into it because your self in part wave it And you doe well For the grimnesse of the thing it self will make a conscience afraid of it For those your Expressions Pag. 23. That Gods love to us in our blood was as great as ever afterwards and that God loved Paul with as great love when he persecuted as when he preached the Gospel Because I finde them there to be but words without proof I forbeare to confute them unlesse in one word that if before and when signifie a time of being out of Christ your words are most false For whiles the elect Ephesians are out of Christ they are without all hope Ephes 2.12 And children of wrath Ephes 2.2 And before men are in Christ God doth but purpose to love not actually love Ephes 1. Or else you must say That God can actually love without Christs making satisfaction to his Justice If you say that these your assertions were proved afore as you doe in that 23. pag. Then we can as truly say they were answered afore Those expressions in the 23. pag. That God loves sinners with infinite love Yea his Love is God himself 1 Joh. 4.16 A word will suffice God in himself is as essentially Justice as he is Love And therefore as necessarily must the one he satisfied as the other communicated to save So that when his infinite justice is satisfied with Christs infinite merits then hee can exercise with honour to himself his infinite love himself properly being the only Obiect of his infinite Love because he is infinite It is enough for sinners that he saves them to the uttermost Hebr. 7.25 and that God Loves Christ infinitely and loves us in him enough if you dare say that obiectively and properly A creature is in a capacity of infinite act upon it or that God can love infinitely a finite thing unlesse you mean infinite in duration that is eternall for time to come And before his Iustice is satisfied hee actually loves not Rom. 9.25 I will call her beloved that was not beloved but onely purposeth to love upon that consideration and satisfaction as wee have afore often proved Heb. 9.26 c. Immediately before in the margin For that Passage onely breathed out Pag. 24. Gods Act of love is immanent in him Gods actions of love are transient upon and in the Creature That Gods Love cannot increase or decrease Wee say That it is true of the Act of Love in God But the actions of Redemption and salvation from God to a creature may as well increase as those of the creation wherein the World was first a Chaos c. after was raising to perfection sixe dayes The more of Christ is in a man the more of Gods actions of love are manifested to him Speciall graces above common graces God speaks higher touching those his Martyrs that have the suffering graces of Christ then of others Phil. 1.29 Dan. 12. last Revel Heb. 6.4.9 The Apostle puts a wide difference between common graces from which there may be a defection and such as accompany Salvation 20.4 If Actions of Gods love may not be more or lesse to a Beleever within the latitude of never falling from grace totally and finally then there are no desertions of which there are so many instances in Scripture Mistake me nor My meaning is Though God never ceaseth to love those that are once in Christ according to that Joh. 13.1 Rom. 11.29 yet sometimes he may doe more sometimes lesse for the inward comfort of such a soul even as on the other side a Christian may more worke his own discomfort at one time then at another The rest that you have in pag. 24.25 are in effect but repetitions of the same things Therefore wee follow you to Pag. 26 27 28. God doth not onely love us before conversion with his great love but say you with his greatest love that ever was communicated to the creature This may appeare by severall effects of the love of God communicated unto men by God in and through his Sonne before conversion faith c. As Predestination Choosing Redemption Justification Adoption before repentance faith conversion or calling And Sanctification Calling opening the heart all of them gracious acts of God communicated unto the creature before the conversion of the creature to God Answer O Brother that you would consider what strange doctrine is here which the Bible never knew For that Scripture you alleage is flat against you Namely That God hath chosen us in him Christ Eph. 1.4 Hath predestinated us unto the adoption of Sons by Jesus Christ Hath made us accepted in the Beloved in whom we have redemption through his Blood even the forgivenesse of our sinnes vers 5 6 7. In whom we have obtained an inheritance vers 11. For can any thing be communicated to the creature through Christ those are your words without Communion Co-union with Christ by faith Is not Christ in us by faith Ephes 3.17 Doth not the Scripture speak as plainly as may be that wee are the sonnes of God which is Adoption by faith Ioh. 1.12 Accepted in him through faith Hebr. 11.6 That wee have Forgivenesse of sinnes which is justification by faith Rom. 5.1 That the inheritance is not of the law but of faith Gal. 3. So for the expressions you use above the Scripture is cleer that sanctification is by faith 1 Ioh. 3.1.2 Acts 15.9 That effectuall calling is by faith Heb. 4.2 If you had only meant that all these choosing redemption justification c. had been made a sinners by Gods decree and purpose 1. You would not have said they were communicated to the creature 2. You should not have numbred Predestination with the rest For by this meanes you speak vaine repetitions thus Predestination is communicated by Predestination For Predestination can be no otherwise ours then in Gods purpose 3. Why did you not think upon this that in Gods purpose faith and repentance and