judge reverently and charitably of the Antients that used the word Merit of good Works because they meant but a moral aptitude for the promised Reward according to the Law of Grace through Christ. 16. They confess the thing thus described themselves however they like not the name of Merit lest it should countenance proud and carnal conceits 17. They judge no Man to be Heretical for the bare use of that word who agreeth with them in the sense 18. In this sense they agree that our Gospel-obedience is such a necessary aptitude to our Glorification as that glory though a free gift is yet truly a Reward of this Obedience 19. And they agree that our final Justification by sentence at the day of Judgment doth pass upon the same Causes Reasons and Conditions as our Glorification doth 20. They all agree that all faithful Ministers must bend the labour of their Ministry in publick and private for promoting of Holiness and good Works and that they must diifference by discipline between the obedient and the disobedient And O! that the Papists would as zealously promote Holiness and good Works in the World as the true serious Protestants do whom they factiously and peevishly accuse as enemies to them and that the Opinion Disputing and name of good Works did not cheat many wicked persons into self-flattery and perdition while they are void of that which they dispute for Then would not the Mahometans and Heathens be deterred from Christianity by the wickedness of these nominal Christians that are near them Nor would the serious practice of that Christianity which themselves in general profess be hated scorned and persecuted by so many both Protestants and Papists nor would so many contend that they are of the true Religion while they are really of no Religion at all any further than the Hypocrites Picture and Carkass may be called Religion Were Men but resolved to be serious Learners serious Lovers and serious Practisers according to their knowledge and did not live like mockers of God and such as look towards the life to come in jest or unbelief God would vouchsafe them better acquaintance with the true Religion than most Men have Having prefaced this much for the rest I refer thee to the perusal of this Treatise which will give thee much light into the nature of the Gospel and especially help thee to the right understanding of the meaning of the Apostle Paul in all his Epistles about the Law the Gospel and the Justification of a sinner O pray and labour for A CONFIRMED PRACTICAL FAITH as daily doth Your fellow Disciple Ri. Baxter Iune 4th 1672. The chief Heads of Discourse 1. THe nature of the Promise to Abraham 2. Why the Law was added to the Promise 3. How those under the Law were saved 4. The nature of the Legal Covenant 5. The mistakes of Iews about the Law and Promise and how St. Paul counter-argues those mistakes 6. How St. Paul's Doctrine of Iustification by Faith and not by Works was then mistaken by some 7. That the Doctrine of St. Paul and of St. James about Faith and Works do not differ 8. With an APPENDIX touching the difference and the reason of the difference between saving and ineffectual Faith A DISCOURSE Of the Nature Ends and Difference OF THE TWO COVENANTS THe mistake of the unbelieving Iews about the true import of Gods Promise to Abraham and of the Law of Moses was a principal cause of their rejecting Christ and his Gospel and their own salvation thereby To rectifie which mistake the Apostle St. Paul used various reasonings according to the various Errors contained in it In which reasonings of his there being some things hard to be understood there were others again which probably mistaking the Apostles reasonings against the Jew-Jewish Notion of Justification by Works ran into a contrary extream thinking they might be saved by Faith without Works as on the contrary the incredulous Iews thought they might be saved by Works without Faith And if many in our dayes had not run into somewhat alike extream through a misunderstanding also of the Apostles writings labour and pains would not have been so necessary as now they are to rectify their mistake and to prevent it in others To the end therefore that the plain Truth may the better appear touching Gods promise to Abraham touching the Law of Moses and the Apostles arguings about these I shall very briefly endeavour these seven things 1. To open the Nature and Design of Gods promise to Abraham And to shew 2. For what ends the Law was added to the promise 3. By what Faith and Practice the Iews under the Law were saved 4. That the Law contained a Covenant different from that with Abraham 5. The grand mistakes of the unbelieving Jews and St. Paul's counter arguings touching both the Law and the Promise 6. The mistake of some pretended Christians in the Apostles days touching the Doctrine of Iustification by Faith without Works 7. That the Doctrine of St. Paul and St James about Faith and Works in reference to Iustification do not differ I shall begin with the first of these CHAP. I. The Nature and Design of Gods Promise to Abraham I Shall endeavour to open the Nature and Design of Gods Promise to Abraham Which Promise is also called the Covenant Act. 3. 25. Gal. 3. 17. In doing of which these eight things will come under consideration 1. What the nature of this Promise is in general 2. What the design of it is 3. What are the special benefits promised 4. What the extent of it is 5. The security given by God for the performance of it 6. That this Promise was conditional 7. What the condition of it was 8. What we are to understand by Gods accounting Abrahams Faith to him for Righteousness Sect. 1. Of the nature of it in general This Promise I take to be of the same nature with that which in the Gospel is called the New Covenant It 's true indeed they greatly differ in the Administration the one being but general implicite and obscure and the other more particular express and perspicuous But though in this they differ yet in their general nature they agree in one and are the same For 1. This Covenant as delivered to Abraham was confirmed in Christ as well as the Gospel afterwards Gal. 3. 17. and that 's a Character of the New Covenant Mat. 26. 28. 2. The Gospel is said to have been preached to Abraham in the Promise that was made him Gal. 3. 8. 3. He was justified by Faith which he could not have been but by vertue of a New Covenant And it was by Faith in the Promise made to him by God by which he was justified Which two things supposed it necessarily follows that that Promise was of the nature of the New Covenant 4. St. Paul argues against the erroneous Iews in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians the necessity of Evangelical Faith unto justification
thus accompanied with and perfected by Works was the Scripture fulâ—illed which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for Righteousness And if so then the Justification by Works together with Faith of which St. Iames speaks here is a Justification before God and not before Men only and to a Man 's own Conscience For of such a Justification doth the Scripture in Gen. 15. 6. speak which is here cited by St. Iames. Nor doth this that Faith accompanied with Obedience is imputed for Righteousness at all derogate from the Obedience and Sufferings of Christ in reference to the ends for which they serve Because the whole Covenant and all the parts and terms of it both Promises of Benefits the Condition on which they are Promised are all founded in Christ his undertaking for us and all the Benefits of it accrue to us upon our Believing and Obeying upon his account and for his sake We are in him who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption 1 Cor. 1. 30. For which cause also he is called the Lord our Righteousness Not as if his personal Obedience to the Law was so formally imputed to us as that we should be reckoned to have kept the Law in his keeping of it which hath been the Opinion of some for if that had been so there would have been no more need that Christ should have suffered for us than there was that he shoud have suffered for himself who had no sin for neither should we if we had perfectly kept the Law in him or in his keeping of it CHAP. II. For what Ends the Law was added to the Promise I Now come to shew in the next place for what end the Law of Moâ—es was added to the Promise And before I do this in particular I shall note only in general that it was not added to cross or confront the Promise or God's Design in it but to be subservient to it Gal. 3. 