righteousnesse as our natural being in the first Adam to our partaking in his condemnation Yea. 3. It is a great deal more necessary and therefore I deny §. 6 Mr. Eyres consequence for though it were yielded that condemnation comes on men only by the Law of Adam yet will it by no means follow that Justification descends to us from Christ as the immediate effect of that Law or Covenant by which himselfe was justified The reason is plain because Adam represented all mankind as virtually in the same obligation with himself b Vide Paul Ferrium scholast Orthod spe c. 20 §. 3. and his offence was the act of the whole humane nature though it be not imputed to particular persons till they begin to exist and his condemnation was so far forth the condemnation of all mankinde it being the very same sentence that condemneth both him and us But Christ Jesus represented no man as in the same obligation with himselfe either in his obedience or Justification otherwise we are justified by works or he by grace for we must be acknowledged to have satisfied Gods justice in him and to have merited eternal life in him in the very same propriety of speech as we are said to have sinned and dyed in Adam which I will never beleeve while I live because it excludes grace altogether from having any hand in the justification of a sinner The grace of our justification is usually placed in these c See the Assemb confes cap. 11. §. 3. two things 1. In that Christ was given freely of the Father for us 2. And his obedience and â—â—tisfaction accepted in our stead But in neither of these is there any grace at all if we have merited and satisfied in him as we are said to sin and die or be condemned in Adam For the Law it self will allow us to make satisfaction if we are able for it inflicts the penalty but in ordâ—r to satisfaction and the punishment of sinners is not eternall but because they cannot satisfie by bearing it But if we have satisfied in Christ it seems we were able to do it â—b esse ad posse valet consequentia And justice it self will accept of satisfaction being performed And as God deals not more rigorously with us in condemning us then he did with Adam in condemning him so neither doth he deale any whit more mercifully with us in justifying us then he did with Christ in justifying him if his satisfaction and justification be ours in the same sense in which Adams sinne and condemnation is ours How much safer is it to say with the Scripture He is the propitiation for our sinnes 1 Joh. 2. 2. and that he hath obtained eternall redemption for us Heb. 9. 12. then to talke of our being in him a propitiation for our owne sinnes or of purchasing in him redemption for our selves The conclusion is the Law that justified Christ cannot justifie us though the law that condemned Adam were yeelded to be the only law that condemneth us which yet I have already denyed Ergâ— there must be some other Law according to which sinners are justified and that is that Law of grace preached in the Gospel whosoever beleeveth shall be saved called the law of faith Rom. 3 27. and the Law of righteousnesse Rom. 9. 31. 4. No saith Mr. Eyre those places are to be understood of the §. 7. new covenant made with Christ not of the conditionall promise as I would have it Rep. Which is spoken after the old rate of Mr. Eyres disputing that is dictating I acknowledge my selfe unworthy to be compared with him in any respect yet the truth if he think himself in the truth is worthy of a more laborious defense then a frigid so 't is or 't is not so though I may not be worthy of a better answer I am perswaded himself will acknowledge that the propriety of the phrases favours me and he doth not so much as pretend to any Argument hat may compell me to understand them improperly 1. For the law of faith it is expresly opposed to the law of works Where is boasting then it is excluded By what law of works nay but by the law of faith The law of works is the law that requires us to performe works that we may be justified Ergo the law of faith is the law which requires faith unto justification even that doctrine which manifesteth the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ without the works of the law as he had before described it v. 21 22. Thus Beza Evangelium vocat legem fidei id est doctrinum quae salutem propâ—nit sub conditione si credideris opposâ—tam doctrinae quae justitiam salutem proponit cum conditione si omnia feceris To the same purpose Paraeus Aretius Hemmingius c. And therefore the Apostle having said that the law of faith excludes boasting he addes immediatly v. 28. we conclude therefore that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law To put faith for Christ is such a piece of boldnesse as I dare not adventure upon as much as Mr. Eyre challength me for my forehead The reasons are mentioned before 2. And as for the law of righteousnesse Rom. 9. 31. it is called the righteousnesse which is of faith in the very next foregoing verse v. 30. And I would Mr. Eyre would tell us how we may otherwise make sense of the Apostle when he sayes the Gentiles attained it by faith v. 30. and the Jews fell short of it by stumbling at Christ through unbelief v. 31. And a few verses below chap. 10. 6. the Apostle calls it the righteousnesse which is of faith and v. 8. The word of faith which we preach the voyce and tenour of which he describes v. 9. If thâ—u shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt beleeve in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved and all this in opposition to the righteousnesse of the law which the Jews sought after the summe of which is comprehended in these words The man that doth them shall live by them v. 5. Hence it is manifest that the law of righteousnesse is that by which only righteousness is attainable and that is the Gospel-promise of justifying them that beleeve in Jesus though they be not able to fulfill the Law of Moses SECT II. IN the next place Mr. Eyre offers us some Arguments to prove §. 8. that justification is not the discharge of a sinner by that signall conditionall promise of the Gospel he that believes shall be saved Let us try then for whereas he censures that saying of mine every man is then condemned when the Law condemnes him I stay not to answer him he might have seen if he would that I intended no more then that whosoever is condemned is condemned by a Law What then are the Arguments The first is crambe bis shall I say or
they were but hypocrites now both which are absurd If he use the distinction in any other sense I know neither Scripture nor reason to justifie it 4. What manner of people they now were and formerly had not been is set down v. 9. Yea are a choice generation a royall priesthood an holy nation a peculiar people c. all which they were internally if Mr. Eyres glosse be true even while they were a generation of Vipers base idolaters a prophane people defiled with all manner of abominations yea and multitudes many years before they are borne for this internall covenant is nothing else but Gods election or Christs purchase 5. These words in Peter are taken out of Hos 2. 23. which text Mr. Eyre urged but even now in that very sense which here he opposeth 6. The former part of the verse is an universal negative you are sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not a people Ergo whatsoever God had done for them towards their salvation before their conversion was not sufficient to denominate them to be a people of God 7. Especially when it follows but now you are the people of God which being the accomplishment of that promise so frequent in Scripture they shall be my people containes more then a promise of that whereof a hypocrite or a hypocritical people is as capable as themselves CHAP. XVII A Reply to Mr. Eyres 21 Chapter being a vindication of the additionall Arguments proving the Covenant to be conditionall SECT I. AT the close of my Sermon I added foure brief Arguments proving that we are not in Covenant §. â— with God beâ—ore we beleeve The first was this Isa 55. 3. Come unto me that is beleeve on me Joh. 6. 35. and I will make an everlasting covenant with you Mr. Eyre answers 1. The particle vaâ— may be taken illatively thus come unto me For I will make an everlasting covenant with you Rep. 1. If this be the sense of the words yet at first sight 't is evident that the rationall particle for notes the following words to be a reason or motive to that act which is here called a coming unto God that is beleeving Ergo the words still suppose that we must beleeve before God make a covenant with us for his making the Covenant is proposed as the end of our coming Or 2. saith he If we take the words as they are rendred they are all one as if he had said I will performe or give you all other benefits promised in my everlasting Covenant Rep. This also yeelds the Argument for hereby it is acknowledged that faith is required as the means which we are to use for obtaining all other blessings of the covenant and a means for obtaining good things by anothers promise is formalissime a condition faith therefore is yeelded to be the condition of obtaining pardon of sin and all other blessings besides it self which is that Mr. Eyre hath hitherto disputed against What follows in this answer hath been spoken to largely already and to what purpose it is mentioned here againe I apprehend not My second Argument was this The voice of the Gospel which §. 2. is the covenant of grace is every where Beleeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved in opposition to the covenant of works which saith do this and live Rom. 10 5. 6 9. This is the Covenant whereof Christ is mediatour Heb. 9. 15 that they that are called unto faith shall receive the promise of the eternall inheritance Mr. Eyre answers The Gospel properly and strictly taken consists neither in precepts nor promises of the New-Testament but in the declaration of these glad tidings that the promises which God made unto his people in the Old-Testament are now fulfilled Rep. This is indeed a prime part of the Gospel but no otherwise then as it tends to hold forth Christ Jesus as the onely and most sufficient cause or author of salvation to as many as will beleeve on him and therefore the whole doctrine of the Gospel is summarily comprehended in this that whosoever beleeves shall be saved Mark 1. 14 15. and 16. 15 16. Matth. 4. 17. 23. Heb. 4 1 2. Act. 20. 20 21 and a hundred other places If the Gospell have no precept how are men then professedly subject to it 2 Cor. 9. 13. Or what is it to obey or not obey the Gospel Rom. 10. 16. 2 Thes 1. 8 1 Pet 4. 17. But what is the direct answer to the Argument This. The command of beleeving with the promise of life to beleevers are parts of our ministry they are not the tenor of the Gospell or New Covenant Rep. 1. A strange answer our ministry is the ministry of the Gospell Ergo when we command men to beleeve with a promise of life we preach the Gospel Ergo such a command and promise are parts of the Gospel 2. Yea they are the summe of all we preach if we preach no more then the Apostles Rom. 10. 8 9. The word of faith which we preach and yet surely the Apostles were ministers of the New Covenant 2 Cor. 3. Then Mr. Eyre tells us againe that the tenor of the New Covenant is I will put my Laws into their hearts c. And I can but answer him againe that not the tenor but the matter of the effects of the New Covenant are there described Act. 5. 31. Christ is said to be exalted to give repentance and remission of sin to Israel Is not therefore repentance to be preached in his Name for the remission of sin or may we not say repent that your sins may be blotted out To Heb. 9. 15. He answers as to other texts formerly that it describes onely the persons that are saved but not the tearmes or means by which they do obtaine salvation Seest thou not Reader how faith is denyed to be so much as the meanes of salvation and no more ascribed to it then to eating drinking sleeping reasoning crying or the like which do all of them in some degree describe the quality and condition of the persons that shall be saved Though I confesse not from that which is proper and peculiar to them but that alters not the case But of these things more at large before Hitherto we have not one Scripture example of such phrase of speech serving onely for a description My third Argument is this The Covenant which is to be preacheed §. 3. to every man and every man called upon to fulfill the conditions of it namely faith that he may receive the blessings of it is not an absolute promise The Covenant of grace is to be preached to every man and every man called upon to fulfill the conditions of it that he may receive the blessings of it Ergo I have put it thus into forme because Mr. Eyre quarrels at the forme He yeelds That the Gospel or Covenant of grace ought to be preached to every creature Marke 16. 15. Matthew 28. 19. But denyes that
THE METHOD OF GRACE in the JUSTIFICATION OF Sinners Being a REPLY to a Book written by Mr. William Eyre of Salisbury Entituled Vindiciae Justificationis Gratuitae Or the Free Justification of a SINNER justified Wherein the Doctrine contained in the said Book is proved to be Subversive both of Law and Gospel contrary to the consent of Protestants And inconsistent with it self And the Ancient Apostolick Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Faith asserted By Benjamin Woodbridge Minister of Newbery Rom. â— 16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace Exod 24. 7. Keeping mercy for thousands forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin and that will by no meanes clear the guilty LONDON Printed by T. R. and E. M. for Edmund Paxton in Pauls Chain right over against the Castle Tavern near Doctors Commons 1656. THE EPISTLE to the Reader Reader BEfore thou enter upon the ensuing Discourse it is necessary that I premise something for thy information 1. Concerning my Sermon 2. Concerning Mr. Eyres answer 3. Concerning this Reply 1. For the first Mr. Eyre having already acquainted thee with the time when it was preached I shall only give thee a more faithful account of the occasion of preaching it and of some passages in it The Providence of God which ruleth all our wayes and motions directed me to the City of New Sarum at such a time when it fell to Mr. Thomas Warrens turne to preach the weekly Lecture there whose Sermon as it well deserves is since printed and in it thou mayest reade those certain necessary and important truths which he then insisted on Mr Eyre withstood him vehemently not without the great disturbance and grief of many to whom the Word of Truth is precious and amiable I had formerly been a Preacher in that â—ity for some time together but was at that time detained there full â—ore against my will by the surprizal of a Chronical distemper which gave time and occasion to many of my acquaintance to visit me and to desire me as I then could to set my seal publicklie to the truth of the Gospel which accordingly I did in that Sermon which is here vindicated against Mr Eyre I was earnestly importuned by many worthy Ministers Christians to print my Sermon whose desires neverthelesse I refused to gratifie partly because I could not be wrought to esteem of it as they did principally out of respect to Mr. Eyre himself whose weaknesses I was unwilling should be made so publick by my meanes One Copy indeed I promised for the private use of some Christians which accordinglie when I was returned home I wrote hastily and sent to them reserving no Transcript of it in my own hands After some weeks how many I cannot now justly tell I was informed that they who had the perusal of that Copy were resolved to send it up to London and if it found the like Approbation there as in the Countrey to commit it to the Presse When I heard this considering how many judicious Ministers had solicited me to print it and how many more might passe judgement upon it before it should be printed I was resolved to meddle nor make no more in the businesse but leave it wholly to the judgment of others which I speak for the vindication of Reverend Mr. Cranford who was pleased to give himself the trouble of prefixing an Epistle to my Sermon for which respect to me then altogether a stranger to him as I yet also am having never seen his face nor he mine as I know of I do hereby return him that acknowledgement which I owe him when he tells the Reader that it was not by my meanes that my Sermon was printed And whosoever he was that assured * Mr Eyre of In his book p. 38. any other hand that I had in the printing of the said Sermon then as I have here related spake without book Soon after the printing of mine Mr. Eyre published a Sermon of his own preached at the following Assizes In his Epistle to the Reader he complains much of my unchristian language especially that I should say he was obstreperous and produceth a Certificate under six witnesses hands living as I am informed for I know not all the men in the County of Dorset the County of Wilts and the City of Sarum of his saire deportment in that opposition which he made against me in the publick meeting-place after Sermon was ended I acknowledge the word to be somewhat homely and such as if I had printed against Mr. Eyre I should have forborne and seeing it gives him such offence do publikely recant it for it is not only there but as I remember thrice in his book that he takes notice of it with a most sufficient Talio Neverthelesse if he will give it another terme I shall own the accusation and be content that it be tried by number of witnesses too I do therefore assure thee Reader that many Christians in that City whom Mr. Eyre would heretofore have accounted worthy of belief though now I think he will allow them no better testimony then that they go for Professours having considered in what formalitie Mr. Eyre proceeded against me took themselves bound in conscience to testifie what they had seen and known and sent me of their own accord a large letter subscribed with all their hands which were very many more then those which Mr. Eyre procured to certifie for him aâ—â—esting fully and particularlie the thing I charged him with assuring me also that if need had been they could quickly have doubled their numbers in the same testimony This letter I also shâ—wed to some of my neighbouring Ministers that they might be my witnesses if called thereto that I report the truth Yet though I acknowledge my self beholding to them that sent me the letter for their love and respects to me I will by no means make use of their testimony as not esteeming my credit worthy to be redeemed with the least damage that may befal them by the evil eye of others on the weather-side of them But out of my own mouth will Mr. Eyre condemn me because when he brake off the conference I used those words of the Apostle Gal. 4. 12. Be ye as I am for I am as you are you have not wronged me at all which words I understood when I spake them in no other sense then Dr. Prestoâ— somewhere gives of them as not reckoning of his opposition against me or his unfair dealing therein so as to entertain any enmity in my heart against him Forgive me this wrong 2. Yet if I in this word have been uncivil with Mr. Eyre he hath made himself a sufficient recompence in his Answer to me having drawn the lines of his grave censures quite through me and round about me characterizing as he sees fit my b Page 165. sect 8 heart c Page 100. sect 11. intentions soul and body my very d Page 165. face and
he determines as supream Governour of the world what shall be our duty to do or not to do and what shall be due to us according to our doing or not doing of this Will Hence the Word and Lawes of God are called in Scripture his Will in hundreds of places By this Will of God doth he give Believers a right to impunity which is their proper Justification whereof his not punishing them de facto is the effect This I shall prove God willing when I come to the vindication of my first Argument against Mr. Eyre In the meane time the thing which he undertakes to prove is That the very essence and quiddity of a sinners Justification is Gods Decree or Purpose from eternity not to punish him I deny it and shall subjoyne some reasons against it by and by besides those which Mr. Eyre takes notice of in his book But first let us see what he hath to say for it Thus then he begins Justification is Gods non-imputing of sin and imputing of righteousnesse to a person Psal 32. 1 2. Rom. 4. 6 8. but Gods Will not to punish a person is his non-imputing sin to him Ergo. Answ I grant the major but I do very much long to see what §. 8. definition Mr. Eyre will give of Justification that may include Justification in Gods knowledge and in his legal justice and in our consciences that I might know whether these three be three several sorts or only three degrees of one and the same Justification but let that passe I deny the minor For proof of it Mr. Eyre appeales to the Original words both Greek and Hebrew both which saith he doth signifie an act of the minde or will Mr. Eyre is to prove that they signifie the purpose or resolution of the will in which sense they appear not so much as once neither in the Hebrew nor in the Greek Interpreters nor do our Translators render them at any time in such a sense and therefore that observation might have been spared 2. An act of the understanding they signifie often but it is such an act as will not endure to be called by the name of imputation but thinking devising esteeming or the like for example Isa 10. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We render it Neither doth his heart think so Nor doth common sense permit that it be rendred Neither doth his heart impute se In like manner Psal 41. 7. Against me do they devise my hurt where the words are the same both in the Hebrew and the Septuagint And cannot be rendered Against me do they impute my hurt So Isa 53. 3. He was despised and we esteemed him not where the words are still the same It would be worthy sense to render them He was despised and we imputed him not Multitudes of like instances might be given But when the words will beare to be grammatically rendered by the name of Imputation they then signifie not an immanent act of the understanding or will but a transient act containing an objectum Quod or something that is imputed and an objectum cui some person to whom it is imputed who also is thereby changed physically or morally And thus the word imputation is used in Scripture 1. When by Law one thing passeth in stead of another Numb 18. 27 30. This your heave-offering shall be reckoned or imputed to you as though it were the corne of the threshing sloâ—re and ver 30. When you have heaved the best thereof from it then it shall be counted or imputed to the Levites as the increase of the threshing floore c. Not that the said heave-offering was esteemed or thought to be the corne of the threshing floore for that had been a fiction or an errour and imperfection of the understanding but because by the determination of the Law it was made equivalent thereunto or equally available to all effects and purposes This is a transient act 2. When a man is charged as the Authour of such or such a fact 2 Sam. 3. 8. Imputas mihi iniquitatem hujus mulieris Junius This also is a transient act 3. The giving of a reward to a man whether the reward be of debt or of grace is Imputation Rom. 4. 4. and to punish sin is to impute sin 2 Sam. 19. 19. because punishment is the wages of sin and not to punish sin when punishment is due by Law is the non-imputing of sin Psal 32. 1 2. and when the Law denies a man that benefit of an action which otherwise he might have expected that action is said to be non-imputed to him Lev. 7. 18. It shall not be accepted neither shall it be imputed to him This also is a transient act In the same sense is the word used in the New Testament Righteousnesse shall be imputed to us if we beleeve Rom. 4. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quibus futurum est ut imputetur Beza Mr. Eyres glosse upon that text we shall meet with in due place and Paul prayes for them that deserted him in his troubles that their sin may not be imputed to them 2 Tim. 4. 12. in both which places imputation expresseth a future act and therefore cannot be understood of an immanent eternal act of God See also Rom. 5. 13. of which more hereafter So that I may very well retort Mr. Eyres Argument upon himself If Justification be a non-imputation of sin then it is a transient act and not an immanent act of Gods Will. But the first is true ex concessis Ergo so is the last And I wonder Mr Eyre should nor foresee the weaknesse of his proofe The original words note an immanent act when they signifie some other thing then imputation Ergo imputation is an immanent act So much for the first Argument The second is this that which doth secure men from wrath and whereby they are discharged and acquitted from their sins is Justification But by this immanent act of God all the Elect are discharged and acquitted from their sins and secured from wrath and destruction Ergo. Answ The Proposition I readily grant the Assumption I deny §. 9. â— and detest For 1. It makes void the death of Christ for what sayes the Apostle Gal. 2. 21. If righteousnesse come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain The case is altogether the same as to any other way by which men may be said to be justified for if they be made righteous in any other way then by the death of Christ then was it a vaine needlesse thing that he should die for our Justification 2. Nor was there any need as to our Justification that he should rise again from the dead whereas the Scripture saith Arose from the dead for our Justification Rom. 4. 25. And therefore saith Paul 1 Cor. 15. 17. If Christ be not risen ye are yet in your sins he speaks to those that did confesse his death but he was out when he
and Glorification But Justification in conscience is the act of conscience reasoning and concluding a mans selfe to be just and as for the expression of Justification terminated in conscience let me here once for all declare against it not only as not being Scriptural but as not being very rational For that upon which Justification is terminated is that which is justified But it is the man and not his conscience which is justified Erge it is the person and not the conscience properly upon which Justification is terminated Passio as well as Actio is propriè suppositi SECT IV. ANother text which doth manifestly hold forth Justification to §. 10. be consequent to faith is Rom. 4. 24. Now it was not written for his sake alone that righteousnesse was imputed to him but for our sakes also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeve Mr. Eyre answers that the particle if is used sometimes declaratively to describe the person to whom the benefit doth belong as 2 Tim. 2. 21. If a man purge himself from these he shall be a vessel unto honour And Heb. 3. 6. Whose house are we if we holdfast our confidence and the rejoycing of hope c. Rep. Which observation is here misplaced for I am not yet disputing the conditionality but meerly the antecedency of faith to Justification Now suppose the particle if be used sometimes declaratively yet is it alwayes antecedent to the thing which it declares or rather to the declaration of that thing As suppose which yet I do wholly deny that a mans purging himself do only manifest and declare that he is a vessel of honour yet surely his purging of himself is antecedent to that declaration or manifestation As the holding fast our confidence is also antecedent to our being declared to be the house of God Yea and Mr. Eyre himself interprets the imputation of righteousnesse in the text of our knowing righteousnesse to be imputed to us of which knowledge himself will not deny faith to be the antecedent yea and more then an antecedent even the proper effecting cause And therefore to tell us before-hand that the particle if doth not alwayes propound the cause when by his own interpretation it must signifie the cause which is a great deal more then a meer condition or antecedent was a very impertinent observation His sense of the text he thus delivers His righteousnesse is imputed to us if we believe q. d. Hereby we may know and be assured that Christs righteousnesse is imputed to us if God hath drawn our hearts to believe Rep. To whom righteousnesse shall be imputed if we beleeve saith §. 11. the Apostle We shall know that righteousnesse was imputed to us before we believed saith Mr. Eyre for that is his sense though I do a little vary the words This is an admirable glosse Whereas 1. Our knowledge that righteousnesse is imputed to us is our own act but the imputation of righteousnesse in the text is Gods act not ours ver 6. Yea saith Mr. Eyre himselfe page 87. § 13. it is the act of God alone and that in opposition to all other causes whatsoever whether Ministers of the Gospel or a mans own conscience or faith But it is like when he wrote that he had forgotten what he had said before in this place 2. Nor doth the text say righteousnesse is imputed to us if we beleeve as Mr. Eyre renders the words but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quibus futurum est ut imputetur To whom it shall come to passe that it shall be imputed if we beleeve 3. And that this imputation of righteousnesse cannot signifie our knowing it to be imputed should methinks be out of question with Mr. Eyre He disputes against me a little below that when the Apostle pleads for Justification by faith the word faith must be taken objectively for Christ because otherwise faith could not be opposed to works forasmuch as faith it selfe is a work of ours And saith the Apostle in this chapter ver 4. To him that worketh the reward is not imputed of grace but of debt Hence it follows that that imputation is here meant which hath no work of ours for its cause But faith is clearly the cause of our knowing righteousnesse to be imputed and that as it is a work of ours Ergo the imputation of righteousnesse here spoken of is not our knowing or being assured that it is imputed 4. To impute righteousnesse in this verse must have the same § 12. sense as it hath ten or eleven times besides in the chapter and particularly when it is said that Abrahams faith was imputed to him not for righteousnesse as we render it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto righteousnesse ver 3. 9 22 23. and unto every son of Abrahams faith ver 5. 11 24 Now what is it to impute faith unto righteousnesse I know that learned and godly men give different Expositions I may be the more excusable if I am mistaken I conceive therefore that to impute faith unto righteousnesse is an Hebraisme and signifies properly to reward the believer with righteousnesse or more plainly i Vid. R Sol. Jarchi in Gen. 15. 6â— Maymon more Nevoch 3. 53. Oâ—cum in Rom. 4. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et Tertull advers Marcion lib. 5. 3. Abraham Deo credidiâ— deputatum est justitiae aâ—que exiâ—de Pater multarum Nationum meruit nuncupaâ—i Nos autem credendo Deo magis proinde justificamur sicut Abraham vitam proinde consequimur to give the believer a right to blessednesse as his reward the word Reward being taken in that more laxe and metaphorical sense in which the Scriptures use it when they call Heaven by glory and eternal life by that name And as the whole salvation of believers is expressed by its two termes to wit They shall not perish but shall have everlasting life John 3. 16. so in Justification there is a right given to deliverance from punishment which is the terminus à quo in which respect it is called the pardon and non-imputation of sin of which the Apostle gives an instance out of David ver 6. 7 8. and a right to the more positive blessings of heavenly and eternal life by the Promise which is the terminus ad quem in which respect it is called Justification of life Rom. 5. 18. of which also he giveth us an instance in Abraham ver 13. for the Promise that he should be heire of the world c. In reference to which part or terme of Justification it is in special manner that Abrahams faith is said to be imputed to him unto righteousnesse for though those Promises were things which in the letter were carnal yet in substance and signification they were spiritual and so did he understand them Heb. 6. 12 13 14 15. and 11. 12 13 14 15 16. Now that this is the true notion of the phrase imputing faith unto righteousnesse namely a
this It is an unsound Assertion that we are said to be justified by faith because that faith doth evidence our Justification before faith The proof of this is the manifest tendency of every branch of this Argument and of each Argument under each branch And I am apt to think Mr. Eyre himself so understood me when he comes to particulars for he doth not once charge them with impertinency which he might have done with advantage enough if it had not been clear that they were all levelled at another scope then simply to prove that faith is of no use to evidence Justification As to the thing it self I am so far from denying faith to evidence our Justification that I do assert as followeth 1. As the word evidence signifies that which is affected to argue another thing so faith doth â—vidence our Justification yea and is the first thing that doth evidence it 2. Faith doth also evidence Justification axiomatically to all those that have a particular testimony from God that they are justified As those whom Christ tells in the Gospel that their sinnes were forgiven them Matth. 9. 2 5. Luke 5. 20 23. and 7. 47 48. If any man now living hath the like testimony from God that his sins are forgiven he hath no better way to evidence it to himselfe then without any more ado to beleeve that they are forgiven 3. Faith doth also concurre to the evidencing of Justification syllogistically but then the whole evidence is not of faith as we shall shew by and by I do therefore acknowledge the use of faith in evidencing Justification in all those wayes by which it may be evidenced though not of faith only in the last nor at all in the second unlesse there be any man that hath heard God saying to him Thy sins are forgiven thee Come we on then to the proof of particulars And first that we §. 12. cannot be said to be justified by faith in respect of faiths evidencing our Justification as an Argument or particularly as an effect thereof To evidence Justification as an Argument is no more then for faith to have such a relation unto Justification as that where the one is the other must needs be also and he that knows the relation they have to each other cannot but know that where faith is there Justification must needs also be Even as laughing and crying may be said to evidence reason in a childe though it may not evidence it to the childe himself because he knows not the dependance of these actions upon his reason so we say where there is smoak there is some fire Groanings argue some ill affection in the body and generally every effect doth argue and evidence its cause to them that know the connexion between the cause and effect Mr. Eyre disclaims faiths evidencing in this way though in answer to Rom. 4. 24. above debated of his Book pag. 44. § 6. he hath as plainly yielded it as can be in these words Hereby we may know and be assured that Christs righteousnesse is imputed to us that we whether Jewes or Gentiles are the persons to whom this grace belongs if God hath drawn our hearts to beleeve and obey the Gospel in regard that none do or can beleeve but such as are ordained to life and to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ What is this but that faith doth evidence our Justification as an Argument seeing that where one is the other is also where there is faith there is Justification It seems the same thing is good Divinity out of Mr. Eyres mouth but out of mine an errour Yet though Mr. Eyre will not owne that faith doth evidence Justification in this way he thinks fit to give his Reader his sense of my Reasons There are therefore three Reasons in my Sermon why we cannot be said to be justified by faith in respect of faiths evidencing our Justification as an Argument The first is this Because then Justification by faith is not necessarily so much as Justification in conscience A Christian may have faith and yet not have the evidence that he is justified As a childe may laugh and cry and yet not have the evidence or clear knowledge that himselfe hath reason c. Mr. Eyre answers 1. By intimating that this agrees not with what I allege out of the Apostle 1 John 3. 20. to prove that if our hearts condemn us God doth much more condemn us 2. If faith did evidence only as a signe it would be a dark and unsatisfying evidence 3. Nothing that precedes faith doth prove a man justified nothing that follows it is so apt to prove it as faith it selfe 4. Wheresoever there is faith there is some evidence of this grace In the least spark of fire and the least twinkling starre there is some light Rep. To the first I say that it never came into my minde to prove that God condemns every one whom his own conscience condemns but that if conscience condemns truly then the judgement thereof is according to the judgement of God and so God condemns as well as conscience But if a beleevers heart shall tell him that he is not justified and his sins not pardoned his conscience is erroneous and judgeth otherwise then God judgeth 2. The two next answers are like chips in pottage that do neither good nor hurt as I see When I can understand whether they make with me or against me I shall consider them farther 3. The fourth answer that whosoever hath faith hath some evidence of his Justification for that he meanes by grace or else it s nothing to the purpose I deny utteâ—ly if by evidence he mean not that which would prove it if it were rightly understood but a mans actual knowledge that he is justified And how doth Mr. Eyre prove it why the least spark of fire hath some light and the least twinkling starre True So the least degree of true faith hath that in it which if it were rightly apprehended would make some discovery that a man were justified But these sparks of fire give no light at all when they lie buried under heaps of ashes and such black and dâ—smal clouds may cover the face of the Heavens that we cannot see not only the lesser stars but not those of greatest magnitude And the Scripture testifieth not only positively that a gracious soule may walk in darknesse but to expresse the greatnesse of this darknesse addes an universal negative And may see no light that is as f Childe of light page 5. 6 8 9 10. Dr. Godwin hath excellently proved he may be without all evidence of his Justification of which the said Doctor gives several instances in David Job Heman and Christ himself and proposeth largely the causes and cure of such darknesse in all which he hath bestowed a great deal of excellent and acceptable paines to no purpose if Mr. Eyres doctrine here be true How many soules have I known and g See Mr. Tho.
judgement If a man shall come to him and say Sir I am assured by the Spirit of God that I am justified and that all my sins are pardoned but whether I beleeve or no or ever did that I cannot tell Would he allow this perswasion to be of God If not then doth not the Spirit testifie to any man immediately that he is justified but the evidence of the Spirit as I said before is if not expressely yet implicitly syllogistical If so I would thus convince the Pretender from Mr. Eyres principles He that doth not believe cannot be assured that he is justified But thou dost not believe Ergo thou canst not have assurance from the Spirit that thou art justified What will be here denied Not the major for that 's an undoubted truth grounded in Mr. Eyres interpretation Not the minor for the man whom we are now convincing of his errour in pretending to assurance by the Spirit is supposed not to know whether he have faith or no. Ergo he cannot truly say he hath faith though he have it because to affirme that for truth which we do not know to be true is a lie though the thing should be so as we say Ergo he must yield to the Conclusion that his assurance is not from the Spirit else the testimony of the Spirit is contradictory to that of Scripture Secondly Mr. Eyres words do also contradict themselves notoriously §. 23. First he tells us that faith evidenceth our Justification by assenting to and tasting the general Propositions of the Gospel then he tells us that those general Propositions are made particular by the Spirit to a beleever otherwise he could taste no sweetnesse in them To tell us that faith evidenceth by tasting general Propositions and then to say in the same breath that it can taste no sweetnesse in general Propositions but they must be first made particular by the Spirit is to say and unsay 3. Accordingly the general Propositions in the Gospel must first be made particular by the Spirit before the soul can taste any sweetnesse in them for which I confesse there is all the reason in the world for the object apprehended must be before the act apprehending the Proposition assented to and tasted must be before the act assenting and tasting But then hence it will follow that a man before he believes hath a particular testimony from the Spirit that he is justified For this Proposition thus made particular by the Spirit is the object of his assent and taste that is of his faith Ergo it exists before his faith even as the general Promises in the Word exist before we can believe them But to say it is evidenced to any man before he believes that he is justified is that which Mr. Eyre hitherto disowned as well he may A mans faith suppose Peters can evidence no more to him subjectively §. 21. then the Word doth evidence to him objectively even as the eye can see no other thing then what the light makes manifest But this Proposition He that believes is justified doth not evidence objectively immediately that Peter is justified for the former is general and the latter is proper And otherwise every one in the world that believes that Proposition might thereby have the evidence of Peters Justification as well as of his own Even as we know by faith that they to whom the Lord said Your sins are forgiven you were justified as well as themselves And all believers one as well as another know by faith that the world was made by the Word of God Heb. 11. 3. because the Scriptures say so Object But the Spirit makes this general Proposition to be particular unto Peter Answ I ask whether the Scriptures be not equally the rule of all mens faith If not then neither of their obedience which will introduce Antinomianisme with a vengeance If so as most undoubtedly so then this particular testimony of the Spirit is no object of Peters faith which I farther argue thus It is no object of Pauls faith that Peter is justified Ergo it is no object of Peters faith The reason is because the rule of all mens faith is one and the same equally Therefore the faith of Christians is called a common faith Tit. 1. 4. the faith of Gods elect ibid. ver 1. which is but one Eph. 4. 5. But if Peter beleeve upon the testimony of the Spirit that which Paul cannot or hath no ground to beleeve upon the testimony of Scripture then Peters faith doth not act by the same rule that Pauls doth but there will be as many rules of faith as there be persons in the world that pretend to this particular testimony of the Spirit 5. To conclude to make a general Proposition particular is to §. 25. change the substance and nature of it for it cannot be general and particular too though I readily grant as before that a truth proposed in common may be made particular in respect of its effectual operation upon one and not upon another but the Proposition it self remaines general still Ergo this particular testimony of the Spirit must be some other then that of Scripture unlesse by being made particular be meant no more then that a particular is inferred out of a general which is a syllogistical evidence not axiomatical which Mr. Eyre now disputes for But I do wholly deny any such particular testimony of the Spirit for which there is not so muth as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scripture and Mr. Eyre I think is of the same mind for he produceth not one text for it That which seemes most to favour it is Rom. 8. 16. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the children of God which text Mr. Eyre doth not mention and therefore I answer it for the sake of some others Compare this verse with the foregoing and with a parallel place to the Galatians and it will not be difficult to give the right sense of it Gal. 4. 6. Because you are sonnes God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Sonne into our hearts crying Abba Father So Rom. 8. 15. Ye have received the Spirit of Adoption whereby we cry Abba Father Then it followes ver 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That very same Spirit so I render the words beareth witnesse c. Hence I gather that this witnesse of the Spirit is not any secret revelation of a Proposition as this Thou Peter or Paul art justified made by the Spirit to the soul But the Spirits working in us liberty in our accesses unto God to call him Father is the thing that evidenceth to us as an infallible Argument that we are the children of God And because Arguments by themselves do not m Argument◠non arguunt extra dispositionem evidence actually but virtually therefore the Spirit by this work helping us to conclude our selves the children of God doth thereby witnesse that we are Gods children SECT VI. MY second
believe c. Answ I am sure he knows that many famous Protestants assert this as well as I and we shall see proof sufficient of it in due place and of the last also that none were to have any benefit by the death of Christ till they beleeve But Mr. Eyre takes special notice of one passage in this Argument §. 38. wherein I say that neither Justification in conscience nor before men are of much worth in the Apostles judgement 1 Cor. 4. 3. To this he gives a large answer § 11. which I am apt to think he would have taken no notice of but to acquaint the world with his good wishes concerning me He refers me to some texts of Scripture to learn what account the Apostle had of Justification before men and in conscience though I cannot learn what account he had of the former from any of the texts mentioned But be it what it will be I give him this brief reply That in comparison of Justification before God neither the one nor the other are much worth though they may be of some worth in these inferiour Judicatories Not only children but grown persons for ought I know may be saved without being justified of men or of their own consciences And I will never beleeve that that Justification is worthy of those many glorious commendations which are every where in Scripture given to Justification by faith which one may live and die without and yet be saved Who will prove to me convincingly that a Christian may not live many years and die at last in melancholy or madnesse under which distempers the judgement of men or of conscience is not much valued and yet be saved or that a soul may not for some grievous sin go with sorrow and darknesse to the grave and never see light till it be carried up to him that dwelleth in light CHAP. V. An Answer to Mr. Eyres ninth Chapter whether faith be the condition of Justification The Affirmative proved from Scripture Mr. Eyres Arguments to the contrary all invalid SECT I. TO Mr. Eyres Argument That if we were justified by §. 1. faith we were not purely passive in our Justification I gave this answer That to beleeve is a formal vital act of thesoul in genere physico but the use of it in Justification is to qualifie us passively that we may be morally orderly capable of being justified by God or though physically it be an act yet morally it is but a passive condition by which we are made capable of being justified according to the order and constitution of God As the reading of the book or acceptance of a pardon amongst men is a condition without which an offendor is not pardoned Hereupon Mr. Eyre disputes largely that faith is not the condition of Justification wherein I do the more gladly joyne issue with him because upon this assertion of ours doth he take occasion to asperse the received doctrine of Protestants with the reproachful names of Popery and Arminianisme Here therefore I shall shew three things 1. What a condition is 2. That faith according to Scripture is the condition of Justification 3. That all Mr. Eyres Arguments §. 2. to the contrary are most miserably inconclusive A condition then is diversly described by divers Authours Some describe it thus a Navar. Enâ—hâ—r page â—8 Conditiâ— est suspensio ali cujus dispositioniâ— tantisper dum aliquid futurum fiat Others thus b Baldus apud Joh. Baptist in verb Conditio est adjectio quaedam per quam dispâ—situm habet in sui esse pendentium existentiam vel defectum Others thus c Pet. de Perus ibid. Est verbâ—rum adjectio in futurum suspendentium secundum quam dâ—â—ponens vult dispositum regulari d In L. 1. F. de â—oud demonstr Bartolus thus Conditio est quidam futurus eventus in quem dispositio suspenditur Any of these will serve my turn these things being agreed 1. That it pertaines to him that disposeth of any thing to propound upon what condition his will is that it be disposed of or not disposed of 2. That the nature of a condition consists mainly in suspending the actual obligation of the disposer until the condition be performed 3. That it is the will of him that makes the condition which is the cause of the obligation that comes upon him when the condition is performed of which we shall see more anon Now that faith is the condition upon which God hath suspended §. 3. his actual donation of righteousnesse to a sinner is so plain and evident to me that I confesse I cannot but wonder that men acquainted with the Scriptures should so much as question it Several expressions there are taken notice of by e Vide Bartelum late in L. 1. F. de cond Demonstr Azor. Inst Moral par 3. l. 4. c. 24. Civilians and Moralists as signes or notes of a condition and scarcely one can I finde which the Scripture doth not use somewhere or other in describing the order and habitude of faith to our Justification But I shall instance but in one or two I begin with that Rom. 10. 6 9. The righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise That if thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt beleeve in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved That salvation here includes Justification appears from the very next words ver 10. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousnesse And I appeal to common sense whether the particle If in this place be not a manifest signe of a condition upon which Justification is suspended or whether it be possible for mortal men to invent any words that can more plainly expresse the matter of a condition Try it by comparison with other Scriptures Gen. 43. 4 5. If thou wilt send our brother with us we will go down but if thou wilt not send him we will not go down and Gen. 34. 22. Only herein will the men consent to us If every male amongst us be circumcised Herein will they consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is upon this condition will they consent as we render that word 1 Sam 11. 2. on this condition will I make a Covenant with you See Gen. 18. 26. 28 30. Exod. 4. 23. Prov. 2. 1 4. Jor. 18. 8 10. and hundreds of other places In all which the particle If is manifestly conditional nor upon the strictest observation which I have made in reading the Scriptures am I able to espy so much as one place wherein the said particle hath any other use when it supposeth to any thing that is future by vertue of a Promise Indeed Mr. Eyre did f Chap. 5. §. 6. before mention two places wherein he will have the particle If not to propound the condition by which a benefit is obtained but only to describe the person to whom it belongs viz. 2
Tim. 2. 21. If a man purge himself from these he shall be a vessel unto honour and Heb. 3. 6. whose house are we if we hold fast our confidence unto the end As to the former place it should have been proved and not said only that the particle If is not a note of a condition if to be a vessel of honour be to be glorified in heaven Or if to be a vessel of honour do signifie a man specially and eminently serviceable unto God sanctified and meet for the Masters use and prepared unto every good work as the Apostle in the same verse expounds it then the particle If is a note of more then a condition even of a true proper cause of an effect that follows naturally and not by Promise for the more a man purgeth himself from spiritual defilements and defilers the more prepared and disposed he must needs be to every spiritual employment The next place Heb. 3. 6. is nothing to the purpose if the particle If be there granted to be meerly a description of the person because the consequent part of the Proposition is not promissory but simply affirmative The text saith not whose house we shall be if we hold fast but whose we are if we hold fast Neverthelesse g Parall l. 3. in loc Junius upon ver 14. which in sense is much the same with this doubts not to affirme the holding fast of our confidence to be a condition A nobis verò conditionem unicam desiderat scil Christus nempe ut maneamus in ipso atque hanc conditionem nâ—tat Apostolus his verbis siquidem principium illius subsistentiae c. which testimony I quote the rather that Mr. Eyre may know that Junius was no enemy to faiths being a condition as he doth somewhere represent him yea and on this verse he is expresse that continuance in the faith is the condition of our continuing to be Gods house §. 4. And that the words Rom. 10. 9. If thou beleeve with thine heart c. cannot be a description of the person meerly I prove largely below in a particular debate of that place I have here only one word to speak against it Either it describes the person from his faith to signifie that as such that is as a believer he is the subject of Justification and then faith must needs be antecedent to Justification and if it be antecedent as an act required of us in point of-duty to a blessing consequent by vertue of a promise then is it antecedent as a condition Or it is a meer description of the person shewing that that is the man that shall be justified though his faith have no order nor tendency to his Justification but may as well follow after it as go before it But 1. This cannot be current sense if Justification be either from eternity or immediately in the death of Christ or at any time before this description be made for example Is it sense to say If thou be the man that dost or at any time shalt beleeve thou shalt be elected or Christ shall die for thee when both election and the death of Christ are long since past or if a man should say If thou shalt be glorified thou shalt be justified would not such a speech suppose that the person to whom those words are spoken was as yet not justified though the Scripture is not wont to speak after this manner in any place 2. Let us take some parallel place and see how it will accord with it As the words of Christ to the father of the childe that was possest Mark 9. 23. If thou canst beleeve all things are possible to him that believeth Or the same words to his disciples Matth. 17. 20. If you have faith as a grain of mustard-seed nothing shall be unpossible unto you If faith do here only describe the person and not propound the condition then whether the father had at present believed or no his childe must have been presently healed notwithstanding supposing him to be a person that at any time should believe and whether the disciples beleeve or no at present all things are possible to them presently they being the persons whose property it is to believe some time or other But more of this hereafter Another note of a condition is the particle if not or except which §. 5. we finde also used in Scripture in this matter for men are threatened that they shall not be justified except they beleeve John 8. 24. If you beleeve not or except you believe you shall die in your sins when men are threatened with damnation except they believe are they threatened absolutely or conditionally if the first then all the men of the world shall be damned for this is to be preached to all men that if they believe not they shall be damned If conditionally then faith is the condition of deliverance from damnation And is not God to be thus understood in all his speeches of like nature Gen. 44. 23. Except your youngest Brother come down with you you shall see my face no more Josh 7. 12. Neither will I be with you any more except you destroy the accursed from amongst you Can the Sun shine more bright in the firmament then it is clear from hence that their destroying the accursed from amongst them was a necessary condition of their enjoyment of Gods Presence Acts 27. 31. Except these abide in the ship you cannot be saved See also Luke 13. 3 5. Rev. 2. 5 22. and multitudes of other places In all which the same particle is a note of a condition unlesse we shall have the modesty to think that the Scriptures were penned on purpose to puzzle and confound our understandings All those texts of Scripture which promise remission of sins to §. 6. them that believe prove the same thing particularly Mark 16. 15 16. Go preach the Gospel to every creature He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned John 3. 16. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten sonne that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life and 6. 40. This is the Will of him that sent me that whosoever seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life with many places of like nature To all which I guesse what Mr. Eyres answer will be by what he saith of the last of these chap. 13. § 14. pag. 135. This text saith he and others like it do only shew who have the fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ to wit They that beleeve Many such cathedral determinations we have from him without §. 7. so much as a pretence to proof especially in his answers to Scriptures alledged against him yet might he very well think that we would expect some solid reason for this his perpetual wresting and abuse of words from their obvious and common sense 1. It
may be justified faith goes before Justification here as works before it there And this was plainly enough expressed in the Argument to any one but Mr. Eyre As to all the Arguments he hath against it they are such grosse non-sequitur's that I know not whether it will be worth while to answer them yet out of civility I will take some notice of them First saith Mr. Eyre works were meritorious of eternal life §. 8. faith is not Rep. Very true though the former part about the meritoriousnesse of works Mr. Eyre himself contradicts in terminis page 190. but that 's common and therefore we compare not faith and works in point of worth and value but only in point of place and order or we compare them in the general nature of a condition wherein they agree not in the special nature or in what is accessory to either wherein they differ as much as buying with money Rom. 4. 4. and buying without money Isa 55. 1. If a commodity may be had for taking or buying he that takes it hath as sure a title as he that buyes it yet taking is not buying A genere ad speciem non valet Argumentum affirmativè Mr. Eyre 2. Works in the first Covenant are the matter of our §. 9. Justification faith is not Answ This is all one with the former If it were not it would only shew another difference between faith and works notwithstanding their agreement in point of place and order and in the geneneral nature of a condition in their respective Covenants Works were such a condition as that withal they were that very righteousnesse for which a person was justified but faith is the condition of our being justified by the righteousnesse of a Mediatour Mr. Eyre 3. If faith hath the same place in the second Covenant as works in the first then must God account saith to be perfect righteousnesse which is contrary to his truth and justice Ans I deny the consequence What manner of Readers did Mr. Eyre promise himself when he puts down such sayings as these without one word or pretence of proof that which made works man's perfect righteousnesse was not the place and order which they had by the Covenant to his Justification but their own essential natural perfection as being a punctual and exact conformity to the rule of his Creation the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that rule of Divinity which by Creation was implanted in the frame of mans nature That it was the condition of his Justification was ex accidenti by vertue of the Covenant promising a reward of life upon the doing of such works May not therefore faith have the same place and order that is be in like manner the condition of the Justification of a sinner because it is not mans natural perfect righteousnesse Titius will let Sempronius have a farme if he will give him to the worth of it He lets Maeveus have another if he will ask him for it Here asking is the condition there the payment of the full price both have the same place and order to the obtaining of the farme yet surely begging is not the payment of the full price Mr. Eyre 4. Then is the second Covenant a Covenant of works §. 10. seeing faith is a work of ours Answ 1. We have already shewed at large that the grace or act of faith is perpetually opposed to works in Scripture-language 2. However this Argument is inconsequent for it will by no means follow that if faith have the same place and order in the New Covenant as works in the old then the New Covenant is a Covenant of works Suppose God had made the world a promise of pardon upon the condition of the existence of some contingent event v. g. That if Paul be converted within seven years after Christs Ascension all the world shall be justified Pauls conversion in this case would have the very same place and order to the Justification of the world as workes had in the old Covenant though it be not a condition of the same nature and quality yet surely this latter promise could not therefore be proved to be a Covenant of workes M. Eyre 5. This assertion makes faith to be not of grace because not from the Covenant of grace seeing the Covenant it self depends on it Ans 1. This assertion supposeth that nothing can be of grace which is not by the Covenant of grace Was not the Covenant it self of grace 2. Of the dependance of faith upon the Covenant of the Covenant upon faith we dispute purposely below Here we speak only of one blessing of the Covenant namely justification And as soon as ever Mr. Eyre hath proved that faith cannot be given us of grace if it be the condition of justification I will write a book of retractations as long as Augustines if I live to it In the mean time he deals not like a disputant to charge such a consequence upon us and never go about to prove it And whereas he suggests to his reader that my proposition is contrary to all Protestants 't is a vaine and empty flourish to speak the best of it He that hath any acquaintance in their writings cannot but know it to be so Of all Protestants Mr. Eyre quotes two in his margine Calvin and Pemble of which the former in that very h Instit l. 3 c. â— sect 2. place which Mr. Eyre refers to speaks as plainly to the overthrow of what he is brought to prove as can be Nam quum dicit Apostolus c. For when the Apostle saies with the heart man beleeveth unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation he shews that it is not enough if a man beleeve implicitly what he understands nâ—t nor makes any search into sed explicitam requirit divinae bâ—nitatis agnitionem in quâ consistit nostra justitia but he requires an explicit acknâ—wlâ—â—gement of the divine goodnesse in which consists our righteousnessâ— This is somewhat more then is any where said in my Sermon Pâ—mblâ— also is as expresly against him as I think is possible and that very frequently I shall transcribe but i Of justâ—â— sect 4. c. 1. p 1. 7 â— one place of multitudes From hence saith he we conclude firmly that the difference between the Law and the Gospel assigned by our Divines is most certaine and agreeable to Scriptures viz. That the Law gives life unto the just upon condition of perfect obedience in all things the Gospel gives life unto sâ—nners upon condition they repent and believe in Christ Jesus Mr. Eyrâ— the is out or Mr. Pemble when the one sayes this is the judgement of our Divines and the other sayes it treads Antipodes to the current of all our Protestant writers SECT IV. THe proposition namely that faith hath the same place and order §. 10. to justification in the covenant of grace as workes in the covenant of workes was
proved in my Sermon in these words If the tenour of the first Covenant do this and live by the consent of all people and Nations Jews and Gentiles will undeniably evince that works were necessary Antecedents of justification in that covenant why then should not Beleeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved which is the tenour of the New Covenant Rom. 10. 6 9. plead as strongly for the like necessity of the Antecedency of faith to justification in this Covenant Mr. Eyre answers That Beleeve and thou shalt be saved is not the tenor of the new Covenant for 1. It 's no where called so 2. In Jer. 31. and Heb. 8. The new Covenant runs quite in another straine That Text Rom. 10. 6 9. is not the tenour of the new Covenant for that requires confession as well as faith The Apostle there describes the persons that shall be saved they are such as do beleeve and professe the truth His scope is to resolve that question how a man may know that he shall be saved c. Rep. The stresse of the Argument lies not at all on this that Beleeve and thou shalt be saved is the tenor of the new Covenant as Mr. Eyre supposeth I think that he may the more colourably wave an answer If I had left out the word Covenant in the Argument and proofe of it yet had the Argument been the same as to its principall intent Do this and live by the consent of all the world proves undeniably that works were to go before justification according to the purport of that saying Ergo Beleeve and thou shalt be saved will as necessarily inferre that faith is to go before justification though we do not at all dispute whether that were the tenor of the Covenant of workes or this of the Covenant of grace Now judge Reader what weight there is in Mr. Eyre's answer The tenor of the new Covenant saith he is not Beleeve and thâ—u shalt be saved Suppose it yet is it that which the Apostles preached v. 8. and one would think should be as plaine to prove the antecedency of faith as the other of workes to justiâ—â—cation 2. And that this is the tenor of the Covenant of grace appears 1. That which the Apostle calleth the righteousnesse which is of the Law v. 5. is the tenor of the Covenant of workes Ergâ— that which he calls the righteousnesse which is of faith v. 6. is the tenor of the Covenant of grace and that is this If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shall believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved v. 9. 2. The doctrine whereof the Apostles were the special Ministers is the tenor of the new Covenant 2 Cor. 3. 6. But Bâ—leeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved is the doctrine whereof the Apostles were special Ministers c. Rom. 10. 8 9. The word of faith which we preach that if thou shalt believe and confesse c. This it seems is the summe of what the Apostles preached and that according to the commission and call they had received from God v. 14. And that faith and repentance and salvation thereupon was the summe of the Apostles Ministry appears also from other Texts of Scripture Act. 20. 21. Luk. 24. 47. Heb. 6. 1. c. 3. The Gospel and the Covenant of grace is all one But this is the summe of the Gospel Beleeve and thou shalt be saved Mark 16. 15 16. Go preach the Gospel to every creature He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved 4. Beleeve and thou shalt be saved are words that have the forme of a Covenant Ergo they are either the Covenant of the Law or of grace or some third Covenant Not the Covenant of the Law for the Apostle expresly opposeth them against that Covenant Rom. 10. 5 6. a third Covenant they cannot be Ergo they are the Covenant of grace Let us now see upon what grounds Mr. Eyre denies these words §. 11. to be the tenor of the new Covenant 1. Saith he they are no where called so Ans Nor doth the name of the Covenant of workes appeare in Scripture nor of the Covenant of grace neither is it therefore a sufficient ground to deny that do this and live is the tenor of the Covenant of workes 2. If it be not called by the name of the Covenant yet is it called by names of equipollent signification as when it is called the Gospel the word of faith the righteousnesse of faith the Law of faith Rom. 3. 27. the Law of righteousnesse 9. 31. the promise Heb. 4. 1. Gal. 3. 22. 3. But neither is the name wanting Gal. 3. 15 16 17. If it be but a mans Covenant no man disannulleth or addeth thereto Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made And the Covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ c. Compare these expressions with v. 22. But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe And v. 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ that we might receive the promise of the spirit through faith And v. 9. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham Hence the Argument is The promise of blessednesse through faith is the summe and substance of the new Covenant Beleeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved is the promise of blessednesse through faith Ergo it is the summe and substance of the new Covenant or of the Covenant of grace These two tearms I use as of the same import to expresse that Covenant which is opposed to the Covenant of workes strictly so called The Minor is past denyall The Major stands upon this foundation That the same inheritance and blessing which was given by promise to beleeving Abraham which promise is called the Covenant is now proposed to all the world Gentiles as well as Jews to be obtained by the same faith that Abraham had and given to them when they believe As to Mr. Eyres second Argument that when the new Covenant is mentioned Jer. 31. and Heb. 8. it runs quite in another straine I must desire thee Reader to have patiâ—nce till thou come to the particular debate of those Texts which thou shalt meet with below wherein thou shalt see it fully proved that there is nothing spoken in them but what doth confirme the truth of that which I here assert I referre thee thither purposely that I may forbeare tautologies But Mr. Eyre hath a speciall reason why this Covenant Rom. 10. §. 12. 6 9. cannot be the Covenant of grace because it requires confession as well as faith and so justification by the new Covenant would be justification by confession as well as by faith Rep. The Apostle answers this fully v. 10. With the heart man beleeveth unto
Gentiles through faith but how it should follow from hence that the Gentiles or any sinners else were reconciled to God immediately upon the deâ—th of Christ is beyond my comprehension And yet if I may speak my own judgement I see no reason why the words may not be understood metonymically and that be said to be done in the death of Christ whereof the death of Christ is the cause that it is done though it be not done presently but sometimes after for the death of Christ did indeed give the ceremonies their deaths wound but they did not totally and perfectly expire till sometime e Vide Scot in Sent. l 4. d 3. qu 4 n. 7. 8 9 12 c. See also D Godwin in Rom. 8. 34. sect 5. p 171 after the Gospel had been preached for surely some yeares after the death of Christ if the Jewes at least multitudes of them who lived farthest from the sound of the Gospel were not bound to observe the Laws of Moses yet they might observe them without sin which after the Gospel was fully preached they could not do But if Mr. Eyre himself or any man else shall think fit hereafter to engage in this Argument I shall desire him to forme his Reasons from these and the like texts into some Logical shape that we may be assured of what it is they ground upon otherwise men may accumulate texts of Scripture in insinitum and an Answerer be left uncertain what he opposeth The last text mentioned by Mr. Eyre is 2 Cor. 5. 19. God was §. 15. in Christ reconciling the world unto himself which words Mr. Eyre confesseth I thus glossed That God was in Christ acting towards the reconciliation of the world to himself but this glosse Mr. Eyre confuteth How Why he tells his Reader It is not so Is not this a gallant confutation But I am out of doubt that it is so and that the Apostles meaning is plainly not that sinners were reconciled immediately and presently by the death of Christ but that God appointed and accepted his death as a most sufficient meanes and cause by which they should be reconciled when they believed and not before the death of Christ effecting this immediatly That notwithstanding all their sins yet there lies not on them a remediles necessity of perishing but that if they shall beleeve on him that died for them they shall be justified and saved Even as if we should say of a Physician that hath found out a Catholicon that would cure all diseases Here 's a man that hath cured all diseases not that his remedy had actually cured them for there may be many thousands to whom it was never applied but that it cures all who will suffer it to be applied f Aquin. 3 â—â—q 49. art 1. ad 3 m. Christus in suâ passione nos liberavit causaliter id est instituens causam nostrae liberationis ex qua possent quaecunque pâ—ocata quandoque remitti vel praeterita vel praesentia vel futura Siout si medicus faciat medicinam ex quâ pâ—ssent quâ—â—unque morbi sanari etiam in futurum Of which more by and by That the place is thus to be interpreted is manifest from the context For after the Apostle had said God was in Christ or by Christ reconciling the world unto himself He addes And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation Now then we are Ambassadours for Christ aâ— though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled unto God If we were reconciled in the death of Christ quoad effectum to what purpose are Ambassadours sent abroad into the world most earnestly and importunately to beseech sinners that they would be reconciled unto God It will be said the meaning of that exhortation is that sinners would â—ay aside the enmity of their hearts against God and returne to him by faith in his Sonne Jesus Christ Answ Most truly if one word more be added namely that we exhort men to beleeve on Christ that they may partake in the reconciliation prepared and purchased in his blood for all that come unto him for surely the reconciliation which the Apostle exhorts to is not only active in our â—aying aside our enmity against God but also passive in Gods being reconciled to us 1. That is the proper importance of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the passive voice though we cannot so happily render it in English as to expresse its significancy It denotes properly not our act of reconciling our selves to God for the word being of the passive voice notes that we also are passive in the reconciliation spoken of but our doing of that upon which another namely God is reconciled with us As when the same word is used in the same sense 1 Cor. 7. 11. But if she depart let her remain â—â—married or be reconciled to her hâ—sband 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not meant of her laying aside of enmity against her husband but of her â—sing meanes to obtain the favour and affection of her hâ—sband that he may be reconciled to her So Matth 5. 24. Be reconciled to thy Brother 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not meant properly of a mans reconciling himself to his brother but of doing what he can to gain his brothers good affection to him In the like sense doth Peter use another word Acts 2. 40. Save your selves from this untoward generation In the Greek the verbe is passive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be you saved from this untoward generation that is convert unto God that you may be saved from the destruction which is coming on this generation In like manner when the Apostle sayes here Be ye reconciled unto God he exhorts us indeed unto faith not as that by which we reconcile our selves to God but as that by which we partake in Gods reconciliation with us If then we be perfectly reconciled before what needs this exhortation 2. Or that other in the next verse but one namely chap. 6 1. We then as workers together with him beseech you also that you receive not the grace of God in vain This grace of God is that which before he called the Ministery of reconciliation even the Gospel inviting us through faith to a reconciliation with God And what is the receiving of this grace in vain but a not believing of Christ and his Gospel through which unbelief the reconciliation begun in the blood of Christ and preached in his Gospel becomes of none effect to us If we were perfectly reconciled immediately upon his death our unbelief could not hinder our reconciliation As to Mr. Perkins testimony which Mr. Eyre in the words following §. 16. opposeth against me namely that the actual blotting out of sin doth inseparably depend upon satisfaction for sin if Mr. Eyre will square it to his own rule he must shew us that to depend insâ—parably and to depend immediately are all one
That I may as well say that the bond and condition of the covenant on our part is expressed in that clause I will be their God which one would have the condition of the covenant on our part who that one is I do not know but I know one who may stand in steed of many hundreds d Thes 4. pag. 109. ex Gen. 17. 1. Hos 2. 16. 23. Dr. John Reynâ—lds who was accounted the ornament and wonder of his age for piety and learning that doth so expound those words and that from one who is above all even God himself who doth plainly so sense the words in some places Dâ—â—t 26. 17 18. Zech. 13. 9. Neverthelesse I did wave this interpretation in this place and interpret both clauses I will be their God and they shall be my people as expressing one and the same thing in reference to two tearmes as when it is said I wiâ—l be their father and they shall be my children because whatsoever is essentiall to the taking of the Lord for our God I conceive to be included in the words foregoing I will write my Laws in their hearts c. Whereas I said that faith is not promised as an effect of the Covenant §. 20. already made but as the means by which we are brought into Covenant this Mr. Eyre invades by many arguments â— saith he the same words cannot be formally both a precept and a promise This is answered already The words are a promise but they suppose a precept what Is it such a strangâ— thing in Scripture that that should be promised which is our duty to do Ezek. 26 27. God promiseth to cause us to walk in his statutes Is it therefore no duty of ours to walk in his statutes In the same chapter v. 26. he promiseth to give a new heart and a new Spirit yet are we elsewhere commanded to make as a new heart and a new Spirit Ezek. 18. 31 God hath promised to circumcise our hearts to love him Deut. 30. 6. Yet is it our duty to circumcise our hearts Jer. 4. 4. And may not then faith be promised and that as the condition or meanes by which we are brought into Covenant Mr. Eyre 2. If the promise of faith be a part of the new Covenant then faith it self is an effect of the Covenant or a benefit given by virtue of it But the promise of faith is part of the new Covenant Ergo. Rep. I deny the Assumption The new Covenant worketh or begetteth faith but it doth not promise it Note therefore Reader that there is a great difference between what is promised concerning the new Covenant and what the new Covenant promiseth Concerning the new Covenant it was promised that it should be effectual to quicken the soul and cause it to beleeve but it self doth not promise to make us beleeve If it did forasmuch as that can be no other then an absolute promise then God doth promise in the Old-Testament namely Jer. 31. 31. that he will promise faith in the New But a promise to promise and that to the very same persons concerning the same benefit is so contrary to reason and runs such an infinite course of promising without beginning or ending that it may not be admitted But how doth Mr. Eyre prove his Assumption Thus. All the promises of God do belong either to the Covenaut of works or to the Covenant of grace The promise of faith is no part of the Covenant of works Ergo of the Covenant of grace Rep. I deny the proposition The promise of the Covenant of grace it self Of which Covenant is it a part of the Covenant of works or of the Covenant of grace not of the former for that promiseth no good to sinners Not of the latter for the Covenant it self is the thing promised If then the Covenant it self may be promised and yet that promise be no part of the Covenant may it not also be promised to be in such a manner or degree more or lesse efficacious and perfect and yet that promise in like manner be no part of the said Covenant Hence we answer the third argument If the promise of faith be an effect of Christs death then it is an effect of the Covenant already made for all the effects of his death are effects of the Covenant which was confirmed by his death Rep. I deny the consequence with the proof of it Not to question againe whether Christ merited the Covenant M. Eyre here acknowledgeth that he confirmed it in his death But that which confirmes the Covenant is no part of the Covenant for the whole Covenant is the thing confirmed Ergo all the effects of Christs death are not the effects of the Covenant which God hath made with us Yea and the preaching of the Gospell to all nations Gentiles as well as Jews that they thereby might be brought into Covenant is an effect of the death of Christ Eph. 2. 16 17. Colos 1. 20. But affording the means by which men may be brought into covenant is not an effect of the covenant In like manner the promise of a better covenant which God would make in the dayes of Christ a covenant more able and successefull in all respects may be very well yeelded to â—â— the effect of the death of Christ but it will by no means follâ—â— that therefore that promise is also an effect of the Covenant promised 4ly Thus he speaks The Scripture no where affirmes that faith is promised as a means to bring us into covenant or to invest us with a right and title thereunto Rep. Nor doth it any where say that it is promised as a part of the Covenant already made with us But it sayes that in sense which Mr. Eyre denyes and that in this very place supposing which Mr. Eyre hath not hitherto denyed that faith is included in those words I will put my laws into their minds c. For in these words as we are forced often to note is declared the successe of the new covenant above the old that it should enable men to beleeve that God may be their God and they his people But if it were not promised in this place yet the constant voyce of the Gospel is beleeve and thou shalt be saved Which words shew that faith is the means by which we obtaine the blessings of the Covenant What saith Mr. Eyre against it Nothing but this we may as well make Baptisme Sanctification Perseverance c. to which the promise of salvation is sometimes annexed means to bring us into Covenant Rep. Alas how frigidly where is the Scripture that saith Be baptized and thou shalt be saved or where doth it say to men that are strangers from the covenant persevere and you shall be saved Indeed they that have already received Christ are wont to be exhorted to holinesse and perseverance in the faith that they may not lose or forfeit their right Rev. 22. 14. and 21. 7. 2 John 8.
