—â— Rom. 8 34. And a poor soul might be hal saved but not to the uttermust contrare to Heb. 2 25. 10. And that place Rom. 8 33. restricteth both equally unto the Elect who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect 11. When Christ laid down his life a Ransome for sinners he could not but know that by that Ransome none should be actually saved without his Intercession it being accorded betwixt Father Son that the mediator should mediate both by Price by Prayer And he could not but know for whom he purposed intended to Interceed how shall we then suppose that he would lay down his life for those for whom he was purposed not to Pray Or that he would do the most for them For whom he would not do the least 12. Christ's intercession is really a presenting unto God the Oblation made Therefore sayes the Apostle Heb. 9 24. that Christ is entered into heaven it self to appear in the presence of God for us And so by appearing he Interceedeth his appearing is in his owne blood whereby he obtained Eternal Redemption Heb. 9 12. so his Intercession must be for all for whom the Oblation was the eternal Redemption was obtained 13. Yea both these are so joyned together by Esaias Chap. 53 12. as that they are made one ground procureing cause of God's divideing him a portion with the great of Christs own divideing the spoile with the strong Because he hath poured out his soul unto death and he bare the sin of many and made â—ntercession for the transgressours 14. This is further clear from the reasons we gave to confirme that fast connexion betwixt Christ's Impetration Application in the foregoing paragraph for the Actual Application of the benefite fruit of his oblation is attributed to his Intercession 15. Nay that whole Chapter Ioh. 17. confirmeth this for there Christ is both Offering himself or sanctifying himself thereunto vers 19. and Interceding and these are so lincked together both in themselves as to the persons for whom that it must argue at least much incogitancy to imagine a divulsion separation of these two acts of his Priesthood 16. If Christ Intercede not for the same persons for whom he died we ask for whom he Intercedeth Is it for actuall beleevers Then we ask a Scripture ground for this restriction And then it is manifest hence that Christ Intercedeth not for the working of faith in any And yet Esaias tels us that he maketh Intercession for transgressours And we see Ioh. 17 20. that he prayeth not only for those who were already beleevers but for such also as were not yet beleevers He told us Himself also that he would pray the Father for the Spirit Ioh. 14 vers 16. And among other things this is one work of the Spirit to cause a sinner beleeve 2. Cor. 4 13. Ephes. 1 17 18 19. The point we are upon will be further cleare if we consider 22. That Christ's death was a Redemption we are said to be Redeemed thereby Gal. 4 5. 3 13. Rom. 3 24. Ephes. 1 7. Col. 1 14. â— Pet. 1 8. Revel 5 9. Tit. 2 14. And therefore all such as he laid down this Redemption or Redemptionmoney for must of necessity be redeemed saved consequently he died not for all seing all are not redeemed saved His Ransome or Price of Redemption which he laid down viz. his blood which he shed is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ransome Mat. 20 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Tim. 2 6. That all such for whom this Redemption-money was payed this Ransome was given must be saved is cleare for 1. Other wayes it were no Redemption a Ransome given for Captives doth say that these Captives in Law Justice ought to be set at liberty 2. This Redemption is the same with as to the effect or hath attending it forgiveness of sins Col. 1 14. Ephes.
to die for the ungodly Rom. 5 6. to be made a curse for us Gal. 3 13. and to be made sin 2. Cor. 5 21. and other expressions of the like Kind have the same import From whence it is evident that Christ took the debt upon him that was justly to be charged upon the account of sinners that he became one person in Law with sinners the principal debtor that he payed satisfied for all the debt and that in their room and place and that therefore all these for whom he died must certainly be delivered from the Debt and from the Charge Consequences thereof These things are manifest of themselves and need no further confirmation Now seing all are not delivered from the debt of sin nor from the punishment due because of sin we cannot say that Christ died as a Cautioner for all for sure his death was a compleat payment of all the debt he undertook to pay and to satisfie for Nor can we say that he died as a Cautioner for he knew not whom far lesse that he died as a Cautioner and yet none might possibly receive advantage thereby Not yet can we say that he died as a Cautioner and payed for some sinnes of all and not for all their sinnes for whom he died seing he was a Compleet Cautioner So then as Christ died in their roome stead as their Cautioner Sponsor for whom he died wrong should be done to Him if all these for whom he was a Cautioner should not at length actually be delivered out of prison freed from the accusation of the Law They for whom he died being in him legally when he died and morally virtually dying in him and with him must not in justice be made to pay their own debt satisfie the Law over againe Christ's stricking hands as the phrase is Prov. 22 26. and so putting his name in the obligation and accordingly making satisfaction the Principal 's name is blotted out and he free in the time appointed for he bare our griefs and carryed our sorrowes c. Esai 53 4 5. and by meanes of death he delivered them who through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage Heb. 2 14 15. This matter will be further clear if we consider 26. How the death of Christ was a Satisfaction and none can deny this but Antichristian Socinian Others willingly grant that Christ did substitute himself in the room of sinners and was willing to undergo the punishment threatned in the Law against sin that the sinners for whom he undertook satisfaction might be freed So he bare their sins Esai 53 11. 