21. Is the Law then against the Promises God forbid For it is not to be thought that God would prevaricate in his Design so that when he had once made a new Law of Grace for the saving of faln Man he would yet afterwards give any Law but what should one way or other subserve to the same end if Men do not deprive themselves of the intended benefit by perverting it And therefore to be sure God did not intend to revive the Old Covenant of Works made with Adam in Paradise in the after promulgation of the Law of Nature which we call the Moral Law already broken He did not therein come to demand his full debt of Innocency in Mans broken and bankrupt condition or to let him know that he would without any other condition than perfect incency cast him into prison until he had paid the utmost farthing For if he had then the Law indeed would have been against the Promise which declares quite otherwise It is true the Law of Nature as it is a perfect Rule of Natural Righteousness founded in God's Nature and Man's Nature doth of it self require perfect innocency and can require no less being suited to the Nature of Man in its perfect state But when God brings this Law forth and sets it before Men that are now faln from that state as he doth in the promulgation of it it is to let them know indeed what they once were and from whence they are fallen and how unhappy their condition now is according to the Tenour and Terms of that Law and that it would have continued so for ever if God had not made a new Law of Grace to over-rule that Law and to let all know that they shall still remain in that condition that wilfully exclude themselves from the benefit of the Law of grace by not performing the Condition of it and not to let them know they should have no better terms from him than that Law affords them nor to make their perfect keeping of it the condition of their Justification But the Law of Moses entirely taken in all its parts was rather given as an Appendix to the Promise both as a Rule of the material part of that Obedience which God would now require of the Israelites in conjunction with their Faith in the Promise and as a Motive to that Obedience This in general The Question is put Gal. 3. 19. Wherefore then serveth the Law And the Answer there is That it was added because of transgression until the Seed should come And it was added because of transgression in more respects than one 1. It was added to discover Sin to make that known to be Sin which was so of it self and in its own nature before the promulgation of the Law For by reason of that grievous Wound which Man got in his Understanding by the Fall and by reason also of a Progressive Degeneration in Mankind the Natural Sense of Moral Good and Evil was to a great degree worn out of the minds of Men. For the repairing of which decay a promulgate Law the ten Commandments answerable to the Law of pure Nature in the Spirituality of it was set on foot in the World And by this Law came Sin and Duty to be more clearly known than they were before Rom. 3. 20. By the Law is the knwoledge of Sin Rom. 7. 7. I had not known Sin but by the Law For I had not known Lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet 2. The Law was added not only barely to make known that to be Sin which was soâ—of it self before but to set it out in it's Colours to make it known in the horrid nature and consequence of it that Men might be the more afraid to have to do with it The Law entred that the offence might abound That is that by that means it might be rendred the more Criminous and Demeritorious That Sin by the Commandment might become exceeding sinful Rom. 5. 20. 7. 13. 3. The Law as it discovered Sin and made it more criminous and the people the more sensible of guilt and more apprehensive of their obnoxiousness to punishment was given to set off so much the more the Glory Beauty and Desirableness of God's Grace in the Promise of pardon and Salvation Rom. 5. 20. The Law entered that the offence might abound But where Sin abounded Grace did much more abound By how much the more Sin appeared Sin and was enhanced and aggravated and rendred manifestly mischievous by a Promulgate Law by so much the more grace appear'd to be Grace in all its Glory that brought deliverance from it Rom. 5. 21. That like as Sin hath reigned unto death viz. by the Law that being the strength of Sin 1 Cor. 15. 56. Even so Grace might reign through Righteousness unto eternal life through Ieâ—us Christ our Lord. After Christ came the rest which he gave was so much the more sweet to these Iews who received him by how much they
was but temporary and being old was ready to vanish and to give place to a New and Everlasting Covenant Chap. 8. 13. 2. That the first Covenant was faulty or defective or else there would have been no place sought for a second ver 7. 3. That the Promises of that first Covenant were not of such things as men stand in need of to make them everlastingly happy as those better Promises of the second Covenant are ver 6. 4. And yet more particularly that in this New Covenant there is promise of such a forgiveness of sins as that iniquity shall be remembred no more ver 12. whereas the first Covenant did not promise any such pardons All that it promised was a forgiveness only as to the concerns of this life otherwise their sins were still kept upon the File to be taken away if ever taken away by the Mediatour of the New Testament by means of his death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first Testament Chap. 9. 15. But in those Sacrifices which were but the Sacrifices of the first Covenant there was a remembrance again made of sins every year Heb. 10. 3. And now by all these reasonings of the Apostle put together it sufficiently appears that the unbelieving Iews did expect Justification and Eternal Life only upon the terms of the first Covenant and that they held that Covenant as comprehending the Covenant of Circumcision to be the Covenant of Eternal Life And indeed this last mentioned Error of theirs in holding the first Covenant to be the Covenant of Salvation did in a manner contain in it all the rest mentioned before which did naturally grow out of it For if that had been the Covenant of Salvation then it would have followed that the Sacrifices of that Covenant had been sufficient and the death of Christ needless and that Circumcision and keeping the Law of Moses would have been necessary to the salvation of the Gentiles c. And now after all this considering what Erroneous Opinions the incredulous Iews held about the Law and about Circumcision and considering in what sense they asserted Justification by the Law and by Circumcision it will be no difficult thing to understand exactly in what sense the Apostle doth every where deny Justification to be by the Law or by the works of the Law For doubtless St. Paul's denial of Justification and Salvation to be by the Law or works of the Law is to be understood in the very same sense in which the incredulous Iews against whom he disputed did hold these to be attainable thereby For else his reasonings would have been beside the question under debate between them And therefore we must take our measure of St. Paul's sense in the Negative part of the Question by his Adversaries sense of it in the Affirmative And if so then in his denying Justification and Salvation to be by the Law or by works of the Law we must understand him to deny a freedom from the Eternal Punishment to be attainable by Legal Sacrifices And also to deny that the Promise of Eternal Life was made upon condition of Literal Circumcision and a Literal Observation of the Mosaical Law without being by Faith renewed in the inward frame Moral constitution of the Soul And likewise to deny Eternal Life to be attainable by the terms of their Political Covenant the Promises whereof were not made upon condition of believing but of doing The Law is not of Faith but the man that doth those things shall live in them Gal. 3. 12. For these and such like were the Opinions which those Jâ—ws did hold as I have shewed and these were the things in which St. Paul opposed them They divided and separated Circumision and the Law in the letter of them from the Spirit of them both claiming Justification by the Letter alone And they divided the Law from the Promise rightly understood and looked to be justified by Works of the Law without Faith in the Promise rightly understood They looked for the Mâ—ssias indeed but not to become a Propitiation for Sin or to establish a New Covenant of Salvation but to further their Temporal and Eternal Felicity in the way of their Obedience to the Political Law But then it doth not in the least appear that St. Paul in denying Justification to be by the Law in the sense thus explained doth also thereby deny works of sincere Obedience to God to concur with Faith in Man's Justification in all respects And if any shall yet suppose that St. Paul in denying Justification by Works in the Jews corrupt sense doth also on the by deny all Works of Evangelical Obedience to bear any part of the Condition on which God promiseth to justifie Men through Christ such a Supposition if admitted would make his Doctrine herein inconsistent not only with the Faith of the holy Men of Old who were wont to express the Condition of the Covenant of Merey by loving God and keeping his Commandments but it would also make him inconsistent with himself and his own Doctrine and the Doctrine of other Apostles as I doubt not but plainly to make appear before I have done with this Discourse There is one Character of Works given by which you may certainly know what Works they were which St. Paul denyed Men were justified by and they were such Works which were apt to occasion boasting Ephes. 