With his Stripes we are healed and sundry other places Nay to suppose any Degree of Suffering on Christ and not our Sins laid on Christ even though in the Doctor 's Sence would overturn the whole Christian Religion and justifie the Socinians Testimonies The Assemblies Lesser Catechism Q. Wherein did Christ's Humiliation consist A. In his being Born and that in a low Condition made under the Law undergoing the Miseries of this Life the Wrath of God and the cursed Death of the Cross in being buried and continuing under the Power of Death for a time Thou seest Christ's Incarnation or being Born and several other things before Christ's Crucifixion are parts of his Humiliation The Ground of the Doctor 's Mistake Because the hidings of God's Face and especially the dying Sacrifice of Christ did so compleat and finish the Work of Satisfaction as the principal parts thereof therefore he thinks our Sins were not laid on Christ till then CHAP. VI. Of God's Separation from and Abhorrence of Christ while our Sins lay upon him Truth THough God testified his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ's Soul and Body in his Agony and suspended those delightful Communications of the Divine Nature to the Humane Nature of Christ as to their wonted Degrees yet God was never separated from Christ much less during his Body's lying in the Grave neither was the Father ever displeased with Christ and far less did he abhor him because of the Filthiness of Sin upon him Errour Christ was on the account of the Filthiness of Sins while they lay upon him separated from God odious to him and even the Object of God's Abhorrence and this to the time of his Resurrection Proved that this is Dr. Crisp 's Opinion He saith P. 294. Nay from this I affirm as Christ did bear our Iniquity so Christ for that Iniquity was separated from God and God was here separated from Christ or else Christ spake untruth P. 295. The Doctor puts an Objection It may be this for saking was but for a little time He saith To this I answer it was as long as Sin was upon him had not Christ breathed out the Sins of Men that were upon him he had never seen God again he having taken Sin upon him he must unload himself of Sin before he can be brought near to God c. There was a Separation and Forsaking when Christ died but at his Rising there was a Meeting again a kind of renewing his Sonship P. 408. It is a higher Expression of Love that Christ should bear the Sins of Men than that he should be given to die for Men c. Affliction is not contrary to the Nature of God God can smile upon Persons when they are under the greatest Scorn c. But where the Lord doth charge any Sin the Lord hath an Abhorrence there P. 379 380. He shews That Christ to be a Scorn yea for God to make him suffer the most accursed Death of the Cross is far less than to make him sin because all this may agree to the Nature of God but Iniquity is the hatefullest thing in the World to God where Iniquity is found a Toad is not so odious nor ugly to Man as that Person is in the Sight of God P. 180. All that Filthiness and Loathsomeness of our Nature is put upon Christ he stands as it were the Abhorred of the Lord. Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not whether the Soul of Christ endured the Effects of Gods Wrath against sin and was amazed thereat as well as at the Importance of the Work he was engaged in and the Enemies he was to encounter with and the Sacrifice he was to make c. 2. Nor whether the Divine Nature suspended for a while on the Cross the delightful Communications of it self as to the Degrees it was accustomed to emit to the humane Nature of Christ. These with awe I freely affirm The Real Difference 1. Whether Christ was separated from God This the Doctor affirms and I deny 2. Whether Christ was at any time under God's Abhorrency or odious to him because under the Loathsomeness of Sin This the Doctor affirms and I deny yea not without Detestation 3. Whether Christ was thus on the account of the Filthiness of Sin upon him separated from and under the Abhorrency of the Father during his lying in the Grave This the Doctor affirms and I deny it of that time and any other or else it would be true for the whole time of his Humiliation The Truth Confirmed 1. This Separation was impossible because of the Union between the Divine and Humane Nature of Christ in one Person This Union could not be dissolved nor could all Communications of Comfort or Strength from the Divine Nature be interrupted while the Union remained Yea the Humane Nature of Christ had never a personal Subsistence of its own but was assumed by the eternal Word the second Person of one Essence with the Father 2. The Father had promised constant Supports to Christ in the whole of his Undertakings and Sufferings and his comfortable Presence with him Isa. 42. 1 4 6. Isa. 50. 7 8 9. 3. The Doctor of all Men had least reason to assert this Separation when he had so exceeded in telling us P. 379. That the Divine Nature is a kind of Soul to the Humanity consisting of Soul and Body and is the Form and Strength of both c. The God-head gives Life to Christ and so all the Sufficiency to bear Iniquity proceeds from the Divine Nature of Christ. And P. 378. Should Iniquity be laid on the Humane Nature and the Divine Nature not support the Humane Nature it would have sunk under sin Reader is it not strange that after this the Doctor should affirm a Separation and that for all the time when Iniquity was upon Christ 4. The Lord Jesus could not be abhorred or odious to God for in him God was always well pleased Isa. 42. 1. Mat. 17. 5. He was now yielding the highest Act of Obedience and so there was at least no cause of Offence yea God loved him for this John 10. 17 18. the Person of the Son was always Gods Delight from Eternity to Eternity Prov. 8. 30. and could not but be so Christ must have been as odious to himself as to the Father for he is of the same Holy Essence Reader How horrid a sound must it have to a Christian Ear to say A Christ odious to God abhorred by the Father and that because he was a loathsome a detestable an abominable and filthy sinner for a time This Point carries that Aspect that from Regards for the Doctor I will not insist on it nor its necessary Consequences and yet upon this depend many of his Positions 5. Christ could not be thus separated from and be as it were the Abhorred of the Lord while his Body lay in the Grave for then his Soul could not be in Paradise as
Gospel-Truth Stated and Vindicated Wherein some of Dr. CRISP's Opinions Are Considered AND THE OPPOSITE TRUTHS ARE Plainly Stated and Confirmed BY DANIEL WILLIAMS LONDON Printed for John Dunton at the Raven in the Poultrey 1692. WE whose Names are subscribed do judge that our Reverend Brother hath in all that is material fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errours mentioned as such in the following Treatise And do account he hath in this Work done considerable Service to the Church of Christ Adding our Prayers that these Labours of his may as we hope they will by the Blessing of God upon them be a Means for the reclaiming of those that have been missed into such dangerous Opinions and for the establishing those that waver in any of these Truths Wiliam Bates Samuel Slater John How Abraham Hume Vinc. Alsop Nich. Blakey W. Lorimer John Reynolds Edw. Lawrence John Showers Rich. Mayo Nath. Taylor Rich. Stretton Tho. Kentish John Quick Nath. Oldfield Many more were ready to attest these Truths but the haste of the Press prevents their Subscription TO THE READER A Dislike of Contention hath long restrained my engaging in this Work tho oft sollicited thereto by several worthy Ministers Peace is the Blessing which I chearfully pursue and is with the Truth what I propose in this very Endeavour I am convinced after frequent Prayers and serious Thoughts That the Revival of these Errours must not only exclude that Ministry as Legal which is most apt in its Nature and by Christ's Ordination to Convert Souls and secure the Practical Power of Religion but also renders Unity among Christians a thing impossible Every Sermon will be Matter of Debate and mutual Censures of the severest kind are unavoidable while one side justly press the Terms of the Gospel under its Promises and Threats for which they are accused as Enemies to Christ and Grace and the other side ignorantly set up the Name of Christ and Free Grace against the Government of Christ and the Rule of Judgment I believe many Abettors of these Mistakes are honestly zealous for the honour of Free Grace but have not Light sufficient to see how God hath provided for this in his rectoral Distribution of Benefits by a Gospel-Rule By this Pretence Antinomianism so corrupted Germany it bid fair to overthrow Church and State in New-England and by its stroke at the Vitals of Religion it allarm'd most of the Pulpits in England Many of our ablest Pens were engaged against these Errours as Mr. Gataker Mr. Rutherford Anthony Burgess the Provincial Synod at London with very many others whose Labours God was pleased to bless to the stopping of the Attempts of Dr. Crisp by Name opposed by the foresaid Divines Saltmarsh Denne Eaton Hobson c. To the grief of such as perceive the tendency of these Principles we are engaged in a new Opposition or must betray the Truth as it is in Jesus I believe many Abettors of these Notions have Grace to preserve their Minds and Practices from their Influence But they ought to consider that the generality of Mankind have no such Antidote and themselves need not fortifie their own Temptations nor lose the Defence which the Wisdom of God hath provided against remissness in Duty and sinful Backslidings Who can wonder at the Security of Sinners the mistaking the Motion of sensible Passions for Conversion and the general abatement of exact and humble walking when so many