Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
mercy_n	call_v	lord_n	sinner_n	2,337	5	7.5568	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39120	Vindiciæ justificationis gratuitæ = Justification without conditions, or, The free justification of a sinner : explained, confirmed, and vindicated, from the exceptions, objections, and seeming absurdities, which are cast upon it, by the assertors of conditional justification : more especially from the attempts of Mr. B. Woodbridge in his sermon, entituled (Justification by faith), of Mr. Cranford in his Epistle to the reader, and of Mr. Baxter in some passages, which relate to the same matter : wherein also, the absoluteness of the New Covenant is proved, and the arguments against it, are disproved / by W. Eyre ...	Eyre, William, 1612 or 13-1670.; Owen, John, 1616-1683.	1654 (1654)	Wing E3947A; ESTC R40198	198,474	230

of Grace and not those works which we do by the aid of Grace But Mr. Pemble answers well This distinction of works done without grace and works done by grace was devised by one that had neither wit nor grace being a meer trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as do indefinitely exclude all works from our Justification without distinguishing either of the time when they are done whether before or after o● of the aid and help whereby they are done whether by Nature or by Grace Others say that when the Apostle denies That we are justified by works he means that we are not justified by the works of the Law but yet by works required in the Gospel such as are Faith and Faithful actions we may be justified To which I answer 1 That the Apostle speaks indefinitely now the rule is Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguit An indefinite Proposition is equivalent to a universal A man is not justified by works is as much as if he had said A man is not justified by any works of his own 2 The Apostle excludes all works from our Justification which do make the reward to be a due debt Rom. 4.4 5. Now the works required in the Gospel supposing it to be a Conditional Covenant when they are performed do make the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give no less then works required in the Law 3 He denies expresly that Abraham was justified by faithful actions which he performed by the help and assistance of Gods Spirit Rom 4.2 4 They are the same works for the substance which are commanded in the Law and the Gospel there is no Precept enjoyned us in the New Testament which is not also commanded us in the Moral Law though the Law doth not expresly command us to believe in Christ yet virtually and by consequence it doth The Law requires us to believe whatsoever God shall reveal or propose to us to be believed and consequently to believe in Christ when God in his Gospel shall reveal him to us There is no reason therefore to interpret this Proposition A man is not justified by works He is not justified by Legal but by Evangelical works seeing they are for substance one and the same 5 There would be no such opposition between Justification by Works and Justification by Faith as the Apostle makes if we were justified by Evangelical works of our own performing All his disputing about Justification would amount but to meer Logomachy or strife of words for there was never any man so sottish as to think that a sinner can be justified by Legal works unless the Law be mitigated and the rigor thereof be in part remitted The Apostle doth not dispute against Justification by works which we cannot perform but by works which men presume they are able to perform He excludes not onely perfect works but all manner of works that are wrought by us § 7. 2. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be a perfect Righteousness then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts But the Righteousness whereby we are justified is a perfect Righteousness Ergo. The Sequel is evident because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is imperfect and defective at least in degrees we do not believe love and obey so perfectly as we ought the best of us may say with him in the Gospel Lord I believe help thou my unbelief Mark 9.24 And when we have done our utmost that we are but unprofitable servants Luke 17.10 Now this imperfection and defect in our Faith and other vertues being defectus debiti in esse is sinful and culpable for which cause our Saviour oftentimes sharply reproved it Matth. 6.30 8.26 14.31 16.8 c. And we are oftentimes exhorted to increase our Faith to abound in duties of Obedience and to perfect holiness Luke 17.5 1 Thes. 4.1 2 Cor. 7 1. In this last place the Apostle hints that the imperfection of our holiness ariseth from the filthiness of the flesh and spirit and consequently it is a defiled and sinful imperfection The Assumption that we are not justified by an imperfect righteousness needs not I suppose any long proof for surely God will not account that for perfect justice which is not so indeed for as the Apostle sayes well The judgement of God is according to truth Rom. 2.2 It is certain God will not justifie any man without Righteousness and it is as certain That God will not account that to be perfect Righteousness which is imperfect and sinful to say That God doth not account our imperfect holiness to be Righteousness judicio justitiae but onely judicio misericordiae is a meer shift which serves but to set the attributes of God at variance between themselves which in the Justification of a sinner do kiss and embrace each other Psal. 85.10 When God judgeth according to mercy he judgeth according to truth his merciful judgement is a just and a righteous judgement the mercy of God is shewn not in accounting a sinner perfectly righteous for that Righteousness which is imperfect but in accounting to him that Righteousness