Incarnation nor was his Assumption of our Nature absolutely necessary to the discharge of his Prophetical but of his Priestly Office A Body was prepared him that he might have what to offer in Sacrifice to God Hebr. 10. 7 8. It was the Spirit of Christ that spake in the Prophets 1 Pet. 1. 11. and to deny this is to deny something more than all the Thirty nine Articles namely the Nicene Creed I believe in the Holy Ghost who spake by the Prophets But 2. I deny that to receive a Doctrine upon the Authority of Christ is the true and full Notion of believing on him Faith in general implies an assent to a Truth upon the Authority of the Revealer but to make this a saving a justifying Faith the assent of the Understanding must draw along with it the Consent of the Will A true Faith is described by such terms as include the Concurrent Acts both of the Will and the Understanding and therefore that which the Apostles Creed expresses I believe the Resurrection of the Body the Nicene Creed renders I look for the Resurrection of the Dead Taking in that Act of the Soul whereby it waits and stedfastly hopes for the goodness of the thing promised as well as credits the Veracity of God in the truth of the Proposition And thus Abraham believed in Christ he looked and waited for that rich Mercy wrap'd up in that promise of the Messiah and all those spiritual Blessings that were to come through him 3. The Reason of the Promise is the Object of Faith as well as the Truth of the Promiser Abraham believed the Promise to be true upon the Authority of him who gave it forth but he saw also that it was upon the account of Christ a Mediator that God would communicate to him the Blessings of the Covenant opitomized in that I will be thy God And this was that Gospel or Glad-tidings which was preached to Abraham Gal. 3. 8. But our Author threatens we shall hear more of this presently And I promise him when we do it shall be fully considered 2. He answers Affirmatively Abraham believed God To which I say Subordinat a non pugnant To believe God and to believe in Christ are very well consistent That Abraham believed in God and therefore he believed in Christ seems to me to carry as fair Reason as that other of his Abraham believed God and therefore he did not believe in Christ for the Scripture represents them as well agreed 1 Pet. 1. 21. Through Christ we believe in God 4. Our next Task must be to Combate with our Author's scruples and certainly never did man so snithe with prejudices against Truth It 's hard to conceive how Abraham should learn this Mystery from that general Promise In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed Prejudice will I confess make an easier matter than this very hard and unbelief impossible to be conceived And yet were there not something worse than Prejudice at the bottom the difficulty could not be insuperable For 1. Abraham had one Promise that we know of to clear up the meaning of this Several Promises give Reciprocal light to one another The first Promise assured him That the Seed of the Woman should bruise the Serpents head This shews to Abraham the necessity of having that Enmity removed which the Devil by sin had sowen between God and his Creature the removing of this Enmity could not be whilst Satan had the Dominion over the Creature A Seed is therefore promised to heal all that misery which sin brought into the World This Promise was committed to the Church of God which was a faithful Guardian to keep so precious a Iewel committed to its trust In this Seed which God had now revealed should come out of the Loyns of Abraham God promises Blessedness which mutually sends light to the other Promise that God would not only by the Promised Seed Deliver from evil but bestow all good 2. Abraham might have other and better Comments upon both these Promises than we are concerned to know it 's enough for us that we are taught in general that Abraham was justified the same way that we are and what that is the New-Testament abundantly declares And therefore it 's more ingenuous to conclude That Abraham was justified by a Faith in Christ because we are so than That we are not justified by the Righteousness of Christ because Abraham was not so 3. Abraham understood the true use of Sacrifices which are a clear Paraphrase upon the Promise in what manner God would reconcile the World to himself namely by laying the sins of the Offender upon the head of that Sacrifice which in the fulness of time should be offered for a Propitiation to God In the Faith of which grand Propitiation all true Believers lived and died And when at length he was exhibited to the World Iohn the Baptist points to him as the Accomplishment of all their former Sacrifiees and the Answer of all their Prayers and Hopes This is that Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the World John 1. 29. But 4. The Promise it self is not so obscure neither but that upon this single Supposition That God would bless the World with spiritual Blessings in the promised Seed they might easily conclude they could not be blessed in themselves and therefore not in their own works and deservings but in the Righteousness of another who must be more acceptable to God than themselves 5. We ought to entertain charitable thoughts of God of his Goodness and Mercy that he would not preach to Abraham the Gospel in an unknown tongue that is would not give him a Promise without the full latitude and extent of its meaning And 6. We are assured of the matter of fact that God did because he had the same Gospel preached to him That God would justifie the Heathen through Faith Gal. 3. 8. Now as it 's a strange way of Preaching to speak in a Language not understood so it 's as strange a Gospel that knows no Mediator no Redeemer Whatever then was the Object of a Gospel-Faith was the Object of Abraham's Faith for substance and whatever did constitute a Gospel-Righteousness made up his Righteousness And yet after all this our Author has muster'd up more self-created Prejudices to stumble his own belief of the way of Abraham's Justification For he supposes that Abraham must believe many things incredible and know many things not knowable before he could come to the knowledg of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness As 1. He must be well assured that the Blessings here meant are spiritual Blessings c. But if this be the worst on 't it would stumble me more to believe how he could believe Blessedness without pardon of sin and eternal life I cannot tell whether I shall satisfie another but I have satisfied my self in this matter from these Considerations 1. That Abraham upon his believing was
his Death His Death confirmed his Doctrine His Doctrine was he that believes and obeys shall be justified and saved Hereupon we believe it to be true and in process of time come to obey it our obedience justifies us and therefore the Blood of Christ may be said to justifie us And whereas Iudas his Covetousness the Jews Herod's Cruelty Pilates Flattery had a direct tendency to the Death of Christ why we may not be properly said to be justified by them also at this rate I profess I cannot apprehend Religion is fallen into most cruel and unmerciful hands in this latter Age who to give a â—…aint colour to any little sorry fancies of their own care not to interpret Scripture in such ways as shall certainly open a dore to elude the plainest Truths God is said to have made the World Now if any has a mind to eternize his Name which without some rare discovery cannot be let him take our Author's Course and he is secure of a Monument That is indeed a Scripture phrase but if you examine it throughly it signifies no more than that God made a company of Atoms and put them in Motion and then let them alone they will dance you so long in infinite spaces till they jostle themselves into that form wherein you see things at this day And thus here 's a fair Account how God may be said to have made the World because he made that which made the World and the Cause of the Cause you know may be said to be a Grand-Father-Cause of the thing Caused But this is infinitely beyond what our Author will allow the Blood of Christ of Causality in our justification for it 's only a Confirming Cause of the Promise and that in Commission with other things and they have a greater stroke in the business than it self then when we come to believe that Promise and that belief proves strong enough to perswade us into Obedience then we are justified for the sake of that Obedience But 5. The Consideration of the Text it self Rom. 5. 9. is enough to discredit this idle conceit for ever for Christ is said to dye for us and in order to our justification in the same sence that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of old 〈◊〉 who laid down Life for Life Blood for Blood Body for Body v. 6. Christ dyed for the â—…ngodly v. 7. For scarcely for a righteous Man will one dye yet peradventure for a good Man some one would even dare to dye v. 8. But God commendeth his love to us that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us v. 9. Much more then being now justified by his Blood c. 2. Christ says he is called a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood that is by a belief of the Gospel Covenant Rom. 3. 25. But how short this comes of the Apostle's design is obvious from the place Christ is set forth by God to be a propitiation through faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness that he might be just and the justifier of him that believes in Iesus But is God ever the more declared to be a just God demonstrated to be a Righteous God because Christ has confirmed his Doctrine and we believe and obey it The obedience of most men is so imperfect that when they have done all they will need mercy and that will declare one of God's attributes But what provision is here made that God may be declared Righteous and Iust All that he has assigned to the Blood of Christ turns not away the least of God's displeasure against sin or the sinner Christ dyed to confirm the Doctriâ—…e Well but still God is displeased with sinners for what Reason is there why God should be less displeased with them because Christ dyed to confirm his Doctrine Well but hereupon Man believes this Doctrine to be true but yet God's Anger is never the more turned away from the sinner because he believes what God says is true For what Reason is there why God should be less displeased with him who believes the Truth and yet will not obey his Commands So that neither the Blood of Christ nor Faith neither do reconcile God to us or propitiate him for us well at last Man gives obedience to the Commands and then God is propitiated and reconciled So that the true Scripture should have been had our Author had the pâ—…nning of it God hath set forth Man to be his own propitiation through his own obedience And why might it not have been said that God set forth the Martyrs to be a propitiation through Faith in their Blood For they willingly and chearfully shed their dearest Blood to confirm the Truth of the Gospel and upon their Confirmation of it some have believed it and upon their believing it have obeyed it and then by that obedience are reconciled to God And thus may Paul be said to have dyed for our sins and Peter to have been Crucified for us and both of them to have been set forth by God to be a propitiation through Faith in their Blood Nor let any say that the Death of the Martyrs was not so strong a confirmation of the Gospel as the Death of Christ For if we believe the Truth and obey it upon more infirm Evidence yet if that evidence produce a strong Faith and that a vigorous obedience such an obedience will not find less acceptance with God because it was begotten by weaker Motives 3 The Scripture says he uses these Phrases promiscuously to be justified by Faith and to be justified by the Faith of Christ and to be justified by Christ and to be justified through Faith in his Blood and to be justified and saved by Grace Nay by believing that Christ is the Son of God John 20. 31. And that God raised him up from the dead When our Author has a design upon any great Truth of the Gospel then the clearest expressions the wisdom of God's Spirit shall use are Phrases allusive figurative metaphorical tropical forms of Speech But the Scripture uses not these expressions promiscuously only our Author confounds them craftily Each of them have indeed something in common with the rest and no wonder all the Offices the Active and Passive Obedience of Christ the whole work of the Spirit the actings of Faith and every saving-Grace meet in this one great Project the glorifying of God the Electing love of the Father the Redeeming Love of the Son and the Sanctifying love of the Holy Spirit in the Iustification and Salvation of a Believer But yet each of these expressions carries in it something peculiar to it self for the Scripture abhors to speak at his dull and cloudy rate who by diversifying one and the same thing in twenty several shapes can vend it for so many several things when 't is but the same notion disguised in a new-fashioned expression One denotes the interest of Faith another speaks the concern of him who is Iehovah