affirm Sins are not to be feared as doing any hurt even when the most flagitious are committed Graces and Holiness cannot do us the least good God hath no more to lay to the Charge of the wickedest Man if he be elected than he hath to lay to the Charge of a Saint in Glory The Elect are not governed by Fear or Hope for the Laws of Christ have no Promises nor Threats to rule them by nor are they under the Impressions of Rewards or Punishments as Motives to Duty or Preservatives against Sin c. In this present Testimony to the Truth of the Gospel I have studied Plainness and to that end oft repeated the same things in my Concessions to prevent the Mistakes of the less Intelligent though I could not think it fit to insist a new upon all To the best of my knowledge I have in nothing mis-represented Dr. Crisp's Opinion nor mistaken his sence For most of them he oft studiously pleadeth Of each I could multiply Proofs and all of them be necessary from his Scheme though not consistent with all his other occasional Expressions His Scheme is this That by God's mere Electing Decree all Saving Blessings are by Divine Obligation made ours and nothing more is needful to our Title to these Blessings That on the Cross all the Sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ and ceased ever after to be theirs That at the first moment of Conception a Title to all those decreed Blessings is personally applied to the Elect and they invested actually therein Hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of these Blessings nor ought they to intend the least good to themselves in what they do Sin can do them no harm because it is none of theirs nor can God afflict them for any Sin And all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Christ enervating his Laws and Pleadings obstructing the great Designs of Redemption opposing the very Scope of the Gospel and the Ministry of Christ and his Prophets and Apostles The Doctor had not entertained these Opinions if he had considered that God's Electing Decree is no Legal Grant nor a Formal Promise to us The Decree includes the Means and the End willing the first in order to the last and as it puts nothing in present being so it barrs not God as a Governour to fix a Connexion between Benefits and Duties by his revealed Will So if the Doctor had animadverted That Christ's Sufferings were the Foundation of our Pardon but not Formally our Pardon For them our Sins are forgiven when-ever they be forgiven without them Sin cannot be forgiven and they were endured that the Sins of all the Elect when Believers should be forgiven But yet they are not forgiven immediately upon nor merely by his enduring those Sufferings but there were by Divine Appointment to interpose a Gospel-Promise of Pardon the Work of the Spirit for a conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the Person to be pardoned and a judicial Act of Pardon by that Promise on the Person thus conformed to the Rule thereof To clear this Point Consider 1. The Law is sometimes taken for the Preceptive part of God's Will with the Sanction of the Covenant of Works In this Covenant Life was promised to sinless Obedience and Death was threatned against every Sin without admitting Repentance to Forgiveness Upon the Fall Life is impossible by the Law with this Sanction And hence to preach it to Sinners as a way of Blessedness is
would think this needed no proof unless it were a doubt whether a rational Subject transgressing the Law of God be a Transgressor or that he that doth a sinful Fact is a doer of it or whether it be his sinfull Fact who doth act it And yet the Point is included in these plain things Need I add 1. Christ teacheth Believers to pray for the Pardon of Sins as their own Sins Forgive us our Sins Luke 11. 4. It would be vain to object they pray for the Manife station of Pardon for were it so yet it 's for our sins It would sound strange to pray Forgive us the sins of Christ. 2. The Saints in Scripture esteemed their sins to be their own sins and themselves sinners when they committed sin or found its motions Though our Iniquities testify against us Jer. 14. 7. As for our Iniquities we know them Isa. 59. 12. Take away mine Iniquity Job 7. 21. Lord pardon my Iniquity Ps. 25. 11. Was it not his own sin that Peter wept for And whose sin caused the incestuous Man's sorrow See 1 Joh. 1. 9. Confess our Sins 3. God reckons mens sins to be their own he reproves them as theirs he forgave them as theirs 1 Joh. 2. 12. Jer. 33. 8. Surely the few things which God had against Thyatira were the sins of that Church Rev. 2. 20. Were they not Laodiceans sins which God calls her to repent of Rev. 3. 19. and whose sin was that which Paul wished might not be laid to their charge who deserted him 2 Tim. 4. 16. 4. Mark what will follow hence No elect members of a Church is justly censured for offences and no Christian criminal should be punished for they are not the sinners the sin is not theirs A hundred such consequences naturally proceed from this error which fully tends to render sin and sinners innocent Not to say what Popery is in it as if justification did remove the filth of sin Testimonies Whatever I shall hereafter cite from the Assembly and Elders at the Savoy to prove that God fees Sin in Believers and what Afflictions God brings on Believers for sin and the Necessity of renewed Pardon will declare their full consent and each of these Heads prove the present Truth of which see Chap. 1. 6 17. 18 19. The Synod of New England condemn this as a blasphemous Speech of their Antinomians If Christ will let me sin let him look to it upon his Honour be it P. 19. And also That if I be Holy I am never the better accepted of God if I be unholy I am never the worse c. Dr. Owen of Justif. faith P. 284. To imagine such an Imputation of our sins to Christ as that thereon they should cease to be our sins and become his absolutely is to overthrow that which is affirmed for on that supposition Christ would not suffer for our sins And a few Lines after he adds No Non-imputation of sin as unto Punishment can free the Person in whom it is from being formally a Sinner The Grounds of the Dr's Mistake He thinks because God removes our sins by Pardon so as to acquit us from Punishment therefore our sins cease to be ours Because a pardoned Person is discharged from Condemnation therefore he thinks that Person is not to be denominated a Sinner from the Violation of the Precept Because Christ took upon him to make satisfaction for sin therefore he thinks no Filth can cleave to the Offender nor he be a Transgressor by the Offence I need not warn thee how the Doctor speaks of laying our sins on Christ P. 339. and the actual forgiving them as if they were the same thing but they differ as is manifest in Chap. 3. CHAP. V. Of the Time when our Sins were laid on Christ and continued there Truth THE Obligation of suffering for our Sins was upon Christ from his undertaking the Office of a Mediator to the Moment wherein he finished his satisfactory Atonement The Punishment of our sins lay upon Christ from the first moment to the last of his State of Humiliation Errour The Time when our sins were laid actually on Christ was when he was nailed to the Cross and God actually forsook him and they continued on him till his Resurrection Proved that this is the Dr's Opinion He tells us P. 356. Now there was a pitcht time wherein God did serve Execution actually upon him and that was when God did forsake this Son of his when he called him forth and charged sin upon him And P. 357. Look upon the Execution or rather the serving of the Execution that is the actual laying of Iniquity upon Christ this Inniquity was laid upon him at that instant when he was upon the Cross and God nailed the sins of Men to the Cross of Christ and from that time there was not one sin to be reckon'd c. 360. Wherein the Difference is not It is not whether God withdraws and the Death of Christ were the very eminent compleating Parts of Christ's propitiatory Sufferings This I affirm The Real Difference Whether our sins were not laid upon Christ in a scripture Sence before he was upon the Cross and whether what he suffered before his Crucifixion were propitiatory Sufferings for our sins This the Doctor 's Assertion opposeth and I affirm The Truth Confirmed Reader Take with thee what hath been said Chap. 2. that the Filth of sin was not laid on Christ and it remains that what I am to prove is either 1. That Christ was under an Obligation to bear the Punishment of sin before his Crucifixion Or 2. That he actually suffered some of the Punishment of sin before his Crucifixion And can there be a Necessity of saying much of either As to the First Whatever proves a Covenant of Redemption what ever Grant was made of saving Benefits to any fallen Sinner before the Death of Christ in trust of his executing what he had engaged yea all such Expressions as I come to do thy Will Heb. 10. 57. For this cause I came unto this Hour and the like do prove that he was bound to the bearing of Punishment as our Sponsor before he was on the Cross. As to the Second I would only note 1. That the whole of his Humiliation was a degree of his suffering for sin and so a part of his Satisfaction His being made lower than the Angels by being incarnate his Poverty his Temptations his Stoning his Reproaches his Whippings his Agony in the Garden his Arraignment his Condemnation Buffettings Spitting on him being crowned with Thorns and many more were they real Sufferings or no if they were Punishments what were they for except for sin How could he otherwise be subject to them any more than to Death it self 2 The Effects and Fruits of satisfactory Sufferings are ascribed to several of his Sufferings besides his Crucifixion 2 Cor. 8. 9. For your Sakes he became poor that ye through his Poverty might be rich Isa. 53. 5.
