express himself what he meant by For and From sin if Mr. G. had not been willing to mistake that I may say no more Yea but saith Mr. G. for sin is nothing else but from sin Herein your Medicine for the Plague deceived you otherwise you might have observed that for sin notes sin to be the impulsive cause of the Affliction whereas from sin notes sin to be avoided to be the final cause of the Affliction And these are not all one The Learned Grotius De satisfactione Christi cap. 1. hath observed That as often as this phrase for sins is joyned to words of suffering it alwayes signifieth the impulsive cause Which is most true if only the difference of the Type and the Anti-type be observed and the impulsive cause accordingly distinguished For if you grant Socinus but that which Mr. G. here affirmeth That for sin is all one with from sin he will easily frustrate the satisfaction and expiation of Christ For if his dying for sin note nothing else but the final cause viz. That he might thereby teach us to avoid sin then Christ in regard of any Expiation of Sin hath utterly dyed in Vain Now concerning punishments and chastisements for sin whether they be incident to Believers or not Although Mr. G. by his slight and perfunctory passing it over hath not given occasion of any full and large discourse but have taken up the most trivial Arguments whereunto he cannot be ignorant That satisfactory Answers have been given unto which he hath said nothing at all for the satisfaction of the Reader I shall say a few things briefly 1. These words of Punishing and Chastizing for Sin can denote nothing else but the Meritorious and Impulsive cause namely That sin is the meriting cause and chastisements and punishments are the merited effects This Grotius whom I cited before hath fully evinced against Socinus whose words are these It cannot be shewn that these words ob peccata or propter peccata that is for sin especially where they are joyned to sufferings are ever taken otherwise in the Holy Scripture than in this signification of merit Where also he gives satisfaction to those Scriptures which were by Socinus cited to the contrary Now if any part of the just merit or desert of the sins of believers be notwithstanding the satisfactory sufferings of Christ laid upon believers to bear them in their own persons then it is most evidently apparent that Christ did not or did not sufficiently bear the full merit and desert of sin And that these sufferings being inflicted in a way and course of justice Christ hath not by his death fully satisfied the demands of Justice then which nothing can be said more dangerous and destructive to the very foundation of Christian faith Yet 2. I believe that sin as the impulsive cause and punishment or chastisement as the effect of sin may be considered two Wayes 1. In a Typical consideration 2. In a Moral I do not say that he did bear the whole Typical charge of sin pardon the expression I cannot meet with one more fit at this present for that were to make him the Type of himself That charge of sin was born wholly by the people of the old and typical Covenant both in their persons and administrations even until the very death of Christ wherein was exhibited the full Anti-type who only bore the sins of his people in the full merit and desert of them Morally or Really as Real is opposed to the Type For in the Death of Christ the Old Covenant with all its Types had an end and the New Testament or Covenant became in force Heb. 9.16 17. A Testament is of force after men are dead otherwise it is of no force at all whilst the Testator liveth But the Old Covenant did thereby decay wax old and vanish away Heb. 8.13 Yet as I said before several times and say it again that if it be possible the truth of what we hold might appear unto all men breaking through those many clouds of slander wherewith we have been and are encompassed I say that by the promise of the Messias or by the promised Messias they were all freely and perfectly before God justified they as we and we as they Act. 15.11 Christ bore the full Moral or Real charge of their sins in the same measure as he did ours Only I say with all approved Protestants that the Typical and Subservient Administration or Covenant did exceedingly darken this upon their spirits not to hinder the benefits of Christ that they should not so spiritually come upon them But only that the enjoyment should not be with that Lustre and Glory as they are set forth to be enjoyed in the New Testament whereunto therefore in some measure the Gospel is restrained and it is by way of glorious eminence styled the Kingdom of Heaven Even that administration of the Gospel of the grace of God here on earth Mat. 3.2 and 26.29 So then we say that as all Types ceased at the death of Christ so likewise did all Typical charging of sin therewith all cease 3. Albeit we acknowledg the same or rather more hard things to flesh and blood do usually befall the children of the New Testament then did those of the Old in regard of the sharpness whereof and the event also that they have in their conversation they are somtimes called chastisements or corrections or Rebukes Yet their great consolation is that it is not the good pleasure of God their well