is the Son of God signifies the same thing too Joh. 20. 31. But here our Author has relieved himself from his old Artifice which never failed him the forceing Scripture over to him when he is lazy and will not stir a step to go to the Scripture The Text speaks its own Language thus These things are written that ye might believe that Iesus is the Son of God and believing ye may have life through his Name where the Evangelist says not They are justified by believing that Iesus is the Son of God but that having first satisfied their Faith from Scripture that Jesus is the Son of God which Truth being well studied well digested and improved will give us a marvelous light into the Mystery of the Gospel and without which the whole of the Gospel is involved in eternal Night and then believing they have eternal Life through his Name by his satisfactory Blood and Righteousness and the Authority which he has thereby with the Father But believe it here is harder work than all this behind for our Author will propound several Questions and when he has done answer them 1. Quest. What is it to believe that Christ is the Son of God Ans. That is says he That Messiah and Prophet whom God sent into the World Very good Now as I remember p. 4. he told us That Christ was anointed to be the Messiah at his Baptism let the Reader examine it Now if to be the Son of God be to be the Messiah and that he was not the Messiah till his Baptism then he was not the Son of God till his Baptism and then for about 30 years he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mere Man and yet this is a great favour I assure you for his Baptism was about three or four years before his Resurrection and then they are to blame who will suspect this Principle to be Socinian well But yet to believe Christ to be the Son of God is to believe him to be the Messiah Ay But there 's one odd misadventure more in the thing that is that Hebrew is easier than Greek for if Messiah explain Christ any better I am very much out in my reckoning Some from hence will pretend to give us a Scheme of our Author's Faith about the Deity of Christ and perhaps should they deal with him as he has dealt with others or half so uncharitably it would be found dissonant to what he professedly owns in subscribing the three Symbols of Faith but I see no reason to fix an Opinion upon any Man that he will not openly avow 2. Quest. But what is the Messiah Ans. Why The Prophet whom God sent into the World to reveal his Will to us To believe him to be the Son of God is to believe him to be the Messiah and to believe him to be the Messiah is to believe him to be a Prophet and that is as near as I can measure it just one third part of his Mediatory Employment Surely he has mean thoughts of his Reader 's Intellectuals or great presumptions upon their good-Natures or a high esteem of the persuasiveness of his own Rhetorick that can hope to proselyte them into a belief without one Argument That the Son of God signifies no other than Messiah Messiah no more than Prophet and that the Prophetical-Office of this Messiah is the just compleat Object of our Faith 3. Quest. But what does this Belief of Christ to be the Messiah the Prophet include Ans. A general Belief of the Gospel which he preacht most rare Divinity I suppose we may be saved upon very cheap terms by and by For 1. A general Belief of the Gospel will serve the turn to justify 〈◊〉 well enough that is as far as Faith has ought to do in Justification If Faith believes Christ to be the Messiah that is a Prophet whom God sent to reveal his Will to us it has got a general Belief of the Gospel which may be without understanding in particular one syllable of what Christ has revealed of his Father's Will and then I suppose a general Obedience will serve well enough for a general Faith 2. We may believe Christ to be the Messiah yet if we believe not also what that Person is in whom the Office of Mediator resides we shall understand very little of its Nature Dignity and Efficacy To believe Christ to be Anointed signifies very little unless we understand also who it is that is so Anointed 5. To believe that God raised Christ from the Dead doth the same Doth the same the same what Why it includes a general Belief of the Gospel because his Resurrection was the last and great Confirmation of the Gospel Let us now put all this together We are said to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead and that signifies the same with being justified by the Blood of Christ and both these signify to be justified by believing and obeying the Gospel and yet to believe that God raised up Christ from the Dead includes only a general belief of the Gospel In all which there is nothing but what is rotten at the Core 1. Let us examine in what sense we are said to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead The place assigned is Rom. 10. v. 9. If thou shalt confess with thy Mouth the Lord Iesus Christ and shalt believe in thine Heart that God â—…ath raised up him from the Dead thou shalt be saved Where Salvation is not promised to a Belief of this Proposition That God raised Christ from the Dead but to a Believing it with the Heart such a Faith as closes with the Redeemer included in that Proposition as is evident from the Faith of Thomas Joh. 20. 28. Our Lord Jesus willing to satisfy his doubts and scruples about the Truth of his Resurrection shews him his Hands and Feet gives him leave to put his Hâ—…nd into the Print of the Nails and the Hole of his Side upon this he is satisfied and expresses the Belief of his Heart in these words My Lord and my God When therefore the Apostle tells us That by believing with the Heart that God has raised Iesus from the Dead we shall be saved he intends such a Faith as accepts of and gives up the Soul mutually to a Redeemer as its own God and Lord and not a general Belief that Christ must needs be the Messiah because he was raised from the Dead and if the Messiah his Doctrine must needs be true be it what it will though we know nothing of it 2. It may be enquired whether such a general Belief that God raised up Iesus from the Dead be a true justifying Faith If it be An Implicite Faith will serve tum for all the Particulars of the Gospel and this would save abundance of needless pains that men take in reading of meditating upon the Scriptures and now instead of the Colliers Faith who believed as the
It was enough that God had firmly revealed that he had made sufficient provision for it by a Mediator Abraham believed stedfastly that the means God had chosen were proportionable to their end and the rest was to be left to God 4. And herein lay much of the Bondage that Believers were in Under the Old-Administration of the Covenant of Grace they had not so satisfactory an account of the particular means how the Redeemer should work out their Deliverance which way he should accomplish the great work of Propitiation and therefore when fresh guilt contracted by fresh sin lay upon the Conscience their faith was staggered and peace broken because they had a clear Objection against their pardon from their sins but not so clear a Solution from the promise of the pardon of it the Promise being encumbred with so many intricacies that the only refuge was a Retreat to the Faithfulness of God in general Which yet was no easie work under the Scruples and Cavils of present guilt and the Accusation of Conscience Ay! but says he this was more than the Apostles understood till after the Resurrection though Christ had expresly told them of it Was it so Then 1. They could never know it to the World's end For if telling and express telling will not make us know there 's no remedy we must be content to be ignorant But this is our Author's humour to reproach all the World for Soâ—… and Fools but himself and a few more Rational Heads The Jews were all Fools they had more particular Promises than Abraham and yet they looked only for a temporal Prince The Apostles they were all Naturals for they had been told and expresly told of it and yet understood no more than the wall I wonder what could have been done more to make them know it unless it had been beaten into their heads with a Beetle I suppose our Author has got this fancy from some such place as that Mark 9. 31. The Son of Man is delivered into the hands of Men and they shall kill him and after that he is killed he shall rise again but they understood not the saying But can we be so vain as once to imagine that they understood not the Grammar of those words that they knew not the literal sence of dying No! but they had not such clear satisfaction about some of the Consequents of it Perhaps they had not such a firm and stedfast belief of the truth of it as might bear up their hearts at an even rate of Tranquillity and Calmness under their temptations and tryals they might not improve the Truth to encourage in a patient waiting for the Resurrection of Christ And that this was it that pinch'd them is plain they declare it Luke 24. 19 20 21. Concerning Iesus of Nazareth how the chief Priests delivered him to be condemned to death and crucified him but we trusted that it had been be that should have redeemed Israel They believed his Crucifixion but were staggered about his Resurrection Hereupon Christ rebukes their slowness of heart to believe all that the Prophets had spoken how Christ ought to suffer and to enter into his glory ver 25 26. Besides it 's a common Rule That verba intellectus implicant affectiones words that in their bare sound only denote the understanding yet in their true intent and meaning take in the will and affections And again Negatives are often put for Comparatives I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice that is I will have Mercy rather than Sacrifice So here They understood not that is They understood not so much of it as such clear Expressions deserved 3. Another great Scruple for I see there 's no end of them is this He must understand the perfect holiness and innocency of Christ's life But that was the least thing of a thousand He needed no Elias to explain that a very Nullifidian would have believed that he whom God had designed to bless others must needs be perfectly blessed himself 'T is true had Christ's work been no other than what our Author has cut out for him he might have discharged it without an absolute sinless Perfection A Prophet might have revealed the whole will of God and afterwards confirmed his Doctrine by his death but to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice this required that Christ the Antitype should be holy harmless undefiled and separated from sinners And in this God was punctual and precise under the Law that the Sacrifice of Atonement should be without spot and without blemish And thus much Abraham might learn from his own Sacrifices and had he conceived the least suspicion that Christ would prove a sinner it had damped his joy and triumph in the foresight of his day Ay! but says he further he must understand that he fulfilled all Righteousness not for himself but for us Answ. 1. It 's a most wretched and unrighteous way of procedure to call things clear and evident into question for the sake of some that are obscure and disputable It becomes ingenuous persons to agree to what is clear and certain leaving them upon their own Basis and to reduce the doubtful to them It 's plain that Abraham was justified by Faith his Righteousness was the Righteousness of Christ If the measure of his knowledg herein be unknown to us yet that he had a knowledg is not so If God revealed this to Abraham's Faith I doubt not but he believed it That he did not is more than our Author can prove If he shall attempt it his Arguments may be considered in the mean time his Conceits and Crotchets ought not to prejudice the Truth But if God did not reveal it Abraham's Faith might live though not be so vigourous and strong without it 2. Abraham might know that what Christ suffered he suffered not for himself but in the stead of those for whom he suffered for he saw the Sacrifices die and yet not for their own sins And why he might not conclude That what a Redeemer did was for others too I cannot tell 3. There 's many a sincere and sound Believer that understands not all the Terms of Art that are used in the Explication of the Doctrine of Justification that perhaps cannot tell you which part of Christ's obedience answers this and which the other exigency of the sinner and yet believes the Thing that Christ is made to him Righteousness of God He is not so well versed in the Nomenclature of the Schools as to call every thing by its proper name but goes downright to work he renounces his own Righteousness sees the necessity of a Redeemer to make his peace with God accepts of life upon God's terms and leads a holy life suitable to his present mercies and future hopes and leaves the rest to the Learned World to wrangle about who may perhaps dispute themselves gravely and learnedly into Hell whilst the poor honest man believes his Soul into Glory 4. He must understand the great mystery
of the Incarnation of the Son of God Understand the mystery of the Incarnation I assure you it 's fair if it be well believed I have not met with many not with any that understand the mystery of it to this day It 's more adviseable for our Author to secure his own Faith in this point than Abraham's Understanding Abraham was a Believer and received his Religion upon the Authority of the Revealer but our Author will own none but what approves it self to his Reason and whether the Incarnation of Christ have had that happiness with him I cannot tell and therefore to deal plainly with him I have some Conjectures that may weigh against his Prejudices which incline me to choose Abraham's Faith even in this particular before his own But however that be the Scripture assures us that Abraham was justified the same way that New-Testament-Believers are One God one Lord Iesus Christ one Holy Spirit yesterday to day and the same for ever and if his poor prejudices must controul divine Revelations I cannot help it An Atheist would believe there iâ—… a God but that he cannot get over all Objections and our Author would believe the Gospel-report of the way of Abraham's Justification but that he cannot weather all the Prejudices which he first creates and then pleads 5. He must understand the nature of Faith and of rowling the Soul on Christ for Salvation and renouncing all Righteousness of his own Answ. I question not but the Father of the Faithful one so much in the exercise of Faith understood very well the nature of it and that he would hardly have lighted his Candle at our Author's Torch but it 's grown the Mode for junior Understandings to vilifie the grey Heads of the Fathers and to count them all Blâ—…ck heads that think not to a hairs breadth with them Abraham knew that Faith consisted in a firm belief that what God had promised was true and that the things of the Promise were exceeding good and so to him He gave a full assent and consent to both with their special Reasons he embraced the mercy of the Promise with thankfulness and joy and credited the veracity of him that made the Promise with security of mind and he felt by experience that quiet and satisfaction of Soul that arises from an interest in him that gave and that Redeemer that was given in the Promise And if he must be jeered for rowling himself on God and on his Christ for ought I know he must bear his burden 5. And now conformable to his old awkward humour our Author will attempt the deciding the Controversie Which way Abraham was justified from Heb. 11. And this I say is a perverse and awkward way of proceeding to wave the proper places Rom. 4. Gal. 3. where the Apostle professedly disputes the point and fix upon one where he disputes it not Two things he would perswade us to believe him in 1. That the Apostle in this Chapter discourses of a justifying Faith To which I answer That the Apostle does indeed Treat of a Faith that justifies but not of Faith as it justifies A justifying Faith has many excellent and admirable uses does a Christian noble service besides that of justifying him before God It teaches him to trust God in all the ways and methods of his Providences to depend on him for all the good things of this life as well as those of a better It deals with the Promises of the life that now is and those of that to come It encourages us to pray Give us this day our daily bread as well as