to our Justification before God the contrary to which he had spoke but just before upon v. 5. Obj. Nulláne igitur utilitas erit circumcisionis Respondet in Christo nihil valere ideoque justitiam in fide sitam esse c. Perkins his words are these in answer to the objection of the Papists from those words Faith worketh by love Paul saith he doth not shew in this verse what justifieth but what are the exercises of godlinesse in which Christians must be occupied And he doth not shew how faith justifieth but how it may be discerned to be true faith namely by love But neither doth this intend any thing more then to shew the reason why Paul describes justifying faith as working by love viz. not that it justifieth as working by love though it be the property of that faith by which we are justified to work by love But he was far from thinking that faith was no whit available to our Justification before God It is his own observation upon this very verse not far before The second Conclusion Faith is of great use and acceptation in the Kingdome of Christ By it first our persons and then our actions please God and without it nothing pleaseth God And immediately after these words which Mr. Eyre refers to disputes for Justification by faith without works against the Papists The last place I mentioned was 1 John 5. 11. He that hath §. 40. the Sonne hath life he that hath not the Sonne hath not life Mr. Eyre answers He doth not say that all who have not faith except final vnbelievers have not the Sonne or any beneâ—t by him Rep. This upon the matter is to deny that the testimony is true 1. Life doth here signifie all that blessednesse which God hath given us in Jesus Christ ver 11. Ergo he that hath not the Son hath no benefit by him But he that believeth not hath not the Sonne for to have the Sonne is to believe on him Ergo he that believeth not hath not the Sonne nor any benefit by him That we have the Sonne by believing on him is manifest 1. From the Apostles own interpretation for having spoke in general He that hath the Son hath life he applies it particularly to those to whom he writes v. 13. And these things have I written unto you that believe on the Name of the Sonne of God that you may know that you have eternal life 2. From the perpetual sense of the phrase throughout all these Epistles as chap. 2. 23. Whosoever denieth the Sonne the same hath not the Father but he that acknowledgeth the Sonne hath the Father also suitable to what this John records in his Gospel chap. 12. 44 45. He that beleeveth on me believeth not on me but on him that sent me And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me And more expressely in his Epistle 2 ep v. 9. Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ HATH NOT GOD But he that abideth in the doctrine of Christ HE HATH both the Father and the Sonne Compare 1 ep 2. 24. 2. If we are said in Scripture any where to have the Son in any other sense then by believing or as excluding believing why have we no intelligence of it Mr. Eyre might very well think we should interpret his silence partly in that he declares not how we may be said to have Christ any otherwise then by faith partly in not attempting to justifie it from the phrase of Scripture as an argument that himself is conscious that the doctrine which he here suggests hath no footing in the Scriptures Briefly the Apostle speaks without distinction or limitation He that hath the Sonne hath life even that eternal life whereof he spake in the verse immediately foregoing If the Son may be had without believing then eternal life may be had without believing also wherefore we winde up the Argument If it were the Will of God that none should have the life which is in his Sonne till by believing he had the Sonne then was it his Will that none should be justified by the death of Christ till they did beleeve The reason is because the life of pardon or Justification is an eminent part of that life which God hath given us in his Sonne and virtually includes all that life we have by Christ But the antecedent is proved true from the text Ergo the consequent is true To these texts mentioned in my Sermon and now vindicated let §. 41. me adde one or two more If God hath set forth Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood then was it not the Will of God that any man should have actual remission or Justification by the blood of Christ till he did beleeve But God hath set forth Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood Ergo. The Assumption is the Apostles own words Rom. 3. 25. The reason of the Proposition is plain because if any man be pardoned and justified immediately in the death of Christ then is not Christ a propitiation z Inseriâ— fidem ut doceat fidem esse conditionem sub quà Christus nobis datus est propitiatorium Dav. Paraeus in loc through faith but without it Not that our faith contributes any degree of worth or sufficiency to the blood of Christ by which it may be made in its kinde a more perfect cause of our remission but because God hath so constituted that our remission shall not follow and so our sins not be propitiated quoad â—ffectum in the blood of Christ till we beleeve Again the Compact and Agreement between the Father and the Sonne in his undertaking the work of Redemption is set down at large Isa 53. throughout particularly ver 10. 11 12. where also the Justification of those for whom he died is mentioned as the fruit and effect of Christs offering himselfe for them and bearing their iniquities but not before their faith but through it ver 11. By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justifie many that is by the knowledge of him where knowledge as elsewhere in Scripture often signifies faith And what shall I say more we have proved from multitudes of Scriptures that God requires commands and exhorts all men to beleeve that they may be justified by the blood of Christ And what stronger evidence can we need then this that it was not the Will of God that men should be justified by that blood before they did beleeve even as under the Law there was no propitiation by sacrifice typical but supposed on the offendors part the concurrence of some act as a Lev. 5. 5. câ—nfession b Chap. 23. â—9 30. humiliation c â—b 1. 4 3 2 â—assim laying his hand on the head of the sacrifice d Lâ—v. â— 16. â—ide Joma Peâ—râ—k 8 8 â— or the like signifying that faith by which sinners should be justified when Christ the true sacrifice should
