is not also a Law of Grace which requires of us Faith and Repentance and sincere Obedience See Tit. 2.11 12. 2. I come to particular Testimonies which I shall briefly examine and give them particular Answers And 1st Whereas my R. Brother gives the Sum of the Gospel in the words of the Augustan Confession to be this That God not for our merits but on the account of Christ justifyes those who believe that they are received into favour for Christ's sake I Answer 1. That this is so far from beng a perfect definition that it is no accurate Description of the Gospel For here is no mention of the promise to give a New Heart and to work Faith and Repentance in the Elect which is an essential part of the Gospel Witness Ezek 36.26 27. John 6.45 Acts 5.31 Heb. 8.10 Nor is here any mention of the promise of Eternal Life which is another Essential part of the Gospel 1 John 2.25 2. I Answer That to take this Testimony barely as it is cited by Mr. Goodwin it must be rightly understood otherwise it will be found to contradict our own Confession of Faith Chap. 18. Art 3. where it is expresly denyed that assurance doth so belong to the essence of Faith c. Yea I fear it will be found to contradict Melancthon himself who was the Principal Composer of that Augustan Confession For in his Common places he so defines justifying Faith as to make such assurance to be but the immediate consequent effect of it whereas he places the essence of it in a firm certain assent to the general Promise a Cordial receiving of Christ and trusting in him for Justification according to the Promise His own words are (d) Sit igitur haec definitio Fides est assentiri universo verbo Dei nobis proposito quidem promissioni gratuitae reconciliationis donatae propter Christum mediatorem Estque fiducia misericordiae Dei promissae propter Christum Mediatorem nam fiducia est motus in voluntate necessario respondens assensioni Estque fides virtus apprehendens applicans promissiones quietans corda Melanct. in loc Commun loco de vocabulo fidei Let this then be the definition Faith is to assent unto the whole word of God proposed unto us and particularly to the promise of Reconciliation or Justification freely given for the sake of Christ the Mediator And it is a Trust in the Mercy of God promised for Christ the Mediators sake For trust is a motion in the Will necessarily answering unto assent Faith also is a Vertue apprehending and applying the Promises and quieting hearts Here we see Melancthon held the Faith by which we are Justifyed to be an actual and not meerly an habitual or seminal Faith and he judiciously ascribes three acts to it as also doth our own Confession of Faith wherein he comprehends the whole Nature of Actual Faith 1. An Act whereby we assent unto the whole Word of God especially to the Gospel-promise of free Justification through Christ 2. An Act whereby we receive and apply the Promise and God's Mercy through Christ therein 3 An Act whereby we trust to the Promise and to Gods Mercy through Christ therein And then the effect of all is that thereby it quiets our hearts Whence I infer that to make this definition of Faith consistent with the Augustan Confession by the believing aforesaid that they are received into favour for Christ's sake must be understood a believing that there is no other way to be received into favour but for Christ's sake and therefore that Christ is to be received and trusted in only for that end Without this favourable interpretation that Aushurgh Confession as cited by my R. Brother will be found to contradict our own Confession of Faith which is more exact and perfect And even to contradict Melancthon himself who was the first Compiler of the said Ausburgh Confession 3. If my R. Brother had duely considered what in the Apology pag. 88 89. I quoted at large out of the 20th Article of that Ausburgh Confession which was certainly subscribed both by Luther and Calvin and I think by most of our first Reformers beyond the Seas he might have been ashamed to have quoted that Confession against me in this Controversie For there it says expresly 1. That the Gospel requires Repentance 2. That the Promise of Grace is Vniversal as the preaching of Repentance is Universal And 3. That the Gospel Commands all to believe and receive the benefit of Christ c. Now here my Reverend Brothers whole Book is confuted by the Augustan Confession 2. In the second place he quotes Melancthons Apology for the said Confession and makes him describe the Gospel to be properly the promise of pardon of sins and of Justification on Christs account To which I answer that this is a very lame imperfect description of the Gospel It is indeed properly a part but it is far from being the whole of the Gospel The promise of taking away the heart of Stone and giving an heart of Flesh with the gift of Faith and Repentance and the Promises of other things also are proper parts of the Gospel 3. In the third place he quotes Luthers little Treatise of Christian Liberty Disc p. 29. and tells us that there Luther divides the whole Word of God into two parts to wit into Precepts and Promises and the Precepts he entitles purely to the Law but defines the Gospel to be the other part of Gods word and so to be only a complete Systeme of Gracious Promises And then he cites the express words of Luther which are as followeth Therefore the Promises of God belong to the New Testament yes and are the New Testament I Answer 1. That if Luther as Mr. G. saith did there divide the whole word of God into two parts to wit Precepts and Promises and entitled all the Precepts purely to the Law and referred all Promises to the Gospel then it is as clear as the Light at Noon day that he was mistaken and that his division of the whole Word of God into those two parts was very lame and defective for in the word of God besides Precepts and Promises there are 1. Histories 2. Prophecies 3. Mysterious Doctrines 4. Threatnings which as such are neither Precepts nor Promises 5. Besides Evangelical Promises there are in the Word of God meer Legal Promises which must belong to the Law and cannot properly belong to the Gospel And my R. Brother doth himself in the same page 29. cite Melancthon distinguishing between gratuitous Promises or Promises of Grace and Promises that are not gratuitous or of Grace Now if there be in the Word of God Promises that are not of Grace surely they must belong to the Law and not to the Gospel if as Mr. G. holds the Gospel be nothing but a pure Doctrine and meer Promise or Promises of Grace 2dly I Answer That though Luther doth indeed say that the
promiseth unto his Elect and perfecteth in them the prescribed Condition of Faith and Repentance These are Gomarus his own words truly Translated which together with his 30th Position that next follows in order do sufficiently refute Mr G' s Gloss and may make him Blush for so grosly abusing that Great Man and most Zealous Anti-Arminian Fourthly Mr. G. having passed over the Testimony of Dr. Andrews the learned Bishop of Winchester comes in the last place to Dr. Twiss and pretends by a short Answer to take off his Testimony and to shew that it is nothing to the purpose And his short Answer is That all which can be concluded from the words of Dr Twiss is only this That God hath appointed a set and stated order in our Salvation according to which He proceeds I reply That this Answer is short indeed and that is no fault at all but the fault of it is that it is most false as doth most evidently appear by Dr. Twiss his own express and formal words quoted at large in the Apology I appeal to any Man of common sense that can read and understand English if withall he be a Man of Common Honesty and Ingenuity whether 1. Dr. Twiss doth not say that in the very Gospel there is a Positive Law according to which God proceeds in his dealings with Men. 2. That the said positive law is not only a Law to God himself but that it is a positive law to us appointing unto us a set and stated order of walking and prescribing a condition to be performed by us through Grace that we may obtain Salvation for the sake of Christ and his Righteousness only 3. That the said order is by necessary consequence a