Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n believe_v faith_n revelation_n 2,202 5 9.5251 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A59809 A defence and continuation of the discourse concerning the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and our union and communion with Him with a particular respect to the doctrine of the Church of England, and the charge of socinianism and pelagianism / by the same author. Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 1675 (1675) Wing S3281; ESTC R4375 236,106 546

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

to this Argument is to find what there is to be answered To be justified by Works without Merit if any men phrase it so can signifie no more but this that God for Christs sake forgives the sins and accepts the Persons of those who though they be guilty of many Infirmites yet do heartily and sincerely endeavour to please him and by the practise of a real Righteousness do every day aspire after a greater likeness to him now the question is Why since these men do not merit such favours should God prefer them before those who busie themselves in some external Rites and Ceremonies or Judaical Observances which have no real Goodness in them And I can give no other account of it but that it is for the same reason for which God prefers an Evangelical before a Ceremonial Righteousness and if there be no reason for this excepting Merit I confess the Argument is unanswerable Is there no reason why God should prefer the internal Habits of Grace and Vertue which are a participation of his own Nature and the beginnings though but weak and imperfect of a new and spiritual Life and the best qualifications for future Glory and Happiness before some external Rites and Usages which have no real worth Is there no reason why God should prefer the substantial Acts of Piety and Charity which are useful to Men and an imitation of the bounty and goodness of God before picking up straws and such useless and ludicrous Employments Is there no difference between Works which are imperfectly good and Works which have no goodness in them But I think it is a Work of Supererogation though not very meritorious to answer such an Argument But now in requital of this Argument against the distinction between Works and Merit I shall give another for it and that is That our Church makes nothing more necessary on our part to our Salvation than to our Justification and therefore when she rejects Good Works from the Office of Justifying if she intends to deny the Necessity as well as the Merit of Good Works she must be understood to deny the necessity of Good Works to our Salvation also which is an express Contradiction to her declared Doctrine There is no such distinction as this between Justification and Salvation to be found in any of the Articles or Homilies of our Church which is a good Argument that our Church knew no such distinction for if she had we cannot but think that she would have made use of it in express terms at one time or other there being the same occasion for it then that there is now The Sermon or Homily of Justification is called the Sermon of Salvation and these words Iustification and Salvation are promiscuously used in the Homily it self Thus in the third part of the Sermon of Salvation we have these words at the beginning It hath been manifestly declared unto you that no man can fulfil the Law of God and therefore by the Law all men are condemned whereupon it followeth necessarily that some other thing should be required for our SALVATION than the Law and that is a true and lively Faith in Christ bringing forth good Works and a Life according to Gods Commandments Where Salvation must of necessity signifie what at other times is called Justification for our Church tells us that we cannot be saved by the Works of the Law because we cannot fulfil the Law which is the reason at other times assigned why we cannot be Iustified by the Law Because all men be Sinners and Offenders against God and Breakers of his Law therefore can no man by his own Acts Words and Deeds seem they never so good be justified and made righteous before God Which are the very first words of the Sermon of Salvation And what is here required for our Salvation is the very same which in other places our Church requires to our Justification viz. A true and lively Faith in Christ bringing forth Good Works and a Life according to Gods Commandments Thus in the first part of the Sermon of Good Works our Church cites those words of S. Chrysostom I can shew a man that by Faith without Works lived came to heaven but without Faith never any man had Life the Thief that was hanged when Christ suffered did believe only and the most merciful God justified him this is an Example of living and going to Heaven by Faith without Works that the Thief was justified by Faith only so that to be justified by Faith and to live and go to Heaven by Faith it seems are equivalent expressions as appears also from what follows And because no man shall say again that he lacked time to do good VVorks for else he would have done them Truth it is and I will not contend therein but this I will surely affirm that Faith only SAVED him So that to be justified and to be saved by Faith still signifies the same thing and in the same sense wherein our Church affirms that we may be justified by Faith only she affirms that we may be saved by Faith only which therefore must not exclude the Necessity but the Merit of Good Works and whenever Faith only will not justifie it will not save neither as it follows If he had lived and not regarded Faith and the Works thereof he should have lost his Salvation again That is his Justification as appears from the whole Discourse The Learned Bishop Davenant certainly was not acquainted with this distinction when he proposed that Question Utrum bona Opera sint necessaria ad Iustificationem vel Salutem Whether Good Works be necessary to Justification or Salvation and answers it without making any difference between their necessity to Justification and to Salvation which is not very reconcileable with our Modern Divinity in which good Works are so far from being owned necessary that they are judged dangerous and hurtful in reference to Justification though they may be necessary to our Salvation And indeed this distinction between Justification and Salvation was on purpose invented to mollifie some harsh expressions of later Divines who rejected good Works and a holy Life from having any thing to do in the Justification of a Sinner This gave birth to the Antinomian Heresie which wholly rejects the Law and good VVorks and under a pretence of advancing the freeness of Gods Grace delivers Believers from all the necessary Obligations of Duty and Obedience to prevent the infection of this Doctrine they invented this distinction between Justification and Salvation and asserted that though Good VVorks are not necessary to our Justification yet they are to our Salvation which is as much as to say that though our sins shall be pardoned and our persons accepted and accounted perfectly righteous and have an actual Right and Title to future Glory without Holiness and Obedience yet we shall never have an actual Possession of Glory but upon the condition of an holy Life which were it true