else for then should be but one man in the world to whom the righteousnesse of Christ were imputed The Proposition is manifest because the faith here spoken of is determined to the person of the beleever To him that beleeveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 HIS faith is imputed And it is called the faith which Abraham HAD in his uncircumcision ver 11. And the truth is that otherwise I mean if His faith be His Christ Abrahams faith or Davids faith or any other Christians faith may be said to be imputed unto us with the very same propriety of speech as it is said to be imputed to him or them 4. If faith be here put for Christ or his righteousness the words are non-sense Put faith for righteousness and the words run thus But unto him that believeth his righteousness is imputed to him for righteousness What sense is that or put it for Christ and they run thus But unto him that believeth his Christ is impured to him unto righteousness But what is it to impute Christ unto righteousnesse I know he is said to be made unto us righteousness 1 Cor. 1. even as he is made unto us Wisdom and Sanctiâ—ication that is the Authour of both but to impute him unto righteousnesse is a barbarisme To say nothing of the insolency of that phrase His Christ in Scripture and of making Christ as distinct from his righteousnesse the object of justifying faith 3. We have already proved that to impute faith unto righteousnesse §. 5. is to reward the believer with a right to life If then faith be put for Christ to impute faith unto righteousnesse is to reward Christ with righteousnesse And if for righteousnesse it is to reward righteousnesse with righteousnesse both which are absurd 4. The faith which was imputed to Abraham unto righteousnesse was the faith which he had being yet uncircumcised ver 10 11. If faith do here signifie Christs righteousnesse the words sound thus The righteousnesse of Christ which he had in his uncircumcision was imputed to him unto righteousnesse And because he could not have it but by imputation therefore the full sense will be this The righteousnesse of Christ which was imputed to him in his uncircumcision was imputed to him unto righteousnesse Spectatum admissi c. 5. Consider we also what is said ver 9 10 11 12. from whence §. 6. we advance three Arguments more 1. The faith from which Abraham was denominated faithful and the father of the faithful was the habit or grace of faith not the object A conjugatis Even as it is the habit of wisdom goodness temperance c. from whence a man is denominated wise good temperate c. but the faith which was imputed to him was that from whence he was denominated faithful and the father of the faithful for faith was imputed to him unto righteousnesse saith the Apostle ver 9. and that in his uncircumcision ver 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he might become the father of all the faithful that are in uncircumcision that righteousnesse might be imputed to them also ver 11. for so stands the connexion of the sentences and the beginning of this ver 11. And he received Circumcision c. is answered immediately by ver 12. And the father of circumcision c. The like Argument doth this Apostle use elsewhere Gal. 3. 9. They which be of the faith be blessed with faithful Abraham 2. If we become children of the faith of Abraham by believing then Abrahams faith signifies his believing and not Christs righteousnesse The reason is because to be a childe of Abrahams faith is to follow or imitate him in that which is called his faith as when Mr. Eyre calls me a sonne of Mr. Baxters faith And if we are like him by believing then believing is the quality wherein the similitude consists between him the Father and us the children But we become the children of Abrahams faith even that very faith which was imputed to him unto righteousnesse by believing ver 10. The father of all them that beleeve ver 11. That walk in the steps of father Abrahams faith Who are also called the seed of the faith of Abraham ver 16. 3. And I would that Mr. Eyre or some body else would make sense of the Apostles words if faith be put for Christs righteousnesse ver 12. Abraham became the father of Circumcision to them that walk in the steps of his faith What is that Why to them that walk in his Christs righteousnesse I am even sick of this non-sense let me adde one word more that I may rid my self of this nausâ—ous work 6. The faith spoken of throughout this chapter is that which is §. 