conditional order with respect to us and that it is required of us to observe the Conditional Order and to perform the condition in order to obtain the blessing and benefit promised conditionally in the Gospel These three things are so evident by the words of Dr Twiss that it is needless to use further reasoning to make them more evident and therefore I shall forbear doing it at present and only refer the matter to the judgment of every understanding conscientious Reader who shall be at the pains to peruse my Citations out of Twiss Thus I have clearly vindicated all the Citations that Mr. Goodwin hath excepted against and endeavoured to elude and have shewed that they stand in full force and do very pertinently prove the matter for the proof whereof they were brought in the Apology and that his Exceptions are so poor and mean yea false and foul that he had done more prudently and had better consulted his own credit and reputation as an Ingenuous Man and a Schollar if he had done by all my Witnesses as he did by Dr. Andrews passed them all over and said nothing to them at all But before he make an end of his Eighth Chapter he undertakes in P. 68. to instruct Ministers how to deal with a poor dying Sinner and 1. when a Minister comes to visit a Sinner on his Death-bed that hath lived in Lewdness to that time of his Sickness Mr. G. would not have him to advise and exhort and in the Lord's Name to command and beseech such a sinner to do any thing in order to his obtaining Salvation through the Mercy of the Father the Meritorious Righteousness of the Son and the Grace of the Spirit no though the Minister know that the Man hath lived to that day in Unbelief and Impenitence and in the practice of all manner of wickedness yet he must have a care that he do not exhort him to Faith in Christ and Repentance towards God he must not tell him that Faith and Repentance are both duties indispensably necessary to Salvation and required of him by the Gospel-Covenant and therefore that if now he do not believe in Christ with all his heart and if now he do not repent unfeignedly of all his sins and pray to God through Christ for Grace to enable him so to do he will be undone for ever But that on the other hand if he now cry to God mightily for Grace to help him in time of need and through Grace now at last believe and repent and turn to the Lord in heart and affection his many and great sins shall be pardoned and his Soul shall be saved through Christ according to the Tenour of the New Covenant or law of Grace This must not the Minister do because this would fright the wicked man and make him think that the Minister were sending him to Hell Well but what must the Minister do then why that Mr. G. tells us in the second place and the sum of his Advice you may take thus Poor Sinner by the Covenant of life and salvation God requires neither Faith nor Repentance of thee he requires no Duty of thee at all by the Gospel for that is all Promise absolute Promise but if God hath Decreed to save thee he hath Blessings in store for thee and all Blessings of the Covenant are inseparably linked together and thou shalt have one and all of them never trouble thy head then about Believing in Christ and Repenting of thy Sins for these are Duties which the Gospel requires not of thee But look thou on Faith and Repentance as Blessings given not as Duties required by the Gospel and laying thy hand on thy heart if thou findest the Blessings of Faith and Repentance there then all is well and thou mayest be assured of thy Interest in all other blessings This it seems is his way of visiting the Sick and thus he would Instruct other Ministers to Visit them and if we may believe himself he hath by this sufficiently answered that part of our Apology in Page 32 33. which relates to this matter But whether this be a sufficient Answer I am content without adding one word more of Reply to refer it unto the Judgment of the Intelligent and Godly Reader Remarks on his 9th Chapter MR. Goodwin's Design in this his last Chapter is to make simple unlearned People believe That our Opinion of the Gospel's being a New Covenant or Law of grace which hath its own Commandments and its own Promises and Threatnings doth too much agree with the Popish Socinian and Arminian Opinion concerning the New Law And it appears to be very dangerous to agree with them in that Opinion First because as he says The Papists do in that opinion lay the surest foundation for that dear Article of their Faith the merit of works Secondly because the Arminians and Socinians do zealously espouse it as a most effectual engine to overthrow Justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ Whether this be altogether true or not is not my present business to enquire if they really do what Mr. G. charges them with they certainly do a very ill thing And we are fo far from agreeing with them therein that we utterly detest and abhor it And
is impossible to be done by any power whatsoever which is even impossible to be done by the help of his Spirit and Grace But the Conditional Promise of our Saviour in John 8.51 is of another Nature it is not merely oeconomical but real and intentional really requiring the condition and obliging Men to keep his saying and intentionally promising unto all who do or shall keep his saying that they shall never see Death This plainly appears from the double asseveration wherewith our Saviour spoke the foresaid Promise saying Verily verily I say unto you if a man keep my saying be shall never see doath Whence I conclude that the Gospel is not without all Precepts for here is implyed a Precept to keep Christs saying A Third Tellimony we have in Rom. 10.8 9 10. That is the Word of Faith which we preach that if thou shalt confess with thy Mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy Heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved for with the Heart Man believeth unto Righteousness and with the Mouth confession is made unto Salvation Observe here 1 That by the Word of Faith is meant the Gospel which according to the Dutch Annotations on the place is so called because by it we are exhorted and brought to Faith 2. Observe that besides Faith in the Heart which is required unto Righteousness and Justification there is here required Confession with the Mouth as necessary to the obtaining of consummate Salvation And by Confession with the Mouth is meant an outward Profession of the inward Faith of the Heart and living suirable to our holy Profession Hence Mr. Maâ—o in the last English Annotatiens on Rom. 10.9 saith There are but these two things which the Gospel principally requires in order to our Salvation The one is the Confession of Christ with our Mouths and that in spight of all Persecution and Danger to own him for our Lord and for our Jesus and to declare that we are and will be ruled and saved by him and by him only The other is to believe in our Hearts that God hath raisod him from the Dead Whence I conclude again that the Gospel is not without all Precepts for it hath besides the Precept of believing on Christ with the Heart another Principal Precept of confessing him with the Mouth that is of living suitably to our Faith A Fourth Testimony to prove that the Gospel hath Precepts we have in those places of the New Testament where some are commended for their obeying and being subject to the Gospel and others are blamed and threatned for their disobeying the Gospel 1. We find that some are commended for obeying the Gospel and being subject to it Thus the believing Romans are commended for obeying the Gospel Rom. 6.17 God be thanked that ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you This form of Doctrine is the Gospel as the Dutch Annotation on the place tells us saying expresly that the Gospel is a Doctrine of Godliness and Righteousiness And Paul gave God thanks for this that the believing Romans had from the Heart obeyed it Which they could never have done if the Gospel Doctrine had had no Precept requiring their Obedience For speaking of a Doctrine Precept and Obedience are relative one to another so that take away the Precept of a Doctrine and you take away the possibility of Obedience to