Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	law_n	sin_n	transgression_n	2,676	5	10.9658	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39120	Vindiciæ justificationis gratuitæ = Justification without conditions, or, The free justification of a sinner : explained, confirmed, and vindicated, from the exceptions, objections, and seeming absurdities, which are cast upon it, by the assertors of conditional justification : more especially from the attempts of Mr. B. Woodbridge in his sermon, entituled (Justification by faith), of Mr. Cranford in his Epistle to the reader, and of Mr. Baxter in some passages, which relate to the same matter : wherein also, the absoluteness of the New Covenant is proved, and the arguments against it, are disproved / by W. Eyre ...	Eyre, William, 1612 or 13-1670.; Owen, John, 1616-1683.	1654 (1654)	Wing E3947A; ESTC R40198	198,474	230

rased out those Scriptures which ascribe our Justification unto Christ alone For my own part I see no such cause he hath to triumph unless it be in the dejection of those feeble consequences which he himself hath devised to make our Doctrine odious which we have shewn before are as remote from our principles as the East is from the West I confess neither he nor I are competent Judges in our own cause let the Godly Reader judge between us and hold fast that which comes nearest to the Analogy of Faith I shall now address my self to s●an the force of those Arguments he hath brought to prove That the Elect are not justified in the sight of God before they believe CHAP. X. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges first Argument against Justification before Faith taken from the Nature of Justification is answered HIs first Argument is drawn from the Nature of Justification Which sayes he is the absolution of a sinner from condemnation by that gracious sentence and signal promise in the Gospel He that believes shall not enter into condemnation The Argument he hath cast into this frame If there be no act of grace declared and published in the Word which may be a legal discharge of the sinner while he is in unbelief then no unbelieving sinner is justified But there is no act of grace declared and published in the Word which is a legal discharge of the sinner whilest he remains in unbelief Ergo. Whereunto I answer 1. That his Assumption is false for the Gospel or New Covenant is a published or declared discharge of all the Elect. The sum of which is That God hath transacted all their sins upon Jesus Christ and that Christ by that offering of his hath made a full and perfect atonement for them whereby the whole spiritual Israel are really made clean from all their sins in the sight of God as of old carnal Israel were Typically clean upon the atonement made by the High Priest Levit. 16.30 Now though they cannot plead it before they believe yet is it a real discharge because it frees them from condemnation As a Pardon granted by a Prince is a legal discharge though the Malefactor doth not know of it 2. The Sequel or Consequence of the Major stands upon a sandy bottom a postulatum that will not be granted to wit That Justification is the discharge of a sinner by a published declared act We have shewed before That Justification consists in the non-imputation of sin and the imputation of Righteousness which is an act of the Minde or Will of God It is a gross non sequitur God doth not declare his non-imputing of sin to his Elect before they believe Ergo He doth account and esteem them sinners The Question is not whether this gracious sentence of Absolution be declared but whether it be not in the Brest of God before it be declared or whether this immanent act of God doth not secure the sinner from condemnation If so then there is Justification though there be no published declared sentence As Gods saying in his heart That he would never drown the world any more Gen. 8.21 did sufficiently secure the world from the danger of an other deluge though he had never declared it so Gods will not to punish secures a person from condemnation though this security be not declared § 2. They are but feeble proofs wherewith he hath backed h●s Assertion That Justification is onely by the promise as a declared discharge We are not says he as if he sa●e in Pythagoras his Chair to conceive of Justification as an internal immanent act of God resolving privately in his own Brest not to prosecute his right against a sinner but it must be some declared promulged act c. But why are we not to conceive of it as an internal immanent act Instead of proofs he gives us Illustrations which may pass in a Sermon but are too weak for a dispute As sin saith he is not imputed where there is no Law Rom. 5.13 So neither is Righteousness imputed without Law Whereunto I answer 1. Though men will not impute or charge sin upon themselves where there is not a Law to convince them of it For by the Law is the knowledge of sin Rom. 3.20 7.9 Gal. 3.19 Yet it follows not but God did impute sin to men before there was any Law promulged or before the sin was actually committed For what is Gods hating of a person but his imputing of sin or his will to punish him for his sin Now the Lord hated all that perish ere ever the Law was given The scope of the Scripture alleadged Rom. 5.13 is not to shew when God begins to impute sin to a person but that sin in being supposeth a Law and consequently That there was a Law before the Law of Moses else men could not have sinned as it is confessed they did As the Law it self had a being in the Minde of God so the issues thereof were determined by him before it was declared 2. There