7. described at large from ver 18. to the end where it is said that Abraham against hope believed in hope And being not weak in faith he considered not his own nor Sarahs age ver 19. That he staggered not at the Promise of God through unbelief but was strong in faith ver 20. And was fully perswaded that what God had promised he was able also to perform ver 21. And that this was the faith which was imputed to him unto righteousnesse is manifest from the very next verse ver 22. And therefore it â—as imputed to him unto righteousnesse To make this the description of Christs righteousnesse would render the sense so beyond measure ridiculous that I professe Reader I am afraid to represent it to thee in a paraphrase lest some prophane wits should take occasion to make this blessed Word of God the object of their derision and contempt I might adde that by the same reason that Mr. Eyre interprets faith for the Righteousnesse of Christ another may make as bold to interpret it of the Wisdome Power Goodness Faithfulness or any other Attribute of God for these also are the objects of faith and so to be justified by faith is to be justified by the Wisdome of God or by his Goodness c. every line in Scripture that speaks of Justification by faith will be as good sense thus expounded as if faith be put for Christs righteousnesse unless it be in those places where faith is particularly and expressely determined to Christ as its object and in all such places Mr. Eyre himself will surely interpret faith for the act not for the object SECT III. NOw to the great Argument which Mr. Eyre opposeth to §. 8. prove that faith must be put for its obiect the righteousnesse of Christ Else saith he the Apostle contradicts himself in opposing Justification by faith to Justification by works because faith it selfe is a work of ours Answ But by his favour I will rather beleeve that he contradicts the Apostle and that as perfectly as if he had studied to do it on purpose then that the Apostle contradicts himself For it is as manifest as light can make it that it is the act of believing which the Apostle opposeth to works Rom. 4.
decies cocta that it will inferre justification by works for answer to which I referre the reader to chap. 4. and 5. having proved in the former that it is the Act or grace of faith which the Apostle perpetually opposeth to works and in the latter that benefits may be given of grace which yet are given upon condition His second Argument therefore is this If justification be by that signall promise he that beleeves shall be saved then none were justified before that gracious sentence was published But the Fathers of the old Testament were justified before the publishing of that gracious sentence or any like it Ergo. Rep. A particular explicite faith in Christ was not absolutely necessary §. 9. to salvation till the times of the Gospel and the doctrine of faith and remission was in former times very sparingly and darkly revealed especially in the time between Adam and Moses Yet was the faith of the ancients the same for substance with the faith of Christians and of a like necessity to justification and salvation For Abel was justified by faith Heb. 11. 4. and Enocâ— v. 5. and Nâ—ah v. 7. and Abraham Rom. 4. sic de caeteris and surely they could not believe without a Preacher by whom they might heare of him on whom they beleeved But supposing the promise of remission to be suitable to those times of darker dispensation and the condition of that faith which was then required as sufficient to salvation I passe the proposition 2. I deny the assumption which hath here no other proofe then the old Argument so t is namely that there was not a promise of forgivenesse preached unto the world upon condition of repentance and returning unto God which is the substance of faith before the incarnation of our Lord. There were many Preachers of righteousnesse in the old world Noah d See Dr Golls Sermon before the Astrologers p. 28 29. Manasse Ben. Israel Concil in Gen. 4. 26. 3. is reckoned the eighth 2 Pet. 2. 5. beginning at Enos Gen. 4. 26. And he no question preached faith and repentance to the world that they might escape the destruction of soul and body at once who notwithstanding his preaching perished by their disobedience or unbelief the Greek word signifieth either 1 Pet. 3. 20. and he by his faith is said in a comparative sense to have condemned them Heb. 11. 7. And in the book of Job who lived before the law we finde the world had notice of such a conditionall promise though not from any written word but by tradition or by Preachers immediatly raised up Job 8. 4 5 6. If thy children have sinned against him If thou wouldest seek unto God betime and make thy supplication to the Almighty if thou be pure and upright surely now he would awake for thee c. and this he tells us was the faith of the Fathers many generations before v. 8 9. compare v. 20 21. So chap 33. 27 28. he looketh upon men and if any say I have sinned he will deliver his soul from going down into the pit So chap. 22. 21 22 23. Acquaint thy self with God lay up his words in thy heart If thou returne to the Almighty thou shalt be built up c. see also chap. 11. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19. And what lesse doth the Lord say to Cain Gen. 4. 7. If thou dost well shalt thou not be accepted namely if thou dost well as Abel did shalt thou not be accepted as well as he And wherein Abel's well doing consisted the Apostle tells us Heb. 11. 4. By saith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice then Cain So that from Adam to Noah and from Noah to Moses the world was not altogether without notice of the promise of salvation upon condition of faith and repentance c Vide Mos â—myrâ—â— Spec. anima lâ—er special pâ—r 3 anima i. General par 3. 4. In Moses's time the matter is clearer then to need proofe Heb. 4. 