2. 9. Not of Works lest any man should boast Rom. 4. 2. For if Abraham were justified by Works to wit in the Jews sense by Circumcision in the flesh to which St. Paul alludes ver 1. he hath whereof to glory but not before God but only before Men who were not Circumcised as he was For the unbelieving Jews who sought and expected Justification by Circumcision and other Legal Observations did glory over the poor Gentiles that were destitute of those Works which consisted in the outward Priviledges which the Jews had and looked down upon them with contempt though some of them were much better than themselves such as Cornelius whom they looked upon as unclean This boasting humor of the Iews over the Gentiles is described and reproved Rom. 2. from ver 17. to 29. Now the Doctrine of Justification by Faith of obtaining pardon by anothers undertaking for us to wit Christ Jesus and of being accepted with God through him upon our sincere though otherwise imperfect obedience which sincere Obedience too is not performed without his special Grace and assistance takes away all occasion of boasting in reference both to God and Men and laid the Iews as low as the Gentiles and made St. Peter a Jew to say But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Iesus Christ we shall be saved even as they Acts 15. 11. And therefore when St. Paul had said that now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested even the righteousness of God which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon
all them that believe for there is no difference meaning between Iews and Gentiles Rom. 3. 21 22. he thereupon demands in ver 27. saying where is boasting then It excluded By what Law Of Works Nay but by the Law of Faith Therefore we find the holy Men of Old among the Iews who expected acceptance with God upon other terms than the Pharisaical Iews did who placed their confidence called trusting in the flesh Phil. 3. 4. in their External Priviledges and Performances alone were so far from glorying in such a Righteousness as that that they cryed out in reference to that all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags Isa. 64. 6. Thus Regenerating Grace made David so far from boasting either of Priviledges or of his Performances that he saith unto God Who am I and what is my people that we should be able to offer so willingly after this sort for all things come of thee and of thine own have we given thee 1 Chro. 29. 14. This made St. Paul to say We are not sufficient of our selves as of our selves to think any thing but our sufficiency is of God 2 cor 3. 5. And by the grace of God I am what I am 1 Cor. 15. 10. And of him are we in Christ Iesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord having nothing but what he hath received from him gratis and without all desert yea contrary to his demerits 1 Cor. 1. 30 31. The good Works which the Saints do they do them by vertue of their being created in Christ Iesus in order thereunto Ephes. 2. 10. and all that good is is through Christ strengthening them Phil. 4. 13. From whence therefore we may well conclude that if the works which St. Paul wholly excludes in the matter of Justification were only such as were apt to occasion boasting that then Acts of Evangelical Obedience were none of those Works According to the sense explained then I presume we may well understand that Text Rom. 3. 28. which of all others seems in the Phrase and Expression to be most Exclusive of Works in the point of Justification the words are these Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by Faith without the deeds of the Law Which words if you consider the context seem to import no more but this viz. That a Man is justified in the Gospel-way which in the verse before is called the Law of Faith And not by the deeds of the Law or upon the terms of the first Covenant which in the verse before likewise is called the Law of Works Which two the Gospel terms the first Covenant terms are still opposed to each other in the point of Justification Now although the Conclusion here laid down is true in reference to the Iews as well as to the Gentiles yet it seems to be written here with special reference to the Gentiles Intimating that upon their belief they might be justified without turning Proselytes to the Jewish way as appears by that Interrogation in the very next words following ver 29. 30. Is he the God of the Iews only is he not also of the Gentiles yes of the Gentiles also Seeing it is one God which shall justifie the Circumcision by Faith and Vncircumcision through Faith And the words in the 31 ver do intimate that the words in the 28th vers are to be understood in such a limited sense as I have assigned in my Explication viz. as excluding the deeds of the Law in the act of Justification only in the Iews corrupt sense of the Law because St. Paul therein affirms his foresaid Doctrine of Justification by Faith without the deeds of the Law not to be at all destructive of the Law but contrariwise tending to establish the Law if we take the Law not in that distorted sense in which those Iews held it but as it was appointed by God to promote holiness in the World which is the end and scope of all his Laws In which sense the Apostle was so far from excluding the works of the Law from having any thing to do in the Justification of Men as that he had expresly affirmed before That though the hearers of the Law were not just before God yet the doers of the Law should be justified Rom. 2. 13. Meaning by doers such as do sincerely obey that Law of God under which they are and not such as do perfectly fulfil it as some would seem to understand it For I have shewed before that God never made Promise of Justification upon naturally impossible conditions as that would be and they are dishonourable thoughts of God to think he hath and therefore the Apostle may not be understood to promise Justification to the doers of the Law upon any such terms There is one vein of Texts moâ—â— wherein the Opposition is made in such a form of words between the Iews way of seeking Justification by the Law and the Gospel-way of seeking it by Faith that being a little opened will both illustrate and confirm what I have been representing to you And they are such in which the Iews erroneous way is called their own Righteousness and the true Christian-way of Justification the Righteousness of God by Faith and the Righteousness of God Rom. 10. 3. For they being ignorant of God s Righteousnâ—ss and going about to establish their own Righteousness have not submitted themselves to the Righteousness of God Phil. 3. 9. And be found in him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith This Righteousness is called their own Righteousness in opposition to the Righteousness of God upon a three-fold account as I understand it 1. Because they sought the pardon of their sins by that only which was their own their own Sacrifices Sacrifices which they themselves brought to be offered Whereas the Christian Justification is called the Righteousness of God because the Sacrifice by which pardon of sin and acceptation with God is obtained was from God and given by God to wit Christ Jesus whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation Rom. 3. 25. and Christ hath given himself an offering and a Sacrifice for us Ephes. 5. 2. And he is made unto us of God Wisdom Righteousness c. 1 Cor. 1. 30. 2. It was called their own Righteousness because they did not think Regeneration or Supernatural Grace necessary to the obtaining of it but a Literal observation of the Law and Circumcision such as passed for a Righteousness among Men and such as they without Supernatural aid were able to perform As for those Precepts which commanded the loving of God with all the heart and the circumcising the heart because these were not enjoyned under express penalties as those things were of which the Rulers were to take cognizance therefore the Phâ—risees counted them but Counsels only
