active obedience examined With a View of Wendelin's reasonings against it John Forbes in his Treatise tending to clear the doctrine of justification Chap. 24. pag. 93. c. cometh to speak of the matter of our Righteousness that is that wherein Christ is made of God Righteousness unto us And tels us that this in one word in the Scripture is said to be his obedience Rom. 5 19. But this obedience he restricteth pag. 94. unto the passive Obedience of Christ only in his death And by this restriction not only excludeth all his obedience to the Law but even all his suffering in his state of humiliation Yea his soul-sufferings also for any thing that appeareth He mentioneth a distinction betwixt those things wherein the Righteousness itself standeth which is imputed to us those things which are requisâ—â—e in Christ to the end that in the other he may be Righteousness unto us And this distinction is good in itself but not rightly applied when he referreth all to this last head which Christ did and suffered except only in his death He granteth pag. 95. that the word obedience is oft times in the Scripture referred to the whole work of Christ's humiliation But we do not take it so largely here as to comprehend even his Incarnation but as comprehending that which belonged to his work of Mediation as our Sponsor in satisfying the Law the Law-giver for what we were owing and were not able to pay Nor can we so restrict it as he doth Let us therefore see his grounds His first ground is this We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only wherein God hath purposed according to his purpose ordained according to his ordinance set forth Christ to be our Righteousness Propitiation For the purpose of God he citeth Col. 1 19 20. for the Ordinance 1. Pet. 1 18 19 20. For his setting forth Rom. 3 25. Ans. We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only where in the Scriptures hold him forth to be so And in that wherein the Scripture holdeth him forth to be so God purposed ordained set him forth to be so But we must not restrict the whole Seripture to these three or four places cited If the Scriptures elsewhere pointe forth Christ to be our Righteousness in other acts than in his death all this argueing is to no purpose Sure the Scriptures speak of his sufferings in soul of his being made a curse for us of his being obedient even to the death of his being made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law And that what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us See Phil. 2 7 8. Gal. 4 4. Rom. 8 3 4. 2 There is nothing in these texts exclusive of Christ's obedience And it is loose argueing to say Christ's death only is mentioned in three or foure places of Scripture Ergo nothing else is mentioned or to be understood any where else the particle Only is not here to be found neither expresly nor tacitely 3 Beside that in all these passages there is not one word of a Righteousness no expression signifying the matter of imputed Righteousness to consist therein or that Christ was our Righteousness upon the account thereof Nay neither here nor no-where finde we Christ called our Righteousness because he died for us Nor doth the Apostle attribute our Righteousness unto his blood only Rom. 5 9. Ephes. 1 7. Col. 1 14. No such thing appeareth there Neither Pardon nor Justification which only are there spoken of are a Righteousness or our Righteousness but the consequences fruites or effects thereof His argueing That without shedding of bloud there is no remission from Heb. 6. 10. That Christ dieth no more Therefore Christ is appointed our Righteousness peace in nothing but in his death bloud of his crosse is most loose can only conclude against those if there be any such that say By Christ's obedience active only not at all by his death sufferings have we peace remission of sins We willingly grant that without shedding of bloud there is no remission But this saith not that shedding of bloud alone is all our Righteousness We conjoine both his active his passive obedience so we take in his whole Mediatory work which maketh up his compleat Surety-Righteousness and say that this must be imputed to us in order to our Justification Peace Pardon Acceptance He argueth next from Adam as the Type Rom. 5. sayeth that this Type teacheth us foure things 1. That our Righteousness should proceed from one man Iesus Christ. 2. That our Righteousness should consist in the obedience of that one man 3. That our Righteousness should consist in one obedience only of that one man 4. That our Righteousness should consist in the only one obedience of that one man once only performed Ans. 1 If our Righteousness consist in the obedience of Christ that in opposition to Adam's disobedience to the Law then it must not consist in his sufferings alone for sufferings as such are no obedience to the Law And further Christ's obedience is called his Righteousness Rom. 5 18. but suffering dying is no Righteousness 2 There is no ground to assert either of the two last much less both for though Adam's act of disobedience was one and that done at once Yet it will not follow that therein he was a Typ of Christ or that therefore Christ's obedience must be one act only that performed at one time only for Paul hinteth no such comparison and we must not make typical similitudes without warrand And againe one act of disobedience once committed is a violation of the Law enough to constitute one unrighteous but one act of obedience howbeit frequently performed far less once only performed cannot be a compleet Righteousness which requireth conformity to the whole Law in all points that all the dayes of our life Wherefore Christ's obedience being a Righteousness which consisteth in full conformity to the Law must be perfect correspond with the whole Law cannot be one only act once only performed that such an act too is no formal act of obedience to the Law at all His Second ground is taken from the signes seals of the Righteousness which is by faith that is Baptisme the Lord's supper tels us that they signifie represent to us what is the Righteousness it self whereby we are justified seale confirme unto us that that Righteousness is ours Ans. I should rather think that they represent exhibite whole Christ seal to beleevers or the worthy receivers their interest in Him Right to Him
justification by faith to cry down justification by the Law or by the works of the Law which some false Teachers were perswading those Galatians to beleeve he adduceth a passage of Scripture which saith the just shall live by faith thereby giving us to understand that the just man or the justified man is a living man for the just liveth And it is too narrow to interprete this life of eternal life this would make the Apostles argument very obscure we must therefore undeâ—stand it of a life begun here which shall certainely end in glory this is most consonant both to the Prophet's scope to the scope of the Apostle here Whence we may gather That in justification by faith there is a real life obtained by justification the soulâ— is brought into a new state of life by it such as were really dead are really made alive This may be further cleared from these particulars following I. Such are said to be born again Iob. 3 5. not only by the Spirit which may import Sanctification but also by Water which may import Iustification wherein iniquities are pardoned the Soul is washen from its guilt through the bloud of Jesus Christ represented by the Water in Baptisme Thus are they also put into a new state being delivered from the Power of darkness and translated into the Kingdome of His dear Son Col. 1 13. Christ now owneth them as His Satan hath no more power and jurisdiction over them their guilt being removed and their sinnes being pardoned for because of sin hath Satan as a jailour had power over them as so many prisoners but sin being taken away in their justification they are loosed from his bondes and delivered from his prison and power We see Paul was sent Act. 26 18. To open eyes and to turn from darkness to light from power of Satan unto God that they may receive forgiveness of sinnes c. 2. Hereby they are brought into a State of Salvation and being out of harmes way they are said to be saved being now in a State of life and Salvation through Jesus Christ Ephes. 2 5 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith and how was this It was by Christ together with whom they were quickened when before they were dead in sins trespasses v. 5. So Tit. 3 5. Not by works of rigteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost But how was this work of Salvation begun See vers 7. That being justified by His grace we should be made heirs according to the hop of eternal life So that as justification maketh way for Adoption so it bringeth Souls into a saife state a state of Salvation so as they in a sense are already denominated saved that is brought out of the state of death and put into a state of Salvation Thus are they also said to be quickened together with Him i. e. Christ having forgiveness of all their sinnes Col. 2 13. This will be further clear if we consider how 3. Those who are justified shall certainly be saved not only in respect of the Decree and purpose of God but in respect also of the Gospel constitution and the declared will of God Therefore saith the Apostle Rom. 8 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus And all such as are in Christ Jesus are justified as the Gospel cleareth And againe more clearly vers 30. And whom he justified them he also glorified The connexion betwixt these two is indissoluble So doth the Apostle not only assert but he confirmeth this Rom. 5 9. Much more being now justified by his bloud we shall be saved from wrath through Him And againe vers 17. For if by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they which receive aboundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness That is who welcome embrace and receive the rich offer of grace and the rigteousness of Christ freely and graciously presented in the Gospel to all that will accept thereof shall reigne in the life by one Iesus Christ. So likewise vers last That as sin hath reigned unto death even so might grace reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. 4. They who are justified are brought into a state of blessedness and therefore may well be said to live or to be made partakers of a life Rom. 4 6 7 8. Even as David also describeth the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin See Psal. 32 1 2. If then they be brought into a state of blessedness they must be a in a state of life for death and blessedness are inconsistent 5. They are said to be redeemed and consequently brought out of the state of death wherein they were Ephes. 1 7. In whom we have redemption through his bloud the forgâ—veness of sins according to the riches of his grace In by justification is this forgiveness of sinnes whereby they are made partakers of a redemption See Col. 1. 14. Where the same is asserted by the Apoâ—â—le For further clearing of this let us see wherein this life consisteth and then we shall not only see that it is really a life but also that it is a special and excellent life To this end therefore let us consider these following particulars 1. Hereby they have Remission and pardon of their Iniquities as was now cleared and is manifest from Rom. 3 24 25. Being justified freely by this grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation for the remission of sins that are past c. And by this Remission and pardon of sins they have a freedom and exemption from the Curse and wrath of God that was lying upon them and to which they were obnoxious by sin and guilt Orginal and Actual which they were to be charged with that being the penalty threatned in the Law even death and the Curse of God for it is written cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the Law to do them Gal. 3 10. Deut. 27 26. O how excellent a life is this to be delivered from the wrath of the Almighty sin-revenging God and from the Curse and malediction of the great Legislator and dreadful Judge How rightly may they be said to live who are freed from the sentence of death to which they were liable from the penalty of the broken Law of the great God of Heaven and Earth and from that doom that all who shall not share of this rich privilege of Remission shall be made to hear at length depart from me ye Cursed c. A person guilty of death and lying in chaines looking for nothing but the sentence doom to be
given out against him would think himself a living man if in stead of that sentence which he was every houre looking for he should hear of a free and gracious pardon Much more may this state of Remission be looked upon as a state of life 2 They are hereby freed from that death Slavery and Tyranny which the Law did exercise over them before and doth exerce over all such as are not yet justified for as the Law discovereth sin Rom. 3 20. So it worketh wrath Rom. 4. 15. And thereby hath dominion over a man binding him over in chains as it were unto the wrath Curse of God But Christ hath now delivered them from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for them Gal. 3 13. And they by faith having fled to him are pardoned and the Law hath no more to say especially seing it is satisfied by the Cautioners being made a Curse and having fulfilled it in our Nature and place Rom. 8 3 4. Thus are they freed from and dead to the Law by the body of Christ Rom. 7 4. O what a noble sweet and refreshing life is this to be free of this Slavery and Bondage whereby the Law is alwayes lying about the neck of the poor sinner the Curse and wrath of God as oft as he sinneth And adde to this 3. That they are freed from the just and well grounded managment of the Law against them by Saâ—an or a wakened Conscience I say just and well grounded managment for I grant the Devil and a mis-informed Conscience can bring forth the Law and terrifie therewith a true beleever by charging him with the transgressions thereof even after these transgressions are pardoned but this is unjust and illegal and the beleever is under no obligation to acknowledge these Charges or to admit them but on the contrary to reject them as being groundless contrary to the tenor of the Gospel But the unbeleever and unjustified Soul is laid open to all these fearful charges and dreadful challenges to all those summons that are as so many poisoned darts shot into his very heart every one of which is a death to him which he seeth not how to evite Must not then this be a considerable and noble heavenly life to have sin pardoned and thereby be freed from these Soul-affrighting Heart-pierceing Conscience-burning and Mind-tormenting Acculations Charges Libels and Dittayes brought home and delivered by the wicked Accuser of the Brethren and a wakened enligtened Conscience Must there not be many lives in this one 2. Hereby they have peace and Reconciliation with God being justified by faith we have peace with God Rom. 5 1. God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them 2 Cor. 5 18 19. They are now reconciled Rom. 5 10. So Col. 1 20. And having made peace through the blood of His cross by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself Herein also they have received the Atonement Rom. 5 11. And the Enmity is abolished Ephes. 2 15. And slaine v. 16. So that the enmity on both hands is taken away they are reconciled unto the Lord who before were alienated and enemies in their mindes by wicked works Col. 1 21. And the Atonement being made the wrath of God is apaced towards them and that Law-wrath under which they did formerly lye is quite removed and they are no more looked upon nor dealt with as Enemies but owned and regarded as reconciled friends And who can express the good and sweet of this life or who can conceive what an heaven lyeth wrapped up here How justly may he be accounted a dead man who is an Out lawer and a Rebel to God who tasteth nothing of the Kindness and Friendship of God getteth nothing from Him as from a Friend but all as from an Enemie even all the outward favoures he enjoyeth in the World how great and glorious so-ever they be in the eyes of men And on the other hand how happy is he and how justly and deservedly may he be called a living man who can call God his Friend go to Him as to a Friend receive all from Him as from a Friend how inconsiderable so-ever in the eyes of the World the things be which he getteth This is a life the Good the Advantage the Joy the Comfort the Peace of which who can express 3. Hereby they are absolved and acquitted from all that could be justly laid unto their charge for justification in Scripture is expressive of a juridical Act of a just Judge absolving a person from the guilt laid to his charge and from the sentence of the Law due upon the account of that where with he was charged and never doth denote a making of righteous by infusing of tigteousness or by making any real physical change within whatever Papists say as wee see Deut. 25 1. 2 Sam. 15 4. Prov. 17 15. Esai 50 8. 1 King 8 31 32. Exâ—d 23 7. Mat. 12 37. Luk. 7 29. 16 15. And in multitudes of moe places O! what a life is here when a poor self-condemned sinner standeth before the Judge the righteous Lord hath his sinnes charged upon him and the Law brought forth cursing every transgressour for every transgression and justice appearing against him calling for the execution of the sentence according to Law and for death vengeance due by Law and upon all this can look for nothing but doom and present execution of the dreadful sentence what a life I say is it for such a sinner standing in this posture to have a sentence of absolution pronounced and be openly declared righteous and not worthy of death or free of the charge given in against him and thus is it with Beleevers according to the Gospel constitution for though they have sinned come short of the glory of God in themselves yet now they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ and that by faith Rom. 3 22 23 28. Gal. 2 16. Though they were Unrighteous Fornicators Idolaters Adulterers Effeminat Abusers of themselves with mankind Theeves Covetous Drunkards Revilers and Extortioners yet now they are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 6 9 10 11. God justified the Ungodly Rom. 4 5. The Circumcision by faith and the Uncircumcision through faith Rom. 3 30. 4. The ground of this sentence of Absolution passed upon them or in their favours will more manifest both the Reality and Excellency of this life Though they in themselves have been and are sinners and ungodly cannot plead not guilty nor adduce any ground in themselve where upon they can plead Exemption from the penalty of the Law but as they stand guilty in Law so they stand convicted in their own Consciences their mouthes are stopped and they are become guilty Rom. 3 19. They know and acknowlege that they have sinned and come short of the glory of God vers 23. so can expect nothing but
in its convinced Conscience before the tribunal of God and then seeth in the Gospel a well contrived way of absolution closeth with it How will all this shine forth unto them with a heavenly Lustre and Majestie And how sweetly will their hearts acquiesce in this Sure and Saife way of obtaining life Secondly This may discover unto us what a manifold wisdom of God is to be seen observed in the Gospel dispensation that even Principalities and powers may look into and wonder at as it is said to be made known unto them by the Church Ephes. 3 10. That is by what they see and observe in the administration thereof in the Church And in this part of Gospel-device there are several things remarkable that may give us ground to wonder at this manifold Wisdom of God The whole is a mysterie and this is a prime part of the mysterie and in this mysterie there are many mysteries a short view of which may be of some use to us 1. What a mysterious and wonderful thing is it That such as are dead by Law lying under the sentence thereof so bound over to the wrath of God according to the threatning of the Law which is just and righteous in all points and such as have nothing to defend themselves by from the threatned death unto which they are obnoxious nor any thing whereby to make Satisfaction to the demandes of the Law or to the offended Law-maker or where with to appease Him should notwithstanding hereof be Really Formally and Effectually absolved from the sentence of the Law by the sentence of the Judge and so made and declared to live juridically in Law-sense and to be as free of the curse and penalty of the Law as if they had never been guilty of the transgression thereof And thus is it here indeed Such as were dead in trespasses and sinnes and in the uncircumcision of the flesh are quickened together with Christ Ephes. 2 1 5. Col. 2 13. He who before had the wrath of God on him and abiding on him by beleeving on the Son of God hath everlasting life Ioh. 3 36. And they who were in a manner condemned already yet by beleeving on Him are not condemned yea have eternal life Ioh. 3 15 18. 2. What a mysterie is this That God who is righteous and just and the righteous Judge of the World and who hath declared that he looketh upon it as an abomination for any man to justifie the wicked Prov. 17 15. And whose judgement is alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. Should be one that justifieth the Ungodly And yet so is He said to be and so is He stiled and so is He held forth as the object of faith Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but beleeveth on Him that justifieth the Ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness Papists others who will not suffer their Reason to follow Revelation but will measure all the mysteries of the Gospel by the corrupt rule of Reason and wiredraw those according to the dictats of this pretend an Inconsistency here and therefore will rather pervert the whole nature of Gospel-justification than yeeld to the Spirits Revelation of the matter Hence it is that they say a person cannot be justified by God untill he be a Godly man and have a Righteousness within him upon the account of which he must be justified little adverting That by their own principles it would follow that no man should ever be justified for seing God is a God of righteousness and it is a sure and certaine thing that His judgment is alwayes according to truth He could not absolve a Person as righteous that were not perfectly righteous and void of all sin where is the man not out of his wits that dar say this remembering what David said Psal. 130. 3. 143. 2. But here lyeth the truth the mystery Such as are really and truely Ungodly in themselves and have nothing of their own but unrighteousness within them and whose righteousnesses are but as filthy rags Esai 64 6. are yet justified by God upon the account of a perfect righteousness imputed to them received by faith In the judgment of God such as in themselves are Ungodly are considered as clothed with the perfect righteousness of the Mediator Christ that Head publik person which free grace putteth on them they receive stand under by faith and so are justified declared to be righteous by God whose judgment herein and sentence is most righteous most consonant to truth for he justifieth such as are righteous though not with their own inherent righteousness yet with the righteousness of their cautioner now made theirs 3. Here is another piece of this mystery That Transgressours of the Law shall be Absolved and Justified yet the Law established which threatneth death to Transgressours and promiseth life only to such as observe it in all points Who can reconcile this seeming Contradiction that is not acquanted with the glorious mystery of the Gospel Paul a man well acquanted with this mystery tels us expresly that the Gospel-way of justification which he preached and fully cleared in his Epistles derogateth nothing from the Law but establisheth it Rom. 3 31. Where after he had cleared confirmed the Nature and Causes of Gospel-justification had said vers 30. that He was one God who would justifie the circumcision or Jewes by faith and the uncircumcision that is the Gentiles through faith hy obvâ—ateth this objection that some might have proposed said What shall then become of the Law you make it void by speaking of faith ascribing justification to it as a mean in opposition contradiction to works he answereth Do we then make void the Law through faith That be far from us yea we establish the Law So that there is nothing in this Gospel justification that weakeneth or maketh void the Law but on the contrary it is thereby more fully confirmed and established for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the righteouness of the Law might be fulfilled in us Rom. 8 2 3. Here is then the mysterie Transgressours of the Law are justified upon the account of what their Mediator and Surety their publik person Representer did suffered for Satisfaction to Law Justice the Law-giver by what He did suffered the Law is more established then it would have been by any thing that we did or could suffer for He made Satisfaction to all its demands there was perfect obedience given thereunto its commands answered in all points by our Lord Jesus Christ who knew no sin nor was deceite found in His mouth 2 Cor. 5 21. Esai 53 9. And because it was violated by sinners the Curse threatned was due therefore He did also
satisfie that demand by dying the shameful death of the cross undergoing the wrath curse due to us for sin thereby making a more perfect Satisfaction unto the Sanction and threatning part of the Law than we could have done by lying in hell for ever more And by faith closeing with Christ resting upon Him as such a satisfying Cautioner Redeemer the sinner acknowledgeth the Law in all its force confessing himself a Transhressour and obnoxious to the Curse now presenting to the Law Law-giver the obedience Satisfaction of Christ whereby both its commands Sanction are fully answered resting thereupon as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law for his guilt and of his right to the Crown which he formerly had forfeited 4. Here is another mystery That such as are unrighteous and Ungodly should be declared and pronunced Righteous In justification the person is declared not guilty of what was laid to his charge in order to punishment that juridically and so he is declared free from the punishment that the Accuser was seeking to have inflicted upon him and so is declared pronunced to be a righteous man though not one that hath not sinneth yet now one that is juridically righteous But how can this be seing every man and woman is guilty before God and is come short of the glory of God The mystery lyeth here as was said The righteousness of their Cautioner Christ is reckoned upon their score and is imputed to them they receive it by faith and so it becometh theirs for now by faith they are united unto Christ become members of His mystical body He being the Head and true Representative thereby He and they are one Person in Law being one Spirit as the Husband and the Wife are one person in Law being one flesh and as the Representer and Represented the Cautioner principal debtor and thus they have a true Interest in His Righteousness obedience to the Law which He yeelded not upon His own account being not obliged thereunto antecedently to His own voluntary condescension for us for as to His person He was God and so not obnoxious to any such Law imposed upon man who is in the way to the obtaining of a Crown as the end of his race yea nor was this requisite as to His humane Nature which by vertue of the personal union with the God-head was as to it self either in Patria and in possession of the State of blessedness or in a capacity thereto without working therefore And it is certaine that therefore His being made under the Law was for His owne people that in their room He might in the Nature of Man give perfect obedience to the Law and so make up a righteousness with which they might all become clothed by Imputation on Gods part by faith receiving it on their part and so be justified Hence-saith the Apostle by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous Rom. 5 19. And thus are they who are unrighteous in themselves being Transgressours of the Law constituted righteous as to the Commands of the Law by the righteousness of their Cautioner As also they are though guilty in themselves obnoxious to wrath yet pronunced free and absolved from that charge by the Imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ made in His sufferings death who did bear our griefs and carry our sorrowes and was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon Him and with His stripes we are healed Esai 53 4 5. 1 Pet. 2 24. And his own self bear our sins in His own body on the tree 3. There is likewise a mystery here That the Imputation of the obedience and Righteousness of Christ doth not take away the Imputation of His Satisfaction nor make His Satisfaction useless of no Importance or necessity as Socinians imagine who cast the whole Gospel in the mould of their own corrupt Reason and understanding For they think if Christs Righteousness be imputed to us we are perfectly righteous and if we be perfectly righteous we have no sin if we have no sin there is no need of Satisfaction for our sin But they little consider that we are both guilty of the broken Law and also nothwithstanding obliged to perfect obedience It is unreasonable to think that Adam by his breach of the Law was exeemed delivered from any obligation to obey the Law sin doth not neither can dissolve that obligation otherwayes the best way of being freed from the Lawes of God or Man were to break them cast them at our heels We then being transgressours still under the obligation of obedience to the whole Law our Mediator and Cautioner must not only obey the Law for us to the end we may inherite the promised reward but must also make Satisfaction for the Violation of the Law to the end we may escape Gods Curse wrath threatned in the Law and due to us for the breach of the same Had we perfectly kept the Law we had then had no need of any Satisfaction for our breach thereof but being guilty of sin this Satisfaction and the Imputation thereof to us is absolutely necessary And though we need not nicely here distinguish betwixt this Righteouness Satisfaction in reference to the different ends and say that by His Righteousness imputed to us we have right to the Crown by His Satisfaction freedom from death which was the penalty of the broken Law for God hath joined both together for both ends what He hath thus joined together as we should not separat so neither may we nicely scrupulously distinguish but adore the wonderful wisdom of God in this contrivance and observing our necessity of both sweetly acquiesce in and thankfully accept of both But you will say if we be perfectly righteous by the Imputation of Christs righteousness what need have we of any more are we not possessed of right to the reward and being righteous are we not free of our sin I answer It is true indeed if we said that Christs Righteousness or compleet obedience was first imputed to us or if the Scripture gave any ground to say so there might be some coloure for this Exception but as the Scripture giveth no such ground so neither do we assert it Only we have need of both both are graciously imputed and received by faith yea we being sinners if we might speak of an order here Satisfaction must first be imputed that thereby we may be freed from the sentence of the Law which most presseth a wakened convinced sinner who is most anxious hereanent crying out How shall I escape the wrath and curse of God But as the Lord hath graciously and wonderfully knit the effects together so is the Cause Both Christs obedience and Sufferings were so woven together that they belonged both to made up His
that they were all caused to meet together on Him Esai 53 6. He therefore was made a Sacrifice for sin or dealt with punished as a sinner though no sinner inherently but only by Imputation for He did bear our griefs carried our sorrowes was wounded for our transgressions bruised for our iniquities Esai 53 4 5. to wit now imputed to Him by God reckoned upon His account who knew no sin in Himself inherently So are we made the Righteousness of God in Him 2 Cor. 5 21. that is have His Righteousness who is God imputed to us who were in our selves inherently sinners being in Him by faith are dealt with as Righteous The manifest scope of the place the plaine Import of the word must enforce this truth on all who are not more than ordinarily blinded with prejudice Secondly as Adam's posterity who were not existing when he transgressed the Law of God but were only in his loines federally comprehended with him in that covenant by God's voluntary disignation appointment so did not actually really eat that fruit which Adam did eat yet have that sin guilt so imputed unto them that it is really accounted theirs not meerly in its Effects for its Effects are not truely Imputed neither can be saied to be so for that natural contagion corruption of Nature which is truely propagated to the posterity all actuall trangressions the fruits thereof cannot be said to be imputed because they are really theirs inherent in them But that original sin which is the guilt of Adam's first sin is only it which can be imputed unless we mean such an Imputation whereby our actual sinnes which we commit are said to be imputed to us when they are laid to our charge we actually punished therefore to them who did not actually commit it in their own person by vertue of this Imputation they are accounted guilty of that self same sin therefore are dealt with punished upon the account thereof no less than if they had actually committed it themselves in their own persons no less than Adam himselfs was punished therefore So are Beleevers being by faith united unto Christ made real members of His mystical body now interessed in Him as His Children Brethren made partakers of His Righteousness have it imputed unto them for all ends uses as if it had been their own without any Imputation The reading of the Apostles discourse Rom. 5. from vers 12. forward to the end may satisfy any as to this whole affaire who will yeeld themselves captives unto Truth for upon this doth the Apostle found His whole discourse explication of the rich advantages had by Christ His Righteousness clearing illustrating the same by that similitude of Adam whom He expresly calleth the figure of Him that was to come vers 14. so asserteth that as by one man sin entered into the world death by sin so death passed upon all beâ—ause all did sinne so by one man Jesus Christ the second Adam righteousness ontered into the world life by it so life passed upon all that were in Him because they are righteous in Him or have His righteousness imputed unto them Nay in the following verses the matter is cleared with an advantage unto Beleevers in Christ. But saith he vers 15 16 17 18 19. not as the offence so also is the free gift for if through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God the gift by grace by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded unto many c. And so he goeth on to shew what how great things beleevers receive from Christ with no less Yea rather with much more of a certainety than the Posterity of Adam were interessed in what he did and therefore as judgment was by one to condemnation saith he so the free gift is of many offences unto justification if by one mans offence death reigned by one much more they who beleeve or receive aboundance of grace of the gift of righteousness shall reigne in life by one Iesus Christ. And as the offence of one Adam was imputed unto all thereby guilt judgment came upon all making them liable to condemnation So by the righteousness of one Jesus Christ imputed to all that receive this aboundance of grace of the gift of righteouseess the free gift of justification cometh unto them reconciling them to God instating them for life And the ground reason of this is laid down vers 19. for as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so were guilty made liable to judgment condemnation So by the obedience of one that perfect obedience to the Law that Christ performed opposite to Adam's transgression disobedience shall many be made righteous that is constituted righteous therefore dealt with as such through this imputed righteousness so justified made heirs of life for vers 21. he addeth as sin hath reigned unto death even so grace must reigne through righteousness unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord. They then who will deny or oppose themselves unto this Imputation of Christ's righteousness must do manifest violence unto the whole discourse of the Apostle in this place Thirly Hence another evidencing ground of this imputation for as what is done by a publick person representing others whether upon one ground after one manner or another is accounted legally to be done by those who are represented they are dealt with accordingly as Adam was a publick person representing all his posterity that were to come of him by ordinary generation according to the ordination appointment of God So Christ of whom Adam was a figure was a publick person representing all whom the Father had given to Him for whom He had undertaken for whose sake He sanctified Himself Ioh. 17 19. become their Brother taking on their Nature Heb. 2 11 14. becoming like them in all things sin only excepted Heb. 2 17. comp with Heb. 3 15. Therefore He took not upon Him the Nature of Angels but the seed of Abraham Heb. 2 16. He was the Captaine of their Salvation vers 10. He is also made called the Head of the Church which is His body fulness Ephes 1 22 23. 5 23. Col. 1 18. and so He with His Church make up one mystical body whereof He is the Head Beleevers are members Thus there is a closs mystical union betwixt Christ Beleevers beyond any union that is in Nature whether it be that of Head members of Root Branches of King Subjects or of that betwixt Husband wife for all these are but dark resemblances of this Spiritual Union betwixt Christ Beleevers which is therefore compared unto these in part explained thereby for our better understanding of the matter but none of
