Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
mercy_n good_a grace_n work_n 6,662 5 5.6625 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A35303 A just reply to Mr. John Flavell's arguments by way of answer to a discourse lately published, entitled, A solemn call, &c. wherein it is further plainly proved that the covenant made with Israel on Mount Sinai, as also the covenant of circumcision made with Abraham, whereon so much stress is laid for the support of infants baptism ... : together with a reply to Mr. Joseph Whiston's reflections on the forementioned discourse, in a late small tract of his entituled, The right method for the proving of infants baptism ... / by Philip Cary ... Cary, Philip. 1690 (1690) Wing C741; ESTC R31290 91,101 194

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

have already told you in reference to the first Discovery of New Covenant Mercy whatever is Antecedent thereunto being only a Work or Act of Corrupted Nature can be no Condition whereon the Dispensation of Spiritual Grace is superadded And indeed so it is also even in reference to the after Discoveries thereof Since in us that is in our Flesh there dwelleth no good thing So Paul himself acknowledgeth concerning himself even after his Conversion unto God Rom. 7. 18. For to will saith he is present with me but how to perform that which is good I find not So that as it was at first with us so it is still further than the Free Sovereign and Absolute Grace of the Covenant is still set at Work for our Relief Thus it was with Paul himself He could find no Condition or Pre-disposition in himself to Plead it out with God why the further Dispensations of Spiritual Grace should be afforded unto him Our sufficiency saith he is not of our selves In me that is in my Flesh dwelleth no good thing How to perform that which is good I find not The good that I would I do not but the evil which I would not that I do and when I would do good evil is present with me In respect whereof let who will betake themselves to the Pharisees Plea God I thank thee I am not as other Men. For my own part I am resolved to make use of none other but that of the poor Publican Lord be Merciful to me a Sinner Upon the whole you see that the Apostle expressly Affirms that the Inheritance was given to Abraham by Promise not by Law And you can Assign no other Difference betwixt the Law and the Promise but that the one was Conditional the other Absolute From whence it unavoidably follows that the Gospel Covenant made with Abraham was wholly Free and Absolute So it was at first and so it is at last Rom. 4. 1 2 3 4 5. But I have so far anticipated what I have to offer by way of opposition to your following Arguments concerning the conditionality of the Gospel Covenant which I intend Anon to take distinctly to task In the mean Season you tell me you 'il trouble me on this Head but with one Query more and that is this If the four first verses of the 17 th Gen. contain a pure Gospel Covenant and the Restipulation in the following verses make a Covenant of Works because it thereby becomes conditional still crookedness For is there nothing but Restipulation in the following verses Do not the 7 th and 8 th vers contain the Promises of the Covenant of Circumcision distinct from the Restipulation mentioned vers 9 10 Well but what then Then tell me say you if you please Whether what God granted to Abraham in the former verses be not all nulled and made void again by their ●…estipulation No say I if the Question be stated a right The Gospel Covenant mentioned ves 2. 4 5 6. cannot be nulled or made void by the Covenant of Circumcision that followed after and is accordingly mentioned vers 7 8 9. 10. And my Reason is the same the Apostle gives in Reference to the Law Gal. 3. 17. The Covenant which was Confirmed before of God in Christ the Law which was 430 Years after cannot Disannul that it should make the Promise of none effect The like may be said in reference to the Covenant of Circumcision as I have already told you And therefore how harsh soever it may seem unto you as you say it doth withal telling me that I have brought Abraham Isaac and Jacob and all the Believers of Abraham's Race just into the same case I brought Moses and all the Israelites before under two opposite Covenants where one cut 's off all that the other granted Yet as I have already detected the vanity of this Notion of yours that the one of these Covenants cut 's off all that the other granted And as I have already also plainly and justly Returned the same Absurdity which without cause you charge on my Doctrin on your own in respect of Moses So I may as justly and for the same Reason in respect of Abraham also But say you There is a stronger reason urged than the conditionality of the Covenant to prove it a Covenant of Works and that is Circumcision is made the condition of Abraham's Covenant and that 's the worst of all conditions for it obliges a Man to keep the whole Law Gal. 5. 3. 't is the yoke of Bondage and to whatsoever Covenant it be so annexed it makes it become a Bondage Legal Covenant If we be Circumcised Christ shall proffit us nothing Printed Reply pag. 51. Reply Sir you seem to Express your self in this Paragraph at a scoffing rate Circumcision say you is made the Condition of Abraham 's Covenant and that 's the worst of all Conditions But as I have already told you however you deal with me you must withall remember God's truth will not be so mocked Great use you tell me is made of those Scriptures by you now mentioned in many parts of my Discourse but that I am greatly mi●…aken in applying those texts to the purposes 〈◊〉 do for that the Apostle all along in the Epi●…tle to the Galathians argues against the false Teachers who taught and pressed the necessi●…y of Circumcision as a bond obliging them to the strict and perfect obedience of the Law in order to their Justification thereby And withal you tell me of the Circumcision of Timothy which had not been in case Circum●…ision had bound Men to keep the Law for ●…ustification Reply As for Paul's compliance with the ●…ews in the Circumcision of Timothy however ●…e case stood in that respect This is certain ●…hat the Blessed Apostle would never have expressed himself with that vehemency as he doth Gal. 5. 2 3. For I testify again to every Man that is Circumcised that he is a Debtour to do the whole Law If this had been onely the ●…ense of the Jewish Teachers or the Opinion ●…at they had concerning the nature of Cir●…umcision as you would have it It being plain that he expresseth it as his own Sense ●…n reference to the true nature of that Covenant No way contradicting theirs which yet without doubt he would have done had not this been the true state of the Case From whence therefore the conclusion is evident that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works as that at Sinai was You are pleased to tell me indeed that Circumcision in its own nature did not oblige to the keeping of the whole Law but from the intention of the Agent But the Apostle saith not so This is onely your corrupt Gloss upon tha●… Text. The Apostle tells us expressly If y●… be Circumcised you are Debtours to do the whol●… Law Plainly shewing that let Men desig●… what they will this is the true nature of th●… thing in it self Had Paul expressed