that Doctrine which hath no Precept On the other hand if we once grant that there is such a thing as Obedience to the Doctrine of the Gospel we must by consequence grant also that the Doctrine of the Gospel hath some Precept which requires that Obedience otherwise it can be no Obedience to that Doctrine Again in 2 Cor. 9.13 we read that the Saints glorified God for the believing Corinthians their professed subjection unto the Gospel of Christ Now it is unconceivable how they could be subject to the Gospel if it had no preceptive commanding Authority over their Consciences For Subjection is relative unto and presupposes a superiour commanding Authority in that whereunto there is Subjection This common sense teaches us But so it is that the Corinthians were subject to the Gospel and therefore the Gospel is not without all Precepts but it had a preceptive commanding Authority over them to which they were subject 2. We find that others are blamed and threatned for not obeying the Gospel Rom. 10.16 They have not all obeyed the gospel 1 Pet. 4.17 What shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God And 2 Thess 1.7 8. The Lord shall take vengeance on them that know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ But now according to the principle of the Flacian Sectaries that the Gospel hath no Precept there could be no such thing as disobedience to the Gospel For where there is no Gospel Law or Precept there can be no Transgression against the Gospel This one of the Brethren who was for that way plainly saw and granting the consequence declared it to the World in Print Dansons Confer p. 18. that he and his Party knew no Sins against the Gospel And indeed if the Gospel had no Precept there could be no Sin against it But the Apostles Paul and Peter tell us expresly that there is such a thing as not obeying the Gospel and that persons who obey it not shall be severely punished for their disobedience And if so then surely their disobeying the Gospel is a Sin against the Gospel whence it follows by necessary consequence that the Gospel hath some Precept which was to be demonstrated And if it be said that the Moral Law commands Obedience to the Gospel I answer be it so that is so far from weakening that it rather strengthens the Argument For if it command Obedience to the Gospel then it commands Obedience to the Precept of the Gospel for without the Gospels having some Precept there might indeed be Obedience to the Law in other things but there could be no Obedience to the Gospel at all nor could there be Obedience to the Law in that matter because upon that false supposition the Law should command a Chimerical impossibility which is absurd to affirm of the Just Law of the infinitely Wise God Therefore from the Moral Law its obliging us to obey the Gospel it necessarily follows that the Gospel hath some Precept to be obeyed A Fifth Testimony we have in Tit. 2.11 12. where it is written that The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly righteously and godly in this present world In this Scripture we are to observe two things 1. What is meant by the Grace of God which bringeth Salvation and which hath appeared unto all Men or which bringeth Salvation unto all Men and hath appeared And it is generally confessed to be objective Grace
also the meaning of the words besides the Covenant which he made with them in Horeb is as if it had been said beside that entring into or striking of Covenant And then he adds for further clearing of the matter The Covenant was but one in substance but various in the time and manner of its dispensation The Dutch Annotations go the same way and very clearly assign the reason of its being said that the Covenant was made with Israel in the Land of Moab beside the Covenant made with them in Horeb Their words are It was indeed one and the same Covenant but Renewed Repeated and Published here in the Fields of Moab unto many other Persons in another place and in another manner than at Mount Horeb or Sinai And with these agree the Assemblies Annotations on the place Their words are The same in substance but not altogether the same c. I know very well that there are some Learned Men who in this differ from those before-mentioned and from Deut. 29. ver 1. would prove that the Covenant a◠Horeb was the Covenant of Works and that this in the Land of Moab was the Gospel-Covenant of Grace I am not indeed altogether of their mind for I have already shewed that the Covenant in Exod 24. which was made with Israel at Horeb was not the Original Covenant of Works but the Gospel Covenant of Grace in Type and Figure But though they and I differ in that yet we both agree in this which is the main thing and sufficient for my purpose That the Covenant made with all Israel in the Land of Moab was really the Gospel Covenant of Grace So the Learned Alsted saith (y) Foedus in terrâ Moabitarum est Faedus Evangelii seu Fidei quod Redempvionis gratiae appellatur Quod Deus ibi promulgavit ut Populo poneret ob oculos ingens illud beneficium quo illud quod legi erat impossibile per Christum reddidit possibile Confer Deut. 29. 30. Cap. cum Rom. 10.6 c. Johan Henric. Alsted in Turri Babel destructâ pag. 532. The Covenant in the Land of Moab is the Covenant of the Gospel or Faith which is also called the Covenant of Redemption and Grace which God there promulgated that he might set before the Peoples Eyes that great benefit whereby that which was impossible to the Law is made possible by Christ Compare Deut. 29 and 30. Chapters with Rom. 10. ver 6 c. Now if it be the Gospel Covenant or Covenant of Grace then it is certa in and evident that the Gospel-Covenant or the Covenant of Grace hath Precepts and requires some Duties of us For the Text saith ver 9. Keep the words of this Covenant and do them And ver 10 11 12. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God That thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord the God and into his Oath c. These express words of the Text plainly show that this Covenant hath Precepts and requires Dutyes And that this Covenant which hath Precepts and requires Dutyes is the Gospel Covenant of Grace is yet more manifest from Deut. 30. where Moses speaking still of the same Covenant at the same time he told the People That though they should break it by sin yet they might be received into Grace and Favour again upon their sincere Repentance ver 1 2 3 4 5. Ruthersord of the Covenant of Life opened Part 1. pag. 189. which proves that this could not be the Covenant of Works because as Rutherford well observes The Covenant of Works once broken ceaseth to be a Covenant of Life for ever because the Nature of it is to admit of no Repentance at all 2 Moses speaking still of the same Covenant he says one of the Promises of it is That the Lord will circumcise the Heart of his People and the heart of their Seed to love the Lord their God with all their Heart and Soul that they may live ver 6. But so it is That the Promise of Heart Circumcision is certainly a Promise of the Gospel Covenant of Grace 3 Moses speaking still of the same matter and at the same time he saith as it is written in ver 11 12 13 14 This Commandment which I command thee this day it is not hidden from thee neither is it far off It is not in Heaven that thou should say Who shall go up for us to Heaven and bring it unto us that we may hear it and do it Neither is it beyond the Sea that thou shouldest say Who shall go over the Sea for us and bring it unto us that we may hear it and do it But the word is very nigh unto thee in thy Mouth and in thy Heart that thou may'st do it By which words he plainly teaches us That the Covenant and Commandment of which he there writes is neither impossible nor hard to be understood nor yet is it impossible nor hard to be kept and observed but that through Grace circumcising the heart to love God it is both easie to be known and also easie to be kept and observed Now this cannot be truely said of the Covenant of Works For as Mr. Shepard of New England well observes The Coudition of Works is impossible to be wrought in us by the Spirit And let not any Man think this strange and uncouth to say Theses Sabbathae pag 95. That