Forgive us our trespasses It instructs us to commit our concerns to his fatherly love and care to wrestle vigourously with all the oppositions we meet with in the Profession of Christianity to walk comfortably chearfully conscientiously in our particular Callings to despise the things that are seen which are but temponal in comparison of those which are not seen and are eternal It taught Abel to offer Sacrifice to God whereby he had the witness that he was righteous God testifying of his gifts And if our Author can see no difference between being made Righteous and having the witness of it in his Conscience he needs a Collyrium which I cannot help him to It taught Enoch also to walk with God from whence he had the same testimony that he pleased God The same Faith that justified him procured him a testimony of his Justification but not as it justified him The Direct Act of Faith is one thing and the Reflecting Act of Faith another It taught Noah also to take Gods warning of the approaching Deluge and to prepare an Ark to escape the danger Whereby he condemned the World and became heir of the Righteousness which is by Faith that is he had more full assurance of his Acceptation with God According to a common Rule Multa tunâ—… fieri dicuntur quando facta esse manifestantur 2. He would perswade us into his Notion of a justifying Faith This justifying Faith says he is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen But the Apostle does not here intend to give us a strict Definition of a justifying Faith but a Description of its most noble effects A justifying Faith produces these effects but not at all times nor in all persons justified it 's Faith in its vigour not in its essence that is here described By this Faith the Elders obtained a good report before men and their own Consciences yet was it not this Act of Faith that justified them before God though it was the same Faith that produced this Act by which they were justified Whereas therefore he would oblige us yet more by his critical skill in the Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a firm and confident expectation of those things we hope forâ—… and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Argument of the Being of those things we do not see For my part I am not much edified and therefore let him make merry with his own Talents That which follows will be more for our Information for he will now speak to the Act the Object and the several kinds of Faith 1. For the Act of Faith It is as he says such a firm and stedfast perswasion of the truth of those things that are not evident to sense as makes us confidently hope for them But this seems to me to be a hungry description of the Act of justifying Faith The Scripture has other apprehensions of this matter which describes the Act of faith by receiving John 1. 12. To as many as received him to them he gave power to become the sons of God even to them that believe on his name Where if the Evangelist may be trusted to make his own Exegesis Receiving of Christ and Believing on his name do mutually interpret each other It 's not enough that the Understanding be engaged in this work which may be found in the worst of men and
as a secondary Use some surly ill-conditioned People would conclude that it was not used to confirm a Covenant because the other half was not imployed for that use 2. Another use of the Blood of the Sacrifice sprinkled was to procure the favour of God 2. Chron. 29. 21 22. where we read 1. That all these Lambs Bullocks Rams Goats were offered to God at the Altar Hezekiah commanded the Priests to offer them on the Altar 2. That when the Blood had been shed at the Altar it was afterwards sprinkled on the Altar 3. To shew that the great operation of the Blood even as sprinkled was by vertue of his having been once shed at the Altar The two Goats of the Sin-Offering were only slain by the Priests after they had laid their hands on them and thereby laid the sins of the People upon them in their Typical way but their Blood was not at all sprinkled upon the Altar and yet the greatest efficacy is ascribed to them as the Sin-Offering 4. The design of all these Sacrifices their Offering upon the Altar the shedding and then sprinkling of the Blood is said to be v. 24. to make Reconciliation with their Blood upon the Altar and to make Atonement for all Israel 5. And that none might harp upon the old humour that surely the People were fallen out among themselves were all in Mutiny and Civil-Wars and this Blood was to reconcile them and make them friends We are told It was for all Israel for the Kingdom the Sanctuary for Iudah for Church and State Prince and People All had offended God and this was the Typical way of recovering his favour and regaining a Communion with him in his Temple 3. The Blood was sprinkled also for Purification and Cleansing Lev. 14. 5. Answerable hereto God has promised in the Covenant of Grace that he will sprinkle his people with clean water and from all their Idols and Abominations will be cleanse them Ezek. 36. which he effects by the power of the Holy Spirit and by the Blood of Iesus Therefore are Saints called elect according to the foreknowledg of God the Father through the Sanctification of the Spirit uâ—…to obedience and sprinkling of the Blood of Iesus Christ. 1 Pet. 1. 2. 4. The Blood was sprinkled before the Mercy-Seat Lev. 16. 15. When the Priest had shed the blood of the Sacrifice at the Altar and offer'd it to God he carries in some of the Blood into the most Holy place and by that Blood intercedes with God for the People Thus our Lord Jesus when by the once offering of himself he had made an Atonement with God for sin discharges the other great part of 〈◊〉 Priesthood becomes our intercessor at the throne of Grace and in the merit and vertue of that Blood which was once shed for the reconciling of God and procuring his favour he lives for ever to make intercession for us And now I suppose it may be left to all indifferent Persons to judg whether our Author has not most barbarously Murdered the Death of Christ it self and trampled his sacred Blood under his feet allowing no other end or use to it but that oâ—… confirming a Covenant whereas considered as the Blood of sprinkling it has far greater and higher ends and yet the Blood as sprinkled comprehends not the whole design of that Blood § 4. But yet supposing That all the ends of the Death of Christ were wrap't up in that one expression the Blood of sprinkling and supposing also that the Blood of the Sacrifices as sprinkled had no other end or use but the confirming of a Covenant yet how will this prove his main Assertion That we owe the Covenant of Grace to the Death of Christ All that will follow is that we owe the Confirmation of the Covenant to it and only the Confirmation of the Covenant and then another thing will follow too that we do not owe the Covenant it self to it unless he can prove that procuring and confirming are Terms of the same importance The advantage our Author has got by this way of Reasoning is that he has found out a way how to own all Scripture-Expressions and yet accommodate them to his own preconceived Opinions 1. Hence says he we are said to be justified by the Blood of Christ Rom. 5. 9. That is by the Gospel-Covenant which was confirmed and ratified by his Death To which I Answer 1. If we may be said to be justified by his Blood because his Blood confirmed the Covenant then we may be said more properly to be justified by his Miracles for they indeed had a proper direct immediate and sufficient evidence in them to confirm the Doctrine which he Preacht and it 's a Miracle almost as great as any of them that the Scripture should never once intimate that we are justified by Miracles which directly and properly confirmed his Doctrine and yet constantly affirm it of his Death which directly and properly confirmed it not 2. Then also with the same propriety of Speech we may be said to be justified by the Blood of the Martyrs which was a convincing Testimony that they believed their Doctrine to be true and then the old Popish Rhime will come in fashion again Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro te impendit Da nos Christe scandere quo Thomas ascendit 3. If the Blood of Christ contribute no more to our justification than as it confirmed the Truth of this proposition amongst others He that Believes and obeys the Gospel shall be pardoned and saved then it 's possible to be justified without the Blood of Christ God has given us many Arguments to confirm the Truth of the Gospel If then I believe the Truth of what Christ preached upon those Arguments which are suited to its confirmation as upon the evidence of Miracles c. and accordingly obey all its Commands It were very hard if I should miss of Pardon and Life for not believing it upon one single Argument and that but a probable one neither What if I Believe the Promise upon nine of God's Arguments and hit not upon the Tenth obey upon nine of God's Motives and want only that single String to my Bow shall my Faith and Obedience be rejected because not grounded upon every particular Reason that may possibly be Muster'd up to confirm them 4. It will be in vain ever to speak or write again if such far-fetcht Consequences be allowed to interpret what is spoken and written There are no two things in the world so remote each from other but they have some kind of Relation and Affinity and if this way will salve all there will hardly be found that thing in the World if it may but be conceived to have had any Relation as an Argument to our Faith and Obedience but we may be said to be justified by it We are said to be justified by the Blood of Christ True But how Why thus The Blood of Christ signifies
and then our Authors Argument will hold though his Cause break If God for the sake of Abrahams imperfect Obedience yet as he was the Head of the League gave so many temporal Mercie to Israel surely then God for the sake of Christ the Head of all that the Father hath given him will bestow Spiritual and Eternal Mercies for the Head and Members making but one Body the Obedience of the Head is reputed the Obedience of the Members And as the Blessings which God bestows for Christs sake are Transcendently gâ—…eater than those bestowed on Israel for Abrahams sake so is the Obedience which Christ performed upon it's own account and the Dignity of the Person infinitely beyond the imperfect Obedience of Abraham and the Union which Faith makes with Christ is a stricter Union than any Natural Civil Political Union that could possibly be between Abraham and his Posterity Thus I have endeavoured to Vindicate our Authors Argument but I am sure he had rather it should perish than be thus justified But is it not strange our Author should tell us That he knows how many Blessings God bestowed upon the Children of Israel for their Fathers sakes and yet not acquaint us with one single Blessing that God bestows on us for Christs sake For the sake of Christs Personal Obedience I wish I had so much Interest in any Friend of his that had that Interest in him to perswade him to acquaint us freely and open-heartedly what those blessings are and how procured Why just now he comes to it The Righteousness of his Life and the Sacrifice of his Death both serve to the same end to establish and confirm the Gospel-Covenant God was so well pleased with what Christ did and suffered with the obedience of his Life and Death that for his sake he entred into a Covenant of Grace with Mankind Very good what needed all this Circumlocution and Periphrase To beat about and about the Bush Had it not been more Civil to have given us our doom in plain English than to Tantalize us with sugared hopes and expectations of some great matter from Abraham Isaac and Iacob Some would say 1. That this ascribes more Influence to Abrahams Obedience than thus to Christs for God for the sake of Abraham's Active Obedience entred into a Covenant with Israel and chose them to be his peculiar People without the Death of Abraham but the Obedience of Christs Life and Death must both concur to procure this Covenant and yet it is such a one as I suppose God would not refuse upon as small an account as the sake of Abraham 2. Some will say this is not to Answer the Question but perplex it The Question at first was what influence the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Sacrifice of his Death have upon our acceptation with God He Answers They serve to establish the Covenant they confirm to us that God will pardon and save us if we believe and Obey but what if I Obey without such confirmation shall my Obedience be rejected without it be performed upon that Confirmation Ay but God entred into this Covenant of Grace for Christs sake Still I say that 's not an answer but the bandying the Question upon us again a hundred times over Why should his Life and Death have such an influence upon God to make that Covenant Why should they Operate that way What connexion is there between Christs active and passive Obedience and such a Covenant But sure we forget our selves for we are enquiring into the influence of Christs Active Obedience And 1. For Confirming a Covenant let any rational Man satisfie me how The Obedience of a Person perfectly holy pure spotless sinless being accepted of God should prove this promise That therefore God will accept them whos 's best Obedience is imperfect and defective This is so far from confirming it that God will accept me who am a Sinner that it leads to utter dispair of acceptance with him seeing I came so infinitely short of my pattern What hope can a sinner have of acceptance from a consideration that God has accepted Christ who was no sinner If Faith was ready to believe that God would accept him that believes and obeys yet had it seen Christs Faith and Obedience and his acceptance thereon it might have stagger'd him that ever such pitiful things as his Faith and Obedience should find favour with God And if Faith was so strong as to overcome that difficulty as to believe the Promise notwithstanding this staggering Example yet it 's far enough from Truth that a sinner should believe the promise ever the more that his imperfect Service should be accepted and rewarded because Christs entire obedience was so Nay without question it had been a greater confirmation of that promise to have had assurance that God had pardoned some hainous Offender some flagitious wretch who deserved Condemnation than to behold him accepting a Person not obnoxious to Condemnation So says the Apostle 1 Tim. 1. 16. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy that in me first Iesus Christ might shew forth all long-suffering for a pattern to them who hereafter should believe on him to Life everlasting The Pardon of a Blasphemer one injurious a Persecutor is a stronger confirmation that God will pardon a sinner than the acceptance of Him that had done no wrong neither was guile found in his mouth 2. But now for Gods making such a promise for Christs sake or entring into a Covenant to pardon accept for Christs sake this answers not the Question in the least for 1. It onely asserts that God has declared openly that he will do it Now a Declaration of Pardon is not a Pardon a promise of acceptance is not acceptance and therefore a Reason of or Motive to such a Promise such a Declaration is not a Reason of or Motive to Pardon and acceptance Christs Obedience was so well pleasing to God that for his sake he made such a Promise Well but if my Obedience be little Christs Obedience will not make it accepted as if it were great if imperfect it will not render it accepted as if it were perfect 2. That God has made such a promise for Christs sake answers not the Question for it s but turning the Question into an Assertion As if we should enquire what Reason is there that God should accept me for Christs obedience And he should Answer there is a Reason why God should accept me for it but never shew the Reason Or thus What Cause is Christs Obedience of the Acceptance of our Obedience And he should say it is a Cause but not shew the Cause But then further The Obedience and Righteousness of Christs Life was one thing which made his Sacrifice so Meritorious I confess I question the Truth of the Proposition had Christ Sacrificed himself as soon as he came into the World his Sacrifice had been as Meritorious being the Sacrifice of him that as Priest was God and