this Grace he gave in Paul From all which it is evident that the principal Grace of the Covenant or God's putting his Laws in our Hearts which is influential to all the rest can depend on no condition on our Part. These things then being thus premised the Answer which I shall return unto the forementioned Argument is this First That it is evident that unto a full and compleat enjoyment of all the Promises of the Covenant Faith on our part from which Evangelical Repentance is inseparable is required But then it must withal be considered that these also are wrought in us given to us and bestowed upon us by vertue of that Promise and Grace of the Covenant that depends on no Condition in us which renders it wholly free and absolute from the Foundation to the Topstone thereof Whereas therefore you are pleased to tell me That there is something as an Act required of us in point of Duty which is Antecedent to the Benefit of the Promise If you intend hereby that Faith from which Evangelical Repentance and Good Works are inseparable is such a Condition of the Covenant as to be by us performed Antecedently unto the participation of any Grace Mercy or Benefit of it as your words imply for you admit of no Benefit from the Covenant till this be performed It is most untrue and as I have already told you 't is not onely contrary to the express Testimonies of Scripture but destructive of the Nature of the Covenant it self For if so Men must do all those things before they receive the Remission of Sins Yea while they are as yet dead in Trespasses and Sins Yea then must they do them whilst they are under the Law and the Curse of it For so are all Men whose Sins are not pardoned But this is to make Obedience unto the Law and that to be performed by Men whilst under the Curse of it to be a Condition of Gospel Mercy which is to overthrow both the Law and the Gospel How notoriously false and absurd is that Doctrin which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace saith Mr. Flavell himself p. 395. of his forementioned Book entituled The method of Grace the desire of Self-sufficiency saith he was the ruin of Aadam and the conceit of Self-sufficiency is the ruin of multitudes of his Posterity This Doctrin saith he is not only contradictory to the current stream of Scripture Phil. 2. 13. 1 Jo. 1. 13. with many other Scriptures but it is also contradictory to the common Sense and Experience of Believers yet saith he the Pride of Nature will strive to maintain what Scripture and Experience plainly contradict and overthrow I shall need to make no other Descant upon these words of his but this If that Doctrin is notoriously false and absurd which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace Then so is that Doctrin which asserteth that Faith is required of us in point of Duty antecedent to the benefit of the Promise Secondly If Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law and purchased Heaven and Happiness for Men as all true Protestants hitherto have taught then nothing can remain but to declare this to them to incline them to believe and accept it and to prescribe in what way and by what means they shall finally come to inherit Eternal Life To affirm therefore that Faith and Repentance are the Conditions of the New Covenant required of us in point of Duty antecedent to any Benefit of the Promise doth necessarily suppose that Christ hath not done all for us nor purchased a right to Life for any but onely made way that they may have it upon certain terms or as some say He hath merited that we might merit But the Conditions of the Covenant are not to be performed by the Head and Members both The Scriptures do assure us That when the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Gal. 4. 4. Christ therefore having in our stead performed the Conditions of Life there remains nothing but a Promise and the Obedience of Children as the Fruit and Effect thereof to them that believe in him together with means of obtaining the full possession which here we want Well but as under the Old Covenant Man was bid to do this and live So under this New Covenant he is commanded to Believe and live And as Death was threatened to the failure of Obedience to the Law So it is now threatened to the want of Faith under the Gospel Faith being the Condition on which the consequent Benefits of Life and Salvation are suspended Mar. 16. 15 16. Go preach the Gospel He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved He that believeth not shall be damned Jo. 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting Life and he that believeth not shall not see Life Where Faith seemeth to be put into the room of perfect Obedience and therfore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was So Rom. 10. 9. That if thou shalt consess with thy Mouth and believe in thine Heart thou shalt be saved Mat. 18. 3. Except ye be converted and become as little Children ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Mar. 11. 26. But if ye forgive not neither will your Heavenly Father forgive you With multitudes more saith Mr. Flavell of such kind of Expressions which are all Conditional Particles inserted into the Grants of Benefits it being not possible to put words into a frame more lively expressive of a Condition than these are Reply First whereas it is supposed that Faith under the Gospel seemeth to be put into the room of Perfect Obedience unto the Law and therefore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was This cannot be for as much as it is Christ's Perfect Obedience onely which is put into the room of ours to justify and save us as our own should have done had we been able to perform it And so his Sufferings take away the Curse which our Disobedience brought upon us Secondly It must also be observed that God having promised Salvation upon the account of his Sons satisfaction to all that come to him or believe in him Faith is therefore no other than a Coming Believing or Trusting in this Promise of God and so in the Righteousness of Christ exhibited in the Promise whereby it is applied unto us Wherefore Faith is not properly put into the room of Perfect Obedience nor doth it what Perfect Obedience was to do which was to be the Condition of Life For though that was to be our Righteousness under the Law yet it is evident that Faith on the other hand is appointed onely as an Instrument to receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ which is the alone matter of our Justification before God