1 2. Let us therefore feare least a promise being left us of entring into his rest any of you should seem to come short of it for unto us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them but the word preached did not profit them being not mixed with faith in them that heard it Hence 1. it is manifest that salvation was promised Israel under the type of rest in Canaan 2. That it was not promised them absolutely but upon condition whether the condition were expressed or understood otherwise their non-entrance into Rest must have been imputed wholly to Gods unfaithfulnesse and not to their unbelief whereas the text sayes expresly it was their unbelief which made the promise of no effect to them and they could not enter in because of unbelief chap. 3 19. 3. That the Gospel is preached to us as it was to them and therefore the same condition is required of us as was required of them namely faith otherwise we also shall fall short of the promised rest as they did v. 1. The third Argument is this If justification be only by a declared §. 10. discharge then elect infants that die in their infancy have no justification Rep. I deny the consequence where 's the proofe I can find no other but this that infants are insensible of this declaration and unable to plead their discharge from any such promise which is nothing in the world to the purpose Cannot infants have right to a benefit by law or the declared act of a Rector or Lawgiver because they are unsensible of it and cannot plead it They are condemned by law whiles infants Rom. 5. 14. They may be servants or free by law Do not our laws provide for the rights of Minors Pupils and Orphans even in their infancy 2. It doth also ruine the maine pillars of Mr. Eyres discourse All the places which I before alledged to prove justification by faith according to him are to be understood of the manifestation of justification to the conscience Give me leave then to retort his owne Argument The justification spoken of in the places aforesaid Gal. 2. 16. Rom. 8. 30. and 4. 24. Act. 10. 43. and 13. 39. c. is that without which no man can be saved But some may be saved without justification manifested and declared to the conscience as infants Ergo the justification mentioned in those places is not justification in conscience or manifested unto conscience The fourth Argument succeeds The making justification a §. 11. declared discharge detracts from the majesty and soveraignty of God for it ascribes to him but the office of a notary or subordinate Minister whose work it is to declare and publish the sentence of the Court rather then of a Judge or supream Magistrate Rep. If this Argument be cast into forme it runs thus He that forgives sin by a declared Act is but a notary or subordinate Minister for their work it is to declare and publish the sentence
Covenant I mean any saving benefit before faith Therefore Mr. Eyre answers secondly That though the Spirit be not given us one atome of time before faith yet it is enough §. 3. that it hath a precedency in order of nature though not of time and that faith is not before the Spirit Rep. Neither for if the Spirit be not said to be given to us but in reference to his working of faith in us then faith is wrought in nature before the Spirit can be said to be given to us as if the Sunne be said to dwell or be in my house because it enlightens my house then in order of nature my house is first enlightened before the Sun can be said to be or dwell in it There is but one thing more in this Chapter that needs answer and that is this I had said the Spirit is not given us but in reference to some peculiar operation of his working faith in us and added for illustration that as a man doth first build himself an house and then dwell in it so Christ by his Spirit doth build organize and prepare the soul to be a house unto himself and then dwells in it Mr. Eyre answers But is not that organizing preparing act of the Spirit one benefit of the Covenant and is not the Spirit in that act the cause of faith Rep. If these interrogations have the force of an affirmation Mr. Eyre should have proved them and not barely asserted them I have answered sufficiently already There is no peculiar work of grace before faith it self which may not be wrought in a hypocrite who hath not the Spirit as well as in a childe of God Ergo there can be no work of the Spirit before faith it self in reference unto which the Spirit can be said to be given to us Preparative works do not difference a beleever from an hypocrite and therefore in themselves are no fruit or benefit of the Covenant So much â—o thâ— sixteenth Chapter CHAP. XIII A Reply to Mr. Eyres Seventeenth Chapter Concerning the Covenant wherein faith is promised and by vertue whereof it is given to us SECT I. HAving thus shewed that we receive not the Spirit before we beleeve §. 1. it remains that we enquire whether faith it self be not given to us by vertue of the Covenant made with us for if we are in Covenant with God before faith be given us it is every whit as much to Mr. Eyres purpose to shew that we are in Covenant before we beleeve as if he had proved that the Spirit is given us before we beleeve For answer therefore to the question understand Reader that it may have a double sense 1. Whether the Covenant of grace that is the Gospel have any efficiency in converting the * â—id Dr. Ed. Reynold Sinful of siâ— page 337 Mr. bâ—lk 〈…〉 oâ— the Covenâ—â—â— pâ—â—t 4. page 318. soul and working it to beleeve and in this sense I readily grant that faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant Or 2. Whether God have engaged himself by Covenant to any sinner in the world to give him faith so that if God should not give him faith he were unfaithful and a breaker of his own Covenant In this sense is the question to be understood and my answer to it was a Faith is not given to us by vertue of the Covenant made with us but by vertue of the Covenant made with Christ God hath promised Christ that sinners shall beleeve on him Isa 53. 