that it runs as a Line through all his Discourses and is the foundation he builds most upon P. 298. I say all the Weight and all the Burthen and all that very Sin it self is long agone laid upon Christ and that laying of it upon him is a full Discharge and a general Release and Acquittance unto thee that there is not any one Sin now to be charged upon thee See p. 375. 281 285. and hence he shews that the Elect are justified before they do believe otherwise till such Believing the Person of the Elect doth bear his own Transgression and is chargeable for his own Transgressions p. 616 617. See more Ch. 9. Wherein the Difference is not The Difference is not 1. Whether Christ made a full Atonement for sin 2. Nor whether that shall in time be applied to the Elect for their actual Remission as the Effect of it 3. Nor whether we be so far released thereupon as that God can demand no Atonement from any who shall submit to the Gospel-way of the Application of it 4. Nor whether the Law be answered and God's Honour so vindicated thereby that the sins of Men cannot hinder an Offer and Promise of Forgiveness and Life 5. Nor whether when we are pardoned the whole meritorious Cause of Pardon be that Atonement and what is required of Sinners is only a Meetness to receive the Effects of it 6. Nor whether this Atonement was the only way of Forgiveness which we can apprehend All these I affirm The real Difference The real Difference is 1. Whether the Elect were actually discharged of all their sins at the time that Christ made Atonement This the Doctor affirms and I deny 2. Whether that very Act of God's laying Sins upon Christ on the Cross be the Discharge of the Elect from all sin This the Doctor affirms and I deny The Truth confirmed The first point of Difference thou mayst find handled in Chap. 1 9 11 12. the last I do refer to in this Chap. viz. that the very Act of laying of Sin on Christ upon the Cross is not the actual immediate Discharge of the Elect from sin 1. It was not the Will or Purpose of God or Christ that the laying of our sins on Christ should be the immediate Discharge of the Elect. I suppose thou wilt grant that if it was not the Will of God or Christ that this should discharge them then it did not discharge them And it 's plain God did not will it should be so For we have a full Account that it is the Elect when he is a Believer that is to be discharged Joh. 6. 40. This is the Will of him that sent me that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting Life The Decree it self adjusted this Order 1 Pet. 1. 2. Elect according to the fore-knowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto Obedience and sprinkling of the Blood of Christ. This is further evidenced elsewhere even in all such Places as be produced to prove that Faith and Repentance is required to our actual Remission and that declare the Impenitent and Unbelieving to be unpardoned For we cannot suppose that Christ's revealed Will in his Word is repugnant to his Purposes when dying or that he should add other Requisites to the Pardon of the Elect if they were immediately pardoned on his Death 2. This overthrows the whole Scheme so wisely contriv'd for the Distribution of the Effects of his Death Things are so adjusted that forgiving the Elect should be an Effect of Christ's Kingly Office as well as his Priestly Office He is exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour to give Repentance and Remission of Sins Acts 5. 31. The Holy Ghost is to influence in the Application of Christ's Merits for Forgiveness 1 Cor. 6. 11. But you are washed but you are sanctified but you are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God Hence the Design of the Gospel-Ministry is to open mens eyes and turn them from Darkness to Light and from the power of Satan to God that they may receive Forgiveness of Sin Act. 26. 18. It 's a Mercy received in this Order which is quite overturned if the Elect be discharged when Christ died 3. By the opposite Errour the Elect would have been discharged if Christ had never risen again For if meer laying our Sins on Christ did acquit the Elect let Christ never have risen we were rid of them they ceased to be ours and so could not condemn us by returning upon our Persons tho' Christ had continued dead yea his continuing dead had been the surest Release Whereas we are said to be begotten to a lively hope by Christ's resurrection 1 Pet. 1. 3. and saved thereby 1 Pet. 3. 21. 4. Yea if taking sins off from the Elect and laying them on Christ was their Discharge they would be discharged before the sufferings and Death of Christ This appears for they were laid on Christ before he suffered and according to the Doctor 's Scheme were taken off us to lay on Christ and their being laid on Christ made the Sufferings of Christ to be just From which it must follow that the Elect were eased of their Burthen before Christ suffered yea it would be easily proved they were released tho' he had not suffered 5. If this Errour hold the Gospel-Notion of Forgiveness by the Blood of Christ is destroyed Forgiveness denotes the Person guilty and it 's a judicial Act of God as a Rector acting by the Gospel-Rule and this supposeth the full and perfect Atonement made by Christ and the Grant made in the Virtue thereof But in the Doctor 's Opinion the Person is never guilty for sins were laid on Christ before we were born and therefore they were never upon us A judicial Act by a Rule there is none for the Gospel-grant of Pardon is not to the Elect as elect but as penitent Believers neither is the Atonement of Christ supposed to our Forgiveness For the Doctor owneth that our sins being laid on Christ is before the making of the Atonement and without our sins lay on Christ he could not justly be punished So that our Discharge being a Transferring of sin from us to Christ and this being done before Christ made Atonement we are discharged not for the Atonement of Christ nor by an Act of Forgiveness for the sake of this Atonement I need not add that by this Notion Heathens may be in a pardoned state and there 's no need of the Gospel or Knowledge of Christ to bring them out of a state of Wrath. Testimonies Thou hast read before Ch. 1. How the Assembly and the Elders at the Savoy declare We are not justified before the Spirit apply Christ to us in our effectual Vocation They both agree in Conf. ch 8. a. 1. That God from Eternity gave Christ a People to be his Seed and to be by him in time redeemed
called justified sanctified and glorified Here thou seest Redemption and Justification are distinct things and the Elect are in Time called before they be justified In the Larger Catechis Q. What doth God require of us that we may escape his Wrath and Curse due to us The Assembly answer That we may escape Wrath c. He requireth of us Repentance towards God and Faith towards our Lord Jesus and the diligent Use of the outward Means whereby Christ communicates to us the Benefits of his Mediation Here thou seest that 1. We may be for a time without the Benefits of Christ's Mediation 2. That notwithstanding his Mediation we are under the Curse and Wrath as still due to us for sin till we repent and believe For it 's to escape these God requires Repentance and Faith 3. It 's by Means attended to and operating on us that the Benefits of Christ's Mediation are communicated for the Removal of the Curse and Wrath. VVhat can be more fully spoken against our being discharged when Christ suffered yea or before we repent and believe The Synod of New-England condemn this Speech viz. To say We are justified by Faith is an unsafe Speech VVe must say we are justified by Christ the Synod tells us it is no unsafe Speech But on the contrary to say a Man is justified before Faith or without Faith is unsafe as contrary to the Language of the Scripture p. 17 18. and they confute That as the 68. Errour viz. Faith justifies an Unbeliever that is the Faith that is in Christ justifies me that have no Faith in my self p. 13. Doctor Owen of Justif. p. 306. saith But yet the Act of God in laying our sins on Christ conveyed no actual Right and Title to us unto what he did and suffered They are not immediately thereon nor by virtue thereof ours or esteemed ours because God hath appointed somewhat else not only antecedent thereunto but as the Means of it unto his own Glory The Grounds of the Doctor 's Mistakes Because it was God's Act to appoint Christ to suffer for our sins that we might in his VVay and Time be discharged therefore he thinks we are immediately discharged by that Act. Because Christ's Atonement is the sole meritorious