our Believing he will not fail to do it Because we must in order to Assurance of Pardon believe our Sins are actually pardoned therefore our actual Pardon is the Object of the Faith by which we obtain Pardon and so he sets our Pardon instead of God Christ and the Gospel-Promises which are the Scripture Objects of Justifying Faith Because Faith is the Evidence of Invisible Realities still remaining Invisible therefore it 's whole Use is to manifest our Pardon before our Pardon hath a Being Object The Doctor lays great stress on Ezek. 16. 6 c. and very often builds this and other of his Opinions upon it Answ. He doth so and without the least Ground For 1. That Chapter doth not describe the Dealings of God with a particular Soul in order to Salvation but with Israel as a Political Body in a peculiar Covenant It shews how mean and idolatrous their Original was how graciously God singled them out and dignified them above the rest of the World by many Privileges and among the rest by making a Covenant of Peculiarity with them But this Covenant is not the Covenant of Eternal Life For ver 59. it was a Covenant they broke And ver 61 62. it 's called Thy Covenant as opposed to My Covenant Dare any Man say that all the Jews were Washed Quickned Justified c. Yet each of these were true of the whole Body in this Chapter See what a Character is given of their Temper and Carriage after all this is said of them and sure it cannot agree to a Justified Soul or a Soul decked with Grace See from ver 14. to ver 23. And had the Doctor considered this Chapter he would find most of his Opinions baffled on the same grounds as he thinks a Verse or two can serve him Ver. 3 4 8. In the day they were born they were unwashed unloved out of the Covenant Where is Justification c. from Eternity or from the time of Conception Ver. 23. When after they were washed and in Covenant God denounceth Woe woe unto thee for their wickedness May not Wrath then be preached to an elect Person Ver. 27 38 43. I 'll judge thee and give thee blood in fury and recompence thy ways upon thy head Doth Sin do a Believer no harm Is there no displeasure in God against the Elect for Sin When God saith Thou hast fretted me c. when v. 58. thou hast born thy lewdness and thy abominations can it be true That no Elect Person bears his own Sin Nor ought he to charge himself therewith Or doth not God charge him with it 2. Admit that the Birth of a Child was a resemblance of Israel's first becoming God's Covenant-People in Abraham or at Mount Sinai and admit that this People's becoming the Lord's were an Exemplar of every elect Person 's Recovery yet all that can be inferred is That an Elect Person is vile miserable and guilty when God comes effectually to call him When thou wert in thy blood I said unto thee Live But what 's this to Justification before Faith Doth God quicken a Soul before he wash it and doth not that Soul believe What Life can there be that excludes Faith A quickned Soul believes as soon as quickned and the Text shews you that it 's quickned before it 's washed A Digression concerning the Necessity of Repentance to Forgiveness The Doctor judging we are Justified before we Believe it 's no wonder he tells us we are forgiven before we confess sin p. 255 c. or repent But my business in this Digression is with Men of more Orthodox Principles who yet seem to be doubtful in this Point I shall therefore state the Point between these Wherein the difference is not 1. It is not VVhether Faith or Repentance be any part of the Meriting Righteousness for which we are Justified 2. Nor VVhether the Habits of Faith and Repentance be wrought at the same time and included in the Regenerating Principle 3. Nor VVhether Convictions of a lost State and some degree of Humblings and Sorrow are necessary to drive a Soul to Christ 4. Nor VVhether there must be an Assenting Act of Faith before there be any Exercise of Repentance under the power of the VVord which must be believed in some degree before it operate to these effects 5. Nor VVhether ingenuous Sorrow for Sin in the sence of actual Pardon be after that Pardon 6. Nor VVhether Repentance as it consists in Fruits meet for it as External Reformation a Fruitful Life and the like must follow Pardon it being against the Tenor of the Promise that Forgiveness should be suspended so long after a Man believes and repents with his heart 7. Nor Whether Justification be equally ascribed to Faith and Repentance For we are said to be Justified by Faith which imports that Repentance is but a disposing Condition and Faith the receiving Condition Repentance without Faith is unavailable as Faith without Repentance is impossible Faith seems to compleat all and in a manner comprehend all These things Orthodox Divines are agreed in The seeming Difference VVhether a sincere purpose of Heart to turn from Sin and Idols to God be absolutely necessary to Forgiveness of Sin The other parts of Repentance are excluded out of the Question by what you have read before And this is that part of it which the word lays a great stress on from hence Repentance is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2. 