his Abilities in the Bud or to Blemish so promising a Work in the Frontispiece Our Author having once oblig'd us by discovering the Origen of this Mistake is resolv'd to load us with a second obligation by rectifying it For which purpose though he has many wayes to the Wood yet the very best way of All is to Examine the various significations of this Name Christ in Scripture First he assures us that Christ is Originally the Name of an Office The Name of an Office and Originally the Name of an Office too To which I onâ—…y whisper softly in his Ear It 's neither the one nor the other not the Name much less Originally the Name of an Office The Hebrew word Messiah to which the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exactly answers denotes a Person Anoyntâ—…d and thereby set apart for some special work or service And I dare be judg'd by this Gentleman himself if it be not so For in the same sentence with the same breath wherewith he had told us that Christ is Originally the Name of an Office he immediately addes which the Iews call the Messias or one Anoynted by God And now sure the Controversie will be brought into a narrow compass Whether He whom the Iews call the Messias or one Anoynted of God be a Person or an Office that is Whether a Person be a Person or no but it 's not for me to determine so weighty a Point And therefore the Gentleman himself who is a fair Disputer and no imperious Dictator shall give you a Reason why he contradicts his own Assertion wherein he is the rather to be believed because he speaks with so becoming a proof of credibility that to confirm a Truth he confutes himself For saith he under the Law their Prophets Priests and Kings were invested in their several Offices by the Ceremony of Anoynting them with Oyl Not to mention what a profound Observation he has made becoming his Good Learning nor how little need he had to Transcribe it from Volkelius lib. 3. de ver â Relig. c. 2. p. 41. Propteâ—…eà quod Olim tum Sacerdotes Vatésque tum Reges per Unctionis Religionem â—…tque Ceremoniam muneribus suis initiabantâ—…r All Ordinâ—…ry People would conclude that Kings Priests and Prophets signifie not Offices in the Abstract but Persons very Persons real errant Persons as any are under the Sun vested with their several and respective Offices in the Concrâ—…te as your systematical men love to speak And therefore if our Authors Reason reaches the Thing it pretends to evince Christ the Messiah will not signifie an Office but a Person authorised by his Office for the discharge of those Employments his Eternal Father had anoynted and appointed him unto But how shall we know whom or what the Iews called the Messiah The very best way that I know is to single out those Places in the Old Testament where Messiah or the Anoynted one is found and let the Gentleman practise upon them with all the critical skill and cunning he is guilty of and see how he can wire-draw Office out of them Ps. 2. 2. The Rulers take Counsel against the Lord and against his Anoynted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Against his Messias or against his Christ It would be harsh to Render it against his Office Whatever it was it is called Gods King v. 6. and Gods Son v. 7. and whether it was a Person or an Office that will bear those Titles I shall referre to his determination Dan. 9. 25. Messiah the Prince 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 V. 26. The Messiah shall be cut off but not for himself was it an Office that was cut off though not for Himself So that this New Notion dwindles away into a fine New-Nothing which is a thousand pities It would doubtless have served his turn at many a dead lift in the ensuing debates however it was advisedly done and upon mature deliberation that he favour'd us not with one single Text to prove that wherein the Scripture professes a deep silence It has been accounted very ominous to stumble at the Threshold and whilest he layes it down as a superliminary Maxim That All Errour has some yet to instance in One which has No Appearance of Truth But because our Author has so courtâ—…ously discover'd to us the Ground of that dreadfull mistake That Christ will save some whom his Gospel condemnes and as you know One good Turn deserves another that we may not be behind hand in returns of Civility I look upon my self engaged in all the bonds of honesty and Ingenuity to shew him the Ground of his gross Mistake That Christ is Originally the Name of an Office The Man had seen or read somewhere an Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is something more a kin to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than Chalk is to Cheese or Milk to Mustard and because that word signifies Unctio an Anoynting and so perhaps at two or three removes an Office the Good-man dream't that Messiah must needs be of the same import Quod miserè volumus id facilè credimus and this might possibly Trepan him into that critical Soloecisme yet if I have not hit the Nail on the head he has the liberty to assign the True ground of his Mistake and in the mean time I shall live as well as I doe But having given us such a Notable Specimen of his Charity he is as willing to improve this gratefull Occasion to Bless us with his Admirable Divinity and to Illuminate our Understandings as Dionysius the supposed Areopagite expresses it with a Beam of Darkness Two things he is resolved we shall be his Debtors for First to inform us of the precise time of Christs Anoynting to his Offices Secondly of the Nature of the Offices themselves 1 For the Time he tells us Jesus received the Divine Unction at his Baptism when the Spirit of God descended on him like a Dove Well seeing 't was no sooner I am glad it was no later and if it will not be allow'd from his Birth and Incarnation it 's some Comfort that it was before his Death or Crucifixion But in good earnest was not Jesus The Christ before then I see All wise men are not of one mind For those three of the East Matth. 2. 2. came to seek and worship One Born King of the Iews And the Angels preacht other Doctrine to the plain Shepherds Luke 2. 11. Unto you is Born this day in the City of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord and v. 46. at Twelve years of Age we find him engaged in his Fathers business and we are loth to censure that he ran before he was sent or acted before he had a Call or executed his work before he had a Commission because we cannot tell as times goe what ill use some might make on 't But now to give some Appearance of Truth though never so little to this Errour we are turn d over to Acts
that Sacrifice once for all to be offer'd up to God for that end 6. And it was Necessary that the gracious God who had trusted the World so long with Pardon Peace and Life should at last be satisfied and not alwayes be put off without due Compensation to his Justice and Truth 7. The Case and Condition of the Elect of God made by the common Apostacy Enemies to God and under the Curse annex'd to the Violation of the Law upon this one Supposition that God would pursue his Original Love and Purposes of Grace to them that a due Compensation should be provided for his wronged Justice Sin had perplexed matters and involved things in such Intricacies that Humane Wisdom could not find out an Expedient How God might be Just and yet the Justifier of him that believes how Mercy and Truth should meet together how Righteousness and Peace should kiss each other Many Salvo's have been propounded to the World many Expedients set on foot but upon severer scrutiny have been found Physicians of no value not able to heal the wounds of an inquisitive Conscience awaken'd with the sense of the Souls worth and Gods wrath in the Judgement to come All these things does the Lord Christ alone compromise adjust all these Accounts and reconcile these Intrests The Justice of God is satisfied the Law fulfilled the Truth of God secured his Holiness vindicated and all his Attributes unreproached 'T is true indeed God is a free Agent and absolutely consider'd might have left the world to perish under the Curse but seeing it pleased him to carry on his design of Love still notwithstanding the intervention of sin what others may pretend I know not but to our Apprehensions as there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him so there is one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him 2 Cor. 8. 6. 2. The Work of Christ whilest in the World was the discharge of his whole Mediatory Undertaking as Prophet Priest and King To divide Christ is to destroy him As half a Heart is no Heart in Gods Acceptation so half a Christ is no Christ as to any saving advantage the Soul can possibly reap from him He was therefore 1. A Prophet to acquaint us fully with the Preceptive will of God in which rank we must place that great Command of Faith in Christ 1 John 3. 23. And this is his Commandement that we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ. He acquainted us also with the Promissory Will of God as the great Encouragement of our Souls in walking resolvedly with God in wayes of New Obedience He acquainted us also with the Purposes of God which should follow his Promises and Precepts to invigorate them with Efficacy and Success And this he does by the Ministry of his Word but more especially by the Holy Spirit inwardly and powerfully and yet sweetly not offering violence to our Faculties but making us a willing People in the day of his Power 2. He was a Priest and as such he offer'd himself a true and proper Sacrifice to God thereby answering the Sacrifices of the Old Testament which though they were Typical yet in their way were true and Real Sacrifices and all this in pursuit of the Fathers Love and his own 1 Joh. 4. 10. Herein is love not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the Propitiation for our sins what Intercessions as a Priest he made for those the Father had given him we need no other pattern of than that Prayer John 17. per totum 3. His Kingly Office he exercised in gathering governing defending protecting his Church abolishing those Laws which were accommodated to that other Dispensation and would not fit its present posture and instituting New Ordinances of Worship agreeable to the oeconomy of the New Testament which Office yet he exercised in such a way that little of Glory and Majesty appeared therein to a Carnal Eye the Grandeur thereof being vailed under the form of a Servant 3. The general Design of this Work we may assure our selves was exceeding Glorious nothing but admirable could be the Product of such an undertaking with what Joy and Triumph was it entertain'd by the Angels who were less concern'd therein than poor fallen Man Luke 2. Glory be to God on high on Earth peace good will towards men 1 Tim. 1. 15. This is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation that Jesus Christ came into the World to save sinners the chiefest of Sinners Which Great End that he might attain he dealt with God as a Priest to reconcile him to us with Us he dealt as a Prophet enlightning our Minds in the Knowledge of God and our selves and as a King subduing our hearts by his Spirit of Grace to accept of those Terms which might secure the Glory of God in our Eternal Salvation But the main Design I shall express no otherwise than in the words of the Church of England Art 2. who suffered and was crucified dead and buried to reconcile his Father to us and to be a Sacrifice not only for Original but all Actual sins of Men. From whence we learn 1. That Reconciling and Sacrificing Work is onely proper for a state of Humiliation it 's annex'd to his Death Sufferings Sacrifice 2. That the Death of Christ according to the mind of this Article supposes God to be incensed against and angry with Sinners and therefore he suffered to Reconcile God to us 3. That the Death and Sufferings of Christ are of sufficient value to secure Gods Honour and appease his Anger 4. That Original Sin how small a mote soever it may seem in some mens eyes is yet such a troublesome Beam in Gods eyes that it requires the same Blood of Christ to be a Sacrifice for it 5. That all Actual sins even the smallest if any may be called small need the Blood of Christ to reconcile God to the Sinner without which they will infallibly destroy the Soul Thus far the Church of England of whose Doctrine our Author has great Reason to be very tender if not for the Truths sake yet for his Credits sake having subscribed it and above all for St. Georges sake Buttolphs-lane for otherwise it may be easie for some poching prolling Fellows to dismount George-a-horse-bâ—…k and get into our Authors Saddle CHAP. III. Sect. 2. Of Acquaintance with the Person of Christ. INterest is beholden to the Eagle for two of its greatest Excellencies a quick Eye to discover and sharp Pounces to seize the Quarry When once it had appeared in some pregnant Instances that the High-road to Preferment lay in the way of exposing Religion under the Persons of the Non-Conformists it 's incredible how soon sagacious Interest discern'd and made her advantage The old dull Methods of Marrying the Chamber-maid or Trucking with the young Gentleman grew as Obsolete as Systematical Divinity An unhappy happy