and not direct Precepts But the Christians-Righteousness which is by Faith may be said to be of God because by Grace they are saved through Faith in Christ Iesus and that not of themselves it is the gift of God And we are his Workmanship created in Christ Iesus Ephes. 2. 8 10. 3. It was called their own Righteousness because it was a way of seeking to be justified of their own devising and not of God's appointing And on the contrary the Gospel-Method of Justification is called the Righteousness of God through Faith because it is of God's Institution and appointment It is the substance of God's new Law or Covenant The result of all then is That they were the Works of the Law as exclusive of Faith in Christ and his death which the Apostle denied any Man to be justified by and not those works of the Law which are the immediate effects of Faith in Christ in his Death and in his Doctrine CHAP. VI. How St. Paul's Doctrine of Iustification by Faith and not by Works was then mistaken by some I Come in the next place to shew how that St. Paul's reasonings about Faith and Works in reference to Justification were probably mistaken by such Solifidians as St. Iames reasoned against For he having taught that God did justifie the ungodly Gentiles upon their believing and without the deeds of the Law but denying Justification to as many of the Iews as did not believe though they were Observers of the Law there were some who thereupon through mistake laid the whole stress of Salvation upon believing to the neglect of a holy and virtuous life And St. Paul being sensible how apt some were to make a bad use of his good Doctrine and to draw bad Conclusions out of good Premises he frequently mentions such Inferences on purpose to caution Men against them As for Instance He having said in Rom. 5. 20. That where sin abounded grace did abound much more In Chap. 6. 1. he saith What shall we say then shall we continue in sin that grace may abound as some it seems were ready to infer God forbid saith he how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein You may consult to like purpose in general Rom. 3. 5 6 7 31. 6. 15. Gal. 2. 17. and find that St. Paul and others were slanderously reported to have said let us do evil that good may come That there were such as did misrepresent St. Paul's Doctrince touching God's grace and long-suffering and wrest several passages in his Epistles and other Scriptures to their own destruction we are told by St. Peter also 2 Pet. 3. 15. 16. And account that the long-suffering of the Lord is Salvation even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the Wisdom given him hath written unto you as also in all his Epistles speaking in them of these things In which are some things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own destruction And after St. Paul in his 2 Tim. 3. 2 3 4 5 verses had by many black Characters described a sort of Christians that had a form of godliness but denyed the power thereof In ver 8. he further describes them by that which was the cause of the forementioned unsavoury fruits of the flesh to wit that they were men of corrupt minds or understandings and reprobate concerning the Faith or void of Judgement concerning the Faith as the Margin hath it They were Men of corrupt Principles and injudicious concerning the Doctrine of faith They did not discern faith to be necessary in the operative and practical nature of it But as they did satisfie themselves with a form of godliness without the power so they did likewise with a formal inefficacious and liveless Faith which made them so unsavoury in their lives And St. Iohn after he had in his first Epistle antidoted the Christians against the pretentions of the Gnosticks who held a bad life consistent with Communion with God through illumination of mind and the Christian Faith deceiving themselves and labouring to deceive others in thinking they might be righteous without doing Righteousness 1 Ioh. 3. 7. He towards the conclusion of that Epistle sums up his general scope in it in these words These things have I written unto you that believe in the Name of the Son of God that ye may know that ye have Eternal Life and that ye may believe on the Name of the Son of God Chap. 5. 13. His meaning is as I conceive that he wrote this Epistle first to the end they might be the better assured of salvation by Christ upon their rightly believing on him And secondly To the end they might not be drawn into mistakes in the point of believing as if any Faith less than such as is accompanied with a constant adherence to Christ's Doctrine and example touching a holy life would give them that assurance He wrote to them that did believe that they might believe that is that they might believe yet more understandingly more groundedly and so perseveringly against all temptations to Apostacy from the Profession of the Faith or to loosness in the Profession of it St. Iude also ver 3 4. stirred up the Christians to contend earnestly for the Faith the Doctrine of saving Sinners in the way of Believing because as he told them there were certain Men professing Faith but of ungodly lives that were amongst them that turned the grace of God into lasciviousness so understanding the Law of Grace the Gospel as if it had been a Proclamation from Heaven of a general pardon for Christ's sake and through Faith in him of as many sins as Men had a mind to commit The which Error led them into those Monstrous Impieties charged upon them in that Epistle By reason of which the way of Truth the right Faith they pretended to was evil-spoken of in the World as St. Peter notes they being indeed Spots and Blemishes to the Christians and Christian-Profession so long as they were admitted to their Feasts of Charity as owned by them to be of their number This was indeed an ungodly Faith But the Faith which he exhorted them to contend for and to build up themselves upon as on a sure Foundation he calls their most holy Faith vers 20. such a Faith as is an Operative Principle of a holy life And they were such Christians as St. Iames in his Epistle did expostulate with that did lean so much upon a meer believing upon a meer assent of the mind unto the truth of certain Propositions as that they were careless in the subduing of their Passions and bridling their Tongues and regulating their Actions as if these had not been necessary to Salvation But thought themselves safe upon account of their barren Faith though they were proud and conceited of their knowledge and Atainments censorious and contentious unmerciful and uncharitable In a word they were
A DISCOURSE of the Nature Ends and Difference OF THE Two Covenants Evincing in special That FAITH as Justifying is not opposed to WORKS of Evangelical Obedience WITH An APPENDIX of the Nature and Difference of saving and ineffectual Faith and the reason of that difference To which is prefixed a PREFACE by Mr. Rich. Baxter 2 Pet. 1. 5. Add to your Faith Virtue Jam. 2. 22. And by Works was Faith made perfect LONDON Printed by I. Darby for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. TO THE READER Reader THeology is the Doctrine of the Kingdom of God A Kingdom is a State of Government Government is by Laws He therefore that will understand any thing in Divinity must understand the Laws of God And though there be many inferiour Particles distinguished from the weighty things of the Law which few do clearly understand yet is it necessary that we know in general what kind of Law it is that we are under and also that we know the most important parts If we understand not the Law of Tything Mint and Cummin we must not be ignorant of Iudgment Mercy and Faith Matth. 23. 23. They that tell us we are now under no Laws do tell us thereby that we are under no Goverment and consequently that God and out Redeemer Jesus Christ is not the Governour of Believers And he that knoweth that the Name GOD doth signifie the Divine Relation to Man as well as the Divine Nature will know that this is to deny a God and to deny Iesus Christ and rather to be called Atheism and Infidelity than Antinomianism Even they that had not the written Law of Moses had a Law of Nature partly written out upon their hearts And Christians have both the Law of Nature Extrinsick and the written Law of Christ and both acccording to the various measures of Grace written out upon their hearts that is received by knowledge Faith Love and readiness to obey But they that know that we are under a Law as those in Heaven even Angels are yet do not all well understand what Law it is and on what terms the World or the Church are governed and must be judged That the first Law of Natural Innocency as alone or as to the Promissory part or as to threatning without mercies or remedy is it that any part of the Earth is now governed by or under is an intolerable Errour God promiseth not sinners everlasting life on condition they be no sinners That Promise ceased by a Cessation of the Subjects capacity without any more ado or possibility of reviving it Nor doth God deal with any people according to the sole threatning of that Law without mercy dispensation or remedy The Law of Grace was as truly made with all men in Adam Gen. 3. 