disease Otherwise he should make sins of Omission to be no disobedience be cause Omissions are no Acts. Ans. The Apostle so compareth the Obedience of Christ with the disobedience of Adam as the Satisfaction with the provocation or as the Remedie with the disease as that withall chiesly he cleareth up the manner way thereof to be by Imputation thus That as Adam's sin of disobedience which includeth both Omission Commission being a Violation of the Law of the Covenant was imputed to his posterity they hence became guilty obnoxious to death yea were punished with original Corruption which cometh by propagation the consequences thereof so Christ's obedience which was full compleat is imputed unto Beleevers whereupon they become Righteous in order to their recovery out of their Natural state of sin and misery Further He saith By that obedience of Christ whereby it is here said that many are or shall be made Righteous that is jusâ—ified we cannot understand that Righteousness of Christ which consists only in obedience to the Moral Law but that Satisfactory Righteousness or obedience which He performed to that peculiar Law of Mediation which was imposed upon him and which chiesly consisted in his sufferings Ans. By the obedience of Christ unto the Law of Mediation strickly so taken as distinguished from His obedience to the Moral Law beleevers could not be made Righteous as the posterity of Adam are made sinners by his disobedience for that could not be properly imputed as this is as hath been shown so Paul's similitude should halt But 2. Why is Christ's obedience to the Law of Mediation set in opposition to His obedience to the Moral Law seing this was a part of that unto this He obliged Himself in undertaking the Mediation Was He not by the Law of Mediation bound as well to give obedience to the Law as to suffer the penalty And was He not obliged to both as Surety in room place And then why may not both be imputed unto them 3. Why should obedience here be thus restricked to the Law of Mediation He addeth two reasons but neither are valide The 1. is this Because otherwise the opposition â—etwixt Adam's disobedience which was but one single Act and Christ's Obedience if it were his universal conformity to the Law would not hold Ans. This same man told us in his former exception That Christ's obedience in respect of Adam's disobedience was considered opposed as the Satisfaction to the provocation as the Remedie to the disease now if this be true Christ made Satisfaction for no provocation but for that single act of eating the forbidden fruit what He did suffered should be only a Remedie for that one distemper if so how shall the rest of the Provocations and diseases be taken away or are there no more Provocations or diseases 2. Adam's disobedience was no Single act of disobedience but a disobedience including the breach of the whole Moral Law Saith not Iames that he who offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2 10. prove it too in the following vers The 2. is this The Effect that is here attributed to this obedience of Christ to wit justification or Righteous making of many is constantly appropriated to the death blood of Christ. Ans. This that is attributed to the blood death of Christ elsewhere to wit our justification sheweth that the death of Christ is not understood exclusively for by His death exclusivly considered we cannot-be made Righteous for the Imputation of another's suffering though it may exeem from death suffering yet it cannot constitute Righteous in reference to the commanding Law 2. The death of Christ must not be looked on as one act of obedience but as including all His foregoing acts of obedience belonging to His State of humiliation whereof His death was the crowning piece so as including as His whole suffering so His whole obedience to the Law under which he was made for He is said to have been obedient unto death even unto the death of the cross Phil. 2 8. not that the death of the cross was all His obedience as it was not the whole state of His humiliation but the terminating remarkable act thereof as it was not all His suffering His whole life being a life of suffering 3. If this obedience be understood of this one act of obedience in His dying justification be looked upon as the effect of this only what shall become of His Soul-sufferings while He was in an agonie in the garden But if the act of obedience in His death include these why not His whole state of humiliation And if it include all this why not also His obedience to the Law seing His being made under the Law belongeth to His state of humiliation as the Apostle tels us Gal. 4 4. He excepteth furder saying Suppose that by the obedience of Christ we should here undorstand His active obedience to the Moral Law yet it will not hence follow that men must be justified or made Righteous by it in such a way of imputation Ans. If by Christ's obedience to the Moral Law we be made Righteous as the posterity of Adam were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam that obedience of Christ must necessarily be imputed to us as Adam's disobedience was imputed to his posterity for there is no other way imaginable Let us hear his reason to the contrary For certaine it is said he that that justification or Righteous-making whereof the Apostle speaketh vers 19. is the same with that which He had spoken of v. 16 17 18. Now that Righteousness vers 17. is described vers 16. to be the gift i.e. the forgiveness of many offences i.e. of all the offences whereof a man either doth or shall stand guilty of before God unto justification and evident it is that that Righteousness c. cannot stand in the Imputation of a fulfilling of the Law Ans. 1. Though making Righteous and justification be inseparable yet they are not formally one the same but Righteous-making to wit by Imputation is antecedent unto justification the ground thereof as becoming sinners is not formally to be condemned but is prior to it the ground thereof 2. That free gift mentioned vers 16. is not free forgiveness but is that which is opposite to judgment or guilt or reatus tending to condemnation so is the same with that which is called the Grace of God the gift by Grace vers 15. and the gift of Righteousness vers 17. which is in order to justification free pardon As therefore the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guilt is not the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation but tendeth thereunto so neither is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justification but leadeth thereunto is followed therewith 3. Nor can the Adversary Himself take these words vers
16. the free gift is of many offences to be the same with free pardon of many offences else he must say that this free pardon goeth before justification consequently is not justification it self as he saith else where for the text saith that the free gift is of many offences unto justification as judgment or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was antecedent to condemnation 4. So then the true meaning is that the free gift of Righteousness hath respect unto many sinnes to the end that justification pardon that followeth thereupon might be full whileas the guilt that was imputed to Adam's posterity had respect only to his first breach of the Covenant for which all were made obnoxious to condemnation Lastly He saith It is but loose and unsavoury argueing to reason from a thing simply done to a determinat manner of doing of it so is it to reason from being made Righteous to a being made Righteous by Imputation Ans. The particular manner or way how we are made Righteous is aboundantly signified by our being made constitute Righteous by the Righteousness of another who was our Head Representative Surety that because it can be imagined to be no other way than by Imputation And Further the whole discurse of the Apostle here particularly the comparison so much here insisted upon putteth the matter beyond all debate As Adam's sin was imputed to his posterity whereby all were accounted sinners dealt with as such even as guilty by reason of Adam's act of sin So Christ's Righteousness becometh ours by Imputation we are made Righteous accounted such dealt with as such upon the account thereof No man can imagine how one shall be accounted guilty punished as guilty of a sinful act done by another unless the guilt of that sinful act be imputed to him so no man can imagine how one can be accounted Righteous dealt with as such upon the account of the Righteousness of another if that Righteousness of the other be not imputed to him And beside This is called a gift a free gift a free gift of Righteousness a free gift of Righteousness received which fully pointe forth this Imputation which we contend for Fiftly Rom. 8 3 4. For what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us The Law could not help a sinner from under the Curse nor unto the recompence of reward because it was weak through the flesh through the sin corruption of man whereby he could not give right and full obedience thereunto And therefore God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh who by His obedience suffering in His state of humiliation took away the sting of death the strength of sin by satisfying all the demandes of the Law the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the jus right of the Law which consisted in yeelding full perfect obedience in making full Satisfaction for the violation committed for the Law said cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written therein to do them Deut. 27 26. Gal. 3 13. And the Righteousness which is of the Law is that the man who doth these things shall live by them And this was so ordered that the Righteousness of the Law the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law the jus and demand of the Law mentioned might be fulfilled in us that is in our Nature by the Redeemer Surety who did suffered all this in for His own The Ethiopik Version is a clear commentary and when we were impotent to do the commands of the Law God sent His own Son for that sin who took on our body of sin condemned sin it self in our body that he might justifie us be propitious unto us and that so he might fulfill the work of the commands of the Law for them who walk in the Law of the holy Spirit Let us now see what John Goodwine excepteth p. 145. c. He saith 1. Some understand this rather of Sanctification than of justification by the fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law that Evangelical obedience to the precepts thereof which all those that truely beleeve in Christ do in part performe and desire and strive to performe more perfectly Ans. Gospel justification Gospel-Sanctification agree well together and Christ is the true foundation cause of both But that this is to be understood rather of justification appeareth hence 1. That this is a further explication confirmation of what was said vers 1. There is therefore now no Condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus 2. all that measure of Sanctification which the Saints through Grace attaine unto here cannot be called a fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law the Lawes demands are not thereby satisfied for it calleth for perfect obedience which none of the Sanctified can give 3. If this were understood of Sanctification why are these words added who walk not after the flesh bue after the Spirit 2. He said By the Righteousness of the Law which is here said to be fulfilled in beleevers cannot be meant the Righteousness or active obedience of Christ imputed because it must of necessity be such a Righteousness and such a fulfilling as may be apprehended as a proper and sutable effect of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh as the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 declareth But it is unpessible that the active obedience of Christ or the imputation of it should be any proper effect of condemning sin in the flesh that is of the abolishing or taking away the guilt or the accusing and condemning power of sin for when the guilt of sin is purged away there needeth no other Righteousness nor Imputation of Righteousness for justification Ans. 1. Christ's obedience Suffering need not be distinguished both being done in His state of humiliation and belonging-thereto both being necessary to answere the demand of the Law which we did lye under Christ performed both to the end the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or jus right of the Law might be fulâ—illed in us and for us by this Surety And before guilt be purged away we must have both imputed to us for justification by saith must not make the Law void but rather establish it 2. Neither is this vers 4. to be looked on as holding forth the end of that which did immediatly preceed in the end of vers 3. or of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh but rather as a further end of God's sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh or as a comprehensive end of all that was mentioned before 3. He saith That clause in them still notes either a subjective inhesion of some things in persons or else some kind of Efficiency But the Righteousness
of Christ is Subjectively and inherently in Himself only nor are we the workers of this righteousness Ans. Though the Righteousness of Christ be subjected in Him only wrought by Him alone yet the same being imputed unto Beleevers the Righteousness of the Law may be said to be fulfilled in them because by faith they are in Christ Christ is in them and in them is as much as for them or upon them or on their account as this same person hereafter granteth in a like case so it is accepted of God for all ends as if it were performed by them so it is fulfilled in our nature for for this end He came in the likeness of sinful flesh 3. He saith If by Righteousness of the Law we understand that entire obedience which every beleever according to the great variety of their several conditions callings relations stand bound to performe it cannot be said to be fulfilled in them by the imputation of Christ's righteousness for every beleever is bound to many moe particular acts than can be found in all that golden Catalogue of works of Righteousness performed by Christ. Ans. If the works of Righteousness performed by Christ shall not be a compleat Righteousness that can Satisfie the demandes of the Law where shall beleevers get a compleet Righteousness Shall their poor imperfect obedience wherewith themselves are not satisfied but complaine much of and mourne for be a more perfect compleat fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law than was the perfect obedience of Christ with which the Father was well pleased Or shall the single weak act of their Faith as this Author saith be a more entire fulfilling of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law than the Catalogue of the works of Righteousness performed by Christ What probable ground is there for this imagination 2. Christ's obedience was perfect the Law-giver was satisfied there with accepted of it in the behalfe of all the chosen ones all their defects sinnes in their various conditions callings Relations were done away by the Satisfaction made by Christ so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law was perfectly fulfilled in their behalf this being imputed unto them received by faith no more is requisite unto a stateing of them into a state of pardon right to glory 5. He saith The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not obedience to or conformity with the Law but rather that justification which was the end and intent of the Law or rather that jus or right or Law as it were of the Law Ans. But all this will not weaken our Argument for that right jus or demand of the Law was as to us now sinners both Satisfaction for transgressions committed and full and compleat obedience till both were done performed there could be no justification of sinners and so this rather establisheth than hurteth the doctrine of Imputation whatever he may imagine 6. He saith By the word Law cannot necessarily be understood the Moral Law for 1. The weakness of the Law extends also to the judicial and Ceremonial 2. The jewes to whom he specially addresseth himself in all this disputatiâ—n built as much on the observation of the Ceremonial Law 3. The Moral Law though perfectly observed could not have justified all men at least not the jewes who were obliged to the observation of other Lawes 4. The Imputation of the observation of the Moral Law would not have served for the justification of the jewes who were under the transgression of other Lawes Ans. It wiâ—â— satisfie us if by the Law here be understood that universal Rule of Righteousness which God prescribed unto men that certainely is the Moral Law whereof as to the jewes the Ceremonial judicial were a part or were reduced unto particularly the Ceremonial Law being God's instituted worship they were obliged to observe it by vertue of the Second command And thus both the Exception all the Reasons confirming it evanish for 1. we take not the Law here so narrowly as to exclude the other lawes which God gave to the jewes seing they are all reduced there unto comprehended thereunder 2. Paul is here mainly writting for Information of the Gentiles the Church of Rome though there might be some jewes among them what he saith may be also for their use yet this will not prove that by the Law he understandeth any other than that perfect rule of Righteousness which God gave unto them comprehending these other Lawes as appendices thereof 3. The Moral Law thus taken if observed could have justified even jewes if we suppose they had not been born sinners 4. Christ having fulfilled all Righteousness His Righteousness was an observation of this Universal Law therefore the Imputation thereof can serve for the justification both of jewes Gentiles Lastly He saith The clear meaning of the place seemeth to be this That that justification or way of making men Righteous which the writings of Moses prophefied of long since to wit by faith in the Messiah might be accomplished made good and fully manifested in us or upon us viz in our justification who by an eminency of holiness in our lives above the straine and pitch of men under the Law give testimony unto the world that the Messiah the great justifier is indeed come into the world and having suffered for sin and overcome death hath poured out the Spirit of Grace aboundantly upon those that beleeve Ans. 1. To take the Law here for the meer writtings of Moses then to Interpret the fulfilling thereof as is here done is to exclude the witnessing of the Prophets which Paul expresly mentioneth Rom. 3 21. 2. What could this contribute to prove that there was now no condemnation to such as were in Christ Jesus among the Gentiles 3. How can this be a proof of what was said vers 3. foregoing 4. How can this be the end of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh as himself said it was Except 2 5. He told us before that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did properly Signifie jus right or Law of the Law now I pray what is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this jus right of Moses's writtings And how is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oâ— Righteousness fulfilled 6. What then can be meant by the weakness of Moses's writtings or how could they be said to be weak through the flesh 7. And how could God be said by this Interpretation to send His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh because Moses's writtings were weak through the flesh 8. I see then in us may import the same that upon us importeth though it was excepted against formerly as we heard 9. It seemeth by this Interpretation that there was no Eminency of holiness or walking after the Spirit among those who were under the Law which is utterly false 10. Christ by His coming did not only fulfill Moses's writtings
that denote Beleevers Union with Him as the ground of their Interest in His Righteousness should not be asserted to Import this Imputation yet this words that we might be made the Righteousness of God will be a rock whereupon Imputation may stand for they hold this forth unto us That as God made Christ sin by Imputation so He maketh us righteous yea the Righteousness of God by Imputation Except 5. The clear meaning is this that God for that end made Christ sin that is an offering or Sacrifice for sin for us that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him that is that we might be justified or made a Society or Remnant of Righteous ones after that peculiar manner of justification which God hath established through that Sacrifice of His Son Ans. When Christ was made an offering for sin the guilt of sin was laid upon Him even the guilt of our sin And if we be justified or made a Society of justified ones we must be made a Society of righteous ones and if we be made a Society of Righteous ones we must first have a Righteousness seing we have not a Righteousness of our own we must have a Righteousness made over to us and seing we have this Righteousness made over to us as being in Christ it must be the Righteousness of God So that though this Interpretation be very far fetched and hath no countenance from the words and destroyeth the cohesion of these words with the former as also the reason that is contained in them adduced for confirmation of what was said vers 19. yet it cannot destroy the doctrine of Imputation but must contribute to its support though a little more remotely He laboureth to give strength to this his Interpretation by alleiging 1. That it is a frequent Scripture expression to call the sin-offering or the Sacrifice for sin by the name of sin simply as Exod. 29 14. and 30 10. Levit. 5 6 16 18 19 7 1 2 7 9 7. Ezek. 44 27. 45 19. 23. Hos. 4 8. Ans. Though it be true that the Hebrew words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do sometimes signify sin sometimes an offering for sin yet the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth alwayes signify sin in the New Test. and the 70 do not use this Greek word in the places cited except Exod. 29 14. there in the version that is in the Biblia Polyglot Lond. It is in the Genitive case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of sin the chald-paraph calleth it an Expiation Targ. Ionath Hierof say it is a sin so doth the persik version the Samaritan Version turneth it that is for sin the Arabik an Expiation But further though it were granted to be so taken here yet our cause would hereby suffer no prejudice but be rather confirmed as was lately shown And when the same word used to express a Sacrifice for sin which signifieth sin it self we may hence be confirmed in this that that Sacrifice for sin hath guilt laid upon it before it can be Sacrifice for sin it must be sin in respect of this before it be a due Sacrifice or oblation for sin And therefore Christ must have been sin in law by Imputation or have the guilt of sin laid upon Him before He could be a fit Sacrifice for sin He alleigeth 2. To express a Number of justified or righteous persons by the abstract terme of Righteousness is very agreable to the Scripture dialect in other places as poverty for poor captivity for captives Ans. 1 Yet no one instance can be given where the word Righteousness hath this Import 2 But how ever as was said these justified or righteous persons must be righteous else they cannot make up such a company as captivity can never signify a company of men that are not captives nor poverty a company of persons that are not poor So that this company of righteous ones must needs be righteous and that in order to justification seing they have no Righteousness of their own for in themselves they are ungodly they must have a Righteousness by Imputation 3 Why should they be called the Righteousness of God according to this Interpretation And how is the opposition here observed betwixt Christs being made sin their being made the Righteousness of God in Him But this man by this Interpretation transgresseth all lines of Correspondence He alleigeth 3. That addition of God imports that that righteousness or justification which beleevers obtaine by the Sacrifice of Christ is not only Righteousness of Gods free donation but of His special procurement and contrivement for them Ans. 1 Righteousness and justification are not one the same how oft so ever he name them as Synonymous 2 We grant that the Righteousness the Iustification which Beleevers obtaine are both Gods free gift His contrivement But notwithstanding hereof yea so much the rather is there a Righteousness imputed to them the Righteousness of Christ who is God and a Righteousness which will be accepted of God whose judgment is according to truth as a sufficient ground whereupon to pronounce such as in themselves are ungodly to be Righteous so to justifie them He alleigeth 4. That by the grammatical construction dependance of the latter clause our being made the Righteousness of God in Christ upon the former it is evident that in the latter such an Effect must of necessity be signified which may answere that cause to wit the death of Christ for us this is deliverance from the guilt punishment of sin not the Imputation of His active obedience Ans. As Christs death could not be separated from His Obedience which is thereby presupposed His death being the Sacrifice of one who is made under the law and was obedient thereunto unto death that in the room stead of His own So the Imputation of Righteousness to us should not be separated from the Imputation of His Sufferings both being necessarily required unto sinners who had sinned yet remained under the obligation of the law in order to their acceptance with God and Justification He alleigeth 5. The Scriptures when they speak of the Sufferings of Christ as a cause inrespect of justification never ascribe any other effect unto them but only either the Remission of sins deliverance from wrath Redemption or the like Ans. As the Scriptures making so frequent mention of the Sufferings of Christ do not exclude His Obedience so neither do they exclude the Imputation of His Obedience in order to our justification and receiving a Right to glory yea they make our being constitute Righteous an Effect of His Obedience Righteousness or Righteous-making is accompanied with Justification So that though the Scriptures speak sometimes more expresly of the Sufferings sometimes more expresly of the obedience of Christ according to the exigence of the cause handled yet both are inseparable
Salvation we must be clothed with the Righteousness of Christ which is that which faith grippeth to apprehendeth that the shame of our nakedness may not appear and we may be in case to stand before the Tribunal of God CHAP. X. Some Arguments for the Imputation of Christs Righteousness Vindicated from the Exceptions of John Goodwine THe truth concerning the Imputation of Christs Righteousness hath been hitherto asserted from Scripture several of these passages have been vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. Goodwine a maine adversary thereunto For further clearing of the matter we shall see what Exceptions the same man bringeth-in against the Arguments which are made use of by the Orthodox for the truth asserted Argum. 1. If there be no standing in judgment before God unless we be endued with perfect Righteousness then must the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to us in our justification But there is no standing for us in judgment before God unless we be endued with a perfect Righteousness Ergo c. Against this he excepteth pag. 192. Chap. 7. saying That the consequence of the former proposition is not good And so doth Bellar. answere de Iustific lib. 2. cap. 7. So do also the Socinians But let us hear his reasons Remissin of sins saith he which is the purchase procurement of the death of Christ is a perfect Righteousness is every way able to bear us out in judgment Ans. Remission of sins neither is nor can be called righteousness â—or a pardoned person is noâ— the same with one that hath kept the law though by vertue of this pardon he is freed from the punishment due to the transgressours of the law yet hath he no right to the reward promised to the keepers of the law 2 Remission of sins being the purchase of Christs death Sufferings cannot be had without the Imputation of the death Sufferings of Christ unto the Beleever so hereby one halfe of the truth must be granted But His Sufferings Obedience going together both making up one Mediatory Surety-righteousness performed by Christ in His estate of humiliation both most be Imputed made over to the Beleever to the end he may receive pardon right to Glory Arg. 2. He that is justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own must needs be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed because there is no righteousness to be found in any other for the justification of a person in the sight of God But every man that is justified is justified by the righteousness of another and not by his own Ergo c. He excepteth 1. The Major is false because the passive obedience of Christ is the Righteousness of another and men may be are throughly fully justified by the merite hereof communicated to them in the free pardon of their sinnes and so need not the imputation of His active obedience Ans. 1 We plead not for the sole Imputation of Christs active obedience but for the Imputation of all that He did and suffered for in the room stead of His owne 2 Where are Christs meer Sufferings as distinguished from His obedience called a righteousness or how can meer Sufferings as such or bearing of the punishment threatened by the law be called a righteousness doth not righteousness denote the conformity of actions unto the law 3 When it is said the merite of Christs passive obedience is communicated unto us the meaning must be one of these two either that it self is properly made over imputed to us or onely in its effect free pardon of sinnes If this latter be said Then no other Imputation is granted than what Socinians will yeeld unto how can it be said to be Imputed as to its Effects when it self is not Imputed in order to the partaking of these effects If the former be said then there is something that is in it self imputed not meerly in its Effects And if Christs Passions Sufferings be imputed abstracted from His righteousness Active obedience they shall be justified without a righteousness And it neither is nor ever will be proved that pardon of sinnes is the whole of justification or that a pardoned man is 〈◊〉 ipso that he is pardoned a righteous man or that a pardoned man meerly as such hath right to the recompence of reward promised to the fulfiller of the law Except 2. to the Minor A man may be said saith he to be justified by the Righteousness of another and not by his own in a double sense Either 1. by way of merite and then it is true that every one is justified by the Righteousness of another that is by the merite of the righteousness of another or 2. by way of forme so it is altogether untrue for that Righteousness where with a man is formally made Righteous is alwayes a mans own by donation Possession Ans. 1 When a man is justified by the merite of the Righteousness of another that Righteousness of the other must be imputed to the justified person or we have no other Imputation than what Socinians yeeld to 2. If the righteousness whereby one is formally justified be his owne by donation possession no other possession be thereunto requisite then we may be said to be formally justified by the righteousness of Christ for we affirme that Beleevers are possessed thereof by Gods free donation and Imputation thus the whole is granted for nothwithstanding hereof that same righteousness which is made over to the Beleever by free donation Imputation is Christs Inherently so is the righteousness of another Whereby we see that the members of this distinction thus explained are not different Yet we must not think that this righteousness of Christ is so given to us as that it is inherent in us wrought in us as Faith Repentance are for even Remission of sinnes whereby he will have us formally justified is not so in us as Faith and Repentance are in us And through Gods Imputation and Donation the righteousness of Christ may be the Beleevers when it is received by faith as well as Remission of sinnes for to speak in his own language that which is given unto man by God may truely and properly be called his own 3 That remission of sins is formal justification will never be proved and seing he will have Remission of sins to be the pure Effect of Christs Sufferings and death so must justification be and then why saith the Apostle Rom. 4 25. Who was delivered viz. to Sufferings and death for our offences and raised againe for our justification Arg. 3. If Beleevers have a true and real communion with Christ then is his Righteousness theirs by imputation But the former is true c. It may be he proposeth the Argument in such a mode way as may be most to His own advantage for who argueth thus he nameth not Yet it is true that
charity Concil Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 10. whereby we see this Justification whereof they say Iames speaketh Chap. 2. is manifestly nothing else but the very grouth of Sanctification and so they know no Iustification at all distinct from Sanctification wherefore we need say no more against the same it being Justification formerly explained which we treat of and not of Sanctification whereof they seem only to speak when they mentione Iustification and indeed this their Iustification which is true Sanctification admitteth of various and different degrees of this they may imagine not only a first and a second but according to the various degrees thereof a third and a fourth yea a Tenth Twentieth if they please The Scripture it is true maketh mention of twosold Iustification one by the Works of the Law another by Faith but it asserteth with all that these are inconsistent and that no man living can be justified the first way by the works of the Law Mr. Baxter beside the difference he maketh betwixt Justification as Begun and as Continued in reference to the different conditions required to the one and to the other imagineth a twosold Iustifieation or two Iustifications or as he saith against D. Tullie pag. 167. rather two parts of one yet in his last Reply to Mr. Cartwright pag. 46. he maketh them as distinct as are the two lawes he speaketh of the first he saith is by God the Creatour the second by Christ the Redeemer and in order to the vindication clearing of this he speaketh much of a twosold Righteousness In his writtings against Mr. Cartwright pag. 70. giving us several to the number of thirteen differences betwixt them making the one to consist in out Non-obligation to punishment by the Law of works because of its dissolution upon Satisfaction made by Christ to be without us in the merite satisfaction of Christ to be in substance the same with Pardon to be opposite to that guilt which sin in general procureth to be but the tantundem of what the Law required to justify us from a true Accusation that we by sin deserve death c. And the other to consist in our Non-obligation to the far greater punishment to be within us done by us to consist in innocency or notguiltiness to be opposite to that guilt which one particular sin procureth to be the idem required in the new Law to justifie us from a false Accusation that we have not performed the Conditions of the new Covenant c. all which to examine is not my present purpose only I shall say as to this two sold Justification that it is an explication of the matter which we have not in Scripture which I judge should only regulat both our Conceptions Expressions in this affaire and what ever pleasure men may take to give way to their Luxuriant phancies yet it will be safest for us to follow the threed of the Word and to speak of this mysterie according to Revelation and not according to our Apprehensions And of all men I judge Mr. Baxter should be most averse from creating new Termes Words Expressions in these divine things who expresseth himself so angry-like especially in his later writtings in words which to some may seem to favour little of sobâ—iety or of modesty against such as contend about words when it may be they are but defending the received orthodox doctrine from his new Notions and Expressions as being Censorious dividers Word-souldiers I know not what But as to the matter in hand in particular as to this second Iustificaâ—ion or rather first for it is supposed to be first in order of nature if not in time also which is founded upon our Innocency or performance of the Conditions of the new Covenant Faith Repentance New Obedience so is a declaring of us Righteous because of our inherent Righteousness I shall only say these few things 1. That I finde not this new Iustification explained expressed nor so much as hinted by the Apostle in all his discourses and disputes about this subject though he hath spoken very much of Iustification and on all occasions did vindicate clear up the gospel-truth thereanent If it be said That all this is sufficiently hinted more then hinted by the Apostle when he tels that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness I answere What the proper meaning of this Expression is shall be shown hereafter where it shall also be manifested that the Faith here said to be imputed is not our act of Faith but Christ his Righteousness laid hold on by faith or the object of Faith held forth in the Gospel received by Faith And for answere to this I judge it sufficient to say That the Apostle is manifestly there speaking of that other Iustification which we owne for the only Iustification hold forth in the Gospel whereby Remission of sins is had Peace with God through a Righteousness without of that Iustification which taketh away all glorying both before God man and wherein God is hold forth to be laid hold on by Faith as one that justifieth the ungodly and of that Justification which is from the Accusation of the Law by all which many other Particulars observable in the Apostles discourse there it is undeniable that he is speaking of that other Iustification which we asserte If it be said That all this is sufficiently imported when Faith is made the Condition of Justification we are said to be justified by faith I answer What way Faith is the Condition of Justification is so to be called shall be seen afterward only I say that what the Scripture speaketh of this can give no ground for a new distinct Justification because this new Iustification is rather a Iustification of Faith or of the Beleever because of his faith purely upon the account of his Faith for it is a sentence of judgment pronunceing the man to be a Beleever because he is so his faith to be right Faith because it is so than any Iustification of him by faith Not to mentione this that together with faith as the Condition Repentance New Obedience is joyned then there must be a Iustification of works or of the man by yea because of works which cannot be imported by being Iustified by faith because that is alwayes opposed to Iustification by works Beside that even in mens courts there are not two distinct sentences of the judge required in deciding of a Controversie depending upon the clearing of a Condition one anent the truth of the Condition the other anent the thing depending upon that Condition but the Condition being instructed to be performed the one sentence is given out much less is this requisito here where we have to do with God who knoweth whether the Condition be performed or not and needeth not that we instruct the same against the Accusations of Satan or of the