Sinners to be their God in a way of special Interest but it being upon such hard terms that it is utterly impossible that way to attain unto Life he hath therefore been pleased to abolish that and to make a New Covenant which is not like or not according to the former which was Conditional but that which is wholly Free and Absolute wherein he hath promised to put his Laws into our Minds and to write them in our Hearts and that he will be to us a God and we shall be to him a People Ezek. 36. Jer. 31. Heb. 8. And this is a Covenant of Grace indeed sure and certain a Covenant truly Evangelical and not of the same Building as the Apostle speaks with the Sinai Covenant Heb. 9. 11. The like may be as justly said in reference to the Covenant of Circumcision as hath been now spoken in Reference to the Sinai Covenant For though there were Promises in it that were full and glorious enough I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee all the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession and I will be their God yet all these Promises though good enough in themselves being Conditional they were therefore failable and still liable to forfeiture as they were contained in that Covenant It being evident that it obliged all that were under it to perfect and universal Obedience as the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein contained Gal. 5. 3. From whence as it is manifest that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works so it is as evident that it is not the Greatness or Goodness of the Promises contained therein that can excuse it from being such if Works be the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein promised For as I have already told you what else maketh or wherein else consisteth the true Form or Nature of a Covenant of Works but that Works be the Condition of it This was the whole entire Nature of the first Covenant which alone renders the it Essentially or Specifically Different from the Promise of Grace or the Gospel Covenant But all this notwithstanding you are pleased to tell me That it is so clear that none can doubt or deny what you have asserted that understands the Nature of the two Covenants And now Sir say you what course do you take to avoid this Argument Such a one sure as no Man that ever I met with took before you and that is this You boldly cut Abraham's Covenant Gen. 17. into two parts and make the first to be the pure Covenant of Grace which is the Promisory part to the 9 th verse And the Restipulation to be as pure a Covenant of Works What a hard shift will some Men make to maintain their Opinions You say truly say you p. 205. that at the 7 th and 8 th verses was their Restipulation why then do you say p. 224. that at the 7 th verse he proceeds to speak of another Covenant than what he had been speaking of before Does the Promise and the Restipulation make two Covenants Or are they just and necessary parts of one and the same Covenant Sir all this I have answered before and there have plainly shewed you how greatly you do here abuse me and your self too by a gross misrepresention of my plain words and sense The like you do in that which follows You also tell us say you that the Covenant Gen. 17. 1 2 3 4. was a plain Transcript of several Free Promises of the Gospel under the Denomination of a Covenant but why then don 't you take the Restipulation vers 7 8 9 10. to be a part of it The Nonsense of which Question I have already also shewen you But to this you make answer on my behalf Oh no say you there is something required on Abraham's and his Posterities Part and that spoiles all Well after you have laughed in your Sleeve at my Answer of your own forming you thus proceed Why but Sir If the requiring of Circumcision alters the Case so greatly as to make it a quite contrary Covenant how come it to pass that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant and yet Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised Thus runs this Passage in your Manuscript Copy By way of Reply hereunto I must tell you Sir That whether the requiring of Circumcision alters the Case or no I am sure you have quite altered the Scope of my Discourse in reference hereunto For as I do no where boldly cut the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 17. into two parts and make the first to be a pure Covenant of Grace which is the Promisory part to the 9 th verse and the Restipulation to be as pure a Covenant of Works as you would make the World believe I do So yet nevertheless I do plainly tell you that though the Promse and the Restipulation mentioned vers 7 8 9. make but one and the same Covenant of Circumcision yet there are two Covenants mentioned in that Context The first between God and Abraham himself as I have already proved vers 2 4. which could be made with no other The other between God and Abraham and his natural Posterity also vers 7 8 9 10. The former I call a Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant wherein the Believing Gentiles are concerned For saith God ver 5. A Father of many Nations have I made thee Or as the Apostle explains it The Father of all them that believe that is both Jews and Gentiles The latter I call a Covenant of Works which was made betwixt God and Abraham and his natural Posterity onely who were all of them by Vertue thereof to be Circumcised as a token of their Obedience to the whole Law which Ordinance of Circumcision doth not concern the Gentiles at all So that when you ask me How comes it to pass that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant and yet Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised I must tell you That your Question confounds the true state of the Question between us For you know well enough that I had made a Distinction of a twofold Covenant there mentioned the one a Gospel the other a Legal Covenant And therefore this is no other than to turn things upside down your general practice throughout your whole Reply How comes it to pass say you that the Covenant to Abraham himself was a pure Gospel Covenant I will tell you Sir how it came to pass if you rightly understand what you should Question me about If by the pure Gospel Covenant you mean the Covenant mentioned vers 2 4. I Answer It came to pass as the fruit of Gods own Free Grace and Mercy and that both unto Abraham himself and to the Believing Gentiles also that are concerned therein But then say you How comes it to pass that Abraham himself was first required to be Circumcised if the Covenant to Abraham himself was a
