Sinners to be their God in a way of special Interest but it being upon such hard terms that it is utterly impossible that way to attain unto Life he hath therefore been pleased to abolish that and to make a New Covenant which is not like or not according to the former which was Conditional but that which is wholly Free and Absolute wherein he hath promised to put his Laws into our Minds and to write them in our Hearts and that he will be to us a God and we shall be to him a People Ezek. 36. Jer. 31. Heb. 8. And this is a Covenant of Grace indeed sure and certain a Covenant truly Evangelical and not of the same Building as the Apostle speaks with the Sinai Covenant Heb. 9. 11. The like may be as justly said in reference to the Covenant of Circumcision as hath been now spoken in Reference to the Sinai Covenant For though there were Promises in it that were full and glorious enough I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee all the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession and I will be their God yet all these Promises though good enough in themselves being Conditional they were therefore failable and still liable to forfeiture as they were contained in that Covenant It being evident that it obliged all that were under it to perfect and universal Obedience as the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein contained Gal. 5. 3. From whence as it is manifest that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works so it is as evident that it is not the Greatness or Goodness of the Promises contained therein that can excuse it from being such if Works be the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein promised For as I have already told you what else maketh or wherein else consisteth the true Form or Nature of a Covenant of Works but that Works be the Condition of it This was the whole entire Nature of the first Covenant which alone renders the it Essentially or Specifically Different from the Promise of Grace or the Gospel Covenant But all this notwithstanding you are pleased to tell me That it is so clear that none can doubt or deny what you have asserted that understands the Nature of the two Covenants And now Sir say you what course do you take to avoid this Argument Such a one sure as no Man that ever I met with took before you and that is this You boldly cut Abraham's Covenant Gen. 17. into two parts and make the first to be the pure Covenant of Grace which is the Promisory part to the 9 th verse And the Restipulation to be as pure a Covenant of Works What a hard shift will some Men make to maintain their Opinions You say truly say you p. 205. that at the 7 th and 8 th verses was their Restipulation why then do you say p. 224. that at the 7 th verse he proceeds to speak of another Covenant than what he had been speaking of before Does the Promise and the Restipulation make two Covenants Or are they just and necessary parts of one and the same Covenant Sir all this I have answered before and there have plainly shewed you how greatly you do here abuse me and your self too by a gross misrepresention of my plain words and sense The like you do in that which follows You also tell us say you that the Covenant Gen. 17. 1 2 3 4. was a plain Transcript of several Free Promises of the Gospel under the Denomination of a Covenant but why then don 't you take the Restipulation vers 7 8 9 10. to be a part of it The Nonsense of which Question I have already also shewen you But to this you make answer on my behalf Oh no say you there is something required on Abraham's and his Posterities Part and that spoiles all Well after you have laughed in your Sleeve at my Answer of your own forming you thus proceed Why but Sir If the requiring of Circumcision alters the Case so greatly as to make it a quite contrary Covenant how come it to pass that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant and yet Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised Thus runs this Passage in your Manuscript Copy By way of Reply hereunto I must tell you Sir That whether the requiring of Circumcision alters the Case or no I am sure you have quite altered the Scope of my Discourse in reference hereunto For as I do no where boldly cut the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 17. into two parts and make the first to be a pure Covenant of Grace which is the Promisory part to the 9 th verse and the Restipulation to be as pure a Covenant of Works as you would make the World believe I do So yet nevertheless I do plainly tell you that though the Promse and the Restipulation mentioned vers 7 8 9. make but one and the same Covenant of Circumcision yet there are two Covenants mentioned in that Context The first between God and Abraham himself as I have already proved vers 2 4. which could be made with no other The other between God and Abraham and his natural Posterity also vers 7 8 9 10. The former I call a Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant wherein the Believing Gentiles are concerned For saith God ver 5. A Father of many Nations have I made thee Or as the Apostle explains it The Father of all them that believe that is both Jews and Gentiles The latter I call a Covenant of Works which was made betwixt God and