10. and 55. 4 5. Psal 2. 8. and 110. 3. Matth. 12. 21. Psal 89. 25 26. c. Hereupon Mr. Eyre disputes largely that faith is given to the Elect by vertue of the Covenant made with them the sense of which we have already explained that the Elect are supposed to be in Covenant with God before they beleeve and so God obliged to them by Covenant to give them faith I deny it See we what Mr. Eyre brings for proof of it First a similitude at the end of his first section If one promise §. 2. another that in case he shall bear so many stripes or perform any other condition he will then take care of and provide for his children doth not this promise made with the father most properly belong to his children The case is the same between Christ and us He performed the condition and we receive the benefits of the New Covenant Answ Whether the case be the same between Christ and us is the proper debate of the next Argument in the mean time this comparison is not to our case because the Promâ—se made to Christ that Jews and Gentiles shal come into him by faith is a promise that he shall have children spiritual that he shall have a numerous seed even like the stars of heaven for multitude But as the promise made to Abraham concerning the multitudes of children which he should have was no promise to them that they should becom children which were promise to nothing that it should become something so the promise to Christ that many Nations shall come unto him and becom children to him in a spiritual sense is no promise to them nor have they thereby any right given them to be made believers but unto him and in gratiam sui for his own honour and glory Much lesse doth such a promise hinder that that faith by which they become children unto Christ may not be enjoyned them as the condition upon which they are to partake in Christ and blessednesse by him The serond and great Argument is this If there be but one Covenant §. 3. of grace which is made both with Christ and us then faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us But there is but one Covenant of grace made both with Christ and us Ergo Hence a little before I am bid to shew that there are two distinct Covenants of grace one made with Christ and the other with us or that there is any other Covenant made with the Elect then that which is made with Christ c. Answ Before we can give a distinct answer to this we must first enquire how we may conceive of the forme and tenour of the Covenant of grace The tenour of the Covenant of works is plain and intelligible Do this and live But it seems there is no Covenant of grace made with men at all though some men are the intended objects of the blessings therein contained but only with Christ with whom we are to conceive the father striking a Covenant to this sense If thou wilt make or do thou make satisfaction for the sins of the Elect and I will give them grace and glory where the condition is Christs death or rather his satisfaction for his death if it had not been satisfactory had availed nothing and the promise is that the Elect shall have grace and glory This being explained I do utterly deny that there is but one Covenant of
purchase See Exod. 19. 5. We shall cleare all this by a distinction at the end of Mr. Eyres Arguments Mr. Eyre proceeds fourthly We receive faith it self upon this §. 6. account because we are Gods people Ergo God is our God before we believe The antecedent he proves Gal. 4. 6. Because ye are sons God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba father So. Isa 48. 17. I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profâ—t Answ I deny the Antecedent The proof is such as I never expected to have met with from a Scholar and a Divine To Gal. 4. 6. I deny that the Spirit of the Sonne there mentioned is to be understood of faith but of that Spirit of prayer which includes that boldnesse liberty and confidence spiritual which God gives to them that are his Sonnes by faith For we are the Sonnes of God by faith in Jesus Christ saith this Apostle not farre before chap. 3. 26. and receive the Spirit of the Sonne through faith ver 14. a Spirit given to believers not a Spirit given to make men believers Joh. 7. 38 39. Rom 8. 14 15. for we are believers before we are Sons Joh. 1. 12. as to the other text Isa 48. 17. I consent to Junius that the meaning is Praesto quod mearum est partium not that they had actually believed which sense the very next ver contradicts but as Piscator in his Scholia upon the place because he had taught them ea quae apta vel comparata sunt ad prodessendum those things which if they had observed would have been very much for their profit and advantage Fifthly saith Mr. Eyre None do or can believe and repent §. 7. but they to whom the Lord doth manifest this grace That he is their God Ergâ— the Lord is our God before we beleeve and repent Answ This is strange Divinity that the soul must be assured by revelation that God is his God before he can believe or repent If this be true souls are in worse condition after they have repented and believed then before many faithful souls are groaning all their daies after this manifestation of God to be their God But what is the proof We châ—se and love him because he chose and loved us first Joh. 15. 16. 1 Joh. 4. 10 19. Hâ—â— 2. 