that God can be just in destroying without the least Impeachment of his Mercy and Goodness since Mercy it self is not obliged to plead for the Sinner without respect had to the other Properties of that God who is Essentially what he is But has our Author never a Stone to throw at the head of this Truth Two things he offers most lamentable Ignorance and horrid Blasphemy 1 Here 's most wretched Ignorance A happy Change sayes he this from all Iustice to all Love No Sir don't trouble your self here 's no Change at all happy or unhappy God is the same holy just righteous gracious and loving God that ever he was onely sayes the Doctor he 's otherwise discovered Justice and Mercy are not contrary things in God he can be all Love and Mercy and yet punish the Sinner that cannot plead the Death of Christ for his Discharge and he can be all Iustice too and yet pardon the believing repenting Sinner through Jesus Christ The Change is not made in God with whom is no variableness nor shadow of turning but the Change is made in the State and Condition of the Creature who once standing upon his own bottom and so considered by a holy and righteous God was the Object of just displeasure but now being found in Christ and so eyed by God is in another Capacity and meet to enjoy the benefit of that Grace and Love to which before such Qualification he had no right and whereof he was utterly incapable 2 I wish Ignorance had been the worst that might be charg'd upon his Discourse for certainly here 's a vein of the most unparallel'd Blasphemous Drollery that ever faced the World with an Imprimatur except Friendly Debates Ecclesiastical Policies and some few others of the same Kidney And first he will represent the Holy God in his taking Vengeance or requiring Satisfaction like an angry passionate Man and the Grace of God upon the Account of Christ's Death and Sufferings to the Kindness of a revengefull Man when he has glutted himself with Revenge and his Passion is over I think it might become our Author or the proudest Worm on Earth to have spoken more reverently of the way of Gods dealing with repenting Sinners through our Lord Jesus Christ That discomposure and perturbation of Mind to which frail man is obnoxious falls not upon the great God he can turn the wicked into Hell and all those that forget God without Passion Fury is not in me saith God Isa. 27. 4. An earthly Judge in his private Capacity may weep when he pronounces Sentence of Death against a Malefactor and yet remember that he is a Iudge and cut off from the City of God the wicked of the Land Nihil minùs quam irasci punientem decet Nothing is more uncomely in him that punisheth than Passion And though we read of Gods Anger Wrath and Fury yet it becomes us to conceive of God according to his Dignity even when he represents himself to our Capacity Though God humble himself we have no warrant to abase him whatever things are attributed to God which are common to Men it 's our Duty to garble out all the Imperfections and Frailties that those Qualities are mixed and attended with in Men before we ascribe them to God But this is not the worst he will strain his impious Drollery a few Notes higher The summe of which is that God is all Love and Patience when he has taken his fill of Revenge as others use to say the Devil is good when he is pleased This is indeed the summe of all our Authors blasphemous Froth but neither the total summe nor any particular of what the Doctor has ever asserted The summe of the Doctors words is this That God is the righteous Iudge of all the Earth and that it 's a righteous thing with him to render to every Man according to his Works and yet he has pleased to admit of Satisfaction to be made by his Son Iesus Christ who most willingly offer'd himself a Propitiatory Sacrifice to God In which Son of his whoever shall believe God is ready to pardon and forgive him And now must the plain Truth of the Gospel be thus muffled up and disguised in ugly Expressions to render it lyable to scorn and contempt Thus have the Papists array'd the Martyrs of Jesus in the Sambenit or Devils-Coat first shewing them as Hereticks and then sacrificing them to the flames I see he has furnish'd himself with a Creep-hole It 's not as he but as others say Sed malè dum recitas incipit esse tuus As 't is applyed it 's his own and yet it hits not neither For the Devil is never so pleased as to become Good nor God ever so displeased as to become Evil Nay the Devil is then worst when he is pleas'd for the greatest evil pleaseth him best and God is gloriously excellent when he is displeased for the greatest Evil is the Cause of his displeasure But let this pass for an Ornament of our Authors style which is indeed embellished with Figures but none more beautifies it than this which we may well call a Satanismus He has not yet done he has not loaded the Truth with Reproach to his mind and therefore one id est will doe it That is he would not believe God himself should he make never so many Promises of being good and gracious to Sinners unless he were sure he had first satisfi'd his Revenge But let him not be angry We believe every Promise that God has made of being gracious to Sinners but we say we cannot find one such without Provision first made for the securing Gods Righteousness Shew us a Promise that is Yea and Amen and not in Christ. Produce that Promise wherein God is engaged to justifie a Sinner and not be just himself quote us the place from whence we may flatter our selves that God will destroy any of his Attributes to save a Sinner However therefore our Author has represented God he has thus represented himself 1. That he is a Holy God A God of purer eyes than to behold evil and that he cannot which is the Word so displeases the Man look on iniquity he cannot but see it wherever it is as he is omniscient and yet he cannot see it cannot look on it wherever it is without Abhorrency He is a holy God and from his Natural and Essential Holiness does it arise that he cannot behold sin with Approbation and therefore must and will punish it Thus has he represented himself Psal. 5. 4 5 6. Thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness neither shall evil dwell with thee The foolish shall not stand in thy sight thou hatest all the workers of Iniquity 2. God further testifies of himself that he is the righteous Iudge of all the Earth Governing and Judging the World according to his own holy Nature and the Rules of his holy Law and not according to our Authors good
Iesus Christ who has by the Sacrifice of Himself reconciled God to Man and Man to God has received some Light and Confirmation from these Papers That our Author has opposed any thing that may stagger the Faith of Christians tolerably exercised in the Word of Righteousness I do not see but that it 's easie to erect a Castle in the Aire and when we have so done to draw a formal siege about it to batter storm rase and utterly demolish it not to leave one stone upon another this I grant he has satisfied me in to satiety For having all along laid it for the ground-work of his most accomplisht Raillery That some men found all their Religion upon the Person of Christ exclusive of the Scriptures he is now resolved to destroy that Hypothesis to give it no Quarter but even to Internecion plow up the Foundation and sow it with Salt that After-ages may sing goodly Ballads of his Atchievement Iam seges est ubi Troja fuit Thus when the Creative Power of the Imagination has given Life to a Chimâ—…ra the same Power with the same ease can stop it s breath annihilate it and calcine it to it 's primitive Nothing There are Two parts of his present Discourse First a false Supposition Secondly a most unmercifull Confutation of that Supposition 1. That which he supposes and is resolved to suppose in spight of Fate is that These men you wot of Pretend to learn their Religion from an Acquaintance with Christs Person to which he often addes and alwayes understands without Gospel Revelation A Supposition so idle absurd and palpably false that none can possibly believe it of those Persons upon whom 't is fixt but those and some such there are that have accustomed themselves to tell a Lye so often till at length they begin to be pretty well perswaded that they speak Truth Happy men that have found an Expedient so far to mitigate their Guilt that what was before a formal Lye becomes now onely a material Untruth That Iesus Christ is God and Man that he dyed for our Sins and rose again for our Iustification that he was set forth by God to be a Propitiation for sin to declare Gods Righteousness for the Pardon of it that he is our High-Priest our Advocate with the Father with whatever else comes within the compass of their Creed they do solemnly profess to have learnt from the Gospel onely and surther than as Scripture has been Liberal herein they protest in so many Letters and Syllables they know nothing less or more these things are owing purely to Revelation and they are ready when or wheresoever cited before their competent Iudges to give it under their Hands and Seals attested with all the Good men and True of the Vicinage The plain Truth is Their Principles lie in it their Writings witness to it and at other times they are reproach'd by these very same unreasonable men that they so tenaciously and pertinaciously adhere to the written Word that they make it the Rule of their Faith the Rubrick of their Worship the Directory of their Prayers the Square of their Obedience the Treasury of their Hopes and the grand Cynosure whereby they steer or desire to steer the whole Course of their Conversation to Eternal Life 2. The Confutation of this Hypothesis which is his second Travel must therefore needs be very easie And to this purpose he brings us in two pompous Reasons mounted like St. George himself on horse-back armed Cap-a-pe with his Trusty Morglay by his side his Launce ready couch d but all this while where 's the Dragon Or like a Champion of State who upon the Coronation of some Great Prince presents himself in rigid Steel throws down his Gantlet defies all Men Women and Children in defence of the Princes Title when he knows well enough before-hand that none will Take it up Now his Reasons are drawn the former from the uncertainty of such a Way and the Second which is as strong as the other from the uncertainty of such a Way Reader do not smile It was no less a Piece than the Great Demosâ—…henes who being ask'd What were the Main Qualifications of a Good Oratour answer'd The first is Pronunciation the second Pronunciation and the third forsooth was Pronunciation But stay awhile and you will see our Author come off well enough 1 His first Argument is taken from the uncertainty of such a procedure This is at best to build Religion upon uncertain Conjectures we agrâ—…e to it and whatever I could be content to be at a loose end in it should not be my Religion but yet for more sureness he lines his Argument with an under-reason and had he faced it with Bayes it would have worn like Steel Had we seen Christ in the flesh and been witnesses of the many Miracles he wrought of his Death upon the Cross and his Resurrection from the Dead had he not acquainted us with the End and Design of all this we might have ghess'd and ghess'd till we had been weary but it's odds we had never ghess'd right Nay yet further to overwhelm all Opponents with Reason upon Reason he addes Because there 's no natural and necessary connexion between the Person of Christ and what he did and suffer'd and the Salvation of Mankind for these things are available for those Ends to which God design'd them the virtue and efficacy of them depends upon God's Institution and Appointment and therefore can be known onely by Revelation So that his Conclusion is this Whoever would learn the Religion of our Saviour must learn it from his Doctrine and not from his Person To say the Truth the greatest fault I find with all this is that he betrayes the Truth he contends for and does not understand that his Clyent had better have given him a Double Fee to say Nothing than a single one to Destroy the Cause he pretends to plead I shall therefore only burden his Margin with a few asterisks and fairly dismiss him 1. Let the Reader carefully enquire who those We are that if they had seen Christ in the flesh his Miracles Death and Resurrection yet without He had acquainted them with the End and Design of all this might have ghess'd themselves weary e're they had ghess'd aright And for the clearing of that let him know that he speaks not here in his own Person but in the Person of others who have not the knack or if they had are not fortified with a Priviledge to conclude Quidlibet ex Quolibet or to demonstrate Godwin-Sands from TenterdonSteeple for as to Himself you may be pleased to understand that he can infallibly prove all this and more from as little as that comes to and less Admire his Abilities pag. 84. When We remember that Christ died as a Sacrifice and Propitiation for Sin this gives Us a great Demonstration of Gods good will to us how ready he is to pass by all our former sins in