Abraham and his natural Posterity onely who were all of them by Vertue thereof to be Circumcised as a token of their Obedience to the whole Law which Ordinance of Circumcision doth not concern the Gentiles at all So that when you ask me How comes it to pass that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant and yet Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised I must tell you That your Question confounds the true state of the Question between us For you know well enough that I had made a Distinction of a twofold Covenant there mentioned the one a Gospel the other a Legal Covenant And therefore this is no other than to turn things upside down your general practice throughout your whole Reply How comes it to pass say you that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant I will tell you Sir how it came to pass if you rightly understand what you should Question me about If by the pure Gospel Covenant you mean the Covenant mentioned vers 2 4. I Answer It came to pass as the fruit of Gods own Free Grace and Mercy and that both unto Abraham himself and to the Believing Gentiles also that are concerned therein But then say you How comes it to pass that Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised if the Covenant to Abraham himself was a
of Promise but God gave it to Abraham by Promise Is the Law then against the Promise God forbid For saith he if there had been a Law which could have given Life verily Righteousness should have been by the Law So then the Law would but could not give Life and why could it not give Life but through our Weakness we were not able to perform it nor could the Law furnish us with power to Enable us thereunto But what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh that Christ hath performed and by his Death and Sufferings made up the Breach between God and us And so in this respect there is only a Difference of Deficiency between the Law and the Gospel the one being strong and powerful the other weak and unable to Relieve us But yet say I this Difference notwithstanding through the satisfaction of Christ there is no Repugnancy or Hostile Contrariety betwixt the Law and the Promises or between the Law and Faith which hath respect to the Promises c. This you account strange Doctrin The Reason you give say you is as strange that this comes to pass through the satisfaction of Christ. Good Sir say you Enlighten us in this Rare Notion Did Christ Die to purchase a Reconciliation betwixt the Covenant of Works as such and the Covenant of Grace And I pray Sir why not Did not Christ satisfie the Law on our behalf Was he not made of a Woman made under the Law to Redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Doth or can the Law it self Impeach those for whom Christ Died and whom God himself pronounceth Righteous Doth not the Law it self that was before our Enemy against us and contrary to us stand up as our Friend through the Mediation of Christ And hath not God for this very purpose set forth his Son Christ unto us a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood to declare unto us his Righteousness that he might be Just and the Justifier of him that Believeth in Jesus And were not the Two Tables accordingly put into the Ark to shew their subserviency to Christ and in this sense its Consistency with him Typically demonstrating that though the Covenant of Works could not be kept or performed by us yet it should be perfectly fulfilled in Christ for us Is there not here a Perfect Reconciliation betwixt the Two Covenants Are not Mercy and Truth here met together And do not Righteousness and Peace sweetly Kiss and Embrace each other through the satisfaction of Christ And yet it follows not that to be Justified by Works and by Faith should after Christ's Death make no odds of Difference between them according to the Corrupt Inference which you unjustly draw from the Premises For though 't is true in a sense we may be said to be Justified by Works rightly and truly enough that is as Christ in his own Person hath fulfilled the Law for us yet your Inference is far enough from being truly deducible from the Premises according to the common and proper sense of Justification by Works Since as all our own Works are throughout the Scripture perfectly Excluded from any concern in that matter viz. as the meritorious or procuring cause of our Justification So they are according to the tenour of the foregoing Discourse also For if Christ hath satisfied the Law for us hence it follows that our Justification is only the fruit of Gods meer free Grace alone through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Thus much may suffice to have been spoken concerning the Absurdities or Self-contradictions which Mr. Flavell chargeth on on me Which so far as they have been already Examined the Reader may easily perceive that they do all of them return upon himself There is only one Passage more which doth more nearly touch the Heart of the Controversie betwixt us which is necessary also to be considered before we proceed unto what follows And that is this Whereas I have Affirmed and do still Affirm that there was no Promise of Pardon on Repentance in Moses's Covenant Mr. Flavell thinks he hath a mighty Advantage against me and