which is not his own the perfect Righteousness of the Mediator In this judgement of God Justice and Mercy do both meet Justice in that he will not justifie a sinner without a perfect Righteousness Mercy in that he will accept him for such a Righteousness which is neither in him nor performed by him but by his surety the Lord Jesus Christ. Some of our Protestant Divines do call Inherent holiness Evangelical Righteousness in respect of the principle from whence it flows A heart purified by Faith and to distinguish it from that Legal Righteousness which Reprobates and Unbelievers have attained to being but the fruit of a Natural Conscience I am sure it is no Protestant Doctrine that Inherent Sanctification which on all hands is acknowledged to be imperfect and defective is that Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God which must needs be such a Righteousness as God himself sitting on the Throne of his Justice can finde no fault with at all but doth present the person that hath it just and perfect before Gods Tribunal 3. If the Righteousness whereby we are justified be the Righteousness of God then we are not justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts but the Righteousness whereby we are justified is the Righteousness of God Ergo. The Sequel is clear because our Obedience to Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness which the Scripture calls the Righteousness of God For though we receive it from God it being the gift of his Grace yet it is every where called ours as our Faith Matth. 9.2 22. Rom. 1.8 Hab. 2.4 Jam. 1.3 Our Charity 2 Cor. 8.8 24 1 Cor. 16.24 Philem. v. 1 7. Our Hope Phil. 1.20 1 Thes. 2.19 Our good Works Matth. 5.16 Revel 2.2 Our Patience Luke 21.19 2 Thes. 1.4 Revel

within them that they have quite forgotten nay some have utterly denied the Christ without them that God-man who is the onely Propitiation for our sins How much cause then my Brethren have we of continuall thankfulnesse unto our God who in so generall a defection hath been pleased to keep us that we are not led aside with the deceivablenesse of this unrighteousnesse and to lead us to that rock which is above us For how ever the world doth account of Pharisisme yet they that have any acquaintance with the mind of God know there can be hardly named a greater sin then the establishing our own● righteousnesse It is the good pleasure of God for which everlasting praise be given unto him to reveale those things unto babes which are hiden from the wise and prudent The Gospel hath been and will be a mystery to the worlds end Humane reason cannot conceive how men should buy without mony or become rich by stripping and emptying of themselves attain unto righteousnesse by renouncing and abhorring their own righteousnesses Hence it is that the Doctrine of an unconditionate Covenant and the Free Justification of a sinner is looked upon by our learned Rabbies as such a foolish and ridiculous conceit A great Master in our Israel speaks strangely of it Unconditionate promises saith he beget onely an irrational fallacious foundationless Faith which the bigger it swells the more dangerous it proves And a little after he calls the Faith and Hope begotten by such promises A dependance on some fatal chain some Necromantick trick of believing thou shalt be saved and thou shalt be saved nay on Satan himself some responce of his Oracle c. And not much before It is a miracle says he that they who believe this Doctrine of unconditional Pr●mises are yet restrained from making this so natural a use of it from running into all the riots in the World I remember a good Note of his from John 7.48 That the greatest Schollars are not always the soundest Christians We see Christianity is not Book-Learning nor is Faith attained to by strength of parts I should might I be so bold humbly ask this Learned Doctor Whether the Faith and Hope of all the Saints we read of in the Scripture were an irrational fallacious and foundationless Faith Now let him shew us any one of them that in his addresses unto God did ever plead a Conditional Promise● That of Hezekiah 2 King 20.3 is of a peculiar consideration I remember Luther calls it Stulti loquium Hezekiae Others that excuse it say That Hezekiah draws his Argument not from his own works but from Gods he reasons from what God had done for him that he would do more and bestow the mercy which then he needed But besides him from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelation we do not finde that any of Gods people have used any other plea unto God or have had any other support for their Hope and Confidence then his free promises of Grace and Mercy not onely the woman of Canaan the Publican and such as they were but Abraham Jacob Moses David Paul c. have all of them Fled for refuge unto these promises their Faith never knew any other bottom or foundation besides this Is it an irrational thing to receive life as a gift and not as wages It were very strange if the Mercy and Faithfulness of God should not be as sure a Foundation to relie upon as our own Works I will be bold to say Whosoever do build upon other Foundations besides the free Promise of Mercy they will have no better success then he who built his house upon the Sand Matth. 