Heb. 4. 1. c. But our first entrance into covenant is never ascribed to either of them But Mr. Eyre shall have measure pressed down and running over I meane many plaine testimonies of Scripture where faith is promised as a meanes to bring us into Covenant with God CHAP. XIV An answer to Mr. Eyrs eighteenth chapter Jer. 24. 7. Heb. 10. 14 15. Ezek. 11. 19 20. and 36 25 26 27 28. and other places proving faith to be promised as a meanes by which we are brought into Covenant with God vindicated SECT I. FOr proofe of this I mentioned many places of Scripture §. 1. to all which Mr. Eyres answer is upon the matter one and the same and therefore we shall be brief in our reply to this chapter because one generall vindication will serve the turne for all As to his first Paragraph wherein he chargeth me so severely for saying the words of the Covenant described Jer. 31 and Heb. 8. are to this sense This is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel when I shall write my Laws in their hearts I will be their God c. He doth but shew how desirous he is of an occasion against me I told the Reader plainly in that very place that I did not therein give the Grammaticall translation of the words though if I had so rendred them it might have been justified by an elleipsis of the Hebrew particle â— of which there are examples good store in Scripture if it were worth while to produce them and set down those words for no other end but to let the Reader know that the very description of the new covenant as to it's matter and effects in the said texts did suppose the forme and tenor of it to be such as those words do represent having shewed but just before that there were three things in the Covenant as described Heb. 8. of distinct consideration viz. the matter and blessings of it on Gods part the bond and condition of it on our part a promise and declaration that God will work this condition Therefore while Mr. Eyre opposeth that which he calls my rendring of the words though I confesse I am not able to dive into the sense of his Argument he sights with his own shadow when afterwards I say the words will bear to be read thus This is the covenant which I will make saith the Lord that giveth his Laws into their minds c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. though neither did I seek any advantage from this observation as I also plainly told the Reader yet the whole text according to this reading agrees wholy in sense with our translation and therefore neither needed Mr. Eyre to have quarrelled with me about it nor shall I need to vindicate it Come we then to the matter it self The Apostle out of the Prophet §. 2. Jâ—r â—y doth thus describe the new covenant Heb. 8. 10 This is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Laws into their minds and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people In which words I told the Reader there were three things of distinct consideration 1. The matter and blessings of the covenant on Gods part in those words I will be their God and they shall be my people 2. The bond and condition of it on our part and that is faith signified by the writing of Gods Laws in our hearts 3. A promise or Declaration that God will work this condition I will put my Laws into their minds That this is the certaine undoubted meaning of the Holy Ghost we have already shewed by uncontroulable evidence from the text it self We shall now confirme the same by comparing it with other places of Scripture The first we mentioned was Jâ—r 24. 7. I will give them a heart to know me that I am the Lord and they shall be my people and I will be their God fâ—r or when they shall returne unto me with their whole heart Where we have the very same arguments as here viz. The blessings promised I will be their God The condition on the peoples part which is their returning with their whole heart and the cause of this return I will give them an heart Mr. Eyre answers That their returning unto God is not the condition of Gods being their God We go on then Ezek. 11. 19 20. I will put a new spirit within them that they may walk in my statutes and do them and they shall be my people and I will be their God Which is the summe of the covenant on Gods part So Ezek. 36. 25 26 27 28. Againe the Lord promiseth that he will cleanse and purifie them and so they shall be his people and he will be their God Ezek. 37. 23. And after he had promised that they should walk in his judgments and observe his statutes it follows Moreover I will make a Covenant of peace with them it shall be an everlasting covenant which â—â— sâ—â—me is this I will be their God and they shall be my people v. 20 27. To all which Mr. Eyre gives the same denyall as to the first We shall therefore prove that in all these places faith is promised as a means to bring us into covenant with God And then take a view of the reasons of Mr. Eyres denyall in generall or upon particular places For the former the substance of Gods covenant with men is this §. 3. I will be their God and they shall be my people as not onely all the Divines which I can light on but the Scriptures also witnesse Deut. 29. 12 13. That thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God that he may establish thee for a people unto himself and that he may be unto thee a God More then this we need not nor are we capable of And God himself accounts that he hath fully kept his covenant when he becomes a God to a person or people Zech. 8. 8. and therefore to be their God is the totall summe of the Covenant on his part Moreover the Scriptures certifie us that the Covenant made with Abraham Isaack and Jacob containes all the blessings which God by Covenant gives to any people Gal. 3. 9 14 18. Rom. 4. 13 16 23 24. But I will be thy God was the summe of the covenant made with Abraham Isaack and Jacob Gen. 17. 7. Exod. 3. 6. with Matth. 22. 32. c. In those words therefore is contained all the blessings of the covenant on Gods part Hence our Argument proceeds thus If God promise faith for this end that he may be our God and we his people then is it promised as a means by which we are brought into Covenant with God But-faith is promised for this end that God may be our God Ergo it is promised as a means to bring us
into covenant If the assumption be denyed we confirme it diversly 1. From the plaine scope of some places as Ezek. 37. 23. I will cleanse them So shall they be my people and I will be their God and chap. 14. 11. That they may be no more polluted with all their transgressions but that they may be my people and I may be their God Even as he is often said to have brought them out of Egypt which signifies spiritually the bringing of sinners out of the darknesse and slavory of a sinful condition into the way of life Jude v. 5. that he might be their God Lev. 11. 45. and 26. 45. and 25. 38. and 22. 33. Numb 15. 41. 2 Faith is promised for this end that we thereby might obtaine that which was promised to Israel when God brought them out of Egypt though they obtained it not because they continued not in Gods covenant Ergo it is promised as a means for this end that God may be our God and we his people The reason of the consequence is because this was that which the Lord said to Israel when he brought them out of the Land of Egypt obey my voice so will I be your God and ye shall be my people Jer. 7. 23. and 11. 4. The antecedent is written with a Sun beam in the place under debate Jer. 31. 31. c. Where the writing of Gods Laws in our mind which in some other of the places mentioned is called the putting of a new Spirit within us and a causing us to walk in his statutes is most apparently promised as a means of obtaining that good which Israel by the covenant made with them in the day when the Lord took them by the hand to bring them out of the Land of Egypt did not obtaine for herein lay the imperfection and faultinesse of that covenant that they brake it and consequently that the Lord regarded them not In opposition to both which it is that God promiseth to write his Laws in their minds and so to be their God other things we referre till by and by It is therefore a truth beyond contradiction that the giving of the first grace is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means §. 4. and qualification on mans part for his entrance into covenant Let us see what Mr. Eyre hath against it and first in generall from § 4. downward First he excepts against the fitnesse of my expression in calling our conversion the first grace which he saith is more properly spoken nf Gods eternall love or of Christ himself Answ But the question is onely understood of the grace of God in us which is more frequently called by the name of grace then either of the other two Jam. 4. 6. 2 Pet. 3. 18. Heb. 12. 28. and 13. 9. c. The first of which is faith or our conversion unto God But even in this sense saith Mr. Eyre inherent sanctification is unduly put in the first place which is a consequent both of justification and adoption Gal. 4. 5 6. though it be promised in Jeremy before remission of sins yet in other places it is put after it as Ezek. 36. 25. 26. Jer. 32. 38 39. Answ The former part is true of sanctification strictly and most properly taken for the habits of the life of holinesse opposed to the body of sin in us But in this sense I deny faith to be any part of sanctification and if Mr. Eyre doth thus interpret the promise of writing Gods Laws in our heart c. Then shall I also deny that faith in Christ is herein promised but onely a greater measure of grace to them that beleeve which will much advantage his cause But if sanctification be taken largely for any gracious workings of God upon the soul so as it includes faith it self then do I deny that it is any where in Scripture put after remission of sins The two places mentioned for of Gal. 4. 5 6. we speak below say nothing so Ezek. 36. 25. Then will I sprinkle cleane water upon you and you shall be cleane from all your filthinesse and from all your Idâ—ls will I cleanse you Mr. Eyre takes it for granted that this is meant of pardon of sin and I acknowledge that sprinkling or washing with water doth sometimes also include that 1 Cor. 6. 11. But sometimes also it signifies our regeneration or conversion unto God Tit. 3. 5. and so do I understand it in this place for a through conversion of them from dumb Idols to the true and living God the former of which is more peculiarly intended v. 25. and the latter v. 26. my reason is because the cleansing of them from their Idols is expressely opposed to their defiling themselves with Idols chap. 37. 23. Neither shall they dâ—file themselves any more with Idols But I will cleanse them and that for this end that he might be their God Which by Mr. Eyres own acknowledgment includes remission of sin and therefore the said remission is not meant by cleansing them from their Idols otherwise the sense were this I will pardon their sin and so I will pardon their sin The second Text is Jer. 32. 38 39. They shall be my people and I will be their God and I will give them one heart and one way that they may feare me for ever for the good of them and of their children after them to which I adde the next verse v. 40. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turne away from them to do them good c. Here indeed it cannot be denyed but that Gods giving a heart to feare him is mentioned after the promise of forgivenesse of sin included amongst other things in the words foregoing I will be their God But though it be mentioned after yet is it apparently mentioned as the means to this end that God may be our God I will give them a heart to fear me for the good of them and of their children The fear of God is promised for this end that he may do us good or as v. 40. that he may never turne away from us to do us good Ergo it is promised for this end that he may be our God because as we have shewed before for God to be our God is all one as to be our benefactor and to do us good Wherefore this verse followes the former in place or writing not in dependance declaring the way which God will take that he may be our God namely by putting his feare into our hearts and so advanceth what Master Eyre would prove from it by overthrowing it Secondly He utterly denyes that the giving of a new heart is §. 5. promised as a means on mans part for his entrance into covenant For 1. The Scripture no where affirmes it and it is weakly concluded hence because it is sometimes mentioned first in the recitall of the covenant c. Answ Whether it be
have diligently perused I think all the places in Scripture where those words are found and cannot discerne where they are either taken more largely then to signifie the communication of that good which is part of our felicity as distingushed from those acts of the soul by which we tend and move towards it Nor yet so strictly as to note some one only priviledge and benefit And for Mr. Eyre to obtrude a distinction upon us of words which cannot be distinguished but according to their use in Scripture and yet never go about to enform us where the Scriptures afford the least protection to it is no better then to begge the question For vindicating my Interpretation of the Covenant as described Heb. 8. I had also quoted at large Heb. 10. 14 15 16 17. After he had said before This is the Covenant which I will make with them after those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Lawes into their hearts and in their mindes will I write them adde here then he saith or then it followes and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more Mr. Eyre will have them read thus After he had said before This is the Covenant which I will make with them after those dayes then the Lord saith I will put my Lawes into their hearts c. This is the place which first established me in the right understanding of the Covenant as I have described it The only question between Mr. Eyre and me here is whether those words saith the Lord ver 16. be the words of the Apostle or the words of Jeremy cyted by him I am for the latter 1. Because those words are in that place of Jeremy 2. Because this Apostle rehearseth the same words as the words of Jeremy Heb 8. 8 10. If Mr. Eyre can shew better evidence for his interpretation he should have done it CHAP. XV. An answer to Mr. Eyres nineteenth Chapter wherein he endeavours to prove that in the New Covenant there are no conditions required of us to invest us with a right and title to the blessings of it SECT I. MOst of my work in answer to the things contained §. 1 in this Chapter is already performed there being little throughout but what hath had its tryal in the foregoing Discourse Mr. Eyre before he comes to Argument premiseth two things he might have said three 1. What he meanes by the New Covenant 2. What by a condition Upon the former I shall animadvert nothing having so largely already confuted it This only I observe that he calls the New Covenant an engagement and that by word or promise and distributes the Covenants of God into that of works made with Adam and that of grace made not with men but with Christ and yet not farre before placed the very essence of the Covenant in Gods eternal purpose of doing good to the Elect. To what he speaks concerning a condition I have nothing to adde more then what hath been spoken already His definitions out of Dr. Câ—well Câ—okâ— c. I consent to if by casus incertus he mean no more then that which is in it self and in its own nature contingent 3. He enformes us that some by a condition mean no more then barely an antecedent But that is an improper use of it we take it in its most proper Law-sense Come we then to the arguments they begin § 6 The first is this In §. 2. all those places wherein the nature or tenour of the â—ew Covenant is declared there is not any menâ—ion at all of the least condition Jer. 31. 33. Ezek. 36. 25 c. Hos 2. 