15. as the Law of Innocency was Though the Serpents Seed be mentioned in it that intimateth not that any were such as then in the Loins of lapsed Adam but as consequently they would become such by rejecting and abusing Grace and so contracting a further Malignity If Man as in Adam's loyns then was the Serpents Seed then all God's Elect should be such and so be bruised and not saved by Jesus Christ For all then were really alike in Adam And to say that God's meer Election and Reprobation without any real inherent difference existent or foreseen is the reason of denominating some the Seed of the Woman and some the Seed of the Serpent is an unproved fancy and irrational corrupting the Word of God All men therefore in lapsed Adam were at once under the guilt of Sin and also under a remedying Law of Grace so far as that it is enacted and offered to save those that receive it It saved not Adam himself meerly by the making of it till by Faith he had received it And no doubt but as the Covenant of Grace to us extendeth to the faithful and their Seed so did the Covenant of Grace to Adam for it was the same as was made to all the faithful before Christâ—s Incarnation The case of Infants being obscure clearer Truths are not to be reduced to it And whether Cain and Abel as they were both born in Original Sin so were both pardoned upon their Covenant-Dedication to God by their Parents and Cain after lost his Infant-state of Grace as Davenant Ward c. think Infant Grace may now be lost or whether Adam and Eve neglected that Dedication of Cain to God which was needful to his Sanctification or whether God past him by and denyed him Infant-Grace of his meer will I leave to Mens enquiry and various judgments The controversie concerneth Children now as well as then and the difficulties every way are not small But of these things I am past doubt 1. That Cain was not the Serpents Seed meerly for Original Sin and as born of Adam as Abel was also nor did God make him the Serpents Seed by Reprobation but that he made himself so by superadded Sin against the Redeemer and Law of Grace 2. That all Mankind are still under this Law of Grace further than they forfeit the benefits of it by sins against it 3. That most Writers if not most Christians do greatly darken the Sacred Doctrine by overlooking the Interest of Children in the actions of their meer Parents and think that they participate of no guilt and suffer for no Original Sin but Adams only and bring the Doctrine of Original Sin it self into doubt by laying all upon Covenant-Relation and denying or overlooking the Natural Proofs Doubtless through Scripture it is remarkable that God usually judgeth the posterity of new sinners to new punishments and promises and threatnings are made since the Covenant of Innocency ceased to the believers and unbelievers or wicked with their Seed For we may well say that the Seed of Cain Cham Nimrod Ishmael Esau Saul Ahab c. had more Original Sin than what they had from Adam And Matth. 23. 35. Expounds the matter It was not in vain that Ezra Daniel c. confessed their forefathers sin nor doth our Liturgie pray for the dead but the living when it saith Remember not Lord our offences nor the offences of our Forefathers neither take thou vengeance of our Sins The Author of this Treatise beginning at the Promise made to Abraham doth it to comport with the Apostle Paul who thought meet to call the Iews to no higher Observations than the Case in hand about the Non-obligation of Moses's Law to the Gentiles did require But this denyeth not but supposeth the same Law of Grace in the main to have been made to all men in Adam and Noah and to have been in force to all Mankind before it was renewed to Abraham saving that to him and his Seed there were many great priviledges added above the rest of Mankind upon his extraordinary obediential Faith Of how great importance it is to have a right understanding of the difference between the Law of
Innocency and the Law of Grace and in it the Promise made to Adam and Noah and that to Abraham and the peculiar Mosaical Law and Covenant and the perfecter Edition of the Law or Covenant of Grace by Christ Incarnate a true Student of Theology may easily discern Wherein I hope the Reader will find that among the many late Treatises on this Subject the Authour here hath done considerable service to the Church of God Of which Subject I have written long ago so much my self and am attempting to make it yet more plain that I need not here tell you what is my judgment only lest any who know not how to stop in Mediocrity should be tempted by Socinians or Papists to think that we countenance any of their Errors or that our Differences in the Point of Justification by Faith or Works are greater than indeed they are and lest any weak Opiniative persons should clamour unpeaceably against their Brethren and think to raise a name to themselves for their differing Notions I shall here give the Reader such evidences of our real Concord as shall silence that Calumny Though some few Lutherans did upon peevish suspiciousness against George Major long ago assert that good Works are not necessary to Salvation And though some few good men whose zeal without judgment doth better serve their own turn than the Churches are jealous lest all the good that is ascribed to Man be a dishonour to God and therefore speak as if God were honoured most by saying the worst words of our selves and many have uncomely and irregular Notions about these matters and though some that are addicted to sidings do take it to be their godly zeal to censure and reproach the more understanding Sort when they most grosly erre themselves And though too many of the people are carried about through injudiciousness and temptations to false Doctrines and evil lives yet is the Argument of Protestants thus manifested 1. They all affirm that Christ's Sacrifice with his Holiness and perfect Obedience are the Meritorious Cause of the forgiving Covenants and of our Pardon and Iustification thereby and of our right to Life Eternal which it giveth us And that this price was not paid or given in it self immediately to us but to God for us and so that our foresaid benefits are its effects 2. They agree that Christ's Person and ours were not really the same and therefore that the same Righteousness which is an Accident of one cannot possibly be an Accident of the other 3. They all detest the conceit that God should aver and repute a Man to have done that which he never did 4. They all agree that Christ's Sacrifice and Merits are really so effectual to procure our Pardon Justification Adoption and right to the sealing gift of the Holy Ghost and to Glory upon our Faith and Repentance that God giveth us all these benefits of the New Covenant as certainly for the sake of Christ and his Righteousness as if we had satisfied him and merited them our selves And that thus far Christ's Righteousness is ours in its effects and imputed to us in that we are thus used for it and shall be judged accordingly 5. They all agree that we are Justified by none but a Practical or working Faith 6. And that this Faith is the Condition of the Promise or Gift of Justification and Adoption 7. And that Repentance is a Condition also though as it is not the same with Faith as Repentance of unbelief is on another aptitudinal account even as a willingness to be cured and a willingness to take one for my Physitian and to trust him in the use of his Remedies are on several accounts the Conditions on which that Physitian will undertake the Cure or as willingness to return to subjection thankful acceptance of a purchased parden and of the Purchasers love and future Authority are the Conditions of a Rebels pardon 8. And they all agree that in the first instant of a Mans Conversion or Believing he is entered into a state of Justification before he hath done any outward works And that so it is true that good Works follow the justified and go not before his initial Iustification As also in the sense that Austin spake it who took Justification for that which we call Sanctification or Conversion 9. And they all agree that justifying Faith is such a receiving affiance as is both in the Intellect and the Will and therefore as in the Will participateth of some kind of love to the justifying Object as well as to Justification 10. And that no Man can choose or use Christ as a means so called in respect to his own intention to bring him to God the Father who hath not so much love to God as to take him for his Endâ—n the use of that means 11. And they agree that we shall be all judged according to our Works by the Rule of the Covenant of Grace though not for our Works by way of Commutative or Legal proper Merit And Iudging is the Genus whose Species is Iustifying and Condemning And to be judged according to our Works is nothing but to be Iustified or Condemned according to them 12. They all agree that no Man can possibly merit of God in point of Commutative Iustice nor yet in point of Distributive or Governing Iustice according to the Law of Nature or Innocency as Adam might have done nor by the Works of the Mosaical Law 13. They all agree that no Works of Mans are to be trusted in or pleaded but all excluded and the conceit of them abhorred 1. As they are feigned to be against or in stead of the free Mercy of God 2. As they are against or feigned instead of the Sacrifice Obedience Merit or Intercession of Christ. 3. Or as supposed to be done of our selves without the Grace of the Holy Ghost 4. Or as supposed falsly to be perfect 5. Or as supposed to have any of the aforedisclaimed merit 6. Or as materially consisting in Mosaical observances 7. Much more in any Superstitious Inventions 8. Or in any evil mistaken to be good 9. Or as any way inconsistent with the tenor of the freely pardoning Covenant In all these senses Justification by Works is disclaimed by all Protestants at least 14. Yet all agree that we are Created to good Works in Christ Jesus which God hath ordained that we should walk therein and that he that nameth the Name of Christ must depart from iniquity or else he hath not the Seal of God and that he that is born of God sinneth not that is predominantly And that all Christ's Members are holy purified zealous of good Works cleansing themselves from all filthiness of flesh and Spirit that they might perfect holyness in God's fear doing good to all Men as loving their Neighbours as themselves And that if any Man have not the Sanctifying Spirit of Christ he is none of his nor without holiness can see God 15. They all