7.27 They may perchance when it is too late experiment the fallacy they have put upon their own souls The Doctor is as much mistaken in the use of the point as he is in the Doctrine to say That the natural use of it is to run into all the ri●●s in the world he might have taken notice where the Holy Ghost makes another use of it Tit. 2.11 Luke 1.74 2 Cor. 7.1 And right reason would have suggested that the freer the Promise is the more is the love and bounty of the Promiser shewn Now Love naturally begets Love Publicans saith our Saviour will love those that love them and can a man believe so great a benefit as the free remission of his sins and not love him that hath remitted them Possibly a man that hath received this Grace but in the notion may draw such untoward conclusions from it but for any true Believer to sin upon this ground is as impossible as that light should become darkness 1 John 3.3 9. I must confess the loose and unev●n walking of many Professors hath given too much occasion unto Adversaries to Blaspheme this Doctrine And though it be unjust in them to charge the faults of Professors upon their Profession yet you cannot but see how much it concerns them who have hope of Salvation through Christ alone to vindicate the honor of this Grace and by their exemplariness in wel-doing to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men The vindication of this Doctrine lies as much upon private Christians as it doth upon Ministers the strongest Arguments against it are but the Suppositions and Consequences of carnal Reason which are soonest confuted by a holy Conversation in which respect illiterate men may be irrefragable Disputants and women may nonplus the learnedst Doctor And therefore whilest I am in this Tabernacle I shall not cease to stir you up by putting you in remembrance of these things though you know them and are established in the present truth Some of you know how unwillingly I undertook this Publick Imployment being more inclined to the Truel then the Sword to build up my Hearers in their most Holy Faith then to engage in Controversies against Oppos●rs And truly nothing could have induced me to it but the tendency of the Work to your Edification that the simplicity of the Gospel may abide amongst you and that you may stand fast in the Truth which you have received being able to answer the cavils of them that do oppose it It was not least in my eye That our honest Neighbors who by the evil arts of some that affect preheminence have been prejudiced and disaffected towards us may see and satisfie themselves Whether we believe and contend for any other Faith then that which was once delivered ●nto the Saints for surely they will have but little comfort in separating from us without a cause I must needs tell them their account at last will not be with joy who have rejected the counsel of God against themselves Whatsoever success this Discourse may finde with others I doubt not but it will be an acceptable service unto you I desire that it may provoke you to be more instant in Prayer for me that ●tterance may be given me and that my

another time he would have taken my word for a greater matter I desired Mr. C. an Assembly man who sat next unto him to declare whether it were not so but he refused to speak though I urged him twice Had he remembred the words of our Saviour John 8.37 I dare say he would not have refused to perform so just an office At length a Gentleman that stood by one of the Parish Elders ingenuously acknowledged That I had truly alledged it Then Mr. W. denied their authority saying It was a Humane testimony I accepted his Answer and desired the people to remember what Mr. W. had told them knowing that many present would receive it sooner from him then they would from me That the Authority of the Assembly is but Humane and not Divine and Infallible and consequently That their Votes and Determinations are of no greater force then the Proofs and Reasons which do confirm them And therefore I immediately offered him Divine Authority in the Argument following If they with whom God did make the New Covenant when it was first revealed and exhibited were in that federal Act or Relation the types and figures of Jesus Christ then the New Covenant was made onely with Christ. For that which is attributed to a person as a type or figure belongs properly and peculiarly to the Antitype But all they with whom the New Covenant was made when it was first exhibited were in that federal Relation the types of Christ Ergo. The Minor was proved thus The New Covenant was made with Abraham but Abraham in his federal Relation or in receiving that Covenant was a type of Christ Ergo. Whereunto if it had been needful I had added divers other Instances as of Noah Phinehas David c. who in the respective Covenants which God made with them were also types and figures of Jesus Christ. The Covenant made with Noah Gen. 9.9 was as our Divines have observed the Covenant of Grace and that Scripture it self doth make it manifest Isai. 54.8 9. Now Noah in receiving the Covenant was a type of Christ for it followed immediately upon the offering up of his Sacrifice Chap. 8. v. 20 21. which clearly signified That all the effects of Gods Covenant are procured for us by that Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savor which Christ hath offered Eph. 5.2 So Phinehas his Covenant concerning the everlasting Priesthood Num. 25.12.13 was the very same which was confirmed by oath unto Christ Psal. 110.4 it was made with Phinehas as a Typical Mediator because he stood in the gap to turn away Gods wrath Verse 11. In like manner the Covenant made with David was the Covenant of Grace 2 Sam. 23.6 And therefore it is called The sure mercies of David Isai. 55.3 Now that David in receiving that Covenant was a type of Christ is evident from Acts 13.34 Psalm 89. verses 3 4 19 20 24 28 34 c. But I must return to Mr. W. who denied the Major viz. That the Covenant made with Abraham was the New Covenant which I proved in this wise If the whole New Covenant be comprised in this one promis● I will be thy God and the God of thy Seed then the New Covenant was made with Abraham But the whole New Covenant is comprised in this promise I will be thy God c. Ergo. He answered I deny all I replied to him That the Sequel is evident forasmuch as this promise is the sum of the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. And