justified in time as soon as they are capable of it that is as soon they are in being In his Book of Communion p. 204. he has ten Propositions much to the same purpose He there tells us That Christ in his undertaking of the work of our Redemption with God was constituted and considered as a common publick person in the stead of them for whose reconciliation to God he suffered And that being thus a common Person upon his undertaking as to merit and efficacy and upon his actual performance as to solemn declaration this is what Dr. Crisp calls Gods laying iniquity upon Christ by way of Obligation and by way of Execution was as such as a common person acquitted absolved justified and freed from all and every thing that on the behalf of the Elect as due to them was charged upon him or could so be So that he was from all Eternity upon his undertaking and in time upon his actual performance as a common Person that is in the name and as representing the persons of the Elect acquitted absolved and justified and therefore as it follows Christ received the general acquittance for them all and they are all acquitted in the Covenant of the Mediator whence they are said to be crucified with him to die with him to rise with him to sit with him in heavenly places namely in the Covenant of the Mediator This is what Dr. Crisp calls a secret application of Gods laying iniquity upon Christ to particular persons which is done before they know it and the only difference between him and Dr. Owen is that Dr. Owen will not allow this to be a discharge of the Elect in their own persons but only in the Person of the Mediator and Dr. Crisp thinks it more proper to say that this is a personal discharge of them since it is done in their names and persons but it is no great matter who speaks most properly when the thing is the same In another Discourse of the Death of Christ in answer to Mr. Baxter's Objections against his Treatise of Redemption p. 72. he asserts that the Elect have an actual right to all that was purchased by Christ's Death before believing and that is equivalent to their having a right from Eternity or from the first moment of their being And he offers it as his one opinion Whether absolution from the guilt of sin and obligation unto death though not as terminated in the conscience that is though it be not known to the Person which is Dr. Crisp's secret application for complete Iustification do not precede our actual believing and expounds the Justification of the ungodly Rom. 4. to this sense as Dr. Crisp expresly does And though he dare not assert complete Iustification to be before believing yet he affirms that absolution is as it is considered as the act of the Will of God that is secret and known only to God for a discharge from the effects of anger naturally precedes all collation of any fruits of love such as faith is And the difference between this absolution and complete Justification is no more but this That absolution wants that act of pardoning mercy which is to be terminated and completed in the conscience of a sinner That is though such a man be pardoned before believing yet he can have no sense of his Pardon before believing which is exactly Dr. Crisp's notion And absolution wants the hearts perswasion of the truth and goodness of the Promise and the mercy held out in the Promise And it wants the Souls rolling it self on Christ and receiving Christ as the Author and Finisher of that mercy an All-sufficient Saviour to them that believe All which signifies no more than that Absolution is before and without Faith for this apprehending the truth and goodness of the Promise and rolling it self on Christ according to the Doctors notion constitute the justifying Act of Faith And therefore when the Doctor elsewhere tells us that the Elect till the full time of their actual deliverance determined and appointed to them in their several Generations be accomplished are personally under the Curse of the Law and on that account are legally obnoxious to the wrath of God He only chuses to contradict himself to avoid the imputation of Antinomianism For by their actual deliverance I presume he must understand the time of their actual believing and if they are absolved before they actually believe how can they be under the Law or legally obnoxious to the wrath of God And therefore he immediately qualifies this that though they are obnoxious to the Law and the Curse thereof yet not at all with its primitive intention of execution upon them which is as much as to say that they are obnoxious to the Curse of the Law but not obnoxious to the execution of that Curse which I take to be non-sense How then are they obnoxious to the Curse of the Law Why as it is a means appointed to help forward their acquaintance with Christ and acceptance with God on his account By which I suppose he means that their Absolution being at present secret and not terminated and completed in the Conscience they are terrified and scared with the threatnings of the Law as fancying themselves to be under it when they are not and this makes them fly to Christ for refuge and sanctuary And though Dr. Crisp indeed do not like this way of affrighting men to Christ by the Law yet the difference is not great and makes no material alteration in the Scheme of their Religion And therefore when Dr. Owen adds That it was determined by Father Son and Holy Ghost that the way of the actual personal deliverance of the Elect from the Sentence and Curse of the Law should be in and by such a way and dispensation as might lead to the praise of the glorious grace of God and to glorifie the whole Trinity by ascending to the Fathers love through the works of the Spirit and Bloud of the Son All that he means by it is this that we shall have no sense of our Absolution by the Bloud of Christ till we actually believe nor be actually possessed of Eternal Life till we be renewed and sanctified all which Dr. Crisp will own and is consistent enough with our Justification or Absolution from Eternity since Faith and all other blessings are the effect of our antecedent Absolution in Christ as the Doctor confesses And this is all Mr. Ferguson means when he tells us That Christ's own discharge was an immediate consequent of his sufferings and they for whom he suffered had also immediately a fundamental right of being acquitted but their actual deliverance was to be in the way and order that he who had substituted himself in our room and he who had both admitted and been the Author of the substitution thought fit to appoint This is the necessary consequence of this Doctrine that if Christ acted as a Surety in the name