pleased and fully reconciled Father that they should in any way bear the desert and merit of there own sin charged upon them either typically as though the true Lamb of God which was to bear the sins of the world and take them away were not yet come or Really as though there were no Lamb of God at all for them that either had or ever would suffer for their sins So that their present sufferings be they never so smart yet are but trials and exercises of faith and therein pure testimonies of love not of Anger or of Punitive Justice to the spiritual eye which discerneth all things even as they are the dispensations not only of a Father but also of a well-pleased Father in and through his beloved Son Matt. 3.17 For although here below and to the eyes of flesh all things seem to be black cloudy and tempestuous yet the eye of faith mounts up above the clouds and there discerns the full serenity of Heaven notwithstanding the contrary appearances here below And if in the wayes of God herein towards us there seems to be some reference unto sin yet is it not to sin in its own nature as it is the transgression of Gods Law calling for justice from God in some way or other for so it was utterly purged and done away by the Death of Christ Heb 1.3 1 Joh. 3.5 But as they are grievances unto Gods people as they are a continual trouble and vexation unto
the Administrations of the Old Testament were of things which were of themselves of several natures some were Ceremonial as the Sacrifices their Temples their Tabernacles their Altars and such like some were Moral as their Prayers Repentance Reformations and all the Duties of the Moral Law For the Ceremonies that they were Types of Christ and so ceased by the coming of the substance Christ himself is generally acknowledged onely some attribute unto them no efficacy at all but only a shaddowing out of Christ and his benefits who was to come others say they had a typical carnal and tâ—mporal efficiency in the Mosaical Church and Common-wealth proper to that Administration and answerable in some way to the benefits in the New That they by the Ordinance of God brought down upon that People temporal and outward blessings answerable to the spiritual and eternal blessings by Christ Which Question is largely discussed by Vossius wherein I shall not interpose because they that attribute most unto those Ceremonial performances yet bound the effect of them within the compass of the Old Testament so that they resigned up their keyes and power unto their Lord and King whose harbingers they were at his appearing But for the Actions and Administrations of the Moral Law that they also were in some sort typical is not so usually observed as the former yet it is no less true Who can deny but that Phineas his praying or executing of justice whether soever it was for the Hebrew will probably bear either a Moral Action and yet typically shadowing out unto us Christ our Great High-Priest by whose interceding for us with the Father he is pacified towards us So not a few Protestant Writers have interpreted it But what speak I of one Action when as Dr. Taylor hath published a Book wherein he discovers all along a Typical shadowing forth of Christ not only in the Ceremonial but also Moral Actions of most of the Antient Patriarcks Priests Judges Kings and Prophets But here I do not desire to dispute the Question but only as briefly as I can to explain my Judgment Therefore in such Moral Actions as these I observe Three Things First Their Moral Nature whereby they are of perpetual use both in the time of the Old Testament and of the New as Prayer Repentance and other Actions of Duty towards God and man are as necessary as ever they were in the time of the Old Testament and shall be by the true Children of Faith as much practised and in a more spiritual manner contrary to that false slander that passeth abroad concerning us That we let men loose from all duties of piety towards God or charity towards man against which false reproaches the Lord will in time arise to the Vindication of his People In the mean time they may be bold to commend their names and reputations unto Him into whose hands they have already committed their souls Secondly In these actions there is their typical effect whereby if they were good Actions in that Administration they wrought proportionable effects as Phineas his praying stayed the plague If they were evil actions they brought evil effects as David's numbring the People brought the plague his Adultery the death of the Child c. These effects I call typical because they are attributed to these actions as they do typically relate unto Christ and setting aside that relation such an effect should not have been attributed unto them As for Example the prayer of Phineas had not stayd the plague if he had not therein stood as a Type of Christ who is the onely one that turns away all evil from those that are his who because he was not so reveal'd in those times therefore it was requisite that it should be shaddowed out unto them in this and such like Types so that the effect is only ascribed to the Type in umbra in the shadow but to the thing typified in veritate in the truth So I think I may say that all actions even of the Moral