of Promise but God gave it to Abraham by Promise Is the Law then against the Promise God forbid For saith he if there had been a Law which could have given Life verily Righteousness should have been by the Law So then the Law would but could not give Life and why could it not give Life but through our Weakness we were not able to perform it nor could the Law furnish us with power to Enable us thereunto But what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh that Christ hath performed and by his Death and Sufferings made up the Breach between God and us And so in this respect there is only a Difference of Deficiency between the Law and the Gospel the one being strong and powerful the other weak and unable to Relieve us But yet say I this Difference notwithstanding through the satisfaction of Christ there is no Repugnancy or Hostile Contrariety betwixt the Law and the Promises or between the Law and Faith which hath respect to the Promises c. This you account strange Doctrin The Reason you give say you is as strange that this comes to pass through the satisfaction of Christ. Good Sir say you Enlighten us in this Rare Notion Did Christ Die to purchase a Reconciliation betwixt the Covenant of Works as such and the Covenant of Grace And I pray Sir why not Did not Christ satisfie the Law on our behalf Was he not made of a Woman made under the Law to Redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Doth or can the Law it self Impeach those for whom Christ Died and whom God himself pronounceth Righteous Doth not the Law it self that was before our Enemy against us and contrary to us stand up as our Friend through the Mediation of Christ And hath not God for this very purpose set forth his Son Christ unto us a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood to declare unto us his Righteousness that he might be Just and the Justifier of him that Believeth in Jesus And were not the Two Tables accordingly put into the Ark to shew their subserviency to Christ and in this sense its Consistency with him Typically demonstrating that though the Covenant of Works could not be kept or performed by us yet it should be perfectly fulfilled in Christ for us Is there not here a Perfect Reconciliation betwixt the Two Covenants Are not Mercy and Truth here met together And do not Righteousness and Peace sweetly Kiss and Embrace each other through the satisfaction of Christ And yet it follows not that to be Justified by Works and by Faith should after Christ's Death make no odds of Difference between them according to the Corrupt Inference which you unjustly draw from the Premises For though 't is true in a sense we may be said to be Justified by Works rightly and truly enough that is as Christ in his own Person hath fulfilled the Law for us yet your Inference is far enough from being truly deducible from the Premises according to the common and proper sense of Justification by Works Since as all our own Works are throughout the Scripture perfectly Excluded from any concern in that matter viz. as the meritorious or procuring cause of our Justification So they are according to the tenour of the foregoing Discourse also For if Christ hath satisfied the Law for us hence it follows that our Justification is only the fruit of Gods meer free Grace alone through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Thus much may suffice to have been spoken concerning the Absurdities or Self-contradictions which Mr. Flavell chargeth on on me Which so far as they have been already Examined the Reader may easily perceive that they do all of them return upon himself There is only one Passage more which doth more nearly touch the Heart of the Controversie betwixt us which is necessary also to be considered before we proceed unto what follows And that is this Whereas I have Affirmed and do still Affirm that there was no Promise of Pardon on Repentance in Moses's Covenant Mr. Flavell thinks he hath a mighty Advantage against me and supposes I do therein plainly contradict my self because I do yet grant that God promiseth Pardon on Repentance Lev. 26. which Mr. Flavell Affirms to belong to the Dispensation of the Law at Mount Sinai where the Jews are directed to the Covenant which God had made with Jacob Isaac and Abraham for their Relief in this respect For that is the Covenant saith God there that I will remember Well Be it so saith Mr. Flavell if you will needs have it so that the Promise mentioned Lev. 26. refers to Abraham's Covenant yet still it follows that the Covenant made with Abraham must be a Conditional Covenant of Grace For so it s made by this very Text If they accept the Punishment of their Iniquities and their Uncircumcised Hearts be humbled then will I remember my Covenant with Abraham c. You see then that no Unhumbled or Impenitent Person could have Relief from it till Confession and Contrition were wrought in him when you in the mean time stoutly deny that there are any Conditions required in a Gospel Covenant M. S. P. 5. Printed Reply P. 20. But then Mr. Flavell should have considered that this Contrition and Gospel Humiliation can by no means be Effected or Expressed till the Heart be first soundly wrought upon by the Grace of that Covenant which God hath made with Sinners in Jesus Christ. And accordingly this is one main Branch of that Covenant Deut. 30. 6. which I have already proved to be a Gospel Covenant and Essentially Different from that of the Law The Lord thy God will Circumcise thy Heart and the Heart of thy Seed to Love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart and with all thy Soul that thou mayst Live Compare this with the forementioned Text in Leviticus If their Uncircumcised Hearts be humbled c. The Sinner might Reply But Lord this we cannot do of our selves we cannot break our hard and flinty Hearts nor will it ever be performed until thou takest the Work into thine own Hand This therefore the Lord himself undertakes The Lord thy God will Circumcise thy Heart c. And what Condition can there be of that but that of the good Pleasure of God's own Goodness and Grace For whatever is Antecedent thereunto being only a Work or Act of Corrupted Nature can be no Condition whereon the Dispensation of Spiritual Grace is superadded From whence as I have already told you it plainly follows that I the Covenant of Grace is wholly Free and Absolute Eor as much as there is nothing that can be supposed as the Condition thereof whether it be Faith Repentance or new Obedience which is not therein Absolutely Promised Thus God himself is pleased to Represent unto us the Nature of that New and Evangelical Covenant which he Promised to make