23. And Burroughs Rivet and Zanchy are quoted to prove what That God begins with us first and makes us his people before we owneâ— him for our God Alas the thing to be proved is not that God gives faith and repentance of which there was never anâ— question between Mr. Eyre and me but that he is our God and we his people before he give it us we have shewed from Scripture that he gives faith that he may be our God and we his people And if God make us his people viz. by giving us faith and repentance before he be our God which is the sense of the Authours whom Mr. Eyre quotes have they not fairely proved his proposition viz. That none can believe and repent but they to whom God hath manifested himselfe to be their God His sixth and last Argument is They to whom God is a Father §. 8. and a Shepheard have the Lord for their God But God was our Father and Shepheard before we believed All the Elect are the sheep and children of Jesus Christ before they believed Joh. 10. 16. Isa 53. 10. Heb. 2. 13. Jer. 3. 19. Answ I deny the assumption Indeed the Elect are called the sheep of Christ Joh. 10. 16. not that they were his sheep at present for none of the qualities of sheep mentioned or not ment oned in that Chapter a gree to men dead in sinne and ungodlinesse and much lesse to men that are not and a shepheard actually there cannot be where there are no sheep but proâ—eptically from what they should be of which manner of speech we have given many instances before from Scripture Thus saith Abraham to his servant Gen. 24. 4 38. Thou shalt go unto my kindred and take a wife unto my Son Isaac Not that she was his wife or any mans else before he took her but because she was to be made his wife or she whom God had appointed for him ver 44. and if Abraham knowing Rebeckah had said to his man as is usual to be said amongst our selves in like cases I have a wife for my son in such a place it would have argued no more then that he had an intention if he could to make such a one his sonnes wife Thus a Qâ—est super Lâ—vâ—t cap. 23. Hieron in Ezâ—k 30. Augustine observes that before the ordination and sanctification of the Priests they are yet called by the name of Priests Exod. 19. 22. Non quia jam sacerdotes erant sed quia futuri erant hoc eos jam tunc Scriptura appâ—llavit per anticipationem sicut sunt pleraque talium locutionum Nam filius Nave Jesus appellatus est cum longe postea hoc nomen ei Scriptura narret impositum As to Isa 53. 10. and Heb. 2. 13. We have spoken to them often It should be proved and not only said that the seed and children there mentioned are meant precisely of the Elect. As to Jer. 3. 19. But I said how shall I put thee among the children and give thee a pleasant land and I said Thou shalt call me my Father and shalt not turn away from me Deodate gives the true sense viz. my will indeed is firme to re-establish you but true conversion is the only means and necessary condition of it God according to the order of government he hath established cannot give the inheritance of children to any but those whom he hath converted and made his children Junius upon the place to the same purpose Upon the survey of this whole dispute I have onely two things to §. 9. observe 1. That whereas I have proved the words of those covenant I will be their God and they shall be my people to be a promise made to them that beleeve of the many places in Scripture where those words are used Mr. Eyre cannot find us so much as one wherein they are applyed to men that are not converted unto God 2. His arguings from such passages of Scripture wherein men are sometimes said to be the Lords or to be Gods or the Lord thy God and the like conclude nothing till it be proved that such expressions imply as much and the same with those words in the Covenant I will be their God c. forasmuch as men may be said to be his and he theirs sometimes in some other sense then those words in the Covenant signifie All the earth is Gods and all the fullnesse thereof Psal 50. 12 10. 11. All men are his Ezâ—k 18. 4. generally whatsoever is made by him or used to his glory or subject to his government or separated more immediately
promise to the same purpose 1. If every conditional promise be contrary to grace then neither can God encourage us to any act of obedience by a promise of rewarding it nor may we take encouragement to obey out of respect to the reward without prejudicing the Grace of God The Reason is because do thus or thus and I will give thee this or that is a conditional promise more then such a forme of words we have not to prove that God ever made a conditional promise But the consequence in both the parts of it is grossely false for God doth make conditional promises to encourage us to obey his will and we are to take encouragement from them for that end For example he promiseth Lev. 26. 3 12. If ye walk in my statutes and keep my commandments and to them I will walk among you and will be your God and ye shall be my people Which that it pertaines to Christians as well as to the Jews the Apostle expresly teacheth 2 Cor. 6. 16 17 18. And from thence inferres immediately Chap. 7. 1. Having therefore these promises let us cleanse our selves from all filthinesse of the flesh and Spirit c. The promises he mentions aâ—e Gospel promises therefore promises of grace Yet out of respect to the good promised are we to come out and separate from all filthinesse of flesh and Spirit and God hath given us these promises for this end Moses rejected the pleasures of sin because he had respect to the recompense of reward Heb. 11. 25 26. So Paul 2 Cor. 4. 16 18. So Christ himself Heb. 12. 2. Multitudes of conditional promises we have in the Gospel which therefore surely are not inconsistent with grace Mat. 6. 14 15. Joh. 14. 21 23. Rom. 8. 13. Mat. 7. 