1. Pet. 2 24. And he was made sin 2. Cor. 5 21. Hence he is called a Propitiation 1. Ioh. 2 3 4 10. Rom. 3 25. Whereby we see that Christ took upon him the whole Punishment that was due to sin and that God whom sinners had offended was well pleased with what he did and suffered according to that undertaking yea more pleased than he was displeased with all the sinnes of those for whom he suffered for hereby His Authority Justice was made to appear more glorious excellent How then can we think that many of those it may be all for whom he gave that satisfaction may notwithstanding possibly be made to make satisfaction for themselves as they may by our Adversaries way Was not his satisfaction full compleat Why should any then for whom he gave that satisfaction be liable to Punishment Is this consonant to justice Did not the Lord Jehovah send Christ sit him with a body for this end Psal. 40 6. Heb. 10 5. laid upon Him the iniquities of us all Esai 53 6. that He might make full satisfaction for them to justice suffer for them all that the Law could demand of them or they were liable unto by the broken Law Did not Christ do suffer all which he undertook to do suffer for this end And did not the Father accept of what he did suffered as a full Compensation Satisfaction And seing this cannot be denied it is manifest that this was done by Christ as a Cautioner Heb. 7 22. how can it be imagined that the Principal debtor shall not thereupon have a fundamental right to freedom pardon in due time after the Gospel method be actually Discharged delivered from the penalty of the Law Redeemed by the Satisfactory Price payed by the Cautioner accepted of the Creditour Doth not the denying of this certain infallible Effect call in question the value worth of Christ's satisfaction and give ground to say that Jehovah was not Satisfied with the price or that Christ made no Satisfaction Did not Christ make Reconciliation for the sinnes of his people Heb. 2 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adde for a further confirmation of this 27. That Christ's death was a propitiating sacrifice He gave himself for us an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour Ephes. 5 2. He offered up himself once Heb. 7 27. He is a sacrifice for us 1. Cor. 5 7. the lamb of God which beareth or taketh away she sin of the world Ioh. 1 29. He offered up himself without spot to God Heb. 9 14. he was once offered to bear the sinnes of many Heb. 9 28. we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once for all he offered one sacrifice for sin for ever Heb. 10 10 12. Now as the sacrifices under the Law which were a type of this did not procure a General Possible benefite but did procure a Real favour only to the People of God for they sanctified to the purifying of the flesh Heb. 9 13. So certainly this Real Perfect sacrifice must have a Peculiar Real Effect sprinkle consciences from dead works to serve the living God Heb. 9 14. And this is not a thing common to all nor is it a meer Possible thing They must then do a great indignity unto the Sacrifice of Christ who speak of an Universal meerly Possible Redemption Adde to this 28. How upon this Sacrifice which Christ offered up in his death we read of a Reconciliation made Ephes. 2 16. and that he might Reconcile both unto God in one body by the crosse having sâ—aine the enmity by it or in himself 2. Cor. 5. 10. when we were enemies we were Recenciled to God by the death of his Son Col. 1 20. and having made peace through the blood of his crosse by him to Reconcile all things unto himself Therefore is he called our Peace Ephes 2 14. he maketh Peace vers 15. we have Peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ. Rom. 5 1. Now this Reconciliation being of parties that are at variance must be a Reconciliation of both to other and so a mutual Reconciliation and Christ effectuateth both and both are purchased by
given unto him to redeem Yea are not the given ones clearly distinguished from the rest Ioh. 17 6 9 as we cleared above Againe 32. If the Redemption of Christ be Universal and Conditioonal it must necessarily follow that Christ laid down his life and the price of his blood as much for Iudas and all the Reprobate as he did for Iohn and all the Elect for the Redemption being Conditionally for all it cannot be more for one then for another And yet this cannot be said as appeareth from the reasons formerly adduced This would lay that the Fathers and Christs love was equal towards all and that no more was purchased for the one than for the other and that the Elect have no more benefite by Christs death than the Reprobat have and that Christ had no more an eye to Redeem the Elect by his death than to Redeem the Reprobat was no more a Cautioner for the one than for the other all which and the like cannot but be looked upon as most absurd Shall we think that Christ became sin as well or as much for Iudas as for Peter Shall we think that He redeemed all alike from the Curse of the Law These sound ill to Christian ears So 33. we may thus reason Either Christ's Redemption is Conditional Universal as to the Price laid down Satisfaction made or as to the Application Actual bestowing of the benefites purchased But neither can be said to the advantage of the