must understand all the difficulties of Quantity and whether it consist of Divisibles or Indivisibles and must understand the differences of Matter and the reason why he can bite one sort of Matter with his Teeth but can make no impression upon another and how the parts of matter hang together and the like There is a more general indistinct apprehension of things which is sufficient to govern our Actions though we do not understand all the Niceties and Philosophy of them But if our Author can find such subtilties in those plain matters which are taught Children in the Church-Catechism which are objections that will indifferently lie against the plainest Instructions what does he think of those sublime matters of the Eternal Decrees and Counsels of God Election and Reprobation and such-like Mysteries which are so familiarly thrust into Catechisms What subtilty is required in Children to understand these deep Points and to comprehend the subtil and artificial Schemes of Orthodoxy This is much like another Cavil against the intelligibleness of our Union with Christ I am sure says our Author that our Union with Christ is an Union No doubt Sir and if it be so it cannot be very easie to be understood because the Metaphysical notion of Union is as difficult as any other transcendental term Why then let the Metaphysicians dispute it out but for all that I can easily understand and I believe any one else can what it is to be related to Christ as Subjects are to their Prince and Disciples to their Master and Wives to their Husbands c. This is enough to give the Reader a taste of our Authors Skill and should I add any more it might bring my own discretion into question for next to making foolish and cavilling Objections it is an argument of a very little Wit to answer them And therefore to proceed Dr. Owen observes that I have writ against his Book which was writ and published near twenty years since I confess I do not well understand the force of this Objection unless he imagine that his Book is now grown venerable for its antiquity but where-ever the force of it lies I am sure it answers another grand Objection against me which is so often repeated that I am a Young Man a defect which time will mend and which Industry will supply However I suppose the Doctor was not very old twenty years ago and it argu'd some Modesty in the young Man rather to attack a Book writ by the Doctor when he was a young Man too than rudely to assault his Writings of a later date which may be presumed to be the effects of a more mature Judgement and riper years and I hope this consideration will plead my excuse with him for not undertaking that task which he has so kindly allotted me right or wrong to answer all his late voluminous Treatises which I think I may as soon be perswaded to do as to read them that magnificent Title of Exercitations which used to be prefixed before some learned Discourses invited me to take a little taste of them till I found my self mistaken and deceived with some jejune or trite Observations which has so put me out of conceit with flattering Titles that I shall never again believe the Titles of Books or Chapters for his sake But this Book has had the approbation of as Learned and Holy Persons it may be as any the Doctor knows living in England or out of it who owning the Truth contained in it have highly avowed its Usefulness and are ready yet so to do I fear that either the Doctor 's Acquaintance with Learned and Holy Men is not very great or that this is not true for I cannot conceive how very holy men should so approve a Book which is so little a Friend to Holiness or that learned men should be pleased with such loose and inconsequent Reasonings but let that be as it will I am sure there are as learned and as holy men who do as little approve it unless the Doctor thinks that Learning and Holiness are confined to his own Party or that the approbation of his Writings is the only sure test of Mens Learning and Holiness But the great charge of all which runs thorow his whole Book is that I have mis-represented his words and perverted his sense which sometimes he attributes to ignorance sometimes to malice sometimes he calls it an impudent falshood sometimes flagitiously false and shows very great Skill at varying phrases which he is much better at than at writing Controversies Whether this Charge be true or not shall be examined particularly as far as I can reduce the several particulars of this Charge into any order But to abate the wonder a little I must inform my Reader that this is Dr. Owen's way of answering Books to deny those Doctrines which he dares not own or cannot vindicate I am not the first who have been charged with such falsifications Mr. Baxter was taxed with it long since in a whole Book written for that very purpose intitled Of the Death of Christ and of Iustification the Doctrine concerning them formerly deliverd vindicated from the Animadversions of Mr. R. B. where this grave man is corrected as magisterially as if he had been such another Stripling as my self Towards the conclusion of that Discourse I meet with a very excellent Prayer If I must engage again in the like kind I shall pray That He from whom are all my supplies would give me a real humble frame of heart that I may have no need with many pretences and a multitude of good words to make a cloak for a Spirit breaking frequently thorow all with sad discoveries of Pride and Passion and to keep me from all magisterial insolence pharisaical supercilious self-conceitedness contempt of others and every thing that is contrary to the Rule whereby I ought to walk It is great pity that Forms of Prayer are not lawful for this is too good a Prayer to be used but once in a mans life which I doubt is one reason why we see no better effects of it in the Doctors Writings But there is a heavier Charge than all this behind which is frequently hinted by Doctor Owen and more expresly managed by Mr. Ferguson who in his Preface tells his Readers That I treat the sacred Writers with as much contempt as I do T. W. and Burlesque the Scripture no less than others have done Virgil's Poems This would be a terrible Adversary were he as good at his proofs as he is bold and daring in his Charge This is a crime of a very high nature to burlesque Scripture and the foulness of the imputation might justly have provoked a tamer man than my self did not his weak and ridiculous proofs more deserve contempt than any serious resentment He waves the proof of this in his Preface but in his second Chapter where he entertains his Readers with a tedious impertinent Discourse about Metaphors and
perfect and unsinning Righteousness so that he only confidently affirms what was in dispute and this goes for an Argument This Argument he silently passes over only he transcribes the last clause without taking any notice of the reason of it and huffs it off with an Appeal to his Reader Any man may easily guess by the management of this whole Discourse that the Doctor had no mind his Readers should know what was in dispute or what Arguments were alledged on either side and I do readily believe what he says That he is weary of every word he is forced to add for it is enough to tire any mans heart out to be forced to say something and not to have one wise word to say But to return from this long Digression it were very easie to give several other instances of this way of arguing from Metaphors as when they prove that we are wholly passive in our first Conversion because we are said to be dead in trespasses and sins from whence they infer that we can contribute no more to our own Conversion than a dead man can to the quickning of himself and that we are born again and are made new Creatures and created to good Works and the like but to discourse this fully would take up too much time and possibly may fall under consideration in a proper place What I have already discours'd is sufficient to acquaint Mr. Ferguson that I am no Enemy to a sober use of Metaphors and that he and his Friends do very much corrupt Religion and perplex and entangle the plainest notions of it by the abuse of Scripture-Metaphors CHAP. III. Concerning the DOCTRINE of the CHURCH of ENGLAND THose Objections if they may be so called of which I have taken notice in the former Chapter are but some slight Skirmishes but the main Battel is still behind the great out-cry is That I have contradicted the Doctrine of the Church of England contained in her Articles and Homilies This I confess were a very great fault if it were true and if it be not it is a very