the Assumption is acknowledged by all Divines that ever I met with nay the Apostle himself calls it the Gospel Gal. 3.8 If my memory fail not he affirmed That the Covenant made with Abraham was onely concerning temporal blessings as the Land of Canaan c. whereof Circumcision was a Seal I well remember That upon his often affirming that the New Covenant made with us is this Conditional promise If thou believest thou shalt be saved I offered him this Argument to evict the contrary If we are in Covenant or do partake of some benefits of the Covenant before we do believe then that conditional promise is not the New Covenant but we do partake of the same benefits of Covenant before wee doe believe Ergo. The reason of the Sequel is because the cond●tion must be performed before the benefit which is promised upon condition can be received The Minor was proved by a medium which Mr. Rutherford makes use of for the same purpose The Spirit which works Faith is given us before we do believe but the Spirit which works Faith is a blessing of the New Covenant and given us by vertue of the Covenant Ergo We do partake of some blessings or benefits of the New Covenant before we believe He denied That the Spirit which works Faith is given us by vertue of the New Covenant which I proved from the Tenor of the New Covenant mentioned Heb. 8.10 I will put my Laws in their minde c. and they shall all know me He denied That this was a promise of the Spirit which works Faith but rather of the Spirit of Adoption which follows Faith That it is a promise of the Spirit which works Faith was proved from John 6.45 where our Saviour having shewn that none do believe but by a Divine and Supernatural power No man can come to me except the Father draw him he addes It is written in the Prophets they shall be all taught of God i. e. God will give his Spirit unto all that are ordained to life which shall enable them to believe The places in the Prophets where this is written or promised are Isa. 54.13 and Jere. 31.34 which is cited by the Apostle Heb. 8. Then he denied That this was the New Covenant made with us whereunto I replied The New Covenant which is made with Spiritual Israel is the Covenant made with us but this Covenant is made with Spiritual Israel Ergo. His Answer was I deny all Though the Major be as clear as the Sun That all the Elect whether Jews or Gentiles are Spiritual Israel or the Seed of Abraham See the Ninth Tenth and Eleventh Chapters to the Romans and Gal. 3.26 29. And the Assumption is in the Text This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel in those days c. And therefore I rejoyned Contra negantem principia non est disputandum and so our Conference brake off I have here given the Reader a true Narrative of our Discourse concerning this matter wherein I take the Lord to witness I have not wittingly concealed or added a syllable to vary either from his sence or my own § 2. I shall now return to his Printed Discourse and take things in the same order as they lie before us The Argument as he hath formed it runs thus If we are in Covenant before we believe then we are justified before we believe but we are in Covenant before we believe Ergo. Wherein

principium omnium bonorum i. e. The cause and fountain of all other blessings and particularly of the renewing of our hearts and our returning unto God Now the consequences and Effects of a Blessing are not the Conditions of it § 3. His next Allegation from Heb. 10.14 c. hath the fate to fall as short of the mark as the former did For the Apostles scope there is not to shew in what order and method the benefits of the Covenant are bestowed upon us but that there needs no other Sacrifice for sin besides the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered which he proves because God in that Covenant which he promised to make with his people in the times of the New Testament declares That he will not onely give them a new heart but their sins and iniquities shall not be remembred any more Now where there is no more remembrance of sin there needs no more Sacrifice for sin so that the words expressed are sufficient to compleat the sense without understanding of then he saith or then it followeth which Mr. W. hath added in the close of the sixteenth Verse We may take them as they lie from Verse the fifteenth Whereof to wit of Christs perfect Sacrifice mentioned Vers. 14. the Holy Ghost is a witness to us for after he i. e. the Holy Ghost had said before This is the Covenant that I will make with them after those dayes to wit of the Old Testament which are now expired The Lord saith viz. The Holy Ghost who is the Lord Jehovah and with the Father and Son the Author of the New Covenant I will put my Laws into their hearts and in their mindes will I write them and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more So that I say there is no need that either of those clauses Then he saith c. should be foisted in between the 16 and 17 Verses It seems to me That the Copulative And is set as a bar to keep it forth shewing that the words in the 17 Verse ought to follow immediately upon the sixteenth I grant that the promise of Remission is one of the most special and noble Blessings contained in that general promise I will be their God yet it doth not follow that Regeneration or Inherent holiness is required or promised as the means or qualification to obtain this Blessing Pareus his Note upon the place is very sound That the Apostle here doth ground the promise of remission of sins upon that perfect oblation which Christ hath offered and not upon works of Sanctification which according to Mr. Woodbridges Doctrine is the immediate principle from whence it follows § 4. His next Assertion That in the New Covenant the giving of the first Grace is always promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means and qualification on mans part for his entrance into Covenant is justly obnoxious unto more then one Exception 1. The work of Conversion or the renewing of our hearts i● unfitly called The first Grace For 1 to speak properly the first Grace is that which is Grace indeed to wit the Everlasting Love Favor and Good-pleasure of God towards his people for this is the rise and fountain of all those mercies which we receive in time yea of Christ himself John 3.16 Or 2 if by Grace we understand the Fruits and Effects of this Grace then certainly the precedenc● or priority must be given unto Jesus Christ for whose sake all other blessings are bestowed upon us Ephes. 