so affected with all the Arguments to a New Life which are contained in Christs Incarnation and Life and Doctrine c. It seems there are not Arguments enough in his Person but we must run to his Doctrine for a Recruit and what 's become then of his specious Promise that he would out-throw all that ever tryed before him in making Schemes of Religion from Acquaintance with his Person The veriest Bungler on Earth could but have contradicted himself but I wish that were the worst onâ—…t For 1. Some cannot see any Method at all in it But to be recovered is the Method of being Recovered to be converted is the way to be converted and that 's a very sure way I promise you for Omne quod est in quantum est Necesse est esse But this one of his peculiar Excellencies p. 18. The way to be perfect is to live as Christ lived or which is all one The way to be perfect is to be perfect If any one can make any better of this he shall have my free leave When we are so affected with all the powerfull Arguments contained in Christs Incarnation c. as to be sensible of the shame and folly of sin and to be reconciled to the love and practice of true Piety and Holiness Then The English of which is this When we are once holy then we are holy And this is his New way or Method of a Sinners Recovery by Christ. But 2. We have been made to believe hitherto That Method is a convenient sorting and marshalling of Matters which relate each to other into such an Order as may tend best to the reaching the End in practical Disciplines and making out the Truth in Theories But herein our Author is wretchedly out of the way For first he tells us we must be so affected with all the powerfull Arguments contained in Christs Intercession c. and then we partake in the Merits of his Sacrifice and find the Benefit of his Intercession for us That is we must set the Cart before the Horses which is an excellent Method Seeing we cannot partake of the Fruit of Christs Intercession before we partake of the Fruits of his Sacrifice for it is unquestionable that the Intercession of Christ is available by virtue of and operates by his Sacrifice 3. His Method is very lame upon this Account that he tells us we must be affected with all the powerfull Arguments contained in Christs Incarnation c. and yet never tells us how these Arguments become effectual to affect us which is a main thing in this Method A Method he supposes and yet never informs us whether it be onely a way that God prescribes us to recover our selves by using the best of our own Natural strength or whether it be Gods Way and Method which he proceeds in for the effectual recovery of a Sinner to himself 4. Here 's a Method pretended how a Sinner is recovered and yet no Consideration had what part and share the Holy Spirit bears in it which must needs be marvellously ridiculous to him that considers Iohn 3. 5 6. Except a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Our Saviour had said v. 3. Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God but not contenting himself to have shew'd how absolutely necessary Regeneration is to Salvation v. 5. he shews the Spirits concernment in that work and that all other Endeavours after Conversion without his powerfull Operation will amount to no more than flesh The streams will not rise higher than the Spring V. 6. That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit But yet 5. It 's equally absurd to speak of a Sinners Recovery and never shew from what he is recovered As if he should promise to Open to us the Nature of Motion and yet never shew us from whence the Motion takes its rise nor whither it tends Sinners are here talk'd of to be recovered but whether there be a state of corrupt and sinfull Nature a state of Enmity against God a state of blindness and darkness of Mind from which this Recovery must move we are not honoured with half a word 6. Here 's a recovery to Acts of Obedience love and practice of Piety but nothing of a New Heart a New Nature which the Scripture makes the Vital Principle of all New Obedience Here we are told a little of the Fruit the Tree brings forth but nothing how the Tree was made good that it might bring forth good Fruit. 7. He assigns a sensibleness of the Shame and Folly of Sin as the Means to get a Title to the Promises of the Gospel and yet some of those Promises contain an Engagement of God to give that New heart new spirit which he makes the Condition of obtaining a Title to the Promises Ezek. 36. 26. I will take away the heart of Stone out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of Flesh. I am perswaded that if we should all study seven years to be Impertinent and Ridiculous there are not many that could reach or equallize our Authors Attainments Secondly The other part of his Task wherein he is always most Admirable is To pluck down those Methods which others have or are supposed to have Built And 't is certainly an easier province to find faults than to amend them Now first he enlightens us with this Doctrine That the design of Christs coming into the World was not to distract mens minds with the Terrors of the Law and the Inexorable Iustice of God not to bring us under a Legal Despensation of Fear and Bondage Now all the Colour of this trifling Sophistry lies in two things 1. In putting in the word Distract to make his Negative seem Tenable For though Christ came to Humble to Abase to Awaken the guilty Consciences of sinners yet it would be hard to say he came to fright men out of their Wits to prepare men for Bedlam and the slipping in such an useful word will make a Negative justifiable upon any of the Designs of Christ But can sinners be more Mad than they are who go on securely in a state of Impenitency and Rebellion against God No sure That which some call distracting of sinners is but really a step towards the helping of them to their Wits 2. The Design of Christs coming into the World is either Subordinate which relates still to some further end and design of Christ or Ultimate to which all others do submit and give deference Now 't is true To awaken guilty Consciences with the Terrors of Gods Iustice to bring the Soul into a spirit of Bondage were not that which Christ did aim at as his great End but that he aimed at these things also in the way to his farthest End That is he used the Law to rowse the sleepy sinner to see his danger and provide
therefore suppose them instructed in the Doctrine of Iustification But when the Apostle Paul who is called The Apostle of the Uncircumcision comes to preach and write to the Gentiles he must be more express they knew little of God and nothing at all of a Redeemer they must be taught their Catechism and the first Rudiments of Christianity and therefore do we find these great Points more explicitely handled in his Discourses which are more sparingly and more covertly delivered by the Evangelists 2. The Evangelists have given us a perfect account of Christ's Doctrine but then the perfectness of that account is not to be measured by what Christ preached but by what they were commanded to record and transmit to Posterity S. Iohn was faithful in giving us a perfect account of Christ's Sermons but his faithfulness and the entireness of the account he gives us thereof is not to be taken from every Miracle Christ wrought or every Sermon he preach'd for he omits that whole famous Sermon preach'd by Christ in the Mount recorded by Matthew And S. Matthew was also faithful in his account and yet he omits the excellent Prayer recorded by Iohn Chap. 17. and yet both of them and both the other have conveyed down to us whatsoever was delivered to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from above Luke 1. What strange work would our Author's Dilemma make amongst the four Evangelists if it were discharged at them Did Christ instruct his Hearers in all things necessary to Salvation or Was the Evangelist John short in giving us a perfect account of his Doctrine If the first then Christ was not faithful in his Prophetical Office If the latter then you overthrow the credit of the Gospel And therefore unless you can prove every Article of the Christian Faith from express words in that one single Book of his Gospel and particularly The Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness our Author will retain his inveterate prejudices against it Nay we may fly a great deal higher Christ was faithful in the discharge of his Prophetical Office and therefore no doubt whenever he preach'd a single Sermon he acquainted his Hearers with all things necessary to Salvation and the Evangelists have delivered us a perfect account of every such Sermon and therefore unless you can prove every Article of your Creed from every single Sermon of Christ our Author is like Thomas he will not believe but upoń his own terms but will justifie his prejudices against it That the Doctrine is certainly to be found no-where because he finds it not every-where Christ preach'd so much of necessary Truth in every Sermon as he judg'd necessary the full account of his preaching must be gathered from the rest And every Evangelist has registred so much of Christ's Miracles Sermons and the passages of his Life as he had in charge and what is omitted in one must be supplied from others And all the Evangelists have delivered so much of what Christ taught the Iews as is needful for us to know and what is further necessary for Gentiles to know is abundantly and explicitely made up from other holy Persons divinely inspired for that very end The whole will of God necessary for us to know for salvation is not so explicitely revealed in any one Book of the Sacred Oracles but we have need to receive Information from the whole Nor were the Writings of any one Prophet Evangelist or Apostle design'd to complete the Canon of our Faith but the whole Scripture I say not this as if I at all questioned much less denied that the Doctrine of Christ's Righteousness imputed is laid down by the Evangelists though some mens prejudices will not permit them to see it either there or any-where else but that it is there spoken to more implicitly our Saviour doing another thing touching upon it by the way as supposing them already instructed in it And that the Writings of the Apostles qualified to preach to the Gentiles by the pouring forth of the Holy Spirit upon them have more clearly commented upon that and other important Doctrines and beaten out that Gold which was before in the Lump and though of equal weight yet not so dilated So that there remains no more just cause of Dispute about these matters with them who believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God And as for others they can never want Objections whilst their Corruptions and Unbelief continue in full force strength and power But 5. There is another Prejudice which extremely gravels him That in all the New-Testament there 's no such expression as the Righteousness of Christ And this he says is worth our observing A Learned Observation it is but I think the whole New-Testament is but one great expression of the Righteousness of Christ or else it is but one great blot However I am glad that he will own that the New-Testament mentions the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith and the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Iesus Christ. For the Righteousness of Christ is the Righteousness of that Person who is God They who crucified Christ are said to crucifie the Lord of Glory 1 Cor. 2. 8. and that Blood by which the Church is purchased is called the Blood of God Acts 20. 28. that is the Blood of that Person who is God though not as God Thus the Righteousness of Christ the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith are expressions of the same import They describe the same Righteousness under various Considerations being called the Righteousness of God because it was the Righteousness of him that is God the Righteousness of Christ because it was fulfilled in his own Person and the Righteousness of Faith because Faith makes Him and thereby his Righteousness to become ours However we desire to plead for no more of Christ's Righteousness to be imputed to us than we can evidently prove was inherent in him and fulfilled by him And if after all our Author be so passionately fond of his Prejudices he may keep them to himself But now he will examine these expressions more distinctly 1. For the Righteousness of God He confesses That in the New-Testament most commonly it signifies that Righteousness which God approves and commands and which he will accept for the Iustification of a sinner That was well jumbled God approves and commands a Righteousness in a Believer which he will not accept for the Iustification of a sinner That Righteousness which God will accept he has commanded us to seek in Christ but that Righteousness which he has commanded us to find in our selves is not that Righteousness which he will accept for our Iustification Inherent Righteousness may be called the Righteousness of God because he commands it but especially because he works and creates it But the true Reason of the expression is because it is the Righteousness of him who is God and only discovered by the Wisdom of God and accepted by God in the
the Law only That all the World is not become guilty by the external deeds of the Moral Law and a failure therein he proves Rom. 5. 14. where he shews That death reigned over some who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam ' s transgression 5. Those deeds which David excluded from his Iustification the Apostle excludes from our Iustification for he quotes his Proposition from Psal. 143. 2. and therefore takes it in his sense or else he could not make use of his Authority But David excludes all his deeds whatsoever from Justification Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man be justified He durst not once think of God's entering into judgment with him upon the account of any thing he had attained From all which it appears that the Apostle exclâ—…es the Law the whole Law and the deeds thereof all the deeds thereof from having any concern in the Iustification of a sinner in the sight of God 2. We may observe hence That the Apostle opposes the Righteousness of God unto a Righteousness by the deeds of the Law But now says he the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested vers 21. And as in vers 20. he says not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the deeds of the Law but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the deeds of Law of a Law of any Law So here he says not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Law as if he intended some singular Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a Law without any Law And hence he fully silences and stops the mouth of our Authors Cavil that by the deeds of the Law is meant only an external Conformity of our Actions to it But the Apostles words leave no place for ambiguity For if the Righteousness of God without Law a Law any Law be manifested then without either Ceremonial or Moral Law then also without external or internal deeds of either But the Apostle shuts out Law simply and absolutely The Righteousness of God without Law is manifested As this term Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is more properly predicated of the Moral than of the Ceremonial Law so the deeds of Law are more properly predicated of internal than external deeds and Analogum per se stans stat pro famosior Analogato If then as our Author contends we are justified by the Moral though not by the Ceremonial Law or by internal Conformity to it though not by external Conformity to it only then the Apostles Doctrine is true in an improper or less proper sense but utterly false in the proper or more proper sense of the words For had 〈◊〉 words been inverted they had carried a clearer truth in them By the deeds the internal deeds of the Law the Moral Law shall all flesh be justified But now the Righteousness of God with the Law the Moral Law and it s internal as well as external deeds is manifested But this is not to interpret the Apostle but dictate a new Gospel to him But further Hence I have just occasion to complain of an unrighteous surmise with which our Author loads some men That because they exclude Law and Law-deeds from Iustification in the sight of God that therefore they exclude it from having any place in their Lives and Conversations The Apostle who is a zealous Vindicator of the interest of the Law as a Rule of our Obedience yet we see discharges it wholly from any from all use and service in the Justification of a sinner in the sight of God Therefore he adds Before God and the Psalmist In thy sight to teach us That though the Righteousness of God without Law is manifested as to the truth of the thing yet the Righteousness of God is not cannot be manifested to us without a sincere obedience to the Law There 's a Iustification before God to this the Law a Law any Law contributes nothing but there 's a Justification before Conscience before men and to this a sincere and evangelically universal obedience contributes much 3. The Apostle assures us That this Doctrine of his is no new fancy broached t'other day and set on foot lately in Gospel-times but the same way by which all the good men of old were justified v. 21. It 's witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Now as to the Prophets testimony though our Author approves not their Cryptick way of demonstrating but is all for plain Meridian demonstration yet they are full that Jesus Christ was the main consideration in the Justification of a sinner from of old Acts 3. 