Law do in this manner point unto Christ In like sort David's Adultery brought the death of the Child as the typical effect of that sin So that David in that consideration bare his own sin But how Onely as a Type of Christ as manifesting that the Saviour of the World that was to bear their sins was yet to come Yet did he not really bear his own sin no not in any degree For so it was wholly reserved for the Lord Christ upon whom it was charged to the uttermost who made a full satisfaction not only for the eternal but also the temporal punishment of all that belong unto him not only for those since Christ but even for all from the beginning of the world so that neither David nor any other of the Children of God in the Old Testament had ever had any sins charged on them had they not stood as Types of him that was to come to bear the sins of many neither ever had they sins charged upon them in the real positive nature of it if I may so speak for so it was only and wholly born by Christ for them but onely as I said in this typical consideration For Christ onely hath with one sacrifice perfected for ever those that are consecrated Heb. 10.14 He onely is the propitiation for our sins 1 Joh. 2.1,2 And this he did not onely for those since Christ but also for the sins that were past Rom. 3.25 to wit under the former Covenant Heb. 9.15 So then in the time of the New Covenant since the death of Christ there is no remembrance of sin neither upon Christ who is risen again from the dead without sin nor upon the faithful seeing they cannot now be shadows of Christ to come who is already come and by the lustre of his presence hath made all shaddows flee away So that the whole amounteth to that which I layd down in the beginning namely That where any thing is attributed to persons or actions which is Christs own peculiar that is to be understood of those persons or actions onely as they do typically relate unto Christ and ought not to be ascribed to any other person or action though otherwise of the same kind which have not this typical relation unto Christ The Reason is taken from that main foundation of Christian Religion to wit The satisfaction of Christ is compleat and all the Scriptures hold it forth as All-sufficient and compleat Thus have I Christian Reader given thee a short abridgment of my thoughts concerning the difference of the Testaments so far as it concerns the present matter in debate and as the present occasion would permit being willing rather to trespass upon thee by this digression than to suffer this matter altogether to pass untouched being of such moment both for the Vindication of the Truth and Us from so many slanders Hereafter if God permit I may have an opportunity to explain my self more largely in
freely and hath given his Son to me and for me And this known primarily only in the free promise of his Grace laid hold upon by Faith Notwithstanding it is also exercised and hath an influx into this act of Love to my neighbour For We Love him because he Loved us first That is because we know he loved us first For unknown Love hath no efficacy to produce a reflection of Love in him upon whom it is terminated And as we love Him so we love others for his sake who hath so loved us So then so far as our Love is truly Christian so far is the Love of God to us manifested by Faith in it And so in all the acts of true Christian Love there an is evidence of peace as in it Faith is acted and the Grace of God to us therein taken notice of and manifested Now although some of those places in John may well be interpreted of the evidence of Works in reference to others As the latter of these here cited by Mr. G. if not the former yet I believe there are others that speak of that evidence to our selves which I last explained In all or most of which places I believe it is not altogether unobservable that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 herein not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hereby which as I conceive is more proper to the sense expressed Now to the former place 1 John 2.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 herein or hereby we know that we know him if we keep his Commandements To let pass that which some have observed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is and may sometimes be translated Agnovimus we have acknowledged him so that the words should then be translated thus Herein we know that we have acknowledged him if we keep his Commandements To let pass this I say or to leave it to the consideration of the judicious Reader I Answer that John in chap. 3. v. 23. hath explained himself what he means by his Commandements This saith he is his Commandement That we should believe in the Name of his Son JESVS CHRIST and love one another as he gave us Commandement These are his Commandements not in a legal way but as written in the hearts of the Faithful by the finger of his Spirit and as we are called forth to the exercise of them in the strength of the same Spirit by the glorious manifestation of his grace in Jesus Christ unto us expressed by those and infinite such Exhortations contained in the Word By the exercise of these two Faith and Love there is then we acknowledge an evidence of our good