7 c. If a man promise another to whom he hath no natural relation but out of a meer desire of his good that he will make him heire to five hundred per annum on condition he will go no more into an Alehouse or into none of the Popes dominions in such a promise there would be found every thing which according to Scripture or Philosophy as we have shewed before chap. 5. is required to an act of grace and yet the promise is conditionall If Mr. Eyre shall use his old evasion and say that in the places forementioned there is no proposing of a condition but onely a declaring of the persons who shall enjoy such and such blessings besides what hath been spoken against it before I shall onely adde this that then the said places and innumerable others like them do not declare that faith or righteousnesse or prayer or any other duty to which the promise is made is any whit more acceptable to God then unbelief or unrighteousnesse or neglect of prayer but onely that the person beleeving the person that keeps the Commandements of Christ the person that prayeth c. is more acceptable to God then he that doth not these things which is such a prodigious assertion that till I know whether Mr. Eyrâ— will own it I will not go about to confute it 2. If the condition being performed be it of what kind it will be the thing promised do eo ipso become a due dept then is it unjust to make the full price of a thing the condition of any contract The reason is Because whatsoever becomes a debt by contract supposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repassum as they call it or an equality between that which I part with and that which I receive for it If then the full price be the condition another is bound to then have I double as much as what I part with is worth For if the condition had been the payment of six pence for what is worth a 100. l. the six pence being paid it becomes by virtue of the contract proportionable to that which is worth a 100. l. otherwise it could not make it a due debt If then I have in six pence what is proportionable to that I part with then if the said 100. l. had been the condition of the contract I had had double as much as that I part with is worth because the said 100 l. is in it self proportionable and againe it becomes proportionable by being made the condition of the contract so that it hath a double proportion of worth to that I part with for it In the next place Mr. Eyre brings in his adversaries as objecting §. 5. against this his third argument and clearing themselves from any impeachment of Gods grace though they assert the covenant to be conditional But in none of his objectionss doth he take notice of what he might very well suppose would be principally insisted upon for wiping off his aspersions As 1. That the Covenant of grace is not made with righteous persons but with sinners and enemies and children of wrath who if they had had their due and the rich grace of God had not prevented had been past all capacity of having any new terms of life and peace proposed to them 2. That the conditions required are neither so much as is Gods due nor yet so much as man was once able to performe which the Apostle mentions as a glorious difference between the righteousnesse of the Law and the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 5 8 9. God accepteth the heart though in many things we sin all Therefore these conditions are such as are indeed available for our good through the acceptance of a gracious and mercifull governour as Benhadads servants prevailed with the merciful Kings of Israel when they supplicated for life with sackcloth upon their loyns and ropes about their heads 1 Kings 20. 31 32. though they availe us nothing in the tryal of justice But let us see Mr. Eyres objections First he supposeth us objecting thus We ascribe no meritoriousnesse §. 6. to these conditions as the Papists do unto works His answer is 1. The Papists assert no other works and conditions to be necessary to justification and salvation then we do 2. They ascribe no more meritoriousnesse to works then we do for Mr. Baxter says that the performers of a condition may be said to merit the reward 3. The condition required of Adam himself was not meritorious in a strict and proper sense Rep. 1. The first is a calumny The Papists some of them dispute that it is a thing possible to keep the Law of God and that facile parvo negotio they are Bellarminâ—s words dâ— Jâ—stif lib. 4. cap. 11. 2. The second is a calumny as Mr. Baxter a man borne to reproaches hath sufficiently shewed in his admonition to Mr. Eyre Reader if thou art not read in the fathers do but peruse Vâ—ssâ—â— Theses De bonor opâ—r merit or Bp. Vshers answer to the Jesuits challenge or any other Protestant who replies to the testimonies of the fathers which the Papists are wont to boast of and thou wilt find that they do all
justifie the sense in which the fathers use the word merit though they disclaime the terme as Mr. Baxtâ—r also doth The Fathers indeed intending no more thereby then simply to obtainâ— As when they say of the Virgin Mary Mâ—ruit â—sse mater redemptoris Shee obtained this honour or priviledge to be the mother of the Redeemer Sine merito nostro meruimus we have obtained it without our merit and the like 3. The third I confesse is to me a very difficult question viz. Whether Adam in the state of perfection did or could merit any thing of God on the one hand I see the Apostle asserting roundly that to him that workâ—th the reward is imputed of dâ—bt nâ—t of gracâ— Rom. 4. 4. On the other hand I am not able to conceive how the creature can lay an obligation of justice upon his maker Rom. 11. 