supposes I do therein plainly contradict my self because I do yet grant that God promiseth Pardon on Repentance Lev. 26. which Mr. Flavell Affirms to belong to the Dispensation of the Law at Mount Sinai where the Jews are directed to the Covenant which God had made with Jacob Isaac and Abraham for their Relief in this respect For that is the Covenant saith God there that I will remember Well Be it so saith Mr. Flavell if you will needs have it so that the Promise mentioned Lev. 26. refers to Abraham's Covenant yet still it follows that the Covenant made with Abraham must be a Conditional Covenant of Grace For so it s made by this very Text If they accept the Punishment of their Iniquities and their Uncircumcised Hearts be humbled then will I remember my Covenant with Abraham c. You see then that no Unhumbled or Impenitent Person could have Relief from it till Confession and Contrition were wrought in him when you in the mean time stoutly deny that there are any Conditions required in a Gospel Covenant M. S. P. 5. Printed Reply P. 20. But then Mr. Flavell should have considered that this Contrition and Gospel Humiliation can by no means be Effected or Expressed till the Heart be first soundly wrought upon by the Grace of that Covenant which God hath made with Sinners in Jesus Christ. And accordingly this is one main Branch of that Covenant Deut. 30. 6. which I have already proved to be a Gospel Covenant and Essentially Different from that of the Law The Lord thy God will Circumcise thy Heart and the Heart of thy Seed to Love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart and with all thy Soul that thou mayst Live Compare this with the forementioned Text in Leviticus If their Uncircumcised Hearts be humbled c. The Sinner might Reply But Lord this we cannot do of our selves we cannot break our hard and flinty Hearts nor will it ever be performed until thou takest the Work into thine own Hand This therefore the Lord himself undertakes The Lord thy God will Circumcise thy Heart c. And what Condition can there be of that but that of the good Pleasure of God's own Goodness and Grace For whatever is Antecedent thereunto being only a Work or Act of Corrupted Nature can be no Condition whereon the Dispensation of Spiritual Grace is superadded From whence as I have already told you it plainly follows that I the Covenant of Grace is wholly Free and Absolute Eor as much as there is nothing that can be supposed as the Condition thereof whether it be Faith Repentance or new Obedience which is not therein Absolutely Promised Thus God himself is pleased to Represent unto us the Nature of that New and Evangelical Covenant which he Promised to make
this Grace he gave in Paul From all which it is evident that the principal Grace of the Covenant or God's putting his Laws in our Hearts which is influential to all the rest can depend on no condition on our Part. These things then being thus premised the Answer which I shall return unto the forementioned Argument is this First That it is evident that unto a full and compleat enjoyment of all the Promises of the Covenant Faith on our part from which Evangelical Repentance is inseparable is required But then it must withal be considered that these also are wrought in us given to us and bestowed upon us by vertue of that Promise and Grace of the Covenant that depends on no Condition in us which renders it wholly free and absolute from the Foundation to the Topstone thereof Whereas therefore you are pleased to tell me That there is something as an Act required of us in point of Duty which is Antecedent to the Benefit of the Promise If you intend hereby that Faith from which Evangelical Repentance and Good Works are inseparable is such a Condition of the Covenant as to be by us performed Antecedently unto the participation of any Grace Mercy or Benefit of it as your words imply for you admit of no Benefit from the Covenant till this be performed It is most untrue and as I have already told you 't is not onely contrary to the express Testimonies of Scripture but destructive of the Nature of the Covenant it self For if so Men must do all those things before they receive the Remission of Sins Yea while they are as yet dead in Trespasses and Sins Yea then must they do them whilst they are under the Law and the Curse of it For so are all Men whose Sins are not pardoned But this is to make Obedience unto the Law and that to be performed by Men whilst under the Curse of it to be a Condition of Gospel Mercy which is to overthrow both the Law and the Gospel How notoriously false and absurd is that Doctrin which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace saith Mr. Flavell himself p. 395. of his forementioned Book entituled The method of Grace the desire of Self-sufficiency saith he was the ruin of Aadam and the conceit of Self-sufficiency is the ruin of multitudes of his Posterity This Doctrin saith he is not only contradictory to the current stream of Scripture Phil. 2. 13. 1 Jo. 1. 