estate and thereby peace First In Faith primarily by its own proper act going out of a mans self and laying hold on JESUS CHRIST for our sufficient Attonement and Peace-maker And Secondly In Love as I said not by consideration of the inherent goodness of it but in its ground and as the influence of Faith is in it and upon it for so only it is evidenced unto us and conceived by us to be a truly Christian Act. Mr. G. addeth We do not saith he look for peace of Conscience from the subduing of our lusts as the primary cause but as a sure signe and concomitant of the same To this I Answer as before that subduing of Lusts of it self without the light of Faith shining and giving evidence that they are expiated before God in the death of Christ is no evidence at all and therefore no sure sign or concomitant no more than that subduing of Lusts which we read of in Heathens in Jews in Turks and Papists in their Monasteries at this day theirs is without true Faith and so is this But if you grant the assurance and evidence of faith in your subduing of lusts then I grant there is an evidence of peace in it as that Faith shines forth in it which giveth the light of the knowledge of the appeased countenance of God towards us in the face of Jesus Christ and no otherwise Sect. 11. In this Section Mr. G. as he hath done divers times before instead of disâ—roving what he had before him makes an inference of his own or some others slandrous coin and that he layes to our charge but he must either own it himself or else he must name the Author of it It is that we slight Godly Sorrow which the Apostle so much commends 2 Cor. 7.9,10,11 I profess that I am a stranger to any person or Author I mean of those that profess the Gospel that slight Godly Sorrow It is an ungodly and unbelieving Sorrow which we speak against That Sorrow which is stirred up upon the apprehension of Gods faithfull and constant love towards us and our weak and unanswerable walking towards him this Sorrow so far as it doth not intrench upon true faith nor any way darken or question the ground of it we have always approved and we say where true faith is it will always be as occasion is offered But when this is degenerated into a Sorrow of unbelief or into a Popish and dead contrition as Luther calls it then we cannot allow of it of which degeneration this is a sure sign when by it the appeased face of God our Father is covered and kept out of sight by it All this sorrow and sadness saith Luther is of the Devil and it is a sacrifice very acceptable unto him Whereas the Dr. had asked whether we could chuse but fall foul upon our own Spirits when we see the filthiness and infirmity of our wrestling with sins I Answer saith Mr. Goree we cannot chuse indeed but fall foul upon our selves and say with the Apostle O wretched men that we are who shall deliver us from this body of death Rom. 7.24 And also with the publican Lord be merciful unto us Sinners Luke 18.13 But now saith he let us ask them whether upon the sight of their defects they fall thus foul upon themselves or no I am afraid saith he they follow the Pharisee rather than the Publican boasting rather than praying for pardon of Sin Surely if we should do as Mr. Geree doth here in effect say we are humbler than you we should indeed play the Pharisees and boasters But yet we may very well say that Mr. G. had no ground for this sentence upon us We acknowledged the evil of all our actions and that as he ought to have judged in christian charity in true humiliation and self-denial to be so great that they deserve the displeasure of God even unto eternal death acknowledging nothing in our selves as of our selves but matter of shame and everlasting confusion which you were so far from consenting unto that you call it a disgracing of righteousness and holiness Sect. 9. whereas in the same Sect. you affirmed of your duties that you seek Salvation by them Whether this be nearer the Publican or the Pharisee let the godly reader judge Yet if we add to the acknowledgement of what we are in
the Typical charge of sin upon many of Gods people as David and others did not signifie that he did really bear any dram of that Spiritual curse and punishment due to his sin but only that he in the flesh bare it as a Type of him that was to come 1. It did signifie that he that was to take away and bare sin in his own body was not yet come 2. It did shaddow out that when he did come he should utterly take it away so that none afterwards that belonged unto Christ should bare it either Typically as the Sacrifices and Children of the Old Testament or Really as Christ only hath done for all his And this is the reason why there were sacrifices of Propitiation in the Old Testament viz. Typically to shaddow out the real attonement of Christ which was to dome Exod. 30.10,15 c. Lev. 16. and very frequently elsewhere Whereas in the New Testament there are none none at all either Typical or Real since the death of Christ And therefore the Mass is justly abhorred of all true Christians as blasphemous against the death of Christ if it be counted an attonement or propitiation for sin either Typical or Real If the former then it is a denial of Christ to be already come For the Types did all