conversion were eternally as well thought upon by God and intended for man as Redemption and Justification He lincks the means and the end in an indissolvable chain Rom. 8. So that in Gods decree you cannot say that any one of those Acts is older then another Let any man read your words over again and speak truly whether you can mean any thing if he make sense of your words though false unlesse he understand a communicating that is actuall and not mentall meerly in God For you speak of sanctifying an ungodly man of effectuall Calling 〈◊〉 as some of the instances of those things that you say are communicated in Christ another note that you meane actuall communicating And then you fall upon your Bead-roule as they speak if not your bad-roule of a redemption justification sanctification calling opening the heart communicated to the creature before the conversion of a creature to God Good Lord teach you seriously to think what conversion that is that hath no effectuall calling or what
seven Arguments which if need had required might have been seventie Now I will answer the Objections An Answer to Argument VII IF we are not justified in his sight before we believe a then we are unjust sinners workers of iniquity Answer So we are As we have shewed out of Ephes 2.2 Where we are said to walke after the course of the world to be guided by the Spirit that ruleth in the children of disobedience and to be children of wrath as well as others till we be in Christ by faith v. 4 5 6 7 8. So 1 Cor. 6.9.10.11 But then saith the obiection If we be workers of iniquity God hates us Psalm 5. 1. Answ We know no middle between Gods love and hate And the text saith plainly that till they be called they are in regard of actuall love a people not beloved Rom. 9.24.25 ☞ Some reply that this is meant of the Gentiles To which 1. We reply that that is all one In the Gentiles we see those that were not beloved afore the call are beloved after 2. That the text names Jewes and Gentiles and brings that of Hos to prove it with which if we go on to end of 3. chap. of Hos it is fully proved Chapters are of late invention Besides that 9. of Rom. we alledge that Ezekiell 16.8 It was a time of love This text is urged against us but you may see it is for us For it should seeme it was not the time of love till God passed by her and spread his skirt over her the righteousnesse and excellency of Christ In order of nature she lay in her blood before justified and loved But in order of time at the same time yea minute of time she was in her blood was justified and loved At the same time the soule is created in man But in order of nature the understanding acts before the will And whereas it is said Esau have I hated not Jacob But Iacob have I loved This the Apostle applies peremptorily to Election and reprobation Now Election is every where in Scripture called a purpose If any where it be called a love we must be forced to ioyn both together unlesse we will set the Scriptures together by the eares and say It is a purpose of love Now a purpose is not an act nor an act a purpose Gods decree is not the execution nor the execution the decreeing 2. Answ Isay 1.13 Your incense is abomination to me the calling of Assemblies I cannot away with it it is iniquity even the solemne meeting your new moones and your appointed feasts my soule hateth c. And all because their hands were full of blood But ver 18. Come now let us reason together though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow See here is as much said of hating those that should be pardoned ver 25. as of Sodom and Gomorrah ver 10. God cannot hate the essence of the Devill being his creature but onely his manners So of the iustified before iustified as we have shewed Answ b What absurdity can be conceived by one principled with Divinity For though man could fall in the first Adam yet he cannot fall from the second Adam being once in him For the gifts and calling of God Rom. 11. are without repentance We can perfectly sinne being out of Christ and so deserve to be hated But we being in Christ have a perfect righteousnesse in him that saves them to the utmost that is for ever that come to God by him seeing he ever lives to make intercession for them Heb. 7.25 So that as he breaks the power of corrupt nature that it cannot sinne perfectly with a full will Rom. 7. so he perfectly pardons all sinne that there is no condemnation Rom. 8.1 Objection 1. We are justified by Faith therefore not before Faith Answer First it should have concluded not before the act of beleeving a Secondly I denie the consequence and say we may be justified both by it and yet before in a different sense This Proposition We are justified by Faith is very ambiguous He was not a Foole who an hundred years since said that this Proposition was one of those things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do other Scriptures to their own destruction 2 Pet. 3.16 I would our Age had not proved it true that the misunderstanding of this Proposition hath turned upside down the Doctrine of Justification amongst pudling preachers There is in this Proposition two words ambiguous and doubtfull The first Justified which sometimes in Scriptures signifieth to be reputed reckonned or accounted Just as It is God that iustifieth Sometimes it is taken for to be declared or manifested to be Just as By workes a man is iustified James 2.24 If you take Justified in the first sense we say we are not reputed or reckoned Just by the act of believing If you take Iustified in the second sense I say we are justified that is declared to be Iust by believing Faith manifesting to our consciences that we