is not the same reason of our being sinners and being righteous seeing that sin is our act but Righteousness is the gift of God A man is not a sinner before he do commit sin either by himself or Representative which necessarily supposeth a Law For sin is the transgression of a Law 1 Iohn 3.4 But a man may be righteous before he doth works of Righteousness and consequently before any Law is given him to obey Indeed if we were made righteous by our own personal Inherent Righteousness then our Justification would necessarily require a Law for as much as all our Righteousness consists in a conformity to the Law But seeing we are justified by the imputation of anothers Righteousness what need is there that a Law should first be given unto us § 3. Mr. W. goes on As our condemnation is no secret act or resolution of God to condemn but the very voice and sentence of the Law Cursed is he that sinneth and therefore he whom God in his Eternal Decree hath purposed to save may yet for the present be under the sentence of condemnation as the Ephesians whom God had chosen to Eternal Life Chap. 1.4 were yet sometimes the children of wrath Chap. 2.3 So on the contrary our Justification must be some declared promulged act or sentence of God which may stand good in Law for the discharge of the sinner against condemnation We say that condemnation being taken not for the Will of God to punish or to inflict upon a person the desert of his sin but for the thing willed or for the curse it self it comes upon men by vertue of that Law or Covenant which was made with the first Adam So our Justification being taken not for the Internal Act of Gods will not to punish but for the benefit willed to us by that Internal Act to wit Our actual discharge from the Law descends to us by vertue of that Law or Covenant which was made

of the Law and by the just judgement of God proceeding against them according to the tenor of the first Covenant So that God need not go about to entangle men who were before fast bound in the shackles of sin and misery the Law condemned them sufficiently though their contempt of the Gospel will aggravate their condemnation Our Saviour had no intent at all to shew the state of the Elect before believing but the certain and inevitable misery of them that believe not by reason of the sentence of the Law which had passed upon them § 4. 2 His next Allegation is as impertinent as this Verse 36. of the same Chapter He that believeth not the wrath of God abideth on him It is evident that our Saviour speaks there of a final unbeliever and not of an Elect person before believing the phrase of the abiding of Gods wrath is applicable to none but unto Reprobates who do perish for ever And to say that the place hints there is a wrath of God which is done away by believing is but an attempt to suborn the Spirit to serve our turn § 5. 3 That which seemes to speak most fully to his cause is Ephes. 2.3 where the Apostle tells the Ephesians whom God had chosen to Eternal life Chap. 1.4 That they were by nature the children of wrath even as others To which I answer 1 That the Text doth not say that God did condemn them or that they were under Condemnation before Conversion 2 The Emphasis of this Text I conceive lies in this clause by nature So then the Apostles meaning is That by nature or in reference to their state in the first Adam from whom by natural propagation they descended They were children of wrath they could expect nothing but wrath and fiery indignation from God Yet this hindered not but that by Grace they might be the Children of his Love for so all the Elect are whilest they are in their blood and pollution Ezek. 16.4 8. The Lord calls them his Sons and Children before Conversion Isai. 43.6 53.11 8.18 Heb. 2.9 For it is not any Inherent qualification but the good pleasure of God that makes them his Children Ephes. 1.5 Rom. 8.29 John 17.6 Believers considered in themselves and as they come from the loyns of Adam are sinful and cursed Creatures as vile and wretched as the Devil himself though in Christ they behold themselves made righteous and blessed It is granted That Elect Infants have the Righteousness of Christ imputed to them though they know it not and I see no reason that can be given why it should not be imputed to the rest of the Elect before Conversion § 6. Although the Elect are freed from wrath and condemnation yet in some sence they may be said to be under it in regard that the Law doth terrifie and affright their consciences Rom. 4.15 In which respect it is called A ministration of wrath and of death 2 Cor. 3.7 9. The wrath of God hath a threefold acception in the Scripture 1. It signifies the most just and immutable Will of God to deal with a person or persons according to the tenor of the Law and to inflict upon them the punishment which their sins shall deserve And in this sence none but Reprobates are under wrath who for this cause are said to be hated of God 2 It notes the threatnings and comminations of the Law Rom. 1.18 Psal. 6.1 Hos. 11.9 Jonas 3.9 c. 3 It notes the execution of those threatnings or the punishments threatned Ephes. 5.6 Luke 21.23 Matth. 