1.3 Or else 3 if by Grace we understand the Fruits and Effects of Christs death or the benefits which are freely given us for his sake even in this sense 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 that place of Jeremy before Remission of sin● yet in other places it is put after it as Ezek. 36.25 26. Jere. 32.38 39. The Reason why this promise is sometimes put first may probably be because the Grace of Sanctification is most apt to affect our senses we do apprehend and perceive it before we come to know our Justification § 5. 2. It is utterly false That the giving of a new heart is not promised as a part of the Covenant but as a means on mans part for his entrance into Covenant For 1 the Scripture no where affirms it and it is weakly concluded hence because it is sometimes mentioned first in the recital of the Covenant which is all he hath to pretend for this notion seeing that in other places the promise of Sanctification follows that of Justification from whence he may as well conclude that Justification is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means to intitle us unto Sanctification so that not onely the promise of Faith but of Remission also shall be excluded from being a part of the Covenant 2 The promise of a new heart includes not onely the first act of Faith and Repentance but the continuance and increase of these Gifts so that either he must say that all the Promises of Sanctification which are included therein are no part of the Covenant or that the same promise is both a means to bring us into Covenant and a part of the Covenant i. e. it is a part and no part I must confess that I never yet met with that man who had the forehead to deny that the promise of Faith and Repentance is a part of the New Covenant 3 It seems to me an undeniable truth that the promises of Sanctification as well as of Justification are parts of the Covenant considering 1 that they have the same ground and foundation to wit the merit and purchase of Jesus Christ Christ hath merited Faith and Repentance no less then remission of sins Now whatsoever Christ hath purchased the Covenant promiseth All the effects of his death are equally parts of the New Covenant 2 Both these promises have the same end and design viz. The glory of God Faith and Repentance are not promised onely subserviently for our benefit but ultimately for the praise of his glory Tit. 2.14 1 Thes. 4.3 3 They are promised in the same manner as distinct and not as subordinate benefits he doth not say I will write my Laws in their hearts that I may pardon their sins and iniquities But I will write my Laws c. and their sins and iniquities I will remember no more § 6. 3. It sounds harshly That God promiseth Faith as a means on our part to bring us into Covenant for if God doth promise to bestow Faith it cannot properly be called a means on our part it were a means on our part if we performed it our selves and by our own strength as the condition required of Adam should have been For the removing of this rub I shall make it to appear that in the New Covenant there is no condition required

on our part to give us a right and title to the blessings of it But before we proceed we will give the Reader a brief account of those other Scriptures which Mr. W. hath alledged to prove That Faith is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means on our part to obtain the remission of sins All which I finde have the same misfortune as the rest not to be able to bring forth the conclusion which his fancy hath begotten on them That in Ezek 36.25 26 27 28. makes quite against him for there the Lord first promiseth to justifie us in those phrases of pouring out clean water upon us and of cleansing us from all our filthinesses Verse 25 ●nd then to renew or sanctifie us Vers. 26 27. So that there is no colour to infer from hence that Sanctification or any part thereof is promised as a means to intitie us to Justification § 7. The other two Texts are much to the same purpose scil Ezek. 11.19 20. and chap. 27.23 24 26 27. where the Lord after he had promised unto his people many particular blessings as that he would give them a new heart take away their stony heart make them walk in his Statutes and Ordinances that they should no more defile themselves with Idols that David i. e. Christ should be their King and Shepherd that his Tabernacle should be with them i. e. He would dwell in them and walk in them 2 Cor. 6.16 He tells them That he will be their God and they shall be his people from whence Mr. W. would gather That God promiseth Faith not as a part of the Covenant but as a means to bring us into Covenant that God may be our God How rational this Deduction is let the Re●der judge for if that promise I will be their God must be taken exclusively so that the promises preceding are no part of the Covenant then the promises of Justification Sanctification Perseverance c. must be excluded from being parts of the Covenant If he sayes that it onely excludes Faith I would ask quô jure what reason is there that it should exclude Faith more then the other promises preceding If it includes the