unto thy Fathers to give thee Deut. 11. 21. That your days may be multiplied and the days of your Children as the days of Heaven upon Earth A great variety of outward blessings is promised as the reward of keeping that Covenant And therefore Wisdom under that Dispensation is described as having length of days in her right hand and in her left haâ—d Riches and Honour whose ways are ways of pleasantness and all her paths peace Prov. 3. 17. And as this Covenant was National so there were Promises of National Blessings such as was the setting them on high above all the Nations of the Earth making them the Head and not the Tail The giving them victory over â—nemies multiplying the Nation and bestowing on it Health Peace and Plenty Deut. 28. Lev. 26. When it 's said once by Moses thrice by Ezekiel and twice by St. Paul that the Man that doth them shall live in them Lev. 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11 13 21. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. thereby Epitomizing the first Covenant I conceive that by living is meant a long and prosperous life in this World As on the contrary the condition of one greatly afflicted is in Scripture-Dialect a kind of Death and such an one said to be free among the Dead Psal. 88. 5. And that which inclines me so to think is not only the Reasons already given to prove that no other life was promised in the first Covenant but also the congruity of this sense with other passages in the Writings of Moses As Deut. 30. 15. See I have set before you this day Life and Good Death and Evil. If you would know what is meant by Life here the next verse will inform you That thou mayest live and multiply and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in the Land whither thou goest to possess it The contrary whereunto is the death he had set before them saying I denounce unto you this day that ye shall surely perish and that ye shall not prolong your dayes upon the Land c. Deut. 32. 46 47. Set your hearts unto all the words which I testifie among you this day for it is not a vain thing for you because it is your life and through this thing ye shall prolong your dayes in the Land wherein ye go The latter words are exegetical of the former Through this thing ye shall prolong your dayes is the interpretation of those it is your Life And it may be considered also whether this Particle in which if a man do he shall even live in them may not determine the nature and kind of that reward which was promised in the first Covenant as it was a present reward a reward which was received even while the work was doing according to that Psal. 19. 11. In keeping them there is great reward And this is agreeable to what fell out in the event The Lord was with them to prosper them while they were with him but when they forsook him presently troubles overtook them The pouring out of God's fury on them to consume them in the Wilderness being put in Ezek. 20. 13 21. as the direct contrary to those words which if a man do he shall even live in them seems greatly to favour this Nation But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the Wilderness They walked not in my Statutes and they dâ—spised my Iudgments which if a man do he shall even live in them Then I said I would pour out my fury upon them to consume them in the Wilderness And indeed one main difference between the two Covenants which I would have here observed lies in this to wit the presentness of the reward promised in the first and the futurity of that promised in the second St. Paul in his Allegorical description of the two Covenants Gal. 4. 24 c. represents those that adhered to the first Covenant by the children of Bond-servant to whom Abraham gave gifts in present and sent them away as in Gen. 25. 5. and those that adhered to the second by the Son of the Free-woman Isaac who was Abrahams Heir to whom he gave the whole Inheritance at last And the Adoption of Sons as the Priviledge of the New Covenant is opposed to the condition of Servants under the Old Gal. 4. 7. And what are they adopted to but to an Inheritance for the future for by Adoption they are made Heirs If a Son then an Heir of God through Christ an Heir of what of an Inheritance for the future an Inheritance Incorruptible undefiled and which fadeth not away reserved in Heaven 1 Pet. 1. 4. And therefore they are said to wait for the Adoption to wit the redemption of their Bodies at the resurrection Rom. 8. 23. Sons and Heirs serve their Father with a free and ingenuous Spirit though they have but little for the present in confidence of what he will do for thâ—m hereafter in another world when they shall come to age But those under the Old Covenant were like Servants who serve with a servile Spirit because they do it with expectation of present pay The one walk by Faith which is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen the other were influenced in their obedience by the expectation of present reward because that was it which the first Covenant promised to the observers of it These Promises now insisted on were promises of reward to the observers of this first Covenant But besides these there was another sort of Promises exhibited in the first Covenant and they were Promises of pardon in many cases when the Laws of that Covenant were broken There were as I have shewed Laws of Indemnity which made many of the breaches of the Laws of duty pardonable upon certain conditions And such were all sins of Ignorance and Inadvertency and some of those also which were committed wittingly But presumptuous sins and such as carried in them a kind of contempt of the Law these were exempted from pardon Heb. 10. 28. He that despised Moses Law died without mercy under two or three witnesses But for the other there were promises of pardon upon certain conditions which conditions were not always the same In some cases the offering of a Sin-offering or Trespass-offering was the Condition In other Cases that with confession of Sin was the Condition And in some other Cases Sacrificing Restitution and Satisfaction were the Condition And afflicting of the Soul as well a the Sacrifice for Atonement on the day of general Expiation was always a Condition of forgiveness These things in the particularities of them you have in the 4 5 6 16 and 23d Chapters of Levit. And then the Condition of the Promises of Purgation of Legal Uncleannesses and the penal effects of them was the observing the Rules prescribed for purifying the Unclean Now the forgiveness promised by these Laws of Indemnity did not free the Conscience from all Obligation to Eternal punishment but only freed the
Circumcision if the great benefits of the Covenant of which Justification was one were suspended upon that as a necessary condition And yet that hâ— was justified when not Circumcised there is the express Authority of Scripture for This he asserts Rom. 4. 9 10. For we say that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness How was it then reckoned when he was in Circumcision or in Vncircumcision Not in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision Afterwards he proceeds to undeceive them in the apprehension they had that the benefits of the Covenant were entailed upon Abraham's Natural Seed as such or at least as such with the addition of a literal observation of Circumcision and the Law without respect to the Spiritual and new Birth Rom. 9. 6 7 8. They are not all Israel which are of Israel as they thought they were neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children But in Isaac shall thy Seed be called That is those shall be called Abraham's Seed which are born as Isaac was by Faith in the Promise which are therefore called Children of the Promise For so the Apostle expounds it saying They which are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed to wit such as are born after the Spirit as it is explained Gal. 4. 28 29. And this agrees to what he had said before Rom. 2. 28. He is not a Iew which is one outwardly c. Against which corrupt Opinion Iohn the Baptist did oppose himself when he admonished the Pharisees to bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance and think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father Mat. 3. 