Cause of Forgiveness therefore he thinks God suspends not Forgiveness till he works any thing else in the Soul which he hath made requisite to our being forgiven tho' not as any meritorious cause Because the Scape-Goat carried their sins into the Wilderness who expressed their Faith and Repentance by laying on hands on it and confessing sin therefore the sins of men are taken away by Christ while they continue impenitent and unbelieving CHAP. IV. Of the Elect's ceasing to be Sinners from the time their Sins were laid on Christ. REader I shall premise 1. Men are sinners or cease to be sinners in several distinct Respects 1. As to the Filth and Obliquity of Sin with respect to this they are more or less sinners according to the degree of their Innocence and Holiness 2. With some as to the Guilt of sin which refers to the Sanction of the Law against Offenders With respect to this the Offenders be more or less sinners as they are forgiven or not forgiven 3. As to the Charge of the Fact which was sinful with respect to this neither After-sanctification nor Pardon will deliver a Transgressor from having been a sinner the Fact was his The first and last denominate one a sinner most properly The second denominates a Man punishable but not a sinner formally 2. In the whole Scheme of the Doctor 's Principles it 's the Elect as elect who cease to be sinners Therefore when he speaks of a Believer he doth not mean he was a sinner before he believed for he states the time to be when Christ had our sins laid upon him viz. on the Cross. Having explained the Title of this Chapter I proceed Truth An elect Person ceaseth not to be a sinner upon the laying of our sins upon Christ that is he remains a sinner as to the Guilt till he believes if Adult He is a sinner as to the Filth of sin till he be sanctified He is a sinner as to the charge of the sinful Fact he commits and that even after Pardon and Sanctification Nevertheless he is free from the Curse when he is pardoned and shall be purged from all the Filth of sin when he is perfect in Holiness And tho' Christ did bear the Punishment of our Iniquity yet it never was Christ's Iniquity but ours Errour The Elect upon the Death of Christ ceased to be sinners and ever since their sins are none of their sins but they are the sins of Christ. Proved that this is Doctor Crisp 's Opinion The Doctor puts this Objection p. 8. Must not he be reckoned to be a sinner while he doth sin A. I answer No Tho' he doth sin yet he is not to be reckoned a sinner but his sins are reckoned to be taken away from him c. A Man doth sin against God God reckons not his sin to be his he reckons it Christ's therefore he cannot reckon it his This he endeavours to prove p. 270. If thou hast part in the Lord Christ which he thinks all the unbelieving Elect have all these Transgressions of thine are become actually the Transgressions of Christ and so cease to be thine and thou ceasest to be a Transgressor from that time they were laid upon Christ to the last hour of thy Life So that now thou art not an Idolater thou art not a Thief c. Thou art not a sinful Person what sin soever thou committest p. 271. So that if you would speak of a sinner supposing that Person of whom you speak to be a Member of Christ i. e. Elect you must not speak of what he manifests but of what Christ was Wherein the Difference is not The Difference is not 1. Whether the pardoned Sinner shall be delivered from Condemnation 2. Nor whether God for Christ's sake will deal with a pardoned Sinner as if he had not been a Sinner 3. Nor whether Forgiveness doth take away Sin as to its Obligation to Punishment 4. Nor whether the Atonement of Christ when it 's applied in its full Effects will perfectly remove all Punishment and purge away all Filth and Defilement from the Elect. Each of these I affirm The real Difference 1. Whether because Christ obliged himself to bear the satisfactory Punishment of our sins did they therefore become the sins of Christ This the Doctor affirms and I deny Of which I have spoken Chap. 2. 2. Whether our sins were pardoned when Christ suffered on the Cross This the Doctor affirms and I deny Of this see ch 1. and 3. and 12. c. 3. Whether even they that are Members of Christ yet if they do sin are they Transgressors and Sinners and are the sins they commit their sins This the Doctor denies and I affirm The Truth proved One
it was when his Body was in the Grave Luk. 23. 43. Alas how can any bear to think that as the Doctor affirms he never saw God's Face all that while Where was he Yea What tormenting Agitations of Soul must he be under even after Death in the unseen State The Papists indeed tell us he was in Hell but they assign Purposes more becoming Christ's being there than the Doctor 's Position imports It was the height of Hell for Christ to be banished from God's Face and be under his very Wrath and Abhorrence all that time and his Mind tormented with the Filth of sin made his He never would have been a Saviour on Terms so inconsistent with his Person But the whole Notion is contrary to Scripture for under the greatest Abatements of Comfort he owns God's Presence and Relation My God My God Matth. 27. 46. and just upon his loud Cry he said Father into thy Hands I commit my Spirit and having said thus he gave up the Ghost Luk. 22. 46. Was there a Separation or Abhorrence when he thus addresseth himself to God as his God and his Father Did he never come near God all that while when God received his Spirit or rejected his Prayer which God never did reject Joh. 11. 42. Me thou hearest always See Ps. 69. 13 14 15 17 18. Ps. 22. 18 19 20 24. Heb. 5. 7. He was heard in that he feared which refers to this time Testimonies The Opinion I oppose is such that I will only instance the Words of Doctor Owen of Justif. P. 286. There was no reason why God should hate Christ for his taking on him our Debt and the Payment of it And suppose a Person out of an heroick Generosity of Mind an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for another so as to answer for him with his Life Would the most cruel Tyrant under Heaven that should take away his Life in that case hate him And then the Doctor shews here and P. 287. the Word Hate signifies either an Aversion or Detestation of Mind or only a Will of Punishment In the first Sence saith he there was no ground why God should hate Christ on the Imputation of Guilt unto him sin inherent renders the Soul polluted abominable and the only Object of Divine Aversation But Christ was undefiled c. The Grounds of the Doctor 's Mistake The Doctor doth not distinguish between the Affects of VVrath and the Effects of VVrath Because God forsook Christ as to the usual Degrees of Comfort he thinks Christ was separated from God Because he that is formally a sinner is odious to God therefore he thinks Christ was odious to God who had on him the Punishment of sin with the Guilt or Obligation to bear this Punishment by his own Consent neither of which have any thing of the Loathsomeness of sin I know not why he thinks Christ came not near God from the time of his Death to his Resurrection unless because of his Conceit that the Loathsomeness of sin being on him God could not bear the sight of him till he had sweat it out a Reason too horrid for me to say more to and indeed inconsistent with the Notion of a Mediator for the sins of others CHAP. VII Of the Change of Person between Christ and the Elect and their being as Righteous as he Truth THE Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ is so imputed to true Believers as that for the sake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life eternal it being reckoned to them and pleadable by them for these Uses as if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them whereby they are delivered from the Curse and no other Atonement nor meriting Price of saving Benefits can be demanded from them Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them untill Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven Errour Every Believer or elect Person is as righteous as Christ and there is a perfect Change of Person and Condition betwixt Christ and the Elect he was what we are and we are what he was viz. perfectly holy and without Spot or Blemish Proved that this is Dr. Crisp 's Opinion P. 270 271. The Doctor saith Mark it well Christ himself is not so compleatly righteous but we are as righteous as he nor we so compleatly sinful but Christ became being made sin as compleatly sinful as we Nay more we are the same Righteousness for we are made the Righteousness of God that very Sinfulness that we were Christ is made that very Sinfulness before God So that here is a direct Change Christ takes our Person and Condition and stands in our stead we take Christ's Person and Condition and stand in his stead What the Lord beheld Christ that he beholds the Members of Christ to be c. So that if you reckon well you must always reckon your selves in anothers Person and that other in your Person And P. 180. God gives his Son Christ c. God gives the Person of Christ to Men as much as to say God gives Christ to stand in the room of Men and Men stand in the room of Christ. So that in giving Christ God is pleased as it were to make a Change and all the Loveliness the Person of Christ hath that is put upon us and we are as lovely with him even as the Son himself And P. 158. Here is a Person in Blood in a loathsome Condition but for all this as loathsome as the Person is in himself and in his own Nature yet here is Perfection of Beauty c. On the account of this he saith P. 428. We appear before God perfect in Holiness And P. 419 420. Christ draws up and exhales that Impurity which Men live in c. and when Men are without Spot and all fair God falls in Love with them c. The Church hath no Blemish at all no Imperfection See more of this in Chap. Of Union Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not whether the mediatioral Righteousness of Christ habitual active and Passive be a Righteousness sufficient to and designed for the Salvation of the Elect. 2. Nor whether our Justification and all other Benefits when we are made Partakers of them be the Fruits of this Righteousness as the only meritorious Cause of them 3. Nor whether Christ's Sufferings and Obedience were so in our Stead that God cannot exact from us any other Atonement for Sin or meriting Price of any Gospel-blessings 4. Nor whether Christ by his Righteousness merited for all the Elect that they should in his Time and Way be certainly Partakers of its saving Effects and did not only purchase a conditional Grant of those Effects viz. That Proposition He that believeth shall be
Law of Innocence but of Gospel-Grace Who can doubt this if they consider 1. That the Covenant of Innocency promised Life to nothing below sinless and perfect Obedience 2. The Threatnings of the Covenant of Innocency admitted no Repentance or After-Relief to the Guilty They did fix the Curse irrevocably in case of any Transgression 3. No Overture of Life or Door of Hope or Argument to Conversion with Hopes of Acceptance could be framed out of those legal Threats or Promises to any Man that is a Sinner Turn ye Turn ye why will you die was not the Language of that Covenant No if a Man is once a Sinner the Law could speak no lower than this Thou art undone whether thou turn or no. Things being thus I would intreat thee to consider all the Calls of God in Christ to Men since the Fall VVeigh the Promises and Threats wherewith God strengthneth those Calls See if any one of the Calls to Faith or Repentance or Holiness thus back'd with Promises and Threats be not Evangelical 1. Doth God in those Calls promise Life to nothing below sinless perfect Obedience Or doth he threaten Eternal Death in those Calls against whatever is short of perfect Obedience 2. Do the Threats annexed to those Calls exclude all after-Repentance See Ezek. 18. 21. Is that Gospel or no But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed c. he shall surely live his transgressions shall not be mentioned 3. Are not these Calls with the Promises and Threats directed to Sinners for their Conversion and Recovery Is it not to Sinners God speaks in them and is it not for their healing and Salvation Are not the Promises an Offer of Relief Are not the Threatnings intended to awe and warn Sinners against Refusal of these Offers They be not uttered to bind the Curse but to deliver from it by urging our Compliance with the Commands of a Redeemer To day if you will hear his voice harden not your hearts as in the provocation c. Heb. 3. 7 8. 4. 7. Every Threatning used by God as an Argument to Conversion is a Gospel-Threatning 2. What kind of Government can Men assign to Christ if there be no Sanction to his Precepts Dr. Crisp oft tells us That the Sanction of the Law of Works is removed the Curse is gone as to the Elect. This is true if he mean that sinless Obedience is not now the Way of Life and that all below it shall not bind Death upon us so as to hinder our Relief by the Gospel But what then hath the Redeemer no Promises and Threatnings to rule Men by And is their Obedience or Disobedience an indifferent thing as to their Happiness or Misery Must he save all or damn all or else be a Respecter of Persons in his judicial Distributions Is this the Language of God to Sinners since the Fall Did Christ preach at this rate when on Earth Or doth he so speak now from Heaven Heb. 12. 25. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh for if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth much more shall not we escape if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven Heb. 2. 3. How shall we escape if we neglect so great Salvatian which at first began to be spoken by the Lord c. Our Lord assures us Mens Sins are aggravated and their Damnation grows greater by a Rejection of his Call to Sinners through Impenitence and Unbelief Joh. 8. 24. Ye shall die in your sins Heb. 10. 29. Of how much sorer punishment c. It 's a precarious Dominion that Christ exerciseth if he hath neither Rewards nor Punishments to induce Mens regards to his Authority Read the Scriptures or wait the Judgment-day and you 'll find it otherwise 3. How unsuitable is it to the present state of Mankind that Christ should govern us without Promises and Threatnings He is a King and we are his Subjects And we are 1. Subjects in a state of Tryal for another World 2. We have great remains of Sin within us and Temptations without us 3. We have still in our Nature Hope and Fear which are the things which all the methods of Christ's Government suppose and are suited to Each of these would furnish me with Arguments beyond all rational Contradiction for the Proof of this Point whereas the opposite Errour implies That either Men are Machines or Brutes or Infants at best or else the Judgment-day is past already Yea how vain are the Expostulations Warnings Reproofs and Encouragements which the Word is filled with The Divine Being and all the Methods of Grace are strangely exposed by Conceits so sordid He calls us to fear lest we should seem to come short of the Promise Heb. 4. 1. Be not high-minded but fear Rom. 11. 20. Work out your salvation with trembling Phil. 2. 12. He that ploweth should plow in hope 1 Cor. 9. 10. We are saved by hope c. Rom. 8. 24. What are all these if our state be in no suspence as to what we shall be or do 4. I hope I need not prove that these Gospel-Promises and Threatnings are the Rule by which Christ dealeth with Men To doubt it would inferr a heavier Charge than any good Man would sustain It 's enough to calm us that he saith Be not deceived God is not mocked that which a man soweth that shall he reap Gal. 6. 7. This is spoken to Believers and true of the Redeemed II. By this Gospel-Constitution persevering Holiness sincere Obedience or good Works are Necessary to Salvation He that made Faith necessary to Justification hath made Obedience necessary to Salvation He hath as well promised Heaven to the Godly Man as Pardon to the Believer And our perseverance in Holiness and Obedience is as truly our Way to Glory as the Scriptures can describe it Nothing of these merit Heaven but he that merited Heaven hath peremptorily appointed these to bring us thither Heb. 6. 10 11 12. For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love c. And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope to the end that ye be not sloathful but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises Every word is forcible to argue this Truth But I shall offer a few things more 1. Christ in the Gospel declares they shall miss of Heaven and eternally perish who are Apostates Ungodly Disobedient and Unprofitable and that for being such This Doom is not the Doom of the Law of Innocence for it is not denounced against every Backsliding but Apostacy It 's not against every Imperfect degree of Godliness but Ungodliness It 's not against every Defect of Obedience but Disobedience It 's not against every Neglect of Fruitfulness but such Unprofitableness as argues a dead and barren state Reader art thou so unskilful in the Word as not to remember If any