rest why not this But to draw to a conclusion we say that this promise I will be their God and they shall be my people may be taken either 1 more generally as comprehending all good things whatsoever as if the Lord after the enumeration of many particular benefits had summed up all in this I will be their God q. d. They may expect as much good from me as the living God can bestow upon his people even this that hath been mentioned and all things else and in this sence the promise of Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is included in it or 2 it may be taken more restrictively as noting some particular benefit and priviledge distinct from the rest as that they shall worship him and he will protect and provide for them or else that they shall not onely have an interest in God but that they shall know it and live in the comfort of it § 8. In the next place Mr. W. offers me his service to new mold my Argument and to cast it into a better form as thus They concerning whom God hath promised that he will give them Faith they are in Covenant before they believe but concerning the Elect God hath promised that he will give them Faith Ergo. But pace tanti viri I shall not accept his courtesie if he hath any minde to it as I have framed it the Law is open he may try his skill onely he may be pleased to remember that these Texts Jere. 31.8 Heb. 8. were not brought to prove that we are in Covenant before we believe but that the Spirit which works Faith is given by vertue of the Covenant made with us As for that Argument which from these Texts he hath advanced against us together with the Auxiliaries which he hath placed in the rear I shall presently attend their motion having first given in my evidence to the cause depending That the New Covenant is not conditional and that in it God doth not require any restipulation from us to intitle us to the blessings of it The contrary Assertion I conceive is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his whole discourse For if there be no condition or restipulation required in the New Covenant there will be no need to make Faith the mears of our entrance into Covenant nor any absurdity in saying that our Justification in the sight of God precedes Faith CHAP. XIX Wherein is shewn 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 BEfore I do give the Reasons of this Assertion I must crave the Readers patience whilest I tell him 1 what I mean by the New Covenant and 2 what I understand by a condition 1. By the New Covenant I mean that engagement which God hath laid upon himself to bestow on them for whom Christ hath died all good which is commensurate to their nature and by vertue whereof all blessings Corporal Spiritual and Eternal do flow down unto them I call it an Engagement because God by promising makes himself a debtor though not to us yet unto himself being bound in justice to perform his Word and Promise There are two principal Engagements which God hath laid upon himself in order to our Eternal Happiness to one of which all his promises may be reduced The first is that Covenant which he made with the first Adam in the time of his innocency wherein God promised us life upon condition of our perfect obedience This is called a Covenant of Works because the effects thereof do depend upon our works the promise is not in force nor have we any right to the Blessings until all those works are performed which are here required Now this Covenant saith the Apostle became weak through the flesh i. e. It was altogether unable to give us life by reason of our default and not performing the condition required of us we have no benefit at all by this engagement and therefore the Lord made another Covenant with the second Adam that upon the making of his soul an offering for sin he would give unto his Seed viz. All the Elect Eternal life i. e. All good things whatsoever which they stand in need of Now this we call The New Covenant because it succeeded in the place of the other and the Covenant of Grace because all the effects thereof do flow down unto us meerly from the favor of God and the merit of Christ. All the mercies we receive they are the fruits and effects of this engagement Zech. 9.11 It is the onely plea we can use to God both for the things of this life and that which is to come and by vertue hereof we may claim and confidently expect from him all

which the adversaries of the Gospel doe make of this expression were most of the ancient Fathers now alive to see what use the Papists and others doe make of their unwary sayings to patronize their Errors I am perswaded they would fill the world with their retractations and apologies Have we not cause then to be careful in this matter when we see so many profligated Errors as Free-Will and Universall Redemption sheltering themselves under this expression But 3 That which moves me most is compassion to our vulgar hearers who when they hear men say that Faith Repentance c. are conditions of the Covenant understand it no otherwise then in the most common acception and as the term Condition is used in reference to mens Contracts and as Obedience was the condition of the first Covenant whereby as Luther hath observed they live stil in bondage not daring to take hold of the Promise because they doubt whether they have the condition All their endeavors after Faith and Holinesse are but mercinary and selfish they would not do the work but to get the wages § 5. But this is not the matter that is now in question Our difference is not about words but things The Reader I suppose is sufficiently informed in what sence we deny that the New Covenant is conditional to wit in that manner as the first Covenant was which was properly conditional and this perswasion I cannot but adhere to notwithstanding al that I have seen or heard to the contrary That in the New Covenant wherein God hath promised Life and Salvation unto sinners for whom Christ hath shed his blood and by vertue whereof they do obtain all good things present and future there is no condition required of them to obtain or procure the blessings that are therein promised For though God doth bestow upon us one blessing before another yet he gives not any one for the sake of another but all of them even to our finall sitting down in Glory are given us freely for the sake of Christ Glory it selfe is not only not for but not according to our works as the principle or rule by which God proportions his reward but according to his owne Mercy and Grace My Reasons for the Thesis are § 6. 