8 c. A change of mind or purpose And Conversion refers to this as the principal part of it Proved that Repentance as it lies in a sincere purpose to turn from Sin and Idols to God is necessary to Forgiveness 1. The Repentance God so commands in order to Forgiveness can include no less than this Act. 3. 19. Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out And Act. 2. 38. Repent and be baptized in the name of Christ for the remission of sins To preach Repentance and Remission is Christ's Charge to his Ministers Luk. 24. 47. And none can doubt that before the Person of the Messias became the disputed Truth in the VVorld the chief Subject of God's message to Men was a Call to Repentance 2. Repentance is a Grace to which Pardon is promised and upon the working of it Forgiveness is given And Impenitency continues Guilt where-ever it reigns How much of the Bible must I transcribe if I quote all places that prove these Ez. 18. 30. Act. 3. 19. Act. 26. 18. To turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God that they may receive forgiveness of sin c. Mark 1. 4. And preach the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins Luk. 13. 3. Except you repent you shall all perish Christ was exalted to give Repentance and Remission of Sins Act. 5. 31. Nay the Sin against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable because it 's impossible to bring the Committer of it to repentance Heb.
With his Stripes we are healed and sundry other places Nay to suppose any Degree of Suffering on Christ and not our Sins laid on Christ even though in the Doctor 's Sence would overturn the whole Christian Religion and justifie the Socinians Testimonies The Assemblies Lesser Catechism Q. Wherein did Christ's Humiliation consist A. In his being Born and that in a low Condition made under the Law undergoing the Miseries of this Life the Wrath of God and the cursed Death of the Cross in being buried and continuing under the Power of Death for a time Thou seest Christ's Incarnation or being Born and several other things before Christ's Crucifixion are parts of his Humiliation The Ground of the Doctor 's Mistake Because the hidings of God's Face and especially the dying Sacrifice of Christ did so compleat and finish the Work of Satisfaction as the principal parts thereof therefore he thinks our Sins were not laid on Christ till then CHAP. VI. Of God's Separation from and Abhorrence of Christ while our Sins lay upon him Truth THough God testified his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ's Soul and Body in his Agony and suspended those delightful Communications of the Divine Nature to the Humane Nature of Christ as to their wonted Degrees yet God was never separated from Christ much less during his Body's lying in the Grave neither was the Father ever displeased with Christ and far less did he abhor him because of the Filthiness of Sin upon him Errour Christ was on the account of the Filthiness of Sins while they lay upon him separated from God odious to him and even the Object of God's Abhorrence and this to the time of his Resurrection Proved that this is Dr. Crisp 's Opinion He saith P. 294. Nay from this I affirm as Christ did bear our Iniquity so Christ for that Iniquity was separated from God and God was here separated from Christ or else Christ spake untruth P. 295. The Doctor puts an Objection It may be this for saking was but for a little time He saith To this I answer it was as long as Sin was upon him had not Christ breathed out the Sins of Men that were upon him he had never seen God again he having taken Sin upon him he must unload himself of Sin before he can be brought near to God c. There was a Separation and Forsaking when Christ died but at his Rising there was a Meeting again a kind of renewing his Sonship P. 408. It is a higher Expression of Love that Christ should bear the Sins of Men than that he should be given to die for Men c. Affliction is not contrary to the Nature of God God can smile upon Persons when they are under the greatest Scorn c. But where the Lord doth charge any Sin the Lord hath an Abhorrence there P. 379 380. He shews That Christ to be a Scorn yea for God to make him suffer the most accursed Death of the Cross is far less than to make him sin because all this may agree to the Nature of God but Iniquity is the hatefullest thing in the World to God where Iniquity is found a Toad is not so odious nor ugly to Man as that Person is in the Sight of God P. 180. All that Filthiness and Loathsomeness of our Nature is put upon Christ he stands as it were the Abhorred of the Lord. Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not whether the Soul of Christ endured the Effects of Gods Wrath against sin and was amazed thereat as well as at the Importance of the Work he was engaged in and the Enemies he was to encounter with and the Sacrifice he was to make c. 2. Nor whether the Divine Nature suspended for a while on the Cross the delightful Communications of it self as to the Degrees it was accustomed to emit to the humane Nature of Christ. These with awe I freely affirm The Real Difference 1. Whether Christ was separated from God This the Doctor affirms and I deny 2. Whether Christ was at any time under God's Abhorrency or odious to him because under the Loathsomeness of Sin This the Doctor affirms and I deny yea not without Detestation 3. Whether Christ was thus on the account of the Filthiness of Sin upon him separated from and under the Abhorrency of the Father during his lying in the Grave This the Doctor affirms and I deny it of that time and any other or else it would be true for the whole time of his Humiliation The Truth Confirmed 1. This Separation was impossible because of the Union between the Divine and Humane Nature of Christ in one Person This Union could not be dissolved nor could all Communications of Comfort or Strength from the Divine Nature be interrupted while the Union remained Yea the Humane Nature of Christ had never a personal Subsistence of its own but was assumed by the eternal Word the second Person of one Essence with the Father 2. The Father had promised constant Supports to Christ in the whole of his Undertakings and Sufferings and his comfortable Presence with him Isa. 42. 1 4 6. Isa. 50. 7 8 9. 3. The Doctor of all Men had least reason to assert this Separation when he had so exceeded in telling us P. 379. That the Divine Nature is a kind of Soul to the Humanity consisting of Soul and Body and is the Form and Strength of both c. The God-head gives Life to Christ and so all the Sufficiency to bear Iniquity proceeds from the Divine Nature of Christ. And P. 378. Should Iniquity be laid on the Humane Nature and the Divine Nature not support the Humane Nature it would have sunk under sin Reader is it not strange that after this the Doctor should affirm a Separation and that for all the time when Iniquity was upon Christ 4. The Lord Jesus could not be abhorred or odious to God for in him God was always well pleased Isa. 42. 1. Mat. 17. 5. He was now yielding the highest Act of Obedience and so there was at least no cause of Offence yea God loved him for this John 10. 17 18. the Person of the Son was always Gods Delight from Eternity to Eternity Prov. 8. 30. and could not but be so Christ must have been as odious to himself as to the Father for he is of the same Holy Essence Reader How horrid a sound must it have to a Christian Ear to say A Christ odious to God abhorred by the Father and that because he was a loathsome a detestable an abominable and filthy sinner for a time This Point carries that Aspect that from Regards for the Doctor I will not insist on it nor its necessary Consequences and yet upon this depend many of his Positions 5. Christ could not be thus separated from and be as it were the Abhorred of the Lord while his Body lay in the Grave for then his Soul could not be in Paradise as
it was when his Body was in the Grave Luk. 23. 43. Alas how can any bear to think that as the Doctor affirms he never saw God's Face all that while Where was he Yea What tormenting Agitations of Soul must he be under even after Death in the unseen State The Papists indeed tell us he was in Hell but they assign Purposes more becoming Christ's being there than the Doctor 's Position imports It was the height of Hell for Christ to be banished from God's Face and be under his very Wrath and Abhorrence all that time and his Mind tormented with the Filth of sin made his He never would have been a Saviour on Terms so inconsistent with his Person But the whole Notion is contrary to Scripture for under the greatest Abatements of Comfort he owns God's Presence and Relation My God My God Matth. 27. 46. and just upon his loud Cry he said Father into thy Hands I commit my Spirit and having said thus he gave up the Ghost Luk. 22. 46. Was there a Separation or Abhorrence when he thus addresseth himself to God as his God and his Father Did he never come near God all that while when God received his Spirit or rejected his Prayer which God never did reject Joh. 11. 42. Me thou hearest always See Ps. 69. 13 14 15 17 18. Ps. 22. 18 19 20 24. Heb. 5. 