own additional Threatning in the sense aforesaid seems very evident to me 1. Because the conditional promise of the Gospel being made to the Believer exclusively to him and to no other John 3.16 17. John 8.24 it cannot but virtually imply that the Unbeliever shall not have the benefit promised and that is a Threatning 2. Because the Scripture is express in the case for over and besides the Threatning for formerly breaking the Law the Gospel threatens for not sincerely repenting and believing the Gospel John 3.18 He that believeth not is condemned already And why so Why certainly not only because he hath not perfectly kept the Law of Works but likewise as it follows immediately because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God And then in ver 19. our Saviour saith this is the Condemnation that Light is come into the World and Men loved Darkness rather than Light because their deeds were evil See also for this the Commission it self which our Blessed Lord gave to his Apostles and in them to all his Gospel-Ministers who succeed them in preaching the Gospel Mark 16.15 16. Go ye into all the World and preach the Gospel to every Creature He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned From which words it appears 1. That it is the primary design of the Gospel that Men to whom it is Preached should believe and be Baptized and that if they do so they should be saved according to the true import of the Conditional Promise But 2. If they neglect or refuse to believe and by believing to use the Saving Remedy offered them in the Gospel against the Curse and Condemnation of the Law they shall be damned And this is the secondary design of the Gospel to threaten Men with Condemnation if they believe not that the threatning may be a means to deter them from the Sin of Unbelief and to preserve them from being damned According to this Gospel Men to whom it hath been Preached will be judged at the last day As it is written Rom. 2.16 God shall judge the Secrets of Men by Jesus Christ according to my Gospel Now in judging Men who have lived under the Preaching of the Gospel the Lord will justifie the true Penitent Believer and condemn the Unbeliever and that according to the Gospel whence it follows by good consequence that the Gospel hath Threatnings as well as Promises and that as the Believer shall then be justified according to the Promises so the Unbeliever shall be Condemned according to the Threatnings of the Gospel But if the Gospel have neither Precept nor Threatning nor Conditional Promise as Mr. Goodwin affirms that it hath not I do not see how any Unbeliever could be judged and condemned according to the Gospel It cannot with any colour of reason be said that he may be judged according to the absolute Promise of the Gospel For the Absolute Promise of the Gospel was never made to such an Unbeliever as lives and dyes in Unbelief My R. B. will not admit that ever there was any Conditional Promise of the Gospel made to such an Unbeliever and if not a Conditional Promise much less was there ever an Absolute Gospel-Promise made to him If it be objected That though the Believer cannot be both Judged and Justifyed by the Law yet the Unbeliever may be both Judged and Condemned by the Law I answer It is true Every Unbeliever is Judged and Condemned by the Law that he was under and Transgressed But besides that it is true That some Vnbelievers are likewise Judged and Condemned by the Gospel and according to the Gospel And therefore we said in the Apology pag 200. That professed Christians who live and dye in Impenitence and Unbelief will be doubly condemned both by Law and Gospel By the Law for breaking it And by the Gospel for not believing in Christ and not using and applying by Faith the Remedy offered them in the Gospel against the Condemnation of the Law The same saith the Reverend Learned and Judicious Hutcheson on John on the 18th verse of the Third of John these are his words Christ goeth on to Clear and Illustrate the Certainty of the Salvation of Believers in him by shewing on the contrary the Condemnation of Unbelievers whom he declareth to be under a double Condemnation one by the Law and another by the Gospel And a little after albeit the Sentence of the Law be sufficient to Condemn Mankind and will Condemn all them who have not heard of Christ yet under the Gospel Unbelief and not receiving of Christ is the great Condemning Sin for as no Sin will condemn the Man who fleeth to Christ the Remedy so when the Remedy is not Embraced the Sentence of the Law is Ratified in the Gospel and Court of Mercy For he that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed The Sentence is declared Just and confirmed by a new Sentence since he will not take help And thus Unbelief is the great unpardonable Sin Mark 16.16 Whereas other Sins that against the Holy Ghost excepted because it is joyned with final Impenitence would be pardoned if Men would believe And on ver 19. Doct. 5. Where Christ offering himself in the Gospel is not received in Love but contemned it bringeth sadder Condemnation than the breaking of the Law as being a sinning against the Remedy and that with an high hand an undervaluing of him and doing of what they can to make void his pains For this is the Condemnation that Light hath come c. Thus Mr. Hutcheson on John 3.18 19. agrees with us That Unbelievers shall be Judged and condemned by the Gospel And it is something strange that a Minister of the Gospel should be at this day so far under the power of Unbelief as to doubt of or deny this since Christ himself saith expresly John 12.48 That the word which he hath spoken shall judge the Unbeliever in the last day And from the Context it appears that the said Word which shall judge the Unbeliever is the Word of the Gospel For it is the Word which Christ Preached and which the Unbeliever received not And I think that is the Word of the Gospel Nor am I singular in so thinking For Calvin was of the same mind as is evident from what he writes in his Commentary on John 12.48 Non potuit magis splendido elogio extolli Evangelii authoritas quà m dum illi judicii potestas defertur conscendet quidem ipse Christus Tribunal sed sententiam ex verbo quod nunc praedicatur laturum se asserit That is The Authority of the Gospel could not be more highly praised nor a more glorious Elogy given unto it than in ascribing to it the Power of judging Men. Christ himself shall indeed ascend the Judgment Seat but he affirms that he will pass the Sentence according to the Word which is now Preached The
And it is observable that here Repentance is required in the first place and then Pardon is promised as a great favour which shall follow after For the Promise runs in the Future Tense the Lord will have Mercy upon the wicked Man who hath truly repented and our God will abundantly pardon him He will pardon him all the Sins whereof he hath truly repented how many soever they have been And as John Baptist our Lord himself and his Apostles began their Preaching of the Gospel with the Preaching of Repentance so when our Lord Christ after his Resurrection enlarged the Apostles Commission and sent them to preach the Gospel to the Gentile World he told them that they must preach Repentance and Remission of Sin in his Name among all Nations beginning at Jerusalem Luke 24.47 So that it was a part of their Commission to preach the Gospel that they should preach Repentance as a means to obtain Remission of Sins through Faith in Christs name And it is certain that they acted according to their Commission Peter led the way and in his first Sermon after they were endued with Power from on high he said to the convinced humbled Jews who asked him and the rest of the Apostles what they should do That they should repent and be baptized every one of them in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins Acts 2.37 38. Those Jews were deeply convinced that they had broken the Law and thereby fallen under its curse and destroyed their own Souls so that it was not then time to preach the Old Law of Works to them nor did Peter preach it then to them but he preached the Gospel-Covenant and New Law of Grace to them saying as before mentioned Repent c. for the remission of sins And by that first Gospel-Sermon he converted about Three Thousand Souls And as he began so he continued to do for his next publick Sermon to the people was of the same strain with the first for after he and his Brethren had born their Testimony to Christs Resurrection and by his Resurrection and the Miracle done in his Name had proved him to be indeed the true Christ whom God promised to send into the World for the Redemption of his People And likewise after he had charged them with and proved them guilty of the murder of Christ and had shewed that by ignorantly murdering Jesus of Nazareth they had unwittingly fulfilled the many Prophesies which foretold the sufferings of Christ for the Salvation of his People he immediately commanded and exhorted them to repent and be converted as the means to obtain the Pardon of their Sins and Salvation of their Souls Acts 3.19 Repent ye therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And here by the way we may take notice that the antient Syriack Interpreter renders this place thus Repent therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out and that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Act. 15.17 After the same manner it is rendred in the Tigurin Translation Irenaeus also a very Antient Father and Martyr above Fourteen Hundred Years ago thus quotes this Scripture (o) Poenitentiam igitur agite convertimini uti deleantur peccata vestra veniant vobis tempora refrigerii Domini Iren. lib. 3. adversus haereses cap. 12. Repent therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out and that the times of the Lords refreshing may come unto you So Irenaeus But I lay not the stress of my Argument on that Old Translation for our own Translation is sufficient to my purpose since it plainly shews That the Gospel prescribes Repentance unto Sinners as a means to prepare and dispose them for obtaining the Pardon of their Sins which the Natural Moral Law by it self immediately doth not do but only requires a Natural Legal Repentance such as is before described and that Men should so sin no more for time to come but doth not ordain it to be a means nor require it as a means to obtain pardon nor yet ensure pardon to it through Christ as such a means And as Peter led the way in preaching the Gospel by preaching Repentance as a means to obtain pardon of Sin so the other Apostles followed according to the Commission which they all received from the Lord himself Paul as was shewn in the Apology was sent to the Gentiles to open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God that they might receive forgiveness of sins c. Acts 26.17 18. And he was faithful to the Lord who sent him and approved himself so to be by testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks Repentance towards God and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ Acts 20.20 21. And the end in order to which he preached up the use of these means of Faith and Repentance was that people might receive forgiveness of Sins And if that was not Gospel-preaching how can it be proved that ever there was such a thing as Gospel-preaching in the World and that Paul was faithful to God and the Souls of Men in preaching the Gospel since Repentance towards God and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ and that too in order to pardon of Sin to Justification and Salvation were the two great heads of Doctrine that he mainly insisted upon as evidently appears from Acts 26.17 18 19 20 c. compared with Acts 20.20 21. And that the other Apostles preached the same Gospel in the same way and to the same end it is needless to go about to prove it since they had all one Commission and were all faithful in preaching according to their Commission Now as this was Gospel in the days of the Apostles so it hath been and still is and ever will be Gospel to the end of the World For Christs Gospel is an everlasting Gospel and in all Ages hath been preserved and continued in the Church and hath been preached as to the sum and substance of it by certain faithful Ministers of Christ in all Ages Lactantius of old gave this as a mark to know the true Church by (o) Sciendum est illam esse veram Ecclesiam Catholicam in quâ est confessio poenitentia quae peccata vulnera quibus subjecta est imbecillitas carnis salubriter curat Lactant Divin Instit lib. 4. cap. 30. We must know saith he that that is the true Catholick Church in which is Confession and Repentance which wholesomely cures the sins and wounds to which the weakness of the flesh is subject Here is nothing for Popish Merits and Satisfactions for his words signifie no more but this that Confession and Repentance is a wholesome means used in the true Church according to the Gospel 1 John 1.9 for obtaining
that tho he was a fallible man as we all are yet he was in that an humble Man and a sincere lover of Truth And I wish Mr. G. may follow his Example for assuredly it will be more for his Reputation and Honour than obstinately to persist in the Flacian Error which some it seems have drawn him into And since he professeth to have so great an esteem for Dr. Owen I desire him and all that are concerned to consider what I shall Cite out of the Doctor 's Vindication of the Gospel in his Answer to Biddle's Socinian Catechism His words are Take the word Law strictly in reference to a Covenant end that he who performs it shall be Justified by his performance thereof so we may say * Dr. Owen 's Answer to Biddle 's Catechism pag. 384. he to wit Christ gave the Law Originally as God but as Mediator he gave no such Law or no Law in that Sense but revealed fully and clearly our Justification with God upon another account Again If they the Socinians shall say That Christ may be said to reveal the Ten Commandments because he promulged them a-new with new Motives Reasons and Encouragements I hope he will give us leave to say also That what he calls a New Commandment is not so termed in respect of the matter of it but its new Enforcement by Christ We grant †Ibid. p. 3â—8 Christ revealed that Law by Moses with its New Covenant-Ends as he was the great Prophet of his Church by his Spirit from the Foundation of the World but this Smalcius denies Again That there are Precepts and Promises attending the New Covenant is granted but that it consists in any addition of Precepts to the Mosaical Law carried on in the same Tenour with it with other Promises is a Figment directly destructive of the whole Gospel and the Mediation of the Son of God ibid. page 393. And in the next page he says That Moses was a Mediator of a Covenant of Works properly and formally so called and that the Church of the Jews lived under a Covenant of Works is a no less pernicious Figment than the Former The Covenant of Works was Do this and live On perfect Obedience you shall have Life Mercy and Pardon of Sins were utter strangers to that Covenant and therefore by it the Holy Ghost tells us That no man could be saved The Church of old had The Promises of Christ Rom. 9.5 Gen. 3.15 and 12.3 were Justified by Faith Ger. 15.6 Rom. 4. Gal. 3. Obtained Mercy for their Sins and were Justified in the Lord Isa 42.24 Had the Spirit for Conversion Regeneration and Sanctification Ezek. 11.9 and 36.26 expected and obtained Salvation by Jesus Christ Things as remote from the Covenant of Works as the East from the West It 's true the Administration of the Covenant of Grace which they lived under was dark legal and low in comparison of that which we now are admitted unto since the coming of Christ in the flesh but the Covenant wherein they walked with God and that wherein we find acceptance is the same and the Justification of Abraham their Father the pattern of ours Rom. 4.4 5. And afterwards in the same book chap. 33. p. 652. the Doctor says N. 3. Nor doth Biddle inform us what he intends by keeping the Commands of God Whether an exact perfect and every way compleat keeping of them up to the highest Degree of all things in all things circumstances and concernments of them Or whether the keeping of them in an universal sincerity accepted before God according to the Tenour of the Covenant of Grace be intended Ner 4. What Commandments they are which he chiefly respects and under what consideration Whether all the Commandments of the Law of God as such Or whether the Gospel-Gommands of Faith and Love which the places 1 John 5.3 and Mat. 11.30 from whence he answers do respect And in the following page Doctorr Owen's 5th Answer is That to keep the Commandments of God not as the Tenour of the Covenant of Works nor in an absolute perfection of Obedience and Correspondency to the Law but sincerely and uprightly unto acceptation according to the Tenour of the Covenant of Grace and the Obedience it requires through the assistance of the Spirit and Grace of God is not only a thing possible but easy pleasant and delightful Thus we say That a person regenerate by the assistance of the Spirit and Grace of God may keep the Commandments of God in yielding to him in answer to them that sincere Obedience which in Jesus Christ according to the Tenour of the Covenant of Grace is required Yea it is to him an easy and pleasant thing so to do This is sufficient to show that Dr. Owen was far from thinking that the Gospel Covenant hath no precepts but is a meer absolute promise or Doctrine of Grace that requires nothing of us at all He says the quite contrary as appears by his words to wit that it hath precepts as well as promises and that it requires of us sincere obedience in order to our obtaining possession of Eternal salvation in Heavenly Glory I could bring many more very many worthy and Orthodox Modern Divines to bear Testimony to the point under consideration that the Gospel hath precepts and requires Duties but these are enough at present therefore I shall forbear mentioning any more except the late Reverend and Ingenious Mr. Gilbert who in his short discourse concerning the guilt of sin and pardon of it c. In the second page grants expresly that there are both Gospel-precepts and Gospel-sins and tells us 1. That Gospel precepts are mainly the same for substance with those of the Law but not exacting their observance with the same Rigour Namely for Justification And I add nor yet for salvation 2. That Gospel-sins are the Transgression of such Gospel-precepts Thus I have proved both by many clear Testimonies of God and also of good Men Ancient and Modern that the Gospel-Covenant is not without all precepts it is not such a Doctrine of grace as requires nothing of us at all but it is a Doctrine of Grace that obliges us to Duty and requires of us sincere obedience to its Evangelical precepts in an Evangelical way for our due keeping of Covenant with God in Christ and in order to our obtaining the Consummate Life and happiness through Christ promised in the Covenant Now from the foresaid Considerations and Testimonies of God and good Men it will not be difficult to gather a short and clear answer to my Reverend Brother's Reasons and Arguments which he brings to prove that the Gospel is such a Doctrine of Grace as hath no precepts and requires no duty at all SECT III. And first he argues from the nature and use of precepts They are designed says he pag. 42. As the Rule of our Actions they instruct us what to do they draw the lines of our Duty and set the limits
all reject as false and absurd and as reflecting on God's Moral Law as if it had been imperfect before Whereas in truth Gods Moral Natural Law was alwayes most perfect in its kind and obliged to all Moral Natural Duties even unto the highest degree of sinless perfection And therefore what Christ did with respect to the said Moral Law was to fulfil it most perfectly in his Life to explain it by his Doctrine to clear up the true and full meaning of it and to vindicate it from the false glosses of the Pharisaical Jews to suffer and satisfie God's Justice for his Peoples breach of it And to impose it explained as aforesaid on his own Disciples and Followers as the Rule and Law of their Moral Natural Allegiance and Obedience unto God But then for mere Positive Laws as before his Incarnation he had given some such unto his Church so after his Incarnation the old Positive Laws being abrogated he gave unto his Church some new positive Laws such as those that relate to the Two Sacraments the first day of the Week as the Christian Sabbath and the Order and Discipline that is to be observed in his Church under the New Testament And though it is freely granted by us that when such Positive Laws are once enacted by our Lords Royal Authority the Moral Natural Law it self doth oblige us to obey them yet we are first in order of Nature obliged to give Obedience to them by the Institution of them and by the Soveraign Authority which doth institute and enact them And the Law of Nature by it self immediately would never make them Laws nor oblige us to do the things which are the subject matter of them if they were not first made Laws by a new exertion of the Lords Legislative Power which doth by those positive Laws themselves first and immediately oblige us to obey them Seventhly Consider that we ought to distinguish between a Laws being Old or New Quoad ipsam rei materiam substantiam aut quoad rei modum circumstantiam in regard of matter and substance or in regard of manner and circumstance Thus the Moral Command to love the Brethren is both Old and New in different respects It 's Old in respect of the matter and substance and yet it is New in respect of that special manner of loving the Brethren as Christ loved us Witness John 13.34 and 1 John 2.7 8. So likewise the Positive Command to believe in the Messias is both Old and New in respect of different Circumstances of time It is old even as old as the first Promise after the fall Gen 3.15 as it had respect unto Christ to come But it is new as it hath respect unto Christ already come and Crucified Dead and Buried Risen from the Dead Ascended into Heaven and there most highly dignifyed and glorifyed For no Man under the Old Testament was obliged or could be obliged to believe in Christ under this consideration But now we are all to whom the Gospel is Preached ind sp nsably obliged thus to believe on him In like manner though the positive Command to believe in the Messiah be as old as the first promise Gen. 3.15 yet the Command to believe that the Man Jesus of Nazareth is the true Messiah is new and could not be so old Eighthly Consider that we should distinguish between a Law that hath only Legal Promises without any promise of Mercy and Grace in it at all and a Law that hath all Merciful and Gracious Promises belonging to it and those many great and precious Now the first Covenant of Works is a Law that hath only Legal Promises without any Promise of Mercy or of renewing and pardoning Grace in it at all It is a Law that required personal perpetual and ever-sinless Obedience and promised Life to Man on Condition of such Obedience and for such Obedience only would have Justifyed him and therefore it is called the Law of Works But the Covenant of Grace is a Law that hath all merciful and gracious Promises belonging to it and those many great and precious and therefore it is rightly called the Law of Grace And with respect to the Elect who are the most proper subjects of it as a Law of Grace its predominant is Grace Grace runs through it all and appears in all the parts of it 1. There is Grace in the mandatory part of it in that part of it which prescribes its Condition in that legal ever finless perfection is not rigidly insisted on but Evangelical sincerity in the performance of it is required as a Condition which also is accepted through Christ and the sinful defect thereof together with all other sin is freely forgiven for Christ's sake 2. There is Grace Rich and Glorious Grace in the promissory part of it in that it promises to the Elect special Effectual Victorious Grace to cause them freely yet certainly perform the condition in Gospel sincerity And in that when they through Grace perform the Condition it further promises them most Gracious Benefits and Glorious Blessings and all through and for Christ and his Righteousness 3. There is Grace also in the very minatory Sanction for the design of the Threatning is not to bring on Men the Punishment threatned but to curb the Flesh in them and to restrain them from those Sins which their own corrupt Nature inclines them unto and which the Devil and the World tempt them unto So that the very threatning is useful to them and it is a Mercy to them even to such as the believing Romans that they are under that conditional threatning Rom. 8.13 if ye live after the Flesh ye shall dye And since Grace doth thus appear in all the parts of it See Heb. 12.25 it is very fitly called the Law of Grace yea I do not refuse to joyn heartily with my R. Brother in calling it a Doctrine of Grace but withal I must declare that I do not at all like it the worse nor is it unto me the less gracious because it prescribes unto me something to be done by me through my Lords Grace But I like it the better for that since it doth not in the least detract from the Grace of it Now if the Premisses be duely considered and if the foresaid distinctions be rightly applyed as there may be occasion it will be easie thereby to Answer all his Testimonies from Reformed Protestant Divines SECT II. His first set of Testimonies Examined and Answered FOR his first set of Testimonies to prove from our Protestant Divines definition or Description of the Gospel that they believed it to be a pure Doctrine of Grace 1. I Answer thereunto in general that if that be all they prove I profess sincerely in a true and sound Sense to believe the same thing to wit that the Gospel is a pure Doctrine of Grace as I have said and explained it before From whence it doth not follow by any good consequence that it
with Water in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost and to Eat and Drink the Blessed Bread and Wine in remembrance of Christ's Death till he come To this I shall subjoyn the Testimony of the Late Reverend and Learned Dr. Owen and then pass on From Deut. 18. ver 18 19. he infers that Christ was to be a Law giver His words are (n) Dr. Owens 1st Vol. on the Epist to the Hebrews exercitat 17. pag. 224. The Prophet here foretold was to be like unto him Moses wherein he was peculiar and exempted from comparison with all other Prophets which were to build on his Foundation without adding any thing to the Rule of Faith and Worship which he had Revealed or changing any thing therein In that is the Prophet here promised to be like unto him that is he was to be a Law-giver to the House of God as our Apostle proves and declares Chap. 3. ver 1 2 3 4 5. Moses was the great Law giver by whom God revealed his Mind and Will as to his whole Worship whilst the Church-State Instituted by him was to continue Such a Prophet was the Messias to be a Law-giver so as to Abolish the Old and to Institute New Rites of Worship This raising up of a Prophet like unto Moses declares That the Whole Will of God as to his Worship and the Churches Obedience was not yet Revealed Had it so been there would have been no need of a Prophet like unto Moses to lay New Foundations as he had done Thus the Doctor Now as I have distinguished of Faith so I distinguish of Repentance As there is a Faith in God which most certainly is commanded by the Natural Moral Law it self immediately so there is a Repentance towards God which is also Commanded by the Natural Moral Law it self immediately This I never denyed but always believed and in our Apology pag. 200. we plainly enough professed this our belief in these words Heathens who never heard nor could hear of the Gospel for want of an Objective Revelation of it they living and dying without Repentance and Faith in the True God under the guilt of Sins against the Law and Light of Nature will be Condemned by the Law but not by the Gospel which they could not know Rom 2.12 These words plainly show that our Judgment is That Heathens are guilty of Sins against the Law and Light of Nature in that they do not believe in the True God nor repent of their Sins although they have not the Gospel and so no Gospel-Promise to assure them of Pardon and that they shall be Condemned by the Law of Nature for their Unbelief and Impenitency against the Law of Nature together with their other Sins against the same Law And from this it appears That a great part of my Reverend Brothers Seventh Chapter is altogether Impertinent and that I am not at all concerned in it Mr. Goodwin here fights against a Man of Straw of his own making and setting up and valiantly runs him down again and I do not in the least envy him the Glory of such a Victory But though the Natural Moral Law doth oblige all Mankind of ripe years to a Natural Legal Repentance that is 1. To be heartily sorry for having offended God their Creator and Preserver by breaking his Law which they are under and outwardly also to express the inward sorrow of their Hearts 2 To hate their Sin as a great Evil in it self and the procuring Cause of Evil unto Men. 3. Not to act their Sin over again but to abstain from Sin and to keep God's Natural Moral Law for the future Yet there is another kind of Repentance which the Natural Moral Law doth not by it self immediately oblige all Mankind unto in all parts of the World and that is an Evangelical Repentance which ariseth from an apprehension and perswasion of God's Mercy in Christ to all such as are truely Penitent and to our selves if we do or shall truely Repent This is a Repentance towards God considered not meerly as our Creator Preserver and Ruler but as in Christ reconciling the World unto himself and as Ruling Graciously and Mercifully by Christ So that it hath a formal Object different from that of the other Natural Legal Repentance and it hath likewise a different Habitude and Relation unto God and is carryed out unto him after a different manner which is sufficient to give it another Form and to make it formally to differ from the foresaid Natural Legal Repentance Moreover it hath another Office and Use assigned to it for it is constituted and Ordained by God through Christ to be a Condition Dispositive of the Subject to be pardoned or a means to prepare and qualifie us for Receiving the Pardon of our Sins by Faith in Christ's Blood and for his Righteousness only apprehended applyed and trusted to by Faith Now such a Repentance as this a True Evangelical Repentance considered under this formal notion as arising from the foresaid perswasion of Gods Mercy in Christ to the truely Penitent and as a Condition or Means to dispose and prepare for pardon and as having pardon ensured to it by Promise through Christ I say Repentance of this kind and considered under this Notion is Commanded and Required by the Gospel-Law or Covenant firstly directly and immediately and then by the Natural Moral Law mediately and by consequence As the Gospel Commands us to believe that God is upon terms of Saving Pardoning Mercy to the truely Penitent so the Gospel or God by the Gospel makes True Repentance to be one of the Terms to be a Condition or Means to dispose and qualifie us for pardoning Mercy and makes Pardon sure to us by Promise through Christ upon our Repentance As also It is the Gospel and God by Gospel that requires the said dispositive Condition that Commands us to Repent that we may certainly obtain the Promised Pardon through Faith in Christ's Blood That God by the Gospel Commands us to Repent in order to obtain the Pardon of our Sins is as Clear as the Light at Noon to all that are not blind through Unbelief For doth not the Evangelical Prophet say Isai 55.7 Let the Wicked forsake his Way and the Vnrighteous Man his Thoughts and let him Return unto the Lord and he will have Mercy upon him and to our God for he will abundantly Pardon Or He will multiply to Pardon It cannot be said That this is the Voice of the first Covenant and Law of Works For that Covenant is so far from requiring Repentance as a means to obtain Pardon of Sin that it doth not so much as admit of Repentance as any means to such an end as we shall hear by and by from Mr. Caryll And if it be not the Voice of the Old Covenant and Law of Works it must be the Voice of the New Covenant and Law of Grace for there is no Medium no Third that can have any place here
Pardon of Sin by Faith in Christs Blood Hence in the same Book he saith (p) Vitam nobis morte acquisivit Christus morte superatâ nulla igitur spes alia consequendae immortalitatis Homini datur nisi crediderit in eum illam crucem portandam patiendamque susceperit Lactant. Divin Institut lib. 4. cap. 19. Christ by his Death hath purchased Life for us having overcome Death therefore Man hath no other ground of hope given him of obtaining Immortality unless he believe in him and take up and patiently bear that Cross to wit of Christ Julius Firmicus also writeth thus (q) Misericordia Dei dives est libenter ignoscit Relictis nonaginta novem ovibus amissam quaerit unam reverso Pater prodigo Filio vestem reddit parat coenam Nulla vos desperare faciat criminum multitudo Deus summus per Filium suum Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum volentes liberat poenitentibus libenter ignoscit nec multa exigit ut ignoscat Fide tantùm poenitentiâ potestis redimere quicquid sceleratis Diaboli persuasionibus perdidistis Julius Firmicus Maternus lib. de errore profan Relig. pag. 11. Edit Oxon. 1678. God 's Mercy is rich he willingly forgives Having left the ninety and nine sheep he seeks the one which was lost And the Father bestows a Garment upon and prepares a Supper for the Prodigal Son when he returns Let not any multitude of your Sins cause you to despair the most high God by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord delivers or redeems those that are willing and willingly forgives the penitent nor doth he require of us many things that he may forgive By Faith and Repentance only ye may recover whatever ye have lest by the wicked perswasions of the Devil The word redimere is not here used by this Antient Authour in a strict and proper but in a large improper sense and signifies to recover as I have translated it And so the word to save is taken largely and improperly in Holy Scripture when Men are said by Christ or his Apostles to save themselves Luke 7.50 Thy faith hath saved thee Acts 2.40 Save your selves from this untoward generation 1 Tim. 4.16 In doing this thou shalt both save thy self and them that hear thee And that I have rightly Translated the foresaid word used by Julius Firmicus Maternus will evidently appear to any that shall be at the pains to read in the same Book Page 61. Line 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 c. And again Page 65 66. for by his own words there first to the Heathens and then to the Emperours it doth plainly appear that he was sound and orthodox in the point of our Redemption by the Obediential Sufferings of Christ God-Man and Mediatour between God and Men. But though it be thus that he maintained we are properly redeemed by Christ only and that none could ever obtain Life but by the Merit of his Obedience and Death yet it is withal most certain that he held not only Faith in Christ Jesus but also Repentance towards God to be necessary yea and antecedently necessary in order to the obtaining pardon of Sin For these are his express words (r) Quaere potius spem salutis quaere exordium lucis quaere quod te summo Deo aut commendet aut reddat Et cum veram viam salutis inveneris gaude tunc erectâ Sermonis libertate proclama 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum ab his calamitatibus post poenitentiam tuam summi Dei fueris indulgentiâ liberatus Ibid. pag. 6 7. Seek rather the hope of Salvation seek the beginning or rising of the Light seek that which may either commend thee or restore thee to God and when thou hast found the true way of Salvation rejoyce and then with an uplifted or loud freedom or boldness of speech proclaim it saying as the Heathens used to do in the Worship of Isis when they had found the Body of Osiris We have found it rejoyce we together when by the mercy of the most high God thou shalt be delivered from these calamities after thy Repentance And as the Apostles and Fathers after them as is shewn more largely in the Apology taught that the Gospel requires Evangelical Repentance in order to pardon of Sin so did our first Reformers and Protestant Divines since the Reformation As for our first Reformers abroad let the Augustan Confession which they all subscribed bear witness what their Judgment in that matter was I have spoken to this before and shewed from the express words of the Augustan Confession quoted at large in the Apology Pag. 88. That the Gospel requires Repentance in order to pardon of Sin and at the same time offers Remission of Sins freely for Christs sake to all that are truly penitent Melancthen who drew up that Confession and wrote an Apology for it is so clear in the case that it is matter of wonder to me that any should be so immodest as to deny so plain and certain a matter of fact For after he had said in his common places That the Particle gratis freely in Rom. 3.24 doth not exclude Faith but excludes the condition of our own worthiness and transfers the cause of the benefit from us unto Christ and moreover having said that the Particle freely doth neither exclude our own Obedience but only transfers the cause of the benefit from the worth of our Obedience unto Christ that the benefit may be sure Finally having said that the Gospel preaches Repentance but that our reconciliation may be iure it teaches that our Sins are pardoned and that we please God not for the dignity or merit of our Repentance or newness of Heart and Life but for Christs sake only and that this consolation is necessary to pious Consciences From the premisses he makes his inference in these words following (s) Atque hinc judicari potest quomodo haec consentiant quòd diximus Evangelium concionari de poenitentiâ tamen gratis promittere reconciliationem Definit itaque Christus Evangelium Luc. ultimo plane ut artifex cum jubet docere poenitentiam remissionem peccatorum in nomine suo Est igitur Evangelium praedicatio poenitentiae promissio quam ratio non tenet naturaliter c. Melancth loc com loco de Evang pag. 398. And hence it may be judged how these things agree that we said the Gospel preaches concerning Repentance and yet it freely promises Reconciliation Christ therefore in the last of Luke chap. 24. ver 47. defines the Gospel plainly or altogether as an Artist when he commands to teach Repentance and Remission of Sins in his Name The Gospel then is a preaching of Repentance and a Promise which Reason doth not naturally attain unto c. Thus Melancthon and I could quote more out of his Writings to this purpose but this is enough He who cannot see by this little that Melancthon believed the
necessary simply necessary yea and antecedently necessary in order of Nature to the obtaining pardon of Sin His Arguments are distributed into three Classes Some of them prove its necessity others prove its antecedency All together strongly prove that it 's antecedently necessary in order of Nature to the obtaining of Pardon This is to be seen in pag. 249 250. 3. He enquires whether Repentance may be called a Condition as well as Faith And Answers that it may not be called a Condition in the same Sense as Faith is called one For Faith is the only Condition whereby we close with the Covenant and whereby we close with receive and apply Christ and his Righteousness as held forth to us in the Covenant-Promise But then he says That in a large Sense it may be called and it is a Condition necessary with Faith concomitantly in the same subject to qualifie and dispose it in a congruous suitable way to receive Pardon of Sin by Faith in Christ alone This is to be seen in pag. 253 254 255 256. And this is the same thing which we believe and have openly professed to the World in our Apology So that there is not an hairs breadth of difference between his judgment and mine except it be in the wording of it And this manifestly appears from our calling Repentance the Condition or Means which only qualifies and disposes the Subject for receiving Pardon by Faith alone whereas we call Faith the Instrumental Means or Condition whereby we receive and apply the Object to wit the Promise and Christ with his Righteousness as held forth to us in the Promise for Justification and Salvation This is sufficient to show that Mr. Durham is of the same Judgment with us as to this matter and that therefore we justly bring him in to Witness for us I would have quoted his own words but they are so many and would swell my Discourse to such a Bulk that I choose rather to refer the Reader to the Book and Pages where he will see if he be in any doubt that I have faithfully given his Sense in few words Our Fourth Witness shall be the Famous Confession of Faith Composed by the most Learned of the Reformed Divines of Poland Lithuania and the Provinces thereon depending together with Divines from Germany and which they gave in at Torn in the Year 1645 unto the Lutheran and Popish Doctors all Assembled there to Confer about Religion for several Moneths together Their words are these (x) Non controvertitur hîc an ad remissionem peccatorum requiratur conversio mentis ad Deum interna peccatorum dum dolore detestatio asserimuus enim talem poenitentiam ut perpetuam conditionem ad peccatorum remissionem requisitam fuisse in utroque Testamento qua peccator non quidem eam meretur hoc enim efficit solum meritum satisfactio Christi cum eam nobis fide viva applicamus sed per eam praerequisita conditio impletur quâ aptus fit at Divinam misericordiam consequendam Confession Doctrinae Ecclesiarum Reformatarum in Regno Poloniae maguo Ducatu Lithuaniae annexisque Regni Provinciis in Colloquio Thoruniensi exhibit D. 1. Septembris A. D. 1645. Cap. 6. De Sacramentis Sect. De Poenitentiâ 1. It is not Controverted here whether the Conversion of the Mind to God and the inward Detestation of Sins with Sorrow be required unto the Remission of Sins for we assert that as a perpetual Condition unto the Remission of Sins such a Repentance was required under both Testaments whereby a Sinner doth not indeed merit it for the alone Merit and Satisfaction of Christ doth that when we apply it to our selves by a lively Faith but by it the pre-required Condition is performed whereby he is made fit and disposed to obtain the Divine Mercy Thus that Confession of Faith and those many Learned Judicious Divines who drew it up bear witness to the Truth with us That Repentance is pre-required and always was pre-required as a necessary Condition whereby a Sinner is qualified and made meet to receive the Pardon of his Sins by Faith in Christ's Blood I could bring more Testimonies both from the Word of God and the Writings of Holy Sound and Orthodox Ministers of Christ for the Confirmation and Elucidation of this Truth but I have been too large already upon this Point and therefore this may super abundantly suffice to show That though the Natural Moral Law oblige all Mankind in all parts of the World to one sort of Faith and Repentance yet there is another sort of them there is an Evangelical Faith and Repentance unto which the Evangelical Law of the New Covenant doth only by it self immediately oblige us And the Moral Natural Law obliges us to them but mediately only and by consequence in as much as it obliges us to observe all God's Positive Laws which it pleaseth him at any time to Enact for us Consider Eighthly That under the Gospel God hath made sincere Obedience to his Moral Natural Law and to all his Positive Laws which are in Force and not Abrogated one of the Articles of the New Covenant taken in its Latitude He hath made our performance of such sincere Obedience to his Laws a Condition necessary to qualifie and prepare us for obtaining full possession of Eternal Life and Happiness in Heavenly Glory for the sake of Christ and his Meritorious Righteousness only 1. For clearing of this It is to be observed that in the first federal Law of Works given and prescribed unto Man before the Fall there are Three things to be distinguished 1. There is the preceptive part of it 2. The Minatory Sanction 3. The Promissory Sanction 1. There is the Preceptive part which obligeth to Duty and except the Positive Precepts of Sanctisying or keeping Holy to God the Seventh day precisely in order from the Creation and of not eating the Forbidden Fruit All the rest of the Preceptive part of that Law of Works is in force still and obliges Mankind to an Ever Sinless Obedience de futuro 2. There is the Minatory Sanction or Threatning which binds over Transgressors to suffer the Punishment threatned And this is still in force with respect to all Impenttent Unbelievers They are all whil'st they continue in that State under the Curse of the first broken Law and Covenant and are lyable to a further degree of the same Punishment for every Sin which they shall commit in this World Yet by the Gospel there is a Door of Hope to get out of this State opened through Christ unto those to whom God sends it 3. There is the Promissory Sanction or the Promise of Life unto those who keep the Precepts without any Sin whatsoever Now this is not in force since the fall so as that any Man should be obliged ex intentione Dei to believe or hope that he shall obtain Eternal Life by his keeping the Preceptive part of the first Covenant or
Law of Works This was briefly explained and proved in the Apology pag. 200 201. and it might be further confirmed if it were needful But it is not needful because to a Man who knows himself to be a Sinner and understands the Nature of that first Law as every Man of common understanding may do it is self-evident that that Law condemns him to Death for his Sin and that it is simply impossible for him to be justified unto Life by that very Law which every moment condemns him to death And yet it must be confessed that the first Law or Covenant of Works as fortisied with its Promissory Sanction is repeated both in the Old and New Testament where the Scripture saith to Sinful Man Do this and live Levit. 18.5 Rom. 10.5 Gal. 3.12 But we must know that this was Occonomical and Gods design in it was not to oblige any sinful Man to seek or expect Life by his doing the Works of the first Law and Covenant which Promised Life to Man only on condition that he so kept it as never to sin at all nor by Sin to break it But then you will say What was Gods design in it I answer That so far as the Lord hath given me light to see into this matter his design seems to have been 1. By setting before us the form of the First Covenant of Works to recal to our minds what Man once was and what he should still have been That once he was without all Sin and able to have continued so and to have lived for ever by keeping Covenant with God 2. To convince us that now we are all in our Natural State Dead Men by that very Law and Covenant which would have secured Life to us if we had perfectly kept it but now brings us all under the guilt of Death Temporal and Eternal Death because we have broken it 3. To stir us up to confess our Sin and Misery and to put us upon searching Whether God hath in Mercy provided any remedy against our Sin and Misery 4. To make us willing to receive and use the Remedy as soon as God discovers it to us In a word to make us despair of ever obtaining Life by the Works of that Law which condemns us to death for our sins and to make us flee for Refuge unto Christ our Help and Hope as God offers him to us in the New Covenant or Law of Grace 2dly It is to be observed That as soon as any Man takes this course assoon as any Man takes hold of the New Covenant of Grace and heartily and sincerely by Faith closes with and receives Christ and his Righteousness as offered and held forth in the said New Covenant he is instantly acquitted from the guilt of Death he was under for breaking the Law and hath a Right to Life given him only on the account of the Lord Redeemer Christ and his Satisfactory Meritorious Righteousness received and applyed by Faith alone And so he is justifyed by Faith without Works For though Faith in Christ the Mediator be in it self a Heart-work yet it is not the Works of the Law it is not any of those Works which the First Covenant or Law of Works did require to Justification It is neither a Work which the Natural Moral Law by it self immediately required nor yet is it a Work in the Sense of the Law of Works for Works in the sense of that Law and Covenant they signifie that Obedience to the Law whereby a Man in his own person fulsills the Righteousness of the Law and that for which a Man is justified But Faith is not a Work in that Sense for as much as it is no part at all of that Obedience which sulfills the Law and for which a penitent Believer is justified It is only Christs Obedience unto Death even the Death of the Cross for which Believers are justified and Faith is no part of it but is the only instrumental means or receptive applicative condition whereby we come to have interest in it and to be justified by and for it alone 3. It is to be observed that though upon our first taking hold of Gods New Covenant and Law of Grace by Faith we are for Christs sake alone instantly acquitted from the guilt of Death and receive a right to Life yet God hath made it one of the Articles of the new Covenant that according to our time and talents we must afterwards yield sincere Obedience to his several Laws and Institutions both Moral Natural and Positive before we be admitted to full possession of Eternal Life in Heavenly Glory God doth not require this sincere Obedience in order to our being first justified but in order to our being at last glorified And he requires it as a necessary condition to qualifie and prepare us for the full possession of that Heavenly Glory which Christ hath purchased for us and God for Christs sake gives unto us Hence 4. It is to be observed That thus the Moral Natural Law it self comes to be in the hand of Christ the Mediatour of the new Covenant or Law of Grace and to belong to the Gospel so far as that sincere Obedience to it together with all Gods positive Laws and Institutions is made an Article of the Gospel Covenant and a condition necessary to be performed by us before we enjoy the ultimate benefit promised in the said Covenant 5. It is to be observed That we must distinguish carefully betwixt what the Moral Law as to the matter of its Precepts requires of Believers and what it requires as coming under a new ferm that is plainly as cloathed with a new sanction to wit the sanction of the new Covenant In the first sense the Moral Law as to the matter of its Precepts doth still require of all even of Believers a perfect ever sinless Obedience de futuro but there is this vast difference between the case of Believers and Unbelievers that though for every the least disobedience it condemn the Unbeliever yet doth it not nor can it condemn the true penirent Believer who walks not after the Flesh but the Spirit because the Apostle saith There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit Rom. 8.1 such are not under the Law not under its condemmng power but under Grace Rom. 6.14 In the second sense the Moral Law formally considered as cloathed with the new Covenant form that is with the sanction of the new Covenant so it requires not of true penitent Believers an ever sinless and most perfect personal perpetual Obedience as a means or condition necessary to qualifie and prepare them for the possession of Eternal Glory but it requires of them or God by it as taken into the Gospel requires of them only sincere Evangelical Obedience perseverance in true Faith and sincere Holiness under that formal consideration as a means or condition necessary to the end aforesaid
the New Covenant or Law of Grace This I proved sufficiently before from John 3.18 19. and Mark 16.15 16. compared with Rom. 2.16 and John 12.48 To which Places may be added Mat. 11.21 22 23 24. and Mat. 21.43 44. and others Secondly The Gospel-Covenant hath Threatnings against Regenerate Believers That in case they should not persevere to the end in faith and holiness but should totally and finally fall away they should be most severely punished for their Apostacy For the clearing of this I will briefly do these Two Things 1. Show that there really are threatnings against regenerate believers in case they should Apostatize 2. That those threatnings belong to the Gospel And 1. That there are such threatnings appears from John 15.6 If a Man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch and is withered and Men gather them and cast them into the fire and they are burned Here is a threatning against those who are in Christ that if they abide not in him they shall be burned The like conditional threatning we have against the believing Romans who were beloved of God and called to be Saints Rom. 8.13 If ye live after the flesh ye shall die but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body ye shall live And Rom. 11. v. 20 21 22. Thou standest by faith be not high minded but fear For if God spared not the natural branches take heed lost he also spare not thee Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God Towards thee goodness If thou continue in his goodness Otherwise thou also shalt be cut off So we have recorded in the Scripture a most terrible threatning against the believing Hebrews if they should totally and finally Apostatize and that we might be sure that the threatning is not only against hypocritical Professors of the Christian Religion but that it is also against Regenerate Believers upon supposition of their Apostacy the Apostle Paul includes himself in the number of those against whom he denounceth the Threatning as it is written Heb. 10.26 27. If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledg of the Truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin but a certain fearful looking for of Judgment and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries See also to this Purpose Heb. 10.38 of which we spake in the Apology p. 55. And take notice of what Mr. Dickson observes on Heb. 2.3 How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation The Apostle saith Dickson Joyneth himself with them in the Threatning And again on Heb. 12.25 much more shall not we escape if we turn away from him that speaketh from Heaven He Joyneth himself * Dickson 's Exposition of the Epistles in English edit Lond. 1659. Observations on Epistle to the Hebrews page 222.223 and 273. saith Mr. Dickson in the same danger with the People if he should turn away or refuse Then saith he Preachers should do well to lay the edg of their threatnings to their own Hearts and to Enroll themselves amongst the threatned c. From these places of Scripture and others that might be alledged to the same purpose it manifestly appears that there are threatnings against Regenerate Believers if they fall away Now in the second Place That the said Threatnings do not belong only to the Law of Works but that they are truly Threatnings that belong to the Gospel-Covenant or Law of Grace may thus appear Regenerate Believers are not under the Law Rom. 6.14 They are not under the Threatning Condemning Power of the Law of Works They are not only causally but actually Redeemed from the Law 's Curse Therefore the Threatnings wherewith they are conditionally Threatned are not Threatnings that belong to the Law of Works as such but they are Threatnings that belong to the Gospel-Covenant or Law of Grace under which Believers are I grant indeed That 1. True Regenerate Believers are not absolutely under those Threatnings and that they are not bound to believe that those Threatnings shall be Executed upon them Nay 2. on the contrary if they know themselves to be true Regenerate Believers and that none such shall ever totally and finally fall away from Christ I grant that they ought to believe that the said threatnings shall never be executed upon them Yet for all that it is evident by the Scriptures before mentioned that true regenerate believers are conditionally under the said threatnings and are bound to believe that they would be executed and fulfilled upon them if they should totally and finally fall away And our God in great wisdom and mercy hath thus ordered his Covenant that the belief of the foresaid conditional threatnings may be a means to preserve his own people from Apostacy and to make them persevere in faith and holiness to the end According to that Jerem. 32.40 I will put my fear in their hearts that they shall not depart from me Compared with Rom. 11.20 21 22. And Heb. 4.1 and 12.28 29. And 1 Pet. 1.5 Who are kept by the Power of God through faith unto salvation Mr. G. doth or may know that this is no new singular opinion of mine that the Gospel hath its own threatnings for as I shewed in the Apology p. 27. the Learned Professors of Leyden were of the same Judgment before me And so was Mr. Rutherford as appears by what I quoted out of him there in p. 63. And Monsieur Turretin as was shewed there also in p. 103. Whereunto I now add other Testimonies as 1. The learned and diligent Pezelius writing against Flacius above an hundred years ago gave Testimony to this truth that the Gospel hath its own threatnings †Sunt Testimonia vocis Divinae nota piis omnibus quae ostendunt reâ—e dici quod Evangelium habeat comminationes severissimas utenim haec est Evangelii vox qui crediderit Baptizatus fuerit salvus erit sic antithesis mox addita similiter ad Evangelium pertinet qui non crediderit condemnabitur similes antitheses sunt in his dictis qui credit in filium habet vitam aeternam qui non credit filio non videbit vitam sed ira Dei manet super eum Item qui credit in Filium non Judicatur qui autem non credit jam Judicatus est Eas esse voces Evangelii propriissimas non dubium est tamen non solum sunt promissiones dulcissimae de gratia Dei de Justitia coram Deo de salute aeterna sed etiam comminationes sunt severissimae arguentes hoc peccatum quod est incredulitas in Filium Dei Mediatorem relinquentes sub aeterna condemnatione omnes non credentes in hunc Filium 4th Par. Obj. Resp Theolog. Collect. ex Scriptis Ph. Melanct. opera Christoph Pezelii loc de definit Evang. pag. 161. There are saith Pezelius Testimonies of Gods word known to all the Godly which shew that it is rightly said that the Gospel hath most severe
before where he thus writes †Aâ—que hâ—ec universa in una Persona Christi unici Mediatoris Dei Hominum ita continentur nodo indissolubili juncta connexa sunt ut qui couatur unum ex illis Christo adimere conetur Christum solvere quam esse notam certissimam spiritus Antichristi Johannes Apostolus dilectus Discipulus Domini Docet in prima sua Catholica â—pistâ—a coque crimine Antichristianismi summi sacrilegii tenentur omnes haeresiarchae eorum sectatores pertinaces qui Schismate impio imprimis Christum divellere conati sunt quod nullo mo so potest fieri Bibliander ubi supra Pag. 198 199. And all these things are so contained and joyned and connected together by an undissoluble Knot in the one Person of Christ the only Mediator between God and Men that whosoever endeavours to take one of them from Christ he endeavours to Destroy Christ which to be a most certain mark of the Spirit of Antichrist the Apostle John and beloved Disciple of the Lord teaches us in his first general Epistle And of this Crime of Antichristianism and of the highest Sacriledg are guilty all Authors or inventers of Heresies and their obstinate Followers who by an ungodly Schism do principally indeavour to divide Christ which can no way be done Thus the Learned and pious Bibliander I hope therefore my Reverend brother will joyn with us and for the future acknowledge that the office of a Lord and Judge too doth belong to Christ the Mediator and that eo nomine because he is Mediator and as he is Mediator For as the Dutch Annotators have it on 1 Cor. 15.25 He must Reign as King That is Accomplish his Kingly office as Mediator c. In short as I hope we shall so I wish we may all agree in that of Salvian an Ancient and Zealous writer of the fifth century * Nos ita judicandum humanum genus a Christo dicimus ut tamen etiam nunc omnia Deum prout rationabile putat regere ac dispensare credamus ita in futuro judicio judicaturum affirmemus ut tamen semper etiam in hoc saeculo judicasse doceamus Dum enim semper gubernat Deus semper judicat quia Guberuatio ipsa est judicium Salvian Lib. 1. de Gubernatione Dei Pag. 15. Vid. etiam Lib. 2. Pag. 55. ubi haec habet unde tu qui ad solatium arbitror peccatorum tuorum considerari actus nostros a Deo non putas ex hoc ipso aspici te a Christo semper intellige puniendum forsitan propediem esse cognosce We so say that Mankind will be Judged by Christ as that yet we believe also that God now at present doth rule and dispence all things as he things reasonable or sit and let us so affirm that Christ will Judge at the Day of Judgment which is to come hereafter as notwithstanding to teach also that he hath always judged in this world For whilst God doth always govern he doth always Judge also because the very Governing Act it self of God and so of Christ the Mediatorial King is Judgment Thus Salvian And I think this may suffice for Answer to Mr. G's Third Objection 4. Obj. Lastly He appeals to the express words of Christ himself in John 3.18 He that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God And says page 55. He is confident we will have regard to these words Answer Indeed his Confidence in this is well grounded for we really have as we ought a very great regard to these and all the other words of our most blessed and glorious Lord and they have a Commanding power over us to induce us to receive them with faith and love But what then must we therefore have regard to Mr. G's Consequence which he draws from them by force and violence That doth not at all follow And for my own part I declare that I reject his Consequence which is that the Gospel or Covenant and Law of Grace hath no threanings since he that believeth not is Condemned already Because he hath not believed in the Name of the only-begotten Son of God And whereas he says that the unbeliever is already Condemned by the old Law of works and therefore there is no need that he be Condemned again by the Gospel and a new Law of Grace I Answer that a Man who lives under the Preaching of the Gospel and yet remains still in unbelief is already Condemned both by Law and Gospel by the old Covenant and also by the New so long as he continues in his unbelief as I shewed before And it doth not become us to say unto God that he needs not to do the same thing twice when we know that he hath twice done it especially when we may plainly see that tho the same person be twice over Condemned yet it is in different respects and for two different causes First he is Condemned by the old Law of works for not keeping it perfectly and personally so as never to break it either by original or actual sin And thus all Unbelievers in the world are condemned even Heathens that never heard the joyful sound of the Gospel and never had a Gospel-Offer of Mercy upon the Terms of the New Covenant and Law of Grace Secondly He is condemned also by the Gospel or New Covenant Law of Grace for not accepting the Gospel-Offer of Mercy for not receiving and applying to himself the Remedy tendred to him in the Gospel-Covenant or Law of Grace Here this Unbeliever is guilty of a sin which the foresaid Heathens who have only the Law of Nature are not guilty of he is guilty of a sin which is directly and immediately against the saving Remedy mercifully provided and offered him in the Gospel and therefore there is sufficient Reason for condemning him again by the Gospel-Covenant I say for condemning him to a greater Degree of Punishment than that of meer Heathens who are guilty only of sins against the Law of Nature but are guilty of no sin against the Gospel of Christ are not at all guilty of any sin in neglecting or refusing to receive Christ by Faith and the Salvation offered through him in the Gospel-Covenant Our Saviour says in this very Text That the Unbeliever who is guilty of Positive Unbelief against the Gospel is condemned already not only and meerly because he hath broken God's natural moral Law but because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God And then as it were to obviate Mr. G's Objection he adds immediately This is the Condemnation that light is come into the world and Men loved Darkness rather than Light Because their deeds were Evil. See what was quoted before in the remarks on Mr. G's sixth Chapter out of Mr. Hutcheson's Exposition on John 3. v. 18.19 As for Mr.
what Grotius had written that prima remissio unde caeterae ortum habent nullam in nobis requirit conditionem The first Remission of sin from which the rest flow requires no condition in us he Answers thus * Ad primam remissionem peccatorum non requiri conditionem Verum non est quia non remittitur peccatum adulto nisi poenitententi et credenti Andr. Rivet Animadvers in notas H. Grotii in Cass p. 38. lin 9.10.11 edit in 8◠It is not true that no condition is required in order to obtaining the first Remission of Sins for Sin is not remitted to a grown person unless he repent and believe And when Grotius in his Animadversions again on Rivet had explained himself and told him that by the first Remission or Reconciliation to which no condition is required he meant nothing but the means of Grace which make way for Repentance and Remission Such as are mentioned Act. 2. Rivet replies †Multi sunt quibus via illa ad poenitentiam proponitur qui eam non ingrediuntur collatio loci Actor 2. nos docet nullam remissionem peccati obtineri nisi peccatores compuncti sunt corde v. 37. quibus ita dispositis annunciatur remissio peccatorum quae non fit sine proevia illa conditione quam Deus efficit per gratiam suam in ijs quibus vult peccata remittere conferantur loci-Nam etsi sine ulla conditione proevia in homine deus curet annunciari peccatoribus remissionem peccatorum non tamen eam confert actu nisi per poenitentiam haec quae sunt verissima satis intellexi et exposui suo loco quancum potui perspicue c. Andr. Rivet Exam. Animadversionum H. Grotii pag. 22. There are many to whom that way to Repentance is proposed who do not enter into it The comparing of that place Act. 2. Teaches us that no Remission of Sin is obtained unless Sinners be pricked in their heart v. 37. Vnto whom being so disposed Remission of sins is Preached which Remission is not granted to them without that previons or antecedent condition which God by his Grace works in those whose sins he will remit or pardon Let the places be compared For altho without any previous condition in Man God causeth Remission of sins to be Preached unto Sinners yet he doth not Actually confer or give that Remission but by Repentance or upon condition of Repentance These things which are most true I understood well enough and in its own place I explained as clearly as I could c. Thus the great Rivet confuted Grotius but of late we have got another way of confuting him For there are some who indeavour silently to confute Rivet the most judicious and successful confuter of Grotius and then they give out to the people that they have confuted Grotius Now from the premises it appears that all which that person hath said against conditions in the Gospel-Covenant is light as vanity and that whereas it is pretended that there are no conditional promises in the Gospel-Covenant because there are no conditions in it the Contradictory thereunto is really true That there are conditions in the Gospel-Covenant because there are conditional promises in it as was Demonstrated in the Apol. and as hath been generally believed by the reformed Churches unto this day And tho Mr. Goodwin stiffly deny that there are any conditional promises in the Gospel-Covenant yet I do not see how that is consistent with his concession in pag. 55. towards the end that mercy and pardon is offered by the Lord to unbelievers as a pardon is offered to a Rebel by his Prince but they reject the mercy and refuse to accept of the pardon offered them in the Gospel And that aggravates their guilt and brings upon them a greater punishment For as an unbeliever cannot be said to reject the mercy and refuse to accept the pardon which was never so much as once offered to him by the Lord So it cannot be proved that ever mercy and pardon was offered to the unbeliever without the conditional promise of the Gospel If mercy and pardon be at all offered it must be by the Gospel for the Law offers no such thing to any And if it be offered by the Gospel only I demand how it is offered by the Gospel and by what part of the Gospel Either it is by the Revelation or precept or threatning or promise of the Gospel But 1. It is not offered by the meer Revelation of the Gospel For according to Mr. G. the Revelation of the Gospel is only a Revelation of Mercy and Pardon to the elect but a Revelation of Mercy and Pardon to the elect only cannot be an offer of mercy and pardon to the nonelect Besides that the meer Revelation of the Gospel is common to the Church and to the Angels Eph. 3.10 1 Pet. 1.12 But tho the Gospel be revealed to the Angels yet it doth not by its Revelation make any offer of Mercy and Pardon to them So that the meer Supernatural Revelation of the Gospel is no offer of Mercy and Pardon to the non-elect in the visible Church 2. It is not offered by the meer precept of the Gospel For according to Mr. G. the Gospel hath no precept of its own And tho it had a precept yet that precept would only require some duty of them but by it self could never offer any such benefit as Mercy and Pardon unto them 3. It is not offered by the threatning of the Gospel for according to him the Gospel hath no threatning and if it had a meer threatning alone without a promise is no means of offering Mercy and Pardon to a Man It remains therefore in the 4th place that since Mercy and Pardon is offered to the non-elect unbeliever it must be by the promise of the Gospel But it cannot be by the absolute promise for the absolute promise is not made to the non-elect unbeliever besides that the absolute promise is always fulfilled and so the non-elect should be certainly pardoned and saved And since it is so evident that it cannot be by the absolute promise it must of necessity be by the conditional promise that Mercy and Pardon is offered to non-elect unbelievers in the visible Church And consequently the Gospel hath a conditional promise for without a conditional promise it is unaccountable how Mercy and Pardon can be either offered to or rejected by those unbelievers Thus we have fully and clearly Answered the objections against the Gospel's having conditional promises and have shewed that the denial of them is inconsistent with the Gospel-offer of Mercy and Pardon made to unbelievers in the visible Church I should now pass to the next Chapter but that I must first briefly consider Mr. G's way of Interpreting the places of Scripture which seem to contain conditional promises so as to show that they contain no such thing And the way not to leave one conditional promise in all
from that Text to please my Reverend Brother yet the other Texts do abundantly answer my whole design and prove that the Gospel is expresly called 〈◊〉 Law in Scripture 3. And therefore it is not true which he says in the 3d place That Isa 42.4 is not effectual to prove my Assertion for my Assertion there is That the Scripture expresly calls the Gospel a law which it really doth in that very place as Mr. G. himself confesseth in Page 63. and I desire no more to prove my Assertion which only was concerning the word Law its being there used of the Gospel but not at all concerning what sense it is used in I meddled not with the sense of the word Law there and then and all that I shall do now shall be to desire the Reader to take the sense not from me but from Mr. Pool in these words The 〈◊〉 shall wait for his Law i. e. shall gladly receive his Doctriue Pool's Annotations on Isa 42.4 and Commands from time to time Mr. G. seems to be afraid that the receiving of Commands from Christ will undo men but Mr. Pool thought that the converted Isles would gladly receive Christ's Doctrine and Commands And it seems the Apostle John thought so too and therefore said 1 John 5.3 That his Commandments are not grievous 4. There is one Text more to wit Luke 19.27 which he says I urged to prove That the Gospel is a new Law with Promises and Threatnings But that is another mistake for I did not urge it to prove that but I quoted it to prove That Christ will account them his Enemies and punish them as such who do not like his Gospel because it is a Law of Grace which obligeth men to duty with a promise of blessing to the performers and with a threatning of misery and punishment to the neglecters refusers and despisers This is as clear as the light to any that reads and understands the Apology Pag. 22 line 19 20 21 22 23. As for Rom. 11.26 which he quotes I have spoken to it before and shewed how he wrests that Scripture Lastly For his wondering at my saying That the Law or Covenant of Grace is both new and old in different respects I regard it not if he had not been resolved to cavil at my words and to wrest them from their genuine obvious sense he would have found in them no cause of wondering Let any man of common Sense and Honesty read the Apology Page 22. at the end and Page 23. at the beginning and then let him judge whether there be any thing in that part of it but words of Truth and Soberness So much for answer to the first part of his Eighth Chapter concerning Texts of Scripture SECT II. In the second part of his Eighth Chapter he pretends to answer the Testimonies of Fathers and Protestant Divines which I alledged in the Apology to prove that new law of grace are not new words of an old ill meaning To all that he writes on this Head one general answer might suffice to wit That he impertinently gives his own sense of their words whereas that was not the Original Question In what sense the Fathers and Protestant Divines have heretofore called the Gospel a law a law of grace aed sometimes a new law but whether they did ever so call it all whether they did ever use those words or whether they did not use them and so whether the words be old or but new and of an old ill meaning This was the State of the controversie as manifestly appears by the Apology Page 24. line 15 16 17 c. And Mr. G. is so far from denying this matter of Fact that he plainly confesses it and moreover brings some other Testimonies to prove That the Gospel was called a Law by the Ancients and by some modern Writers as we have seen before Now this was all that I designed to prove by the Humane Testimonies which I cited in the Apology I might therefore stop here since my Testimonies remain in full force with respect to the matter of Fact for the Proof whereof they were alledged by me But since Mr. G. hath endeavoured to pervert the sense of my witnesses I will ex super abundanti consider what he hath said to wrest their words from their genuin sense And I begin with Justin Martyr Mr. G. first confesseth that Justin called the Gospel a Law and if he had been so ingenuous to confess likewise that he called it a New-law as he certainly did and as I proved by his express words then he had confessed also That I did very pertinently quote Justin and that his Testimony clearly proved the matter of fact for the proof whereof it was alledged to wit That new law is not a new word of an old ill meaning but it seems we must not expect that Mr. G. will be so ingenuous as to confess the whole Truth Secondly He saith That by law Justin meant no more than a new Doctrine of Grace to wit a Doctrine that requires no Duty of us at all And this he pretends to prove by the Design which Justin had in answering Trypho the Jew whereunto I answer That Justin did not mean by calling the Gospel a new law that it is no more but a Doctriue of grace more excellent than the Jewish law and its ceremonies which requires no duty of us at all Nor doth any such thing appear by the words and Design of Justin Now to clear this I will shew the True Occasion of Justin's mentioning the new law or Covenant and his real design in so doing which my R. B. hath not faithfully done The True Occasion then was this Trypho the Jew in the foregoing Page 227. had confessed that there were Precepts in the Gospel so great and wonderful that he doubted whether it was possible for any man to keep them but withal he affirmed That he did wonder also that the Christians who made so great profession of being of the True Religion and of excelling all other men and yet kept not the law of Moses observed not the Solemn Feasts and Sabbaths were not circumcised and moreover trusted in a crucified man did nevertheless hope to obtain any mercy from God since they did not keep his law Hast thou not read said Trypho That the man who was not circumcised the Eighth Day should be cut off from his People and that this was ordained alike with respect to Strangers and those who were bought with money This Covenant saith the Jew you Christians despise and regard not the Precepts of it and yet ye would perswade your selves That you know God though you do none of those things which they do that fear God If thou hast any thing to say in thine own defence against these things and canst shew what ground you have to hope for mercy from God tho you do not keep his Law we shall most willingly hear thee Thus argued the Jew And hence
it was that Justin took occasion to mention the new law and Covenant in his Answer to the foresaid Discourse of the Jew which Answer he thus begins There never was O Trypho nor ever will be another God besides him who created the whole world and we have no other God than you none but that same God who brought your fathers out of Egypt Nor do we trust in any other for there is no other but in him in whom you trust also to wit the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. And we trust in him and hope to be saved not by Moses nor by the Law to wit of Moses But I have read O Trypho that there should be a latter or after-Law and a Testament or Covenant c. As these words and what follows them are cited in the Apol. p. 24. This New-Law or Covenant Justin saith all Men must keep That would be saved Then alluding to Isa 42.6 He saith Christ was given to be this Eternal and latter-Law unto us and a sure Covenant after which there is neither Law nor precept nor Commandment How that passage of Justin is to be understood I have shewed before Then he proves out of Isaiah and Jeremiah that Christ was to come and that through him God would make this New and last Law or Covenant with his Church consisting Jews and Gentiles And since God was to do thus he concludes from the conversion of the Gentiles from Idols to Faith in the crucified Jesus and from their Holiness of Life and perseverance in Faith and Holiness to the Death that the Messias was already come and that this was the New-Law and Covenant which the Christians lived under and according to the terms whereof they hoped to be saved through Christ believed on For saith Justin we are the true Spiritual Israel the spiritual progeny of Jacob and Isaac and Abraham who in his uncircumcision by Faith obtained a good Testimony from God and was blessed and called the Father of many Nations even we who are brought near unto God by this crucified Christ This he confirms from Isaiah 55. v. 3.4 5. Then tells them this very Law ye Jews disgrace and vilify his New and Holy Covenant where he manifestly distinguishes the Covenant from the Lord himself neither do ye to this day receive it nor repent of your evil deeds The Legislator is come and present and you see him not The poor receive the Gospel and the blind see but you do not understand Then he tells them that they needed another Spiritual Circumcision and Sabbath and Unleavened bread and washing That God was not like them pleased with those external Rites and Ceremonies but that now by the New Law and Covenant he called them to true Evangelical Repentance and Faith in the Blood of Christ which alone can wash away sin and expiat the guilt of it To prove this he cites those Scriptures mentioned by Mr. G. he stops not there but goes on and tells the Jews that their External Rites Washings and Sacrifices were but Types and Shadows of the inward Spiritual Washing and Purification of Gods People by the Blood Spirit and word of Christ Wherefore he exhorts Trypho and his Company to Faith and Repentance according to the Tenour of the New-Covenant And that he doth in the words of Isaiah Chap. 55. from v. 3. To the end Now this was not the old Law and Covenant of works but the New Law or Covenant of Grace which Justin in the words of Isaiah Preached to these Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 231. This is that very thing which this New Law-giver Judges fit and meet to require of you From the premisses it is manifest that Justin did not think the New-Law or Covenant to be a Doctrine of Grace in such a sense as to require nothing of us at all for there and through the whole Dialogue he shews that Faith and Repentance and Evangelical obedience are required by the Gospel-Law and Covenant and says expressly that this Covenant all Men must keep that would obtain possession of the Inheritance of God Thus he Answered the Jew's objection and shewed that Christians had ground to hope for Mercy and Salvation tho they kept not the old Sinaitical Covenant because they had received from God a New-Law and Covenant of Grace which they kept and keeping it they were sure to obtain the pardon of their Sins and salvation of their Souls through the Blood and Death of Christ the Mediator and surety of that New and better Covenant That this is the true sense of Justin is evident by what I quoted out of him before in my remarks on Mr. G' s. 7th Chapter by what I have here related concerning the Jew's Objection and his Answer to it which was the true occasion of his mentioning the New Law and Covenant And by what he writes in pag. 243. 263 323 327. I might now pass from Justin to a vindication of the Testimonies of Cyprian from the exceptions made against them by Mr. G. if another Reverend Brother in his niblings at our Apol. had not pretended to prove in his Book on Rom. 4. That I impertinently quoted Justin Martyr His words in pag. 35. Are these I shall saith Mr. C. only instance his first citation out of Justin Martyr and I am willing to be Judged by any of the Subscribers that will take the pains to read it if Justin intends any thing more than the recommending the Christian Constitution and proving it preferable to the Mosaical for he says This new law is posterior to Moses his Law but the Apologists new law has been ever since the Fall of Adam Thus Mr. C. whose Arguments are to be considered before I pass any further I answer then thus That Justin intended the recommending of the Christian Constitution of the Covenant af Grace and proving it preferable to the Mosaical was never denied by me tho I deny that he intended no more than the recommending of it in Mr. C. his sense for I did and do most firmly believe That that was part of his Design and the other part of it was to prove against the Jew That the New Law or Covenant of Grace was now to be kept as it is in its Christian Constitution and that the keeping of it as such was sufficient to the obtaining of salvation and that the keeping of it in its Mosaical Constitution or form of Administration was not now necessary as Trypho pretended But then good Sir consider that in prosecution of that design he expressly calls the Christian constitution of it as such a New-Law and Covenant of the greatest or most excellent Authority of all which all Men now must keep whosoever they be that would obtain possession of the Inheritance of God Now I appeal to all Men of Common sense and reason if withal they have but common honesty whether this citation was not very pertinent to my purpose which was to prove that the accuser of the