absolutely Free and Sovereign is received there is an Order 't is true which for the most part God Observeth in the Communication of ensuing Graces and Priviledges namely that Faith and Obedience shall Precede the Increase and Inlargement of them Thus it was with Abraham in the Instance before us who received this last great signal Promise and Priviledg Gen. 22. upon that signal Act of his Faith and Obedience in Offering up his Son upon God's Command But yet nevertheless In the first place 't is Evident that the Gospel Covenant in the First Discovery thereof is wholly Free and Absolute So it was to Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. where there is no such Obligation laid upon Abraham to walk before God and to be Perfect as you Affirm there was which nevertheless you Insinuate was the Condition or Qualification then required of him in order to his Participation of the Gospel Mercies there Promised him If God had indeed there told Abraham as you suggest he did That he would Bless him and make him a Blessing c. provided he walked before God and was Perfect Then it had been a Covenant of Works as much as the Covenant of Circumcision was which obliged both Him and His to do the whole Law But as I have already told you there is nothing of that Nature there to be found God only tells him Vers. 1. Get thee out of thy Country and from thy Kindred and from thy Father's House unto a Land that I will shew thee and I will make of thee a great Nation and I will Bless thee c. which is far from that Perfection which you say God there Obliged him to 'T is true afterward this charge was laid upon him Gen. 17. 1. I am the Almighty God walk before me and be thou Perfect For God requireth many things of them whom he Actually takes into Covenant and makes Partakers of the Promises and Benefits of it Of this Nature is that whole Obedience which is prescribed unto us in the Gospel in our walking before God in Uprightness There being an Order in the things that belong hereunto Some Acts Duties and Parts of our Gracious Obedience being appointed to be Means of the further Additional Supplies of the Grace and Mercies of the Covenant Of this Nature is that General Obligation here laid upon Abraham Gen. 17. 1. Walk before me and be thou Perfect and hereunto also appertaineth that famous Act of his Obedience mentioned Gen. 22. 16 17. But then it follows not that the Gospel Covenant is a Conditional Covenant For as it is wholly Free and Absolute in the First Discovery thereof so it is as Free and Absolute still From the Foundation to the Topstone thereof 't is all of the same Piece And the Reason is because whatever Duties God requireth of us in order to the Enjoyment of the full end of the Covenant in Glory yet even those Duties or Acts of Obedience which God thus requireth of us must be Performed by us if they be Performed aright in and by vertue of the First Grace of the Covenant already received Col. 2. 6 7. As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord so walk ye in him Rooted and Built up in him and stablished in the Faith as ye have been Taught So likewise Gal. 3. 2 3. This only would I Learn of you Received ye the Spirit by the Works of the Law or by the Hearing of Faith Are ye so Foolish having begun in the Spirit are ye now made Perfect by the Flesh which First Grace of the Covenant must therefore also be continued and Renewed upon us Day by Day Else we shall certainly Faint and Perish in our own Corruption at last 2 Cor. 4. 16. Psal. 36. 10. In this respect it is Evident that the Gospel Covenant is so far from being at all Conditional that it is expressed in the Nature and Form of a Promise throughout the Scripture Thus it was to our First Parents soon after the Fall a Promise that the Seed of the Woman should overcome the Devil and his Seed No Terms no Conditions added but a bare Declaration of a Way of Mercy to their Dejected Self-condemned Consciences Next when the Covenant was Revealed to Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. It is a Formal Absolute Promise that God would Bless him and all Nations in his Seed And ever after it is called the Promise made to Abraham which Israel waited to see accomplished And so the Apostle stiles it in the forementioned Heb. 6. 13. when God made Promise to Abraham saying Surely in Blessing I will Bless thee c. And accordingly the Apostle Gal. 3. 18. affirms that the Inheritance was given to Abraham by Promise and not by Law For saith he If the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise but God gave it to Abraham by Promise which clearly Argues the Absoluteness of this Gospel Covenant For wherein differs the Law from a Free Promise but that the one is Conditional the other Absolute the one Promiseth Life upon Condition of Obedience the other without Money and without Price The like doth the same Apostle tell us Rom. 4. 13 14 15 16. For the Promise that he should be the Heir of the World was not to Abraham or to his Seed through the Law but through the Righteousness of Faith For if they which are of the Law be Heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none Effect And why Because the Law worketh Wrath. And how doth the Law work Wrath Why as it is a Conditional Covenant wherein alone it is opposed unto the Promise which is Free and Absolute For as the Apostle rightly adds Where no Law is there is no Transgression that is where no Conditions are added there can be no Violation or Breach of Covenant And consequently It is therefore of Faith that it might be by Grace to the end the Promise might be sure to all the Seed which else it could not be For if any Conditions be added though never so mild and gentle we are still in hazard Nay had it been so it would have rendred the Gospel Covenant worse then that made with Adam himself Since we have now no strength to Obey nor Power to fulfil these Conditions though in the least or lowest degree no not so much as to a thought So Paul acknowledgeth of himself and that even after his acquaintance with New Covenant Mercy 2 Cor. 3. 5. Not saith he that we are sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves whereas Adam was furnished with a Capacity sufficient for the discharge of the most Perfect Obedience And if you say that God requireth nothing of us but what he giveth Strength and Grace to Perform having Promised to put his Laws in our Hearts c. This doth but so much the more clearly Evince the Absoluteness of the Gospel Covenant Since the Gospel Promise can depend on no Condition on our part For as I