are Iust before God By Faith we understand that God hath freely iustified us in his Son Another word ambiguous in this Proposition is Faith which is diversly taken sometimes for the act of Faith or believing and sometimes for the obiect of Faith the thing believed as Faith was reckoned unto him for righteousnesse Rom 4. that is the obiect of faith So that it is all one as if he had said God or Christ was reckoned to him for righteousnesse If we understand the act of Faith then I say as before we are not reckoned Iust by the act of our faith if by faith we understand the obiect of our faith then I say we are reckoned or reputed Iust by God in by or through Christ Jesus our Faith An answer to your reply to the 1. Obiection We are iustified by faith therefore not before faith Your Answer is 1. That the conclusion should be not before the act of believing We reply the conclusion should not have more termes in it then the premises 2. That if a man hath the habit of faith he cannot but be actually in Christ For it is part of Christ 2. You answer That you deny the consequence We reply That which is said to be done by an instrument inferres it is not done without the instrument 3. You reply that a man may be iustified by faith and yet be iustified before faith in a different sense distinguishing of the reputation of one iust and the manifestation of one iust And of Fides quâ fides quam of faith and its obiect What is all this to the purpose when your own former replies do intimaredly confesse that you took the Argument to mean iustification it selfe not the manifestation and faith the quality not the obiect For the Apostle doth not mean Rom. 5.1 that Christ is the instrumentall cause but the meritorious cause And faith the
AN ANTIDOTE AGAINST ANTINOMIANISME The first Dosis The unjustifiablenesse of justification before faith Prescribed and administred in a soft Answer I. To seven Arguments II. To the solutions of five Objections III. To the novell distinction of Gods reconciliation to man without mans reconciliation to God Penned plainly for the undeceiving of the plain-hearted Christian and mildely for the regaining of our mistaken brother H. D. by D. H. London Printed for G. B. and R. W. SEVEN ARGUMENTS to prove a that in order of working God doth justifie his Elect before they do actually beleeve VVith some Answers to the Objections that some make against the same For the confirmation of those that do truly beleeve b lest they should attribute any part of the Office of Christ to the act of their beleeving Ezekiel 16.2 3 4 5 6. c Son of man cause Jerusalem to know her abominations And say Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan thy father was an Amorite and thy mother an Hittite And as for thy nativity in the day that thou wast borne thy navill was not cut neither wast thou washed in water to supple thee thou wast not salted at all nor swadled at all None eye pitied thee to do any of these things unto thee but thou wast cast into the open field to the loathing of thy person in the day that thou wast borne And when I passed by thee and saw thee polluted in thine owne blood I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood Live yea I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood Live Printed in the yeere 1643. An answer to the Title In Order of Working God doth justifie his Elect a before they do actually believe So you 1. Here you do more then seem you do expresse your self to meane justification in act or actuall justification not justification meerely in Gods decree For Gods decree to justifie is not a working iustification so you flie off from that extreame of making a precedency of iustification before faith in Gods decree where indeed the decree of faith is as old as the decree of iustification yet in your dispute you oft fall on againe upon this extreame 2. Here you seem but you do but seem to wave the other extreame of holding a precedency in time of iustification before faith you seem onely to hold a precedency in order of nature because you say in order of working but you onely seem For if onely the difference be in order of nature this doth not inferre a necessity that they should be severed in time not an hour not a quarter of an hour But more is intended namely that a man may be instified many years before he believe so in the 1. Argum which is most false yea we cannot say that in order of working in the same moment when whole Christ is brought to the soule that iustification goes before faith if there be any precedency of one before another For 1. Actuall iustification is by union with Christ granted in 2. Argum. ad Phil. 3.9 Now the very instant of union is of Christs being in us by spirit of faith Ephes 3.17 1 Ioh. 3. ult Ioh. 1.12 you confesse the spirit unites in 2. Argum. e 2. If faith hath any thing to do in iustification it is an instrument but the toole is before the worke in order of nature 3. Though the King purposeth to pardon a fellon yet he doth not actually pardon and pronounce discharged till he accept and plead that pardon 4. The order of working set down Rom. 8.30 is Whom he predestinated them he called whom he called them he iustified if effectuall calling includes not faith it is not effectuall but onely that which may be in hypocrites but 2 Pet. 1.3 it s plaine calling is to glory and vertue It is a part of the office of Christ to give gifts and graces b and so that of believing to them whom he saves Iohn 1.16.17 And of his fulnesse have all we received and grace for grace For the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Iohn 17.19 And for their sakes I sanctifie my selfe that they also might be sanctified Ephes 4.7.8 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ How proves he that From an act of his Mediatorship namely his ascension Wherefore he saith when he ascended up on high he led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men Ezek. 16.2.3.4.5.6 To this we answer c that all that text doth not hold out that God iustified Jerusalem one minute before he restored her to spirituall life holines For when he passed by he said Live And when he said Live he entred into Covenant with her and washed her v. 8.9 Christs name and nature is not barely to save us in our fins but from our sins Matth. 