3.7 Now in the first and third sence the Elect never were nor shall be under wrath God never intended to deal with them according to the tenor of the Law nor doth he inflict upon them the least evil upon that account Christ having freed and delivered them from the Curse But as wrath is taken in the second sense for the comminations and threatnings of the Law so they are under wrath till they are able to plead their discharge and release by the Gospel The threatnings of the Law do seize upon and arrest their Consciences no less then others and therefore the Law is compared to a rigid School-Master which never ceaseth to whip and lash them until they flye unto Christ. For though he hath freed them from the Curse yet the Lord sees it fit they should for a while be held under the Pedagogy and Ministration of the Law that they may learn to prize the Redemption which they have by Christ Gal. 3.22 The Lord when he published the Law in Sinai as the Apostle observes Gal. 3.17 Did not repent him of his promise made Typically with Abraham and his Seed but really with Christ and the Elect in him But sayes he the Law was added because of transgression i. e. To discover their sinfulness and misery by nature and to render the Grace of the promise more desirable Vers. 22. As the Saints in the Old Testament were Heirs of the Promise had a real and actual Interest in all the Blessings of the New Covenant whilest their Consciences were whipped and scourged by this merciless School-master so all the rest of the Elect are partakers of the same Grace of Life though the Law doth terrifie and condemn them The threatnings of the Law do not shew what is the state of a person towards God or how God doth account of him but what he is by nature and what he hath deserved should be inflicted upon him which a man cannot chuse but expect and fear till his Conscience be secured by better promises So that I shall not be afraid to say That the Consciences of the Elect before Faith are under wrath and not their Persons and though their Consciences do condemn them yet God doth not But against this Mr. W. hath sundry Exceptions § 7. The condemnation they are under is the condemnation exception 1 of the Law which pronounceth all men guilty not onely in their own conscience but before God Rom. 3.19 Answ. That the voice or sentence of the Law shews not who are condemned of God but who are guilty and damnable in themselves if God should deal with them by the Law which is the scope of the Apostle Rom. 3.19 20. That all the world might become guilty before God So indeed are all men considered according to what is due by the Law Psal. 143.2 But the Elect as considered in the Grace and forgiveness of God and the perfect satisfaction of Jesus Christ are discharged from this rigorous Court their cause is judged at another Bar. § 8. The condemnation of an unbelievers conscience is exception 2 either true or false if true then it is according to the judgement of God and speaks as the thing is and so God condemns as well as the conscience c. Answ. The testimony of an unbelievers conscience 〈◊〉 true so far as it agrees with the written word if it witnesseth to a

justitia bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his Eternal Election The onely cause of Christs death was to satisfie the Law he did not die to procure a new Will or Affection in the heart of God towards his Elect nor yet to adde any new thing in God which doth perfect and compleat the act of Election as Wallaeus seems to intimate But that God might save us in a way agreeable to his own Justice that he might confer upon us all those Blessings he intended without wrong and violation to his holy Law for God having made a Law that the soul which sinneth should die the Justice and Truth of God required that satisfaction should be made for the sins of the Elect no less then of other men which they being unable to perform the Son of God became their Surety to bear the Curse and fulfil the Law in their stead God might will unto us sundry benefits which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice As a King may will and purpose the deliverance of his Favorite who is imprisoned for debt yet he cannot actually free him till he hath paid and satisfied his Creditor So though God had an irrevocable peremptory Will to save his Elect yet he could not actually save them till satisfaction was made unto his Justice which being made there is no let or impediment to stop the current of his Blessings As when the Cloud is dissolved the Sun shines forth when the partition wall is broken down they that were separated are again united So the cloud of our sins being blotted out the beams of Gods love have as free a passage towards us as if we had not sinned Now that Christ by his death removed this let and hinderance the Scripture is as express as can be desired as that he made an end of sin Dan. 9.24 Blotted it out c. Col. 2.14 Took it quite away as the Scape-goat Levit. 16.22 John 1.29 And slew the enmity between God and us Ephes. 2.16 See Verses 13 14 15. § 4. Fifthly If it were the Will of God that the sin of Adam should immediately over-spread his posterity then it was his Will that the Satisfaction and Righteousness of Christ should immediately redound to the benefit of Gods Elect for there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both to their respective subjects for as the Apostle shews Rom. 5.14 both of them were heads and roots of mankinde Now the sin of Adam did immediately over-spread his posterity All men sinned in him before ever they committed any actual sin Rom. 5.12 14. And therefore the Righteousness of Christ descended immediately upon all the Elect for their Justification Rom. 5.17 18. Sixthly If the Sacrifices of the Law were immediately available for the Typical cleansing of sins under that administration then the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered was immediately available to make a real atonement for all those sins for which he suffered The reason of the consequence is because the Real Sacrifice is not less efficacious then the Typical Heb. 9.14 But those Legal Sacrifices did immediately make atonement without any condition performed on the sinners part Levit. 