at all or Justification must be some other thing than a pronunceing or declaring of a man Righteous 2 Why have we heard so much above said for Faiths being Righteousness why have there been so many passages of Scripture adduced to confirme this particuiarly such as mention the Righteousness of faith or the Righteousness of God by faith But it may be this salvo is added a Righteousness properly so called Yet then it will follow that it must be at least a Righteousness improperly so called and that must be an improper speach faith is imputed for righteousness and if that be an improper speech why is there so much noise made about the impropriety of the speech when we take Faith for the object of faith in that sentence faith imputed unto righteousness All that great clamoure must now recurre upon the excepter and his followers 3 If this which he hath given be the meaning of these words faith imputed unto righteousness let any judge whether our sense of them or this be most genuine freest of trops figures which of the two is apparently farthest fetched 4 Faith then it seemeth is tendered unto God faith being but a Righteousness improperly so called we tender unto God in our Justification a Righteousness only that is improper thereupon are declared Righteous whether properly or improperly I know not 5 If upon the tender of Faith God look upon us as Righteous then we mâ—st be righteous for we must be what he seeth acknowledgeth us to be And then I ask whether doth he look upon us as properly Righteous or as improperly Righteous 6 If God look upon us as having fulfilled the condition of the Covenant as Righteous upon that account then he must look upon us as properly righteous faith must be a proper righteousness or he must say that Christ hath purchased that an improper Righteousness shall be the Condition of the Covenant for we heard he said that Christ had purchased that Faith should be the condition But the performance of the Condition of God's Covenant must be hold for a proper Righteousness as perfect obedience was under the first Covenant And we heard lately that Faith was truely properly called a Righteousness that it might be so called with truth in sufficient propriety of speech in his answere to the first argument 7 If we be righteous by faith be looked upon as such by God having performed the condition of the Covenant it is not imaginable how we shall not be if not meritoriously yet at least formally Righteous seing as Adam by Perfect Obedience would have performed the Condition of that Covenant under which he was and thereby had been both Meritoriously formally Righteous so must it be now in respect of faith which is made to have the same place force efficacy in the new Covenant and that through the procurment of Christ that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant 8 He saith we are made meritoriously righteous by Christ's sufferings But what is the meaning of this Is this the meaning thereof that Christ's sufferings hath merited a Righteousness to us Then hereby nothing is spoken to the point for we are not now speaking of Christ's Righteousness but of ours And againe I would enquire what Righteousness hath it merited unto us Whether a meritorious Righseousness or a formal Righteousness as he distinguishad or both Or is the meaning this That through Christ's merites sufferings we have a Righteousness which is meritorious If so I enquire what is that Righteousness Whether is it Christ's Righteousness imputed to us made ours or is it our Faith that becometh meritorious If this last be said that is granted which was denied Faith must be accounted our meritorious Righteousness If the former be said imputation of Christ's Righteousness will be granted more than we dar say 9 He saith we are made formally righteous with the pardon of sins But this is never proved and it hath been often asserted And how will he make this a Formal Righteousness Righteousness properly so called Is this any conformity to a Law in whole or in part Did not himself insinuat in his answere to the first Argum. that nothing can with truth and in sufficient propriety of speech be called a Righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of God And sure I am Pardon of sins is not any such conformitie 10 The summe of this answere is this Faith is not imputed as a Righteousness but it is said to be imputed unto Righteousness because it is the fulfilling of the Condition of the new Covenant whereby we come to be made Righteous meritoriously by Christ's death Righteous formally with the pardon of sins And what a wiredrawn untelligible self-contradictory sense this is let every one judge He denieth the consequence 2. Because suppose that this inference lay in the bowels of what we hold that faith were a proper righteousness yet neither would this argue that therefore God should receive a righteousness from us in our justification for we rather receive our faith from God for our justification shen God from us in our justification though I grant that in a sense a far off with much adoe it may haply be made a truth that God receives our faith from us in our justification Ans. But sure though Adam's obedience was originally from God efficiently he being the First Cause yet had Adam been justified according to that Old Covenant he had been justified by his own works not by the Righteousness of another bestowed on him by God so he had been said to have presented his own Righteousness unto God in order to his justification and God might have been said to have received it from him in his justification or rather in order thereunto Now just so is it here as to Faith for faith is our work we come with it to God he taketh it from us thereupon justifieth us according to our Adversaries opinion not in a sense a far off or made with much ado as he supposeth but in a sense most plaine obvious He saith lastly That that imputation of faith for righteousness which he protecteth supposeth a righteousness given unto received by men because it could not be truely said that God doth impute faith for righteousness unto any man except he should make him righteous upon his beleeving Now as it is impossible that a man should be made righteous without a righteousness in one kinde or other so is it impossible also that that righteousness wherewith a man is made righteous in justification should be derived upon him from any other but from God alone for this righteousness can be none other but forgiveness of sins Ans. 1 How can the Imputation of Faith suppose a Righteousness given unless the Righteousness be given before Faith be imputed seing what is supposed is alwayes first in order
flow therefrom be accounted one the same thing but two distinct parts of one compleet effect And therefore the mentioning of the one in stead of the whole proveth no confusion or sameness but rather an inseparablness which is yeelded He move â—in an objection against himself â— 5. thus How can God be said to impute a Righteousness to a man which never was nor ever had a being no Righteousness at least of that kind whereof we now speak having ever been but that perfect obedience which Christ performed to the Law This indeed is a very rational question for our Author talketh much of an imputed Righteousness and never doth nor yet can tell us what that is that can deserve the name of a Righteousness Let us heare what he answereth 1. saith he There is as express compleet a Righteousness in the Law as ever Christ himself performed Ans. But what Righteousness is or can be in a Law but what is there by way of prescription And who doubts 〈◊〉 the perfection of this that acknowledgeth the perfection of the Law This is utterly impertinent to the purpose in hand where the question is of a Righteousness consisting in conformity to the Law and which must be attribute to man to whom the Law is given And what if it be said saith he that God in remission of sins through Christ from out of the Law imputeth to every man that beleeveth such a Righteousness as is proper to him Ans. To say this is to speak plaine non-sense for what is that to furnish a man with a Righteousness out of the Law Can a man be changed into a Law or can a man have any Righteousness prescribed by a Law but by thoughts words deeds bearing a conformity to the commands of the Law And how can 〈◊〉 pardon cause this transformation can the pardon of murther or of any prohibited act make that act conforme to the Law Pardon thus should be a self destroyer for an act that is no transgression of a Law can need no pardon and thus pardon should make itself no pardon What he subjoineth hath bin spoken to elsewhere He giveth a 2. answere saying To say God cannot impute a Righteousness which never had a being i.e. which never was really actually performed by any man is to deny that he hath power to forgive sinâ— Ans. This hath been is full denied it never hath been nor never shall be proved that forgivness of sin is the imputation of a Righteousness Though he addeth from Rom. 4 6. 3 28. c. that it is the imputation of such a Righteousness as consisteth not noâ—es made up of any works performed to the Law by any man which is but a Righteousness that never had a being Ans. This is but a plaine perverting of the Scriptures which speak only of works in that exclusion done performed by us as the whole scope and all the circumstances of the passages demonstrate to any man who will not willingly put out his owne eyes and it were a meer imposing upon the Understandings of the most ordinary Reader and a miserable mispending of time to goe about the evincing of this which is so obvious But what desperat shifts will not a wrong cause put men to use who will not be truths captives His 5. Conclusion cometh here also to be considered It is this He that is fully discharged from his sins needeth no other Râ—ghteousness to give him-Right 〈◊〉 unto life This is as false as the rest for the Law is do this live and pardon for transgressions is not the same with doing of the Law What is his reason death is the wages of sin is of sin only being due to no creature in any other respect nor upon any other terme whatsomever But what then Now he that it free of death no wayes obnoxious thereunto cannot but be conceived to have a right unto life there being neither any middle condition between death life wherein it is possible for a reasonable creature to subsist nor againe any capacity of life but by some right â—itle thereunto Ans. Though this be true as to us now that he who is no wayes obnoxious unto death hath a right unto life Yet the consequence that he would draw from it is not good to wit that that only which taketh away the obnoxiousness unto death giveth also a right to life because God hath inseparably joined these effects together as also their distinct causes together and giveth them inseparably so that he who is pardoned hath also a right to life not meerly upon the account that he is pardoned but because together with the imputation of the Satisfaction of Christ whence floweth pardon he imputeth also Christ's Righteousness upon which followeth the right to life And howbeit now as to us there is no middle state betwixt these two Yet in Adam there was for while he stood he was not obnoxious unto death and yet he had not right unto life but was to work out perfect his rask to that end But he tels us That while Adam stood he was already in possession fruition of life else he could not be threatned with death Ans. This is not the life whereof we are speaking we are speaking of the life promised by that Covenant unto perfect obedience But it seemeth that he joyneth with the 〈◊〉 in this granting no life promised to Adam but a Continuance of what he was already in possession of He enquireth If he had not a right unto life by his freedome from sin but was to purchase this right by an ctlual fulfilling of the Law it would be known what quantitâ—eâ— of obedience to the Law he must have paid before he had made this purchase how long he must have obeyed keept the Law Ans. There is no necessity of any exact knowledge of these things our maine question doth not â—â—and or â—all with the knowledge or ignorance of them Yet we may say and that is sufficient that that Law or Covenant requiring perfect obedience and perpetual without the least omission or commission he must have paid all that obedience which the Law required of him to the day of his transâ—â—â—gration or change to glory before the 〈◊〉 had been made He addeth for had he lived a two yeers in his integrity uprightness without the least touch of any transgression he hâ—d still but a debtor of obedience to the Law upon the same termes that he was at the beginning the least interruption or breach in the course of his obedience had even now been the forfeiture of that life he enjoyed Ans. How long Adam should have lived upon earth before his translation to glory we know not nor is it of use for us to enquire it is sufficient to know that he was to finish his course to persevere in obedience to the end if he would not both forfeit the life he had and the expectation of
not expresly say so and yet this he will not say seing he granteth that his obedience was an essential requisite absolutly necessary to the constitution of him our Priest and his Sacrifice propitiatory But we read of his being made under the Law to redeem these that were under the Law Gal. 4 4 5. and of his Righteousness obedience as necessary to our Righteousness justification and as having a no less direct influence into the same than Adam's offence disobedience had unto our death damnation Rom. 5 17 18 19. CHAP. II. Christ underwent the Curse of the Law MR. Goodwine tels us in his 14. Conclusion That the sentence or Curse of the Law was not properly executed upon Christ in his death But this death of Christ was a ground or consideration to God where upon to dispense with his Law to let fall or suspend the execution of the penalty or curse therein threatned Ans. 1 This is directly contrary to what the Apostle saith Gal. 3 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us for it is written cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree It was the Curse of the Law that we were under were to be delivered from and this Christ hath delivered us from by coming in our stead bearing it for us yea bearing it so that he is said to have been made it being made a Curse for us which is a most emphatick expression to hold forth Christ's bearing the very penalty threatned in the Law which cursed every one that continued not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them vers 10. Deut. 27 26. If Christ underwent the Curse of the Law he sure did suffer the very sentence or punishment threatned in the Law for the Curse of the Law can import no other thing 2 If Christ did not bear the sentence or Curse of the Law how could he be said to have died or suffered in our place room or stead No man is said to suffer in the place stead of another who doth not suffer that same particular kind of punishment that the other is obnoxious to and is obliged to suffer 3 Why was Christ said to be made sin for us 2. Cor. 5 21. to bear our iniquities Esai 53 6. 1. Pet. 2 24. If he did not undergoe the very punishment that was due to us because of sin 4 This is to give away the cause in a great measure unto the Socinians who will not yeeld that Christ's death was any satisfaction to the justice or payment of our criminal debt or a suffering the punishment of sin due to us for if Christ did not suffer the curse sentence of the Law he did not suffer the punishment which the Law threatned and justice required he did not suffer any punishment at all if he suffered not our punishment or that which was due to us he did not stand in our Law-place to answere all the demands of justice according to what we were liable unto by the Law nor did he bear our sins in his own body on the cross 5 If Christ's death was a ground or consideration to God whereupon to dispense with his Law then it is apparent that the consideration of Christ's death was anterior to the dispensing with the Law whereas the contrary is rather true to wit that the Lord's dispensing with the Law was anteriour to his sending of Christ because the Law properly knowing no mediator and requiring none to suffer the penalty for another must first in order of nature be considered as dispensed with before Christ be substituted in the room of sinners to undergo what they deserved 6 If it was only a ground to God whereupon to let fall or suspend the execution of the penalty then it seemeth Christ's death was no full payment or Satisfaction for a full Satisfaction requireth more than a suspension of the execution of the punishment even a full delivery there-from Let us heare his reason Because saith he the threatning Curse of the Law was not at all bent or intended against the innocent or Righteous but against transgressours only Therefore God in inflicting death upon Christ being innocent and Righteous did not follow the purport or intent of the Lawâ—but in sparing forbearing the transgressours who according to the 〈◊〉 of the Law should have bin punished manifestly dispenseth with the Law and doth not execute it Ans. All this being granted yet it will not follow that the sentence Curse of the Law was not executed upon Christ in his death for notwithstanding of this dispensing with the Law as to the persons Yet was there no Relaxation of the Law as to the punishment threatned Though the Law did not require that the innocent should suffer Yet the Supream Lord Ruler dispensing with his own Law so far as to substitute an innocent person in the room place of sinners the Law required that that innocent person taking on that penalty and thereby making himself nocent as to the penalty should suffer the same that was threatned consequently bear the Curse threatned in the Law As saith he further for explication when Zaleucus the Locrian Law-giver caused one of his own eyes to be put out that one of his son's eyes might be spared who according both to the letter intent of the Law should have lost both he did not precisely execute the Law but gave a sufficient account or consideration why it should for that time be dispensed with Ans. This speaks not home to our case wherein we pay not the half nor no part of the penalty But Christ payeth the whole as substitute in our room If Zaleucus had substituted himself in the room of his son suffered both his own eyes to be put out though the Law had been dispensed with as to the persons yet the penalty of the loss of both eyes had been payed the same punishment which the Law required had been exacted And so it is in our case as is manifest Yet he granteth that in some sense Christ may be said to have suffered the penalty or Curse of the Law as 1. It was the Curse or penalty of the Law saith he as now hanging over the head of the world ready to be executed upon all men for sin that occasioned his sufferings Ans. If this were all all the beasts senseless creatures may be as well said to have suffered the penalty Curse of the Law consequently to have suffered for man to have born mans sin in order to his Redemption as Christ for the sin penalty of sin whereunto man was liable did occasion their suffering or being subjected to vanity Rom. 8 20 21. Thus our whole Redemption is subverted the cause yeelded unto the wicked Socinians for if this be so Christ had not our sins laid upon him he did not beare our sins
in his body on the tree he was not wounded for our transgressions the chastisement of our peace was not on him He was not made sin for us He was not our Cautioner High Priest He died not in our room stead Againe 2. saith he some what more properly Christ may be said to have suffered the Curse of the Law because the things which he suffered were of the same nature kinde at least in part with these things which God intended by the Curse of the Law Ans. Though this seemeth to come nigher to the truth than the former Yet it cannot give full satisfaction untill it be explained what that part is in respect of which only Christ's sufferings were of the same Nature kinde with what the Law threatned Let us hear therefore what followeth see if thence satisfaction can come But if by the Curse saith he of the Law we understand either that entire systeme historical body as it were of penalties evils which the Law itself intends in the terme or else include take-in the intent of the Law as touching the quality of the persons upon whom is was to be executed in neither of these senses did Christ suffer the Curse of the Law Ans. 1 This doth not explaine to us what that part is in which Christ sufferings are of the same Nature kind with what was intended by the Curse of the Law 2 There is need of explication here to make us understand what is that entire Systeme historical body of penalties evils which the Law itself intends in the terme Curse or death for this is but to explaine one dark thing by what is more dark so can give no Satisfaction 3 But if the alternative added be explicative so the two particulars here mentioned be one the same then we deny that that doth properly belong to the essence of the penalty as threatned in the Law that is every thing that necessarily attended the punishment as inflicted on man did not directly essentially belong thereunto as threatned by the Law such as the everlastingness of death despaire the like necessarily accompanying this punishment inflicted on sinners so that notwithstanding Christ did not neither could endure these accidental consequential evils Yet he both did might be said to suffer the Curse death threatned by the Law which is to be abstracted from what floweth not from the Law itself but meerly from the Nature of the subject or Condition of the sinner punished But it may be these words of his the intent of the Law as touching the quality of the persons upon whom it was to be executed have some other import that he meaneth hereby no more but this that the intent of the Law was that the sinner should suffer And indeed if so it was impossible that Christ's sufferings could answere the intent of the Law But we have said above that as to this the Law was dispensed with yet notwithstanding Christ the substitute Sufferer did suffer the same kinde of punishment that the Law threatned under the termes of Death Curse What he addeth Further can give no Satisfaction So that God saith he required the death sufferings of Christ not that the Law properly either in the letter or intention of it might be executed but on the contrary that it might not be executed I meane upon those who being otherwise ohnoxious unto it should beleeve Ans. Though it be true that God required the death sufferings of Christ not that the Law either in the letter or intention of it might be executed as to that wherein it was dispensed with Yet God required the death sufferings of Christ that the letter intent of the Law might be executed as to that wherein it was not dispensed with that is as to the punishment therein threatned And unless the Law as to this had been executed no man obnoxious to it should have escaped and that because of the Veracity of God yea because of his justice which he had determined to have Satisfied ere sinfull man should escape the punishment In the next place he tels us that God did not require the death sufferings of Christ as a valuable consideration where on to dispence with his Law towards those that beleeve more if so much in a way of Satisfaction to his justice than to his wisdom Ans. This savoureth rankly of Socinianisme It is not for us to make such comparisons as if God's Wisdom justice were not at full agreement and were not one The Scripture tels us that God set forth Iesus Christ t s be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his Righteousness for the remission of sins that are past To declare I say at this time his Righteousness that he might be just the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus Rom. 3 25 26. And so it is manifest that Satisfaction to justice was hereby intended And this is enough to us who know also that in the whole contrivance of the business the Infinite Wisdom of God is eminently relucent And Love not to make any such comparisons only we think that a Propitiation and Satisfaction the like termes used in Scripture in the expressing of this matter have a direct aspect bear a manifest relation unto justice and correspond diâ—ectly there with yea clearly enough inferre the same though there were no other mention made expresly of the justice of God in this matter What saith he next to prove this for doubtless God might saith he with as much justice as wisdom if not much more have passed by the er ansgression of his Law without consideration of satisfaction Ans. What God might have done by his absolute Soveraignity antecedent to his designe purpose as to the punishment or the reatus poenae which must not be extended to the reatus culpae is not to the question But now the Lord having declared his determination purpose to rule governe the world thus to have the glory of his relative justice manifested in the Salvation of lost man could not according to justice passe by transgressions without a satisfaction He adds No man will say that in case a man hath bin injured wronged that therefore he is absolutly bound in justice to seek satisfaction though he be never so eminent in the grace practice of justice but in many cases of injuries sustained a man may be bound in point of wisdom discretion to seek satisfaction in one kind or other Ans. This is the Socinian way of argueing nothing to the pointe for we are to look upon the Lord in this matter not as a private man who may dispense with injuries done him but as a Righteous Governour who is resolved to demonstrate his justice equitie and who therefore cannot suffer sin to go unpunished without a due satisfaction had for the violation of his Lawes
all who work well keep the Law of Moses shall have free Pardon Right to life And thus they were as well justified by the works of the Law as by faith for faith was also required of them And then the meaning of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3 28. is therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith and by the deeds of the Law for both faith works with Mr. Baxter belong to this Subservient Righteousness as he calleth it If this be consonant to the Apostles doctrine which doth so contradict it let the Reader judge 3. Saith he That therefore it appeareth that the Jewes did so fondly admire the Law their National Privileges under it that they thought the exact keeping of it was necessary sufficient to Iustification Salvation And they thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness as a Sacrifice for sin meriter of free Pardon the Gift of life but only a great King Deliver to redeem them by Power from all their Enemies Bondage Ans. This mistake of the Jewes concerning the Messiah speaketh nothing to the point whereupon we are that is that Paul denieth justification to be by the Law And their errour mistake about the Law is not to be limited restricted to the Ceremonial Law so the thing that we say is confirmed hereby 2 They thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness And Mr. Baxter will not have him to be our Righteousness save only in that he hath purchased the New Covenant wherein our faith obedience to the Law is to be looked upon as all our proper immediat Righteousness upon the account of which we are to receive Pardon Right to life 4. He saith That is was not Adam's Covenant of Innocencie or persection which the Jewes thus trusted to or Paul doth speak against as to justification though a minore ad majus that is also excluded for the Jewes knew that they were sinners that God pardoned sin as a Merciful God that their Law had Sacrifices for Pardon Expiation with Confessions c. But they thought that so far as God had made that Law sufficient to Political ends to Temporal Rewards Punishments it had been sufficient to Eternal Rewards Punishments that of it self not in meer subordination to the typified Messiah Ans. Though the jewes knew that they were sinners yet they did also suppose that by their works of obedience to the Law Moral as well as Ceremonial they might make amends so think to be justified pardoned thereby and that God would accept of them grant them life for their own Righteousness sake therefore did they laboure so much to establish their own Righteousness followed after the Law of Righteousness sought Righteousness as it were by the works of the Law What Mr. Baxter talks here of the jewes not using of that Law in subordination to the Typified Messiah hath need of Explication for as to his sense of it we see no ground thereof in all the Apostles discourse 5. He saith That the thing which Paul disproveth them by is 1. That the Law was never made for such an End Ans. Yet he said that the man which doth those things shall live by them Rom. 10 5. Levit. 18 5. Gal. 3 12. that the doers of the Law are justified Rom. 2 13. And therefore speaketh of that Law which according to its primitive institution was made for such an end 2. saith he That even then it stood in subordination to Redemption free given life Ans. This we cannot yeeld to in Mr. Baxters sense often mentioned for Paul no where giveth us to understand that their obedience to this was their immediat Righteousness Condition of Justification the meritorious cause ex pacto of their Right to Christ to life c. 3. saith he That the free Gift or Covenant of Grace containing the promise of the Messiah and Pardon life by him was before the Law and justified Abraham others without it Ans. It is true this Argument did particularly militate against the Ceremonial Law Yet this not being the Apostles onely Argument other Arguments reaching the Moral Law as well as the Ceremonial we must not limite the Apostles disput only to the Ceremonial Law 4. saith he That their Law was so strick that no man could perfectly keep it all Ans. Adde also that they could not perfectly keep any one command thereof 5. saith he That every sin deserveth death indeed though their Law punished not every sin with death by the Magistrate Ans. And this holdeth true of the Moral as of the Ceremonial Law 6. saith he That their Law was never obligatory to the Gentile world who had a Law written in their hearts therefore not the common way of justification Ans. The Apostle maketh no such conclusion that therefore it was not the common way of justification for this would suppose that it were the way of justification unto them which is directly against the Apostles disput 7. saith he That their Law as such discovered sin but gave not the Spirit of Grace to overcome it in so much as though he himself desired perfectly to fulfill it without sin yet he could not but was under a Captivity that is a moral necessity of Imperfection or sins of infirmity from which only the grace of Christ could as to guilt power deliver him Ans. Therefore the Moral Law is as well here to be understood as the Ceremonial as is manifest 8. saith he That no man ever come to heaven by that way of merite which they dreamed of but all by the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Ans. But that way of merite attendeth all works in the matter of justification as the Apostle assureth us Rom. 4 4. Ephes. 2 8 9. is opposed to the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Rom. 11 6. 3 21 24. Tit. 3 5 7. From these things Mr. Baxter draweth this Conclusion Therefore their conceite that they were just in the maine forgiven their sins so justifiable by the meer dignity of Moses Law which they keept by the works of the Law not by the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer by the Faith Practical Beleife of that Gift and acceptance of it with thankful penitent obedient hearts was a Pernicioue Errour Ans. 1. Nothing is here said to ground a restriction of this erroneous conceite of theirs unto the Ceremonial Law for this conceite of being justifiable by the Law and the works thereof in opposition to the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer is as applicable to the Moral as to the Ceremonial Law 2 The Apostle doth not ground his disput upon the Iewes their express rejecting of a free Gift of Pardon c. But from justification by Faith laying hold on the free Grace
justification was not only among the Gentiles who had been without God without Christ all the Meanes of understanding any thing of Salvation through a slaine Saviour but even amongst the Jewes who by the Dispensation of the New Covenant which they were under might have been better principled for it was they who most urged the Interest of the Law of works therebyâ— laboured to corrupt the Gentiles to lead them off the simplicity of the Gospel-truth and of them saith the Apostle Rom. 10 3. that being ignorant of God's Righteousness going about to establish their own righteousness they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God They sought after a Righteousness another way than by faith in Christ who is the end of the Law for righteouness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 4. but as it were by the works of the Law Rom. 9 32. IV. The Pharisee who went up to the Temple Luk. 18 11 12. prayed thus with himself God I thank thee that I am not as other men are Extortioners Unjust adulterers or even as this Publican I fast twice in the week I give Tithes of all that I possesse c. hath many followers Many there are who will have confidence in the flesh in what they do Nature never taught Paul to account all his great Privileges Attainments loss dung but rather to account them gaine for he saith they were gaine to him that is while he was a stranger to the Gospel to the Grace of God manifested therein Hence is it that the last are first the first are last such as thought themselves far advanced to have attained a great measure of righteousness so to be children of the Kingdom are shut out Publicanes Harlots are preferred as being willing to renounce themselves their own righteousness more than such Legalists Iusticiaries who confide in something which they themselves do have attained V. This is also manifest from the great difficulty of prevaling with such as seem to themselves to have in them something more than ordinary to relinquish renounce these things to betake themselves only unto Jesus to rest on Him alone for Righteousness Life Salvation from the little fruit that the Gospel Doctrine findeth among them How many subterfuges finde they out under which they think to shelter themselves from the wrath of God How many fig-leaves do they sowe together that they may cover the shame of their nakedness withall And at what cost paines charges are they in seeking to establish their own Righteousness And all to fortifie themselves in their own delusions to keep our the pure Doctrine of the Gospel And how ready are some to take hold of the smallest wig that they may hang upon it finde reliefe if it can yeeld but the least ground of hop in their imaginations ere they betake themselves to Christ according to the Gospel How many Fetches Turnings Windings hath a Soul pursued with wrath the apprehension of death ere it be willing to close heartily with Christ offered in the Gospel Yea if such as have had some wakenings come so far as to change something of their former outward sinful courses be not so loose prophane as formerly how ready are they to sit down even upon that bit of negative righteousness Much more if they be brought the length to go about some religious duties how will they then sit down sing as if all were well All which do plainly evince that there is a strong Inclination in us by nature to follow the way of works that we may have some share of the honour of our own justification VI. This sad truth is hence apparent likewise That when any Opinion is broached that but seemeth to give more to works than ought to be given though possibly upon the matter there be but little said that may make any real Difference how ready are many to close therewith to entertaine that Doctrine to cry it up commend it to improve the Advantages real or supposed there had to the furâ—er Confirmation of that Anti-evangelik errour which their Soul 's fully comply with when upon the other hand there is such a nauseating in many too too manifest at the Simplicity of the Gospel of the Doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ. If it be enquired whence doth this proceed or what can be the true causes hereof I answer Many things have a powerful Influence into this as I. The Natural Enmity unto all the wayes of God that each hath as a piece of his heirship from Adam What ever God willeth we will not yea we will nill though our nilling of it be against ourselves we have no reason for it There is a Spirit of Contradiction Enmity to God in us all by nature that we neither can nor will comply with God's wayes with what tendeth to set forth His Glory It is marked of the Iewes that they stumbled at that stumbling stone Jesus Christ who was the end of the Law for righteousness to all such as beleeve Rom. 10 4. 9 32. They had such a prejudice at Christ at the way of Salvation through Him that they brake their necks upon Him who onely was the rock of Salvation II. The innate darkness of Mens mindes touching themselves all the things of God especially the Mysteries of Salvation is another cause of this Opposition to the Gospel-way of justification They neither know their own hearts nor their own wayes doings nor are they acquainted with the holy righteous Nature of God nor with the nature of His Lawes Commandments c. They know not I say the Corruption of their own Natures the innate wickedness which is there which neither is nor can be subject to the Law of God Hence ordinarily such as erre in this matter of justification do intertaine erroneous apprehensions about Original sin our innate Pravity as do all the Sâ—cinians Papists many Arminians others So they are ignorant of the Law of God not knowing how Holy Good Spiritual it is how it obligeth the whole man Spirit Soul Judgment Understanding Will Affections Memory all the out ward Man condemning the least sin in Thought word or deed commanding the highest pitch of holy duties right Principles Ends Motives c. And hence they see neither Omissions of what is commanded not their Commissions of what is prohibited whether as to their Nature Multitude or other Aggravations and the ignorance of this maketh them to see less the necessity of a Righteousness without them to seek for it with less earnestness zeal whence it cometh to passe ordinarily as is to be seen among Papists that such as are most for works in justification shape the Law according to their minde curtaile it as did the Pharisees of old that
state of humiliation by both imputed by God and received by faith the beleever receiveth the whole Effect that is both Immunity from punishment a Right to the reward promised to obedience or to the Crown As Christ the Messias made an end of sins made reconciliation for iniquity so He brought in an everlastingh righteousness Dan. 9 24. And beleevers have the benefite of both for as they receive the grace of God the gift by grace aboundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness so they shall reigne in life and grace through righteousness reigneth unto eternal life Rom. 5 15 17 21. 5. Upon the other hand this mystery is also observable That Christs Satisfaction taketh not away the necessity of the Imputation of Christs Righteousness obedience as some do say who think that because we have full pardon of all sinnes by vertue of the Satisfaction of Christ therefore we need no more a person who is pardoned being therefore one that is not unrighteous one that is not unrighteous being righteous for say they there is no mids betwixt just or righteous and not unjust or not unrighteous he who is righteous having done all his duty so having a right to the promised reward of life So that upon this ground they suppose there is need of no more in order to obtaining of life beside say they the Scripture saith that the man is blessed to whom the Lord imputeth not sin he who is blessed upon this account needeth no righteousness to be added to render him blessed and to give a right unto glory But 1 we were as was said guilty of the breach of the Law so liable to punishment were also under obligation to give perfect obedience unto the Law Satisfaction therefore for our breach our pardon upon Satisfaction faith not that we have not broken the Law and if we have broken the Law we cannot be said to have yeelded perfect obedience unto the Law when God pardoneth upon a Satisfaction made He doth not judge or suppose that the person pardoned hath perfectly kept the Law for His judgment is according to truth and the very pardon supposeth a Transgression and a Transgression taketh away perfect obedience as perfect obedience destroyeth or rendereth useless all pardon Wherefore neither before God nor man can a person meerly because of Pardon be said or be accounted to have all that was required Upon Pardon it is true he is as much exeemed from the obligation to punishment as if he had kept the whole Law but yet by that pardon he is not made nor accounted to be one who never broke the Law there upon hath a right unto the reward promised As supposing for illustrations sake when a Prince maketh a Law commandeth such such persons to obey the same under the paine of death with all promiseth to such as observe the Law and do what is commanded that they shall enjoy a rich reward become heirs of a great Kingdom and the persons after they have broken the Law and become guilty of death are pardoned upon the Interposition of some great person Satisfaction made by the same for the failure they cannot upon the account of this Satisfaction their pardon thereupon be said to have done what was commanded nor to have right unto the reward to the Inheritance promised to such as obeyed the Law 2 Therefore though a person that is pardoned be one that is not unrighteous that is obnoxious to the penalty yet he is not one that is righteous positively or in reference to the reward but only one that is negatively righteous that is one that though he hath no right to the reward yet he is not liable to the punishment and therefore though he be thus negatively not unrighteous that is one that is freed from the punishment yet he cannot be accounted one that hath done all that was commanded so he cannot be accounted Righteous in reference to the reward 3 So that there is a manifest mids betwixt being righteous that is one having a right to the reward and being not unrighteous that is not obnoxious to the punishment as is clear by the Instance of Adam before his fall for during that time how long or how short so ever it was he could not be said to be untighteous because he had not yet sinned nor could he be said to be righteous in reference to the reward that was promised on condition of perfect obedience to the end that is such as had done all his duty for if he had then done all his duty or all that was required in order to the reward he had then had a full and compleat right to the reward of life promised God would have given it to him according to the Covenant and Promise But we know it was not so for he was to finish his course run his race to the end before he could have challenged a right to the promised inheritance and this he did not So that before he fell by transgression it might have been said of him that he was not unrighteous that is that he was one that had not yet transgressed and deserved the punishment-threatned but he could not be said to have been fully positively righteous that is one that had done all his duty and therefore had now a full compleat right unto the reward 4 It is true the Scripture saith that the man is blessed to whom the Lord doth not impute sin but it doth not say That he is blessed to whom the Lord only imputeth not sin or to whom He giveth no more nor doth the Scripture say that this pardoning or not imputing of sin purely abstractively considered that is considered alone without any more as it must be considered by such as oppose us here is that compleat blessedness whereof the Scripture speaketh But the reason why such are said to be blessed to whom the Lord doth not impute sin is because Imputation of â—ighteousness is inseparebly annexed with non-imputation of sin therefore in that same place of Scripture to wit Rom. 4. 6. It is said that David Psal. 32 1 2. describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness while he saith blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin c. Whereby we see that both these are so firmly connected by the Lord that the one cleareth and confirmeth the other that who ever hath the one hath the other also and upon that account are blessed enjoying the whole Effect of the Imputation of Christs whole Surety-righteousness and these two to wit pardon of sins and the Right to the Inheritance flowing from the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction of His obedience though they are never separated yet they are distinguished spoken of distinctly in Scripture It is one thing to be delivered from under the Law another thing to