great calumny And yet whether it be true or false every one may believe as he pleases for the Doctor is not at leisure to make good the Charge this he leaves to the Bishops and Governours of our Church to consider which is very wisely done of him But all that he takes leave to say is That the Doctrine here published and licens'd so to be either is the Doctrine of the present Church of England or it is not If it be so what then Why then the Doctor shall be forced to declare That he neither has nor will have any Communion therein But I thought there had been no need of declaring this now If this be all the hurt my Book has done to force the Doctor to renounce the Communion of our Church after so many years actual separation from it the matter is not great But why so much haste of declaring Why as for other Reasons at which you may guess so in particular because he will not renounce or depart from that which he knows to be the true ancient Catholick Doctrine of this Church What a mighty Reverence has the Doctor for the Church of England That he will rather separate from the present Church of England than renounce the Ancient Catholick Doctrine of the former Church of England That he will not renounce any thing which he knows to have been the True Ancient Catholick Doctrine of this Church But does he indeed speak as he means Does he account the Authority of the Church of England so sacred as to make it the Foundation of his Faith and a sufficient Reason to renounce any Doctrines which she condemns and to own what she owns If he does not I would desire him to explain the force of this reason and if he does I would beg of him for the sake of his Reason to renounce his Schism though upon second thoughts I fear this is no good Argument with the Doctor Well but if it be not so that is if the doctrine here published be not the Doctrine of the present Church of England as he is assured with respect unto many Bishops and other learned men that it is not What then What account will he now give of Renouncing the Communion of this Church Nay not a word of that but he has a little Advice to the Bishops and Governours of it It is certainly the Concernment of them who preside therein to take care that such Discourses be not countenanced with the Stamp of their Publick Authority lest they and the Church be represented unto a great disadvantage with many What a blessed change has my Book wrought in the Doctor He is now mightily concerned for the Honour and Reputation of the Bishops and Church and fears lest they should be disadvantagiously represented to the World Who could ever have hoped for this who had known the Doctor in the blessed times of Reformation And yet I vehemently suspect that after all his Courtship to the Church and Bishops the Doctor designs a little kindness to himself and his Friends in it to perswade the Reverend Bishops not to suffer any Books to be Printed against them which they cannot answer which may represent them to a great disadvantage with many The Looking-Glass-Maker transcribes several passages out of the Homilies to what end he himself knows best for I should not readily have guessed my self concerned in them had it not been for that ingenious Reflection How ill Mr. Sherlock hath fitted his Cloth to this Pattern he that is not very blind may see So that now every one must acknowledge for the credit of his eye-sight that I have contradicted the Homilies by which artifice as I have heard some waggish Fellows have perswaded silly People to confess that they have seen some strange Prodigies which they did not see and which indeed were not to be seen But to gratifie the ill nature of these men let us for once suppose that which they cannot prove that I have contradicted the Doctrine of the Church of England what then Why then I have contradicted the Doctrine to which I have subscribed if I have done so it is very ill done of me but what then Why then this is a sufficient Answer to my Book But I pray why so Do they believe the Church of England to be infallible Do they think it a sufficient proof of the Truth of any Doctrine that it is the Doctrine of the Church of England Why then do they reject any of the Articles of our Church Why do they renounce Communion with us If they attribute so much to the Judgment and Authority of our Church is it not as good in one case as it is in another Every one I suppose knows what Obedient Sons they are of the Church of England how they reverence the Authority of their Mother and is it not a plain Argument how hard they are
Christ and therefore tell us that St. Paul who had an excellent faculty this way observes what doth most effectually take with people to beguile their Spirits and with a kind of Craft to catch their Affections and that accordingly he meets with every thing that is most enamouring and taking with people Thus far Dr. Crispe and Dr. Owen very well agree in placing the great Mystery of Religion in winning and wooing People unto Christ though St. Paul tells us that the Ministers of the Gospel are Embassadors of Christ beseeching the People in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God So that Christ and his Embassadors woo for God but Antinomians woo altogether for Christ to win people to the Person of Christ. Let us then consider what course they take thus to woo and win people unto Christ Now if by this wooing people to Christ they understood no more than to persuade men to embrace the Faith and Religion of Christ the proper way to effect it were to prove the Truth and Certainty of the Revelation made by Christ to represent the Excellency of his Religion how easie and advantageous his Commands are how perfective of our Nature and how necessary to dispose and qualifie us for future Happiness to set before them those Rewards which Christ hath promised to those who obey him and those severe threatnings which he hath denounced against the Workers of Iniquity and to confirm them in the belief and expectation of all this by the consideration of the Incarnation Death and Sufferings of the Son of God who died to expiate our Sins and to purchase Pardon and Eternal life for all true Penitents and rose again from the dead and ascended into Heaven to intercede for us to dispence the influences of his Grace to raise us to a new and spiritual life here and at the last Day to raise our dead bodies out of the dust and to reward us with Immortality and Glory And then we may argue from the love of our Crucified Saviour to perswade men to live to him who died for them These and such like Arguments are very powerful to perswade men to be Christians but this is not the way of wooing for Christ You must with a holy guile catch peoples affections and make them fall in love with the Person of Christ and therefore you must describe his Personal Graces and Excellencies and consider what is most enamouring and taking with the People Thus for instance The World is mightily taken with Beauty with compleatness of Person Oh saith one let me have a beautiful person it is no matter how poor Well then Christ is a rare piece for such is the beauty of Christ that there is no beauty like his He is the Image of the invisible God the brightness of his Glory and the express Image of his Person And Mr. Watson could have furnished him with a great many other irrefragable proofs of Christ's beauty and loveliness though I think the Doctor had too much wit to have made use of them But besides Beauty some persons look for Linage what a Stock a person is of Well if