therefore he doth wash blot out and not remember the unpardoned Sins of impenitent Persons whereas there is not one of those to whom these Promises are made but God hath charged Sin upon them before Because God commands Israel Isa. 1. to wash and make themselves clean by Repentance therefore we are clean without it Because God can have no Communion with a Sinner out of Christ therefore he can have no Communion with an imperfect Believer in a Christ. CHAP. XVII Of the Hurt that Sin may do to Believers TRUTH IT 's true of Believers that if Sin should have Dominion over them they would thereby be subject to Condemnation And though the Grace of God will prevent the Dominion of Sin in every elect Believer and so keep them from eternal Death yet true Believers may by Sin bring great hurt upon themselves in Soul and Body which they ought to fear and they may expect a share in National Judgments according as they have contributed to common Guilt ERROUR The grossest Sins that Believers can commit cannot do them the least harm neither ought they to fear the least hurt by their own Sins nor by National Sins yea though themselves have had a hand therein Proved that this is Dr. Crisp 's Opinion P. 510 511. They need not be afraid of their Sins they that have God for their God there is no Sin that ever they commit can possibly do them any hurt Therefore as their Sins cannot hurt them so there is no cause of Fear in their Sins committed c. There is not one Sin nor all the Sins together of any Believer can possibly do that Believer any real hurt This he attempts to prove from Rom. 7. Some will be ready to say here is a Fear of Sin Oh wretched Man that I am Who shall deliver me from the Body of this Death But give me leave to tell you that the Apostle in this Chapter as I conceive doth personate a scrupulous Spirit and doth not speak out his present Case c. Obj. Sure the Doctor only meaneth that Sin shall not damn them A. Hear him putting this Case You will say no Condemnation in Hell but yet as there are Remainders of Sin in God's own People so there will some Evil or other fall upon the Commission of Sin He summs up his Answer thus Now Sin is condemned to the Believer it can do no hurt at all to him P. 513. Sins are but Scare-crows and Bug-bears to fright ignorant Children but Men of Insight and Understanding see they are counterfeit things c they are to know for certain it is but a mad thing there is no Fear from the Sins of Believers all the Terrour and Fearfulness of Sin Christ himself hath drunk it c. Sin is dead and there is no more Terrour in it than is in a dead Lion P. 515. He shews that the Sins of the Nation cannot hurt God's People though they had a hand in them P. 429. Are you sinful in respect of the Prevalency of Corruption Let it not come into your Thoughts that you are worse than others or less than others P. 522. So oft as Men fear Affliction from Sin committed so oft do they slander the Grace of God See P. 429 413 510 562 559. Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not Whether God will preserve elect Believers from eternal Condemnation by keeping them from the Dominion of Sin 2. Nor whether a justified Person be freed from the Curse of the Law or the Sanction of the Law of VVorks 3. Nor whether a Believer should fear his eternal Condemnation no farther than his Sins bring his Sincerity in question or lead to Security or Apostacy 4. Nor whether God may in Soveraign Mercy spare to execute those Rebukes National or Personal which a godly Man's Sins may expose him to 5. Nor whether God may and can over-rule the Sin of a Believer afterwards to his Benefit All these I affiâ—m 6. Nor whether the Afflictions of the Godly be the Execution of the damnatory Curse of the Law or any Satisfaction or Atonement for Sin This I deny and add that Christ alone satisfied Justice The real Difference 1. Whether according to the Gospel-rule if a Believer should yield up himself to the Dominion of Sin he should perish This I affirm and the Doctor denies against plain Texts directed to Believers as Rom. 8. 13. 2. VVhether a Believer falling into such Sins as Idolatry Murther c. ought not to awe his Soul against Security with lively thoughts of Damnation and if he continue long herein ought not he to suspect the State of his Soul as in danger of Hell This I affirm and the Doctor denies and thereby he renders the Gospel-threatnings as urged by the Spirit on the Hearts of Believers to be all foolish 3. VVhether Christ is at liberty sharply to afflict a justified Person for provoking Sins though he be secured against Soul-destroying Judgments This I affirm and the Doctor denies 4. VVhether a Believer falling into great Sins ought to fear God's present Rebukes for such Sins This I affirm and the Doctor denies 5. VVhether great Offences be a real hurt to a Believer and oft brings on him much present harm This I affirm and the Doctor denies The Case of National Sins is concluded as these be and I have elsewhere spoken to The Truth Confirmed The principal Point to be proved is That Sins do a Believer hurt this will convince us of the rest for as it brings hurt it is the Object of Fear in all that wisely resent things And as any threatned Affliction is caused by it it argues a Power reserved in Christ so to threaten and afflict both which I have proved Chap. 13. One would think a little Labour will serve to prove a Point which the Feeling and Experience of all Men plead for yet take a Hint of those Heads of Arguments which might be improved 1. Sin it self is a great hurt to any Man guilty of it or pestered with it It 's so called Jer. 8. 11. It s a Wound or we need no Healing it 's a Defilement or we need no Washing it 's a Crime or what 's Forgiveness it's a going astray or where 's the Use of Returning it's a Weakness or Strengthning after it were needless Is that no harm which is a Blemish to our Natures the Disease of our Souls the Disorder of our State in reference to God and our selves as depending on him If Sin be no harm why should we pray against it Why doth God so warn us still against it Why doth Grace so oppose it Why doth the Spirit strive against it Wherefore do we praise God for preventing it On what Account hath God made it the Duty of Magistrates and Parents to punish for it and of Ministers to censure the Transgressors If it 's become so innocent in his People Why doth Christ complain so oft of it Why should the Doctor tell us we should
fear it before we commit it though not after Why should Saints desire Heaven to be rid of Sin Can that be a small Mischief that dishonoureth God reproacheth the Name of Christ grieves the Spirit pleases the Devil offends the Good hardens the Wicked puts the tender Heart on Mourning for it in it self yea in others Psal. 119. 136. If Sin be no hurt Grace and Holiness as the Contraries to it are not Good nothing is a Blessing as a Prevention of it Where shall I stop Yet each of these refer to the Sins of God's own People and some of them more affect their Sins than the Sins of other Men. 2. There 's great Hurt befalls God's People for committing Sin Doth not God hide his Face the Spirit abate its Influences Is not the Conscience oft seared the Heart oft less capable of Impressions by the VVord the Soul streightned in Duty great Decays in Grace and Vigour too oft never recovered this side the Grave Many are rendred incapable of Service by Reproach for Sin or by Poverty Diseases c. VVho hath not found by Sin what he must call Hurt VVhat Pains Loss of Friends Ruine on Estates Blasts on Undertakings Are VVars Plagues Fire Removal of Ordinances Famine cursed Relations c. no Hurt Sure so many will not be proselyted to this Opinion as to Transubstantiation But what can be offered for it Obj. God will order all this for the good of a Believer therefore none of these hurt him 1. A. I do not know where God hath promised ThatSin shall do us good and in its Nature it hath no aptness to Good and the best Good it can do is to prevent it self Rom. 8. 28. saith All things shall work together for good c. But it speaks of Sufferings for Christ not Sins against him and though God should over-master it to some Concurrence for Good yet it were a greater Mercy to receive that same Good by other Means 2. A. Though Sins or corrective Afflictions may be ruled to do us good yet that doth not hinder but that they do us hurt This may be evinced not only because it were a greater Mercy to have that Good another way which but for Sin we should not miss of But also 1. VVhatever God threatens to inflict that thereby he may dissuade from Sin must needs be a Hurt or Damage It is not a Threatning if it include no harm and it 's a Reproach to our God in his Government to think otherwise VVhat confounding of Promises and Threats would it inferr Doth not God intend to awe Men with some Hurt when he saith Rev. 2. 