receive the Adoption of Sones and the blessing of Abraham Gal. 3 13 14. 4 4 5. As it is one thing to finish the Transgression to make an end of sin to make Reconciliation for iniquity another thing to bring-in Everlasting Righteousness Dan. 9 24. Yea the redemption from the Law and from its curse is mentioned as preceeding the other as the finishing of transgression is also mentioned before the bringing-in of Righteousness in the passages cited And thus as these Effects are distinguished though inseparable so is the Cause By the Imputation of Christs Satisfaction we have pardon of sin being redeemed from the curse of the Law by His being made a curse for us by the Imputation of His Rigteousness and obedience we are looked upon as Righteous so have a right to the promise and Inheritance Though we need not thus distinctly consider both save only to demonstrat the necessity of the Imputation of both for Christ by His death did also purchase the Inheritance for us and by His obedience made Satisfaction for sin it being a piece of His Humiliation So that both in the deep wisdom of God make up one cause of that one Effect which comprehendeth all Blessedness that is both pardon of sinnes and Right to the Inheritance c. By the Imputation of both or of this compleat Surety-righteousness of Christ including both beleevers are pardoned and adjudged unto life Hence our pardon and justification are often ascribed unto Christs death not as distinctly considered or as excluding His Righteousness obedience but among other reasons because that was the compleating Act of His obedience and to which all the rest preceeding had a respect as to that which should compleat the whole Meritorious part of His Mediation And hereby His obedience can no more be excluded than His foregoing soul-sufferings Nay His death did presuppose and include His obedience for it was the death of one who had perfectly obeyed the Law which death obedience being His Mediatory work in the state of His Humiliation was a compleat Righteousness for the blessedness advantage of all those for whom He appeared whose debt He undertook to pay 5. That the obedience of Christ must also be imputed to sinners is manifest from this That otherwise they should have no Righteousness at all imputed to them that properly can be called a Righteousness for if nothing but that which is commonly called Christs passive obedience or His Sufferings be imputed there can no Righteousness be said to be imputed for dying and suffering the penalty as such are no righteousness being no obedience to the commands of the Law in conformity to which consisteth proper Righteousness as when one dieth for his crime of Murther he cannot be said to be thereby a righteous man or to have obeyed the Law forbidding Murther nor can we be said properly to have obeyed the Law when Christ in our room did suffer the penalty of death due to us for the breach of it They who are in hell suffering the vengeance of eternal fire cannot be said to be obeying the Law It is true Christ in dying did obey a command Imposed upon Him by the Father but that was no command of the Moral Law prescribed unto man thereafter in dying Suffering He gave no obedience to that Law under the obligation to which we were standing no more than He can be said to have Suffered the penalty while He was obeying the Law these two being so manifestly different So that it is clear that if Christs obedience be not imputed to us no proper Righteousness is or can be said to be imputed to us Yea 6 If Christs obedience be not imputed to us that Law which saith do this and live is not fulfilled but rather abrogated quite abolished and it must be said that not withstanding of that constitution of Gods we live though we neither do this nor is our Cautioners doing of it imputed to us And so we have a right to the Reward get it at lenght without the Righteousness required in order thereunto Let us therefore admire the harmonious perfection of this Effect Work of infinite wisdom I know several things are objected against this Truth as there are many other grounds Reasons adduced for the same but these I shall speak to at more length afterward 7. This is also a mysterie here to be noticed That a Righteousness that is not ours inherently but Christs should be made ours made over to us reckoned upon our score or we become clothed therewith there upon justified as Righteous as really effectually as if we had wrought it our selves and it had been properly inherent in us Socinians Papists Arminians others who will not subject their reason unto this mystery and give credite to Revelation will acknowledge no such imputation of Righteousness but at most do grant but an improper imputation that is an imputation as to Effects so that with them Christ neither Suffered nor obeyed in our stead room but only for our good advantage that too conditionally only in case we beleeve and performe the Gospel-condition But this imputation as to Effects only is no imputation at all there being no thing thereby Imputed not the Righteousness of Christ it self for this they expresly deny nor yet the Effects themselves for we no where read of Imputed Justification Adoption Pardon c. which are the Effects Yea it is not enough to them to deny this Imputed Righteousness but in contempt scorne they call that which we name an Imputed Righteousness a putative Righteousness as if it were a meer imaginary thing But whatever such in decision think or say the Gospel holdeth forth to us a Righteousness imputed or the Righteousness of Christ graciously bestowed upon made over to belevers or freely given unto them so that they are dealt with by God as Righteous Juridically legally or as possessours of such a compleat perfect Righteousness that as really to all Effects as if it had been their own inherently performed by them so had been theirs without any such Imputation And because this as the cause is imputed to them made theirs therefore all the Effects thereof shall really certainely be bestowed upon them in God's appointed time methode This is the Truth which the Gospel holdeth forth to the solide peace joy comfort of Beleevers the full clearing vindicating of which would require a just Treatise I shall therefore here propose but a few clear manifest Grounds of this refreshful comfortable truth leaving the further prosecution vindication of them of other arguments that are used in this matter with the examination of what is objected on the contrary till afterward First therefore we say as Christ who knew no sin was made sin that is had the sinnes of His people laid upon Him imputed to Him so
them nor all of them do fully unfold the mystery And in it there is ground enough to suppose Christ to be a publick person a Representative as also for asserting of this Imputation because Beleevers being thus united unto Christ are made partakers of His righteousness of what He as Head Husband did suffered in their room place they thereupon are blessed with all the fruits effects thereof Fourthly His being called a Surety Heb. 7 22. doth also give ground confirmation unto this Imputation for as He who becometh Surety for another undertaketh to do or suffer what he for whom he is Surety was obliged to do or suffer As when Paul became Surety for Onesimus bound himself as such unto Philemon he would have Philemon requiring all that Onesimus was due to him at his hand reckoned upon his score he undertook to satisfie him for this debt or for what he could crave of Onesimus as we see Philem. vers 18 19. If he hath wronged thee or oweth thee ought put that upon mine account I Paul have written it with mine own hand I will repay it So what the cautioner doth or suffereth as such or according to his undertaking is reckoned upon the score of the Principul debtor as Paul's paying of what Onesimus imputed to was endue te Philemon was to be reckoned on the score of Onesimus him that he thereby might be freed from all pursuite of Law or action against him at the Instance of Philemon Wherefore as Christ becoming Surety for His Children saying to the Father Lo I come in the volumne of they book it is written of me I delight to do thy will ô God Psal. 40 7 8. Heb. 10. 7. did take upon Himself the debt of sinners engaged to pay all that is both to give perfect Obedience to the Law fulfill all Righteousness Mat. 3 15. as also to pay the penalty to make Satisfaction to Justice by becoming a Curse suffering Griefs Sorrowes Bruisings Mockings the cursed death of the Cross for all this He did willingly cheerfully I have said He a baptisme to be baptized with meaning His death how am I straitened or pained untill it be accomplished Luk. 12 50. He laid down His life that He might take it againe no man took His life from Him against His will but He laid it down of His own accord Ioh. 10 17 18. And as Christ did really actually performe all that He did undertake so that He said upon the Cross it is finished It must of necessity follow that all they for whom He became Surety undertook to do suffer what was laid upon Him must have that Imputed made over unto them they must be clothed with that rob of Righteousness which He did make for them must appear before the throne of justice clothed therewith Fiftly Christ's making proper full Satisfaction to the Father in the Name room of His people saith also That there is an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness unto them for whom He performed that Righteousness as His Satifaction must be for them So that if Imputation be denied Satisfaction also must be denied Hence the Socinians wickedly deny both indeed who ever deny the one must also deny the other or not speak consequentially for when one laith down a satisfactory price for another it must be reckoned upon the score of imputed to that other to the end he may be dealt with as if he had laid it down himself thereby be freed from what otherwayes he must have undergone if upon the account of that Satisfaction he be not so freed it cannot be called a Satisfaction for him When Christ laith dwon his life for His sheep His sheep must not dye perish for if they perish He did not die for them if they perish not because of His dying for them His death must be imputed to them upon the account of it they must be saved So that Christ's dying for His own is dying in their Room Person place Stead as the particle for manifestly importeth 2 Sam. 18 33. Gen. 44 33. Numb 3 12. Rom. 5 6 7. Hence His Ransome is expresly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 2 6. Many moe arguments might be here adduced for confirmation of this Truth but I shall satisfy my self at present with these few plaine ones so proceed 8. This Mystery is also considerable here That both the justice of God the Mercy free Grace of God take place in this matter Socinians cry up the Mercy free Grace of God in the matter if justification but it is to this end that they may with more desperat confidence shut out the Justice of God so as it may have no place there therefore they deny all Satisfaction Redemption Atonement c. except what is meerly metaphorical because they cannot see how justice mercy both can with joint hands concurre to our justification But the Apostle better taught than they better acquainted with the mind of Christ in this Mystery than they are seeth no Inconsistency But rather declareth the sweet perfect harmony concurrence of these in this mystery telling us Rom. 3 24 25 26. That we are justified freely by His grace yet addeth through the redemption that is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His bloud to declare His righteonsness c. And againe to declare His righteousness that He might be just the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus Here is a free grace triumphing yet Justifice declared and manifested God declared to be just and His righteousness manifested yet sinners and beleevers justified freely by grace So Eph. 1 7 8. There is a Redemption through the price of bloud yet a free pardon of sinnes according to the riches of Gods grace wherein He hath abounded towards us in all wisdome prudence But if it be enquired wherein appeare to this mercy and freedom of grace in our justification seing there was a Satisfaction made to justice for all the sinnes of His peaple I answer 1 was it not an Act of wonderful free grace mercy that when the Lord might have executed the sentence of the Law upon us according to that threatning that day thou eats thou shalt die and so have made us sinners who transgressed the Law to die and suffer yet He would accept of a Satisfaction at the hands of a Surety Cautioner 2 Was it not Act of grace mercy to us that He himself would provide a Surety and put His name in our obligation so make Him sin for us who know no sin lay all our iniquities upon Him that He might bear the punishment due to us for the same See Ioh. 3 16. 3 Was it no Act of Soveraigne grace mercy that God should both provide
it accompanying it with other things as to the Nation of the jewes because for this end was the law as a law given by the law-giver that Subjects might walk according to the same and that they might become thereby righteous and have a right to the reward promised by fulfilling this condition of the Covenant Now when these ends or this end putting these together as one were onely attained by what Christ did and suffered the jewes who stumbled at this stumbling stone rejected this righteousness of God could never be justified by all their own acts of obedience to the law how zealously so ever they should have sougt after a rigteousness thereby Except 6. The 5. we passe because he laith no weight on it him self The plaine direct meaning is that the law that is the whole Mosaical dispensation was for that end given by God to the jewes that whilst it did continue it might instruct and teach them concerning the Messiah who was yet to come and by his death to make atonement for their sinnes that so they might beleeve in Him accordingly and be justified and further that in time that Nation might be trained up prepared for the Messiah himself and that Oeconomy perfection of worship service which He should bring with him establish in the world at his coming Ans. What was said to the two foregoing Exceptions may serve for an answere to this for what ever truth may be in this yet it is no true sense exposition of the place because Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth so to the Gentiles as well as to the jewes whereas this gloss limiteth restricketh all to the jewes 2 There is nothing here keeping correspondence with what is said vers 3. touching their going about to establish their own righteousness and refuising to submit unto the righteousness of God 3. The righteousness of the law described by Moses here cited vers 5. hath no interest in the Mosaical Oeconomy as given for the mentioned end to the jewes 4 If Christ made an atonement for sins was to be beleâ—ved in accordingly by such as would be justified then that atonement was to be made over unto them reckoned upon their score to the end they might be justified upon the account thereof 5 The Text saith that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness so was to bring in everlasting Righteousness as well as to make atonement for sins Dan. 9 24. 6 The perfection of that service worship which Christ was to establish at His coming was a clearer manifestation of the Gospel of the Grace of God whereby the Righteousness of God or the Surety-righteousness of Christ was imputed unto Beleevers received by faith in order to justification as the whole Gospel declareth He laboureth to confirme this gloss with two reasons 1. Because the jewes sought Righteousness self justification as well from the observation of the Ceremonial as of the Moral law 2. Because Christ is held forth as the end of this dispensation 2 Cor. 3 13. Gal. 3 24. Ans. As to the first of the reasons we have often replied to it already And the second will not prove that there is no other interpretation of this passage that can have place And beside That whole Oeconomy did pointe out and lead them to the Messiah that in Him they might find that which they were seeking after by their own works all in vaine even the Righteousness of God which will sufficiently cloth all beleevers and both keep them from wrath due for sin give them a right to glory So that even this sense if rightly understood doth rather strengthen than hurt imputed Righteousness Eightly 1 Cor. 1 30. Is excepted against by him pag. 162. c. To which we may adde vers 29. 31. Which will help to cleare the matter That no flesh should glory in His presence but of Him are ye in Christ Iesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification Redemption That according at it is written he that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. All the work of God in and about His chosen ones is so contrived that no flesh should have ground to glory in the presence of God but that he who glorieth should glory in the Lord and therefore He hath made Christ to be all things to them that they stand in need of in order to their everlasting enjoyment of Himself and particulary Christ is said to be made of God to us among other things which our necessity calleth for Righteousness answering His Name the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS Ier. 23 6. And a Righteousness he cannot be made unto us any other way than by clothing us who are naked and have no righteousness of our own with a Righteousness that is by Imputing to us His Righteousness that we may thereby become Righteous be looked upon as such and so be accepted of God justified Except 1. Christ is no other way said to be made righteousness then He is said to be made Wisdom c. Therefore we may as well plead for the Imputation of His Wisdom or His Sanctification there is no more intimation made of the Imputation of the one then of the other Ans. This is but the old exception of Socinus part 4. de Servant Cap. 5. And of Volkel De vera Relig. Cap. 21. p. 566. And it standeth upon this onely ground That Christ is made all these particulars to us here mentioned after one the same manner and what that manner is should be declared of necessity it must be a very general one otherwise it shall not agree to all these particulars Therefore Socinus hath devised a very general manner of way saying in the place cited That all this signifieth nothing else than that we have attained to that by Gods providence through Christ that we are become wise holy redeemed before Gods that therefore Christ is said to be righteousness to us because through the providence of God by Christ we have attained to be just before God But this general way maketh us not one white wiser Volkelius in the place cited giveth us no relief but only tels us That Christ is said to be made all these to us because he was the cause of all these because God by his meanes made us wise holy will at length redeem us Bellarm. condescendeth to tell us that He is said to be our Righâ—eousness because He is the efficient cause thereof But how that is he doth not explaine But Bellarm. next answere is to some better purpose Christ saith he is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the Father for us and doth so give and communicat that Satisfaction to us when he justifieth us that it may be called our Satisfaction Righteousness 2 Such as oppose us here do must necessarily so do
in what He Suffered in His state of Humiliation for to us a Childe was born and to us a Son was given He was made under the law for us that he might redeem such as â—ere under the law that they might receive the Adoption of Sones Esai 9 5. Gal. 4 4 5. 2. This active obedience of Christ saith he was serviceable to that same great End whereunto our righteousness and obedience are subservient viz. the glory of God the advancement of His Kingdom Ioh. 8 49. 7 18. Ans. And was not His death Sufferings also subservient unto this great end Will it therefore follow that He died not to make Satisfaction to justice for the sinnes of His people And if this cannot follow what ever Socinians imagine how shall it or can it hence follow that His obedience was not to satisfie the demands of the law and to procure the reward to His people Is there any Inconsistency betwixt His fulfilling the law as Mediator and Surety in the room of His people His doing it for the glory of God the advancement of His Kingdom 3. Another enâ— saith he is the exemplariness of it Ans. This is but another arrow taken out of the quiver of the Socinians is of no force to weaken our argument seing a subordinat less principal end doth not destroy a more principal end Was He not exemplary to us in His death Sufferings shall we therefore say That there was no satisfaction for sins intended thereby And what is there here peculiar unto Christ as Lord Mediator seing the lives of other Saints are also exemplary 4. It had saith he an excellent Importance to draw to Imitation Ans. This is the same with the preceeding and deserveth no further answere 5. It was saith he a meanes of continueing His person in the love and complacâ—ncy of His Father which was a thing of absolute necessity for the carrying on of the great work of Redemption for if He had once miscarried who should have mediated for Him Ioh. 15 10. 8 29. Ans. As to His Person He was God equal with the Father in power and Glory It were therefore blasphemy once to suppose that His person stood in need of this for any such end or to suppose that He could have failed as to any act of obedience thereby have displeased God Wherefore His obedience being the obedience of one who was is God over all blessed for ever it could not be necessary to Himself unto any such end Therefore it behoved to be wholly for us for whom He was made under the law as He was given to us and borne for us 6. It was saith he of absolute necessity to qualify fit the Sacrifice for the Altar and render Him a person meet by His death and Sacrifice of Himself to make attonement for the world and to purge and take away the sin of it Ans. Shall we think that He who was God was not a fit enoug Sacrifice for the world but that He must be made fit and prepared by acts of obedience And as for His Humane Nature which was no person but did subsist in the Divine Nature being assumed into the subsistence thereof was it not sufficiently fitted to be a Sacrifice by its personal union with the Godhead was it not thereby Holy Harmless undefiled separat from sinners which is all that the Apostle requireth Heb. 7 26 Was not the Humane Nature personally united unto the Godhead from the very first moment of conception The holiness then that consisteth in Acts of Actual obedience was not required unto this Union and after this Union it was not possible that He could sinne as it is not possible that the glorified now in Heaven can break the Lawes that we break here while on earth and yet it will not follow that they are under the same particular obligations to particular acts of commanded duties that we stand under So nor was Christ as to Himself under the obligation of the pâ—rticular duties of the law to which He willingly submitted Himself gave obedience but all this was for us Nor was this necessarily required to make His Sacrifice Holy for His Humane Nature being once united to the Divine could not otherwayes be but holy and without sin and so a sinless and holy Sacrifice And withall we would take notice that the Actions of the Mediator were the Actions of the person and not of either of the Natures alone therefore must not be looked upon as the Actions of a meer man So that His acts of obedience were the acts of obedience of God man or of that person that was God He needeth not then tell us that the Absolute holiness and Righteousness of the humanity it self was of necessary concurrence unto His obedience for we grant it and this flowed from the hypostatical union but that which we deny is That there was an Holiness and Righteousness in acts of outward obedience to the law requisite thereunto as if the humane Nature by vertue of the hypostatical union had not been holy and harmless untecedently unto those outward acts of obedience and so had not been a sinless and holy Sacrifice if He had been offered up in His Infancy or before He was in capacity to do any commanded acts He needeth not say as he doth pag. 204. that we conceive that Christ-man might have been righteous without doing the works of Righteousness which is all one as to say that He might have been Righteous though He had transgressed for not to keep the law in those to whom the law is given is nothing else but to transgress For we neither do nor need assert any such thing for by vertue of the hypostatical union He was Righteous and could not transgress or do any thing contrary to what was imposed upon Him but we say that by vertue of this union as to Himself the Humane Nature was not under the law as we are but He was under the law that He might fulfill it for others not to fit and qualifie Him to be a meet Sacrifice as if for this His Humane Nature had not been meet enough before To this he saith pag. 205. Let this Supposition be admitted that Christ had suffered in the womb and that this Suffering of His had been fully Satisfactory yet had He been as perfectly righteous in this case and consequently had kept the law perfectly as now He hath done for the law requireth of Infants during their Infancy nothing but holiness of Nature I Ans. 1. This is enoug to confirme what we say viz. That all His after actual obedience was not necessary to this end 2 And beside though this holiness of Nature was conforme to the law upon the matter yet it was not a formal obedience unto the law if we speak of Him in reference to Himself for the Humane Nature had this Holiness by vertue of the Hypostatical union and Christ when
the Humane Nature was first conceived was God-man and the person was under no law so was not under the obligation of any such law but was made under the law as Mediator and so for us and not for himself nor it is any more to advantage to except againe say that His meaning is not that there was an absolute necessity that he should keep the law upon the same termes every wayes which now He hath done as that He should performe the same Individual acts of obedience or the same number of acts in case He had been called to suffer any white sooner but that untill the very Instant in which He should suffer whether it were sooner or later He should in all things submit himself unto the good pleasure of God For it doth hence sufficiently appear That all his after obedience in all these particular acts was not necessary to fit Him as a Sacrifice so could not be necessary for Himself And therefore seing He had been a sufficiently holy Sacrifice had He been offered up before the actual performance of these commanded duties in the law it is manifest that these duties were not required unto the end alleiged but that as He was made under the law for us so all His actual obedience to the law was for us and not for himself The Excepter in end perceiving the Invalidity of all his own discourse here closeth the matter thus pag. 206. But however suppose this necessity or use of the Righteousness of Christ could not be sufficiently cleared yet since there are many others of undeniable evidence the position so much contended for to wit that the Godhead of Christ sufficiently qualified Him for such a Sacrifice as He was makes nothing at all for the Imputation of His Righteousness Therefore we shall not trouble either our selves or our Reader any further with untying an Impertinent knot What these others of undeniable evidence are we have not yet seen and sure this one ground is sufficient to demonstrat that his obedience to the law in all points was not for himself nor to qualifie him as a Sacrifice but for us and therefore it must be imputed made over to us and become our Righteousness whereby and whereupon together with his Sufferings made over to us also we are to be justified and accepted of God as Righteous and not only have pardon of sinnes but also a Right to the Inheritance and to the reward promised upon obedience 7. As Christ saith he p. 206. was a Sacrifice so was He and yet is is to be for ever Hebr. 7 27. c. An High-Priest and that Righteousness of His we speak of qualifieth Him that is contributeth to His qualification for Priesthood as well as it did for His Sacrifice Ans. Seing it cannot be proved that his actual obedience to the law which is the Righteousness we are here speaking of was necessary to qualifie him to be a Sacrifice here on earth much less can it be proven that it was necessary to qualifie him for his Priest-hood in heaven And all these qualifications mentioned Heb. 7 26 He had before that actual obedience was either performed or he in a capacity to performe it therefore his actual obedience was not necessary thereunto 8. That holy pleasure saith he and contentment which Christ himself took in these works of Righteousness may be looked upon as one considerable end Ioh. 4 34. Ans. So took He pleasure and delight to Suffer He had a Baptisme to be baptized with and how was he straitned or pained till it was accomplished Luk. 12 50. Shall we then say that therefore his death was not to make Satisfaction for the sins of his own These are but Socinian Evasions that have no force to weaken the truth in the least And thus notwithstanding of all his Exceptions this Argument abideth in its strength We proceed to another Arg. 5. If we be debtors unto the law and that not only in matter of punishment but in perfection of obedience also then did Christ â—ot only suffer death for us that we might be delivered from the Curse but also fulfilled the law that so we may be reputed to have fulfilled the law in him or by the Imputation of His fulfilling of the law to us Otherwise the law should yet remaine to be fulfilled by us But the former is true Ergo c. The force of the Argum. lyeth here that we were debtors unto the law not only as to the punishment which we had deserved by transgression but also as to perfect conformity thereunto and therefore coming in our law-place taking on our debt did not only undergoe the punishment for us but did also yeeld perfect obedience And this compleet Surety-righteousness of Christ consisting both in doing and Suffering must be imputed unto us and reckoned upon our score to the end we may be justified and Accepted of God as Righteous have Right not only to Impunity but also to the Reward promised to the obedient He excepteth p. 208. c. Against the Minor upon these grounds 1. If the meaning saith he be that we who are beleevers are debtors to the law in perfection for our justification it is false But as for these that beleeve not in Christ it may be true in this sense that if they mean to be justified and to escape the punishment otherwise than by Christ they must keep the whole law Ans. 1 We say not that Beleevers who are already justified through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ are debtors unto the law for this end but that ere they could be justified and accepted of God as Righteous they were obliged to perfect obedience as well as to suffer the penalty and seing this was impossible unto them their Surety was to do it and he did it and what he did was imputed unto them and reckoned upon their score 2 As for Unbeleevers ans such are all by Nature seing it is confessed that they ere under this obligation then it is necessary that before they be justified either they or a Surety for them must satisfy both these demands of the law And though none be now under a command to give perfect obedience unto the law to the end they may be justified but such as hear the Gospel are commanded to beleeve in Christ and to accept of him by faith that they may have an Interest in his Righteousness so be justified yet that taketh not away this Imputation but establisheth it rather because Christ having satisfied all the demands of the law both in doing and in Suffering and that as a Surety Head Redeemer and publick Person by beleeving in him they receive this and have it made over unto them 2. If the proposition saith he meaneth that Beleevers are debtors of perfect obedience to the law in a way of Sanctification thankfulness This is true but it concerneth not the question Ans. Nor do we speak of this knowing
that it is nothing to the present question But this we say That all men by nature and so Beleevers before they be justified by faith in Christ are not only under the Curse because of sin but are under the demand of the law or the commanding power of the law requiring perfect obedience in order to the reward And that therefore both these demands of the law must be satisfied by their Surety and the same must be imputed to them and reckoned upon their score before they can be looked on as free of the Curse and as heirs of the Reward promised to full perfect obedience 3. We are not saith he therefore exempted from keeping the law no not in respect of justification it self because we have transgressed it but because 1. having once transgressed it we are utterly uncapable of such an observation whether personally or by imputation which may amount to justification or exemption from punishment 2. That relaxation or release from an observation of or dependance upon the law by justification accrueth unto us by meanes of our dependance upon Christ for justification through his death Rom. 7 4. Ans. 1 If our transgression of the law doth not exeem us from the obligation to keep it perfectly in order to justification then ere we be justified that obligation must be satisfied as well as the obligation to punishment and so the law must be perfectly keeped as well as its penalty suffered And seing we our selves can do neither our Surety must do it for us that must be accepted for us imputed to us 2 Nor can it be said that our uncapableness to keep it so as may amount to justification doth exeem us from the obligation or destroy the lawes power to require that of us more than our uncapableness to suffer the penalty so as may amount to a justification doth or can exeem us from the obligation to suffer or destroy the lawes power to require the penalty of us It is true that no man now is called of God to endeavoure this way of justification yet all such as live without the Gospel have not the better more sure way through faith in Christ made known unto them The obligation to perfect obedience remaining after the transgression saith that ere a man that was both obliged to Suffer and to yeeld perfect obedience can be justified the law as to both these demands must be satisfied the Sureties Satisfaction to both must be reckoned upon his score 3 Justification Exemption from punishment are not one the same in our case more than pardon Righteousness 4 The Exemption that accrueth to beleevers saith not that there was no obligation upon mankind both to suffer and to obey in order to justification anteriour to Christs doing both 4. God never required saith he pag. 210. of any man but only of Christ both exactness of obedience to the law subjection to punishment due to the transgression of the law conjunctim but divisim only He that shall perfectly keep the law is not bound to suffer the penalty Ans. 1 Then our transgressing of the law should exeem us from the obligation to obedience contrare to what was granted in the First Exception 2 Though he who perfectly keepeth the law is obnoxious to no punishment yet he who breaketh the law as we all did in Adam beside our daily transgressions is obnoxious to punishment this obnoxiousness to punishment no more dissolveth his obligation to obedience than his transgression was able to do And therefore we are all considered in our Natural state obliged to both conjunctim for we are borne sinners and yet born under the obligation of keeping the law of God 3 Gods requiring both of Christ who was Mediator Surety saith that both were required of us for what was required of him as Surety was required of the principal debtors 5. He saith In case a Man hath transgressed the law hath suffered whether by himself or by some other for him the full punishment threatned he is no further a debtor unto the law neither in point of punishment nor of obedience for the punishment is of equal consideration to the law with the most absolute conformity and as no man can be obliged to fulfill the law twice for his justification so neither is it reasonable to conceive that he who hath suffered the full penalty that being as satisfactory to the law as the exactest obedience should be still bound to the observation of the law Ans. When the law promiseth life to the fulfillers as well as threatneth death to the transgressours the suffering of death for the transgression is not such a fulfilling of the law as hath the promise of life annexed to it Devils though now suffering the vengeance of eternal fire the death threatned yet cannot be said to be fulfilling the law or obeying unto life nor can they be said to be justified nor to be suffering any thing in order thereunto In order therefore to our justification Acceptance with God as heirs of the life promised who were both obnoxious to punishment also obliged to give perfect obedience to the law the law as to both must be satisfied Nor can we say that the punishment of Devils is of equal consideration to the law with the conformity yeelded thereunto by the confirmed Angels And though the suffering of the penalty in lawes penal or such as promise no reward unto the obeyers may be said to be of equal consideration with the keeping of the law yet this cannot be said in lawes which promise a Reward to the observers as well as threaten a punishment to transgressours Nor can the man that suffereth the punishment suppose to the full that is threatened in the law be said to have fulfilled the law and to have deserved the reward promised to obeyers 2 Though Christ hath both obeyed the law suffered the punishment yet the law is not twice fulfilled but once because as was granted such as were sinners and obnoxious to punishment were also obliged to yeeld perfect obedience for transgression did not destroy this obligation As when a man is punished for breach of a law that not only required obedience under such a penalty but also promised a reward to the observers when he is put to performe what was commanded ere he can have the promised reward he is not put to fulfill the law twice for his punishment was but Satisfaction to one part of the law or to threatning but it was no satisfaction of the law as to the reward promised Arg. 6. If there be no justification without a perfect Righteousness no such Righteousness to be found but the Righteousness of Christ performed to the law then of Necessity this Righteousness must be imputed to us unto justification But the former is true Ergo c. The ground of this Argument is that justification is the pronouncing of a person righteous justification being
