of sin not from the imputation of it and we confess sin was the occasion of our Saviours sufferings but it was our sin not his own He offered himself to suffer all the miseries of life and death which we had deserved and it was as just in God to inflict them on him as it is in a Creditor to make the Bonds-man who is able and willing to pay the debt of an indigent Bankrupt And thus Christs sufferings do still more strongly prove they are the just desert of sin since even a surety for sinners cannot escape them Par. The satisfaction which you have given me invites me to give you some further trouble in the resolution of my remaining doubts You cannot be ignorant how the Quakers fasten the charge of Pbarisaism upon the Clergy in having their Pulpits exalted and do they not herein manifest an horrible pride and come within the lash of that reproof of our Saviour Mark 12. 38 39. Beware of the Scribes which love to go in long cloathing and love Salutations in the Market-places and the chief Seats in the Synagogues Min. What our Lord condemned in the Scribes and Pharisees was their pride in chusing the high places in the Synagogues in a vain presumption that they exceeded all men in Learning and Holiness herein the Quakers discover not our pride but their own Ignorance for it is not for preeminence that we use our Pulpits but for convenience not that our persons but that our voices may be exalted and herein we aim not at glory to our selves but edification to our People and this is according to the example of Ezra Neh. 8. 4. who did erect a Pulpit of wood not in obedience to the Ceremonial Law because it was no where commanded by it but that he might stand above the People that he might be the better heard while he interpreted the Law to them But I beseech you let us not so far humour the Quakers as to take notice of all their idle impertinencies and cavils but if you have any thing of moment to object against us I am ready to give a reply to it and further to engage you to give credit and attention to what I say I profess to you that I have not spoke any thing hitherto but what I am perswaded in my Conscience is agreeable to sacred truth and I hope you will believe me without an Oath Par. An Oath would be so far from giving me any assurance of your sincerity that I should for that be the rather moved to question it for what more expresly forbidden than swearing what so contradictory to that sacred truth you profess to own I have not much convers'd with Books but I have heard that the primitive Christians whose Piety was approv'd as Gold in the Furnace of a dreadful persecution practis'd such an honest and ingenuous simplicity to that exactness and accuracy that they accounted it a disparagement to be put to an Oath But seeing you hold the lawfulness of it I hope you will prove it out of Scripture and if you can make it in any case a Duty and an act of Religion I shall then change my Opinion of this generation which I esteemed most impious and on the contrary think it very Religious through the multitude of Oaths that are so frequently in it Min. Pray tell me how the Quakers instruct you concerning an Oath Par. That I shall do presently out of a Book I lately met with intitl'd Antichristianism reproved written by Rich. Hubberthorn in answer to a Book of Mr. Tombs who it seems did vindicate the lawfulness of an Oath lawfully administred wherein Hubberthorn endeavours to make it out that all Oaths are utterly unlawful by Christ's command and therefore all such as do vindicate them are guilty of the charge of Antichristianism Min. Before I proceed in this Controversy you must tell me whether or no Oaths were ever lawful Par. Hubberthorn will answer you for his words imply that they were Therefore he tells Mr. Tombs that he failed in his instances of Abraham Isaac David and others swearing for they lived under the first Covenant Min. If Hubberthorn by the first Covenant means the Covenant of works he shews a great deal of Ignorance and folly in saying that Abraham and others after him lived under that Covenant And therefore before I proceed any further upon this discourse concerning Oaths I shall make a digression to unfold this necessary point of Religion about the nature of the two Covenants wherein as in many other things the Quakers are grosly Ignorant and Erroneous You must know then that there is a twofold Covenant which God out of his gracious condescension hath vouchsafed to enter into with man according to the different state and condition he found him in The first was made with Adam for himself and his posterity whilst he remained in the state of Innocency And this by Divines is called the Covenant of works because an exact obedience was required from him and a reward promised him upon that obedience Adam violating that Covenant and thereby falling from his Original happy state he and all mankind are made utterly uncapable of receiving any benefit thereby And now we are to consider man in another state viz. of sin and misery And Gods compassion was such that he was pleased to enter into a second Covenant with him according to the degenerate estate he was faln into and this is usually called a Covenant of Grace because a more superabundant measure of grace is seen and infinitely more favour shown in Gods entrance into Covenant with Man in his lapsed condition for his restitution and reconciliation than in his state of Integrity for his preservation This latter Covenant God made with Adam soon after his fall in these words The seed of the Woman shall break the Serpents head Gen. 3. 