5. Remember c. or I will remove thy Candlestick out of its Place and was this no hurt when it befell them I might instance a thousand Places of this kind 2. Saints with God's Approbation bewail and deprecate Sins and Punishments for Sins as a real Hurt Why hast thou hardned our Hearts from thy Fear c. Isa. 63. 17. For the Hurt of the Daughter of my People I am black astonishment hath taken hold on me Jer. 8. 21. The Book of Lamentations Haman's David's Moans are forgotten Read Pauls Complaints of himself and others 3. God himself accounts these things to hurt his People for he calls it Patience and Long-suffering in him to forbear inflicting them He oft declares his Pity of his People when under them and a ceasing to Pity when he inflicts them Isa. 63. 9. Joel 2. 8. Jer. 13 4. The Removal of these he declares to be an Act of Mercy and Goodness Read the Prophets and you 'll find what Terms he gives these viz. Wounding Smiting Spoiling c. He oft testifieth against Insensibleness of these as evil and afflictive things and threatens to encrease them to beget a duer sence of Sin and Judgments Sure I need not add That Mercies opposite to these are Blessings and promised as such all the good in Repentance argues the Hurt we get by Sin and by the Effects of it If these things will not prove Sin brings hurt we must declare Patience in Saints to be no Grace or find a new Description of what is a Hurt in this VVorld The Doctor indeed calls us to this when Sin is made so innocent and present with-holdings of more Grace from us is a Mercy as he affirms P. 541. Let me add that by Sin a Saint's degrees of Glory may be diminished in another VVorld for sowing sparingly he shall reap sparingly and he therefore that shall break one of the least of these Commandements and shall teach Men so he shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 5. 19. That 's unprofitable for you Heb. 13. 17. TESTIMONIES The Assembly and Cong Elders chap. 19. a. 6 tell us The Threatnings of the Law are of use to the Regenerate to shew what even their Sins deserve and what Afflictions in this Life they may expect for them although freed from the Curse threatned in the Law Chap. 18. a. 4 True Believers may have the Assurance of Salvation divers ways shaken and diminished c. by falling into some special Sin which woundeth the Conscience and grieveth the Spirit by some vehement Temptation by God's withdrawing the Light of his Countenance Chap. 17. a. 3. Saints may fall into grievous Sins and for a time continue therein whereby they incurr God's Displeasure and grieve his Holy Spirit come to be deprived of some measure of their Graces and Comforts have their Hearts hardened and their Consciences wounded hurt and scandalize others and bring temporal Judgments on themselves Turretin tells us Instit. Theol. par 2. p. 650. That a Believer falling into gross Crimes incurreth the Fatherly Indignation of God loseth a present Meetness for Glory contracts damning Guilt So that if he remain Impenitent in that State he ought to conclude himself liable to Death and certain to perish except he return Do not Divines generally conclude That if David had not repented of his gross Sins he fell into he had perished Dr. Owen as much discovers the hurt of Sins to Believers as most Men do See Mr. A. Burgess of Justification lib. 1. from 240. to 245. The Grounds of the Doctor 's Mistake Because there is no Eternal Condemnation lies against a Believer therefore there is no penal Present Affliction upon a Believer Whereas there 's much hurt below Hell and and that it is not Hell that follows the Sin of a Believer is not from the Innocency of Sin but the Grace of God that brings him to Repentance and Faith in Christ for Remission Because all Sufferings for Christ work for Good therefore all Sins against Christ can do no Harm But allow that Sins and Sufferings for Sin were included then thus it reasoneth Because God can and doth over-rule these to some good at last therefore they do no harm in the mean while nor in any degree Because a Believer is freed from the damning Curse of the Law therefore no Gospel-Threatning
Jewish Privileges as Gal. 6. 12. as many as desire to make a fair shew in the Flesh they constrain you to be Circumcised of this Number were these whom the Apostle warneth the Christians against but now by the Gospel we are brought to place our Hopes in greater and surer things 3. He enumerates these Jewish Pretensions which he had as much right to glory in as these boasting Enemies Ver. 4 5 6. He was a Jew by Birth and not a mere Proselyte circumcised as soon as any of the strictest Sect as fiery zealous against Christ as they and as ceremonious as the best touching the Righteousness which is in the Law blameless He intends not Sinless-Obedience nor Gospel-Sincerity but a Life not to be blamed by the Rule of the Jewish Pedagogie i. e. in the Judgment of strict Observers 4. Of these he professeth a Renunciation when converted to Christ. Ver. 7. But what things were gain to me That is these that I reckoned as much upon as they now do I counted loss for Christ when he met me by the way and led me to a truer Judgment of him and my self I soon preferred him his Grace his Benefits and Instruction before all these And Ver. 8. Yea doubtless c. That is I have no Suspicion of my Choice and am still of the same Mind they are still with me vain things of no value compared with that I have since known and experienced in and by Christ yea for him without repining I have not only quitted those Jewish things but I have suffered the loss of all things viz. my Name my Friends my Estate my Ease and Life it self in a fixed Purpose and do count them but Dung that I may win Christ. What these Jews do so boast of and the World so esteem even all are to me but Dogs-meat c. that I may but fully possess Christ and the full Effects of his Undertakings in perfect Peace Holiness and Glory somewhat of which are already begun in me 2. It was not Gospel-holiness which he counted Dung or Loss For 1. This was not his own Righteousness which is of the Law as opposed to that which is by the Faith of Christ. Nay This is by the Faith of Christ our Hearts are purified by Faith Act. 15. 9. In Christ we are created thereto and by him it is wrought through Faith in all his Members who are all in him and in this Union to him I desire to continue and share in the fuller Effects of 2. This Holiness instead of renouncing or suffering the Loss of it he earnestly presseth after and expects to obtain this is the Scope of Ver. 10 11 12 13 14. that I may know him viz. perfectly in his Person and Influences and the Power of his Resurrection i. e. in a perfect Newness of Heart and Life and be conformable to his Death i. e. wholly mortified and dead to Sin If by any means I might attain to the Resurrection of the Dead that is be as holy and happy as then I shall be which is without Spot or Wrinkle or any such thing If I may apprehend that for which I am apprehended of Christ i. e. be as holy and happy as he designed to make me when he seized me in my first Conversion reaching forth unto those things that are before that cannot be imputed Righteousness for this he had in his first Justification but it 's that perfect Holiness and Glory which he expected in Christ hereafter And this is the Mark for the Price of the high Calling of God in Christ viz. What God intended in his Act when he called me in Christ and what I had in my Eye when I consented to that Call as the encouraging Reward Now is not Holiness a great part of all these and instead of renouncing it he tells us he is for it by any means I follow after reaching forth I press towards which was all needless as to what he had already 3. He bewails and owns the Weakness and Imperfection of this Righteousness at present though he was pressing after it Ver. 12. Not as though I had already attained either were already perfect Ver. 13. I count not my self to have apprehended forgetting the things which are behind Can this be true of imputed Righteousness Was not that attained at first Is not that perfect when first justified Or would Paul forget this though his small Degrees of Holiness past he might so forget as that lesser Degrees should not hinder his Pursuit after more Obj. But Ver. 8. Paul speaks in the present Tense I do count all things loss and therefore it was not his former Jewish Privileges A. It was his present Act towards an Object past