25 26. Ye are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant that God made with our Fathers saying to Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed unto you first God having raised up his Son Iesus sent him to bless you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities Whence it appears God's raising up Christ in the World to bless his people with spiritual blessings was no more than what he had covenanted with Abraham and promised to him even in that very Promise which our Author thinks was fulfilled in the numerous Posterity of Isaac But now that this Righteousness of God without Law should be witnessed by Law this seems strange Does the Law witness against it self Is it false to it 's own interest But the Law is God's Law and when it witnesses to a sinner it witnesses home convinces him of the perfect holiness of that God who gave the Law of the peremptoriness of God in not abating one jot or tittle of the Law of the sinners utter inability to come up to the Demands of the Law and therefore the utter impossibility of being justified by the Law of the severity of God's Justice in punishing the violater of his Law and therefore unless he can find another Righteousness he must utterly perish 'T is true the Law speaks its old Language still Do this and live but then it speaks it only to those who are upon a bottom of Innocency for to a Transgressor its language is Cursed is very one that continues not in all things 4. The Apostle acquaints us what that Righteousness of God is which is manifested vers 22. Even the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Christ. Now hence it 's evident that the Righteousness of God and Righteousness by the Faith of Christ are both one and therefore Faith in God and Faith in Christ are both one As is the Righteousness such is the Faith as is the Faith such is the Righteousness which perfectly overthrows that Arbitrary distinction which our Author had studied for more need Of Faith in God and Faith in Christ on purpose to shut Abraham out of Christ and by Consequence out of Heaven and to lock him up in the Limbus Patrum 5. The Apostle concludes That there 's no difference in point of Justification all that are sinners by
in lege Mosis per se honesta sunt Grot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is any thing that God hath thought meet to appoint or command his People Dr. Hammond And now for to divert his Reader he has sprung us new game but I shall adjourn the Consideration of what immediately follows that we may not be bewildred and lost in a wood and shall fall in with him at p. 273. where he reassumes the present Subject Thus yâ—…u see says he how the Apostle opposes the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith not as an Inherent and Personal Righteousness to an Imputed Righteousness but as an External and Ritual to an Inherent and Substantial Righteousness but we have seen no such matter as yet and do believe we are not like to see it And the rather because he has thrown in a very suspicious word that would make any one think that though he sets a good Face upon the Matter yet he has little confidence in the Truth of his own Notions The Truth is lays he The Righteousness of the Law and of Works in the New-Testament signifies only an External Righteousness which cannot please God Now I began to think thus with my self Does the Righteousness of the Law signifie one thing in the New-Testament and another in the Old-Testament Does it signifie a real Inherent Substantial Righteousness in the Old and a Ritual External Righteousness in the New Sincerity in the one and Hypocrisie and Ceremony in the other this is very unaccountable Surely thought I when the Apostle argues with Jews or Judaizing Christians he speaks in their Dialect speaks to their Capacity speaks that he may be understood speaks ad idem They that had read Ps. 119. 144. The Righteousness of thy Testimonies of thy Law is everlasting would wonder to hear the Apostle speak against the Righteousness of the Law but alas he only equivocated and had a mental Reservation in his Sleeve and understood all the while Ceremony and hypocrisie But this is a Riddle which because our Author has made of his own Mother-wit he is the fittest Man alive to interpret it 3 His Second Antithesis is between my own Righteousness and the Righteousness of God and he is considering with himself in what sense they are opposed But there 's no great difficulty in this says he for the Apostle himself tells us that by his own Righteousness he means the Righteousness of the Law and by the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith and therefore he will give this the gentle wipe and away But now he has quite spoiled the Humour of the double Antithesis for if by his own Righteousness he means the Righteousness of the Law and by the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith then there 's but one single Antithesis between his own Righteousness which is of the Law on the one part and the Righteousness by the Faith of Christ even the Righteousness which is of God by Faith on the other part but at these rates he might have given us a treble quadruple sextuple Antithesis and have rung as many changes when his hand was once in upon two Bells as others can do upon six The Apostles Words indeed were clear very clear till our Author found it necessary to obscure them to deprave the Truth conciliate some small reverence to errour to which two Heads I foresaw from the first his whole Discourse might be reduced And thus much we are secured of That the Apostle has repudiated his own Righteousness from any concern in justification and that we may not doubt what that was he tells us 't is that of the Law What the Righteousness of the Law signifies is evident that which always bore that Name that which the Law commands and prescribes viz. An exact Conformity to the Law of God in Spirit Soul and Body so far as 't is attainable or not attainable He assures us next what he owns and adheres to viz. The Righteousness of Christ which is also called The Righteousness of God He further acquaints us how we come to be interessed in this Righteousness and that is by Faith and that we may not ignorantly or wilfully mistake Faith for the Doctrine of Faith he assures us that it 's by Believing by which we obtain this Righteousness Rom. 3. 22. The Righteousness which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe To shut up his learned Exercitation or scholastical Dissertation or Diatriba of Antitheses our Author will favour us with a Reason nay with an obvious and the most obvious Reason why this Righteousness of the Law is called their own Righteousness because forsooth this Legal Righteousness was a way of their own chusing not of God's Appointment Now here he most falsly supposes that by the Righteousness of the Law is only meant a Righteousness made up of the Works of the Ceremonial Law but I think something has been offered to dash that fancy out of countenance I am in haste and intreat our Author to accept of short answers 1. God has not appointed a Righteousnes made up out of any observances of the Moral Law to be that Righteousness wherein Sinners shall stand justified before him If any will demand Iustification thereby God will demand exact and perfect Conformity If therefore Sinners will chase this way 't is their own Righteousness and it 's time to give it a bill of divorce God has not appointed it 2. External Washings External Conformity c. were no Righteousness at all much less the Righteousness of the Law that which it required to form a Righteousness and therefore chuse it or not chuse it this is nothing to the purpose The Apostle renounces his own Righteousness which is the Righteousness of the Law And this is further evident from Rom. 10. 3. which our Author quotes but miserably perverts For they being ignorant of Gods Righteousness and going about to establish their own Righteousness have not submitted to the Righteousness of God Here is then the same Antithesis again between their own Righteousness that of the Law and the Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Jesus Christ and the opposition is so direct and diametrical that 't was impossible to establish their own but they must shake off all subjection to Gods Righteousness The Question then will be Whether we are to be justified by a Legal or an Evangelical Righteousness And to this our Author agrees in words but his Words intend quite another thing from the Truth For by the Law he understands the Law of Moses and let that pass too for once But then by the Law of Moses he understands only the Ceremonial Law though sometimes he is content to take in External Acts of Conformity to the Moral Law and thus by a Legal Righteousness or the Righteousness of the Law he understands one made up of External Observations only wherein the Apostle has clearly
Church believed at all adventures right or wrong he has introduced another full as easie The Belief of the Resurrection of Christ from the Dead A Faith happily contrived for the Genius of this sparing Age which saves us two parts in three of Christ's Offices and eleven parts in twelve of our very Creed 3. Let it be modestly examined also whether To be justified through Faith in the Blood of Christ and to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead â—…e expressions of the same importance If they be then we may be said to be reconciled to God by the Resurrection and that Christ in being raised from the Dead was made sin for us a Sacrifice for sin and it 's something strange that none of the Apostles could hit upon such expressions as might recommend them and their writings to our Author's Charity 4. Let it be considered also whether Christ's Resurrection was the last Argument he gave to confirm the Truth of the Gospel I think his visible Appearance to his Disciples after his Resurrection and those Miraculous Operations he then put forth his Ascension into Heaven whilst his Disciples looked on his pouring out the Spirit upon the Apostles enabling them to speak with Tongues his empowering them to work Miracles many years after his Resurrection and Ascension were all Confirmations of the Truth of his Gospel and all subsequent to his Resurrection 5. Let it have a place in our Thoughts too seeing Christ's Resurrection was the great Confirmation of his Doctrine without which all the rest and especially his Death had been no Confirmation of it and yet Atonement Propitiation Reconciliation Redemption are not ascribed to it whether the Death of Christ to which all these are ascribed have an Influence upon our Acceptance with God only as it confirms his Doctrine It is strange that the Apostles should word matters so crosly to attribute those things to the Death of Christ which do most properly belong to the Resurrection and those things to the Resurrection which do most properly belong to his Death And all-out as strange that our Author should make such a noise with Atonement Reconciliation Redemption and ascribe all these to his Death when-as upon the sole-Reason of his Ascribing them to that Death they are much more rationally applicable to his Resurrection There are some well-meaning Souls no doubt that have read our Author's Book who finding such Glorious things ascribed to the Death of Christ Iustification by his Blood Redemption by his Blood Reconciliation by his Blood lift up their Eyes and cry out What pitty it is that such a sweet young Gentleman that has written such a precious Piece of Union Communion Sacrifice Atonement Redemption and Reconciliation stuft so full with Orthodox Propositions should be taken upon suspicion for a Socinian and yet when we come to scan these fine words they prove nothing but a company of sweet Flowers stuck about his Dead Body And to be justified by Faith in the Blood of Christ is no more but to believe that Christ is a Prophet sent to reveal God's Will to us The Conclusion of the whole Matter then will be this If the Death of Christ has no other influence upon our Acceptance with God but that it confirms to us this Truth That God will pardon and save them that believe and obey the Gospel it has no influence at all upon God for that End for which I refer my self to the Reader and the Reader to the foregoing Discourse He goes on Hence is it also that the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant and therefore all the Blessings of the Gospel are owing to the Blood of Christ because the Gospel-Covenant it self was procured and confirmed by the Blood of Christ. I am now perfectly cured of my Ambition to be one of the Corporation of your Rational Divines and if this be Reason I do by these presents renounce it for ever Here are two words Hence and Therefore which always pretend to inference and conclusion I shall examine how well they make good their Pretences First Hence I pray whence Out of what Premises is this Conclusion deduced That the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ as are the Proper and Immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant Let us look back as far as fairly we may To be justified by Faith by the Faith of Christ by Christ by his Blood c. signifie one and the same thing and Hence it is that the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ c. And really turn it quite backwards and it will conclude as strongly The Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel Covenant and 〈◊〉 it is that To be justified by Faith by the Faith of Christ by Christ by his Blood c. signify one and the same thing Now when he can once bring matters into this Posture he is safe and out of the Gun-shot of Reply for which way soever you come to attaque him you must deny the Conclusion But let us leave out the Hence and consider the words absolutely The Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant To which I answer 1. It 's just as easie for another if he had but a Licence to say The Apostles attribute such things to the Gospel-Covenant as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Blood of Christ and with better Reason because whatever acceptation our Services and Duties our Repentance and Obedidience find with God is clearly assigned to the Blood of Christ. But 2. This is a foul scandalous slander which he throws upon the Apostles they give to the Blood of Christ it s own proper and immediate Effects they rob not Repentance and Obedience to adorn the Sacrifice of Christ with borrowed Plumes They give to Christ the things that are Christ's and to Faith Repentance and Obedience the things that are Theirs They ascribe our Redemption to the Blood of Christ as a proper Price paid to God and they ascribe to Faith it s own Efficiency to interest us in the Benefits of that Redemption They ascribe Reconciliation to the Blood of Christ as its immediate proper Effect without any intervening Act of the Creature for that End and they ascribe to Faith Repentance and Obedience their proper and immediate Concerns to put us into the actual and full Possession of all the Fruits of that Reconciliation made with God They attribute Pardon of Sin to the Blood of Christ who was made sin for us an expiatory Sacrifice to remove guilt that is the Obligation of the Sinner to punishment and they attribute the Application of that Pardon unto Individuals unto Faith as that whereby we receive Christ and all his Benefits 3. If these be the proper and