from the Sun in one act expelling darkness bringing in light which are here adduced for illustration have no force to prove any thing here in regard there is no correspondence in all points betwixt Matters Natural Matters meerly Moral or Political There is no Medium betwixt light and darkness or the habite and its privation but there is a Medium here betwixt Transgressing of the law perfect obedience to the law unto the end Adam so long as he stood was no Transgressour yet he had not then given perfect obedience to the end according to the Covenant So there is a Medium betwixt Freedom from the Penalty the Right to the Reward as was shown above Arg. 7. If do this live be an everlasting Rule of God which shall never be dissolved then must the Active obedience of Christ be imputed unto Men in justification that so they may be said to have done this and so live But the former is true Ergo c. That these words do this and live containe a determination constitution of the Lord as unalterable as these words That day thou eats thou shalt die cannot well be denied and therefore if because of this latter no man can be saved unless their Surety die for them so because of that former no man can have right to the reward unless his Surety performe perfect obedience And as the one is imputed to the Beleever so must the other be Imputed also in order to his compleat Salvation Against this he excepteth pag. 216. c. thus In this sense I grant that do this and live is an everlasting Rule that is it is hath been and shall be everlastingly true that who so ever shall fulfill the law perfectly shall live But not in this sense that it is the only perpetual and standing Rule whereby and according to which men must be justified and so saved for in this sense it neither is nor ever was nor ever shall be a rule of God for God hath alwayes had and for ever will have another rule for the justification of men Ans. 1. Was it not a Rule of life justification to Adam in the state of Innocency was he not according to that Covenant where in he stood to purchase the good promised by his doing It may be the Excepter thinketh with the Socinians that no more was promised to Adam than what he had in possession 2. We do not assert it as a standing rule whereby we should now expect to be justified but we say that it being a constitution of God's as well as the other viz. That day thou eats thou shalt die It must be satisfied as well as the other And as the rule of faith taketh not away Christs suffering of death according to what was threatened in the law so nor doth the law of faith take away His obedience according to the command of the law and as Christs paying down of the Penalty was necessary for our freedom from death so His giving full obedience to the law is necessary to our life though as was said we need not nicely thus distinguish save to shew the necessity of the Imputation of both Arg. 8. That Righteousness which God accepteth on our behalfe is the Righteousness imputed to us in justification But the Righteousness of Christ is that Righteousness which God accepteth on our behalf Ergo c. He excepteth pag. 217. 1. Denying the Major because God may and doth accept that for us or on our behalf which yet He need not impute to us at He accepted of Abrahanis prayer in the behalf of Ismael of the prayer of Elisha for the Shumanites Son and yet neither was imputed to the other Ans. But all this a thousand Instances of the like nature can evince nothing for the Argument speaketh of what is accepted of God in order to justification as the ground and meritorious cause thereof which the Instances adduced come not nigh unto He addeth In like manner these in whose behalf Christs Sufferings were accepted receive an unspeakable benefite blessing by them but this operats nothing to the Inference of the Imputation pleaded for that is that God must look upon these Sufferings of Christ as if they had personally endured them on whose behalf they are accepted Ans. Then it seemeth not only is the Imputation of Christs active obedience denied but also the Imputation of His death and Sufferings and no more is granted than what Socinians will yeeld unto 2 The Imputation we plead for is not such as maketh God to look upon these Sufferings of Christ as if Beleevers had personally endured them but such as maketh God to look upon them as the Sufferings of Christ as Surety Head Publick person in the room stead of His chosen ones which Sufferings payment of the Penalty by the Surety being made over unto reckoned upon the score of Beleevers they are upon the account thereof accepted dealt with as if they themselves had so Suffered and Satisfied in their own persons 2. He distinguisheth thus If by the Righteousness of Christ the proposition meaneth precisely that obedience which He exhibited to that general common law whereunto all Men are obliged considered apart from His obedience to that particular law of Mediator given to Himself alone so it is false If by Righteousness be here meant that obedience of Christ commonly called passive or both active and passive together so it may be true but then the other will be found tardy Ans. 1 Christs obedience to that general law by which all men were obliged did as well belong to His law of Mediation and was comprehended under it as His giving up Himself to Suffering to death for as Mediator He was made under the law as well as suffered the Curse 2 The Minor proposition is to be understood of the whole Surety-righteousness consisting not only in Suffering but also in actual obedience to the law when this is granted the whole we seek is granted Neither is the former proposition found tardy as appeareth from what is said the Syllogisme is good and no Paralogisme what ever he supposeth Arg. 9. If Christ were a publick Person standing in the place or stead of all those that should beleeve in Him then all that He did and Suffered is to be looked upon reputed by God as done Suffered by these consequently are Imputed to them But the former is true Ergo c. Sure if Christ was a publik person standing in the place and room of the chosen ones all that He did as such a person or as a Surety as to that whâ—â—h law and justice required of them they were obliged unto must needs be imputed unto them reckoned upon their score and they must be dealt with upon the account thereof as if all had been done suffered by themselves We do not say that all He did Suffered is or must be
otherwise than by the Imputation of it then must it needs be imputed to us in our justification But the former is true Ergo. c. He excepteth p. 225. The Righteousness of Christ concurreth toward justification by qualifying His person for that Sacrifice of himself by which justification hath been purchased for all those that beleeve Ans. The Argum. is to be understood of His whole Surety-righteousness and not of His active obedience only 2 Even as to this it was answered above that it was not requisite unto this end His humane nature being sufficiently hereunto qualified by the personal union by which His bloud became the bloud of God and all He did and Suffered was the deed Suffering of Him who was God Arg. 11. If we may truely be said to be dead crucified with Christ to be quickened have risen againe with Him c. then may we truely be said to have fulfilled the law with Christ consequently that should be imputed to us But the former is true Ergo c. These expressions pointe forth the closs union that is betwixt Christ and Beleevers thereupon their Interest in what He did and suffered as Mediator Surety publick person to the end they may have right to and possession of the great benefites purchased and procured by Him So they hold forth Christs suffering dying riseing c. as a publick person in their room in their stead as their Representative so that it is râ—ckoned for them and upon their score and they are so interessed therein as that they are to be dealt with as if all these things had been done suffered by themselves And though in these expressions mentioned there be no express mention made of Christs fulfilling the law yet they sufficiently hold forth that which by parity of reason will enforce this as well as the other for they pointe forth Beleevers their union communion with Christ as to His Mediatory work to which His fulfilling of the law did belong Against the consequence he saith These expressions have no such Inference for if we could be said to have fulfilled the law with Christ our own fulfilling it in Him should rather be said to be imputed to us than His fulfilling it for us Ans. 1 This will say as much against the Imputation of Christs sufferings for we are said to be dead with Christ therefore not Christs death but our own death in Him should be said to be imputed to us But the Scripture knoweth no such thing 2 The meaning of the expression is we say but to denote emphatically the imputation of what Christ did suffered unto us for our own fulfilling of the law in Him is but His fulfilling of it for us the same imputed to us so as we are dealt with no otherwayes than if we had done it our selves as our being dead buried with Christ is but His dying in our place stead or our having such an Interest in His death burial as that we are dealt with as if in a manner we had died our selves But he supposeth there is a difference as to this betwixt Christs dying His fulfilling the law saying When the Scripture saith we are dead c. with Christ the meaning is not that God looked upon us as if we had laid down our Natural lives by death when he laid down His as if this laying down our lives were a satisfaction to His justice for then we might be said to have satisfied for redeemed our selves But these expressions import either a profession of such a death in us which holds proportion with or hath a likeness to the death of Christ or else this death it self really wrought in us by that death of Christ. Ans. We do not asserte the meaning of these expressions to be That God looketh upon us as if we had laid down our Natural lives c. But that beleevers have such an Interest in Christs death as being the death of their Surety Redeemer Head Husband and publick person that they receive the benefites advantagâ—â— thereof no less really effectually than if they themselves in their own persons had dyed satisfied the same being now imputed unto them laid hold on by faith 2 Though these expressions at least some of them in some places of Scripture as Rom. 6. may do import what is here expressed yet the full import of these Expressions is not hereby exhausted as the scope circumstances of the places may cleare as particularly that expression Gal. 2 20. I am crucified with Christ these Ephes. 2 5. 6. He addeth against this That Gal. 2 20. The expression is taken in the latter sense importing that the natural death of Christ for Paul others had wrought upon him in a way of assimilation to it self had made him a dead man to the world Ans. Paul is rather clearing confirming how he was become dead to the law and alive unto God vers 19. in through the vertue of Christs death crucifixion in which he had such an Interest that he accounted him self as it were hinging-on the cross in with Christ did so rest upon that by faith owne that Sacrifice alone that he Christ as it were were become one person he owed his being dead unto the law onely thereunto had it as really flowing therefrom following thereupon as if he himself had hung upon the cross as a satisfactory Sacrifice To that Ephes. 2 5 6. he saith The meaning is not that God looks upon them as quickened from a natural or corporal death as Christs quickening riseing againe was Ans. Nor do we say that this is the meaning nor need we either think or say so but this we say that the expression holdeth this forth that Christ dyed rose againe as a publick person Surety that Beleevers have so neer an Interest in His Mediatory work so closs an union with the Mediator that they are as one person in law so that they are really made partakers of some of the fruites of what Christ did suffered already shall as really partake of what is yet to be communicated as if they themselves had laid down that purchasing price Let us hear what he giveth for the meaning The meaning saith he is either to signifie the profession that is made by us of that newness of life which in way of a Spiritual Analogy answers that life whereunto Christ was quickened and rose againe or else the new life it self wrought in us Ans. That the Apostle is not here speaking of a meer profession is manifest nor is he speaking only of a new life wrought in them for he addeth and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Iesus Nor doth that which he saith invalidate the meaning which we give for that effect or inwrough quickening is spoken of as flowing from Christs
thing by way of proportion but must have its jot for jot title for title or else it will curse Ans. 1. We are to regard here more what the Law-giver and Supream Rector will know than what the letter of the Law will acquiesce in 2. This taketh away the Satisfaction of Christ and all His Sufferings as Mediator and destroyeth that ground of our hope and Salvation for the Law as to its letter saith the Soul that sinneth to it shall die and hath not one jote or title of the Satisfaction and Suffering of a Mediator 3. What shall our Adversary now do with faith doth any jote or title of the Law countenance the Imputation of faith for a proportionable Righteousness doth faith answere every jote title point and letter of the Law He answereth 2. To impute acts of Righteousness to a Man which are proper to another calling is rather to impute sin than righteousness Ans. Christ was a publick person appointed of the Father to represent all the chosen ones did in their place room fulfill the law in all points according as was required of Him by the Supream Lord Rector Law-giver this perfect compleat Obedience is made over to all those who are His not one part to this particular Beleever and another to another or some acts to this man some other acts to that man therefore this reply is groundless As to that viz. That God inflicted on Christ not the circumstantiat curse threatned but its equivalency he saith 1. That in these words Thoushalt die the death there is no necessity to meane precisely determinatly eternal death according to the letter Ans. If that was not threatned in the Law no man shall suffer it for the breach of the Law and so there shall be no eternal death even to such as perish which yet himself granteth 2. It was a spiritual death and such as includeth many circumstances which Christ neither could nor did suffer He saith 2. Gods meaning there was not to threaten eternal death in one kinde or other but to have the word death understood as it indifferently signifieth that evil of punishment which was known by that names for eternity is not of the essence of the punishment due unto sins Ans. The doubt remaineth concerning other circumstances ingredients of that death as threatned to man And whether eternity be of the Essence of the punishment threatned for sin or not this is sure that all for whom Christ hath not suffered shall perish eternally all had perished eternally if Christ had not suffered And when God threatned death to man he know that if that threatning did overtake him his death would be eternal He saith 3. Though God should take liberty to vary from the letter of the Curse yet it followeth not that the creature who was bound to obey the precepts of the Law might take the like liberty to do one thing in stead of another or that God should accept any such payment for them Ans. We assert no liberty for man but why should not this liberty be allowed to the Supream God All the reason he giveth I finde to be this That God accepteth on any mans behalf as a perfect legal righteousness the performance of such things which are not required of him hath no correspondence with any of the Covenants Ans. If God could accept that as a perfect Satisfaction which did not every way answere to correspond with that which Man himself was to suffer why might He not accept of that as a perfect legal righteousness which did not in all particulars answere to correspond with that which every beleever was obliged unto What reason is or can be given for the one which will not hold for the other The answere he hath given is no answere unto this Perfect obedience was required of all by the first Covenant Christ did performe perfect obedience for all His owne this being a perfect legal Righteousness is sufficient for all is not the performance of such things as are not required of them Obj. 2. Chap. 10. pag. 107. That Righteousness which is exactly and precisely fitted to the person of Him that is Mediator between God man cannot be imputed unto any other man But such is the Righteousness of Christ. Ergo. The Major he thus confirmeth He that assumeth this Righteousness of Christ represents himself to God in the glorious attire of him who maketh men righteous may conceue himself as great in holiness as Iesus Christ himself c. Ans. Christ's Righteousness was indeed the Righteousness of a Mediator Surety therefore was imputable to all who by faith should be married to Him have union with Him as their Head Husband are become one person in Law with Him as their Representative Surety though not as it was subjected in Him but according to the nature of the thing to their necessity Hereby therefore is no wrong done to Christ no robbing of Him of His mediatory glory but on the contrary a more clear manifest ascribing of the same unto Him by acknowledging Him for the only Mediator by resting on Him on His Righteousness as our only Righteousness and ground of Acceptance We cleare the matter thus When the payment of a Surety is imputed to the debtor and he pleadeth the same in court for his own absolution he doth no injurie unto the cautioner but rather declareth himself unable to pay ascribeth the honour of the payment unto the Surety for he doth alleige or produce that payment as if he would thereby declare that he himself as Surety had paid the summe for another but only produceth the payment of a Surety in reference to himself as a ground sufficient in Law whereupon he should be absolved from the Charge giuen-in against him by the creditor So when the beleever applieth to himself the Righteousness of Christ he doth not make himself a Mediator or Surety but only applieth the Righteousness payment of his Surety Head Husband for his own use to answere the charge given-in against himself and in reference to his own particular case necessity Hereby the beleever doth not assume to himself an equality of Righteousness with God himself but only assumeth that Mediatory Surety-righteousness which He wrought who was equal with God was God so far as their own case necessity requireth We dream of no such imputation as would give ground to us to conceite our selves to have done said all that He did said This is the fiction of the Adversary not our Assertion Against the consideration of the Union betwixt Christ as the Head beleevers as the Members which is the ground of this Imputation communication He saith pag. 113. 1. Christ Beleevers are a mystical body therefore an universal agreement in all things with a natural body cannot be thought on one difference is this
before the bargane be made and may also be paid down some time before he obtaine the purchase We owne only such consequential conditions here as are but the means and Methods appointed of God for such and such ends which have an immedial connexion with the end here intended And therefore we neither say nor imagine that a man may have the Righteousness of Christ or Faith yet not be justified for in the very moment as was said that a Man acteth true Gospel-and so justifying faith he hath the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him and is justified Every priority in order of Nature doth not conclude also a priority as to time far less can a man be supposed to have the Righteousness of Christ without God's Act of Imputation But Finally all these Argueings returne upon his own head for when he saith that faith is Imputed for Righteousness meaning by faith our act of beleeving he must also say that a man may beleeve and yet not be justified untill his faith be Imputed unto Righteousness by God whose work alone this is and his reply to this will relieve us Obj. 24. That which was Imputed to Abraham for Righteousness in his justification is imputed to other beleevers also But the faith of Abraham was imputed to him for Righteousness Ergo c. And for proof of all he referreth us to what he hath said Chap. 2. upon Rom. 4. Ans. We shall not here anticipat the consideration of that place and of this Argument founded there upon seing afterward we will have a fitter occasion to speak hereunto Obj. 25. Here is his last argument which he largely prosecuteth Chap. 21. pag. 188. c. and it would seem that it is here adduced againe for we had it once if not oftner before that he may take occasion to vent his mind against the Imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity Thus he Argueth If the Righteousness of the Law be not imputable or derivable in the letter and formality of it from one mans person to another then cannot the Righteousness of Christ be imputed to any man in justification But the former is true therefore c. Ans. What may be answered unto this Argum. the Reader may see in the foregoing Chapter Object last I shall not here repeat but go on to take notice of what he saith to that objection which he moveth against himself and proposeth thus If the transgression of the Law be imputable from one Mans person to another then may the Righteousness of the Law be imputed also But the former is hence evident because the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity He first excepteth against the Major and denieth the Consequence thereof and giveth reasons of his denial 1. There is saith he no such Emphatical restraint of the guilt and punishment to the transgressour as there is of the reward to the performer of obedience for Gal. 3 12. the very man that hath done them shall live by them which is no where said of the Transgressour Ans. But all this is loose reasoning for as the Law saith God will visite the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth Generation so it saith that He will shew mercy to thousands of them that love Him and keep His Commandements and here the one is as Emphatick as the other 2 As he readeth Gal. 3 12. that the man that doth them shall live in them so we read Ezek. 18 3. the soul that sinneth it shall die and Gal. 3 10. Deut. 27 26. Cursed is every one that abideth not in all things which are written in the Law to do them which words do Import as emphatical a restraint as the other But of that Gal. 3 12. we have said enough above we might also mentione that which was said to Adam in the day thou eats thou shalt die which seemeth to have no less an Emphatick Import But 2. he mentioneth this difference Sin saith he is ever greater in ratione demerity than obedience is in ratione meriti Adam might by his transgression merite condemnation to himself and posterity yet not have merited by his obedience Salvation to both because if he had kept the Law he had only done his duty Luk. 17 10. so had been but an unprofitable servant Ans. All this saith nothing where a Covenant is made promising life to the obeyer as well as threatning death to the transgressour Albeit Adam could not be said to have merited life by his obedience in way of proper and strick merite yet in way of merite expacto he could have been said to have merited for the reward would have been reckoned to him not of grace but of debt and there would have been ground of boasting and glorying Rom. 3 27. 4 2 4. How beit he had done but his duty when he had obeyed to the end yet the condescending love of God promising the reward to perseverance in obedience to the end was sufficient to found this Whether Adam had merited Salvation to all his posterity if he had kept the Covenant to the end or not is not our present question to enquire j this we know that by one man sin entered into the world death by sin so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned Rom. 5 12. And upon the other hand this we know that Christ was made sin for His as a publick person and all His promised Seed and Children are made the Righteousness of God in Him 1. Cor. 1 30. 2. Cor. 5 21. and those are sufficient for our purpose 3. He saith The Imputableness of the transgression of the Law rather overthroweth the Imputation of the obedience of it than any wayes establisheth it for the more Imputable that is punishable the transgression is the less imputable that is rewardable is the obedience of it Ans. This is very true when we speak of the same man as of Adam in both for he could not both be a Transgressour and a Final Observer of the Law and so both obedience and Transgression could not be imputed to himself Let be to any other the Imputation of the one did quite evacuat the other But what maketh this meer shift to his present purpose which is to show if he could that the Righteousness and obedience of the Second Adam the Lord from heaven is not as imputable to His Spiritual Seed Issue as the Sin and Transgression of the first Adam who was of the earth earthy 1. Cor. 15 47. was imputable to his Natural Seed Next he cometh to the Minor and denieth the Imputation of Adam's sin and this seemeth to be his maine buliness wherein he complieth with the Socinians and others Let us hear him first saith he the Scripture no where affirmes either the Imputation of Adam's sin or of the Righteousness of Christ. Ans. The contrary is sufficiently proven above all his reasons cannot evince what he saith He tels us
or Delegate The 4. is but a consequent of this and consequently saith he to repute a double formal Righteousness to result from the said habites acts passions one to Christ as the Natural Subject Agent another to us as the Moral Political or reputed Subject agent so His formal Righteousnese not to be imputed to us in it self as ours but another to result from the same matter This is too Philosophical for me to owne or follow The 5 is or else that we are reputed both the agents Subjects of the matter of His Righteousness morally also of the formal Righteousness of Christ himself All these are but the effuvia of a braine floteing swimeing in ill digested Philosophical Notions School dregs contribute nothing to the clearing of Gospel-Truth which hath little or rather no affinity with aery Philosophical Notions but tende manifestly to the darkening of the same But now when all these Philosophical Notions Relations are at an end we can proceed no further where is that Imputation which is legal plaine to every ordinary Man viz whereby the Satisfaction made to a judge Governour for a crime committed by the delinquen'ts friend or that payment Satisfaction made to the creditor for the debtor by a friend Interposing is in Law-sense accounted the delinquent's debtor's he as really effectually delivevered out of prison therefore as if he had made Satisfaction in his own proper person or had paid the summe out if his own Substance If any Philosopher after Mr. Baxter's manner here should with such Philosophical Whimseyes I call them so for they are no other in this case laboure to disprove any such Imputation say it must be in one of those five senses c. would not any countrey man smille at this But now let us see Mr. Baxter's sixt sense wherein he granteth the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Or else saith he by Imputation is meant here that Christ being truely reputed to have taken on the Nature of sinful Man become an Head for all true Beleevers in that undertaken Nature office in the person of a Mediator to have fulfilled all the Law imposed upon him by perfect Holiness obedience offering himself on the cross a sacrifice for our sins voluntarily suffering in our stead as if He had been a sinner guilty of all our sins as soon as we beleeve we are pardoned Iustified Adopted for the sake Merites of this Holiness obedience Penal Satisfaction of Christ with as full demonstration of divine Iustice at least more full Demonstration of His wisdom Mercy than if we had suffered our selves what our sinnes deserved that is been damned or had never sinned And so Righteousness is imputed to us that is we are accounted or reputed Righteous not in relation to the Precept that is innocent or sinless but in relation to the Retribution that is such as have right to impunity Life because Christ's foresaid perfect Holiness Obedience Satisfaction meritedour pardon Adoption and the Spirit or merited the New Covenant by which as an Instrument Pardon justification Adoption are given to Beleevers and the Spirit to be given to Sanctifie them and when we beleeve we are justly reputed such as have right to all these purchased gifts As to this I shall only note a few things 1. Christ's fulfilling of the Law imposed on Him doth not hinder but that He paid our debt so came in our Law-place substitute Himself in our room to do what we should have done to suffer what we should have suffered according to the Law in all the essentials Substantials of that punishment for had He not done this He could not be said to have suffered in our stead for he only suffereth in the room stead of another who suffereth what that other should have suffered If one be condemned to suffer death another that suffereth only Imprisonment for his delivery cannot be said to suffer in this stead but onely for his cause good as the Socinians say Christ suffered for us 2. Christ not only suffered in our stead as if he had been a sinner guilty but as sinner legally juridically guilty having sins imputed to Him though He was most free of all sin inherently and knew it not the reason is manifest for otherwayes Divine justice should not have shined forth in His sufferings it being no Demonstration of justice to punish one who neither inherently nor Imputatively legally is or can be accounted reputed a sinner 3. Wee cannot with right be reputed Righteous except we be either inherently righteous or righteous by Imputation so legally juridically in Law-sense righteous by vertue of the Imputation of the Surety-righteousness of Christ our Sponsor 4. Righteousness must properly respect the Commands Prohibitions of the Law but secondarily the Retribution if not most Improperly as unrighteousness is in reference to the Law as commanding or forbidding very improperly attributed to any in reference to the punishment threatned And therefore if we be accounted Righteousness it must be in relation to the precept at least in the first place Nor can we be accounted Righteous in reference to the Retribution that is have a Right to Impunity life in the sight of God who judgeth reputeth according to equity right unless we be first accounted Righteous in reference to the precept for this is the only just legal foundation of the other 5. Upon this it doth not follow that we are Innocent or sinless inherently far less that we never transgressed but on the contrary it clearly saith that we were sinners but now are legally or juridically innocent sinless by the Imputation of the side jussorie Righteousness of Christ therefore are not obnoxious to the penalty or to punishment but have right to Impunity life 6. When he speaketh of what Christ merited he expresseth himself dubiously not being positively clear whether Christ merited our pardon c. or the New Covenant the disjunctive particle Or saith He did not merite both in his judgment but before we heard him plainly affirming that Christ merited the New Covenant consequently He did not purchase pardon Adoption the Spirit to any immediatly but only mediatly in purchasing the Covenant which promiseth these to such as performe the Conditions thereof 7. By this way Beleevers are repute such as have right to all these purchased gifts not immediatly by vertue of Christ's Merites righteousness imputed to them bestowed upon them but by vertue of their being inherently Righteous with that Gospel-righteousness faith which is the potestative Condition of the Covenant is now imputed to them accounted their Righteousness according to his judgment Speaking afterward pag. 55. of Christ as an Head Root he tels us that He was no Natural Root or Head which is undeniable Yet He
this we willingly grant a difference but both were Federal Heads Publick Persons their agreement in this satisfieth us He saith 3. Therefore we derive not Righteousness from Him by Generation but by His voluntary donation and contract Ans. We derive it from Him by Regeneration that is as we partake of Adam's guilt when by Generation we partake of a Natural being so we partake of Christ's Righteousness when by Regeneration we partake of a spiritual being in Him And there is no new formal contract made here anent but what is sutable to the Nature of this privilege in order to its conveyance He saith 4. as He became not our Natural parent so our persons not being in Christ when He obeyed are not reputed to have been in Him naturally or to have obeyed in by Him Ans. We say only and we seek no more that Christ was our Federal Head and our persons Federally not physically were in Christ when He obeyed we are reputed to be in Him not Naturally but Foederally and so to have obeyed in by Him He saith 5. If Cbrist we are reputed one person either He obeyed in our person or we in His or both if He obeyed as reputed sinner in the person of each sinner His obedience could not be Meritorious according to the Law of Innocency which required sinless perfection He being supposed to have broken the Law in our person could not so be supposed to keep it If we obeyed in His person we obeyed as Mediators or Christ's Ans. Aristotle's Notions to which Mr. Baxter contrary to all sense reason will have this whole matter restricked in its explication are the cause of all this ridiculous Confusion But for answere I say Christ we are reputed one person not physically but in Law-sense federally therefore both he obeyed as taking on our Law-place coming in to our Law-condition and to say that therefore His obedience could not be Meritorious is ridiculous as if forsooth His coming into our Law-place would make Him to be supposed to have broken the Law in His physical person as if one would say The Surety cannot pay the debtor's debt because by coming in to his Law-place he becometh a bankrupt Himself saith that Christ suffered in our stead this cannot be in our Physical stead but in our Law-stead now will it not as well hence follow that He suffered as a sinner then how could He who suffered as being supposed to have broken the Law make Satisfaction for us or how could His death be Meritorious Thus indeed good service shall be done to the Socinians but bad service to the Truth Finally we obeyed as Federally in Him yet were no Mediators or Christ's but redeemed Saints as the debtor satisfied the Creditor in Law-sense when his Surety did it and yet became no Surety thereby He saith 6. But as is oft said Christ our Mediator undertook in a middle person to reconcile God and Man not by bringing God to judge erroneously that He or we were what we were not or did whas we did not but by being doing and suffering for us that in His own person which should botter answere Gods Ends Honour than if we had done and suffered in our persons that hereby he might merite a free gift of pardon life with himself to be given by a Law of Grace to beleeving penitent Accepters Ans. I doubt there be one word here said to which a Socinian will not subscribe But for answer I say Christ our Mediator so undertook in a middle physical person to reconcile God man that He became our Surety came in our stead Law-place to do and suffer what we were obliged unto by the Law and when God judged Him to be and to do thus He judged not erroneously but truely according to His own gracious Appointment and Ordination making Him a Publick person representing all such as He gave Him to save We have shown elsewhere that Christ merited something else than a Law of Grace to Convey a free gift of pardon life upon New Conditions otherwise His death could not be called a Ransome a Redemption or a price nor could He be said to have died in the stead of any person or to have born their Iniquities or the punishment thereof far less to have been made sin for us But more of this hereafter Object 8. As Christ is a sinner by Imputation of our sin so we are Righteous by the Imputation of His Righteousness But it is our sin it self that is Imputed to Christ. Therefore it is His Righteousness it self that is imputed to us To this he saith 1. Christ's person was not the subject of our personal relative guilt much less of our habites or acts 2. God did not judge Him to have been so 3. Nay Christ had no guilt of the same kind reckoned to be on Him else these unmeet speaches used rashly by some would be true viz. That Christ was the greatest murderer Adulterer c. and consequently more hated of God for God must needs hate a sinner as such Ans. 1 Mr. Baxter will understand nothing here but according to his Philosophical Metaphysical Notions in this sense we may grant him all that he saith And yet adde That Christ was the legal juridical and federal subject of our guilt for our sins did meet together on Him and He was made sin 2 and God doing all this could not but judge Him to have been so 3 Christ inherently had no guilt neither of the same kind nor of any other but that our very sins were imputed to Him reckoned upon His score must be granted or we must deny His dying or satisfying in our stead so plainely embrace Socinianisme 4 Those speeches are but unmeet to such as mistake them as Mr. Baxter doth here who supposeth that their meaning is That He was the greatest sinner Inherently which were indeed blasphemy but far from their thoughts for he inferreth that consequently he must have been more hated of God while as God's hatred if we take it not for meer punishing of sin is only against such as are inherently sinners What saith he moreover To be guilty of sin as we are is to be reputed truely the person that committed it But so was not Christ therefore not so to be reputed Christ was but the Mediator that undertook to suffer for our sins that we might be forgiven not for His own sin really or justly reputed Ans. No man saith that Christ was guilty of sin as we are that is Inherently But if He undertook to suffer for our sins unless we turn Socinians in expounding this sentence we must say that the guilt of our sins was laid upon Him otherwise He could not suffer for them in our place stead we must say that He so suffered for them as that all they in whose stead He suffered should certainly be forgiven not have