q. d. I even now still account them all vain yea and it may extend to all present secular Advantages also as Life Honour and Estate c. q. d. I value nothing as a crucified Christ that I may fully know and enjoy him as a living Member in Eternity it self But I hope none can think that his winning Christ is either a first Interest in Christ or the Imputation of his Righteousness for Justification for this he with Comfort knew he already had and was not now to win by Perseverance and growing Vigour Far less can any think that he accounts Holiness Dung for what more he desired of Christ was in order to perfect the Holiness begun already by Christ in him and had he lost that which was already begun he had vainly expected a further Participation of Christ for Holiness or Joy This Righteousness which is of God by Faith is that eminent Holiness he waited for and if he could be found in Christ by an abiding Union he knew he should arrive at CHAP. XX. Of Gospel-Preaching TRUTH GOspel-Preaching is when the Messengers of Christ do publish to fallen Sinners the good News of Salvation by Christ to be obtained in the way which he hath appointed in his Word freely offering Salvation on his Terms earnestly persuading and commanding Men in the Name of Christ to comply with those Terms as ever they would escape the Misery they are under and possess the Benefits he hath purchased directing all to look to him for Strength and acknowledge him as the only Mediator and his Obedience and Sufferings as the sole Atonement for Sin and meriting Cause of all Blessings instructing them in all revealed Truth and by Gospel Motives urging them to obey the whole Will of God as a Rule of Duty but especially to be sincere and upright pressing after Perfection ERROUR Gospel-Preaching is to teach Men they were as much pardoned and as acceptable to God always as when they are regenerate and while they were ungodly they had the same Interest in God and Christ as when they believe neither can Sin any way hinder their Salvation or their Peace nor have they any thing to do to further either of them Christ having done all for them and given himself to them before
the Prophets even Isaiah himself yea Christ and his Apostles were all Legal Preachers The Law in this sence is that which Converts Comforts Healeth Saveth c Whatever is spoken in Praise of the Word of the Truth of the Commandments of God and Christ are spoken of the Law in this sence And it is the same with the Gospel as I have proved chap. 20. And they are Enemies to Christ and Souls that disdain to be such Legal Preachers 2. But there is a Legal Preaching which is opposed to the Gospel and this indeed is a Crime the word being used as a Reproach this must be intended if Men understand what they speak of And to that this Chapter refers TRUTH Legal Preaching is to Preach the Law as a Covenant of Innocency or Works or to Preach the Mosaick or Jewish-Covenant of Peculiarity But it is not Legal Preaching to require and persuade to Faith Holiness or Duties by Promises and Threatnings according to the Grace of the Gospel and direct Men to fear and hope accordingly ERROUR Legal Preaching is to call People to act any Grace or do any Duty as a required Means of Salvation or inward Peace or to threaten them with Death or any Affliction to cause Fear if they commit the grossest Sins and backsside and fall away or to promise them any Blessing upon their Obedience to the Commandments of Christ or urge the Threatnings to persuade Sinners to believe and repent Proved that this is Doctor Crisp's Opinion P. 616. If Persons are not united to Christ and do not partake of Justification before they do believe c. then mark what will follow That there will be bringing to life again the Covenant of Works c. Obj. How doth this follow I Answer Thus you must of necessity press upon your selves these Terms or such like I must do that I may have Life in Christ I must believe there is no Life till I do believe Now if their be Believing first then there is Doing before Living P. 561 562. This likewise batters to the ground that way of urging Men to holiness which some hold forth That if Men do not these and these good Works and leave these and these Sins then they must come under the wrath of God c. The Love of God constrains the Faithful and not the Fear of Wrath a sense of being delivered from it not a fear of Wrath to come P. 559 560. Obj. Some will say The Preaching of the Terrours of the Law and the Wrath of God and Damnation and Hell-fire unto Men is a safer way to take Men off from Sin than to preach Gracc and Forgiveness before-hand c. A. I say If we preach Wrath and Damnation we must either make them believe they lyc under the Wrath and that Wrath shall come or we must make them believe that though there be Wrath yet it shall not fall upon them Now if we tell them of Wrath and Damnation and say they are secure from them and they belong not to them to what purpose do we tell them of Wrath we had as good hold our tongues c. And he shews how it 's bringing back the Covenant of Works to tell them that God will be angry with them if they commit Sin or do not such and such Duties Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not Whether it is Legal Preaching to preach Duties or Holiness as if Men must perfectly believe and obey or they shall unavoidably perish 2. Nor That it 's Legal Preaching to denounce Wrath and Hell as Miseries from which there is no relief by Christ in the way of the Gospel 3. Nor That it is Legal Preaching to press Men to Faith Repentance and other Duties as if they were to be performed in their own strength without the Grace of Christ and Influences of the Spirit 4. Nor That it is Legal Preaching to promise Salvation to any Action if the Performer thereof be Unregenerate Unbelieving and Impenitent 5. Nor That it is too much Legal Preaching to be always pressing the Duties of the Law of Nature but to neglect Preaching Faith in Christ and Repentance Regeneration c. and so to neglect to make the Person Offices Sufferings and Intercession of Christ as also our Relation to him and Dependance on him as Mediatour with other Gospel-Mysteries known to their Hearers 6. Nor That it 's Legal Preaching to preach that our Faith Holiness or Good Works stand in the same place now as Perfect Obedience did under the Law viz. To render the Reward to be of Debt or be the Meritorious Righteousness for which we are Justified 7. Or That it is Legal to preach that our best Obedience doth not deserve Wrath by the Law as a Rule of Misery and Happiness Or That it doth not need Forgiveness or is any Supplement of Christ's Righteousness yea or to neglect to call Men to renounce all in themselves as any Atonement for Sin or Cause of Pardon and to look to Christ as the only Propitiation Purchaser of all our Blessings and Cause of the Acceptance of our Persons and Performances 8. Nor That it is Legal Preaching to omit to urge Men to Obedience by Gospel Motives as what Christ Suffered the Love of God in him the Benefits afforded by him the Helps he vouchsafes the Relations he admits us to and the like 9. Nor That it is Legal to shew Men their Misery and Sinfulness and not to inform them of the Gospel-way of Salvation 10. Nor That it is too Legal to neglect to improve holy Souls to an ingenuous Obedience from Love to God as well as a holy Fear 11. Nor that it is Legal to encourage such Fear as imports a Life of Torment destructive to our Hopes and Joy Or as if every Miscarriage should over-turn Assurance though the dominion of Sin be not justly suspected 12. Nor that it is Legal Preaching to assert Judaism or the Mosaic Pedagogie viz. to press Circumcision Sacrifices a Covenant of Peculiarity Jewish Priesthood Sabbath or an Abuse of the Law in Opposition to Christ our Saviour who is the End of all Types c. All these I affirm These indeed make up that Preaching of the Law which is opposed to Christ to Grace and to the Gospel The real Difference 1. Whether it 's Legal Preaching to require People to Repent and Believe that their Iniquities may be forgiven for Christ's sake This I deny and the Doctor affirms against the scope of the Gospel as I have proved chap. 8. 10 12 20 c. 2. Whether it be Legal Preaching to press Holiness and Gospel Obedience as necessary to the Salvation of a Justified Person This the Doctor affirms and I deny upon Reasons given chap. 8. 13. 17. 3. Whether it be Legal to threaten such Penalties as are short of Damnation against such Offences as are consistent with Sincerity and yet avoidable by serious care and diligence This the Doctor affirms and I deny for which see