prefigure and confess that Christ was not come If the latter then they must of necessity deny in whole or in part the sufficiency of that sacrifice of propitiation that Christ offered once for all And therefore I do utterly dislike the Expressions of some Ministers who call our Fasting Dayes Dayes of Attonement whereby if they mean that any thing that is done in them can make an attonement or propitiation either Typical or Real then they bring an Idol of Jealousie indeed into the very Holy of Holies and jump with the Papists in setting up an abomination to make desolate rather than to heal the Land and bring a blessing of peace upon it However men may excuse their meanings I am sure some mens expressions are broad beyond all sobriety I am sure the Holy Ghost is very wary of giving any words of that kind as Priests Altars propitiations to any ordinances or actions of the New Testament besides those which are peculiar to the person of Christ alone But if any understand by a day of Attonement no more but a day of Humble Address unto the Throne of Grace in confidence of that one attonement offered once for all for the effects of that one attonement and propitiation to be manifested upon himself and upon the Land Then as Augustine once said in another case so I think I may as justly say in this Teneat mentem sed compescat linguam Let him retain this Meaning but refrain that Expression being every way as dangerous as that of Merit and Priests and Altars or any such like exploded phrases But I have digressed sufficiently I must now return to Mr. G. who goes on in this manner Moreover when the Lord had condemned their Hypocritical Holiness and Services Hay 1.11,12 c. Being much offended with them see what course he prescribes them to make their peace with him ver 16 17 18 19. Wash ye make ye clean take away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes cease to do evil learn to do well Then what follows Come now let us Reason together saith the Lord though your sins be as Scarlet they shall be as White as Snow If ye be willing and Obedient ye shall Eat the good of the Land Here Mr. G. tells us he doth but cite the very words Yes he tells us also to what end he cites them namely as a course prescribed of God to make our peace with him So that here it is evident Mr. G. makes works not only evidences of our peace but even peace-makers which office we dare not to attribute to any but to the Lord Jesus who hath made peace only by the blood of his Cross Col. 1.20 For as we acknowledge but one Mediator between God and man so but one peace-maker For that was his office to mediate and effect a peace Reconciliation and peace-making is his own his sole Act. It is always in Scripture spoken of in reference to a sacrifice Dan. 9.24 2 Cor. 5.18 Heb. 2.18 And that a sacrifice of propitiation of appeasement which Christ only was able to offer But the best of our works are aspersed with manifold defilements they have need of an atonement to make peace for themselves so far are they from making peace for others But Mr. G. seems to infer out of the place that we our selves and that by our own doings must make our selves clean must take away the evil of our doings from before the eyes of God must cease to do evill and learn to do well and all this while we are the enemies of God before our sins be forgiven So the Papist and others before him have desired to infer from the place And this the Lord requires How then shall we answer to it Sure our abilities are not the measure of Gods commands Such passages as these may well shew what is due unto God from man not what man is able to pay unto God Mr. G. himself if he would have taken notice of it hath collected for us out of Mr. Penible a satisfactory answer hereunto in his preface Pag. 4. The Law saith he was added because of transgressions that is to convince man of sin that he might be put in remembrance what was his duty of old and what was his present infirmity in doing of it and what was Gods wrath against him for not doing it That seeing how impossible it was to attain unto life by this old way of the Law first appointed in Paradice he might be humbled and driven to look after the New way which God had since that time laid forth more heedfully attending the promise and seeking unto Christ who is the end of the Law unto every one that believes on him And thus our peace is made we are washed the evil of our doings is done away out of the sight of God And thus we cease to be evil doers and become truly well doers not in our own actions but in him who did all things well And so for his sake being joynt heirs with him we Eat and injoy the good of the Land of the living we have a sure and unshaken interest not only in Heaven but in earth also so far as our fathers infinite wisdom sees them good for us Here lest we should plead some difference between the Testaments Mr. G. prevents us saying That the New Testament differs not from the Old in this particular But mark the Text he alledgeth Christ was exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance unto Israel and remission of sins Act. 5.31 And is there no difference in this Here Christ is plainly expressed as a giver of Repentance and Forgiveness In that of Esay it is