this will take then there is no Stock like this of Christ he is of the greatest House in the world The First-begotten of all Creatures He comes of that great House of God himself He is not a Younger Brother in this House neither for he is the First-begotten of the House that is a great matter among persons to marry the Heir of the Family nay he is the Only-begotten of the House there is never another in all the Family and that is a great encouragement so that if men go all the World over to find a Match in the Noblest House they will never meet with such a one as this of the Son of God which exactly agrees with Mr. Vincent's reasoning to perswade young Women to chuse Christ for their Husband Well but if he be poor after all I shall live but poorly with him But Christ is rich in Treasure too it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell He hath the whole World to dispose of and therefore Gold and Silver are not to be compared to him which Notion Mr. Brooks hath excellently improved in his Riches of Christ. Thus to conclude You have a Proverb That Batchelours Wives and Maids Children must be rare Creatures that is their fancy will devise what kind of one they will have and what kinds of perfections they desire Let the fancy devise what kind of perfections it can to please sense Christ shall really out-strip in perfection all these fancies more than a Substance doth out-strip a shadow This is the great Mystery of Antinomianism which some of our Modern Divines call the Mystery of the Gospel and the only spiritual Preaching of Christ to attribute every thing immediately to the Person of Christ which is spoke of him either with respect to his Gospel and Revelations or his Propitiation and Sacrifice or his Mediation and Intercession for us as to give some few instances of it Thus it is a great Gospel truth That Christ is the way to the Father that he is the way the truth and the life both as he instructs us in the way to life and happiness how we may please God and save our Souls and as he is our Mediator and High Priest by whom we have access to God But then this requires that we study his will and live in obedience to his Laws that we may have an interest in his Mediation and may with a humble confidence put up our Prayers to God in his name Whereas the Antinomians agreeably enough with the Divinity of this last Age make Christ such a way as excludes every thing else even his Laws and Religion Evangelical Righteousness and Holiness from being the way Christ himself and nothing but Christ though in a subservency and subordination to him can be the way Thus Dr. Crisp tells us That Christ is the only way to free sinners from the guilt of sin which is true in a sober sense that Christ only makes attonement for our sins but in the Doctors Divinity Christ is so the only way that nothing else but Christ is required to this neither Repentance nor Evangelical Righteousness The Gospel holds forth the Lord Christ as freely tendring himself to people considering people only as ungodly persons receiving him that is taking him for their own to be justified and saved by him you have no sooner received him but you are instantly justified by him and in this Iustification you are discharged from all the faults that can be laid to your charge And his Argument to prove this is the same with Mr. Ferguson's He was made sin for us here you see plainly our sins are so translated to Christ that God doth reckon Christ the very Sinner nay God doth reckon all our sins to be his sins and makes him to be sin for us And what is
please especially if it be such a rule as will bend and comply with every mans fancy and thus it hath fared with the Doctor and his Friends as I have made appear by a whole Scheme of new Divinity which is wholly owing to this acquaintance with the Person of Christ but hath no solid foundation in the Gospel But though the Doctors words be too plain and express to be evaded yet I had a surer foundation for this Charge than some loose or unwary expressions for the design of that whole digression of the excellency of Christ Iesus will satisfie any impartial Reader that I did not either mistake or pervert his sense for there he gives us many examples of this way of reasoning from the knowledge of Christs Person to discover those other great Mysteries of Religion which however they may be revealed in the Gospel of Christ yet are clearly eminently savingly discovevered only in Iesus Christ. He reduces the sum of all true wisdom to three heads the knowledge of God and of our selves and skill to walk in Communion with God and adds That not any of them is to any purpose to be obtained or is manifested but only in and by the Lord Christ. Upon this I observed in my former Discourse that by is fallaciously added to include the Revelations Christ hath made whereas his first undertaking was to shew how impossible it is to understand these things savingly and clearly notwithstanding all those Revelations God hath made of himself and his will by Moses and the Prophets and by Christ himself without an acquaintance with his Person To this the Doctor answers The fallacy pretended is meerly of his own coyning The knowledge I mean is to be learned in Christ neither is any thing to be learned in him but what is learned by him I do say indeed now whatever I have said before that it is impossible to understand any sacred truth savingly and clearly without the knowledge of the Person of Christ but that in my so saying I exclude the consideration of the Revelations which Christ hath made or that God hath made of himself by Moses and the Prophets and Christ himself the principal whereof concerns his Person and whence alone we come to know him is an assertion becoming the modesty and ingenuity of this Author As for modesty and ingenuity the Doctor may take them to himself since no man deserves them better but I would willingly put in for a share of truth and honesty if he can spare any The Doctor says the fallacy is of my own coyning pray why so Because he does not exclude the Revelations which Christ hath made nor do I say he does in these words but the fallacy consists in not doing it which he ought to have done if he would have been true to his proposed design He who undertakes to prove that there are any sacred truths which cannot be clearly and savingly known by the Revelations of the Gospel without an acquaintance with the Person of Christ which was the Doctors task as appears from what I have already said though he need not wholly renounce Revelation yet he ought to consider the Revelations of Christ and the knowledge of his Person distinctly and shew that these truths are not clearly manifested by Revelation but are clearly and savingly discovered in the Person of Christ The first of these especially with reference to some new discoveries the Doctor has done pretty honestly for he has either alleadged no Scriptures for the proof of these grand Doctrines or such as every one may easily see do not clearly prove them I shall now consider how he acquits himself in the second whereby it will evidently appear that he sets up the knowledge of Christs Person as a way of learning Divine Truths distinct from the Revelations of the Gospel A few instances will be sufficient to clear this matter and that is all I at present design I shall begin with that terrible discovery of the naturalness of Gods righteousness vindictive justice unto him in that it was impossible that it should be diverted from sinners without the