7 8. The Apostle labours to cure this grand Error about Literal Circumcision as disjoyned from Spiritual in many other places and shews how that Circumcision availeth nothing but a new creature such as Spiritual Cirâ—umcision makes a man to be Gal 6. 15. Not Circumcision but Faith Gal. 5. 6. Not Circumcision but keeping the Commandments is that which would only reach those great ends which they sought after in Literal Circumcision 1 Cor. 7. 19. But I shall have occasion to improve these Scriptures further upon another Head of this Discourse And by the way we may observe that those who build their hopes of future happiness upon their having been Baptized and their being of the Church without the inward Grace signified by Baptism which is the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost they are much a-kin to those miserable mistaken Iews 2. They not understanding the Typical and Spiritual use of the Legal Sacrifices as they did prefigure the death and suffering of Christ and the general Atonement which was to be made thereby nor yet the Predictions of the Prophets touching his death they ran into another gross Error and that was That the promised Messias should not by suffering death become a Sacrifice for sin And therefore they said to him when he spoke to them of his death We have heard out of the Law that Christ abideth for ever and how sayest thou the Son of Man must be lift up Joh. 12. 34. They did not dream of his dying but of his Reigning visibly as a mighty Monarch among them and subduing all Nations under them Because they knew him not nor yet the voices of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath day they have fulfilled them in condemning him Acts 13. 27. Their ignorance in the meaning of the Types and Predictions touching the death of the Messias would have been the more excusable if they had not wilfully and obstinately persisted in that Error after those Types and Prophecies were fulfilled and explained to them Ignorance in this matter was found in Christ's own Disciples a great while but their slowness to believe those Types and Prophecies after they were fulfilled was a thing which our Saviour rebuked them for saying O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken Ought not Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory Luke 24. 25 26. But the unbelieving Iews were tenacious of this Opinion after they had sufficient means to have been convinc'd of their Error in it In opposition to which Opinion the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews argues at large the necessity of Christ's suffering by death As first he argues it from his Priesthood For having proved him according to Prophecy to be a Priest not after the Order of Aaron but of Melchizedeck and so a Priest of greater Dignity Chap. 5. and 7. He infers Chap. 8. that as a Priest he must have something to offer in Sacrifice and that of greater value than what was offered by Priests under the Law that were but of an inferiour Order and that he shews to have been himself and his own Blood as the Antitype of all those Legal Sacrifices Chap. 9. Secondly He proves his death necessary for the confirmation of the second and new Covenant as he was Mediatour of it As the first Testament was not dedicated without Blood so neither is the second For where a Testament is saith he there of necessity must also be the death of the Testator Chap. 9. 15 23. Thirdly His death was necessary for the obtaining of Remission of Sins a Benefit promised in the new Covenant For without shedding of Blood saith he there is no Remission of Sin Chap. 9. 22. with Chap. 10. 5 18. And indeed it was a good part of the Apostle's work to beat down this Opinion that the Messias was not to dye Acts 17. 3. St. Paul as his manner was went into them and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures opening and alledging that Christ must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead Yea this Opinion had so generally obtained among them in our Saviours time that it seems the Apostles of Christ at first were not free from it For when our Saviour told them that at Ierusalem he should be delivered to the Gentiles and that they should scourge him and put him to death and that the third day he should rise again it 's said they understood none of these things and that this saying was â—id from them neither knew they the things which were spoken Though they were spoken plainly and in no Parable Luke 18. 32 33 34. Christ his being crucified became a stumbling-block to the Iews through this Error of theirs and that which they insisted upon as a Reason why they would not receive him as the Christ of God 1 Cor. 1. 23. 3. They held another Error which probably was Mother or Daughter of the former and that was That the Legal Sacrifices did expiate and take away Sin not only so as to free them from Legal penalties and temporal punishments as in many Cases they did but so also as to free them from all Obligation to Eternal punishment And so they did attribute to
Judaizers who stand for the necessity of Mosaic Observations have no right to nor shall receive benefit by Christ who is the only Christian Altar to which we bring all our Sacrifices 6. They held the Law of Moses to be unalterable and of perpetual obligation In opposition to which the Author to the Hebrews improves to great purpose that Prophesie Ier. 31. 31 32. Behold the days come saith the Lord that I will make a new Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Iudah Not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the Land of Egypt c. For in that he saith a new Covenant he hath saith he made the first old Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready saith he to vanish away And St. Paul shews how that the Legal Ministration how glorious soever it was was yet done away when that which was far more glorious did appear 2 Cor. 3. 7 11. And again that we are become dead to the Law by the Body of Christ and delivered from the Law Rom. 7. 4 6. 7. The last of their Errors I shall insist on was this They held the first Covenant as alone or separated to be the Covenant of Salvation only taking in with it the Covenant of Literal Circumcision which also was made a part of their Law That first Covenant which I have already described as a temporal Covenant and the Promises and the threatnings of it but temporal they took to be established for perpetuity and the Promises of it to contain Promises of Eternal Redemption or Remission as well as temporal and Eternal Life and Felicity as well as Temporal And such a Literal observation of the Laws of it to be the Condition of those Promises as would render them inculpable in the eye of the Magistracy such a Righteousness sufficient to justifie them before God as St. Paul saith he had while he was a Pharisee Phil. 3. 6. As touching the Righteousness which is in the Law blameless which then he accounted to be his gain Now that they did peremptorily adhere to this first Covenant and the terms of it for Justification and Eternal Life it doth plainly appear by the mighty opposition which the Apostles made against them in it For they did still oppose another Covenant as the Covenant of Justification and Eternal Life unto this Mosaical Covenant and Faith as the Condition of that in opposition to Works as the condition of this as will appear if we come to Instances 1. St. Paul argues it with them that the Promise of God to Abraham and his Seed was not through the Law but through the righteousness of Faith Rom. 4. 13. Not through the Law that is not upon the terms upon which the benefits of the first Covenant were promised to the Nation of the Iews but upon quite other terms exprest by the Righteousness of Faith 2. He argues it farther with them That God's way of accounting men righteous by Faith and their way of seeking Righteousness npon the terms of the first Covenant were utterly inconsistent the one destructive of the other and that but one of these ways could possibly stand For if they which are of the Law be Heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none effect Rom. 4. 14. And again If the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise But God gave it to Abraham by Promise Gal. 3. 18. And if by Grace then it is no more of Works otherwise Grace is no more Grace c. Rom. 11. 6. 3. And that the Law did not exclude the Promise to Abraham he farther argues in that the Covenant with Abraham was confirmed and unalterably setled and established in the Messias 430 years before the Law by Moses was given and that therefore for them to go about to introduce the Law in the room of the Promise to Abraham so confirmed would be as unreasonable and unjust as for one man to alter or make void anothers Covenant after he hath confirmed it Gal. 3. 