1. Because in all those places wherein the nature or tenor of the New-Covenant is declared there is not as Dr. Twisse hath observed any mention at all of the least condition as Jer. 31.33 Ezek. 36.25 c. Hos. 2.18 19 20. in all which places with the like God promiseth to doe all in them and for them upon the last of those Texts Zanchius observes Non ait si non resipueris recipiam te in gratiam desponsabo sed absolute ego te desponsabo est igitur absolutissima promissio qua sine ulla conditione promittit Deus s● s●um populum in gratiam recepturum servaturum c. i. e. He doth not say if thou wilt repent I will receive thee into favor and betroth thee but absolutely I will betroth thee c. It is therefore a most absolute Covenant wherein God without any condition doth promise that he will receive his people into favor and save them The same Author in another place speaking of the Covenant which God made with Abraham Gen. 17.7 It is to be noted saith he that this Promise is altogether free absolute and without any condition which he proves by two Arguments one of which is Quoniam nullam plane in verbis foederis conditionem legimus i. e. Because in the words of the Covenant we finde no condition And long before him that noble Champion of Grace against the Pelagians Prosper of Aquitan who lived about the year 445. Manet prorsus quotidie impletur quod Abrahae dominus sine conditione promisit sine lege donavit The Covenant saith he is still in force and is daily fulfilled which the Lord promised unto Abraham without any condition and established without a restipulation Now if any shall say that these and such like Texts do not comprize the whole but onely a part of the New Covenant because God doth not say it is the whole Covenant I Answer 1 That it is a meer shift like that of the Papists against Justification by Faith alone because the word Alone is not found in those Scriptures which the Protestants doe bring to prove it Our Divines answer it is there virtually and by necessary consequence though not formally or litterally So say I when the Lord saith expressely This is my Covenant It is all one as if he had said This is my whole Covenant Let our Adversaries shew us one place where any conditional Promise is called the New Covenant either in whole or in part 2 That which they would make the Condition of the Covenant on our part is expressely promised to us no lesse then any other blessing and their saying that it is promised in the Covenant but not as a part of the Covenant hath been sufficiently disproved before § 7. 2. Because all those Covenants which God made to prefigure this Covenant were free and absolute without any Condition therefore the Covenant it selfe which was figured by them is much more so It is not to be questioned but the substance hath as much Grace as the shadow Now I say in those tipicall Covenants which God made with Noah Abraham Phineas David c. there are no Restipulations The Covenant with Noah doth not run like that with Adam Do this and live but I will not destroy the earth c. Gen. 9.11 I confesse Rivet saith the condition on Noahs part was ut justè intigrè ambularet But 1 God doth not say so the Lord doth not say I will make this Covenant with thee if thou wilt walke uprightly 2 This Covenant was made not onely with Noah but with every living creature Vers. 12. Now sensitive creatures could not performe any such Condition 3 If the benefit of that Covenant had depended upon Noahs upright walking then upon Noahs fall V. 21. the World should have been drowned again as death entred into the world upon the non-performance of Adams condition The Covenant with Phinehas Num. 25. is not like that which God made with Eli which was but a conditional and uncertain Covenant 1 Sam. 2.30 So the Covenant which God made with David concerning the Kingdom is not like the Covenant which he made with Saul which was quickly voide because it depended upon his obedience 1 Sam. 13.13 14. which Davids did not and therefore the Covenant which God made with David is called The sure mercies of David Isa. 54.3 God promised mercies unto Saul as well as unto David but they were not sure mercies because they were conditional they were promised upon conditions to be performed by him but the Covenant with David was sure and stedfast Psal. 89.28 because it depended not upon conditions on his part and therefore