interposing of a Propitiation this the Doctor tells us is discovered in Christ that is in his Death and Sufferings for Sin what he means by a natural vindictive justice I shall consider in its proper place my present business is to examine how he proves a natural vindictive justice in God from the knowledge of Christ and the only Argument in that place is this Those who lay the necessity of satisfaction meerly upon the account of a free act and determination of the will of God leave to my apprehension no just and indispensable foundation for the Death of Christ but lay it upon a supposition of that which might have been otherwise but plainly God in that he spared not his only Son but made his soul an Offering for Sin and would admit of no Atonement but in his bloud hath abundantly manifested that it is of necessity to him his Holiness and Righteousness requiring it to render indignation wrath tribulation and anguish unto Sin To look upon it Vindictive Iustice as that which God may exercise or forbear makes his Iustice not a property of his Nature but a free act of his Will And a will to punish where one may do otherwise without injustice is rather ill will than justice If you resolve this Argument into its several Propositions it must proceed thus It is very plain in Scripture that Christ died for our sins so far Revelation goes Hence the Doctor infers That it was absolutely necessary that Christ should die for our sins from hence he infers That it was absolutely necessary that Sin should be punished and thence he infers That Punitive and Vindictive Justice is so absolutely necessary to God that it is not at the free choice of his Will whether he will punish sin or not but he must do it Now whether this Argument be good or bad I am not at present concerned to enquire but shall only ask whence the Doctor learns all this train of Consequences from which he at last concludes the naturalness and necessity of God's indictive Justice Are we any where told in Scripture that because Christ died for sin therefore it was absolutely necessary he should die for Sin and that it was absolutely necessary he should die for Sin because it is absolutely necessary that Sin should be punished and that it is absolutely necessary that Sin should be punished because God is so naturally just and righteous that he cannot do otherwise If we are no where taught in Scripture to argue at this rate then here is a plain example how we may learn something from the knowledge of Christ's Person which the Gospel has not expresly taught us how we may reason from what Christ hath done and suffered to draw such Conclusions as are either no where to be found in express terms in Scripture or at least which we are
no where taught to draw from such Premises which makes an Acquaintance with the Person of Christ a new way of discovering Divine Truths distinct from the Revelations of the Gospel and if this be once acknowledged to be a good way of reasoning men may as well draw such Conclusions as are no where to be found in Scripture as those which are By the same Argument the Doctor proves what the desert of Sin is the demerit of Sin is such that it is altogether impossible that God should pass by any the least unpunished How does this appear Why from the Person who suffered for it who was the only Son of God and if God would have done it for any passed by sin unpunished he would have done it in reference to his only Son but he spared him not The sum of which Argument is this that because God would not spare his only Son after he had determined that he should die as a Sacrifice for sin therefore he could not spare him and therefore the demerit of Sin is such that it is impossible God should suffer it to go unpunished which is indeed a pretty Argument but whether it be true or false it is no Scripture Argument and therefore may serve for another instance of this new way of reasoning from the knowledge of Christ. This may suffice at present to make good my Charge that the Doctor sets up an acquaintance with the Person of Christ as a new medium of saving knowledge distinct from the Revelations of the Gospel from whence we may clearly and savingly learn those Divine Truths which though they are pretended to be contained in the Gospel yet are not clearly and savingly to be learnt thence without this knowledge of the Person of Christ the plain meaning of which is that men must first reason from what Christ hath done and suffered and thence form their Notions and Theories of Religion and then it is very hard if they cannot find some obscure ambiguous or metaphorical expressions in Scripture to countenance such conceits But this Book of Communion out of which I have transcribed these passages was writ near twenty years since and therefore to do the Doctor all the right we can let us consider whether in his later Writings he hath expressed himself more cautiously in this matter In his second Volume on the Hebrews a Book of a very late date p. 20. I find this observation A diligent attentive consideration of the Person Offices and Work of Iesus Christ is the most effectual means to free the Souls of men from all entanglements of errors and darkness and to keep them constant in the profession of the truth This is the very same Doctrine we had before that we must learn Divine Truths which is much the same with being delivered from errors and darkness by a knowledge of the Person and Offices of Christ For the explaining of this he tells us there must be a diligent searching into the Word wherein Christ is revealed to us The Scriptures reveal him declare him testifie of him to this end are they to be searched that we may learn and know what they so declare and testifie Thus far it is very well and would men confine their knowledge of Christ and Divine Truths to the Revelation of the Gospel it would be an infallible preservative against all Error But I do not so well understand what he adds towards the conclusion of that Discourse Unto him Christ and the knowledge of him is all our study of the Scripture to be referred and the reason why some in the perusal of it have no more light profit or advantage is because they have no more respect unto Christ in their enquiry If he be once out of our eye in searching the Scripture we know not what we do nor whither we go no more than doth the Mariner at Sea without regard to the Pole-star Truths to be believed are like Believers themselves all their life power and order consist in their relation to Christ separated from him they are dead and useless This is very profound and Mysterious we must search the Scriptures to know Christ and the knowledge of Christ must direct us in expounding the Scripture as the Pole-star does the Mariner to steer a safe and direct Course We must consider all Truths in their relation to Christ which gives life and power and order to them I wish the Doctor had given us some examples of this for I confess I cannot understand it In p. 23. he tells us But here lies the root of mens failings in this matter They seek for truth of themselves and of other men but not of Christ what they can find out by their own endeavours what other men instruct them in or impose upon them that they receive few have that faith love and humility are given up to that diligent contemplation of the Lord Christ and his Excellencies which are required in those who diligently wait for his Law so as to learn the truth of him So that it seems by eying Jesus Christ in searching the Scriptures he means a diligent contemplation of the Lord Christ and his Excellencies which will be a safer guide to all true saving knowledge than all other enquiries whatsoever so that still we must learn all Sacred Truths from the knowledge of Christ's Person and Excellencies And indeed this he expresly tells us in the same Page All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid in Christ and therefore from him alone to be received and in him alone to be learned In the due consideration of the Lord Christ are these Treasures opened unto us There is not the least line of truth how far soever it may be extended and how small soever it may at length appear but the springs of it lie in the Person of Christ and then we learn it aright when we learn it in the spring or as it is in him Eph. 4. 21. which when we have done we may safely trace it down and follow it to its utmost extent If there be any sense to be made of this Discourse it must be this that we must learn all Divine Truths from a consideration of the Lord Christ his Person and Excellencies c. because the Springs of all truth lie in the Person of Christ and without such a serious consideration of the Person of Christ to direct and steer our Course the study of the Gospel will avail us nothing That it is to no great purpose to understand Gospel Truths unless we can find out the springs and the Center of them in the Person of Christ He that looks upon Gospel truths as Sporades as scattered up and down independently one of another who sees not the Root Center and Knot of them in Iesus Christ it is most probable that when he goes about to gather them for his use he will also take up things quite of another nature But it may be we may understand the Doctor better if
we consider the object of this consideration which is to free men from all errors and darkness and that is the Person of Christ his Offices and his Work this is the very thing I charged him with that he affirmed we must attain to a saving knowledge of Divine Truths from a consideration of the Person of Christ and what he had done and suffered for us so that I hope every one will now believe that this was no Calumny From Christs Authrority as King he observes p. 22. Men not considering the Authority of Christ either as instituting the Ordinances of the Gospel or as judging upon their neglect or abuse are careless about them or do not acquiesce in his pleasure in them This hath proved the ruine of many Churches who neglecting the Authority of Christ have substituted their own in the room thereof The consideration therefore of this Kingly Legislative Authority of the Lord Christ by men as to their present duty and future account must needs be an effectual means to preserve them in the truth and from backslidings From the faithfulness of Christ as Prophet he observes the same thing He being then ultimately to reveal the will of God and being absolutely faithful in his so doing is to be attended unto Men may thence learn what they have to do in the Church and Worship of God even to observe and to do whatever he hath commanded and nothing else This is the very first Principle of Phanaticism which undermines the most prudent Orders and wholsom Constitutions of any Church and is another instance of this way of Reasoning from the knowledge of Christ to discover those important Truths which the Gospel no where expresly teaches Neither Christ nor his Apostles have any where told us that we must do nothing in the Worship of God but what Christ hath expresly commanded but this we must learn from an acquaintance with the Person and Offices of Christ from his Authority as King and Faithfulness as Prophet which if we will believe the Doctor have left no room for the exercise of Humane Authority nor for the use of humane Prudence in Church-Affairs But all this the Doctor spake without an Adversary let us now consider how he explains his own meaning in his Answer to my Discourse which you may find in pag. 33 34. where he first denies That he ever taught any other knowledge of Christ or acquaintance with his Person but what is revealed and declared in the Gospel This as I observed above I never charged him with and he himself seems to be sensible of it and therefore adds Yet I will mind this Author of that whereof if he be ignorant he is unfit to be a Teacher of others and which if he deny he is unworthy the name of a Christian this is a dangerous Dilemma for I confess I am not at present disposed either to part with my Rectorship or my Christianity and therefore let us hear what it is namely that by the knowledge of the Person of Christ the great Mystery of God manifest in the flesh as revealed and declared in the Gospel we are led into a clear and full understanding of many other Mysteries of Grace and Truth which are all Centred in his Person and without which we can have no true nor sound understanding of them I shall speak it yet again that this Author if it be possible may understand it this is kindly done since so much lies at stake on it or however that he and his Co-partners in design may know that I neither am nor ever will be ashamed of it That without the knowledge of the Person of Christ which is our acquaintance with him as we are commanded to acquaint our selves with God as he is the Eternal Son of God Incarnate the Mediator between God and Man with the Mystery of the Love Grace and Truth of God therein as revealed and declared in the Scripture there is no true useful saving knowledge of any other Mysteries or Truths of the Gospel to be attained I wish I get well off but I will do my best endeavour to understand it By the knowledge of the Person of Christ the great Mystery of God manifested in the flesh as revealed and declared in the Gospel we are led into a clear and full understaneing of many other Mysteries of Grace and Truth which are Centred in his Person and without which we can have no true nor sound understanding of them If by this he means that we cannot understand those mysteries of Grace and Truth which concern the Person of Christ without knowing the Person of Christ this is a great Truth but contains no great Mystery As for instance Unless we have some knowledge of the Person of Christ God manifested in the flesh we cannot understand the love of God in sending Christ into the World nor the great Mystery of Pardon and Forgiveness through the bloud of Christ we can know nothing of his Death and Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven and Intercession for us at the right hand of God and all those benefits we receive from it we cannot understand our Adoption in Christ to be the children of God nor our Union and Re●●●●on to him as our Head and Husband as our Lord and Saviour nor the communications of his Grace and Virtue to us nor his Power and Authority to raise us from the Dead to judge the World and to bestow Life and Immortality upon his obedient Disciples Not that the Springs of these Truths lie in the Person of Christ or must be learnt from a contemplation of his Person but from the Revelations of the Gospel But the knowledge of Christ's Person is necessary in order to understand those other Gospel Mysteries for the same reason that it is necessary to understand that there was such a man as Alexander before you can know what he did where he was King what Battels he fought what Victories he won or by the same reason that you must first know the subject before you can know the properties and qualifications of it If this be all the Doctor intends I must confess it is very sound and Orthodox but yet I must say that time was when he meant otherwise and his obscure way of expressing so plain a thing would make any one suspect that he meant something more still and if he does then after all his soft and palliating expressions it must come to this That the Person of Christ is the Spring and Fountain of all saving Knowledge from whence we must learn all those Mysteries which are but obscurely and imperfectly revealed in the Gospel unless we make use of this knowledge of Christ and acquaintance with his Person to expound and unriddle them And indeed his second Explication of his sense in this matter plainly looks this way For under an acquaintance with Christ he includes the knowledge of him as the Eternal Son of God incarnate the Mediator between God and
Man with the Mystery of the Love Grace and Truth of God therein as revealed and declared in the Scripture This comprehends all those Revelations which immediately concern the Person of Christ as his Nature Offices Mediation and all the benefits which flow from them the Mystery of the Love Grace and Truth of God therein And then he adds That without such a knowledge of the Person of Christ as this which contains all we can know and all that is revealed in the Gospel concerning Christ There is no true useful saving knowledge of any other Mysteries of the Gospel to be attained This indeed is very warily said and like a right Sophister set aside all the saving Mysteries of the Gospel which concern the Person and Offices and Mediation of Christ and then there are no other saving Mysteries to be discovered or at least no saving knowledge of any other Mysteries because he knew very well that no Christian could own any saving knowledge when he had laid aside the knowledge of Christ And yet in this saying he craftily insinuates too that there are some other saving Mysteries which are to be discovered when we are first acquainted with Christ and he should have done well to have told me what they are and how they may be discovered since my Living or my Christianity lay at stake and I am not very good at guessing but since he has here concealed this secret we must learn what it is from his former Writings and then whatever danger there be in it I must needs say that this acquaintance with the Person of Christ is a very ill way of expounding Scripture or of learning Gospel-Mysteries as being that which different men may use to different purposes as I shewed in my former Discourse and from whence some men draw such Conclusions as do quite evacuate the ends and design of the Gospel This is sufficient to vindicate my self from those imputations of Falshood and Calumny which occur almost in every Page of the Doctors Answer but I shall not dismiss this subject thus but shall first shew you that there is such a way of reasoning from the knowledge of Christ's Person now in great vogue among some late Writers and what Arguments I reject upon that score as weak or fallacious And secondly discourse something more particularly concerning this way of reasoning As for the first I have given instances enough of this nature in my former Discourse which were so plain and evident that I thought the bare mentioning of them was sufficient to convince any man from what Principles such Arguments and Conclusions were deduced But because I find that my Adversaries are willing to take no notice of the chief design for which those passages were alleadged but to fall into some collateral Disputes I must be forced more expresly to state the matter in debate and reduce it to another form and method The Question then between us is plainly this Whether any Persons pretend to learn or prove the great Principles of their Religion from an Acquaintance with the Nature Person Offices of Christ distinct from the Revelations of the Gospel In my former Discourse I asserted that they deduced such Doctrines from the knowledge of Christ as are no where expresly contained in Scripture and I doubt not but that will appear true upon a particular examination of such Doctrines as they have or shall fall in my way but let the Doctrines be true or false the present dispute is whether they make the knowledge of Christs Person a new medium of saving knowledge from whence we may learn the greater deeper and more saving Mysteries of Religion distinct from the Revelations of the Gospel And that they do so is plain from this that most of the Arguments from whence they deduce and by which they prove their most darling and mysterious Notions are wholly owing to an acquaintance with Christs Person and are no where exprest in Scripture I have already given two instances of this in his way of proving the naturalness of vindictive justice to God and the desert and demerit of sin and shall now add some more The Doctor proves from the Deity of Christ as I observed in my former Discourse the endless bottomless boundless grace and compassion that is in him mercy enough for the greatest the eldest the slubbornest transgressor the infiniteness of Grace with respect to the Spring or Fountain the Deity of Christ will answer all our Objections What is our finite guilt before it How comes this guilt to be finite now When we are so often told that the demerit of every sin is infinite as being committed against an infinite God and requiring an infinite satisfaction for its Atonement Shew me the Sinner that can spread his iniquity to the dimensions if I may so say of this Grace I am glad to hear the Doctor put so fair a sense on these words and to declare to the World that he designed no more in it than to invite all sorts of sinners though under the most discouraging qualifications to come unto Christ for Grace and Mercy by Faith and Repentance Though any man who reads that long Discourse about an endless bottomless boundless Grace and Compassion in Christ such an infinite Grace as makes nothing of our finite guilt as all the sins in the world cannot equal its dimensions without one word of Faith or Repentance or a new life to qualifie us for this mercy especially if withal he understood what a great Patron the Doctor is of the necessity of holiness and obedience to qualifie us for Gods mercy as appears from what I have already discoursed above would not easily have guessed this to have been his meaning And whoever writes a Book which cannot be understood without a Commentary ought not to complain that he is mistaken nor charge his Readers upon that account with ignorance falshood or calumny Though for my part I shall be very well contented he should write another Book consisting of little else than those mild and gentle imputations of falshood and calumny so he will but recant or at least handsomly palliate those doctrines which otherwise may encourage bad men continuing so to lay claim to such a boundless and bottomless mercy But my present business is to observe how the Doctor proves that there is such a boundless bottomless Grace in Christ and his Argument is taken from his Divine Nature which is infinite For when the Conduit of his humanity is inseparably united to the infinite inexhausted fonntain of the Deity who can look into the depths thereof if now there be Grace enough for sinners in an all sufficient God it is in Christ. This is a plain instance of this way of reasoning from an acquaintance with Christ with his Divine nature which the Scripture no where teaches and which is weak and fallacious For though the Divine Nature be infinite yet the exercise of mercy and compassion is regulated by wisdom