1.21 to be as a Iesus a Saviour so to be Immanuel God with us Matth. 21.23 Now this of God being with us is applied not meerly to Gods decree but to the execution of his decree of calling iustifying and glorifying Rom. 8.30.31 Seven Arguments to prove that in order of working God doth justifie his Elect before they doe actually beleeve With some Answers to the Objections that some make against the same THis Proposition being contradicted we are iustified before God before the act of our beleeving This is the Proposition which I do now undertake to vindicate by the affistance of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ whose honour is not a little concerned in it b I will first of all lay down seven Arguments for the confirmation of the Truth and then I will answer unto five Objections brought by some against it An answer to the Preface I had thought by that touch you give upon universall Gratians as you call them in the 5. a Argum. * that you had been an opposite to the universall Redemptionists the Pelagians Semi-Pelagians and Arminians But I finde your doctrine in this point to be very consonant and neere of kinne to theirs Herein you agree with them So â—sher delivers their sense who do thus say that the benefit of Christs satisfaction is to be extended so farre as that God for his part is actually reconciled unto men and doth really discharge men from their sins before they believe You differ in this onely that they say to all men God is so reconciled and gives a discharge before faith comes you say he is reconciled to all the Elect and dischargeth them before faith comes To deny this proposition in the sense you meane it That we are justified before God before you mean in time the act of our believing doth nothing derogate from the honour of the Father or his Son b Forthe Father hath committed all the businesse of the Church to Christ Matth. 11.27 28. 1 Cor. 15. sends us
to be advised guided by Christ Mat. 17.5 And Christ is honoured in that he must find the price of our redemption finde an hand for us to receive it So that the salvation and the application by faith is all of the gift of Christ and of the power of Christ Ephes 2.8 By grace are ye saved through faith see Gods favour and Saints faith conioyned and that not of your selves it is the gift of God who works to will and to do Phil. 2.13 The Proposition We are justified before God before the act of our beleeving Argument I. LEt me speake for those that are not able to speake for themselves I meane the little Babes to whom belongs the Kingdom of God I argue thus Infants doe not beleeve a But Infants are justified Therefore some that do not believe are justified Which if it be granted it will follow that some are iustified before they believe That infants are iustified need no proofe * That infants beleeve not must be proved b although the Church of England hath long since put it out of doubt First Faith cometh by hearing Rom. 10.17 How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard shall we say that infants in the Wombe hear the Word Secondly Faith is a Knowledge as some say a Perswasion as others a Trust as others But Infants are capable neither of Trust Perswasion or Knowledge therefore Infants are not capable of Faith But some have said that infants hear the Word of God beleeve in God and love God in an unknowne way c as sometimes John Baptist sprang in his Mothers Wombe for joy at the salutation of the Blessed Virgin But Saint Augustine did answer long agoe not more wittily then truly That this was done by a singular Miracle Neither doth this conclude other infants to beleeve any more d then we may conclude all Asses to be good Counsellors because we read that Balaams Asse spake more wisely then her Master An Answer to Argument I. * Yea if you would hold that infants are iustified before they believe you had need exceedingly to prove that they are so iustified for we know no Scripture for it Justified infants do beleeve a Such an infant may be filled with the holy Spirit Luk. 1.15 And where is the Spirit there are its fruits one of which is faith Gal. 5. The inbeing of grace no way depends upon the growing of the body we know a reasonable spirit is the subject of grace and without respect to age The Angels were full of grace as soone as made Grace doth but perfect reason The soule of an infant is full of reason Ergo why not capable of grace that doth not hurt but help reason how more capable is the soule of a man asleep of faith then the soule of an elect waking childe Yet 1. God hath appeared to men in dreams why not to a waking childe revealing Christ unto it 2. The habit of faith saves else a believer dying in his sleep cannot be saved All infused habits depend not on organicall knowledge that enters by sense 3. Godly men in their deepest sleep have oft the most rationall and divine notions Ergo a childe may awake smiles are the property of reason they will smile Infants do not believe b because Rom. 10.17 Answer that is spoken de Adultis of ripe in yeares