That it did binde him to suffer for his old sin adde also for his new sin yet the obligation to obey for time to come remained But all this is beside the purpose for the maine thing is not yet noticed by Mr. Baxter viz. That Adam by his sin was obliged to suffer that yet there was no way for him to come to the promised Crown but by perfect obedience to that Law that therefore neither he or any of his posterity can enjoy life untill their Surety fulfill that Law for them or undertake to do it as they cannot be freed from Suffering untill their Surety suffer the penalty for them or undertake to do it We need not speak so unaptly as he supposeth we do that is say that the Law commandeth lapsed man not to have sin or imperfect man to have been perfect for we know that were to binde to an Impossibility in Nature for sin existent cannot but be existent But this we say That by vertue of that Law constitution there was no way for lapsed man to enjoy the Reward-promised but by yeelding perfect obedience unto that Law and as this was Impossible in Nature so was it impossible for lapsed man to enjoy the Reward therefore the Lord provided a Surety who should yeeld perfect obedience unto that Law this perfect Obedience is made over unto the Beleever put upon his score as well as the Sureties Sufferings are But saith he if Christ's perfect Obedience and holiness be imputed unto them from their first being then they are reputed not lapsed nor sinners from the beginning so not pardonable Ans. There is no necessity for such a Reputation for this is not the end of that Imputation It is Imputed in order to their obtaining a Right to the Reward which was lost by vertue hereof they do obtaine the Reward as certainly as if they had never sinned Others he saith n. 126 would come neerer the matter say that we are reputed Righteous as fulfillers of the Law yet reputed sinners as breakers of the Law that though there be no medium in Naturals betwixt light darkness life death yet there is betwixt a breaker of the Law a fulfiller of it viz. a Non-fulfiller between just unjust that is not just ◠Ans. I Finde Wolls bius in his Compend Theol. Lib 1. Cap. 30. § 15. full plaine as to this who in order to prove that in justification there is a Remission or Abjudication of sins Imputation or Adjudication of a perfect Righteousuess that though these two benefites be the same as to Time Subjects yet they are really distinct both as to their proper definitions their proxime Causes proper Effects in clearing of the difference as to their definitions he tels us that there is a difference betwixt not just just not just unjust not unjust just that not just just are contradictory that unjust just are partly privative partly contrary that not just unjust unjust just are diverse as also that unjust just are not immediatly contrary for there is Medium betwixt them viz. Innocent who is such an one as is neither unjust nor yet just and that though now these two do not differ as to Subjects yet of old they did for Adam in Paradise before he fell was innocent but was not just for he was to obtaine this by perfect Obedience Now. what saith Mr. Baxter to this He saith this is meer darkness As it seemeth all things are that agree not to his Notions But why There is saith he a Medium negative in a person as not obliged but none between positive private in one obliged as such A stone is neither just nor privatively unjust nor a man about a thing never commanded or for bidden him But what is this to the matter God's Law is presupposed we talk of nothing but Moral Acts. The Law forbideddeth omissions and Commissions both are sin Ans. Though there be no medium betwixt positive and privative in a person obliged as to particular acts commanded or forbidden yet there is a Medium in such a person in reference to the Reatus poenae meritum praemii In reference to every moral act Adam was either just or unjust i. e. either one that obeyed or one that transgressed but in reference to the punishment threatned to the Reward promised before he fell he was neither unjust that is one that was a Transgressour reus culpae poenae nor was he just that is one that had purchased the Reward but was in his way thereunto himself saith little less as I judge in his premonit p. 19. saying 3. But that Law giving life eternal only to obedience to the end of his time of trial he merited not that life by Initial obedience This was Initial Imperfect Righteousness wanting perseverance but not a Medium between just unjust except as just signifieth the merite of life by persevering Righteousness to the last And so I never denied but in a disobliged Subject there is a Medium Adam was not bound to do a yeers work the first hour so was neither just nor privatively unjust as to the future yeers work but as to what he was presently obliged unto he was either Righteous or a sinner Here upon the matter is almost all I desire or say When a command is given to a person to run so many miles in an hour a Reward is promised in case he do it a punishment threatned in case he do it not while he is running as to his present acting he is not disobedient but obedient so in so far is just not unjust yet in reference to the Reward he cannot be called just untill he hath finished the course in the time appointed So Adam while standing though he sinned not yet he had not merited the Reward Mr. Baxter replieth 1. He merited what Reward he had viz. the Continuance of his blessings first freely given Ans. That was not all the Reward which was promised whereof we are speaking for Adam was not yet in Patria howbeit himself was not clear as to this when he wrote his Aphorismes yet afterward in his Book against Mr. Cartwright pag. 19. he tels us he became convinced hereof 2. He raiseth dust to darken the aire by saying That it is yet unresolved what that was by which Adam must merite Immutability Glory whether 1. Once obeying or Consent to his full Covenant 2. Or once loving God 3. Or conquering once 4. Or eating of the tree of life 5. Or persevering in perfect obedience to the end that is till God should translate him But this dust falleth to the ground when he addeth That this last is most likely And indeed it were much of his concernment to prove if he could that all that was required of Adam by vertue of that
but a part of justification because a man may be for-given yet not reputed never to have broken the Law To put away guilt and to make one Righteons are two things This is most clear yet Mr. Baxter saith n. 128. Still confusim Which is wonderfull where I pray must the confusion lye Is it in this that we say Remission of sin is at most but part of justification Doth not himself say as much hereafter n. 208. when he saith that our first constitutive justification is in its own Nature a right to Impunity to life or glory Now this Right to Impunity is the same with Remission but a Right to life or glory is something more Is it in this that we say a man may be forgiven and yet not reputed one who never broke the Law That I am sure can be no confusion and contradiction for it is a contradiction to say that a man is pardoned and yet reputed one that never broke the Law for pardon is of a breach of the Law What saith he to make out this alleiged Confusion Guilt saith he is either of the fault as such or of the punishment of the fault only as the cause of punishment If all guilt both culpae poenae were done away that person were reputed positively righteous that is never to have omitted a duty or committed a sin Ans. But do we say That pardon taketh away the Reatus culpae in it self His own following words may partly be our answer But indeed saith he when only the Reatus poenae culpae quoad poenam is done away the Reatus culpae in se remaineth And this Christ himself never taketh away no not in heaven where for ever we shall be judged once to have sinned not to be such as never sinned Where is now the Confusion Mr. Baxter spoke of But yet I suppose he is in a mistake when he saith that the Reatus culpae cannot be taken away for it must be taken away legally or there shall be no justification though it can never be taken away Metaphysically the same may be said of the Reatus culpae it self seing it will alwayes be true that they did once deserve punishment are not such as never deserved punishment He addeth n. 129. that which to him is the Core of our errour That we â—hink we must be justified in Christ by the Law of Innocency which justified Christ Himself that we are quite or washed simply from all guilt of fault as well as Obligation to Punishment But neither of these do we say as hath been frequently shown We are justified by the Law of Grace by faith yet we say with Paul that the Law is not made void by faith but established the Law of Innocency must be fulfilled but it is not fulfilled by us but by Christ His Righteousness is Imputed to us and received by faith and we thereupon are justified receive Remission and Right to Glory We do not say That Adam's Law meant do this by thyself or by Christ thou shalt live yet we say that that Constitution of God do this and live must as well be established as this Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the Law and that as by vertue of this Christ our Surety was to die the cursed death so by vertue of that He was to fulfill all Righteousness He 〈…〉 next n. 130. that the truth which we grope after and must reconcile us all is as followeth As if all the Reformed divines almost had been hither to but groping after the truth like blinde men groping for the wall and he and possibly two or three moe had their eyes opened to see the truth His discourse here is too long to be rehearsed that it may be examined a few observes upon it may suffice 1 He saith Christ in His sufferings did stand in the room of sinners as their Sponsor Ans. Then His Satisfaction to justice must in due time be reckoned on the score of such in whose room He suffered Why will he not say this also of Christ's Obedience seing both were performed by Him in His estate of Humiliation as the Surety of the Covenant Was He not made under the Law as well as under the Curse And was He not made of a woman given and born to us But neither can we say That Christ stood in the room of all sinners as he supposeth 2 We saith That Christ acquired a Right first to Himself of giving out the purchased benefites to sinners by a new Law viz. by what He suffered did Ans. This is denied as not yet being confirmed and it destroyeth His being a Sponsor and Surety and saith He was not born to us nor died for us but to and for Himself And yet I deny not that Christ hath gote all power and is the General dispensator of the blessings of the Covenant purchased 3 He saith Had Christ antecedently done all that He did in our person we in Him in Law sense the thing its self with its inseparable consequents effects had been all ours ipso facto Ans. There is no necessity for this seing Christ was not thereunto appointed by us or conjunctly obliged with us in the first Covenant but after we were broken did of His own accord put His Name in our Obligation and came in our Law-place so was made sin for us that we might be made the Righteousness of God in Him 4 He speaketh of these benefites being given us upon termes Conditions But we shew before and here-after will have occasion to do it more fully of what Nature these termes and Conditions were and that they are not such as He meaneth 5 He saith What is given by the New Covenant we have title to upon this account because it was purchased by the perfect merite sacrifice of Christ so given us by Him and by the Father Ans. According to Him the Right that is had thus is but remote common to all even to such as perish therefore can hardly be called a Right but the only Right is had is by our performance of the termes and Conditions for he saith n. 137. that Glory is given as a Reward for our beleeving and performing the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace 6 He saith we deserved punishment Christ was punished in our stead that we might be forgiven we had forfeited life by sin Christ merited life for us by His perfection Ans. And why will he not say that Christ did this last as well as the first in our stead seing hereby the freedom of the Gift can no more be weakened than pardon by the other What followeth hath been spoken to already He granteth n. 132. That not to punish to reward are different yet he saith not to have the Gift is to be punished so non-donari here is puniri materially that it is the same
for us according to any obligation that ever fell upon our persons How proveth he this For 1. saith he we were never personally bound to perfect personal perpetual Obedience as the Condition of life for that Covenant as to the promise condition ceased before any man was born Ans. That Covenant I grant ceased to be the way to life as it was to Adam at first because it became a thing impossible yet as Adam fell under the Curse of that broken Covenant so did all his posterity fall with him in him hence when his posterity come to be existent persons they are Children of wrath are under the Curse of that Covenant and all their Actions afterward committed are further sins violations of that Covenant for we may not think that Adam after his first sin was not in case to violat that Covenant any more And though before any man was born the new Covenant or Gospel was promulgat yet notwithstanding thereof all men were born under the Curse of the first Covenant and were never delivered from under that untill they closed with the termes of the second Covenant or Covenant of Grace But he saith 2. All the duty in the world which we are bound unto is to be done for Euangelical ends for recovery grace unto gratitude Ans. And was not Adam before the fall also bound unto gratitude But he possibly meaneth gratitude for Redemption yet he hath proved that all the world Heathens I meane such as never heard of the Gospel are obliged to Gratitude upon the account of Redemption or that all that is required of them is to be done for Gospel ends But in all this I am little concerned who see no necessity of restricking Christ's obedience so 8. He saith That we see not that our own answere implieth the truth of what he and others assert and is the same which they give but our cause is uncapable of What then saith he his We say saith he that Christ did indeed most perfectly obey the Law of Innocency so far for us in our stead though not in our persons as doing that which we should have done did not hath merited for us a better Covenant which obligeth us not at all to obey for the ends of the first Covenant viz. that our perfection might be our Righteousness or the Condition of life but only to obey for the ends of the New Covenant for the obtaining improving of recovering grace Salvation by Christ freely given us which we ourselves must do or perish Ans. 1 If Christ obeyed for us and in our stead I see not why he may not be said to do it as our Surety and so in our Law-person seing according to our Common discourse the Surety Principal debtor are one person in Law But about ambiguous termes we need not debate It is of greater moment to differ as to this that he thinketh the us comprâ—hendeth all persons Elect Reprobat 2 That Christ did merite the New Covenant is no where said in Scripturâ— yet this is all that Mr. Baxter here mentioneth as merited by Him 3 I think he is as much concerned as we are to loose his own difficulties formerly proposed for 1. How can He be said to have fulfilled all the Law for us that did not fulfill it to all due ends 2. Can the Law require more than absolute perfection 3. Was not absolute perfection in Christ's holy Obedience 4. Is not gratitude an end required in the Law of Innocency 5. If Christ fulfilled only the Law of Innocency did he not fulfill the Law for Adam Eve only or for us as in them c. Let him answere these himself and he shall help us Next n. 190. he bringeth some in saying That we may as wel say that man must not die because Christ died for us as not obey because Christ obeyed for us then tels us that we strangely use their reason against ourselves know it not But what if this be his mistake Let us hear his reason For we say saith he that we must die because we did not perfectly either obey the Law or suffer all its penalty by Christ as our legal person but he suffered only to satisfie justico in tantum to this end that man himself suffering death temporal afflictions obeying the Law of grace might be saved from all the rest of the punishment But if we had so fulfilled the Law as afore said by doing or suffering we could not have died or suffered the least affliction as a penalty for all punishment in the essence of the relation is for sin Ans. Though I had rather say That Christ Suffered Obeyed for His own in their stead as their Surety willingly undertaking the debt that they were under than that we Suffered Obeyed in Him yet it may be they who speak so are far from that meaning that Mr. Baxter putteth on their words when they call Christ our legal person they mean no more than that he was a Surety or a publick Person 2 Though he suffered not to deliver His own from temporal death yeth he did bear the Curse satisfied Vindictive justice and left nothing of that for them to suffer what chastisements they meet with yea death it self is made to work together for their good He bringeth them in againe n. 190. saying It is more Inconvenient to say that Christ was perfect in our person than that He satisfied in our peâ—son we by Him And here possibly the same mistake is but continued But as he taketh it up he thinketh that hereby the Gospel is subverted Ans. The whole dependeth upon the Explication of these words in our person Mr. Baxter thinketh that these words in our person in a Law sense import that we payed all in Christ as a man payeth a Summe of Money by his servant whom he sendeth to carry it or some such thing And if this be not their meaning who use this expression all this outcry is to no purpose and is only a fighting against his own imagination a meer striving about words yet he granteth that we may fitly say that Christ suffered in the person of a sinner but he bids us mark the sense saying 1. Suffering as penal belongeth to a sinner as such but Satisfaction is an effect of Christ's Suffering which resulteth not from the meer suffering nor from the person of a sinner but from the will Covenant of God made to that excellent person who was God perfect man Well what next 2. Note 2. saith he that it is not any other mans person that we mean that Christ suffered in but His own Ans. And no man ever dreamed that He either did or could suffer in any other man's physical person But seing He was made sin for us so died in our room stead why may He not be said to have died in our Law-person If a
examined by an assise is really changed as to his Law state when cleared by an assise and pronunced not guilty and so absolved as to that whereof he was accused and set at liberty he is now a free man in Law much more is there a great change in a mans Law-state when before he was guilty of death lying bound in fetters keeped unto the day of execution and now getteth a free Remission of all when of a Man of death he is made a free liege as there is a change in a mans state and Relation when he is made an Adopted son so is there a new state wherein the sinner is brought when he is absolved from the sentence of the Law and declared a Righteous man Sanctification Regeneration and Glorification do all of them hold forth a new real State whereinto he is brought who is made partaker thereof so Iustification with Adoption held forth a new relative state which is also real as real is opposed to what is false or imaginary Hence is it that a beleever is justified even while he is sleeping not acting faith as a person remaineth in a married state though not actually consenting unto the match the consent once granted enstateth the person in that new Relation Propos. 2. This new state of Iustification is continueing permanent not in this sense that God reneweth frequently reiterateth the enstating of them into this new relative state but in this sense that once justified alwayes justified they are fixed preserved in that state as Adoption is a permanent state because once adopted alwayes a child of God Hence it is called a grace wherein me stand Rom. 5 2. It is a state of Reconciliation and Peace wherein we stand It is no fluctuating state wherein one may be to day be out of it to morrow and againe brought into it The ground of this sentence is fixed lasting and permanent to wit the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ once clothed therewith never naked or spoiled thereof againe the gifts and calling of God being with out Repentance Rom. 11 29. The foul's union with Christ through faith is lasting and abiding once in Him alwayes in Him once a member of his mystical body married to him as his spouse and alwayes so for he must finally present all such holy without spotâ— or wrinkle or any such thing Ephes. 5 27. Faith whereby the knot is made and the marriage consent is given remaineth as to its root and habite Christ prayeth that it fail not Luk. 22 32. They are keeped by the power of God through faith unto Salvation 1. Pet. 1 5. All the arguments proving Perseverance of the Saints which we cannot here summe-up do confirme this Propos. 3. Hence Iustification is a State that is not Interrupted and broken off and renewed and reiterated againe as it cannot be quite taken away and annulled so neither can it be broken off for a time so as for that time they should be in a non-justified state the marriage once made is not broken the sentence once pronunced is not recalled sinnes once pardoned by God are not laid againe to his charge The Spirit that once spoke peace said Son be of good cheer thy sinnes are forgiven thee will not be againe a Spirit of bondage unto fear Rom. 8 15. If Iustification could at any time be thâ—s interrupted Adoption behoved to be interrupted with it and so a childe of God behoved to be for that time a childe of the devil The Scripture speaketh not of any such relapse into the state of Nature Sin And such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Iesus by the Spirit of our God 1. Cor. 6 11. once brought out of Nature never reduced into that state againe No more new Iustification than new Adoption once quickened never againe brought into a state of death in trespasses sins Ephes. 2 1 5. for such are then brought into a saife state being quickened together with Christ as Christ being raised from the death dieth no more death hath no more dominion over him Rom. 6 9. so they who are planted with him in the likeness of his Death and Resurrection may alwayes reckon themselves dead indeed unto sin but alive unto God through Jesus Christ vers 4 5 11. Hence there is no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8 1. They are not under the Law but under grace Rom. 6 14. And this holdeth true notwithstanding of after-sins for if after-sins remanent sinnes and corruption could break of this relation and make an alteration in this state no man should be said to be one day in a justified state for the best of men falleth seven times a day in sin and no man can say that he is free of sin there being no perfection here there could be no state of Justification consequently no state of Adoption and Reconciliation if after-sins could break of this Relation or Relative State a beleever could not be said to be partaker of any of the privileges attending this state for one day to end New sins indeed call for new Remissions but these new Remissions are fatherly pardons and not such a sentence of absolution as the person had at first when translated out of the Rate of Death into Life for then the person was not a reconciled Son but now he standeth in a state of Reconciliation and Sonshipe his new pardons are the pardons of a Father granted to a Son as we see Psal. 89 30 31 32 33 34. If his children forsake my Law and walk not in my judgments if they break my statutes keep not my commendements then will I visite their transgression with the rod their iniquity with stripes never the less my loving kindness will I not utterly take from him nor suffer my fatihfulness to fail my Covenant will I not break nor alter the thing that is gone of my lips So 1 Ioh. 1 8 9. If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins 2 1 2. My little children these things write I unto you that ye sin not and if any man sin we have an Advocat with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous And he is the Propitiation for our sins Psal. 103 3 8 9 12 13. Who forgiveth all thine Iniquities The Lord is merciful and gracious slow to anger plenteous in mercy he will not alwayes chide neither will he keep his anger for ever as far as the east is from the West so far hath heremoved our transgressions from us like as a Father pitieth his children so the Lord pitieth them that fear him So this state remaineth firme and unbroken notwithstanding of the various changes which are in their apprehensions concerning it these may
alter many a time in one day But the Lords thoughts are not as our thoughts nor are his wayes as our wayes Esai 55 8 9. His sentence judgment remaineth the same how alterable so ever ours be He is in one minde though we be in many Propos. 4. Hence also it is manifest that Iustification is an Instantaneous act that is it is not a work that is carried on by degrees but a sentence pronunced by the Lord the Righteous Judge once for all Though hereafter they still need renewed pardons so may have moe sinnes actually pardoned this yeer than they had the last yeer yet Justification as relating to their state is no progressive work We hear not of a grouth in Iustification as we hear of a growth in Sanctification for as for that word Revel 22 11 he that is Righteous let him be Righteous still or let him be justified still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not import a growth or progress in Iustification but a continuance in that state beside that others read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Ar. Mont. The complut edition as also the Syriack Arabick Versions This relative change that is made in Iustification is like the relative change that is made in Adoption now the act of Adoption is an Insantaneous act and not a work that is carried on by degrees nor doth it admit of a grouth so that an adopted childe of God can not be more the adopted childe of God this yeer than they were the last yeer though the sense and clear Perception of the one and of the other may doth admit of degrees is not so full clear alwayes at the first as it may be afterwards Propos. 5. Hence it followeth That justification is equal in all that is that all who are justified are alike justified none more than others as none are more Adopted than others speaking of these who are made partaker of the privilege None can be said to be more a son than another so none can be said to be more justified than another who is also justified the Lord's sentence absolveth all equally from all their sins who beleeve and admitteth them all equally into a State of Favoure and Reconciliation They equally passe from death unto life they have equally peace with God they have all an equal imputation of the Righteousness of Christ or a share therein none more or less then others though the faith which laith hold on the Righteousness of Christ be not a like strong in all for it is faith in the same kinde in all and the promise is to the kind and not to the measure or degree of faith It is no where said that we are justified by a faith of such a measure or degree but by faith importing that how weak so ever saith be if it be faith of the right kinde it inteâ—esseth a soul in Christ in his Righteousness whereupon he is justified It is true one may have many moe sins pardoned than another Yet both being Pardoned Iustified they are equally absolved from all that could be laid to their charge he that was the greater sinner is not more liable to the Law then he who was the least offender for the sentence of Pardon or Absolution doth equally free both from all hazard of Condemnation as when two persons are pardoned the one whereof hath committed many crimes worthie of death the other but one they are both equally pardoned freed from prison and from the sentence and set at liberty So also when two persons are pardoned the one whereof hath a greater debt remitted the other a lesser they are equally pardoned the one is not more discharged though discharged of more than the other but both are alike discharged of all their debt freed from all trouble of Law upon the account of their debt So in Iustification all who are justified how great so ever the difference be among them as to the sinnes whereof they were guilty are alike justified because alike freed from the accusation and curse of the Law alike made partakers of the Privileges of Persons pardoned have alike interest in the Favoure of God Right to glory As to what difficulty may arise from the consideration of after sinnes we shall speak to that afterward Propos. 6. The State of Iustification is perfect at the first or Iustification is perfect and compleet to all ends and uses This is clear from what is already said for if Iustification be not an act privilege that admitteth of degrees or of increase and doth not grow more and more dayly it must be perfect at first or adequate to all ends and purposes for which it is appointed or have that perfection that is competent to it It is true it is not so perfect as that it can never be out of sight or as if the sense feeling of it might not grow or become greater nor yet is it so perfect compleet as it thereby the justified person were freed from all sin or all the consequences of sin in this life for it is not hereunto appointed nor granted for these ends But in these respects and for these ends it is may be said to be perfect I That all their former sins are pardoned how many how hainous so ever they have been for then all their sins are cast into the depths of the sea Micah 7 19. are not found Ier. 50 20. In those dayes in that time saith the Lord the iniquitie of Israel shall be sought for and there shall be none the sins of judah they shall not be found for I will pardon them whom I reserve He taketh away all iniquity Hos. 14 2. Then he imputeth no iniquiâ—y Psal. 32 2. but covereth forgiveth sins without exception Rom. 4 7 8. Thus he redeemeth Israel from all his iniquities Psal. 130 8. He forgiveth their iniquitie remembereth their sin no more Ier. 31 34. Heb. 8 12. 10 17. He cast all their sins behinde his back Esai 38 17. Hereby is remission of sinnes without any exception Rom. 3 25. Mat. 26 28. Mark 1 4. Luk. 3 3. Act. 2 33. 5 31. 10 43. 26 18. Eph. 1 7. Col. 1 14. He forgiveth all trespasses Colos. 2 13. and forgiveth all iniquity Psal. 103 3. 2 These sins once pardoned blotted out and cast behinde God's back are not againe laid to the charge of the justified persons once forgiven alwayes forgiven It is true Satan may renew the charge and use false summonds against the Beleever it is also true that after-sins may waken feares bring old sins againe to remembrance the Lord may let them see their former debt not to charge it upon them but to bring them on their knees to humble them the more to cause them cry for and seek out new extracts of the Pardon received yet the sinnes that God once pardoneth he never writteth down againe upon
world in order to his information Moreover there is but one Accusation here brought in against the man from the Law from the Righteous Iudge to wit That he is a sinner therefore a son of death therefore there is but one sentence requisite for as for that Accusation that the person hath not performed the Condition of the new Covenant neither will the Law-giver or judge nor can the Law bring it in against a Beleever and what Satan the accuser of the Brethren or what a blinde or prejudged World or what a man 's own blinde deceitful heart shall or can herein do is of no consideration in reference to a Iustification which is before God in his sight But 2. Against this twofold Iustification I would say that all that is mentioned concerning Gospel Iustification in Scripture agreeth but to one the very contrary thereof must be attributed to the other new-coyned Iustification according to his own explication thereof the one is by faith the other is for faith the one is by faith alone withour works the other is because of Faith Works too the one is an act of God's free Grace the other is an act of pure Iustice the one is of a sinner and of an ungodly person the other is of a Righteous man as such because such the one taketh away all boasting and all gloriation even before men the other not the one maketh the reward of free grace the other of due debt the one is because of a Righteousness without us the other because of a personal inherent Righteousness The publicans language God be merciful to me a sinner suiteth the one best The Pharisees language or some thing like it God I thank thee I am a beleever c. suiteth the other best In the one the one the man can plead no innocencie in the other he can must plead himself not guilty in the one the sinner must say with David Psal. 143 2. enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man living be justified in the other he may and must say enter into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight I shall be justified Other things or this Nature might be mentioned but these are sufficient 3. This New Justification must of necessity be a justification of conscience or in it or terminated in it because it is not before God or in his sight where the world or the deceived heart the chiefe accusers here do not compear to accuse Satans accusing them before God can cause no trouble to them untill he come as an Accuser before conscience give in false summonds there And therefore it is not the Justification by Faith treated of in Scripture as himself proveth in his Confession Chap. 8. pag. 189. c. 4. This will make way for moe Iustifications than two for as faith must be justified so must Repentance so must also Works Perseverance in them to the end If it be said that all these make but one compleet Condition therefore give ground but to one sentence I answer Then no man can have this sentence pronounced upon him to wit to be one that hath performed the Condition until he hath persevered unto the end finished his course this being the first Iustification at least in order of Nature before the other a man must be dead before he be justified from the Law yea or with this Iustification and yet we hear of Iustification in this life Further this will make way for moe Justifications upon this account that it is a declaration of the man to be what he is indeed to have what he hath indeed so as hereby tho man who hath true saving faith must be justified upon that account so the man that hath but an historical faith must be justified in so far in comparison of him that is a meer infidel and may plead his own cause so far even before God's tribunal so may the man that hath but a legal Repentance in respect of him that hath none at all the man that performeth Works materially good though not in a right manner in comparison of him that doth not so much himself tels us pag. 8 ag Cartwright of a 3 sold Accusation 1. that we are not beleevers 2. That we are not true beleevers 3. that we are â—â—lifidians that accordingly there must be several wayes of justification 5 This will lay the ground for God's multiplying or frequently reiterating of one the same Iustification for Iustification presupposeth alwayes an Accusation seing neither God nor the Law will ever accuse a Beleever of being no Beleever only Satan the world his own Misguided Conscience it now if the Accusation of these or of Satan alone as he seemeth to insinuat p. 81. else where against Mr. Cartwright be enough to lay the foundation of such a Iustification then as oft as this Accusation is renewed how oft that may be who can tell must the Lord reiterat his sentence of Iustification and pronunce the man a true Beleever and it will not be sufficient to say that it will suffice if the Lord manifest to the Mansconscience that he a beleever for why shall that be sufficient now more than at the first and if this take away the necessity of reiterating the sentence it will also say that there was no necessity for pronuncing the sentence of his being a beleever at the first None need to say that this same may be alledged against our Iustification before God for the Iustification we only owne is in reference to the Accusation of the Law of Justice of God the Righteous Judge under whose Curse the sinner lyeth until he be justified when he is once justified through faith in Christ he is no more troubled with their Accusations for neither God nor Law nor Gospel accuse a Beleever of being an Unbeleever under the Curse againe whatever Satan his own misguided conscience or others may do 6. He groundeth his twosold Iustification p. 93. 94. upon a twosold Covenant with distinct conditions a twosold Accusation for non-performance of the one of the other But thus as he shall make us to be justified by the old Covenant of works that by the principal justification an absurdity that he frequently loadeth our opinion with so he maketh all the justification which is according to the new-Covenant to be upon because of our own personal Righteousness which is also repugnant to the whole Gospel We do not performe the conditions of the first Covenant and all the liberation from the Curse of that Covenant under which we are by Nature is through the Surety-Righteousness of Christ imputed to us received by faith and the Gospel or new-Covenant revealeth no other way of Justification to us As for the distinct accusations we have said enough already Neither the Lord nor his Law do