Adversaries cause for if the last be said we willingly grant that some of the benefites as Justification Adoption and actuall Glorification are conferred in a manner conditionally but some as faith and the New heart are given absolutely and this cannot Help the Adversaries cause for they will not say that either all have faith bestowed upon them or that all are by believing Justified Adopted c. and so this is not Universall and if the first be said to wit That Christ laid down his life Conditionally it must be said that Christ did not lay down his life Absolutely but upon some condition and what can that Condition be upon which the death of Christ was suspended If it be said that the faith of those to whom it was to be preached was the Condition then it must be said that christ did not die untill these believed or that his death was no satisfaction or price untill they actually believed and then the Father could not be well pleased with the price as a satisfaction until mens Faith came to make it an Actual price which is both absurd and contrary to Scripture If it be said That Christ did absolutely lay down his life a satisfactory Ransom and that for all yet so as none that would not fulfil the Condition should be redeemed I Answer If it was an Absolute satisfactory Ransome accepted as such something must have been purchased thereby all behoved actually really to be delivered from the Law from the curse or from something by vertue of that Absolute Price and they could not be made to pay over againe what was payed by the price of his blood for Justice could not call for two satisfactions And if all were upon this Absolute Price payed Redeemed from the Law the Curse the Sentence of the first Covenant no man shall now die for that broken Covenant If it be said No man was Absolutely delivered even from that but only Conditionally I Ans. How then was it an Absolute Price Or what was purchased thereby If it be said That a possibility of Freedom was absolutely purchased Ans. This was rejected above and the Scripture inferreth Actual Redemption from Christs purchase He shall justifie many for he shall bear their iniquities Esai 53 11. which saith That all whose iniquities he did bear shall be Actually Really Justified by him not have a meer Possibility of Justification Further 34. We may thus argue If Christ died for all every one He either died for all Absolutely or Conditionally The first cannot be said for the reasons already adduced militate against that Nor can it be said that He died for all Conditionally for then either he died to purchase Life Salvation to all upon Condition of their performance of something proposed as a Condition or to purchase salvation and all the meanes thereunto or Conditions thereof Conditionally But neither of these can be said Therefore c. The major is clear from this that the enumeration is full noother way can this Conditional Redemption be conceived or explained The minor may be thus confirmed The first way cannot be said to wit that life and salvation was purchased to all upon a Condition to be by them performed that is upon Condition of their believing for either this Condition is in the power of every son of Adam or not if it be not in their power as all but Pelagians will confess then this Redemption is no Redemption for a Redemption of Captives upon a Condition impossible to them is as good as no Redemption Nor can the last way be said to wit that Redemption and all the Conditions Means thereof were Conditionally purchased for what can be assigned as the Condition of these Conditions And though there were a Condition of the Lords working of Faith assigned which yet we finde not in Scripture yet that would not help the matter for that Condition of Faith would it self be a mean to salvation and so purchased Conditionally upon another Condition and that other Condition must be purchased upon another Condition so in infinitum which is absurd As also 35. this is considerable That the asserting of Universal Redemption goeth not alone but there are several other Universalities also affirmed and maintained either as Consequences or Concomitants or Grounds thereof which the Scripture knoweth not such as these 1. An Universal Love Philanthropie towards all every one without any difference which they lay down as the ground of the Sending of Christ to die for all indiscriminatly 2. An Universal Will in God to save all which they call an Antecedent Will and hold forth as a Velleity or a wish desire that all might be saved as if God could not effectuat whatever he desired or could have a velleity towards any thing which either he could not or would not effectuat 3. An Universal Predestination conditional which expression Amerald used untill the Synods in France did disswade him therefrom 4. An Universal gift of all to Christ or an Universal gift of Christ to all that is a Will purpose that Christ should lay down his life for all and Redeem all at least Conditionally 5. An Universal Justification conditional And why not also an Universal Salvation conditional 6. An Universal Covenant of Grace made with all mankinde in Adam wherein is a free universal deed of gift of Christ first and of Pardon Spirit Glory in by him to all Mankinde without