16.30 § 5. Seventhly If it be the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without any condition performed by them then it was his Will that it should be so for all of them the reason is because the Scripture makes no difference between persons in the communication of this Grace The free gift saith the Apostle came upon all men i. e. In omnes praedestinatos to Justification of life to wit by the gracious imputation of God But it is the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without conditions performed by them viz. To Elect Infants or else they are not reconciled and consequently they cannot be saved Now if any shall say That God hath a peculiar way of reconciling and justifying Infants or of communicating unto them the Benefits of Christs death let them clear it up from Scripture let them shew us the Text that saith God gives Salvation unto Infants in one manner and to men in another to the one freely and to the others upon conditions If they say Infants have the Seed or Habit of Faith the Scripture will contradict them which affirmeth 1 That they have no knowledge at all either of good or evil Deut. 1.39 And that they cannot so much as discern between the right and the left hand And if so how can they who conceive not of things Natural understand those things that are Heavenly and Spiritual And therefore sayes Augustine If we should go about to prove that Infants know the things of God who as yet know not the things of men our own senses would confute us And can there be Faith without knowledge 2 That Faith cometh by hearing of the Word Preached Rom. 10. Now Infants either hear not or if they do they understand not what they hear We have sufficient experience that no Children give any testimony of Faith until they have been taught and instructed Elect Children which are afterwards manifested to be such are as obstinate and unteachable as any others As for the instance of the Baptist that he believed in his Mothers belly because it is said Luke 1.41 That he was filled with the Holy Ghost c. it doth not prove it for as one observes it is not said Credidit in utero but onely exultavit which exultation or springing Divinitùs facta est in Infante non humanitùs ab Infante And therefore it is not to be drawn into an example or urged as a rule to us what to think of other Infants But if any shall say that Infants do perform the conditions of Reconciliation and Salvation by their Parents then it will follow That all the Children of believing Parents are reconciled and justified because they perform the conditions as much for all as they do for one But I suppose no man will say That all the Children of believing Parents are justified we may as well assert works of supererogation as that one is justified by anothers Faith That any Infants are saved it is meerly from the Grace of Election and the free imputation of Christs Righteousness of which all that are elected are made partakers in the same manner § 6. Eighthly If it were the Will of God that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation it was his will that it should not in the least depend upon our works or conditions because that condition or conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect and our Justification would be partly of Grace and partly of Works partly from Christ and partly from our selves Nay it would bee more from our selves then from Jesus Christ seeing that

slightingly of Holiness my own practise would condemn my Doctrine For herein I exercise my self to have always a conscience void of offence towards God and towards men § 3. It is needless to give the Reader an account of all the Oppositions which I have met with in the course of my Ministery nor are they worth the mentioning seeing as the Apostle speaks I have not yet resisted unto blood I shall onely acquaint him with the rise of this present Difference which hapned about three or four years since upon this occasion handling those words How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation Heb. 2.3 in the weekly Lecture which I Preach in this City I proposed this Question Why the Gospel and not the Law is called Salvation seeing Life and Salvation is the end of both One Reason which I gave in Answer thereunto was Because the Law promiseth men life but conditionally upon condition of their Perfect Obedience which condition no man is able to perform and consequently no man can attain unto Life and Happiness by means thereof but the Gospel reveals a Salvation which is freely given unto Sinners which God bestows upon such as have neither money to buy nor worth to deserve it This led me to speak more largely of the Difference between the Law and the Gospel the First Covenant which is a Covenant of Works and the Second which is a Covenant of Free-grace Concerning the latter I laid down this Thesis That in the New Covenant there is no condition required on our parts to intitle us to the blessings of it One Corollary which I drew from hence was That Faith is not the condition of the New Covenant I cannot without too much tediousness rehearse my Explications of this Proposition and I do the rather forbear it now because in the process of this Discouse I shall have more opportunity to rescue my sense of them from some common mistakes I shall onely inform the Reader of one Reason which I then gave for proof of the last Position to wit That Faith is not the condition of the New Covenant and particularly of our Justification which as Mr. W. calls it