third yea multiplied Regeneration whereof the Scripture is silent nay it clearly depones the contrary 10. And if it be enquired how it cometh to passe that after sins may not at least gradually impaire the State of Justification as sins do impaire and weaken Sanctification I answere and this may further help to clear the business under hand The reason is manifest from the difference that is betwixt these two blessing and benefites Iustification is an act of God changing the Relative-state of a man and so is done and perfected in a moment Sanctification is a progressive work of God making a real physical change in the man whence sin may tetard this or put it back but cannot do so with the other which is but one single act once done and never recalled the gifts and calling of God being without repentance Rom. 11 29. In justification we are meerly passive it being a sentence of God pronunced in our Favours in Sanctification as we are in some respect patients so are we also Agents and Actors and thus sin may retard us in our motion and as it evidenceth our weakness for acting so it produceth more weakness Moreover Sin and Holiness are opposite to other as light and darkness therefore as the one prevaileth the other must go under and as the one increaseth the other must decress But there is no such Opposition betwixt sin pardon which is granted in Justification And whereas it may be said that sin expelleth also grace Meritoriously yet that prejudgeth not the truth in hand for it can expell grace meritoriously no further than the free constitution of God hath limited and so though it can and oft doth expell many degrees of Sanctification yet it cannot expell make null the grace of Regeneration or the Seed of God so no more can it expell or annul Justification because the good pleasure of God hath secured the one the other made them both unalterable By these particulars we see how the first doubt is removed out of the way we shall next speak to the Second which is concerning afflictions Punishments which are the fruits and deserts of sin and seem to be part of the curse or penalty threatned in the first Covenant To which we need not say much to show that notwithstanding hereof the State of Justification remains firme and unaltered These few things will suffice to cleare the truth 1. Though all affliction and suffering be the fruite consequent of the breach of the Covenant by Adam the head of mankind for if he had stood and the Covenant had not been violated there had been no Misery affliction Death or Suffering and though in all who are afflicted in this world there is sin to be found And though it cannot be instanced that God ever brought an afflicting or destroying stroke upon a Land or Nation but for the provocations of the People yet the Lord may some rimes afflict outwardly or inwardly or both a particular Person in some particular manner though not as provoled thereunto by that persons sin or without a special reference to their sin as the procuring Cause thereof as we see in Iob and as Christ's answer concerning the blinde man Ioh. 9 3. Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents that he was born blinde but that the works of God should be made manifest in him giveth ground to think 2. Though it doth oftner fall out that God doth afflict Punish and Châ—sten his people even because of their sinnes as well as other wicked persons yet the difference betwixt the two is great though the outward Camitie may be materially the same To the godly they flow from Love are designed for good are sanctified and made to do good they are covenanted mercies but nothing so to the wicked They are mercies to the one but curses to the other They speak out love to the one but hatred to the other They are blessed to the one but blasted cursed to the other They work together for good to the one but for evil to the other and all this notwithstanding that the outward affliction calamity that is on the godly may be double or treeble to that which is upon the wicked Yea there is mercy and love in the afflictions of the Godly when the prosperity of the wicked is cursed Whence we see that all these afflictions cannot endanger or dammage their Justified state 3. Though the Lord may be wroth smite in anger his own people chasten punish them in displeasure yet this wrath anger is but the wrath and anger of a Father and is consistent with fatherly Affection in God and therefore cannot be repugnant to a state of Sonshipe in them Prov. 3 11 12. Heb. 12 5-8 Psal. 89 30 33 34. Revel 3 19. 4. In all these afflictions that seem to smell most of the Curse and of the death threatned and are most inevitable such as death c. there is nothing of pure vinâ—ictive justice to be found in them when Justified persons are exercised with them for Christ did bear all that being made a curse for them and as to this the Lord caused all their iniquities to meet together upon him He drunk out the cup of Vindictive anger and left not one drop of the liquor of the Curse of the Law for any of his own to drink He alone did bear the weight of revenging justice and there is nothing of this in all that doth come upon beleevers So that the very sting of death is taken away the sting of all these Afflictions is sucked out and now they are changed into Mercies Blessings 1 Cor. 3 21 22. Therefore we must not think that they contribute the least mite unto that Satisfaction which justice required for sins Christ payed down to the full justice was fully satisfied with what he paid down nor must we think that God will exact a new satisfaction for sins or any part thereof of the hands of beleevers after he hath received a full satisfaction from the Mediator Christ did rest satisfied therewith The afflictions and Punishments then that the godly meet with being no parts of the Curse nor of that Satisfaction that justice requireth for sin nor flowing from vindictive justice but being rather fatherly chastisments mercies meanes of God can do no hurt unto their state of justification nor can any thing be hence inferred to the prejudice of that glorious state 5. But it is said Pardon and Justification is one thing and a man is no more Justified than he is Pardoned and Pardon is but the taking off of the obligation to punishment and consequently of punishment it self and seing punishment is not wholly taken off but there remaineth some part of the curse or of the evil threatned for sin and will remaine untill the resurrection it is cleare that pardon is not fully compleet not consequently Justification so long as we live But
for answere to clear up the matter in hand more we say 1 Pardon of sins is not adequatly the same with Justification nor the whole thereof but at most a part or rather a partial effect in justification the person is constituted Righteous and declared such and thereupon hath his sins pardoned and a Right to the purchased reward and he is thus made declared Righteous through the Mediators Surety-Righteousness imputed to him and laid hold upon by faith 2 When a person is justified he is at once and for ever freed from the punishment due from the Law from vindictive justice for the broken Covenant the Obligation to punishment required by vindictive justice is taken away and dissolved Christ having fully born that Punishment and satisfied that demand of Justice they in through him are delivered from the Curse and the maledictory sentence 3 Hence all their sufferings afflictions here being no part of the Curse nor of Satisfaction to divine vindictive justice nor of the Condemnation threatned how ever they be materially evil and Fatherly Chastisments or Punishments yet are no effects of Law-vengeance nor parts of vindictive Punishment and so cannot give ground to inferre an imperfect Pardon or an imperfect Justification 4 Nor must we call them any part of the Punishment threatned by the Law remaining yet unremoved for that would make them parts of the Curse and yet Mr. Baxter Confess p. 125. conceiveth it fittest to say that beleevers are freed from the curse are not under it and addeth his reasons there And the consequence is clear because what the Law threatneth as such belongeth to the Curse for the Law saith Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do then Gal. 3 10. Deut. 27 26. And therefore every Punishment that is a punishment of the Law must be part of the Curse So if the Punishments or Afflictions that the Godly are now under be part of the Curse that is yet remaining unremoved or of the Punishment as Mr. Baxter there p. 124. saith it will inevitablie follow that beleevers are yet under the Curse and not wholly delivered there from and as to these outward afflictions many of the truly Godly shall be more under the Curse then several of the wicked and if they be under any part of the Curse how can they be pronunced Blessed how can they be said to be Redeemed from the Curse of the Law how can Christ be said to have been made a curse for them how shall their sufferings not be a part of Satisfaction to Vindictive justice Shasl not they be in part Satisfiers for themselves Shall not they then be beholden to Christ only in part How shall then these Afflictions flow from love run in the channel of love and work-out their good through grace love if they be any real formal parts of the Curse Shall not the curse then be a part of the blessedness of the Saints and of their bequeathed portion which they may owne as theirs as well as they may owne life Shall not the curse or a part of the curse separat from the Love of God and of Christ What I pray will if that do it not and yet the Apostle tels us Rom. 8 33. c. that afflictions cannot do it nor death it self How can any part of the curse work for us a far more exceeding eternal weight of glory and yet Afflictions do that 2. Cor. 4 17. The curse will not conforme us unto Christ yet afflictions will and do Rom. 8 29. 5 Even as to the remnants of the body of death that cause the godly to groan and cry out Miserable man c. if we consider them as an Affliction we cannot say that they are a remanent part of Law-vengeance of Law-punishment or of the curse threatned in the Law for then they should be effects of God's hatred towards the Persons of pure vengeance and of juridical judicial Wrath Anger and were not capable of Sanctification to their spiritual advange and Beleevers upon this account could not be said to be delivered from the Law and dead to that wherein they were formerly held as they are Rom. 7 6. for they who are under the Curse and under such an especial part or Effect thereof cannot but be under the Law and that as a cursing Condemning Law Gal. 3 10. Nor could the Apostle inferre as he doth after the mentioning of the sad wrestlings that the godly have with the body of death Rom. 7 15. c. that there is now therefore no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Rom. 8 1. for this would not follow from their being really properly under such a great part of the Curse Sure this cannot but be derogatory unto the perfect Satisfaction made by Christ seing hereby there is in some measure a Satisfaction made unto the justice of God and it was the end of Christ's suffering satisfaction to deliver his people from the curse of the Law in whole and in part from that penalty threatned in the Covenant of works Christ was made a curse for us and thereby did redeem us not in part only but wholly from the curse of the Law and this penal Law Mr. Baxter must understand pag. 127. Confess or he speaketh not to the purpose Nor can I say with him ibid. p. 119. that every threatning is it in one sense the execution in another that is commonly called the curse of the Law for the execution of the Law upon any person is inconsistent with loving-kindness towards that person but so is not every threatning nay nor the execution thereof upon beleevers as we see Psal. 89 30 31 32 33. Nor could these executions of threatnings be said to flow from Love contrare to Revel 3 19. Heb. 12 6. Prov. 3 12. for there is no fatherly Love in executing of the Curse CHAP. XXI Justification is by Faith what this Faith is how it is wrought HAving thus spoken unto laboured to clear up the Nature some causes of this life of â—ustification we come in the next place to speak to the following part of the Text. Where the way how this life of justification is brought about and attained is pointed forth when it is said The just shall live by faith Faith we see is here mentioned as that which interesseth us in this privilege of life Whence we see 1. That no man is made partaker of the life of Justification before Faith or that untill souls exercise faith they are without this life of Justification Some talk of a Justification from Eternity thus confound Justification with Gods love of Election or with Gods decree purpose to justifie Some speak of Justification of all in the death of Christ but neither is this to be admitted if we speak of actual Justification It is true Christ did when he laid down
hath ground of glorying before men in himself and not in the Lord alone for all have alike ground of glorying upon that account seing what the Lord did was common to all and this new personal Righteousness maketh the difference But it will be said That Christ's Righteousness being acknowledged to be our only legal Righteousness whereby we answere the charge of the Law the asserting of a Gospel-Righteousness whereby we come to have an interest in that legal Righteousness can do no prejudice I Ans. Beside that this maketh two distinct Righteousness as the one a meane to obtean another the one within us a price ex pacto for the other without us and all this in order to Absolution from one charge of the Law brought in against the sinner hereby as to us our personal Righteousness is really made our legal Righteousness because it is made that Righteousness whereupon this man and not the other that wants it is freed from the charge of the Law for according to this way Faith is not imployed to lay hold on Christ's Righteousness that by presenting that Surety-Righteousness unto justice the soul may escape the charge but when the charge of violation of the Law of God is brought in against the sinner his only reliefe is his Gospel-Righteousness which he presenteth whereupon he pleadeth for Pardon Absolution by vertue of the new Covenant which Christ hath purchased for should he alledge the death satisfaction of Christ that should give no reliefe because that was for all alike thereby the New Covenant was purchased where in the Gospel Righteousness whether Faith alone or Faith New Obedience was set down as the Condition and therefore it can stand him in no avail but he must refuge himself from wrath under the wings of his own Gospel-Righteousness for he hath no other and thereupon rest secure be confident of his Absolution from all that the Law could charge against him As for example if the Princes son should by a valuable price given to the Prince procure new Termes and Conditions to be proposed to a company of condemned treatours lying in prison if any one of these were challenged for the old crime threatned with the execution of the sentence past upon that account it would be of no avail to him to say the Princes son hath laid down a valuable price to buy me from death because he knew that he did that for all the rest in purchasing a New Covenant new conditions but the first sure course he would take would be to present his performance of the new conditions say the charge cannot reach me because I have performed the Conditions of the New Covenant procured by the Princes son This I suppose is plaine cleare this in our case would be found to be the only saife course that poor challenged sinners would take if they should act according to the doctrine of our Adversaries to which as I said I should not dar to advise one or other But really the Gospel-way which is opposite to this is plaine saife if we have but so much humility as to complye therewith And a difference may seem small in the debate which yet in practice may prove great of dangerous consequence CHAP. XXVI Christ did not procure by his death the New Covenant or the termes thereof WE heard what the Author of the discourse of the two Covenants what Iohn Goodwine said of this New Covenant As the foundation of their assertion of the imputation of faith properly taken they tell us that the New Covenant wherein this Righteousness is required as the condition thereof is founded wholly in the blood of Christ so that whatever is required of man by way of condition of his acceptation with God becomes accepted to that end upon account of Christ's suffering Mr. Allen p. 16. p. 53. 54. saith Nor doth this that faith accompanied with obedience is imputed for righteousness at all derogate from the obedience sufferings of Christ in reference to the ends for which they serve Because the whole Covenant all the parts termes of it both promises of benefites the Condition on which they are promised are all founded in Christ his undertaking for us and all the benefites of it accrue to us upon our beleeving obeying upon his account for his sake Mr. Baxter also telleth us in his book against D. Tully p. 66. That that which Christ did by his merites was to procure the new Covenant And elsewhere p. 181 that they were the meritorious cause of the forgiving Covenants the like he â—aith elsewhere frequently The Arminians ground the imputation of faith upon the merites obedience of Christ Apol. f. 113. And Arminius himself disp 19. thes 7. that justification is attribute to faith not because it is the very righteousness which may be proposed to God's rigide severe judgment howbeit acceptable to God but because by the judgment of mercy triumphing over judgment it obtaineth pardon of sins is graciously imputed unto righteousness the cause of which is both God righteous merciful Christ by his obedience oblation intercession And in his Epistle ad Hyppolet he tels us that the word imputing signifieth that faith is not the righteousness it self but that it is graciously accounted for righteousness whereby all worth is taken away from faith except that which is by God's gracious estimation that gracious estimation of God is not without Christ but in respect of Christ in Christ for Christ. Christ by his obedience is the impetrating cause or meritorious why God imputeth faith to us unto righteousness And againe in his Artic. perpend de justif What fault is it so say that faith by free gracious acceptation is accounted for righteousness because of Christ's obedience But with this assertion we are not satisfied for these reasons 1. The Arminians who maintaine this so confidently make it the whole of what Christ merited by his death Satisfaction saying that Christ by his death did so satisfie the offended party as he would be favourable to the offender and so say that he acquired to the father a jus a will to enter into a new Covenant with men See their Confess c. 8. § 9. collat cum Apolog. c. 8. § 9. and as the learned Voetius inferreth Select dispp p. 2. p. 233 234. it followeth hence that Christ was not in very deed our Cautioner that he died not in our room stead that he did properly obtaine acquire nothing to us that he did not sustaine the person of the elect while he suffered on the crosse 2. ... that Christ procured no more but a power or liberty unto God of prescribing new Conditions and some go so far as to say that this liberty was such only at the Lord might if he had pleased have appointed the old way of works againe for the condition So said
lest any man should boast manifestly declaring that all works were laid aside in this matter that for this end that no man should have any occasion of boasting this is not spoken as every one may see to qualifie or specifie the works that are excluded these words carry nothing of a restriction in them The same is cleare also Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory shalll the meaning be Abraham was not justified by such works as give ground of gloriation then the meaning lyeth not in the words but the words do expresly crosse contradict that sense unless we shall suppose them to have no sense to speak nothing of the following vers 3. where beleeving is mentioned not another sort of works to wit such as give no ground or occasion of boasting which in this case of justification no man can describe unto us or tell us what they are He tels us p. 122. that the meaning of these words Rom. 3 28. Therefore we conclude c. is no more but this viz. That a man is justified in the Gospel way But not only is that in the general included but that Gospel-way is particularly expressed to be by faith without the deeds of the Law And consequently his Popish Socinian way is diametrically opposite to the Gospel-way He goeth about to explaine to us p. 124. c. what is meaned by their own Righteousness that is so frequently set in opposition to the Righteousness of God tels us that it was so called upon a threefold account 1. Because they sought the pardon of their sins by their own Sacrifices Ans. And why not also by their works of Obedience Sure neither Abraham nor David sought for pardon upon any such accout they renunced other works than these Is that all the Righteousness that Paul renunceth Phil. 3 9 Was he then occupied about Sacrifices Some thing else sure is understood 1. Cor. 4 4. 2. Because saith he they did not think Regeneration or Supernatural grace necessary to the obtaining of it Ans. And truely all the Regeneration Supernatural grace which he thinks necessary is but that a Pelagian Iesuite Arminian will think necessary no more as we saw above But doth he think that Abraham or David had any such apprehensions yet even their works are excluded from justification Was that the Righteousness that Paul called his owne Phil. 3 9 I think for shame he will not say it And what meaneth Paul to say 1. Cor. 4 4. I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified This sure must include works done by supernatural Grace after Regeneration 3. Saith he Because it was a way of seeking to be justified of their own devising not of God's appointing Ans. This is very true but it is not the whole truth in this matter And his way is of the same Nature no more consistent with the Gospel methode of justification through the Righteousness of God by faith than theirs is for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ he rejecteth with contempt True justification he is ignorant of He knoweth no Faith but what is Popish Socinian His New Covenant is but a new edition of the old His Regeneration is Pelagian His Good Works are but works flowing from a Principle of Nature aided with a common divine assistance Let us now in end hear what is the result of all his discourse It is to shew That they were the works ef the Law as exclusive of Faith in Christ his death Not those which are the immediat effects of Faith in Christ in his death in his doctrine But the Gospel tels us that in the matter of Justification all the works of the Law are exclusive of faith in Christ even Abraham's works David's works Paul's works therefore they were all laid aside justification was only looked for through Faith Thus we have seen what a Gospel this is which Mr. Baxter recommendeth to us the consideration whereof may move some to say Noscitur ex socio qui non dignoscitur ex se. CHAP. XXXII Of the object of justifying Faith THough something of the Object of Faith was hinted before Chap. XX. when we were speaking of the Nature of Faith yet it will not be amisse to speak a little more of it here both in reference to what followeth and also more particularly in order to the better understanding of what it is to Live by Faith In order therefore to the explaining of this Object we would premit these few things 1. As was mentioned in the forecited place there is presupposed unto the right exercise actual exerting of Faith accepting the offered Saviour Salvation through him a Conviction of sin misery in one measure or other whereby the Sinner is brought to a desparing in himself seing he can finde no remedie or reliefe for himself within himself and to a concluding that he is an undone man if there be no other remedie than what he is able to do for himself for after all meanes assayed and a soul in that case is ready to turn to many hands to seek reliefe until preventing grace come will embrace close with any promising way how chargable troublesome so ever it be ere it sweetly comply with the only Man-abasing Grace-exalting way of Salvation through Faith in Christ revealed in the Gospel he findeth himself disappointed And further it is presupposed as necessarily requisite hereunto some knowledge of the grounds of Religion particularly of the Gospel of Christ of his offices Work c. all revealed in the Gospel 2. When we speak here of the Object of Faith we mean that Faith by which a Soul is united unto Christ closeth with Him as offered in the Gospel improveth Him to all ends uses which their case necessitie in all time coming calleth for So that it is one the same Faith whether it be called Uniting Faith Saving Faith Justifying Faith Sanctifying heart-purifying Faith or the like It is one the same radical grace receiving these or the like various denominations from the effects brought about by it or the several ends uses it hath is appointed for And the same Faith bringeth all these effects about in its way according to the Order Methode measure ordained of God the same Faith whereby the beleever is Married to Christ Covenanteth with Him as Head Husband Lord Saviour by the same is he justified adopted brought into a state of Peace Reconciliation with God By the same Faith also doth the man get his heart Purified he liveth the life of Sanctification By the same also he getteth Strength Reviving Comfort Support in times of Temptation Trial. So that the Beleevers life first last is by Faith the beginning progress all the steps of it final Salvation is by Faith whence it is called Saving
the life of glory which was promised upon his compleeting his work of obedience He addeth Notwithstanding the Scriptures of the New Test. seem to place the immediat right or capacity which beleevers have to the Kingdom of heaven eternal glory rather in the grace of Adoption than in any Righteousness whatsoever even Remission of sins itself not excepted Ans. I have spoken to this elsewhere and shall only say here That hereby he hath destroyed his Conclusion for hereby we see that in order to the attaining of right to life more is requisite than meer Remission for he cannot say that Remission of sins Adoption is all one having clearly hinted the contrary here having also denied Righteousness to be the ground of Adoption while as before he made Righteousness Remission of sins all one He shall never prove that Adoption is without the Imputation of Righteousness Let us heare his reason The reason whereof may haply be this because the life blessedness which come by Iesus Christ are of far higher nature excellency and worth than that which was Covenanted to Adam by way of wages for his work or obedience to the Law therefore require an higher fuller richer capacity or title in the creature to interesse him therein than that did work faithfully performed is enough to entitle a man to his wages but the gift of an inheritance requirtth a special grace or favour Ans. As this is but dubiously asserted so it is to no purpose for though some difference may be granted betwixt the glory now had by the Gospel that promised to Adam in several respects Yet it was a life of glory that was promised to Adam our Adoption is not without the imputation of a Righteousness Nor was Adam's obedience such a work as in strick justice called for wages without a Covenant The Imputation of Righteousness is indeed a special grace Favoure therefore fit enough to found Adoption His 6. Conclusion is this That Satisfaction which Christ made to the justice of God for sin whereby he procured Remission of sins or perfect Righteousness reconciliation with God for those that beleeve consists only in that obedience of his which he performed to that peculiar special Law of Mediation which God imposed upon him which we commonly though perhaps not altogether so properly call his passive obedience not at all in that obedience or subjection which he exhibited to that common Law of nature which we call moral Ans. Though if we should speak strickly of satisfaction as distinguished from obedience as relating to the punishment for sin the substance of this Conclusion might be granted Yet taking Satisfaction more largly as relative to our whole debt it must necessarily include his obedience to the Law moral 2 Though for explications sake we may speak of Christ's Active of his Passive obedience distinctly Yet there was suffering satisfaction in all his Active obedience as it is commenly called there was action meriting in all his Passive Obedience as it is commonly called His supposing Remission of sins Perfect Righteousness is already discovered to be a mistake 4 The special Law of Mediation required of Christ both obedience suffering he speaketh without ground when he restricteth it to his passive obedience as it is commonly called only His reason is Because nothing can be satisfactory to divine justice for sin but that which is penal Heb. 9 22. for doubtless where there is Satisfaction there is may be remission Ans. This confirmeth only what we granted of satisfaction taken strickly But cannot prove that Satisfaction largely taken may not or cannot yea or must not include obedience this being part of our debt to the Law and to the Lawgiver nor will it prove that there was nothing of Satisfaction in Christ's obedience which he performed in his state of humiliation It is true where there is Satisfaction there is may be Remission but Remission is not all that we stand in need of But he will have that obedience which Christ exhibited to the moral Law no way penal And his reason is because it was required of man in his innocency imposed by God upon Adam before his fall Yea still lyeth shall lye to the dayes of eternity upon men Angels Ans. Yet for all this it might be was penal unto Christ who was not meer man but God man in one person And for Him who was God above all Law that man cometh under to subject him self to that Law which was imposed upon man as a Viator must needs be penal it being a part of his subjection as made under the Law a piece of his humiliation for thus in part he took upon him the forme of a servant was made in the likeness of men being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself became obedient unto death Phil. 2 7 8. Gal. 4 4. What they do who are in glory is not to the purpose for here we are speaking of the obedience subjection of such as are Viators not Comprehensors And Adam while innocent was a Viator and Christ to pay that debt which was required of us all as Viators did humble himself to performe the obedience of a Viator in our place in our stead that so he might give full satisfaction pay our whole debt From hence there is no ground for his Inference to wit that Therefore man was punished that by order appointment of God before his fall that now the glorified Saints Angels yea Iesus Christ himself are now punished in heaven For 1 it might be was penal to him who was God which was duty unto man in innocency as is cleared 2 The Obedience of Saints Angels now in glory far less that of Jesus Christ himself if it can properly be called obedience is not the duty of Viators therefore utterly impertinent to our purpose We do not say that Adam's obedience was penal it being his duty but Christ's was seing no Law required such obedience of him who was God nor was it necessary even to his humane Nature in order to life for himself for the hypostatical union fully removed that necessity either made him as to himself in respect of his humane nature a comprehensor or in the nearest capacity to it even when he was subjecting himself to the obedience of a Viator for us and as standing in our room But he saith the Scriptures themselves no where ascribe this satisfaction to Christ's Active obedience but still to his passive And here he citeth many passages of Scripture to no purpose seing none of these give any hint of the exclusion of his active obedience but rather do include it or else he may as well say that all Christ's active obedience was no way necessary or requisite unto the work of Redemption because these passages do
Nor is it to the point to tell us that some hold that God if it had pleased him might have pardoned Adam's transgression without the Atonement made by the death of Christ for they speak not of what God may now do having determined to manifest the glory of his justice but what he might have done in signorationis ante decretum And as for that word Heb. 2 11. It became him c. it will as well respect the justice of God as his wisdom seing it became him upon the account of justice which he would have glorified Mr. Baxter in his Confess Chap. IX Sect. 5. pag. 289. thinketh that to say that Christ paid the same thing that the Law required of us not only satisfied for our not payment is to subvert the substance of Religion But this is only in his apprehension as he taketh up their meaning who say so And others possibly may have no lower thoughts of some who hold that Christ only gave such a sacrifice to God as might be a valuable consideration on which he might grant us the benefites on such conditions as are most sutable to his ends honour that he did not suffer the same which the Law threatned The screwing up of differences to such an hight as to make either the one or the other subversive of the substance of Religion had need to be upon clear undeniable grounds and not founded on meer sandy and loose consequences such as those seem to me by which Mr. Baxter maketh out this Charge For he tels us The Idem is the perfect obedience or the full punishment that the Law requires It is supplicium ipsius delinquentis Ans. But now seing such as say that Christ paid the Idem will say as well as he that when Christ suffered that which they call the Idem the person himself that sinned did not suffer And I would enquire at Mr. Baxter whether paid Christ the Idem as to all other respects beside that is whether Christ suffered all that penalty which the Law did threaten to transgressours only this excepted which must be excepted that he did it in another person that he was not the person himself that sinned or not If he say Not then the difference goeth deeper but why doth he not then to make out this heavy charge Instance some particulars threatned in the Law which Christ did not undergo And why doth he insist only on this one that he was not ipse delinquens but another person If he grant that in all other respects Christ paid the Idem no man sure can see such difference here as shall make the one side subvert the Substance of Religion for it is a meer sâ—â—ife about a word it cometh all to this whether when one man layeth down his life to save another condemned to death after all satisfaction in money lands rents service or what else hath been rejected he can be said to pay the Idem which the Law required or not Some Lawyers would possibly say he did pay or suffer the Idem Mr. Baxter would say not because he was not ipsa persona delinquens was not the very person that was condemned but another And yet death unto which the other man was condemned was inflicted upon him and no less would be accepted as satisfaction at his hands which would make some say that all that debate whether it was the same or the equivalent were a meer needless contest about a word And if it be but just so here in our present debate every one will judge it very hard to call that a subversion of Religion which after examination trial is found to be but a strife about a word Now how will Mr. Baxter prove that the suffering of the Idem is only when it is supplicium ipsius delinquentis And not also when the same punishment in all its essential ingredients is undergone suffered by another When the Law imposeth the penalty of death or of such a great summe of money on a person transgressing such a Law common discourse would say I suppose the Law give allowance thereto that when another came payed the same penalty for him without the least abatement he payed the same penalty which he Law impofed and not another and not meerly a valuable consideration It is true the Law threatened only the transgressour obliged him to suffer but notwithstanding another might pay the very same thing which the Law threatned requireth He saith next p. 290. the Law never threatned a Surety nor granteth any liberty of substitution that was an act of God above the Law If therefore the thing due were payed it was we ourselves morally or legally that suffered Ans. Sure some Lawes of men will threaten Sureties grant liberty of substitution too But if he speak here only of the Law of God we grant that it threatned only the transgressour that it was an act of God above the Law dispensing therewith that granted a substitution Yet notwithstanding of this it is not proved that that Substitute did not or could not suffer the same punishment which the Law threatned And if Mr. Baxter think that the lawes not threatning a Surety nor granting liberty of a substitution will prove it it is denied Next His other consequence is as uncleare viz. That if the thing due were payed it was we ourselves that suffered personally all these consequences run upon the first false ground that no man can pay the Idem but the very transgressour What he meaneth by we ourselves morally he would do well to explicate And as for legally we ourselves may be said to do legally what our Surety undertaker doth for us And if this be all he meaneth viz. that if the thing due to wit by Law as threatned there be payed either we in our own persons or our Surety for us in our room Law place payed it it is true but subversive of his hypothesis It must then be some other thing that he meaneth by morally or legally it must be the same with or equivalent to personally or the like but his next words cleare his meaning for he addeth And it would not be ourselves legally because it was not ourselves naturally And what lawyer I pray will yeeld to this reason I suppose they will tell us that we are said to do that legally which our Cautioner or Surety doth for us But if he think otherwayes here also that nothing can be accounted to be done by us legally but what is done by our selves Naturally which is a word of many significations might occasion much discourse that is personally Yet it will not follow that no other can suffer the Idem that was threatned but the delinquent himself At length he tels us That if it had been ourselves legally then the strickest justice could not have denied us a present perfect deliverance ipso facto seing no justice can
demand more than the idem quod dehitur rather debetur the whole debt of obedience or punishment Ans. But what if ourselves in our own natural persons had undergone the penalty had we therefore ipso facto attained a perfect deliverance It will be confessed I suppose that all that underlye this punishment underlye it for ever how then doth their legall suffering the idem helpe them If it be said that they must eternally suffer because never able to suffer so as to make satisfaction Yet still it is obvious that their undergoing the idem in their own persons naturally doth not advantage them as to a present perfect deliverance ipso facto or ever at all And where is then the truth of this axiome Or where is its pertinency to our purpose When a man is punished with death according to the Law is he ipso facto presently perfectly delivered It seemeth then that the paying of the Idem yea or the tantundâ—m by another person is more effectual for their liberation than their paying of the Idem in their own persons And againe the Law in many cases granteth liberation even when the Idem in Mr. Baxters sense is payed that is when another payeth down the same Yea likewise if the Creditor be satisfied when another thing is payed So that neither part of this assertion holdeth true universally But yet some may say That if the Idem or the very same were payed by Christ our liberation should immediatly follow I Ans. It will not follow so if we in our own persons had made full payment of that debt of suffering which is impossible to be done in time it might be granted that actuall liberation would immediatly follow but when we did not this in our own persons but Christ made full payment of what the Law could demand by way of punishment or threatned for us it will not follow that our deliverance should immediatly follow thereupon and the reason is because it was such a paying of the Idem as was refusable and as God himself provided out of wonderful love free grace and was accorded unto by a mutual compact according to the free wise Conditions of which the benefites were to be given out Mr. Baxter in his Cath. Theol. part 2. n. 48. saith the Very nature Reason of the Satisfactoriness of Christ's sufferings was not in being the very same either in kind or in degree which were due to all for whom he suffered Whence we see that he denieth that Christ suffered the same either in kind or in degree that was due by the Law to those for whom he suffered His reason why they could not be the same which was due by the Law he giveth n. 49. is the same we heard before viz. The Law made it due to the sinner himself Which notwithstanding it might be the same both as to kind degree which Christ suffered that the Law made due the substitution of a new person that the Law did not provide altereth not the punishment either as to kind or as to degree He addeth and anothers suffering for him fulâ—illeth not the Law which never said either thou or another for thee shall die but only satisfyeth the Law-giver as he is above his own Law could dispense with is his justice being satisfied saved dum alius solvit aliud solvitur Ans. Though the Law intend only the punishment of the transgressour Yet when the Law-giver dispenseth with the Law accepteth of the punishment suffering of aâ—other the punishment suffering of another doth not eo spso that it is the punishment suffering of another become different in kind degree from the punishment enjoyned by the Law as is obvious when â—ne man suffereth death for another the Law being dispensed with that made death due to the transgressour himself his death doth not become eoipso that it is the death of another than of him that transgressed another kind of death ar distinct as to degrees it may be the same as to both And yet this is all the force of Mr. Baxter argument dum alius solvit aliud solvitur which whether it be a certaine universal rule in the Law I much doubt but though it were Yet no man can hence inferre that aliud quoad genus gradus eo ipso solvitur for it is a rule in logick that a genere ad speciem non sequitur affirmativâ— so that though when the Law requireth that he who sinneth shall suffer die another suffereth dieth in the room stead of him who sinned it may be said that in so farr aliud solvituâ— Yet it cannot be hence inferred that the death or suffering of him who sinned not is quite of another kind differeth in degrees from that death which the Law made due to the sinner He mentioneth afterward in the 2 3 4. 5. places some particulars which were not in Christ's sufferings yet would have been in the sufferings of sinners themselves But all this is to no purpose for the question is not whether Christ's sufferings were the same every way with the sufferings of the damned as to all circumstances consequents flowing from the Condition of sinners suffering But whether they were the same as to kind with that death Curse which was threatned in the Law by way of punishment which was therefore due by Law unto the transgressour Let us now see the particulars 2. And sin saith he itself though not as sin was the greatest part of the sinners punishment To be alienated from God not to Love him delight in him but to be corrupted deluded tormented by concupiscence Ans. These are indeed necessary consequents of sin in the person who is a sinner and are consequently punishment but not directly such neither were they threatned as punishments by the Law so do not belong to the essence substance of that punishment which the Law threatned which Christ was called to undertake 3. Saith he And the immediat unavoidable consequents resulting from sin itself were punishments which Christ did never undergo as to be hateful displeasing to God as contrary to his holy nature to be related as criminal to lose right to God's Favour Kingdom Ans. To be hateful displeasing unto God â— agreeth only to a creature which God doth not hate as such as a sinner inherently and though Christ did not feel God's hatred anger against his own person yet he felt his anger hatred against sin sinners And Christ was also related as Criminal not inherently but by imputation when he was made sin for â—s 2. Cor. 5 21. The sinner that is such inherently only loseth right to God's Favour Christ missed the sense thereof when he cried out my God my God why hast thou forsaken me And 4. saith he none of the further punishment which supposed real faultiness could fall on Christ as