the Spirit of Grace cannot now work in us the Condition of the first Covenant the Covenant of Works for the Condition and Duty of that Covenant was That Man should be without all Sin in Habit or Act and that he should be sinlesly Holy in Heart and Life and continue so to be But that is now impossible because it implyes a Contradiction for any meer Man since Adam broke the first Covenant and we in him to be always without all Sin in Habit or Act and to be always Sinlesly Holy in Heart and Life For all Men are already guilty of Sin and the People of Israel were all Sinners and had broken the Covenant of Works before Moses spoke and when he spoke the foresaid words unto them And it implyes a contradiction that by any Power whatsoever a thing which hath been already should be made not to have been at all or that a thing which exists at present should not exist at present whil'st it doth exist It will signifie nothing here to say That yet the Spirit can make us sinlesly Holy de futuro if he please for though that be very true absolutely speaking the Spirit can make a Man sinlesly Holy in Heart and Life for time to come though he hath been a Sinner in times part for that implyes no contradiction And the Spirit of Grace hath de facto done the thing in and upon the Spirits of Just Men made perfect in Heaven yet it is nothing to the purpose here because that is not the Condition and Duty of the Covenant
is because the Gospel consists mostly in Promises though it be not without but partly consist in Precepts also This I have shewed in the Apology that there are not only Promises in the Gospel to those who observe its Precepts but that there are in it Promises of Grace to his People to fit them for and to assist them in the observance of its Precepts and therefore it is fitly called not simply a Law but a Law of Grace So I call it and believe it to be and so it was called and believed to be by other Orthodox Divines before I was born But though I believe the Gospel to be a Law of Grace that requires Duties to be performed by the Grace of the Spirit and accepted through the Mediation of Christ yet I never said nor believed that it is a Law which requires Duties by and for which we are Justified and Saved So far am I from saying or believing any such thing that I have published the contrary to the World in several parts of the Apology and particularly in Page 38 39 40.54 Indeed it is my professed belief that Faith it self is not any the least part of that Righteousness by and for which we are Justified before God 2. The Second thing to be carefully attended unto is that by the Gospel or Law of Grace I do not understand the Books of the New Testament but the Covenant of Grace made with the Church through Christ as it is Recorded in the Scriptures both of Old and New Testament 3. The Third thing to be attended unto is that I always acknowledged that the First Commandment of the Moral Law obligeth to believe all the Supernatural Revelations and obey all the Positive Precepts of the Gospel from which Principle it is so far from following that the Gospel hath no Precepts of its own that on the contrary it plainly follows that it hath Precepts of its own otherwise the Moral Natural Law would never oblige us to obey them 4. The Fourth thing to be attended unto is That since the Gospel or Covenant and Law of Grace hath Precepts of its own those Precepts must of themselves immediately oblige us to the performance of certain Duties and by means of them the Natural Moral Law obliges us to the same Duties tho not to be Justified and Saved for the sake of those Duties but in order to other Gospel ends and purposes If these Four things be carefully attended unto they will preserve People through the Blessing of God from being imposed upon by the false Representation which Mr. G. gives of our Doctrine which Wrong I freely forgive him and heartily pray God both to give him Repentance and Forgiveness 2. The Second and last thing I am here to do is to shew my Reverend Brother some more of his Mistakes in this part of his Seventh Chapter concerning the Precepts of the Gospel 1. And First whereas he says in Page 44. That the obedience of a Believer is not called Evangelical because it is obedience to the Gospel but because of the Principles of Faith and Love from which it flows and in respect of the Evangelical Motives which animate and encourage it This I take to be a mistake if he excludes the Gospel Covenants requiring such Obedience from being one of the said Motives and my reason is because the Gospel's requiring it in order to Gospel-ends and purposes is the principal reason wherefore we call it Evangelical Obedience For it is the Gospel that of it self directly and immediately requires us to obey the Moral Law in such an Evangelical way to wit sincerely with a renewed heart from Principles of Faith in and Love to Christ the Mediator and God as our Redeemer and Saviour by Christ And further as the Authority and Veracity of God revealing Truths to be believed is the formal reason of our Faith which makes and denominates it a Divine Faith so the Authority and Will of God commanding Duties to be done is the formal reason of our obedience which gives it the Denomination of Divine Obedience or obedience to God And if this be true of obedience to God in general that it is called a Divine legal obedience because it is obedience to God's Authority and Will Commanding it by his Law then by Parity of Reason it is true of that special sort of obedience to wit Evangelical Obedience that it is called Evangelical because it is obedience to Gods Authority and Will Commanding and requiring it by his Gospel It were very strange if the Formal Reason of Obedience did contribute nothing to the giving it its Name as well as its Nature 2. Secondly Whereas in Page 45. he says That in John 14.1 Christ himself told his Disciples that they should act faith on him because they were obliged to it by the same Command which required them to believe in God This is another Mistake and the mistake is the grosser for this Reason because by this mistake Mr. G. imposes upon our Saviour and makes him to say that which he did not say nor is it implyed in nor necessarily consequent from his words Our Lord Christ doth not say Believe in me because ye are obliged to it by the same Command which requires you to believe in God This is Mr. G's Fancy or Fiction which he should not have Fathered upon Christ Who saith no such thing in John 14.1 But only saith there let not your heart be troubled Ye believe in God believe also in me Or as the words might be rendred ye believe in God and ye believe in me Now I appeal both to common sense and to common honesty and natural Conscience whether to say ye believe in God believe also in me be all one and the same thing as to say ye should believe on me because ye are obliged to believe on me by the same command and by no other which requires you to believe in God For suppose the Disciples had been obliged to believe in Christ by another Command or both by the same and also by another Command yet Christ might well have used the same words and have said ye believe in God believe also in me I do therefore put Mr. G. to prove that because our Lord Christ said ye believe in God believe also in me Therefore he told his Disciples that they should believe on him not because they were obliged to it by any positive precept of the Gospel but only because they were obliged to it by the same Command of the Moral natural Law which required them to believe in God Mr G. must not dictate to us his own fancies but must prove to us the foresaid Consequence if he would have us to believe what he there says For he ought not to think that we will believe it upon his bare word 3. Thirdly whereas he says in p. 47. That the act and object of faith to wit faith in God before the fall and faith in Christ after the fall Is
doth he say it so clearly as that they can understand that promise of Life and are bound to believe it without a Supernatural Revelation Let my Reverend Brother prove this and I am satisfied as to that matter But 2. I Answer that his position which he infers from the foresaid supposition to wit that ergo God in giving the Gospel Law to some Men speaks generally to all Men without exception of the most Barbarous Heathens believe and you shall Live Is not only notoriously false as considered absolutely in it self but likewise if it be considered relatively as having respect unto and as inferred from the said supposition it is so visibly Inconsequential and Illogical that I admire my R. Brother did not perceive it For what Man of any competent measure of Learning is so void of reason as deliberately to think and say that because the Moral Law which as to its principles and precepts is natural and by nature's light known to all even to the Heathens Rom. 2.14 15. Is sufficiently promulgated to all mankind even to the most Barbarous Nations Therefore by parity of reason the positive Gospel-Law of Grace Believe in Christ Crucified and thou shalt Live Which is supernatural and cannot possibly be known but by Supernatural Revelation Rom. 10.14 Is likewise sufficiently promulgated to all mankind without exception even to the most Barbarous Nations who have not and who never had that Supernatural Revelation by which alone it can be known For my part I cannot but think that that Man is forsaken of common sense and reason who deliberately and seriously thinks and says that there is a parity of reason between the promulgation of the foresaid two Laws of nature and of Grace and that because the one to wit the Law of nature is and must be sufficiently promulgated to all Men without exception therefore the other to wit the Supernatural Law of Grace is and must be likewise sufflciently promulgated to all Men without exception even to the most Barbarous Nations who never had the foresaid Supernatural Revelation by which alone it can be known And since it is palpably evident that there is no parity of reason between the two cases and that there is no Consequential arguing from the Universal promulgation of the natural Law to prove the Universal promulgation of the Supernatural Law of Grace Mr. G. may be ashamed to assirm that the Two amazing absurdities which he mentions will naturally Spring from hence For it is plainly ridiculous to say as he doth that they both naturally Spring from his foresaid Argument or that they naturally Spring from God's speaking generally to all Men believe and you shall Live Now that this may clearly appear I will set down my R. Brother's own words pag. 57. l. 9.10 c. From this saith he two amazing absurdities will naturally Spring the one is that God should by this his new Law promise pardon and Life on condition they believe on his Son to people who never heard that there is such a thing as the Christian Religion in the world nor such a person as Christ and to whose Ears not so much as the sound of his Name ever arrived These are his own express words and in them is contained the first amazing absurdity And I ingenuously confess with my mouth what I believe in my heart that what he speaks of is an amazing absurdity to wit that God should promise pardon and life on condition of Faith in Christ to people who never heard of Christ at all i. e. To whom Christ was never supernaturally revealed at all But with all I must say that I am amazed to find Mr. G. affirming that the said amazing absurdity doth naturally Spring from this That God by the Gospel or Law of Grace speaks generally to all Men believe and you shall live And if he will prove what he here affirms he will amaze me yet more The thing then he hath to prove is that which he affirms to wit That from God's speaking generally upon supposition that he doth speak generally by the Gospel-new-Law to all Men believe and you shall live There will naturally Spring this Consequence that God by the said Gospel-new-Law promises life on condition of believing in Christ to people who never heard of Christ and Christian Religion That is in fewer words but of the same sense and meaning From God's speaking generally by the Gospel to all Men in the world concerning Faith in Christ and Life through him it follows naturally that God doth not by the Gospel speak generally to all Men in the world concerning Faith in Christ and Life through him I do my R. B. no wrong by fixing upon him a consequence of my feigning I do abhor to do such a thing assuredly it is not of my feigning but it was framed in his own head and is Printed with his Name prefixed to it I appeal to his own words for the truth of this Now if this be not an amazing absurdity let him prove the truth of the Consequence And then we shall be all amazed at his Acumen as of one who can Conjure quià libet ex quolibet and Demonstrate by a natural Consequence that because God hath generally promulgated the Gospel to all Men therefore he hath not generally promulgated the Cospel to all Men. But Reverend Sir I hope upon second thoughts you will see how you run your self into the Briers by misrepresenting the truth and by indeavouring to render it odious to your ignorant followers And I wish you may be so ingenuous as to confess for the undeceiving of the people that our Principles are not such as some take them to be and that no such absurdity as is pretended doth naturally Spring from them For my part I never said nor thought that God by the Gospel Speaks generally to all Men without exception believe and you shall live I published the contrary to the world in that very book which this brother now writes against See Apol. pag. 200. But if I were of that Opinion I should from it infer the quite contrary to that which you infer and should say Now from this Opinion if it be true there will naturally spring this other Truth that all Men generally without exception have heard the Gospel and that there is such a Person as Christ and such a Religion as that called Christian In short you know well enough that in my Judgment God hath not Promulgated the Gospel to all Men in the World even to the most barbarous Nations by speaking universally to them all and saying that if they do all Believe in Christ they shall be saved And that therefore many are invincibly and inculpably ignorant of Christ and of the Gospel because God hath no ways Revealed Christ and his Gospel to them unto this day nor doth he either by Precept Command them or by Promise Encourage them to Believe in Christ This is commonly called a Negative Infidelity which is no Sin
in the Barbarous Nations which are most invincibly ignorant of Christ and are under no obligation to Believe in him because the Gospel-Law or Covenant of Grace which can only be known by Supernatural Revelation is not at all Revealed and made known to them but they are guilty of gross Idolatry and other enormous Sins against the Light and Law of Nature for which they are justly Condemned Rom. 2.12 And this shews that my R. Brothers second amazing absurdity doth not concern me for whether it do or do not naturally spring from God's speaking generally to all Men without exception and saying Believe in Christ and you shall Live It doth not touch me and the Cause which I maintain for these two plain Reasons First Because I do utterly deny the Antecedent from which it is said naturally to spring I deny that God by the Gospel speaks generally to all the Men in the World without exception of the most barbarous Nations and Commands them all to Believe in Christ with a Promise of Life if they do Believe in him Secondly For the consequent which is said to spring naturally from the said Antecedent I disown it also to wit That God contrary to his Wisdom and Goodness promises Pardon to all Men upon the impossible condition of Believing in Christ by their meer Natural Powers I am so far from saying this that on the contrary I say there may be many Millions of Men in the World who cannot Believe in Christ by their meer Natural Powers to whom God doth not Promise Pardon of Sin upon the impossible condition of Believing in Christ by their meer Natural Powers And hence it plainly appears that by my Principle I am under no obligation either on the one hand to join with my R. Brother in denying that the Gospel Covenant or Law of Grace hath any Conditional Promises or on the other hand to joyn with the Arminians in affirming that there is an universal sufficient Grace i. e. as Mr. G. expresses it That all Men have sufficient means afforded them to Believe in Christ and that God gives help enough to enable them to Believe if they will and whenever themselves please I thank God I can by my Principle walk safely in the middle way between these two Extreams and not incidere in Scyllam cupiens virare Charybdin And I think it had become Mr. G. to have been more modest than to have past such a Censure upon our most able and judicious Divines who have maintained that the Gospel hath Conditional Promises as that they could not defend the Truth against the Arminians but upon their Principle that the Gospel hath Conditional Promises they ought all to have turned Arminians For this is in effect to say That Whitaker Ames Twiss our British Divines of the Synod of Dort Rutherford Rivet Spanhem Turretin Isaac Junius Triglandius Pool and innumerable more who held that the Gospel hath Conditional Promises were all blind and did not see the mischievous Consequence of their opinions which Consequence if they had followed they themselves must all have turned Arminians and therefore neither did nor could rightly confute the Arminian errors but young Mr. Goodwin is the Man that is above them all inlightned to see that the Gospel hath no conditional promises and by that means he is qualified to be our Champion against those Hereticks who were too hard for the Synod of Dort for Ames Twiss Rutherford Spanhem Durham c. Because these old weak Men were fond of one Arminian opinion to wit that the Gospel hath conditional promises which hath an inseperable Connexion with the whole Arminian System Disc pag. 58. Obj. 3. Thirdly he argues thus against the Gospel's having conditional promises The Scriptures urged by my Reverend Brother do not signify that God passed his word to all Men by a new Law established amongst them that if they obey it and believe and repent they shall assuredly be saved For God always speaks the purposes of his mind and none of his words contradict his heart but he never decreed either absolutely or conditionally that all Men should be Eternally saved I Answer that my R. Brother's objection as here set down in his own express words doth not at all reach me nor make against the truth which I defend For I never said that God hath passed his word to all Men by a new Law established amongst them that if they obey it and believe and repent they shall assuredly be saved I am so far from saying this that in effect I have plainly said the contrary in the Apol. pag. 200. l. 21.22 23 24 25. There my express formal words are that there are Heathens who never heard nor could hear of the Gospel for want of an objective Revelation of it Now by these words I certainly meant and do still mean to signify to the world that God hath not passed his word to all Men even to the most Barbarous Nations by a new Law of Grace i. e. by the Gospel established among them That if they obey the Gospel and believe in Christ they shall assuredly be saved This objection then I might dismiss as impertinent and not militating against me who am not such an Vniversalist as Mr. G. would make people believe that I am tho I have declared the contrary and any body would think that I should know mine own mind better than another Man especially Man who knows not my principles but by my book unless he suffers himself to be imposed upon by believing the false reports of his good Friend I hope that for the future my R. B. will be so just as to take the measure of my principles from my Printed Books and not from the reports of the Accuser But it may be my R. brother will say that tho I be no such an Universalist yet it is certain that I hold that the Gospel hath conditional promises and that the conditional promises are to the whole visible Church even to the non-elect to whom the Gospel is Preached To which I say again that it is true and most certain that such is my Judgment and I am not singular in it for as I shewed in the Apology it is the Common Doctrine of the reformed Churches and Divines Mr. Rutherford saith If the former sense be intended as how can it be denied The word of the Covenant is Preached to you an offer of Christ is made in the Preached Gospel to you * Covenant of Life opened part 1. Chap. 13. pag. 87.88 Then it cannot be denied but the promise is to all the Reprobate in the visible Church whether they believe or not for Christ is Preached and promises of the Covenant are Preached to Simon Magus to Judas and all the Hypocrites who stumble at the word to all the Pharisees as is clear Mat. 13.20 21 22 23. Act. 13.44 45 46. Act. 18.5 6. Mat. 21.43 1 Pet. 2.7 8. And again a little after in the same book pag. 90.
he saith that promises are as properly made to professors within the visible Church Act. 2.39 As Commands and threatnings exhortations invitations and Gospel-requests are made to them But tho the Anabaptists ignorantly confound the promise and the thing promised the Covenant and Benefits Covenanted The promise is to you and so are the commands and threatnings whether ye believe or not c. And pag. 94. of the same book his formal express words are as followeth It is not inconvenient that the reprobate in the visible Church be so under the Covenant of Grace as some promises are made to them and some mercies promised to them conditionally and some reserved special promises of a new bea rt and of perseverance belong not to them For all the promises belong not the same way to the parties visibly and externally and to the parties internally and personally in Covenant with God So the Lord promiseth Life and Forgiveness shall be given to these who are Externally in the Covenant providing they believe but the Lord promiseth not a new heart and grace to believe to these that are only Externally in Covenant And he promiseth both to the Elect. Thus Mr. Rutherford Zanchy whom my R. brother doth highly Commend was certainly of the same Judgment witness his own express words †Respondeo deum vocare etiam reprobos et mandare ut ad se veniant Salutemque illis promittere si velint in Christum credere manifestum est omnes enim vocat per verbum et omnibus vitam promittit aeternam modo in Christum velint credere atque haec est voluntas conditionalis reprobos vero non illudi cum a domino vocantur manifestum tiam ost c. Zanch. depuls calumn de predest not 16. T. 7. pag. 254. I Answer saith Zanchy that God calls even the Reprobate and Commands them to come unto him and promises them salvation if they will believe in Christ it is manifest For he calls all by the word promises unto all Eternal Life provided that they will believe in Christ and this is his conditional will It is manifest also that the reprobates are not mocked nor deluded when they are called by the Lord c. I should never have done if I should quote all our Protestant Divines who are of this Judgment I must therefore forbear to cite any more of them at present and refer to the Apology especially in pag. 114. Having thus frankly and faithfully declared my Judgment in this matter and shewed it not to be singular I will now for the further clearing up of the truth personate my R. brother and for him argue against my self and then Answer the Arguments Obj. God did not decree to save all Men even the non-elect in the visible Church therefore he doth not promise salvation to any upon condition of Faith in Christ The reason of the Consequence is because every conditional promise of God's word presupposes an answerable decree and purpose of God's will for God always speaks the purposes of his mind and none of his words contradict his heart I Answer 1. By denying the Consequence for tho God did not decree to save all even the non-elect in the visible Church yet he promiseth to save some even all the elect in the visible Church on condition of Faith in Christ For he hath decreed to save them all he hath absolutely decreed their salvation on condition of Faith in Christ The decree of their salvation is absolute in respect of God decreeing but the object of the decree is conditional in respect of the salvation decreed That is God by his absolute will hath made faith the condition of their salvation and hath suspended the giving of salvation unto them upon the condition of their believing or till they perform the condition of believing in Christ 2. I Answer by denying the Consequence also with respect to the non-elect for tho God did not decree to save the non-elect in the visible Church as he decreed to save the elect yet he promiseth to save the non-elect in the visible Church conditionally that is provided that they believe in Christ as they are commanded to do And to the reason of the Consequence that every conditional promise of God's word presupposeth an Answerable decree of God's will because none of God's words contradict his will I Answer that in this case the decree of God's will which Answers the conditional promise to the non-elect is not a decree of Gods will to save the non-elect as he hath decreed to save the elect but it is the decree to make the conditional promise of salvation to the non-elect in the visible Church Whatever God doth in time that he decreed to do from Eternity But in time he promiseth salvation conditionally to the non-elect in the visible Church therefore from Eternity he decreed to promise them salvation on condition that they believe in Christ We must distinguish between God's decretory will strictly so called as it hath respect to the infallible salvation of the elect and his promissory will as it hath respect to the conditional promise of salvation to all elect and non-elect in the visible Church constituting a conditional connection between salvation as the benefit promised and faith in Christ as the condition required of all Now to apply this distinction every conditional promise of God's word doth not necessarily presuppose the foresaid decretory will but it sufficeth unto the verification of the conditional promise of salvation as such that there be in God the foresaid promissory will constituting a conditional connexion between salvation as the benefit promised and Faith in Christ as the condition required The conditional promise it self is not properly God's will but it is a sign of his promissory will And it is certain that the promise of God's word is a true sign of his will but in this case it is not a true sign of his foresaid decretory will therefore it must be a true sign of his promissory will and it gives us an infallible assurance that there is a conditional connexion between salvation as the benefit promised and Faith in Christ as the condition required of all so that whosoever performeth the condition he shall have the benefit promised whosoever believeth in Christ shall certainly be saved And therefore it may be truly said to such an one as Cain if thou doest well shalt thou not be accepted Gen. 4.7 And the Spirit by the word saith to every Man in the visible Church that reads and understands the 10th of the Romans if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the Dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10.9 3. Thirdly Mr. G. must admit of this Answer as good and satisfactory or he must find out a better for the objection is certainly sophistical and he is as much concerned to Answer it as I am And I doubt not to make him
cujus testes sunt scripturae cur fieri hoc vel illus Deus velit quo modo velit ne Angelicae quidem mentes in solidum capiunt Calvin 〈◊〉 pons ad Calumnias Nebulonis de occulta Dei Providentia pag. 641. I often in my Writings put Men in mind that nothing here is better than a learned Ignorance because they rave like Mad-Men who adventure or take upon them to be more wise and to know more than is meet Now thou seest how that Will of God to which the Scriptures bear Testimony is certainly known to me and yet the same Will is secret and hid from me because the understanding of the very Angels doth not fully know and comprehend why God Wills this or that to be and how he Wills it By which Words Calvin gives us to understand that if we would act like reasonable Men we should firmly Believe whatever God hath in the Scriptures Revealed to be although we do not understand the way and manner of his willing it to be But now if you say doth it appear indeed that God hath Revealed in the Scriptures that he hath made Conditional Promises to all in the visible Church I answer Yes It doth appear very plainly as hath been shewed already For 1. To all in the visible Church who hear the Gospel Preached the Conditional Promises are general without exception witness Mark 16.15 16. Acts 2.21 Rev. 22.17 and John 6.40 These Conditional Promises could not be more generally and universally expressed and therefore they belong to all Men that hear them upon the same condition of Faith and Calling upon the Name of the Lord. Accordingly the Church of England in her 17th Article which we have all subscribed saith that as a Remedy against the Abuse of the Doctrine of Predestination and to prevent Desperation We must receive God's Promises in such Wise as they be generally set forth in Holy Scripture 2. The Holy Spirit in the Sacred Scripture applies the general Conditional Promise to every one in particular and says Rom. 10.9 If thou shalt confess with thy Mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy Heart that God hath raised him from the Dead thou shalt be saved This every one who hears the Gospel Preached is bound to Believe and therefore he is bound to apply it Conditionally to himself and to say in his Heart if I then shall so confess and Believe I shall be Saved And if he do not do this he in effect gives the Spirit of God the Lye whence it necessarily follows that God hath promised Salvation Conditionally unto all that hear the Gospel whoever they be whether they be Elect or Non-Elect 3. Cain was one of the Non-Elect and God certainly knew him to be such yet God made a Conditional Promise of Acceptance unto him The Lord God with his own Blessed Mouth immediately said unto Cain in particular If thou dost well Shalt thou not be accepted Gen. 4.7 That Interrogation Shalt thou not be accepted is equivalent to an Affirmation and it is as if the Lord had said Cain Thou shalt certainly be accepted if thou dost well See Onkelo's Chaldee Paraphrase with P. Fagius's Notes on Gen. 4.7 4. The Command to Believe on Christ belongs without exception to all in the visible Church unto whom the Gospel is Preached therefore the Conditional Promise of Pardon and Salvation which is annexed to the Command belongs likewise unto all without exception Because the Conditional Promise is therefore annexed to the Command that by the said Promise all may be induced to Obey the Command 5. The Conditional Threatning Joh. 8.24 annexed to the Command belongs to all without exception therefore so doth the Conditional Promise because there is the like reason for the one as for the other If the Conditional Threatning belong to all to deter them from Unbelief the Conditional Promise belongs unto all to persuade them unto Faith Thus doth it plainly appear to be Revealed in the Scriptures of Truth that God hath made Conditional Promises to all in the visible Church And therefore we ought to believe it although we do not clearly know God's modus volendi his way of willing one thing upon condition of another thing 3. Thirdly I answer That however formidable this Objection may be in some Men's Apprehensions yet to me it appears to be a Sophism which is capable of an easie and fair Solution And in order to the solving of it I distinguish between God's Will considered absolutely and entitatively in it self and as it were subjectively and considered respectively and terminatively unto the things Willed or considered objectively Now when we consider God's Will the first way when we consider God's Will absolutely in it self and if we may so say as it is subjectively in God or rather as it is God It is freely confessed that it is not Conditional that it doth not depend on any thing nor hang in suspence at all For God's Will so considered is not distinct from his Nature but is really himself And it is most certain that God is not Conditional that he is not Dependent on any thing nor doth he at all hang in suspence as if he were doubtful what to do But if we consider the respect which God's Will hath unto the things Willed and its termination