is the Special and Noble-blessing of the New Covenant in regard that our Controversie concerning Justification before Faith grew first from thence The Argument was to this effect If Faith be the condition of our Justification it must follow That men are Believers before they are justified for the condition must be performed before the benefit which is promised thereupon can be received But men are not Believers before they are justified the Scripture witnesseth that the Subject of Justification is a sinner or ungodly person Rom. 4.5 5.8 10. Now the Holy Ghost never calls Believers ungodly or wicked but Saints Faithful Holy Brethren Children of God Members of Christ c. § 4. The next news that I heard was That all the Pulpits in the Town were filled with invectives against my Sermon I must confess it surprised me with no little wonder knowing that I had delivered nothing but what was consonant to the Scriptures and wherein I was sure I had the suffrages of many godly and learned men and those too that are reputed amongst the more manly sort of our Protestant Divines But that which I mused at most was the usage of a Neighbor Minister who though he heard not my Sermon and although by reason of a like mistake he had solemnly promised me not to clash against my Doctrine until he had first conferred with me about it yet shortly after without giving me the least hint of his dis-satsfaction he publickly complained to the people what dangerouis Errors had been lately vented amongst them suborned the words of the Apostle Gal. 1.8 to pronounce me cursed and charged the people not to hear them that do teach 1 That the New Covenant is not conditional 2 That Faith is not the condition of the New Covenant or 3 That Justification goes before Faith To let pass those odious Nick-names which my Neighbors and others who have been invited hither to disaffect the people towards my Doctrine have frequently bestowed upon me as Antinomian New-Declarative Troubler of Israel c. which troubled me the less when I remembred what Luther sayes He that will Preach Christ truly and confess him to be our Righteousness must be content to hear that he is a pernitious fellow and that he troubl●th all things c. And a little before The faithful must bear this name and title in the World that they are Seditious and Schismaticks and the Authors of innumerable Evils c. And in another place viz. on Gal. 5.11 Paul saith he taketh it for a most certain sign that it is not the Gospel if it be preached in peace But that which grieved me most was That Satan had gotten such an advantage against my Ministry for those insinuations prevailed so far upon the people that many of my wonted hearers fell off and re●●ained from coming to my Lecture for fear least I should perswade them to believe some other Gospel then that which is revealed in the Scriptures And how to remove this offence so unjustly taken I could not devise for though I made things never so plain in Publick thither they would not come or if I had gone to them in Private it had been but to little purpose they being possessed as one of them most uncharitably told me that I had a design to vent new Doctrine in Publick and to blanch it over with a fair construction in private It came into my minde as the most likely expedient to vindicate both the truth and my self to desire those Reverend Ministers who sometimes came unto my Lecture That if they were dis-satisfied with what I had delivered they would be pleased publickly to declare it assoon as Sermon was ended and show me wherein I had swerved from the truth I hoped that by this means we should have a clearer understanding of one another and the people would be the better satisfied when they had compared their Exceptions and my Answers together But hitherto I could never obtain this favor from them though some of them have taken the Liberty to clamor lustily against me behinde my back and when I was safe enough from giving them an Answer § 5. About April last which was Anno 1652. I came unto the Wednesdays Lecture in this City where I heard a stranger whom I knew not let fall sundry Passages which I conceived to be very wide from the Orthodox Faith as well as contrary to the Doctrine which I had lately delivered in the same place It sounded harshly in mine ears That the Elect themselves to whom Christ was peculiarly given by the Father before the foundations of the world for whom Christ gave himself a Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savor whose sins he bare in his Body on the Tree even to a full propitiation had no right or interest

of Grace and not those works which we do by the aid of Grace But Mr. Pemble answers well This distinction of works done without grace and works done by grace was devised by one that had neither wit nor grace being a meer trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as do indefinitely exclude all works from our Justification without distinguishing either of the time when they are done whether before or after o● of the aid and help whereby they are done whether by Nature or by Grace Others say that when the Apostle denies That we are justified by works he means that we are not justified by the works of the Law but yet by works required in the Gospel such as are Faith and Faithful actions we may be justified To which I answer 1 That the Apostle speaks indefinitely now the rule is Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguit An indefinite Proposition is equivalent to a universal A man is not justified by works is as much as if he had said A man is not justified by any works of his own 2 The Apostle excludes all works from our Justification which do make the reward to be a due debt Rom. 4.4 5. Now the works required in the Gospel supposing it to be a Conditional Covenant when they are performed do make the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give no less then works required in the Law 3 He denies expresly that Abraham was justified by faithful actions which he performed by the help and assistance of Gods Spirit Rom 4.2 4 They are the same works for the substance which are commanded in the Law and the Gospel there is no Precept enjoyned us in the New Testament which is not also commanded us in the Moral Law though the Law doth not expresly command us to believe in Christ yet virtually and by consequence it doth The Law requires us to believe whatsoever God shall reveal or propose to us to be believed and consequently to believe in Christ when God in his Gospel shall reveal him to us There is no reason therefore to interpret this Proposition A man is not justified by works He is not justified by Legal but by Evangelical works seeing they are for substance one and the same 5 There would be no such opposition between Justification by Works and Justification by Faith as the Apostle makes if we were justified by Evangelical works of our own performing All his disputing about Justification would amount but to meer Logomachy or strife of words for there was never any man so sottish as to think that a sinner can be justified by Legal works unless the Law be mitigated and the rigor thereof be in part remitted The Apostle doth not dispute against Justification by works which we cannot perform but by works which men presume they are able to perform He excludes not onely perfect works but all manner of works that are wrought by us § 7. 2. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be a perfect Righteousness then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts But the Righteousness whereby we are justified is a perfect Righteousness Ergo. The Sequel is evident because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is imperfect and defective at least in degrees we do not believe love and obey so perfectly as we ought the best of us may say with him in the Gospel Lord I believe help thou my unbelief Mark 9.24 And when we have done our utmost that we are but unprofitable servants Luke 17.10 Now this imperfection and defect in our Faith and other vertues being defectus debiti in esse is sinful and culpable for which cause our Saviour oftentimes sharply reproved it Matth. 6.30 8.26 14.31 16.8 c. And we are oftentimes exhorted to increase our Faith to abound in duties of Obedience and to perfect holiness Luke 17.5 1 Thes. 4.1 2 Cor. 7 1. In this last place the Apostle hints that the imperfection of our holiness ariseth from the filthiness of the flesh and spirit and consequently it is a defiled and sinful imperfection The Assumption that we are not justified by an imperfect righteousness needs not I suppose any long proof for surely God will not account that for perfect justice which is not so indeed for as the Apostle sayes well The judgement of God is according to truth Rom. 2.2 It is certain God will not justifie any man without Righteousness and it is as certain That God will not account that to be perfect Righteousness which is imperfect and sinful to say That God doth not account our imperfect holiness to be Righteousness judicio justitiae but onely judicio misericordiae is a meer shift which serves but to set the attributes of God at variance between themselves which in the Justification of a sinner do kiss and embrace each other Psal. 85.10 When God judgeth according to mercy he judgeth according to truth his merciful judgement is a just and a righteous judgement the mercy of God is shewn not in accounting a sinner perfectly righteous for that Righteousness which is imperfect but in accounting to him that Righteousness which is not his own the perfect Righteousness of the Mediator In this judgement of God Justice and Mercy do both meet Justice in that he will not justifie a sinner without a perfect Righteousness Mercy in that he will accept him for such a Righteousness which is neither in him nor performed by him but by his surety the Lord Jesus Christ. Some of our Protestant Divines do call Inherent holiness Evangelical Righteousness in respect of the principle from whence it flows A heart purified by Faith and to distinguish it from that Legal Righteousness which Reprobates and Unbelievers have attained to being but the fruit of a Natural Conscience I am sure it is no Protestant Doctrine that Inherent Sanctification which on all hands is acknowledged to be imperfect and defective is that Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God which must needs be such a Righteousness as God himself sitting on the Throne of his Justice can finde no fault with at all but doth present the person that hath it just and perfect before Gods Tribunal 3. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be the Righteousness of God then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts but the Righteousness whereby we are justified is the Righteousness of God Ergo. The Sequel is clear because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness which the Scripture calls the Righteousness of God For though we receive it from God it being the gift of his Grace yet it is every where called ours as our Faith Matth. 9.2 22. Rom. 1.8 Hab. 2.4 Jam. 1.3 Our Charity 2 Cor. 8.8 24 1 Cor. 16.24 Philem. v. 1 7. Our Hope Phil. 1.20 1 Thes. 2.19 Our good Works Matth. 5.16 Revel 2.2 Our Patience Luke 21.19 2 Thes. 1.4 Revel