for there is mention of confession and supplication The expression is affirmative not negative By this argument because it is said the spirit is given by hearing 2 Cor. 3. Ergo it could not be given to Iohn Baptist without hearing This confirmes that spoken afore c that Iohn was filled with the holy Spirit from the womb now manifesting an apprehension of Christ by that motion the body was organized unto namely leaping in the mothers wombe For that of Augustine 1. If men are to be urged in this point then the whole streame of all sound Divines run to this effect We are elected before all time Created in the beginning of time Justified in the fulnesse of time Glorified after all time That the first is the decree the other the execution 2. Augustines speech must be interpreted that he meanes by miraculum mirandum or else his speech is false as in many things he mistooke for a miracle is Mutatio naturae rei of the water into wine Moses rod into a Serpent Now Iohn in the womb was not altered in nature 1. d It is not said that the Asses soule was capable of humane reason and speech The voice or fitnesse of speech was created in his mouth But it is said Iohns soule was filled with the holy Ghost This infusion of the holy Spirit in regard of Gods acting is the same with his infusion of the Spirit into all other believers though the subiect not like to all other believers in regard of body But the Lord did not make the asse speake as he makes man to speake He makes man speake by the naturall instruments of speech And speakes reason from a reasonable soule But the asses speech was created above the power of nature And for that speech that Iohns condition doth no more conclude that other infants do believe any more then we may conclude all asses to be good counsellours because we read that Balaams asse spake more wisely then his Master We answer 1. This will conclude that as all asses would so speake if God did worke alike in them by creation so all infants would believe if God did work alike in them by infusion as he did in Iohn Yea 2. We can conclude more a fortiori If God doth put the spirit of faith for so it is called 2 Cor. 4. into Iohn whom he intended should live to be a man to see Christ and heare of him if not hear him how much more will he put the spirit of faith into elect infants that shall never grow up to manhood but die in their childehood 3. We can conclude that some one hath had faith in infancy But you can give us on instance of any one that hath beene iustified in infancy without faith I say no instance of example As for your Arguments we will answer to them in order 4. It seemes more infants then Iohn have had saving grace in their infancy Mar. 10. Else how were they pronounced blessed and that to them did belong the Kingdom of heaven and were actually blessed of Christ Argument II. HE that is in Christ is justified But we must be in Christ before we can believe a b c Therefore we must be justified before we can believe The Major is plaine the Minor is proved that we must be in Christ before we can believe To believe is a fruit of the Spirit Gal. 5. But we must be in Christ before we can beare fruit Therefore we must be in Christ before we can believe Joh. 15.4 As the branch cannot bear fruit of it selfe except it abide in the
Vine d no more can ye except ye abide in me Secondly if Faith be a good fruit it is required that men must be good Trees before they can bring it forth otherwise Grapes should be gathered of Thornes and Figs of Thisiles Matth. 12.33 If you will e the Argument may be this He that hath the Spirit of Christ hath Christ But we have the Spirit before we believe Therefore we have Christ before we believe An answer to Argument II. 1. THe Argument is false in the forme For 1. a The conclusion is universall i. that all iustified persons are iustified before they believe which must not be in an argument in the third figure For though expresly the proposition is but indefinit yet you supposing it to be In re necessariâ you yeild it to be universall For if the conclusion in this figure may be universall then I may inferre many falshoods As thus Every man is rationall every man is a living creature Ergo every living creature is rationall For the the Minor terme must be the subiect of the conclusion and the Maior terme the predicat So by such a kinde of argument as this I would inferre All effectually called are saved All effectually called do sin Ergo all that sinne are saved 2. There is another fault in the forme of the argument which much concludes against you which is this The Minor terme as we said must be the subiect of the conclusion the Maior terme the predicat now believing is the Minor terme and justification is the Maior and then the argument will according to rule be thus He that is in Christ is iustified we must be in Christ before we believe Ergo we must believe before we can be iustified I answer artificially to Syllogismes because you pretend art and use Syllogismes 2. The argument is false in the matter namely in the Minor proposition b If by the word before you understand time that we must be a certaine time in Christ before we believe For that cannot be But in the same moment that we be actually in Christ Christ is actually in us Rom. 8.1 to the end of verse 10. For Christ to be actually in us or we in him is an union union is the uniting of two into one Ephes 2.13.14.15 Ergo we cannot be in him to be one with him but he must be in us one with us Take up all the comparisons of this union they wil import as much As marriage Is not marriage a mutual consent Is the man married to the woman and not the woman to the man They twaine