upon the things Willed as also if we consider the object of God's Will or the things Willed as one part of the intire object or one of the things Willed hath a relation unto the other so God's Will may very well be denominated Conditional that is God's Will which in it self and as it is subjectively in God or rather to speak properly and strictly the same with God is most absolute independent and determinate may be said to be respectively terminatively and objectively Conditional For this is no more but to say that the respect of God's Will unto and it's termination upon the things Willed is Conditional or that the object as it hath respect unto God's Will and as it is the term of God's Will is Conditional And this may very well be and yet God's Will in it self is not Conditional but most absolute and independent For the respect of God's Will unto and the termination of his Will upon its object and the object as respecting and terminating God's Will are really distinct from his Will God's Will remains the same absolute and independent in it self though it be many several ways related to and terminated upon its objects and though several Denominations be given unto it upon that account Let this distinction be applied unto the Objection and the Sophistry of it presently appears For 1. from God's promising Salvation unto any Elect or Non-Elect upon condition of Faith it follows indeed that God's promissory Will is Conditional to give them Pardon and Salvation if they Believe and so perform the Condition But pray consider How is it Conditional Is it conditionally in it self subjectively or rather
the Scriptures which are generally thought to contain conditional promises such as Mark 16.16 Act. 10.43 Luk. 13.5 Rom. 10.9 c. He saith Dis pag. 58. Is to assert that the import of them is no more but this that there is an unchangeable Connexion between the blessings of the Gospel that Faith Repentance and Holiness are indissolubly fastened with Pardon Justification and Eternal Life in the same person or that God justifies and saves no Man of ripe years but whom at his own due appointed time he makes a believer brings him to Repentance and Sanctifies his Nature To which I Answer 1. That here indeed part of the truth is granted but not the whole truth and with the truth which is granted there is intermixed this great falsehood that all such Scriptures import no more than the foresaid unchangeable Connexion between the blessings of the Gospel For they do really import more 1. They import that the Connexion is not only indissoluble but that it is also conditional For instance that of the Apostle Rom. 10.9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the Dead thou shalt be saved imports manifestly that the Connexion between Faith and Salvation is not only indissoluble but that it is likewise conditional As was clearly proved in the Apol. pag. 50.57 58 59. 2. Such places of Scripture not only import an indissoluble unchangeable Connexion between the blessings of the Gospel but they moreover import such a Connexion between the duties of the Gospel and the blessings of it Between its antecedent duties and subsequent blessings For instance Faith is not only a blessing of the Gospel but it is also a commanded duty of the Gospel As it is written Act. 16.31 Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved Here Faith is commanded as a necessary duty which is to be performed by us antecedently to our obtaining of salvation and our obtaining of salvation is suspended till we perform that duty so as that if we perform it we shall be saved Rom. 10.9 Act. 16.31 But if we perform it not we shall not be saved John 3.36 And John 8.24 And the Lord having thus Commanded Faith in the Gospel and promised us salvation upon our believing and suspended his giving us salvation untill we through grace have performed the Commanded duty of Faith there wants nothing to make our actual Faith to be a condition and the Connexion between the Duty of Faith and the blessing of salvation to be a conditional Connexion 2dly Tho I do not say that Mr. G. is an Autinomian by his principle yet I must say that what he asserts to be the full import and meaning of the foresaid Scriptures doth not seem sufficient to secure Men from real Antinomianism because a Man may possibly assert all this which he here asserts and yet may not only be like an Antinomian but may be a most real Antinomian To make this appear Consider 1. That it is possible and implies no contradiction For a Man to be so Drunk with error as to perswade himself that Faith Repentance and Holiness are indeed blessings which God gives to Men but that they are no duties required of Men. Mr. Goodwin would make him believe that they are no duties required by the Gospel and he may by the help of the Devil make himself believe that as they are not duties required by the Gospel so they are no duties required of him by the Law and he may ground his false perswasion upon a false Interpretation of Rom. 6.14 Ye are not under the Law but under Grace Consider 2. That the Man is certainly a most real Antinomian if he be once of this perswasion that he is not bound either by Law or Gospel to believe in Christ to repent of his Sins and to lead a Holy Life but that without Transgressing any precept of the Law under which he fancies he is not being elected and justified from Eternity he may be an impenitent unbeliever and an unholy liver And as for the Gospel Mr. Goodwin hath taught him that it hath no precept and requires no duty of him at all I hope my R. B. will not deny but that such a Man is not only like to the Antinomian Monster but that he really is an Antinomian Monster Consider 3. That this Antinomian in consistency with his Antinomian Principle may assert this which Mr. G. saith is the full import of all the foresaid Scriptures which most Divines affirm but Mr. Goodwin denies to contain any conditional promises For 1. It is the opinion of this Antinomian that as salvation is a blessing of the Gospel so Faith Repentance and Holiness are blessings of the Gospel which God gives to the elect tho they be no duties which he requires 2. This Antinomian may believe that tho Faith Repentance and Holiness be no duties required yet being blessings of the Gospel Which God gives to his elect he justifies and saves no Man but whom at his own due appointed time he makes a believer brings him to Repentance and sanctifies his nature 3. Upon this the Antinomian may assert that there is an unchangeable Connexion between Faith Repentance Holyness and Salvation as blessings of the Gospel and that Faith Repentance and Holyness are indissolubly fasten'd with Pardon Justification and Eternal Life in the same person All this the Man may assert and yet be an Antinomian still for he may still hold that Faith Repentance and Holiness are blessings but no duties and that he is not obliged to them either by Law or Gospel From all which it appears not to be necessarily true which Mr. G. saith to wit that whosoever asserts this Connexion of blessings Is no Antinomian nor so much as like to such an execrable Monster For I have shewed plainly that a Man may assert this and yet be a most real Antinomian and hold that he is obliged to no duty either by Law or Gospel But saith Mr. Goodain What! Is Holyness the condition of obtaining the beatifical vision No tho it doth naturally dispose the Soul and make it meet for and capable of this blissful enjoyment I Answer and is that so strange and wonderful a thing to hear of Holyness its being called a condition required on our part in order to our obtaining Eternal Life which consists in the beatifical vision Is not such a manner of speech ordinary among our Protestant Divines But I distinguish Holyness is not a Meritorious condition of the beatifical vision of our right to it or of the obtaining of it and yet it is a dispositive condition required of us in order to our obtaining the beatifical vision for the alone Meritorious Righteousness of Christ Ay but says Mr. G. Holyness naturally disposes the Soul and makes it meet for that Blissful Enjoyment Answer and as it disposes the Soul for that blessedness from the very nature of the thing