15. that is God shall send his Son Jesus who shall be born of the seed of the Woman and he shall destroy the power and dominion of the Divel And this afterwards he plainly repeated to Abraham Gen. 22. 17 18. And entails this promised seed to his Loyns But his Son Isaac that Type of this promised seed God commands him to offer up on Mount Moriab which command when he was about to execute a countermand stays his hand and a Ram is by Gods good Providence provided for a Sacrifice to intimate to us that the promised seed was not then to be offer'd up but should be suspended for a time and that in the mean time God would accept the Sacrifices of Rams Bulls Goats c. as Types and Figures that the promised seed should in due time offer up himself a full propitiatory Sacrifice Oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole World Now to say that Abraham Moses and David were under the first of these Covenants viz. the Covenant of works is notoriously false for that Covenant was but a small time in force and after Adam's fall
but a small time of use because it could not give life none living under it but Adam all hopes of Salvation ever after depending upon the grace of the second Covenant which is the only plank after Shipwrack Par. But do we not read in Heb. 8. of an old Covenant which was to be done away and a new Covenant to succeed in the room of it Was not the old Covenant the Covenant of works and did not Abraham Moses and David live under it Min. That Abraham Moses and David lived under the old Covenant there mentioned I readily grant but that that was a Covenant of works I utterly deny which that you may apprehend you must know that the Covenant of grace though one and the same in substance from the first promulging of it to Adam unto the end of the World yet is according to the several forms or modes of its administration distinguished into Old which was to be abolished and New which was never to be antiquated In the times of the Old Testament the Covenant of Grace was administred by Promises Prophesies Sacrifices c. foresignifying Christ to come which for that time were sufficient to build up those who then lived in faith in the promised Messiah by whom they had remission of sins and eternal Salvation Under the Gospel when Christ the substance was come those Types and Ceremonies were abolished and the Ordinances in which this Covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word and the Administration of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper So that the words Old and New are not applicable to the Covenant as to the substance of it but only to its various dispensation Now that the Covenant in Old Testament times was a Covenant of Grace the same in substance with that under which we live in Gospel times I prove thus That Covenant which teacheth Christ by whom eternal Salvation may be attained and which offereth pardon of sin and acceptance to favour upon repentance must needs be a Covenant of Grace but the Covenant delivered in the Old Testament as well as that in the New is such a Covenant as appears from these Scriptures John 5. 46 47. Luke 24. 25 26 27. with 44 45 46. John 1. 45. John 8. 56. Acts 26. 22 23. Deut. 4. 30 31. Exod. 34. 6 7. 2 Chron. 7. 14. and many other places Par. I thank you for the information you have given me in the nature of the two Covenants for I did think as many of the Quakers do that all that lived in the time of the Old Testament were under the Covenant of Works An I have heard some urge it as it seems Hubberthorn here doth to bring down the credit and authority of Old Testament Scriptures and Preachers but I perceive mine and their great mistake herein I would have you now return to the Query about Oaths and let us suppose Hubberthorn by first Covenant to understand the legal dispensation of the Covenant of Grace under which he saith Oaths were lawful Min. Indeed Hubberthorn yields they were then lawful and yet he brings in his proofs as if they were as unlawful then as now Par. What are those proofs Min. In the beginning of his Book against Mr. Tombs you will find Hos. 4. 3. For Oaths the Land mourns and Zach. 5. 