7. He was heard in that he feared which refers to this time Testimonies The Opinion I oppose is such that I will only instance the Words of Doctor Owen of Justif. P. 286. There was no reason why God should hate Christ for his taking on him our Debt and the Payment of it And suppose a Person out of an heroick Generosity of Mind an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for another so as to answer for him with his Life Would the most cruel Tyrant under Heaven that should take away his Life in that case hate him And then the Doctor shews here and P. 287. the Word Hate signifies either an Aversion or Detestation of Mind or only a Will of Punishment In the first Sence saith he there was no ground why God should hate Christ on the Imputation of Guilt unto him sin inherent renders the Soul polluted abominable and the only Object of Divine Aversation But Christ was undefiled c. The Grounds of the Doctor 's Mistake The Doctor doth not distinguish between the Affects of VVrath and the Effects of VVrath Because God forsook Christ as to the usual Degrees of Comfort he thinks Christ was separated from God Because he that is formally a sinner is odious to God therefore he thinks Christ was odious to God who had on him the Punishment of sin with the Guilt or Obligation to bear this Punishment by his own Consent neither of which have any thing of the Loathsomeness of sin I know not why he thinks Christ came not near God from the time of his Death to his Resurrection unless because of his Conceit that the Loathsomeness of sin being on him God could not bear the sight of him till he had sweat it out a Reason too horrid for me to say more to and indeed inconsistent with the Notion of a Mediator for the sins of others CHAP. VII Of the Change of Person between Christ and the Elect and their being as Righteous as he Truth THE Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ is so imputed to true Believers as that for the sake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life eternal it being reckoned to them and pleadable by them for these Uses as if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them whereby they are delivered from the Curse and no other Atonement nor meriting Price of saving Benefits can be demanded from them Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them untill Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven Errour Every Believer or elect Person is as righteous as Christ and there is a perfect Change of Person and Condition betwixt Christ and the Elect he was what we are and we are what he was viz. perfectly holy and without Spot or Blemish Proved that this is Dr. Crisp 's Opinion P. 270 271. The Doctor saith Mark it well Christ himself is not so compleatly righteous but we are as righteous as he nor we so compleatly sinful but Christ became being made sin as compleatly sinful as we Nay more we are the same Righteousness for we are made the Righteousness of God that very Sinfulness that we were Christ is made that very Sinfulness before God So that here is a direct Change Christ takes our Person and Condition and stands in our stead we take Christ's Person and Condition and stand in his stead What the Lord beheld Christ that he beholds the Members of Christ to be c. So that if you reckon well you must always reckon your selves in anothers Person and that other in your Person And P. 180. God gives his Son Christ c. God gives the Person of Christ to Men as much as to say God gives Christ to stand in the room of Men and Men stand in the room of Christ. So that in giving Christ God is pleased as it were to make a Change and all the Loveliness the Person of Christ hath that is put upon us and we are as lovely with him even as the Son himself And P. 158. Here is a Person in Blood in a loathsome Condition but for all this as loathsome as the Person is in himself and in his own Nature yet here is Perfection of Beauty c. On the account of this he saith P. 428. We appear before God perfect in Holiness And P. 419 420. Christ draws up and exhales that Impurity which Men live in c. and when Men are without Spot and all fair God falls in Love with them c. The Church hath no Blemish at all no Imperfection See more of this in Chap. Of Union Wherein the Difference is not 1. It is not whether the mediatioral Righteousness of Christ habitual active and Passive be a Righteousness sufficient to and designed for the Salvation of the Elect. 2. Nor whether our Justification and all other Benefits when we are made Partakers of them be the Fruits of this Righteousness as the only meritorious Cause of them 3. Nor whether Christ's Sufferings and Obedience were so in our Stead that God cannot exact from us any other Atonement for Sin or meriting Price of any Gospel-blessings 4. Nor whether Christ by his Righteousness merited for all the Elect that they should in his Time and Way be certainly Partakers of its saving Effects and did not only purchase a conditional Grant of those Effects viz. That Proposition He that believeth shall be