shall be one flesh can this be true of one and not of the other Hath Christ our nature Have not we his Are we not as the Apostle speaks ioyntly one spirit 1 Cor. 6.17 Or of a Vine and branches If the Vine be united to the branches are not the branches to the Vine Or of a body and members If the body be united to the members are not the members to it Let any reasonable man under heaven tell me nakedly particularly and plainly how actually we I speak of true Christians are in Christ or Christ in us either Physically or morally call it what you will but all is under the operation and notion of the Spirit of faith 1. Physically is there any thing of Christ in us This can be no other then the spirit of Faith The habit of the graces of the Spirit one of which is faith Ephes 3.17 For Christ himselfe is in heaven Are we any how peculiarly as true Christians in Christ This can be nothing else but the actings of our faith carying casting of our confidence hope expectation and desires love upon him Heb. 6.18.19 Most plainly Eph. 3.17 18. we have both Christ being in us we in him by faith 2. Morally if the Lord imputes Christs righteousnesse to me a true Christian my sinnes unto him as 2 Cor. 5. ult and so reputes me iustified actually in him he doth all this under the notion of faith Rom. 4.3 If any say But we are eternally iustified in Gods election or purpose We reply iust so as we eternally believe in Gods purpose For he hath purposed eternally both equally He that eternally purposed to iustifie did eternally purpose to iustifie by Faith Though the purpose it selfe be not for any foreseen merit of faith Now if purpose of iustifying be actuall iustifying then purpose is no purpose or if actuall iustifying be a purpose then act is no more act For while purpose is there is no act whiles act is it is no more a purpose As we see in all humane things we purpose till we go a iourney when we go it we no longer purpose but go it So in divine things Ephes 3.5.6.7.8.9.10.11 The proofe of this Minor is c to believe is a fruit of the Spirit c. Here is supposed that either the Spirit must be in us a time before it brings for the fruit of faith for in your argument you intend a difference of time or that the Spirit or grace of faith must have long previous changes and preparations before it can act any thing As sap in a stock of a tree But for the 1. The Spirit in the essence being God cannot be said at any time to be out of any man good or bad It were contrary to its infinitnes to be excluded out of any thing or any nothing It must needs fill all things as it must needs be God If by the Spirit you meane the creating act of the Spirit that whiles it is every where it create in this or that man the habit of saving graces it doth it just then when Christ comes For you say Christ and Spirit in a saving manner comes together So e For the 2. The Spirit needs no previous antecedent change or preparations If an angelicall Spirit is full of understanding and act as soone as it is created then the Spirit eternally God is eternally all act For the third Faith it selfe is the fruit of the Spirit as all the habits of graces are by which the Spirit is said to be in Saints so that as soon as faith is in a Saint there is a fruit And faith being above reason and senss 2 Cor. 5. it acts without being beholding to reason or sense So that all this Argument proves no before of time You further prove the Minor Secondly say you if faith be a good fruit it is required that men must be good trees before they can bring it forth Answ I do intreat you d and all ingenuous men to consider whether this be a safe expression to say either that men bring forth faith when as but now you said it was a fruit of the Spirit or that men can be good before they have faith when as faith is that which makes the difference between good men and bad men regenerate and unregenerate Act. 15.9 And therefore so commonly are good men
all did originally commit it All our natures were at and in the committing of it which natures we lineally derive from him And that you say we are made sinners in the first Adam simply and absolutely before we have done evill the Scripture saith no such thing but the contrary that in him we are all sinners Therefore to retort the Argument upon you we are not made righteous in the second Adam till we partake of his nature that is his Divine nature as 2 Pet. 1.4 which is that by which we escape corruption through lust A part of which is faith after reckoned up and commended to them to whom Peter writes in verse 5. immediately following To that you urge out of 2 Cor. b 5.19 I answer the Scripture is no friend to universall redemption And then what will follow on your behalfe Surely no more will follow or can follow but this that in Gods ordinary way of Gospell administration God is in Christ reconciling them of the world to himselfe that are perswaded by him to believe and receive the word of reconciliation So evidently immediately before and after that 19. verse Yet you say c This Argument did so wring Cardinall Bellarmine that he confessed Christ may be put on without a proper act of our soule Surely then the saddle was closer and harder put on him by some other then you have tackied it or he was more artificially wrackt then you here stretch him But I am willing to imagine the urmost you would or could make of this Argument It may be you have this in your thoughts that as in Adam children are accounted sinners though they cannot act sin so in Christ children may be accounted righteous though they cannot act faith To which I answer As there is a naturall habit of corruption in infants that makes a