as Mediator between God and Man he must either give it to God or Man for as Mediator he stands onely between these two Parties How absurd it is that he should pay it to Man needs not many words to evince it remains therefore that he paid it to God himself But the Apostle Peter puts that out of dispute in the place under consideration For he tells us that we were Redeemed by the blood of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot whence it appears that Christ was the true Sacrifice chosen by God immaculate to be the real sin-offering and that he was Offered to God as the Lamb was 3. Sect. Our Author supposes that all that the Gentiles were Redeemed from was some gross sins he instances onely in Idolatry but we favourably allow him to include all Actual sins and yet he comes not up to the design of Christ in Redemption The vain Conversation received by tradition from their Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was that Corruption that they derived by propagation being by Nature the Children of wrath even as others Jews and Gentiles being all equally under the Curse and Condemnation of the Law 4. Sect. He supposes that we are Redeemed by the Preaching of the Gospel To which I Answer That we could never in any sense have been Redeemed by the power of the Gospel Preached if we had not first been Redeemed by the price of the Blood of Christ paid to God in a proper sense 5. Sect. He asserts that Deliverance by Preaching is called Redemption by Christs blood because we owe this unspeakable blessing to his Death But how do we owe the Preaching of the Gospel to the Death of Christ When our Author himself was in such a Huff not long ago with any that should own a Doctrine as Gospel that was not Preach'd by Christ in his Life He admired the Sermons of Christ beyond those of the Apostles and will not allow that his Disciples Believed his Death before he was Crucified and yet now we owe it all to his Death As if Moses had not sufficiently confirmed the Truth of his Mission and Doctrine by Miracles though he never dyed himself to confirm them And as if Christ had not done the same abundantly though he had never dyed Christ sent his Apostles to Preach the Gospel to the Iews and Preach'd it in his own Person before his Death and yet of those Jews it 's said Ye were Redeemed not with Corruptible things as Silver and Gold but with the precious Blood of Christ. But this our Author thinks he has proved from Eph. 2. 15 16 17. Having abolished in his Flesh by his Death the enmity even the Law of Commandments c. Came and Preached Peace to you which were afar off and to them which were nigh That which he would prove from hence is this That the Redemption of the Gentile World by the Death of Christ signifies no more than the Removing of the Ceremonial Law and reclaiming them from Idolatry and Prophaneness by Preaching the Gospel and then bringing them into one body or Church with the Jews To make the Text Serviceable to such a design it was necessary 1. That he should lustily bind over our weaker imagination to his own stronger fancy that by Flesh is meant the Death of Christ For my part I see no necessity that Flesh should signifie any more than his Assumption of our Nature In which Nature he has answered and fulfilled all the Types and Ceremonies of the Law though in divers ways and at divers times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render to Abolish signifies not any formal positive Act whereby a Law is expresly repealed and disanulled but the rendring a thing useless of course when it 's end is attained Thus were all the Ceremonies of the Law rendred absolete and of none effect when Christ in the Course of his Ministry had answered their design and particularly Sacrifices became useless by the Death of Christ those Services which were Mercies and no curses in their day being swallowed up of that greater mercy of the Death of Christ. 3. He must suppose and that is indeed a reaching supposition that Christs Preaching Peace is the same thing formally with his procuring peace by his Death than which nothing can be imagined more precarious for he first procured Peace by his Blood and then Preached that Peace which he had procured to Men in his Person and by his Apostles and therefore though Christ Preach'd that peace to the Jews before he Suffered yet it was with reference to that peace he should procure by his Sufferings An eminent instance whereof we have in his Institution and first Celebration of his last Supper Mat. 26. 28. This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Remission of sins for though his blood was not yet shed Actually yet in Gods regard and the Faith of Believers it was considered as shed Antecedently to the Remission of sins for without shedding of blood there is no Remission Heb. 9. 22. And thus was the Blood of Christ considered as shed from the first establishing of the New Covenant Christ being called The Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World even that Lamb without spot and blemish by whose precious Blood Iews and Gentiles were Redeemed 4. He must suppose too that the enmity here mentioned is nothing but some bickering that had fallen out between Jew and Gentile about Ceremonies which the Gentiles that I can find were never very envious at and then when he has made all those suppositions and begged those Postulata's he will be ready for Demonstration A particular consideration of the Text will set that strait which he had made crooked And 1. The Apostle describes the state of the Gentiles by Nature to be most wretched and miserable ver 12. They were Aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel Strangers from the Covenants of promise without Christ having no hope without God in the World They that are without Christ are without God and they that are without a promise are without Christ and they that are without Covenant are without promise and they that are without all these must needs be without hope Their Case must needs be desperate that have â—…o Christ to bring them to God no promise to bring them to Christ and if they were Aliens from the Church where the means of Grace were to be had they must needs be without all these 2. The Apostle shews the true means whereby the Gentiles were brought nigh to God Ye who sometimes were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ It was Christs blood alone by which the great impassable gulph was filled up that was between God and his Creature by sin for Christ is our Peace 3. That the Gentiles might not Object that there were many Ceremonial Hedges and Fences that kept them off from enjoying the Priviledges of those who were
two words Influence and Sake are like two Rackets that Toss the Ball from one to another to the end of the Game However Rebus sic stantibus under our present Circumstances I would gladly know What that Influence is Why He thinks no man will deny that God was very highly pleased with the perfect Obedience of our Saviours Life Truly I think so too and perhaps it may be the last time that we shall be both of a mind But yet to put it upon thinking is a more cunning way of Tempting our unbelief to appear against it Had it been a truth wherein our Authors affections had been bespoke I doubt not but we should have had better Proof than his thinking or standing to the Courtesie of mens denyal But still still the Difficulty presses us Why God should be ever the more pleased with our Obedience because He was pleased with Christs For if no consideration be had of Christs Obedience in the Justification of a sinner as that which God accepts for our Non-obedience I do not see but God had been as well pleased with our Obedience without Christs Obedience as with it The Obedience of Christ was a Transient thing it 's past and gone long since and how it should come in remembrance before God at this day that for the sake of it we should find savour in his Eyes is without the Doctrine of Imputation very unaccountable Why that is the thing wherein our Author will at length Resolve us We know says he how many Blessings God bestowed upon the Children of Israel for the sake of their Fathers Abraham Isaac and Iacob who were great Examples of Faith and Obedience which made them very dear to God and there is no doubt but God was more pleased with the Obedience of Christ than with the faith of Abraham and therefore we ought not to think that we receive no Benefit by the Righteousness of Christ when Abrahams Posterity was so blessed for his sake I have several humble Propositions to make upon this Discourse 1. We ought not to think that we have no benefit But how shall we do to know what that Benefit is Great or Small Spiritual or Temporal Must we content our selves with thinking Surely we have some benefit if we could but tell what it was It may be we may want that benefit and may have it for asking for his sake and yet still we must not know what it is or it may be some small benefit that cannot be seen without a Microscope such it may be and yet answer all the necessary Import of his words 2. We ought not to think that we have no benefit But have we the benefit of acceptation with God For that was the Question if I have not forgotten as well as our Author So that though we should be so charitably credulous as to take it upon one of our Authors Say-soes and Thinkings that we have some benefit by it yet if it be not the very benefit under Dispute it 's monstrously Impertinent 3. We ought not to think But what if we do think so With what argument will he compel us to alter our Judgments For I see this is his Device when he has no mind to a Truth to lay the Proof of it upon thinking and a well fortified fancy 4. Let us now examine his Similitude God says he bestowed many Blessings upon Israel for the sake of their Fathers But 1. VVere they accepted of God Pardoned Iustified for their Fathers sake If not How will it follow that we are Accepted Pardoned Iustified for the sake of Christs Obedience because they received some common Favours for the sake of Abraham 2. VVould God give them any blessings for their Fathers sake unless they walked in their steps If not then they were not accepted for their Fathers obedience-sake but for their own For why should they need the sake of their Fathers Obedience to procure them Blessings for their Obedience more than their Fathers needed the sake of another to procure them Blessings for their Obedience But if so that God did give them many blessings for their Fathers sakes though they walked not in the steps of their Faith and Exemplary Obedience That is indeed to the purpose but then it will be in danger of proving that God may give us Gospel blessings for Christs sake though we walk not in his steps Indeed we read that when Israel was most unworthy and had provoked God most that God did remember his Covenant made with Abraham Isaac and Iacob and God may have special Favours too for sinners who personally considered are unworthy of the least Mercy which some will call the Imputation of Christs Obedience 3. The true account of those Favours which God bestowed upon Israel for Abrahams saké is this God had made a Promise to Abraham that in his Seed all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed That is That in the Messiah which should come of his Line by Isaac there should be a Blessedness or Happiness provided for the miserable undone VVorld This Promise was afterwards clear'd up to Iudah that the Messiah should be conveyed to the VVorld by his Tribe this being an absolute irrevocable Promise that God would out of that People that Tribe deliver a Saviour to the VVorld It was necessary that God should preserve that Tribe that People out of which the Messiah was to come and as it was necessary for the truth of the Promise that that Tribe should be continued in being so was it necessary for the evidencing of the fulfilling of the Promise that that Tribe should be continued in some considerable state of Visibility in the VVorld that so the Promise might not only be made good in it self but that it might be made out that it was made good to the Conviction of Gain-sayers This was the Reason why when Iudah had sinned and God Corrected them yet still He remembred this Covenant he left his People a Lamp for Davids sake on this account that People escaped utter Extirpation when they were upon the borders of Desolation To this Zachary imputes the giving of the Messiah Luke 1. 72. To perform the Mercy promised to our Fathers and to remember His holy Covenant The Oath which he Sware to our Father Abraham 4. Perhaps this may be some account of it The Covenant which God made with Abraham he made with his Seed also Gen. 17. 7. I will be thy God and the God of thy Seed Abraham therefore and his Seed were but one of the Parties to that Gracious Covenant and therefore God in his Providential Dispensations dealing with them as one Body the Obedience Holiness of Abraham the Head was considered as the Obedience and Holiness of the Body so far at least as to turn away temporal Evils and procure temporal Mercies And if this be so we may consider Christ and Believers as one Mystical Body and God in Covenant with Christ their Head and in him with them