them in the fittest times Now the Absoluteness of the New Covenant is so far from being any impediment to Faith as that it affords men the greatest encouragement to believe both to cast themselves into the arms of Christ and to put on a strong confidence of inheriting all the promises seeing that in their accomplishment they depend not upon Works and Conditions performed by themselves § 5. Mr. W. demands 1 Whether there be an absolute promise made to every man that God will give him grace Though there be not yet are the general promises of the Covenant a sufficient ground for our Faith for as much as Grace therein is promised indefinitely to sinners which all that are ordained to life shall believe and lay hold of But says Mr. W. is it sense to exhort men to take hold of Gods Covenant or to enter into Covenant with God if the Covenant be onely an absolute promise on Gods part c. What contradiction is there unto sense in either of these For 1. what is it to lay hold of the Covenant but as Benhadads Servants did by Ahabs words 1 Kings 20.33 to take up those gracious discoveries which God in his Covenant hath made of himself to sinners and to resolve with the woman of Cannan not to be beaten off with any discouragements Which act of Faith is called The taking of the Kingdom of Heaven by violence Matth. 11 12. Which is when a Soule appropriates generall Promises to himselfe in particular And against Hope beleeves in Hope The Apostle calls it Fleeing for refuge to lay hold on the Promise Heb. 6.18 which Promise is the same which God confirmed by an Oath Vers. 17. Now wee doe not finde that God did ever confirme any Conditionall Promise with an Oath but onely those Absolute Promises of his Grace Isai. 54.9 10. Psal. 89 34 35. As for the other phrase of entering into Covenant with God Though wee never find it in the New Testament that the Apostles did exhort men to enter into or to make a Covenant with God yet I conceive that it may bee used in reference to the Externall Administration of the New Covenant Men may bee said to enter into Covenant with God when they take upon them the profession of Christianity and give up themselves to bee the Lords People In this respect wee may exhort men as the Apostle doth To give up themselves a living Sacrifice holy and acceptable unto God and to abide stedfast in the Covenant of God or rather as the Apostles phrase is To hold fast their Profession firme unto the end Hebr. 3.6 It were absurd to exhort men either to make or to concurre to the making of the Covenant of Grace which is his act alone who sheweth mercy unto whom he will § 6. His next Interogative is a very strange one he asks us Whether if the Covenant be an absolute Promise it be sense to accuse blame and damne men for unbeleefe and rejecting of the Gospell Was it ever known that men should be counted worthy of death for not being the objects of an absolute Promise By his favor who did ever say that men are damned for not being objects of an Absolute Promise We say the condemnation of Reprobates doth inevitably follow upon their not being included in that Covenant which God hath made with Christ or Gods not giving them unto Jesus Christ but this is antecessio ordinis non causalitatis their exclusion from this Covenant is but an Antecedent and not the cause of their destruction Men are damned for not beleeving that Grace which God hath manifested to sinners for not receiving it with that esteem and such affections as it doth deserve so that formally the cause of their damnation is not their non-being objects of Gods absolute Promise but their disobedience to the Command of God If he say as the Remonstrators have done before him That they are unjustly blamed and damned for unbeleefe seeing they have no Object for their Faith no Christ to beleeve in We shall Answer That there is a reall Object proposed to their Faith though there be no such absolute Promise that God will give Grace to every man in particular the Object of Faith is the Written Word and more especially the Free Promises of Mercy unto wretched sinners for the sake of Christ which all men are commanded to beleeve both assensu intellectus amplexu voluntatis and for their unbeleefe they perish everlastingly If he shall ask Why God doth command them to beleeve in Christ seeing he never intended they should have any good or benefit by Christ I must say with the Apostle Rom. 9 20. O man who art thou that disputest against God We ought to look to his Commands and not curiously to search into his Councels Deut. 22 29. We know that the Preaching of the Gospell was ordained principally for gathering Gods Elect now because Ministers know not who are Elected and who are not It was necessary that the offer of Grace and command of Beleeving should be universall which will be imbraced and obeyed by all that are ordained to life § 7. His fourth and last Argument against the absolutenesse of the New Covenant is If the Covenant of Grace be an absolute Promise then no men in the world but wicked and ungodly men are in Covenant with God To which I Answer 1 It is very true That the Covenant of Grace is made with Christ in behalfe of sinners and none else Matthew 9.13 The whole need not a Phisitian but the sick If men were not sinners and ungodly there would be no need at all of the Covenant of Grace the Covenant of Works would have been sufficient either it is made with sinners or none 2 It will not follow that when men are in Covenant or doe partake of some blessings of the Covenant that immediately the Covenant ceaseth when we are in Glory the Covenant shall not cease for the continuance of Glory is promised in the Covenant no lesse then Glory it selfe for which cause it is called an Everlasting Covenant So that his inference is very irrationall If the Covenant be an absolute Promise then none but wicked i. e. unregenerate persons are perfectly in Covenant with God It followes rather from his owne opinion for if the Covenant be a conditional Promise when the condition is performed the Covenant is so far forth fulfilled and the Preformers of it so far forth doe cease to be in Covenant and so consequently none but wicked men i. e. such as have not yet fulfilled the Condition shall be the objects of the Covenant or the persons to whom it doth belong Or else it must follow that none at all are perfectly in Covenant with God the Performers of the Condition are not because the Condition being performed the Covenant is fulfilled and thereby ceaseth to be a Covenant and the non-performers of the Condition are not for till the Condition be performed