foundation of a just relation of Adams sinne to them For where there is no habituall corruption of nature there is no imputation of Adams sinne as we see in Christs conception and humane nature He was not accounted a sinner in himselfe but is for them that are saved by him but in himselfe he was and accounted most holy So there is habituall faith in elect infants dying in their infancy through which they are accounted righteous in Christ as we have reasoned to the 1. Argument But that I am loath to wade too deep that little ones should not follow more might be said If it might be said in some sense Christ can be apprehended without a proper act of our soule that is as it is a meere peculiar act of our soule yet not without an act of Gods grace in that soule Till that be put into the soul no more is done in any particular elect person then what was done in the eternall election which the Scripture calls a purpose Rom. 9. And a purpose is not the practise of the thing purposed and of that act of grace the soule of the youngest elect infant is in a faire capacity For the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intelligere the naked act of understanding depends not on the organs of the senses So the Artists that handle of the nature of the reasonable soule no nor doth the representing of an intelligible object to the understanding depend upon the senses when God will in the darke or in a dreame represent as in a vision of the minde the species or images of some spirituall thing that sense never apprehended How much lesse doth the acts of grace in this act of understanding depend upon the body or senses So that though the body be a childe great may be the actings of the gratiated soule Argument VI. VVHere there is full satisfaction made and the party offended accepting that satisfaction and contented to rest in it there must needs follow perfect remission of sinnes But in Christ crucified before we beleeved was full satisfaction made and God was contented to rest in that satisfaction Therefore there will follow perfect remission of sinnes c. First a that there was full satisfaction made in Christ is proved Heb. 10.11 12 13 14. vers For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified But the second that God is therewith contented to rest in that satisfaction we have the witnesse of the Father Matth. 3.17 This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased Acquiesco saith Beza See Esay 53.11 He shall see the travaile of his soule and shall be satisfied An Answer to Argument VI. YOur sixth Argument as you prove it will answer it selfe That Heb. 10.11 a 12 13 14. shews expresly that though Christ did make ready the satisfaction for the common nature of men before they knew of it that after should beleeve yet it is not brought home and made available to any particular person but to the sanctified The sanctified ones for ever in all ages and for eternity have the satisfaction not onely prepared but perfected to them See you Pareus c. on the place whether I deale not clearly with the place That place also Matth. 3.17 is for us against you It is in whom not with whom So that it imports that he is onely well pleased with all he studes in Christ Else he doth not acquiescere rest pleased but is earnest till somewhat else be done 2 Cor. 5.20 This interpretation is as old as Augustines time whom I name because you named him But look to the Scripture which to shew that God is well pleased only with those that are actuall in Christ addes to this speech Matth. 17.5 Hear ye him to draw men into Christ that with them God may be wel pleased Till men be actually in Christ God is not well pleased with them though they be elect See a notable place Rom. 9.25 I will call them my people which were not my people and her beloved which was not beloved who were they Them whom he had called ver 24. Argument VII IF we are not iustified in his sight before we believe a then are we uniust sinners workers of iniquity then doth the Lord hate us for he hateth all the workers of iniquity Psal 5. You know what absurdity will follow if you say we must believe before God can love us But it God hate us to day b and love us to morrow let Arminius with his disciples hear this and wonder why they should be blamed that say we may be loved to day and hated to morrow Children of God to day and of the Devill to morrow when they who would seeme their greatest Adversaries will not spare to say we may be hated to day and loved to morrow the children of the Devill to day and of God to morrow But that God loved us first before we believed when we were enemies in our blood c. is so plaine that I will not willingly so dishonour you as once to conceive that you will deny it Here is an end of the
effectuall calling that is that may be without conversion For that speech which in effect we had afore pag. 23. though we have answered it effectually we hope afore yet lest any should cast an eye upon it here as unanswered and so conceive it unanswerable though you doe but speak not prove wee answer in a word Before Calling and Conversion God doth onely purpose predestinate elect sinners to be loved in time Ephes 1. first 11. verses a place of your own quotation not actually love Rom. 9.23 I will call them my people that were not my people and her beloved that was not beloved And in Gods predestination God doth as well purpose mans fall and foresees him a childe of wrath Ephes 2.2 as his salvation And therefore when God doth actually give Christ to us and us to Christ there is his great and greatest love For in him we have all 1 Cor. 3.22.23 Yet you will hold the conclusion p. 30. That Gods love is as