3. Every one that sweareth shalâ—… be cut off these are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do you gather from thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 horrid abuse the Quakers put upon the Scriptures and the Spirit of God by which they were writ Par. How do you make it appear that they abuse the Scriptures Min. Doth it not appear very plainly when they confess that in the time of the Law Oaths were lawful yet do bring in Hosea and Zachary who lived in the time of the Law speaking against that usage which themselves confess was then lawful If Hosea and Zachary were true Prophets how can we think they contradict the truth If they were false Prophets why do the Quakers use their testimony Par. It may be Hosea and Zachary did not mean the unlawfulness of Oaths then but only prophesied of their unlawfulness in the times of the Gospel Min. That you make use of a pitiful shift will be very evident if you consider that there was then a heavy calamity threatned and hanging over the Land the Prophet gives the cause thereof to be for Oaths and if Oaths were then lawful must the people be cut off for doing what was just and lawful or is it reasonable to think the people should suffer for a sin to be committed afterwards Par. Do you suppose that Oaths were unlawful during the continuance of the Law Min. I suppose no such thing my design being only to shew that fallacious way of arguing which the Quakers use and that this Hubberthorn so much esteemed by them is trap't in his own net and confuted by himself while he confesses Oaths to be lawful during the continuance of the Law and yet contradicts himself again by bringing texts out of the Law to prove them otherwise and thus you see he brings in the Old Testament contradicting it self also which in Deut. 6. 13. commands it as a duty as also in other places Jer. 4. 2. I pray you judge of these things Par. You have highly and I think not untruly charged the Quakers in the use of these Texts of the Prophets for I cannot but acknowledge it an absurdity to alledge the Scripture against it self but I pray you discover the true meaning of them and what swearing the people were there threatned for Min. If you mind the scope of the Prophet Hosea and the sins which swearing is there joyned withal in the first verse of the Chapter you will discern that the cause why the Land mourned was not for taking Oaths for those are already proved and confessed to be then lawful but for taking them against Truth and Mercy with malicious or injurious designs But their bringing in Zachary's words to disprove the lawfulness of swearing discovers a most dishonest principle in the Quakers because they cannot but know that the Prophets words are wrested by them for the fourth verse expresly interprets swearing for which the people are threatned to be cut off to be false-swearing only Therefore consult both at large Zach. 5. 3 4. This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth for every one that stealeth shall be cut off as on this side according to it and every one that sweareth shall be cut off as on that side according to it I will bring it forth saith the Lord of Hosts and it shall enter into the house of the thief and into the house of him that sweareth falsly by my Name Par. But what do you say to an Oath now under the dispensation of the Gospel Min. I say the Gospel has no where abolished the lawful use of it Par. You will fall under John Tombs his charge of Antichristianism for
and thus he cannot sin not through any Natural but Moral impossibility I say he Morally cannot do so the powers of his Soul being acted and inflamed by such a Divine Principle of Grace and goodness as will not suffer him to live in any known sin whatsoever If he does he falls from that Holiness and forfeits the Divine relation and can no longer be said to be born of God no more than he that has carried the repute of an honest man can after wilful breaches of Justice and Honesty challenge that worthy Title Who can be so confident to say that he is free from all the Infirmities of his Nature Who dare say that he never speaks thinks or acts amiss he that saith he cannot fall by Errour is already faln by pride and he that saith he cannot sin sins even in saying so it 's true a good man makes not sin his work and he sins not so as to be lyable to that dismal sentence Depart from me ye workers of iniquity Mat. 7. 23. Par. But the Quakers will tell you that denying perfection in their notion of it you give incouragement to sin Min. If you examine the case truly you will find the quite contrary that the charge will fall upon themselves Pray who is your Friend he that saith you have no Enemy or he that informs you where he lurks when the Devil perswades man that he is clean and free a considerable part of his work is done there is small hopes of that mans conversion who thinks himself well enough already it 's one step to conversion to see our selves unconverted and one step to happiness to perceive that we are miserable nay even miserable sinners he is besotted with his condition that mistakes his Prison for a Palace I need not guard my House when I am sure that no Thieves can enter in it 's vain to offer him Physick who concludes himself well or to sue for redemption when free from thraldom Math. 9. 