justification which is the hinge ground work as it were of his doctrine of the Gospel and to shew how poor sinners standing under the Curse for sin come to be justified before God as in his Epistle to the Romans And to Vindicate the same doctrine of the Gospel from the corrupt pervesions of false teachers as in his Epistle to the Galatians as also to commend the free grace of God in that noble contrivance both in the places mentioned and Ephes. 2. Phil. 3. Tit. 3. and elsewhere when he mentioneth the same Now as to the scope of the Apostle Iames there is nothing to declare unto us that it was his Intent or designe to explaine make known the way how poor convinced sinners standing under the sentence of the Law come to be justified before God and to receive pardon of their sins No such question proposeth he to be discussed No such point of truth doth he lay down to be cleared or Vindicated But his whole scope drift is to press the reall study of holiness in several points particularly spoken to through the Epistle And in that second Chapt. from vers 14. forward as will appear more fully in the explication vindication of the several verses in particular he is particularly obviating that grosse mistake of some who thought that a bare outward profession of the Gospel Faith or of Christian Religion was sufficient to save them and evidence them to be in a justified state and that therefore they needed not trouble themselves with any study of holiness And therefore sheweth that all such hopes of Salvation were built on the sand for they had no ground to suppose that they were truely justified so were in any faire way unto salvation so long as all their faith was no other than a general assent unto the doctrine of the Gospel to truthes revealed not that true lively faith hold forth in the Gospel whereby sinners become justified before God Mr. Baxter tels Cath. Theol. part 2. n. 364. that St. James having to do with some who thought that the bare profession of Christianity was Christianity that faith was a meer assent to the Truth that to beleeve that the Gospel is true trust to be justified by Christ was enough to justification without Holiness fruitful Lives that their sin barrenness hindered not their justification so that they thus beleeved perhaps misunderstanding Paul's Epistles doth convince them that they were mistaken that when God spake of justification by faith without the works of the Law he never meaned a faith that containeth not a resolution to obey him in whom we beleeve nor that is separate from actual obedience in the prosecution But that as we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being Insidels so must we be justified by our Gospel personal holiness and sincere obedience against the charge that we are unholy wicked or impenitent or hypocrites or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation that is justified by God Ans. 1 It is true for it is manifest and undeniable that Iames had to do with some who thought that the bare profession of Christianity was enough that an assent unto the truth was that faith that would prove justifying saving But 2 it is not so manifest that Iames had to do with such as thought that to trust to be justified by Christ was enough to justification without holiness fruitful lives that their sin barrenness hindered not their justification for whatever Mr. Baxter imagine we finde not in Scripture that justification followeth lives that is that there is no justification before this fruitfulness of life appear And himself useth to say that in order to the first justification this holiness of life is not requisite And beside this which he calleth the first we know no other unless he mean glorification But then 3 as to glorification final Salvation we grant that Iames hath to do with such as thought a meer assent to the truth without holiness was sufficient hereunto but that their beleeving thus could flow from their misunderstanding of Paul's Epistles is not any way probable seing Paul in all his Epistles even where he speaks most of justification by Faith without the deeds of the Law presseth the necessity of holiness in order to Salvation so as no imaginable ground hereof can with the least of shewes be pretended 4 That when Paul said justification was by Faith without the works of the Law he meant a true lively faith which only is to be found in that soul in which the seed of grace is sown and which is made partaker of the holy Ghost and of the divine Nature is true but yet justifying faith doth not formally containe in it a resolution to obey him in whom we beleeve as was shown elsewhere 5 Then we see that the faith whereof Iames speaketh is not the same with that Faith whereby Paul said we are justâ—fied And seing both do not speak of the same Faith there can be no appearance of discrepance 6 When he saith we must be justified by our Faith against the charge of being infidels I would know what he meaneth by this charge of infidelity If he meane the charge of not beleeving the Gospel he knoweth that a meer assent to the truth will â—ustifie from that Charge If he meane the charge of not receiving resting upon Christ according to the Gospel even that will be but a particular justification from that particular charge and is not that justification from the sentence of the Law whereof Paul speaketh 7 That we must be justified as he saith by our Gospel personal holiness sincere obedience against the charge that we are unholy wicked or impenitent hypocrites is true but what can all this say for a justification from the sentence of the Law under which we are all lying by Nature and of which the Apostle Paul speaketh And if Iames speak of justification by works in reference to this accusation he speaketh of no other kind of justification than that which the most wicked wreatch yea the devils are capable of when to wit they are falsely accused of having done some evil which they have not done And how can Mr. Baxter inferre from what Iames saith if he speak of no other kind of justification that works are required unto our justification as to state or unto our general justification from the sentence of the Law adjudging us to death because of transgression 8 But he addeth or else we shall never be adjudged to Salvation that is justified by God Then the Justification that Iames speaketh of that Mr. Baxter meaneth is final Salvation And we willingly grant that there must be personal holiness sincere obedience before this and that no wicked or impenitent person or hypocrite shall be adjudged to Salvation But the justification which Paul treateth of is different from
of what is denied to wit that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word becoming man did become upon that account necessarily subject to the Law for himself His 2. Arg. is If Christ did performe active obedience in our room so as it might be imputed to us unto Righteousness then we should be no longer obliged to performe active obedience to the Law The reason of this he taketh from the like saying as we are not obliged to undergo eternal death because Christ hath sustained that in our room Ans. To this enough hath been said elsewhere I shall only here say That it will no more hence follow than from the Satisfaction of Christ whatever Socinians alleige that we are loosed from all obedience to the Law but only that we are loosed from that obedience which was required under the Old Covenant of works to wit to perfecte obedience thereby obtaine the prize as our reward of debt and faile in the least lose all which were the Conditions of the Old Covenant and as to this we deny the minor He replieth by denying what is now in question to wit That Christ performed active obedience in our room to procure eternal life to us affirming that he was bound to do it for himself so did merite nothing to ut thereby Ans. This is but what was said above hence it is cleare that in his judgment Christ wrought for the crown of glory to himself did merite it to himself so had no Right thereto before by vertue of his hypostatical union let be possession albeit all the Angels were to worshipe him his throne was for ever ever Heb. 1 6 8. He addeth If notwithstanding of Christ's active satisfaction we be obliged to satisfie actively so notwithstanding of his passive satisfaction we should be bound to satisfie passively that is suffer eternal death Ans. All the obedience now required is no satisfaction to the Old Covenant-Conditions Christ hath satisfied that and left no part thereof for us to do And therefore it will not follow that we are bound to suffer eternal death or any part of the Curse as such To that answere that some gave that by Christ's active obedience we have this advantage that we are more obliged unto rigide exact obedience He replieth That then we should not sin by short-coming or negligence Ans. But by that rigide exact obedience is not meaned full conformitie unto the Law but such a conformitie as was the Condition of the Old Covenant as is said that is we are now freed from obtaining the crown or right thereto by perfect conformity which to us is impossible from loseing of the crown upon the least escape or failing All obedience runneth now in another channel though the commands the Law as a Law rule of walk remaine the same His 3. Arg. is The Scripture every where speaking of our justification pardon mentioneth Christ's passive not his active obedience As Esai 53 5 6. Rom. 3 24 25. 5 9. Gal. 3 13. 1. Ioh. 1 7. Ans. It is denied that the Scripture doth every where mentione only Christ's passive obedience and the contrary hath been frequently showne And as to the places mentioned none of them containe any exclusive particle or hinte the exclusion of his active obedience And our Adversaries themselves must understand these the like passages Synecdochically otherwayes they shall exclude Christ's soul sufferings as well as his active obedience restrick all to his death bloud shed on the crosse which yet they will not do Now followeth his answere to some Arguments for the contrary Arg. 1. Two things are required unto our Salvation delivery from death the gift of life that is had by expiation of sin by his suffering this by the donation of Righteousness or imputation of his active obedience He answereth The passive obedience of Christ both expiateth sin giveth life his death giveth life 1. Pet. 2 24 3 18. Ans. True but the reason is because it was the death of one who had fulfilled all Righteousness we need not speak of his obedience of his sufferings so distinctly as to ascribe to each severally these several effects It is better I judge to take both conjunctly as one compleet Righteousness for us one meritorious cause of all the benefites procured thereby Arg. 3. for the Arg. 2. I passe as judging it not cogent The actual disobedience of Adam made us sinners He answereth If by actual obedience of Christ in the Conseq his active obedience be understood for his passive may also be called actual in that actually not potentially only he suffered that imputed to us the consequens is denied for Christ's passive obedience imputed hath restored unto us what we lost by Adam's disobedience Ans. But thus the comparison that Paul maketh Rom. 5. betwixt Adam's disobedience Christ's obedience is taken away He opposeth the Righteousness of Christ to the offence of Adam now Christ's death suffering is no where called his Righteousness So he opposeth obedience to disobedience therefore as the disobedience was the violation of the Law obedience must be the keeping of the Law Christ's death imputed is no Righteousness answering the commands of the Law and therefore though it did merite the recovery of what we lost in Adam being the death of one that fulfilled all Righteousness Yet considered abstractly by it self without his active obedience it cannot be our formal Righteousness with which we must be covered as having which we must be considered when justified of God who pronunceth none Righseous but such as are Righteous indeed Arg. 4. With Christ's active obedience his passive was conjoined He ans Denying the conseq that therefore the one cannot be imputed without the other for things conjunct can be distinguished as the one can be known so also imputed without the other Ans. But they are so conjoined as being integral parts of one compleat Surety-Righteousness Satisfaction for our debt therefore belong to his Estate of humiliation during which in all his obedience there was suffering for a part of his subjection was that he was made under the Law even under the commanding power thereof because otherwayes being God Man in one person he was not subject to the Law as a Viator in reference to himself So in all his sufferings there was obedience And what is thus inseparably conjoined we ought not to separate especially seing our case necessity calleth for the imputation of both Arg. 5. If only Christ's passive obedience were imputed then only the halfe of Christ should be given unto us contrary to Esai 9 6. He Ans. denying the Conseq because it is one thing to be given to us another thing to be imputed even Christ's humanity deity is given unto us Ans. But Christ was so given as that all he did suffered as such a given publick person
which our case called for was to be made over to us in order to our receiving the grand benefites of pardon life Now it was necessary for us to have a Righteousness consisting in perfect obedience to the Law because of that Constitution Do this live Suffering as such is no obedience to the Law He addeth Their opinion is hard who deny that Christ's passive obedience is imputed to us unto Righteousness that it is the cause of the reward or of life eternal How could Christ's blood purge us from all sin if it were not the Cause of our Righteousness how should he give his flesh for the life of the world if life were not restored to us thereby hoâ— should we be healed by his stripes if we were not sanctified by him how should Christ's death be our life if we gote not life thereby betwixt freedone from the Curse of the Law right to the everlasting inheritaâ—ce there is no middle state Ans. 1 We deny only that Christ's passive obedience alone is imputed to us unto Righteousness for alone considered being only the paying of the penalty it is not the Righteousness required in the Law 2 The paying of a penalty though it may deliver from punishment yet cannot procure a right to the reward promised to keeping of the Law as is manifest therefore Christ's passive obedience considered alone cannot procure a right to that reward of life that was promised to the fulfilling of the Law by obedience 3 Christ's blood being the blood of one that fulfilled also the Law and conjunct with that obedience both purgeth from sin meriteth life And so we say of the rest following only I cannot see how pertinently in the last sanctification is mentioned for we are speaking of right to life eternal 4 It is true as to us now there is no midd'le state betwixt freedom from the Curse of the Law Right to the Inheritance â— because Christ's whole obedience both active passive is imputed as a compleat Satisfaction Righteousness whereby we come to obtaine both a freedome from the Curse a right to the Inheritance But in Adam before he fell there was a middle state for so long as he stood he was free of the Curse yet was to finish his course of obedience in order to obtaining the right to the promised reward unless it be said that no more was promised than the continuance of what he possessed It was excpted That the Law is not fulfilled by suffering the punishment for the Law the command is one but punishment fulfilleth not the commandement it only satisfieth the threatning Therefore the suffering of the punishment can not be the cause of the reward He ans by denying the Antec saying that by suffering of the punishment the Law is fulfilled by the Mediator partly formally in that he suffered the punishment due to us by the Law partly efficiently in that by his sufferings he not only took away the Curse but acquired a holiness to us with holiness life eternal Ans. This answere is no way satisfying for suffering of the punishment as such is no obedience to the Law and of the fulfilling of the Law by obedience to the commands thereof did the Exception only speak no man will say that such as are now suffering the punishment in hell are any way fulfilling the Law Neither is that holiness procured by Christ's death any fulfilling of the Law according to the Old Covenant such a fulfilling is required in order to the obtaining of a right to the reward of life promised in that Covenant He answereth againe that when the threatning of the Law is satisfied that is done which the Law commandeth to be done so in part the Law is fulfilled Ans. Suffering as such is no commanded thing the Law constituting a penalty maketh only suffering to be due but doth not enjoine any suffering So that though the Law be satisfied with a Satisfaction laid down by another so far as that the other is not to suffer Yet by this paying of the penalty the Lawes commands are not fulfilled in whole nor in part And the Law as to the commands must be fulfilled ere a right to the reward promised to obedienceâ— be obtained Arg. 6. is taken from passages of Scripture mentioning the active obedience of Christ such as Dan. 9 24. Ier. 23 6. 1. Cor. 1 30. Rom. 5 19. Phil. 2 8. He Ans. 1. That these places do not prove that Christ's active obedience is imputed so as by it we are accounted observers of the Law Ans. These passages sufficiently prove that his active obedience belongeth to that Righteousness Satisfaction which is imputed unto us the fruites of the Righteousness of Christ imputed are here as well ascribed to his active as to his passive obedience of the places in particular we have said enough elsewhere our disput here is not about imputation but about that which is imputed or that which is reckoned to us as our Righteousness this we say cannot be pure suffering of the penalty for that as such is no Righteousness nor no where is it so called He Ans. 2. That it only followeth that the reforming of our corrupt nature could not be had from Christ by Christ without his active obedience Ans. The same may as well be said of the passive obedience so the cause shall be yeelded unto the Socinians But the matter is clear That Christ is our compleat Righteousness not effectivly for he worketh no compleat legal Righteousness in us that is a Righteousness according as was required in the Old Covenant And beside the expiation of sin he brought in a Righteousness which is called everlasting Dan. 9 24. which can not be understood of our imperfect sanctification And beside that he is our Sanctification he is our Righteousness 1. Cor. 1 30. therefore must be our Righteousness another way than by working it in us for so is he our Sanctification And Rom. 5. our justification life is directly ascribed to his Obedience Righteousness To that Phil. 2 8. he saith The meaning is that Christ from his birth to his death did so accommodate himself to his Fathers will that he suffered all most patiently that was to suffer even the cursed death of the crosse Ans. It was a suffering of what he was to suffer even to come under the Law for that was a part of his humiliation the text saith he humbled himself became obedient and there is no ground to restrick the word Obedient to his suffering only Arg. 7. Christ was made under the Law for us Gal. 4 4 5. He Ans. He was made under the Law for our good that he might be a fit Mediator Ans. Why may not we as well admit the same sense of Christ's being said to be made a curse for us to wit that it was only for our good and so give up the Cause
to the Socinians Then it seemeth all the Hypostatical union his having the Spirit without measure was not sufficient to make him a fit Redeemer for us Nor was he a fit Mediator untill he had finished his whole course of obedience And yet he was borne a Saviour Luk. 2 11. And was the Lord's Christ vers 26. Salvation vers 50. Arg. 8. We are made acceptable unto God in the beloved Christ Ephes 1 6. He Ans. We are acceptable to God by inherent obedience which Christ hath purchased by his sufferings Ans. But the Text is to be understood of a being made acceptable in order to our obtaining the redemption mentioned vers 7. that is the forgiveness of sins so cannot be meaned of that acceptation which is upon our inherent holiness which followeth our Justification Pardon Arg. 9. Christ hath purchased his Church that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle Ephes. 5 27. He Ans. That Christ did purchase by his death the churches inherent Righteousness Ans. This is granted But not withstanding the expressions here used in the foregoing verse will hold forth a full cleansing not only from the staine power of sin in Sanctification but also from the guilt of sin in justification the Church must be presented without spot or wrinkle or any such thing cleansed with the washing of water holy without blemish Now in order to justification the sinner must be clothed with a compleat Righteousness Arg. 10. Beleevers are found in Christ having a Righteousness Phil. 3 9. How forceable this place proveth our point hath been shown elsewhere He Ans. The Righteousâ—ess of Faith is twofold one is imputed apprehended by Faith which is Christ's passive obedience the other is inherent which is also by Faith Ans. But Paul here layeth by all his inherent Righteousness which was his own was according to the Law only betaketh himself to that Righteousness which is of God by Faith this is not to be restricked to Christ's sufferings only for these as such are not a Righteousness as hath been oft said the contrary hath never yet been proved though it be the maine ground of all Arg. 11. We are perfect compleat in Christ Col. 2 10. He Ans. Christ maketh us perfect in justifying sanctifying glorifying us by the imputation ef his passive obedience only Ans. This is but to assert the thing that is a disproving we say we cannot be justified without the imputation of a compleat Righteousness because in justification we receive a right to life this cannot be had according to the Constitution of God do this live till the Law be satisfied by obedience because we could not do it we must have it in from Christ in whom we are compleat have all we need Arg. 12. Christ hath delivered us from all our debt both of yeelding perfect obedience of suffering for disobedience Col. 2 14. He Ans. He denyeth this sayeth Christ hath not delivered us from giving perfect obedience for we remaine obliged thereunto wherein we come short it is pardoned for his satisfaction imputed to us it is piece piece made up by begun holiness which hereafter shall be perfected Ans. This looseth not the force of the argument for though we be obliged to keep the Law in all points yet we are not under that obligation by vertue of the Old Covenant so that the least breach should frustrate us of heaven so as the reward should be of debt and of this obligation the Argument is to be understood Now because by vertue of this Covenant which must be satisfied we cannot partake of the prize because it is violated therefore it must be satisfied by the perfect obedience of another of our Surety which must be imputed unto us in order to life for all our begun sanctification will not avail us Christ's satisfying by his suffering according to that that day thou eats thou shalt die doth not withall satisfie that other part of the Law do this live Arg. 13. We must not only not be unjust but we must be just if we would have life eternal Therefore Christ's Righteousness must be imputed as well as his death He Ans. denying the Conseq And saith We are freed from the Curse of the Law by Iustification whereby the Passive Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us Purity is begun in us in Sanctification Ans. By justification we have no Righteousness imputed to us for we must be Righteous before we be justified therefore must have a Righteousness imputed before 2 Our begun Sanctification is no purchase of the reward of life 3 delivery from the Curse is but a freeing us from punishment or from the guilt of punishment but this is nothing but a being not unjust as Adam was before he fell It is not a being positivly just in order to the reward for to this is required compleat obedience to the Law that unto the end in which respect Adam was never just having never finished his course of obedience that he might have had a right unto the reward promised I mean in himself CHAP. X. The Fathers give Countenance to the Doctrine of Imputation and some Papists approve it THat it may not be thought that the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ is a new up-start opinion I shall here set down some of their Testimonies unto this truth Iustin. Martyr Epist. ad Diognet p. 386. Quid enim aliud peccata nostra potuit tegere quam ejus justitia in quo alio nos iniqui impii pro justis haberi possumus quam in solo Dei filio O dulcem permutationem o impervestigabile artificium O beneficia expectationem omnem superentia ut iniquitas quidem multorum in justo uno abscondatur justitia autem unius faciat ut multi injusti pro justis habeantur i. e. for what else could cover out sins but his i. e. Christ's Righteousness in whom else could we who are naked ungodly be accounted for Righteous persons than only in the Son of God O sweet permutation O unsearchable Contrivance O benefites exceeding all expectation that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just one the Righteousness of one should make many who are unrighteous be accounted Righteous Againe in lib. de Expositione fidei Filius Dei quatenus homo vitam ab crimine remotam traduxit mortemque voluntariam pertulit per exactam accuratam Conversationem peccatum obliterans per mortem indebitam debitum delens i. e. The Son of God as Man led a life free of all fault and suffered a voluntary death obliterating sin by his exact accurat Conversation deleting the debt by an undue death Irenaeus Adv Haeres c. 15. Dominus in Amicitiam nos reduxit per suam inâ—arnationem mediator Deâ— hominum factus propitians
exception upon condition of acceptance as also an offer of Faith Repentance Conversion with all the consequences thereof 7. An Universal will in God to call into this Covenant and unto the Participation of the benefites thereof all every man 8. An Universal execution of this will or promulgation of this Gospel or New Covenant unto all every one by common favours benefites bestowed on all whereby all are called to believe in a merciful pardoning God and all have abundance of Mercies Meanes of Recovery of life for the Lord now governeth the world only on termes of grace 9. Upon this followeth an Universal Command to all men to use certaine duties meanes for their Recovery by Faith Repentance 10. An Universal pardon of the first Sin so far at least that no man shall perish for the meer Original sin of Nature alone unless he adde the rejection of grace 11. Hence followeth an Universal Judgment Sentence on all in the great day only according as they have performed the new Gospel Conditions 12. Some also adde an Universal Subjective Grace whereby all are enabled to performe the conditions of the new Covenant 13. Universal proper Fruits Effects of this death whereby all the outward favours that Heathens enjoy are said to be purchased for them by Christ why not also what Devils enjoy Finally 36. This assertion of Universal Redemption layeth the ground of maketh way to a new frame of the Covenant of Grace quite overturning its Nature and transforming it into a new Covenant of Works making it one the same with that as to kinde only to differ as to the change of Conditions to be performed by man for as in the first Covenant Adam was to obtain right to possession of life promised in by for through and upon the account of his fulfilling the Condition of perfect obedience imposed by the Lord so in the New Covenant man is to obtaine acquire to himself a right to possession of the Life promised in by for through upon the account of his performance of the Condition of Faith new obedience now imposed in the Gospel and all the difference is that in stead of perfect obedience to the Law which was the Condition of the first Covenant now Faith sincere Gospel Obedience is made the Condition And thus we can no less he said to be justified by works of the Law or which we do then Adam should have been said to have been so justified had he stood and this justification giveth as great ground of boasting unto man of making the reward of debt not of grace as justification by the first Covenant would have done for though it be said that Christ hath made satisfaction to justice for the breach of the first Law thereby purchased to all upon Condition Justification Salvation yet this removeth not the difficulty for what is purchased by Christ's death is made Universal Common to all and so can be nothing according to our Adversaries but a putting of all men in statu quo prius in case to run obtaine the prize for themselves as God's absolute free love put Adam in that Condition at first Christ's death though thereby as they say he purchased the New Covenant which with them is the chiefe if not the only effect fruit of his Death Merites can be no more than a very remote ground of Right to Life Salvation unto any person for it is made Universal Common to all so that all have equal share therein advantage thereby man himself by performing the new Conditions only making the difference so that the immediat ground of the Right to life which any have is their own Faith Obedience or performance of the New Covenant-conditions Whereby it is manifest that as to our Particular and Immediat Right to Happiness we are to plead our own works lean to them as our ground whereupon we may stand appear before God's Tribunal and upon the account thereof plead for the crown as our due debt having now run for it performed the Condition agreed upon and so sing praises to our selves in stead of singing praises to our Redeemer Hence the Righteousness wherein we must appear before God is not the Righteousness of Christ but our own for the Righteousness of Christ say they is only imputed in regard of its effects whereof the new Covenant is the All or the Chiefe and so that doth not become the Righteousness of any man nor can be said to be imputed to any man properly which also they assert but his own Faith is only imputed properly which also they plead for as his Righteousness not as a Way Medium or Methode of Gospel-Righteousness especially when Gospel-Obedience is adjoyned The Righteousness of Christ being thereby only accounted to be imputed in that it hath procured that our own Gospel Righteousness Faith new Obedience shall be imputed to us as our Immediat Righteousness the ground of our Right to Glory What accord is betwixt this frame of the Covenant of Grace that way of justification held forth by Socinians Arminians Papists the learned will easily see and how contrary it is to the Covenant of Grace held forth in the Gospel hitherto professed maintained by the orthodox every one acquainted therewith cannot be ignorant it is obvious how opposite this is unto what the Apostle saith Phil. 3 8 9. yea doubtless and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things and do count them but dung that I may win Christ and be found in him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith And Tit. 3 5 6 7. Not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Iesus Christ our Saviour that being justified by his grace we should be made heâ—rs according to the hope of eternal life And Rom. 3 20 21 22 24. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified but now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifest even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe being justified freely by his grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ. And many other places It is no less clear how hereby the true nature of justifying faith and Gospel Obedience is perverted withall how dangerous this is if put into practice or if men act live accordingly every serious exercised Christian knoweth FINIS The Contents of the Chapters CHAP. I. THE Introduction to the Work and the Text Gal 3.
death destruction if the Lord should enter with them in jugdment and mark iniquity Psal. 130 3. 143. 2. Yet the judgment of the Lord being alwayes according to truth Rom. 2 2. Such as He pronunceth Righteous and absolveth from the sententence of the Law as such must be Righteous for to justifie the wicked is an abomination to the Lord Prov. 17 15. And seing they are not neither can be Righteous in themselves nor have a Righteousness of their own which they can present to justice and in which they can appear before God who is a righteous Judge they must needs have a righteousness from some other and this is a Surety-righteousness the righteousness of the Mediator and Cautioner Jesus Christ Imputed to them and received by faith and being clothed with this noble rob of Rigteousness with Christ who is the Lord our Righteousness and beareth this Name and Title Ier. 23 6. And who is made of God unto us Righteousness 1. Cor. 1 30. They may be looked upon as living indeed In the Lord have they righteousness and upon this account in the Lord are they justified and shall glory Esai 45 24 25. This is the Righteousness of God without the Law which is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets the righteousness of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve Rom. 3 21 22. This is that faith or object of faith that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness Rom. 4 3 5 9. And the righteousness that God imputeth without works vers 6 11. This is the righteousness of faith through which the promise is vers 13. This is the righteousness that shall be imputed to all who beleeve on Him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the deed vers 24. This is the free gift by grace which is by one man Iesus Christ that hath abounded unto many Rom. 5 15. This is that aboundance of grace and gift of righteousness which beleevers receive whereby they reigne in life by one Iesus Christ vers 17. And that righteousness of one by which the free gift come upon all beleevers unto justification of life vers 18. And the obedience of one by which many are made righteous vers 19. And that righteousness through which grace reigneth unto eternal life by Iesus Christ our Lord vers 21. This is the righteousness of the Law fulfilled in us by Gods own Son whom He sent in the likeness of sinful flesh Rom. 8 2 3. This is Gods righteousness to which the Jewes would not submit but went about to establish their own righteousness for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 3 4. It is that righteousness which is of faith which the Gentiles have attained who followed not after righteousness which Israel did not attaine to though they followed after the Law of righteousness because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the works of the Law for they stumbled at that stumbling stone Rom. 9 30 31 32. By this are Believers made the righteousness of God in Him who though He knew no sin yet was made sin for us 2 Cor. 5 21. This is that righteousness which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith Phil. 3 7 8 9. which Paul desired only to be found in and that in opposition to his own righteousness which is of the Law and for which he did account all things which formerly were gaine to him to be loss dung Now what a noble life of faisty and Security is this for a poor naked sinner void of all righteousness and thereby exposed to the lash of the Law to the Curse and wrath of God to be covered with a compleet and perfect righteousness consisting in full satisfaction to all the demandes of the Law both for doing and suffering with which the Self condemned sinner may now with boldness and confidence think of approaching unto and appearing before the Tribunal of God who can express the Serenity of Soul the inward peace calmness and Quietness of mind the Joy Cheerfulness and Exulting of heart that followeth here upon How is the Drooping Sincking Dead and discouraged Soul that hath any sense or feeling of this revived quickened And how beit the sense of it be away as oft it happeneth yet the change that is hereby made when the Lord imputeth this righteousness of Christ causeth the Soul by faith to embrace it and accept of it is as a Resurrection from the dead 5. They have as a benefite necessarily following upon and inseparably accompanying this justification the noble and rich privilege of Adoption For to as many as received Him to them gave He power to become the Sones of God Joh. 1 12. And all those that are justified receive Him and His righteousness and rest upon it Being thus redeemed from under the Law they receive the Adoption of Sones Gal. 4 5. And being justified by His grace they are made heirs according to the hop of eternal life Tit. 3 7. And by this as their State is demonstrated to be a State of life so the many and exceeding great and rich yea incomprehensibly glorius and excellent favours Advantages and Privileges that lye in the womb of this comprehensive Privilege shew their life to be an excellent life for 1 Being thus adopted they have a new Relation unto God as their Father and they are His Children taken into His Family they have His name put upon them they are called by His name or His name is called upon them Ier. 14 9. Then is that word make good 2 Cor. 6. 18. I will be a Father unto you and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters saith the Lord God Almighty Then is He their God in a peculiar manner and they are His People Ier. 31. 1. Then have they written upon them the name of Christs God and the name of the City of His God and His own new name in its earnest and beginnings Revel 3 12. O! what a life is here to stand thus related unto the great God what an honourable life and Privilege is this for such who were by Nature Children of the Devil 2 Being thus Adopted they have a Relation to all the Children of the Family and are united unto them as members of the same Familie as Brethren or Sisters of the chosen Family They are then among those whom Christ hath gathered together in one Ephes. 1 10. And belong to that Church which is His Body the fulness of Him that filleth all in all vers 22 23. They have a relation now unto the Church Triumphant as well as to the Church Militant whence that is in part verified Heb. 12 22 23. But ye are come unto Mount Zion and unto the living God the heavenly Ierusalem to an innumerable company of Angels to the General Assembly Church of the first born which are written in