great before faith as after yet you know that God saith Without faith it is unpossible to please him Heb. 11.6 Next you come to answer Objections and we to reply to them Jn the Objection against the Page 32. which you have not answered to refute yet we have spoken to afore that distinction of hating the sinne not the creature which you you reject is a trueth God cannot hate the entities or beings he made Gen. 1.31 Physically considered no not the devill himselfe for being considered so abstractively from sinne God saw all exceeding good But morally considered as sinfully mannered so he hates them He hates the workers of iniquitie because of that iniquity Psal 36.2 He flattereth himselfe till his iniquity be found to be hatefull which done away in Christ he loves them dearely Ephes 2.1 2. Likewise that distinction Page 33. rejected by you Of Gods love of benevolence to the sinner before conversion and his love of Complacience to him after conversion It hath more light in it than all your assertions in this dispute which are a very darknesse provided that it be meetly understood Namely that God hath a benevolent purpose of saving a sinner before conversion or faith in Christ And after these he hath an actuall love of Complacency to him And before that not Mat. 3.17 17.5 So August In quo non cum quo Your own proof shall assert it This is my beloved son IN whom not VVITH whom I am well pleased Heare yee him So that men must heare and have and be in Christ and then God is well pleased with them Not afore This you grant unawares page 38. in your owne Answer to the Objection and so doe yeeld the Question namely in your large parallel or as least antithesis in that page 38. between Justice and Mercy Law and Gospell The summe whereof is to use your owne words That the one declareth wrath without forgivenesse the other mercy grace and peace in Jesus Christ * VVhere also you put a difference very wel of being under the Law and under grace The onely piece of Divinity that we have had from you all this while The Lord keep us all to that In your Answer likewise to the second Objection Page 40. which you propound as against you out of Math. 6.15 and 18.35 If you forgive not men c. your heavenly Father will not forgive you In summe you yeeld the question and overthrow your eternall Justifi-fication c. For you yeeld that there is a time when a man doth not apprehend or lay hold on for the words are the same in sense Gods forgivenesse And that till Gods pardon come to us we cannot pardon men And sure enough we cannot doe that till conversion that makes the Wolfe to dwell with the Lamb as the Prophet speaks Likewise in your last answer Page 46. to the third Objection Page 45. viz. If God love us before conversion as well as after then to what purpose serveth faith I say in your answer to this objection you overthrow your own position of justification before faith For these are your very words Faith is to good purpose that believing you who were under darknesse and in the shadow of death and saw no light yet I say yee might rejoyce with joy unspeakable and full of glory receiving the end of your faith 1 Pet. 1.8 9. * You durst not goe on with the whole 9. ver of that 1 Pet. but break off in the middle excluding that clause Even the salvation of your soules Because that you thought did too apparently attribute salvation to faith Read the place wisely Rom. 15.13 The God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing So you Now where is life where is peace before faith comes according to your owne answer and your proofes of Scripture The other three last Objections Page 51. c. against your Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation before faith As 1. That then what need we take care what we doe if we believe the Lord will not love us the better if we believe not he will not love us the worse 2. That then a man may dye without faith and yet be saved 3. Why then doth God suffer us to live in prophanenesse twenty fifty sixty yeares I say these Obiections following meerely on your unsound Doctrine are stronger to doe hurt than all your declamations against desperatenesse and loosenesse and disparaging the power of being under grace beneath some heathens morality are likely to prevent It is in vain for that man to forbid yong people the conclusion of committing fornication that allows them the premises of all wanton carriage Corrupt men are in their kind rationall and they will conclude according to the principles you teach them ☜ A maid led away with this Doctrine said boldly to me that she knew not how she could offend Jesus Christ by any thing she did But I leave men to read the Book of our brethren of New-England touching the tragicall effects of these Doctrines 2. Part. Or Sermon Reconciliation of man to God Page 1. There is say you in Scripture a twofold Reconciliation 1. Originall 2. Actuall Parallel to the distinction of originall and actuall sinne Originall Reconciliation is of our natures Actuall is of our persons Answ 1. There are no such termes of distinction in all the Scripture Those places you bring for it Rom. 5.10 Ephes 2.16 Colos 1.21 2 Cor. 5.18 19. let all men read and iudge whether there be the least hint of any such thing For is this any argument that because the Apostle saith to the Romans Ephesians and Colossians that they were already reconciled and tells the Corinthians that he was now but a perswading them to be reconciled that therefore the Corinthians had one reconciliation and were to have another For nakedly this is the sense of your inference For these are your very words you having quoted the former places Now say you compare we these