exception upon condition of acceptance as also an offer of Faith Repentance Conversion with all the consequences thereof 7. An Universal will in God to call into this Covenant and unto the Participation of the benefites thereof all every man 8. An Universal execution of this will or promulgation of this Gospel or New Covenant unto all every one by common favours benefites bestowed on all whereby all are called to believe in a merciful pardoning God and all have abundance of Mercies Meanes of Recovery of life for the Lord now governeth the world only on termes of grace 9. Upon this followeth an Universal Command to all men to use certaine duties meanes for their Recovery by Faith Repentance 10. An Universal pardon of the first Sin so far at least that no man shall perish for the meer Original sin of Nature alone unless he adde the rejection of grace 11. Hence followeth an Universal Judgment Sentence on all in the great day only according as they have performed the new Gospel Conditions 12. Some also adde an Universal Subjective Grace whereby all are enabled to performe the conditions of the new Covenant 13. Universal proper Fruits Effects of this death whereby all the outward favours that Heathens enjoy are said to be purchased for them by Christ why not also what Devils enjoy Finally 36. This assertion of Universal Redemption layeth the ground of maketh way to a new frame of the Covenant of Grace quite overturning its Nature and transforming it into a new Covenant of Works making it one the same with that as to kinde only to differ as to the change of Conditions to be performed by man for as in the first Covenant Adam was to obtain right to possession of life promised in by for through and upon the account of his fulfilling the Condition of perfect obedience imposed by the Lord so in the New Covenant man is to obtaine acquire to himself a right to possession of the Life promised in by for through upon the account of his performance of the Condition of Faith new obedience now imposed in the Gospel and all the difference is that in stead of perfect obedience to the Law which was the Condition of the first Covenant now Faith sincere Gospel Obedience is made the Condition And thus we can no less he said to be justified by works of the Law or which we do then Adam should have been said to have been so justified had he stood and this justification giveth as great ground of boasting unto man of making the reward of debt not of grace as justification by the first Covenant would have done for though it be said that Christ hath made satisfaction to justice for the breach of the first Law thereby purchased to all upon Condition Justification Salvation yet this removeth not the difficulty for what is purchased by Christ's death is made Universal Common to all and so can be nothing according to our Adversaries but a putting of all men in statu quo prius in case to run obtaine the prize for themselves as God's absolute free love put Adam in that Condition at first Christ's death though thereby as they say he purchased the New Covenant which with them is the chiefe if not the only effect fruit of his Death Merites can be no more than a very remote ground of Right to Life Salvation unto any person for it is made Universal Common to all so that all have equal share therein advantage thereby man himself by performing the new Conditions only making the difference so that the immediat ground of the Right to life which any have is their own Faith Obedience or performance of the New Covenant-conditions Whereby it is manifest that as to our Particular and Immediat Right to Happiness we are to plead our own works lean to them as our ground whereupon we may stand appear before God's Tribunal and upon the account thereof plead for the crown as our due debt having now run for it performed the Condition agreed upon and so sing praises to our selves in stead of singing praises to our Redeemer Hence the Righteousness wherein we must appear before God is not the Righteousness of Christ but our own for the Righteousness of Christ say they is only imputed in regard of its effects whereof the new Covenant is the All or the Chiefe and so that doth not become the Righteousness of any man nor can be said to be imputed to any man properly which also they assert but his own Faith is only imputed properly which also they plead for as his Righteousness not as a Way Medium or Methode of Gospel-Righteousness especially when Gospel-Obedience is adjoyned The Righteousness of Christ being thereby only accounted to be imputed in that it hath procured that our own Gospel Righteousness Faith new Obedience shall be imputed to us as our Immediat Righteousness the ground of our Right to Glory What accord is betwixt this frame of the Covenant of Grace that way of justification held forth by Socinians Arminians Papists the learned will easily see and how contrary it is to the Covenant of Grace held forth in the Gospel hitherto professed maintained by the orthodox every one acquainted therewith cannot be ignorant it is obvious how opposite this is unto what the Apostle saith Phil. 3 8 9. yea doubtless and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things and do count them but dung that I may win Christ and be found in him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith And Tit. 3 5 6 7. Not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Iesus Christ our Saviour that being justified by his grace we should be made heâ—rs according to the hope of eternal life And Rom. 3 20 21 22 24. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified but now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifest even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe being justified freely by his grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ. And many other places It is no less clear how hereby the true nature of justifying faith and Gospel Obedience is perverted withall how dangerous this is if put into practice or if men act live accordingly every serious exercised Christian knoweth FINIS The Contents of the Chapters CHAP. I. THE Introduction to the Work and the Text Gal 3.