13. with many other Scriptures but it is also contradictory to the common Sense and Experience of Believers yet saith he the Pride of Nature will strive to maintain what Scripture and Experience plainly contradict and overthrow I shall need to make no other Descant upon these words of his but this If that Doctrin is notoriously false and absurd which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace Then so is that Doctrin which asserteth that Faith is required of us in point of Duty antecedent to the benefit of the Promise Secondly If Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law and purchased Heaven and Happiness for Men as all true Protestants hitherto have taught then nothing can remain but to declare this to them to incline them to believe and accept it and to prescribe in what way and by what means they shall finally come to inherit Eternal Life To affirm therefore that Faith and Repentance are the Conditions of the New Covenant required of us in point of Duty antecedent to any Benefit of the Promise doth necessarily suppose that Christ hath not done all for us nor purchased a right to Life for any but onely made way that they may have it upon certain terms or as some say He hath merited that we might merit But the Conditions of the Covenant are not to be performed by the Head and Members both The Scriptures do assure us That when the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Gal. 4. 4. Christ therefore having in our stead performed the Conditions of Life there remains nothing but a Promise and the Obedience of Children as the Fruit and Effect thereof to them that believe in him together with means of obtaining the full possession which here we want Well but as under the Old Covenant Man was bid to do this and live So under this New Covenant he is commanded to Believe and live And as Death was threatened to the failure of Obedience to the Law So it is now threatened to the want of Faith under the Gospel Faith being the Condition on which the consequent Benefits of Life and Salvation are suspended Mar. 16. 15 16. Go preach the Gospel He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved He that believeth not shall be damned Jo. 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting Life and he that believeth not shall not see Life Where Faith seemeth to be put into the room of perfect Obedience and therfore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was So Rom. 10. 9. That if thou shalt consess with thy Mouth and believe in thine Heart thou shalt be saved Mat. 18. 3. Except ye be converted and become as little Children ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Mar. 11. 26. But if ye forgive not neither will your Heavenly Father forgive you With multitudes more saith Mr. Flavell of such kind of Expressions which are all Conditional Particles inserted into the Grants of Benefits it being not possible to put words into a frame more lively expressive of a Condition than these are Reply First whereas it is supposed that Faith under the Gospel seemeth to be put into the room of Perfect Obedience unto the Law and therefore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was This cannot be for as much as it is Christ's Perfect Obedience onely which is put into the room of ours to justify and save us as our own should have done had we been able to perform it And so his Sufferings take away the Curse which our Disobedience brought upon us Secondly It must also be observed that God having promised Salvation upon the account of his Sons satisfaction to all that come to him or believe in him Faith is therefore no other than a Coming Believing or Trusting in this Promise of God and so in the Righteousness of Christ exhibited in the Promise whereby it is applied unto us Wherefore Faith is not properly put into the room of Perfect Obedience nor doth it what Perfect Obedience was to do which was to be the Condition of Life For though that was to be our Righteousness under the Law yet it is evident that Faith on the other hand is appointed onely as an Instrument to receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ which is the alone matter of our Justification before God
hath also freely promised to write his Laws in our Minds and put them into our Hearts that we might thereby be made meet for himself and the enjoment of himself in Glory Where lies the ground of your Inference thrt those persons that are under those absolute Promises must and shall enjoy the Mercies of Pardon and Salvation whether they Repent or Repent not Believe or Believe not Obey or Obey not May you take to your self a liberty think you to say what you please right or wrong so you may render odious the Principles of such a Diffent from you Will you make the Promises of God to be of none effect Hath he spoken it and will he not peaform it Or will he alter the thing that is gone out of his Lips that he will write his Laws in the Hearts of those whose Sins he pardoneth But say you the Absoluteness of the Promises cuts off their relation to a Covenant And this no Man can deny that understands the difference betwixt a Covenant and an Absolute Promise Reply Sir to this Opinion of yours I shall only oppose the Judgment of that Accute and Learned Divine whom I know you greatly Respect and Reverence the late worthy Dr. Owen in his Third Volume upon the Epistle to the Hebrews p. 267 268. The words he insisteth on are these Heb. 8. 