For indeed Faith it self is not our Righteousness as it would be if it were as you affirm it is the Condition of the New Covenant and that as an Act or Work required of us in point of Duty antecedent to the Benefit of the Promise For that would be to make an Act or Work of our own to be the formal matter of our Justification before God but this it is not it being only designed as an Instrument to receive and apply the Righteousness of another Even that wrought in the person of Christ for us which is wholly distinct from our own or any thing wrought in us or done by us Phil. 3. 9. Tit. 3. 5. You tell us indeed in your forementioned Book Entitled The Method of Grace P. 133 134. That though Faith is a Condition of the Covenant yet you cannot allow that it Justifies as a Condition And why Because as you there also tell us you cannot see according to this Opinion any Reason why Repentance may not as properly be said to Justifie as well as Faith For say you there Repentance is a Condition of the New Covenant as much as Faith And say you If Faith justify as a Condition then not onely Repentance but every other Grace that is a Condition must justify as well as Faith And say I 't is very true If Faith is a Condition of the New Covenant Repentance is a Condition as much as that and so are all other Graces Conditions of the New Covenant as well as Faith and Repentance This cannot be avoided And if all these are the Conditions of the New Covenant why they should not justify as Conditions I see not nor I think you nor any Man else For you give no other Reason why you cannot allow that Faith justifies as a Condition but that this will necessarily bring in Repentance and all other Graces to justify as Conditions also as well as Faith as indeed it doth Since whatsoever is the Condition of the New Covenant must needs be the Condition of our Justification For this is too evident to be justly denied but that as Perfect Obedience under the Law being the Condition of that Covenant was to have been the Condition of our justification before God had we been able to Perform it So after this Reckoning it is noless evident in reference to Faith Repentance and good Works under the Gospel also If therefore these must be ackdowledged to be the Conditions of the New Covenant the consequence is unavoidable that they are also the Conditions nay the very matter and ground of our acceptation before God And so at last in stead of making the Gospel Covenant to be a Covenant of Faith free and absolute we shall make it a plain Covenant of Works For what else maketh or wherein else consisteth the true Form or Nature of a a Covenant of Works but that Works whether perfect or imperfect be the Condition of it This being that alone that renders it essentially different from the Promise of Grace or the Gospel Covenant Thirdly It is true that Believing is Obedience to the Command of Believing that is it is the Act or thing Commanded and that in order to Salvation He that Believeth shall be saved He that Believeth not shall be Damned He that Believeth on the Son hath Life He that Believeth not shall not see Life But then it follows not that it is the Condition of the new Covenant A Physitian bids his Patient to trust himself with him and he will Cure him The Patient by trusting in him doth what is Required yet this is not the condition of his Cure but the means of accepting and using the Physitians Care and kindness We bid a poor Man hold forth his hand and we will give him an Alms. His holding out the hand is a Means to receive the Alms and so required by us not a Condition of our giving it though in so doing he doth what we bid him If one should say to a hungry Man there is Meat which shall be yours to live by it if you will eat it and digest it else not Who will call this a Condition Since it is the very Partaking of the Meat it self whereby a Man makes it his own If a Man redeem a Captive from Slavery and lays down the Price will any Man call his bare acceptance of Liberty the Condition of his Ransom True it is that if he do not accept thereof he will never be freed But this is not therefore the Condition of his Ransom for that was performed by another hand So for a Father to say to one that he bestows his Daughter upon in Marriage Lo she is your Wife take her and Marry her This is not a Condition of her being his Wife as external to it but it is that very intrinsecal and essential Act whereby she becomes his and he her Husband Additional unto all which it ought to be duely observed that in all those foregoing instances there is to be supposed a Power or capacity in the Poor Sick or Hungry Man to receive the Alms make use of the Food or accept of the Physitians kindness and so in the rest But so there is not in us to believe being by nature Dead in Trespasses and in Sins and therefore utterly uncapeable to perform this supposed Condition unless the Power and and Vertue of the New Covenant Mercy be first set at Work to accomplish it in us From whence it is manifest that the New Covenant is wholly free and absolute Since Faith it self is the Fruit and therefore cannot be the Condition thereof As for that Scripture Mark 11. 26. But if ye for give not Men their Trespasses against you neither will your Heavenly Father forgive you with many other Scriptures that seem to require Repentance and good Works as the Conditions of Life and Salvation To this I Answer That it is true that the immediate causes of Salvation are those things which do prepare and dispose for the Possession of Heaven and the state of Happyness which is Sanctification For this is that that makes us meet to be Partarkers of the Inheritance of the Saints in Light And without Holyness no Man shall see God But then it doth not therefore follow that the New Covenant is a Conditional Covenant It is the Law of the Land and the Fathers love that Entitles an Heir to the Inheritance Consequently these are not the Prime but remote Causes of his actual enjoying the inheritance when he comes of Age But the Immediate Causes of his Possession are his being of full Age and being of capacity to use it these giving Jus in Re the other Jus ad Rem Doth it therefore follow that the full Age and capacity of the Heir are Causes or Antecedent Conditions of his Title to the Estate Without these 't is true if he live not or lack understanding he cannot Inherit the Estate or come to the full enjoyment thereof though never so Absolutely
Purchased But none will say they are therefore Antecedent Conditions of his Title or Interest therein it being plain that Life and Discretion are not Conditions of the Purchase but Qualifications of the Subject necessary to enjoy it Sir you cannot be ignorant of Bernard's famous speech concerning good Works Sunt via Regni non Causa Regnandi They are the way to the Kingdom not the Cause of Reigning I know it is usual with many besides your self to call them Conditions of Life But Dr. Ames gives a Distinction which might fairly end all this Controversy To require Conditions saith he as the Causes of our Right to Life is proper to the Law But to require them as Concomitants or Effects of what God hath Promised and the Actual Bestowing it is agreable to the most mild Kingdom of Grace If it be said God cannot forgive Sin till Man resolves to leave it and so Repentance must be before forgiveness I Answer this is untrue as is evident in Infants And as for the Adult It is true God cannot Pardon Sin and suffer Men to go on in Sin but it is sufficient that he Pardoneth and together with Forgiveness he giveth a Heart to Repent and obey And Faith it self which apprehendeth Pardon doth implicitely contain Repentance and all other Graces Forasmuch as unfeigned flying to and Trusting in the Mercy of God for Pardon and Eternal Life is a turning of the Heart to God and Spiritual things and doth naturally dispose the Heart to use all the Means which God hath Prescribed for the Obtaining of his Kingdom The same Answer is to be given to those Scriptures that require Men to Forgive their Enemies and if they do not Forgive neither shall they be Forgiven For First This doth at the most but shew that Christians must be Merciful and disposed to Forgive as they expect Mercy and Forgiveness from God But it proveth not that a Man is not Forgiven or Justified till he doth actually Forgive all Enemies at least in Purpose much-less that it is a Condition of his being Reconciled to God For Secondly The Scripture supposeth a Man to be first Forgiven and maketh that an Argument to incline him to Forgive others Eph. 4. 32. Forgive one another even as God for Christ's sake forgave you And this is the Scope of that Parable Mat. 18. 23 24 c. The Servant is himself first Forgiven and therefore it was Judged meet that he should Forgive his Fellow Servant vers 32 33. Thus much by way of Answer to your first Argument whereby you pretend to have proved the Conditionality of the New Covenant your second follows Argum. 2. If God's Covenant with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. and that Gen. 17. 2 3. were as you say pure Gospel Covenants of Grace and yet in both some things are required as Duties on Abraham's part to make him Partaker of the Benefits of the Promises then the Covenant of Grace is not Absolute but Conditional But so it was in both these Covenants Ergo Reply This Argument I have already dispatcht in my Answer to your third Argument upon the former Head in reference to the Covenant of Circumcision And therefore I need say nothing to it here I shall accordingly proceed to your third Argument whereby you labour to prove the Conditionality of the new Covenant which runs thus Printed Reply pag. 69. Argum. 3. If all the Promises of the Gospel be Absolute and Unconditional requiring no Restipulation from Man then they cannot properly and truly belong to the New Covenant But they do properly and truly belong to the New Covenant Therefore they are not all Absolute and Unconditional Reply That the New Covenant is wholly Free and Absolute I have already Proved by way of Answer to your foregoing Argument there being noCondition at all Annexed thereunto neither in Jeremy nor in the Apostles Recital thereof Heb. 8. In respect whereof your present Argument might more justly and truly have been thus formed If all the Promises of the Gospel do properly and truly belong to the New Covenant then they must needs be absolute and unconditional as that was But they properly and truly belong to the New Covenant therefore they are all absolute and unconditional as that was The sequel of the Major say you is only liable to doubt or denial namely That the absoluteness of all the Promises of the New Testament cuts off their relation to a Covenant You should have said That the Absoluteness of all the Promises of the Gospel cuts off their relation to the New Covenant according to the scope of your forementioned Argument if you had kept close to that And then you must have examined the New Covenant and have compared the Promises of the Gospel therewith But you knew well enough that there are no Conditions annexed to the New Covenant whether in Jer. 31. or in Heb. 8. the consideration whereof it may be startled you off when you came to prove the Sequel of your Major from that expression of the New Covenant to their relation to a Covenant in general That the absoluteness of all the Promises in the New Testament cuts off their relation to a Covenant This by the way looks with no good Countenance and ●…s indeed no other than a plain Shuffle But to proceed And that it doth so say you no Man can deny that understands the difference betwixt a Covenant and an Absolute Promise A Covenant is a mutual Compact or Agreement betwixt Parties in which they bind each other to the performance of what they Respectively promise So that there can be no proper Covenant where there is not a Restipulation or Re-obligation on one part as well as a Promise on the other But an absolute Promise binds onely one Party and leaves the other wholly free and un-obliged to any thing in order to the enjoyment of the Good promised So then if all the New Testament Promises be Unconditional and Absolute they are not part of a Covenant nor must that word be applied to them they are Absolvte Promises binding no Man to whom they are made to any Duty in order to the enjoyment of the Mercies promised But those Persons that are under these Absolute Promises must and shall enjoy the Mercies of Pardon and Salvation whether they Repent or Repent not Believe or Believe not Obey or Obey not Reply You might have added Although God hath therein promised to put his Laws in our Hearts and his Fear in our inward parts and that as he will not depart from us So neither shall we depart from him But that this would have marred and overthrown all your foregoing Discourse For these are the Promises of the New Covenant as well as the Mercies of Pardon and Salvation Nay therefore God hath promised to put his Laws in our Hearts and to write them in our Minds because he will freely pardon our Sins Now if our Sins are freely pardoned and if in the self same Covenant God