12. But if on the other hand I find my self weak then I lay hold on him that is strong from a sense of my infirmities I seek after help If I find many Enemies I prepare against them If I be throughly convinc't that I am beset round with temptations and such stratagems as are under the conduct of such a powerful and Politick Enemy as the Devil is without me and to compleat my misery that I have a false and treacherous heart within me being in those sad circumstances I see the necessity of a Saviour set my watch and fly from the confidence of flesh to the protection of an Almighty arm Par. I shall not yield the cause till you have more fully clear'd the point consult Eph. 5. 5. Rev. 21. 27 from whence we may learn that no unclean thing can enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which implies a necessity of an unsinning state even in this life that in order to our happiness in the next Min. I shall not need to spend much time in refutation of your mistakes in these Scriptures do but duly consult them and the best commentators on them and you will find they import no more than that no unregenerate and unsanctified person shall have any share in bliss and happiness Par. I will give you one Argument more for perfection as it is taught by the Quakers and then I have named all I have that are of any moment by denying perfection a fundamental in Divinity is overthrown viz. that the second Adam has gain'd what the first Adam lost Min. You cannot think that the first Adam had a state of such perfection as to make it impossible for him to sin for you know he did actually fall such a perfection he never lost nor did Christ gain such a state for us in this World We are indeed by Christ and the grace of God put into such a State as that we may perform that which is necessary to our Salvation under the Covenant of Grace even that which God will accept of through his mercy that is we may please God considering what he now expects and accepts through Christ as well as Adam could considering what God required then But if you will stretch this sentence to be meant of an equal perfection to Adam's in this life you discover gross Ignorance in the mis-timeing that fundamental of yours which you are not to apply to this present mortal state but to the life to come here we have but the earnest and first fruits of the Spirit Rom. 5. 23. 2 Cor. 1. 22. Eph. 1. 14 therefore it is that here we know but in part and Prophesy but in part 1 Cor. 13. 9. The state of Grace here is gradual We grow by little and little but when that which is perfect is come then that which is in part shall be done away ver 10. Then mind ver 12. For now that is in this life we see through a glass darkly but then that is in the life to come face to face Seeing God face to face cannot be here for we cannot see the face of God and live Exod. 33. 20. for here we walk by faith not by sight 2 Cor. 5. 7. and it 's only in the life to come that we must expect the fruition of the beatifical vision 1 Joh. 3. 2. But that I may bring this subject to a conclusion give me leave to add that to argue a state here free from sin is to argue against matter of fact and the clearest conviction and experience for we read of failings in the best of men and have not such their shares of troubles and vexations in this life They suffer hunger and cold needs and necessities the tormenting diseases and anguishes of the body and at last yield up the Ghost to Death it self Par. What do you infer from hence Min. That Christians are not reinstated in this life in the outward part or appendages of that perfection which Adam lost that is not in a painless secure immortal state All the miseries we suffer here are but the dire effects and consequents of sin will you say then that the cause is taken away and the effects remain This impleads the Divine justice that some should feel the punishment of sin whilst they are not concerned in the guilt of it And shall not the judg of all the earth do right Par. If to be acquainted with sorrow grief sickness diseases and death be nothing but the effects of sin how shall our Saviour who suffered them all be himself free from the imputation of it Min. Those sorrows were the effects of our sins which he in compassion to us took voluntarily upon himself it was our sins which he bare upon his own body And taking upon himself our sorrows and infirmities he thereby became a more merciful high Priest For death entred by sin so consequently no sin no death nor any of its sad attendants We free Christ from the commission