10. For this is the Covenant that I will make with the House of Israel after those days saith the Lord I will give my Laws into their Mind and write them upon their Hearts And I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a People The thing promised in the Prophet saith the Dr. is a Covenant We render the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place by a Covenant though afterward the same word is translated by a Testament A Covenant properly is a Compact or Agreement on certain terms mutually stipulated by two or more Parties As Promises are the Foundation and Rise of it as it is between God and Man so it compriseth also Precepts or Laws of Obedience which are prescribed unto Man on his part to be observed But in the Description of the Covenant here annexed there is no mention of any Condition on the part of Man or any terms of Obedience which are prescribed unto him but the whole consists in free gratuitous Promises as we shall see in the Explication of it First The Word Berith used by the Prophet doth not only signifie a Covenant or Compact properly so called but a Free Gratuitous Promise also Yea sometimes it is used for such a Free Purpose of God with respect unto other things which in their own Nature are uncapable of being obliged by any Moral Condition Such is God's Covenant with Day and Night Jer. 33. 20 25. And so he says that he made his Covenant not to Destroy the World by Water any more with every living Creature Gen. 9. 10 11. Nothing therefore can be Argued for the Necessity of Conditions to belong unto this Covenant from the Name or Term whereby it is expressed in the Prophet A Covenant properly is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But there is no Word in the whole Hebrew Language of that Precise Signification The making of this Covenant is declared by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But yet neither doth this require a mutual stipulation upon Terms and Conditions prescribed unto an entrance into Covenant For it refers unto the Sacrifices wherewith Covenants were confirmed and it is applied unto a meer Gratuitous Promise Gen. 15. 18. In that Day did God make a Covenant with Abraham saying unto thy Seed will I give this Land As unto the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifies a Covenant improperly Properly it is a Testamentary Disposition and this may be without any Conditions on the part of them unto whom any thing is Bequeathed Thus far the Doctor Now say you to what Licentiousness this Doctrin leads Men is Obvious to every Eye yet this Absoluteness of the Covenant as you improperly call it is by you Asserted c. In reference whereunto I shall only mind you of one Passage more of the same Worthy Person in his forementioned Discourse upon the Hebrews P. 15. It cannot be denied saith he but that some Men may and it is justly to be feared that some Men do abuse the Doctrin of the Gospel to Countenance themselves in a vain expectation of Mercy and Pardon whilst they willingly live in a course of Sin But as this in their management is the principal means of their Ruin So in the Righteous Judgment of God it will be the greatest Aggravation of their Condemnation And whereas some have charged the Preachers of Gospel Grace as those who thereby give Countenance unto this Presumption It is an Accusation that hath more of the Hatred of Grace in it than of the Love of Holiness For none do or can press the Relinquishment of Sin and Repentance of it upon such Assured Grounds and with such Cogent Arguments as those by whom the Grace of Jesus Christ in the Gospel is fully opened and declared I shall need to say no more upon this Head and shall therefore proceed to your Fourth Argument which I find thus stated Argum. 4. If all the Promises of the New Covenant be Absolute and Unconditional having no respct nor relation to any Grace wrought in us nor Duty done by us then the Trial of our Interest in Christ by Marks and Signs of Grace is not our Duty nor can we take Comfort in Sanctification as an Evidence of Justification But it is a Christian's Duty to try his Interest in Christ by Marks and Signs and he may take Comfort in Sanctification as an Evidence of Justification Ergo Reply After this rate you may Prove Quidlibet a Quolibet For doth it follow that because the New Covenant is Absolute therefore it hath no respect nor relation to any Grace wrought in us nor Duty done by us Or doth it follow that because we may justly take comfort in Sanctification as an Evidence of Justification that therefore the New Covenant is Conditional Pray Sir make it out For as yet you have not how this conclusion is naturally deducible from such Premises May not the Grace of God in the New Covenant be wholly Free and Absolute as it is from the very Foundation to the Top-stone thereof when yet we may justly take comfort in those Gracious Operations of the Spirit in us which are brought forth as the Fruit of the Divine Grace so revealed unto us and that as an Evidence of our Interest in him As for the Antinomian Slurs which upon this occasion you are pleased so liberally to reflect upon me in the following part of your Discourse upon this Head I must tell you that I know none that deserve that Character but such as refuse to come under the sweet and easie Yoak of Christ renouncing their Duty to God in Obedience