considered that a Covenant may be one and the same Covenant for substance though often repeated And that thus stood the Case in respect of the Three formentioned Covenants that at Sinai that in the Land of Moab and that with Abraham is evident For first if you compare Deut. 29. vers 2 3 9. with Exod. 19. 4 5. you will find that this in the Land of Moab exactly agrees with the Sinai Covenant the Terms being exactly the same as well as also the Promises in both Covenants So that the Sense of Deut. 29. 1. can be no other than this These are the Words that is these are the Terms or Conditions upon which God hath made that is Renewed Covenant with you The Covenant at Horeb and this in the Land of Moab was but one in Substance though various in respect of the time or manner of Administration And indeed they were both the same for Substance with that made with Abraham also Gen. 17. 7. I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee Thou shalt therefore keep my Covenant thou and thy Seed after thee So it was in the Sinai Covenant Ezod 19. 4 5. You have seen saith God what I did unto the Egyptians and how I bore you on Eagles Wings and brought you unto my self Now therefore if you will obey my voice indeed and keep my Covenant then ye shall be unto me a peculiar Treasure above all People So Deut. 29. 2 3 4 c. You have seen all that the Lord did before your Eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and all his Servants and I have led you forty years in the Wilderness that ye might know that I am the Lord your God Vers. 9. Keep therefore the words of this Covenant and do them that ye may prosper in all that ye do You stand this day all of you before the Lord your God that thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God Vers. 12. That he may establish thee to day for a People unto himself and that he may be unto thee a God as he hath said unto thee and as he hath sworn unto thy Fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob Vers. 13. So that here is no difference at all between the Covenant made with Abraham and that made with Israel at Mount Sinai and this with the same People in the Land of Moab also For we cannot but see that for Substance they do all of them exactly agree onely that at Mount Sinai was made with Israel at their first entrance into the Wilderness that in the Land of Moab about forty years after when they were just ready to enter Canaan For since the greatest part of the Generation were then dead with whom the Covenant was first made at Sinai God thought fit to renew it with their Successors in the Land of Moab additional unto or beside that Covenant Transaction that had passed between him and their Fathers at Sinai But say you it may be observed that the Sameness of some particular Good promised and Duties commanded in this Covenant established with Abraham and that made at Mount Sinai cannot justly be interpreted a Revelation from God that the Covenants are one and the same There may be observed say you an Indentity or Sameness both of Good promised and Duties commanded in the Covenant of Nature and the Covenant of Grace in sundry particulars and yet the Covenants are not only distinct but of quite different Natures and Tenours And who doubts say I but there may be observed an Indentity or Sameness of the Good promised in the Covenant of Nature and the Covenant of Grace and yet both these Covenants are not only distinct but of quite different Natures and Tenours the one being Absolute the other Conditional The one requiring perfect Obedience as the Condition of enjoying the Good therein contained The other promising to work that in us which before was required of us But it is evident that the forementioned Covenants did all of them exactly agree and that both in respect of the Good promised and Duties commanded also For they did all of them require Perfect Obedience as the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein promised which may be justly interpreted as a Revelation from God that they are for the Substance of them one and the same there being no difference at all between them onely in the time and manner of their Administration And then where lies the ground of your Confidence when you say What can possibly be more plain Who can with any pretence of Divine Revelation question whether that Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. be the Old Covenant or the same with that made at Sinai when the Lord himself denies that that Covenant made at Mount Sinai was made with Abraham but evidently and in plain words distinguishes the one from the other These are your groundless Triumphs And say you that which may yet further confirm us is that the Scriptures every where speak of the Covenant made with Abraham in the Singular Number and no where give the least Intimation that there were two Covenants the one of which can possibly be supposed to be the Covenant of Grace and the other the Old Covenant These Arguments say you are so plain that nothing can be rationally Reply'd No! say I doth not the Apostle plainly tell you that there were Two Covenants the one the Covenant of Grace the other the Old Covenant and that upon this very occasion and in reference to Abraham himself Gal. 4. 22. c. For it is written saith he that Abraham had two Sons the one by a Bondmaid the other by a Freewoman But he who was of the Bondwoman was born after the Flesh but he of the Freewoman was by Promise Which things are an Allegory For these are the two Covenants the one from Mount Sinai which gendereth to Bondage the other answereth to Jerusalem that is above and is free which is the Mother of us all Now I pray Sir consider Doth not the Apostle here plainly tell you that there were two Covenants the one a Legal Bondage Covenant the other a Covenant of Gospel Liberty and Freedom the one a Covenant of Works the other of Grace under the Allegory of Hagar and Sarah Ishmael and Isaac And was this Prophetical Instance brought forth in Abraham's Family shewing the Nature and Method of God's future Dispensations towards his Off-spring without any respect unto Abraham himself Had he not two Sons the one by a Bond-maid the other by a Free-woman And did not this serve to represent unto him the different Nature of the two Covenants that had been before made with Himself as well as of the two fold Covenant God intended to make with his Seed after him That God intended to make a two fold Covenant with his Seed after him is evident for what else is the meaning of the two Covenants the Apostle here speaks of the one from Mount Sinai