35. Who hath first given to him and it shall be râ—compensâ—d to him againâ— Nor am I certaine what life it was that was promised to Adam Some Divines are of opinion that it was the same and â—o other which is now promised through Christ to them that beleeve others and particularly Mr. Bâ—rrâ—â—gâ—s are peremptory that the a Gosp converâ— â—er 3. pag. 43. Law to Adam had onely the promise of a naturall life to be continued I shall wave all dispute concerning it and deliver my opinion in these foure conclusions 1. There is a proportion between a spotlesse perfect sinlesse righteousnesse and the reward of a happy and an unafflicted life That he that never did any evil should never suffer any evil unlesse he become a surety for another that hath wrought evil is but just So much at least is signified by the Apostles expression Râ—m 4. 4. To him that worketh the reward is imputed of debt not of grace And the law of nature the rule of naturall justice written and acting in mens consciences in their excusations and justifications of themselves for what they have well done Rom. 2. 15. attests the same 2. God as author of his creatures being and all his faculties and abilities hath a right of absolute soveraignty and dominion over him by virtue of which he may justly challenge the utmost service the creature can performe without engaging himself to give him a reward It was therefore I do not say of grace but oâ— his goodnesse and bounty that he would condescend to promise a reâ—ard to man for his obedience to the Law This â—â—ay down as a concession 3. Gods promise of rewarding mans obedience doth not make himself a debtour to man properly but makes the life promised to become a debt Life may be legally and in justice due and yet God not a debtour For there is dâ—bitum reale as well as personale suitable to the distinction of actions in the b Uâ—pian l. Action Gen. ff de oblig Act. Law into real and personal the former per quam remâ—â— stram quae ab â—liâ— pâ—ssiâ—â—â—r pâ—timâ—s though he be c Justit l. 4. c. 6. §. omnium autem â—â—lâ—o jure nobis obligatus of which they give d Ibid. § aeque si agâ—t severall instances The latter Quâ— cum eo agimâ—s qui â—â—ligatus â—st nâ—â—is ad faciâ—ndum aliquid vel dandum e Inst eod §. omnium aâ—tem idque vel ex câ—ntractâ— vel â—x 〈…〉 lâ—ficio Whence it is manifest that an action purely reall and not mixed with a personall as sometimes it is supposeth no person to be in justice obliged as a debtour and yet the thing a due debt In like manner life might have been given to Adam as a due debt he being worthy of such a reward and yet God in promising it become a debtour to none but to himselfe onely 4. Therefore Gods rewarding Adam supposing him to have continued perfectly righteous is an act of goodnesse and faithfulnesse quoad exercitium but an act of justice quoad specificationem That is it was Gods goodnesse to promise a reward of life to him and his faithfulnesse to execute it but upon supposition that he deale in rewarding him jure rectorio as a good and equitable Governour 't is just that he reward him with a life as perfectly free from all mixture of evill as his obedience was free from all mixture of sin Gen. 18 25. That be farâ—e from thee to do after this manner to slay the righteous with the wicked and that the righteous should be as the wicked that be farre from thee â— all not the Judge of all the earth do right The next objection he thus proposeth The conditions required §. 7. of Adâ—m were legall but the conditions of the New Covenant are evangelicall He answers All conditions performed for life are legall conditions the precepts both of Law and Gospel have the same matter Rep. Repentance towards God and faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ were neither required in the Law given to Adam nor in that given to Israel Gal. 3. 12. 2. The conditions required of Adam were as much as justice it self could exact of him The conditions required of us are such as neverthelesse justice might condemn us and availe us nothing but in Gods gracious and mercifull acceptation Jer. 3. 1 12. Thou hast played thâ—â—â—rlot with many lâ—vers yet return again to me 〈◊〉 and I will not cause miâ—â—â—ngâ—r to fall â—pon you for I am mâ—rcifull saith the Lord. Hence thirdly perfect sinlesse obedience of it self commended man unto God his equitable Governour as worthy not onely not to be punished but to be rewarded suitably to his nature that it did not merit of God so as to lay an obligation of justice upon him to reward it is meerly by accident because of the infinite distance and supremacy of God over man But faith and repentance do onely dispose us to be enriched enlivened and perfected by the fulnesse and sufficiency of another even the Lord Jesus Christ even as poverty may be said to commend one to a liberall man inasmuch as it disposeth him to be a fit object for liberality to exercise it self upon And this is intimated in the place which Mr. Eyre quoated but now Isa 55. 1 2. if his exposition of it be true viz. the conditions which men performe are their money for v. 1. it is said come buy wine and milk without money and without price which coming is saith and this faith as it is the condition upon which we partake in the blessings promised is therefore metaphorically called a buying and thus farre forth it agrees with legall conditions but as it is a buying without money or price it supposeth the said blessings to be freely given as Rev. 22. 17. it is expounded and thus farre forth it is opposed to legall This I put here because I had forgot to do it in its right place which was § 4. Thirdly he supposeth us thus objecting Evangelical conditions are more facile and easie then legal were His answer is