18 19 20. Answ This is answered already In these and the like places not the forme and tenour but the quality vertue and effects of the Covenant are described 2. And so described as that a condition is plainly supposed because one effect of the Covenant is to give strength to fulfill it 3. The tenour of the Covenant is elsewhere described as manifestly conditional for the word of faith which the Apostles preached is the New Covenant 2 Cor. 3. 6. But the tenour of the word of faith which the Apostles preached is this If thou believe thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 8 9. Again the promise by faith of Jesus Christ is conditional The New Covenant is a promise by faith of Jesus Christ Gal. 3. 22. The second Argument is this All those Covenants which God §. 3. made to prefigure this Covenant were free and absolute without any condition Ergo the Covenant it self is much more so The Antecedent Mr. Eyre proves in the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. with Noah Gen. 9. 11. with Phinehas Num. 25. with David 1 Samuel 13. 13 14. Isaiah 54. 3. Psalme 89. 20. Answ A Covenant may be called absolute either antecedently when in its essentiall constitution it hath no condition neither required nor supposed expressed nor understood Or consequently when it becomes absolute upon the performance of the condition In this latter sense I yield the Covenants mentioned to have been absolute In the former I deny it because the faith of the parties with whom those Covenants were made was supposed and in being before those promises were given them and that as the ground and reason though not the cause of their being given them This doth the Scripture testifie of every one of them of Noah Gen. 6. 18. with 7. 1. But with thee will I establish my Covenant for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation Whence he is said to be heire of the righteousnesse which is by faith Heb. 11. 7. Of Abraham Nehem. 9. 8. Thou foundest his heart faithfull before thee and madest a Covenant with him See also Rom. 4. 13 21 22. Of Phineahs Numb 25. 11 12 13. Wherefore say behold I give unto him my Covenant of peace Because he was zealous for hie God Of David Acts 13. 22 23 32 33. compared and therefore he amongst others is said by faish to have obtained promises Heb. 11. 32 33. Indeed faith was not in these Covenants proposed to them as the condition which they were to performe it needed not they being believers before but when God promiseth the same blessings in substance to a sinful world as he had before done to them it is expresly upon condition of the same faith Romans 4. 12 16 23 24. Galatians 3. 7 9 14. c. Thirdly thus he argues If there were any condition required §. 4. in the New Covenant to entitle us to the blessings of it it would not be a Covenant of pure grace To give a thing freely and conditionally are contradictories works and conditions which men performe are their money Isa 55. 1 2. Answ This is the Argument of the Quorum without which nothing can be done Many things we have already spoken from Scripture Reason Divines and Lawyers to evince the falshood of it something more I will here adde according to my
promise to the same purpose 1. If every conditional promise be contrary to grace then neither can God encourage us to any act of obedience by a promise of rewarding it nor may we take encouragement to obey out of respect to the reward without prejudicing the Grace of God The Reason is because do thus or thus and I will give thee this or that is a conditional promise more then such a forme of words we have not to prove that God ever made a conditional promise But the consequence in both the parts of it is grossely false for God doth make conditional promises to encourage us to obey his will and we are to take encouragement from them for that end For example he promiseth Lev. 26. 3 12. If ye walk in my statutes and keep my commandments and to them I will walk among you and will be your God and ye shall be my people Which that it pertaines to Christians as well as to the Jews the Apostle expresly teacheth 2 Cor. 6. 16 17 18. And from thence inferres immediately Chap. 7. 1. Having therefore these promises let us cleanse our selves from all filthinesse of the flesh and Spirit c. The promises he mentions aâ—e Gospel promises therefore promises of grace Yet out of respect to the good promised are we to come out and separate from all filthinesse of flesh and Spirit and God hath given us these promises for this end Moses rejected the pleasures of sin because he had respect to the recompense of reward Heb. 11. 25 26. So Paul 2 Cor. 4. 16 18. So Christ himself Heb. 12. 2. Multitudes of conditional promises we have in the Gospel which therefore surely are not inconsistent with grace Mat. 6. 14 15. Joh. 14. 21 23. Rom. 8. 13. Mat. 7. 7 c. If a man promise another to whom he hath no natural relation but out of a meer desire of his good that he will make him heire to five hundred per annum on condition he will go no more into an Alehouse or into none of the Popes dominions in such a promise there would be found every thing which according to Scripture or Philosophy as we have shewed before chap. 5. is required to an act of grace and yet the promise is conditionall If Mr. Eyre shall use his old evasion and say that in the places forementioned there is no proposing of a condition but onely a declaring of the persons who shall enjoy such and such blessings besides what hath been spoken against it before I shall onely adde this that then the said places and innumerable others like them do not declare that faith or righteousnesse or prayer or any other duty to which the promise is made is any whit more acceptable to God then unbelief or unrighteousnesse or neglect of prayer but onely that the person beleeving the person that keeps the Commandements of Christ the person that prayeth c. is more acceptable to God then he that doth not these things which is such a prodigious assertion that till I know whether Mr. Eyrâ— will own it I will not go about to confute it 2. If the condition being performed be it of what kind it will be the thing promised do eo ipso become a due dept then is it unjust to make the full price of a thing the condition of any contract The reason is Because whatsoever becomes a debt by contract supposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repassum as they call it or an equality between that which I part with and that which I receive for it If then the full price be the condition another is bound to then have I double as much as what I part with is worth For if the condition had been the payment of six pence for what is worth a 100. l. the six pence being paid it becomes by virtue of the contract proportionable to that which is worth a 100. l. otherwise it could not make it a due debt If then I have in six pence what is proportionable to that I part with then if the said 100. l. had been the condition of the contract I had had double as much as that I part with is worth because the said 100 l. is in it self proportionable and againe it becomes proportionable by being made the condition of the contract so that it hath a double proportion of worth to that I part with for it In the next place Mr. Eyre brings in his adversaries as objecting §. 5. against this his third argument and clearing themselves from any impeachment of Gods grace though they assert the covenant to be conditional But in none of his objectionss doth he take notice of what he might very well suppose would be principally insisted upon for wiping off his aspersions As 1. That the Covenant of grace is not made with righteous persons but with sinners and enemies and children of wrath who if they had had their due and the rich grace of God had not prevented had been past all capacity of having any new terms of life and peace proposed to them 2. That the conditions required are neither so much as is Gods due nor yet so much as man was once able to performe which the Apostle mentions as a glorious difference between the righteousnesse of the Law and the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 5 8 9. God accepteth the heart though in many things we sin all Therefore these conditions are such as are indeed available for our good through the acceptance of a gracious and mercifull governour as Benhadads servants prevailed with the merciful Kings of Israel when they supplicated for life with sackcloth upon their loyns and ropes about their heads 1 Kings 20. 31 32. though they availe us nothing in the tryal of justice But let us see Mr. Eyres objections First he supposeth us objecting thus We ascribe no meritoriousnesse §. 6. to these conditions as the Papists do unto works His answer is 1. The Papists assert no other works and conditions to be necessary to justification and salvation then we do 2. They ascribe no more meritoriousnesse to works then we do for Mr. Baxter says that the performers of a condition may be said to merit the reward 3. The condition required of Adam himself was not meritorious in a strict and proper sense Rep. 1. The first is a calumny The Papists some of them dispute that it is a thing possible to keep the Law of God and that facile parvo negotio they are Bellarminâ—s words dâ— Jâ—stif lib. 4. cap. 11. 2. The second is a calumny as Mr. Baxter a man borne to reproaches hath sufficiently shewed in his admonition to Mr. Eyre Reader if thou art not read in the fathers do but peruse Vâ—ssâ—â— Theses De bonor opâ—r merit or Bp. Vshers answer to the Jesuits challenge or any other Protestant who replies to the testimonies of the fathers which the Papists are wont to boast of and thou wilt find that they do all
the absolutenesse of the New Covenant is any way inconsistent with this preaching Because to preach the Gospel is no more then 1. To publish that the Sonne of God is come to save men from their sinnes 2. To presse and exhort all men to beleeve on him 1. With the assent of their minds 2. With the embraces of the heart to trust rely and rowle themselves upon him for all the purchases of his death and in so doing confidently to expect the fruition of them Rep. Here are words enough but whether they tend I can scarcely see I must therefore crave leave of Master Eyre to be better satisfied in the following Quaeres 1. Whether there be any promise of life and salvation made to every man If there be nâ—t what covenant of grace it is which is preached to every man It is a strange Covenant which promiseth nothing the Covenant of grace consists essentially in this that it is the promise of the inheritance Gâ—l 3. 18. If there be whether that promise be absolute or conditionall If the former every man shall be saved if the latter the cause is yeelded If Master Eyre would put his assertions into the forme of promises we might understand him better If I tell a man then that Jesus Christ is come to save men from their sinnes do I promise him any thing or no If I do le ts know what it is for my part I professe I cannot imagine if not I would ask 2ly Whether we require men to trust and rely on Christ or whether saith be required as a means to enjoy the purchases of Christs death if we do we presse men to the performance of a condition for a means used by us to obtaine a benefit by anothers promise is a condition as we have often observed if not whether the soul do not beleeve it knows not why nor wherefore Paul gives a better reason of his faith Gal. 2. 16. We knowing that a man is not justified but by the faith of Jesus Christ we have beleeved But more of this by and by In the meane time I perceive the reason why we were told so carefully that the Gospel consists neither in precepts nor promises and that after so long a dispute that it is an absolute promise I said in the minor that every man is pressed to fulfill the conditions §. 4. of the Covenant that he may obtaine the blessings of it and so saies the Apostle Heb. 4 1. a promise is left us of entring into his rest let us feare lâ—st we fall short of it viz. by unbelief v. 2 3. No says Mr. Eyre The words are an exhortation to sincerity and perseverance in our Christian profession by a similitude taken from foolish racers c. Râ—p As who should say it is not faith but sincerity and perseverance which is the condition of the promise The promise mentioned is of such constitution as that our obtaining or not obtaining it is suspended upon our beleeving or not beleeving so that if we beleeve we obtaine it v. 3. if we beleeve not we loose it as the unbeleevers in Israel lost Canaan v. 2. and chap. 3. 19. If a racer lose the Crowne because he gives over before he comes to the goal then his running to the goal was the condition of his obtaining the Crowne if it be obtained by virtue of anothers promise The major I cleared by severall questions 1. Whether there be §. 5. an absolute promise made to every man that God will give him grace No saith Mr. Eyre yet the generall promises of the Covenant are a sufficient ground for our faith forasmuch as grace therein is promised indefinitely to sinners Rep. 1. The promise of giving faith can be no ground of the first act of faith because faith doth not receive it self But the covenant which is to be preached to every man is the promise of that good which faith receives for the covenant and the promise are all one in Scripture Gal. 3. 17 18 21. Ergo the absolute promise is not the Covenant I asked 2ly Whether it be sense to exhort men to take hold of Gods Covenant or to enter into Covenant with God if the Covenant be only an absolute promise on Gods part Mr. Eyre saies yes For to lay hold of the Covenant is to take up those gracious discoveries which God in his Covenant hath made of himself to sinners and to resolve not to be beaten off c. Rep. To take hold of the Covenant in Scripture language is to joyne our selves to the Lord which is done internally by faith Isa 56. 4 5 6. hereby do we obtaine the promises there mentioned for by faith we obtaine the promises Heb. 11. 33. and 6. 12. But our joyning our selves to the Lord were not to take hold of his Covenant it his Covenant did not require â—s to joyne our selves to him much lesse could we be said thereby more then by any other act to obtaine the promises of his Covenant if the said Covenant did not require this our joyning as a means for that end It is not onely presumption but naturally impossible for a soul to resolve not to be beaten off from God without a promise and a command to lay hold of it But neither can men by faith lay hold on that Covenant which it self promiseth to give the very first act of faith nor can they be commanded so to do As to the other phrase of entring into Covenant Mr. Eyre understands it of mens visible giving up themselves to be the Lords people But that giving up of a mans self to God is surely an act of the heart though a man may also with his mouth professe it and hereby we are admitted not into a Covenant of our own but into Gods Covenant Ergo his Covenant cannot be an absolute promise because we cannot by any act of our owne be admitted into that I asked farther whether if the Covenant be an absolute promise §. 6. men can be accused and damned for unbelief and rejecting the Gospel was it ever known that men should be counted worthy of death for not being the objects of an absolute promise Mr. Eyre answers The condemnation of Reprobates doth inevitably follow upon their not being included in that Covenant which God made with Christ Rep. That this is nothing to the purpose himself acknowledgeth in his next words Their exclusion from this Covenant is but an antecedent and not the cause of their destruction We seek therefore an answer That 's this formally the cause of their damnation is not their non-being the objects of Gods absolute promise but their disobedience to the command of God viz. of beleeving Rep. But doth the Covenant command them to beleeve If it doth it is not an absolute promise if it doth not their unbelief is no rejecting or violation of the Covenant in which yet the Apostle placeth the heynousnesse of the sin Heb. 10. 29. and therefore is not