15 17. Brethren I speak after the manner of men though it be but a Mans Covenant yet if it be confirmed no Man disanulleth or addeth thereto And this I say that the Covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ the Law which was 430 years after cannot disanul that it should make the Promise of none effect 4. St. Paul argues it impossible in the nature of the thing that they should be justified by the Law because one main end of God's promulging the Law of Nature which yet was a great part of the first Covenant was to convince men of their guilt and of their obnoxiousness to wrath and to stop their Mouthes and to leave them without any plea of defence as from it Rom. 3. 19 20. Now we know that what things soever the Law saith it saith to them who are under the Law That every mouth may be stopt and all the world may become guilty before God Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be jnstified in his sight for by the Law is the knowledge of sin And if the Law doth convict men it cannot justifie them For the same Law cannot both condemn and justifie the same person in reference to the same charge If all are cast and condemned by the Original Law as they are for he hath concluded all under sin that he might have mercy upon all Gal. 3. then so many as come to be justified after this must needs be justified by another Law superceding that and that is none other than the Law of Grace The Law of Nature curseth every one that hath broken it though but once and therefore it cannot justifie them too Out of the same mouth in this case doth not proceed blessing and cursing 5. He argues this Opinion of theirs to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Prophets many hundred years after as well as contrary to the Promise to Abraham long before the Law That no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident for the Iust shall live by Faith and the Law is not of Faith but the man that doth them shall live in them Gal. 3. 11 12. from Hab. 2. 4. The Law is not of Faith that is it doth not promise pardon or any other blessing upon believing but upon condition of doing the things therein required the man that doth them shall live in them Levit. 18. 5. 6. The insufficiency of the first Covenant to make men eternally happy and the necessity validity of the second to that end is further argued in Heb. 8. from another famous Prophecy in Ier. 31. 31 c. of God's making a new Covenant with Israel and Iudah in the latter days not according to that he made with their Fathers when he brought them out of Egypt 1. It 's argued that that first Covenant
the Law for them becomes imputed to them in it self and not only as the procuring cause of their Justification upon the terms of the Gospel so that they are looked upon as having themselves perfectly kept the Law in him it hath doubtless infeebled their endeavours after an inherent Righteousness and proved a temptation to them to think that so long as they have such anothers inherent Righteousness essentially in it self imputed to them as Christs is they have no great need to find it in themselves considering also that if they had it they must rather loath themselves for it than take any comfort in it But let no man deceive you saith St. Iohn he that doth righteousness is righteous as he is righteous 1 Joh. 3. 7. I do acknowledge that many of them have been worthy men who yet have propagated these Opinions But that makes the Opinions never the better but have done more hurt in gaining thereby the more credit It is true also that those worthy Men have zealously pressed the necessity of Repentance Regeneration and a holy Life which proved indeed an Antidote against the Poyson of the other Opinions so that they did not become mortal to many as otherwise they would have done And indeed they would have made mad work if they had not been yoked with wholesomer Doctrine as we see they did among Antinomians Ranters and other carnal Chistians that have followed the Docture of those Opinions but have been shy of letting the Doctrines of Mortification and strict living to have any power over them But then if the preaching of those sounder Doctrines of Repentance Regeneration and a holy Life have done much good notwithstanding they have been clogged with Opinions of another tendency it is easie to imagine that they would have done much more good if they had not been checkt by those unsound Principles But I shall say no more of this though more might be said because I hope I may say that most of those who have formerly imbibed these Opinions are now come to deliver themselves with more caution than heretofore And so I shall procâ—â—d to the last thing I propounded to touch upon and that is to shew CHAP. VII That the Doctrine of St. Paul and of St. Iames about Faith and Works in reference to Iustification do not differ but are wholly one IT is true indeed though the Doctrine of St. PAVL and St. IAMES was in nothing opposite the one to the other yet the nature of the subject-matter of their Epistles did differ just as the Errors they engaged against did differ The Errors of the unbelieving Iews consisting much in denying Justification to be by Christ and Faith in him and in placing it in their own works of Circumcising Sacrificing and other Mosaical Observations And St. Paul designing in some of his Epistles to antidote the Christians against the infection of them and to establish them in the saving Doctrine of the Gospel was led of course to bend his discourse in great part against Justification by Works of the Law and on the contrary to assert it to be by Faith in Christ in his Death and in his Doctrine without those works Whereas St. Iames having to do in his Epistle with such as professed the Christian Faith and Justification by it but erring dangerously about the nature of Faith as justifying thinking that opinionative Faith would save them though destitute of a real change in the moral frame and constitution of their Souls and of a holy Life Hereupon it became in a manner as necessary for him to plead the Renovation of Man's Nature and Evangelical Obedience to be some way necessary unto Justification as it was for St. Paul to contend for Justification by Faith without the deeds of the Law And therefore though their Doctrines in this respect did in great part differ yet they did not differ as Truth differs from Error nor as opposites but only as one Truth differs from another For otherwise when St. Paul had to do with the like Erroneous and Scandalous Christians as those were which St. Iames expostulated the matter with When he had to do with such as had a form of godliness but denyed the power thereof he could and did decry a reprobate faith and plead the necessity of a Faith that is unfeighned and of a holy Life as well as St. Iames as appears in part by what was said in the former Chapter and will I doubt not be made sufficiently evident in this In order whereto I shall recommend to consideration these ten things 1. That Works of Evangelical Obedience are never in Scripture opposed to God's Grace 2. That St. Paul in speaking against Justification by Works gives sufficient Caution not to be understood thereby to speak any thing against Evangelical Obedience in reference thereto 3. That Regeneration or the new Creature as including Evangelical Obedience is oposed to Works in the business of Man's Justification as well as Faith is and as well as the grace of God it self is 4. That Evangelical Obedience as well as Faith and together with Faith is opposed to the Works of the Law in reference to Justification 5. That Evangelical Obedience alone is opposed to the Works of the Law 6. Faith it self is an act of Evangelical Obedience 7. By Evangelical Obedience Christians come to have a right to Salvation 8. The Promise of benefit by the Blood of Christ is made to Evangelical Obedience 9. Repentance And 10. Forgiving Injuries are both acts of Evangelical Obedience without which a Man cannot be justifyed And if these things be made out they will I think amount to such a Demonstration as that we cannot well desire a clearer or fuller proof that St. Paul together with other the Apostles taught Justification by Evangelical Obedience as the effect of Faith as well as St. Iames. 1. The works of Evangelical Obedience as the effects of Faith and Regeneration by Faith are never in St. Paul's Epistles or any other the holy Scriptures opposed to God's Grace in referenee to Justification and Salvation Works and Grace indeed are opposed to each other But then by Works we are to understand either Works antecedent to Conversion or as they are denyed to merit at the hands of God or the Works of the Law of Moses as Erroneously contended for by the Iews Or the Works of the Law as Typical and as opposed to things Typified Or the Works of the Law as the Law is in its rigour opposed to the milder Oeconomy of the Gospel But the Works of Evangelical Obedience are never opposed to Grace no more than Faith it self is And there is no reason why they should because Evangelical Obedience is the effect of Divine Grace as well as Faith it self is and tends to the praise of it and is accepted and will be rewarded through Grace Contrary hereunto those words in Titus 3. 5. Not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy