innocency and purity which did once adorn our nature yet even then were we unprofitable to God and it was Gods goodnesse to receive it and to reward it Was then eternall life and happinesse a meere gift of God to Adam for his obedience and love what a free and meere gift then is salvation and eternall life to thee If Adam were not to put any trust in his duties if he could not challenge God for a reward how then shall we relye upon our performances that are so full of sin Use 2. Further to admire Gods exceeding grace to us that doth not hold us to this Covenant still That was a Covenant which did admit of no repentance though Adam and Eve had torn and rent their hearts out yet there was no hope or way for them till the Covenant of grace was revealed Beloved our condition might have been so that no teares no repentance could have helped us the way to salvation might have been as impossible as to the damned angels To be under the Covenant of works is as wofull as the poore malefactour condemned to death by the Judge according to the law he falls then upon his knees Good my lord spare me it shall be a warning to me I have a wife and small children O spare me But saith the Judge I cannot spare you the Law condemnes you So it is here though man cry and roare yet you cannot be spared here is no promise or grace for you LECTURE XIV GENES 2. 17. In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death HAving handled the Law of God both naturall and positive which was given to Adam absolutely as also relatively in the notion of a Covenant God made with Adam I shall put a period to this discourse about the state of innocency by handling severall Questions which will conduce much to the information of our judgement against the errours spread abroad at this time as also to the inlivening and inflaming of our affections practically These Questions therefore I shall endeavour to cleare 1. Whether there can be any such distinction made of Adam while innocent so as to be considered either in his naturalls or supernaturalls For this is affirmed by some that Adam may be considered in his meere naturalls without the help of grace and so he loveth God as his naturall utmost end in that he is the preserver and authour of nature or else in his supernaturalls as God did bestow righteousnesse upon him whereby he was inabled to enjoy God as his supernaturall end And for this end is this errour maintained that so man now born may be made no worse then Adam in that condition at first which errour if admitted would much eclipse all that glory which is attributed in Scripture to grace converting and healing of us Therefore to this Question these things may be answered 1. That it cannot be denied but that in Adam such qualities and actions may be considered which did flow from him as a living creature endued with a reasonable soul so 1 Cor. 15. 45. there the first Adam is said to be made a living soul that is a living creature in his kinde whereby he did provide and prepare those things for his nourishment and life that he needed and this is to have a naturall body as the Apostle calls it But we may not stay in the consideration of him as a man in an abstracted notion but as so created by God for that end to be made happy Therefore howsoever some learned speak of the animall state and spirituall estate of Adam yet both must be acknowledged to be naturall to him 2. In the next place we doe not hold in such a manner his righteousnesse and holinesse to be naturall to him as that we deny every thing to Adam that was supernaturall for no question but the favour of God which he did enjoy may well be called supernaturall so also that actuall help of God say some which was to be continued to him For howsoever the principle and habit as it were of righteousnesse was naturall to him yet to have help from God to continue and persevere was supernaturall Even as you see the eye though it hath a naturall power to see yet there is a further requisite to the act of seeing which is light without which it could not be The second question is Whether Christ did intervene in his help to Adam so that he needed Christ in that state For here we see many learned and sound men differ some say that Christ being onely a Mediatour of reconciliation could no wayes be considered in any respect to Adam for God and he were friends Others again make the grace of Christ universally necessary even to Angels and Adam saying that proposition Without me ye can doe nothing is of everlasting truth and did extend to Adam not indeed by way of pardon or reconciliation but by way of preservation and conservation in the state of righteousnesse Thus those excellent pillars in the Church of God Calvin Bucer and Zanchy with others Now for the clearing of this truth we must consider these particulars 1. That it cannot be denyed but that Christ as the second Person of the Trinity did create and make all things This is to be diligently maintained against those cursed opinions that begin even publikely to deny the Deity of Christ Now there are three generall waies of proving Christ to be God 1. In that the name Jehovah and God is applyed to him without any such respect as to other creatures 2. In that he hath the attributes of God which are Omnipotency and Omnisciency c. 3. In that he doth the works which God only can doe such are raising up from the dead by his own power and creation Now that Christ doth create and sustain all things appeareth John 1. Col. 1. and Hebr. 1. 3. so that it 's impudent blasphemy which opposeth clear Scripture to detract this from Christ Indeed his creating of the world doth not exclude the other Persons onely he is included hereby 2. What help the Angels had by Christ Here I finde different thoughts even of the judicious That place Colos 1. 20. To reconcile all things to himself by him whether things in heaven or earth is thought by some a firme place to prove that the Angels needed Christ even as a Mediatour and Calvin upon the place brings two Reasons why the Angels need Christs mediation 1. Because they were not without danger of falling and therefore their confirmation was by Christ But how can this be proved that their confirmation came from Christ and not from God as a plentifull rewarder of their continued obedience Indeed if that opinion of Salmerons were true which holds it very probable that the fallen Angels were not immediately condemned but had a set space and time of repentance given them this would with more colour have pleaded for Christs mediation but that opinion cannot be made good
his soule was made sinfull This is vehemently opposed by Papists and by Socinians now they both agree that man should not actually have dyed but for sin only they say he was mortall as the Socinians or immortall by a meere supernaturall gift of God But a thing may be said to be immortall severall wayes as the Learned observe 1. From an absolute necessity either inward or outward in this sense God only is said to be immortall 2. When there is no inward materiall cause of dissolution though outwardly it may be destroyed and thus are Angels and the soules of men 3. A thing may be said to be immortall by some speciall gift and appointment of God as the bodies glorified and as some say the heavens and maine parts of the world shall have only a qualitative alteration not a substantiall abolition 4. That is immortall which hath no propensity to death yet such a condition being put it will die and thus Adam was therefore in some sense he may be said mortall in another immortall But because he is commonly called mortall that is obnoxious to death therefore we say Adam before his sin was immortall and this is abundantly confirmed by this sentence of commination And therefore though Adam would have eaten and drunk though his body was elementary and the originall of it dust though he would have begotten children yet none of these can prove him mortall because the righteousnesse in his soule would have preserved the fit temperament of his body especially having Gods Promise made to his obedience 8. Whether upon this threatning Thou shalt die can be fixed that cursed opinion of the mortality of the whole man in soul as well as body Of all the errours that have risen up there is none more horrid in nature and more monstrous in falshood then this so that if it could be true of any mans soul that it was not an immateriall substance but onely a quality of the temperament it would be true of the Authour of that Book which seemeth to have little sense and apprehension of the divine authority in the Scriptures concerning this matter What an horrid falshood is it to call the doctrine of the immortall soul an hell-hatched doctrine And what a contradiction also to call it hell-hatched when yet he holdeth there is no hell But certainly you would think for a man to dare to broach such an opinion he must have places of Scripture as visible as the Sun But this Text is his Achilles and all the rest shrowd under this from which he frames his first and chiefest argument thus What of Adam was immortall through innocency was to be mortaliz'd by transgression But whole Adam was in innocency immortall Therefore all and every part even whole man was lyable to death by sin But what Logician doth not see a great deale more foisted into the Conclusion then was in the Premises Whole Adam was to be mortaliz'd therefore all and every part What a non sequitur is here That is true of the whole as it is the whole which is not true of every part If I should say Whole Christ dyed for death is of the concrete the person therefore all and every part of Christ died therefore his divine nature died this would be a strange inference yet upon this fallacy is the frame of all his arguments built Man is said to be mortall whole man dieth therefore every part of man dieth There is difference between totum and totalii as the whole and every part of that whole It 's true death doth bring the compositum the person to a non-entity but not every part of that compositum to a non-entity Besides that which was immortall is mortalized according to their natures the soule dieth a spirituall and an eternall death But see how the devill carries this man further and sets him upon the pinacle of errour and bids him throw himself head-long because he doth evidently say that if the souls were destroyed as well as the bodies then there would be no heaven nor hell as yet he is bold and confesseth there is none till the resurrection Now if this be so then how shall that be true that the heaven must contain Christ till he come This doth exceedingly puzzle him but he takes the heaven for the place where the Sun is and concludes peremptorily as if he had been in the same also that Christs glorified body is in the Sun Without doubt saith he pag. 33. he must be in the Sun and saith he pag. 34. The Sun may be called well the right hand of God by which through Christ in him we live and move and have our being and there speaketh nothing but darknesse about light as that the Sun is the vaile to keep off the light of Christs body from us which otherwise would be so glorious we could not see it and live But how dare any man make this interpretation The heavens must contain him that is he must be in the Sun till he come to restitution of all things The naming of these things is confutation enough onely this I brought as in a passage meerly to see what cause we have to pray to God to keep us from our selves and our own presumptuous thoughts Use 1. Of Instruction that a law may be made even to a righteous man and that threatnings may be menaced to a man who yet is not under the actuall curse and damning power of the Law Use 2. To see the goodnesse of God that tryed Adam but with one positive precept This should be a caution against multitude of Church precepts how did Austin complain of it and Gerson in his time Use 3. How the devill doth still prevaile over us with this temptation of knowledge There were Hereticks called Gnostici and Ophitae This desire to eate of the tree of knowledge hath brought much ignorance and errour I know there are many people so sottish and stupid that the divell could never intice them with this temptation They account it a trouble even the knowledge of meere necessary things to salvation but when men desire to know above that which is written this is a dangerous precepice Use 4. To take heed of our selves If Adam thus perfect did faile in a command of tryall about so little a matter take heed where you set gun-powder seeing fire is in your heart Compare this of Adams with that of Abraham what a vast difference Austin thanks God that the heart and temptation did not meet together LECTURE XII GEN. 1. 26. And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness YOu have heard of a two-fold law given to Adam one by outward prescript for tryall and exhortation of his obedience the other by implantation which was the Morall Law and of that at this time When God had made all other things then man the immediate and proxime end was created it being Gods goodnesse to make no living creature before he
provided the food and nourishment of it And thus man the last but the choicest externall and visible piece of his workmanship is created but in a great difference from the former for his creation is brought in by way of deliberation and advice Let us make man which words denote 1. The excellency of the man to be made 2. The Mysterie of the Trinitie is here implyed for howsoever the Jewes would have it that he spoke to the Angels or the inanimate creatures or others that the word is used in the Plurall Number for dignitie sake as they shew examples in the Hebrew yet we rather joyn with those that doe think it implyed not indeed that this text of it self can prove a Trinity for the Plurall Number proveth no more three then foure or two but with other places that doe hold forth this doctrine more expresly so that in the words you have the noble and great effect Man the wise and powerfull efficient God the excellent and admirable pattern or exemplar After our image God made man after his image and so implanted it in him that that image could not be destroyed unlesse man destroyed himself not that this image was his naturall substance and essence but it was a concreated perfection in him Now for the opening of this truth let us consider these particulars 1. Whether image or likenesse doe signifie the same thing For the Papists following the Fathers make this difference That image doth relate to the naturalls that man hath his rationall soule with the naturall properties and likenesse to the gratuitalls or supernaturalls which were bestowed upon him Now the Orthodox especially the Calvinists though they deny not but that the soule of a man with the faculties thereof may be called the image of God secondarily and remotely herein differing from the Lutherans who will not acknowledge thus much so that principally and chiefly it be placed in righteousnesse and holinesse yet they say this cannot be gathered from the words for these reasons 1. Because verse 27. where there is the execution of this decree in the text there onely likenesse is named and Gen. 9. there is onely image named and Gen. 5. Adam is said to beget Seth after his image and likenesse where such a distinction cannot be made and this is so cleare that Pererius and Lapide doe confesse it Nor is that any matter because they are put down as two Substantives for that is usuall with the Hebrewes when the later is intended onely as an Adjective so Jerem. 29. 11. To give you an end and expectation that is an expected end so here image and likenesse that is an image most like 2. It 's considerable in what an image doth consist Now the Learned they speak of a four-fold image or likenesse 1. Where there is a likenesse in an absolute agreement in the same nature and thus the Son of God is the expresse image of the Father 2. By participation of some universall nature so a man and a beast are alike in their common nature of animality 3. By proportion onely as the Pilot of a ship and the Governour in the Common-wealth are alike 4. By agreement of order when one thing is a pattern for another to be made after it and this is properly to be an image for two things goe to the nature of an image 1. Likenesse and then 2. that this likenesse be made after another as a pattern Thus one egge is like another but not a pattern of another so man was made like Angels yet not after their image as the Socinians would have it So that to be made after the image of God implieth a likenesse in us to God and then that this likenesse in us is made after that pattern which is in God And howsoever man is a body and God a spirit yet this image and likenesse may well be in other considerations It was the opinion of Osiander that therefore we are said to be made after the image of God because we are made after the likenesse of that humane nature which the second Person in Trinity was to assume and this hath been preached alate as probable but that may hereafter be confuted when we come to handle that Question Whether Christ as a Mediatour was knowne and considered of in the state of innocency 3. Let us consider in what that image or likenesse doth consist Where not standing upon the rationall soule of a man which we call the remote image of God in which sense we are forbid to kill a man or to curse a man because he is made after the image of God we may take notice of the severall perfections and qualifications in Adams soul As 1. In his Understanding there was an exact knowledge of divine and naturall things Of divine because otherwise he could not have loved God if he had not known him nor could he be said to be made very good Hence some make a three-fold light 1. That of immediate knowledge which Adam had 2. The light of faith which the regenerate have 3. The light of glory which the Saints in heaven have Now how great is this perfection Even Aristotle said that a little knowledge though conjecturall about heavenly things is to be preferred above much knowledge though certain about inferiour things How glorious must Adams estate be when his Understanding was made thus perfect And then for inferiour things the creatures his knowledge appeareth in the giving of Names to all the creatures and especially unto Eve Adam indeed did not know all things yea he might grow in experimentall knowledge but all things that were necessary for him created to such an happy end to know those he did but to know that he should fall and that Christ would be a Mediatour these things he could not unlesse it were by revelation which is not supposed to be made unto him So to know those things which were of ornament and beauty to his soul cannot be denyed him Thus was Adam created excellent in intellectuall abilities for sapience knowing God for science knowing the creatures and for prudence exquisite in all things to be done 2. His Will which is the universall appetite of the whole man which is like the supreme orbe that carrieth the inferiour with the power of it this was wonderfully good furnished with severall habits of goodnesse as the firmament with stars for in it was a propensity to all good Ephes 4. 24. It 's called righteousnesse and true holinesse and Eccl. 7. 29. God made man upright His Will was not bad or not good that is indifferent but very good The imaginations of the thoughts of his heart were only good and that continually And certainly if David Job and others who have this image restored in them but in part doe yet delight in Gods will how much more must Adam who when he would doe good found no evil present with him He could not say as we must Lord I beleeve
It 's good instrumentally as used by Gods Spirit for good It 's disputed by some Whether the Law and the preaching of it is used as an instrument by the Spirit of God for conversion But that will be an entire Question in it self only thus much at this time The Spirit of God doth use the Law to quicken up the heart of a beleever unto his duty Psal 119. Thou hast quickened me by thy precepts And so Psal 19. The Law of the Lord enlightneth the simple and by them thy servant is fore-warn'd of sinne You will say The word Law is taken largely there for all precepts and testimonies It 's true but it 's not exclusive of the precepts of the morall Law for they were the chiefest and indeed the whole Word of God is an organ and instrument of Gods Spirit for instruction reformation and to make a man perfect to every good work It 's an unreasonable thing to separate the Law from the Spirit of God and then compare it with the Gospel for if you doe take the Gospel even that Promise Christ came to save sinners without the Spirit it worketh no more yea it 's a dead letter as well as the Law Therefore Calvin well called Lex corpus and the Spirit anima now accedat anima ad corpus Let the soul be put into the body and it 's a living reasonable man But now as when we say A man discourses A man understands this is ratione animae in respect of his soul not corporis of the body so when we say A man is quickened by the Law of God to obedience this is not by reason of the Law but of the Spirit of God But of this anon 4. It 's good in respect of the sanction of it for it 's accompanied with Promises and that not only temporall as Command 5. but also spirituall Command 2. where God is said to pardon to many generations and therefore the Law doth include Christ secondarily and occasionally though not primarily as hereafter shall be shewed It 's true the righteousnesse of the Law and that of the Gospel differ toto coelo we must place one in suprema parte coeli and the other in ima parte terrae as Luther speakes to that effect and it 's one of the hardest taskes in all divinity to give them their bounds and then to cleare how the Apostle doth oppose them and how not We know it was the cursed errour of the Manichees and Marcionites that the Law was only carnall and had only carnall promises whereas it 's evident that the Fathers had the same faith for substance as we have It 's true if we take Law and Gospel in this strict difference as some Divines doe that all the Precepts wheresoever they are must be under the Law and all the Promises be reduced to the Gospel whether in Old or New Testament in which sense Divines then say Lex jubet Gratia juvat the Law commands and Grace helps and Lex imperat the Law commands and Fides impetrat Faith obtaineth then the Law can have no sanction by Promise But where can this be shewed in Scripture When we speake of the sanction of the Law by Promise we take it as in the administration of it by Moses which was Evangelicall not as it was given to Adam with a Promise of Eternall life upon perfect obedience for the Apostle Paul's propositions To him that worketh the reward is reckoned of debt and the doers of the Law are justified were never verificable but in the state of innocency 5. In respect of the acts of it You may call them either acts or ends I shall acts And thus a law hath divers acts 1. Declarative to lay down what is the will of God 2. To command obedience to this will declared 3. Either to invite by Promises or compell by threatnings 4. To condemne the transgressors and this use the Law is acknowledged by all to have against ungodly and wicked men and some of these cannot be denyed even to the godly I wonder much at an Antinomian authour that saith It cannot be a law unlesse it also be a cursing law for besides that the same authour doth acknowledge the morall Law to be a rule to the beleever and regula hath vim praecepti as well as doctrinae what will he say to the Law given to Adam who as yet was righteous and innocent and therefore could not be cursing or condemning of him so the Angels were under a law else they could not have finned yet it was not a cursing law It 's true if we take cursing or condemning potentially so a law is alwayes condemning but for actuall cursing that is not necessary no not to a transgressour of the Law that hath a surety in his roome 6. In respect of the end of it Rom. 16. 4. Christ is the end of the Law By reason of the different use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there are different conjectures some make it no more then extremitas or terminus because the ceremoniall Law ended in Christ Others make it finis complementi the fulness of the Law is Christ Others adde finis intentionis or scopi to it so that by these the meaning is The Law did intend Christ in all its ceremonialls and moralls that as there was not the least ceremony which did not lead to Christ so not the least iota or apex in the morall Law but it did also aime at him Therefore saith Calvin upon this place Habemus insignem locum quòd Lex omnibus suis partibus in Christum respiciat Imò quicquid Lex docet quicquid praecipit quicquid promittit Christum pro scopo habet We have a noble place proving that the Law in all its parts did look to Christ yea whatsoever the Law teacheth commandeth or promiseth it hath Christ for its scope What had it been for a Jew to pray to God if Christ had not been in that prayer to love God if Christ had not been in that love yet here is as great a difference between the Law and Gospel as is between direction and exhibition between a school-master and a father he is an unwise childe that will make a school-master his father Whether this be a proper intention of the Law you shall have hereafter 7. In respect of the adjuncts of it which the Scripture attributeth to it And it 's observable that even where the Apostle doth most urge against the Law as if it were so farre from bettering men that it makes them the worse yet there he praiseth it calling it good and spirituall Now I see it called spirituall in a two-fold sense 1. Effectivè because it did by Gods Spirit quicken to spirituall life even as the Apostle in the opposition calls himself carnall because the power of corruption within did work carnall and sinfull motions in him But I shall expound it spirituall 2. Formaliter formally because
be As a childe whose coat is a little dirty hath it not presently washed but when he falls wholly all over in the dirt this may be the cause of the washing of it so that they are preparations only so far as God intendeth them 6. All determination to one doth not take away that naturall liberty This will further cleere the truth for it may be thought strange that there should be this freedome of will in a man and yet thus determined to one sin onely whereas it 's plaine a determination to one kind of acts good or evill doth not take away liberty God can onely will that which is good and so the Angels and Saints confirmed in happinesse yet they doe this freely and so the Divels will that which is wicked onely It 's true some exclaime at such passages but that is onely because they are prepossessed with a false opinion about liberty for a determination to one may arise from perfection as well as naturall imperfection It is from Gods absolute perfection that hee is determined to will onely good and when Adam did will to sin against God it did not arise from the liberty of his will but his mutability There is a naturall necessity such which determineth a thing to one and that is imperfection but a necessity of immutability in that which is good is a glorious perfection The Learned speak of a three-fold liberty 1. From misery such as the Saints shall have in heaven 2. From sin to which is opposed that freedome to righteousnesse of which our Saviour speaketh Then are yee free indeed when the Son hath made you free and of which Austine Tunc est liberum quando liberatum 3. From naturall necessity and thus also man though hee be necessarily carried on to sin yet it is not by a naturall necessity as beasts are but there is Reason and Will in him when he doth thus transgresse onely you must take notice that this determination of our Will onely to sin is the losse of that perfection we had in Adam and doth not arise from the primaeve constitution of the will but by Adams fall and so is meerly accidentall to it 7. Nor doth it take away that willingnesse or delight in sin which we are inevitably carried out unto For now if man were carried out to sin against his will and his delight then there might be some shew of pleading for him but it is not so he sinneth as willingly and as electively in respect of his corrupt heart as if there were no necessity brought upon him Therefore that is good of Bernards The necessity takes not away the willingnesse of it nor the willingnesse of it the necessity It 's both an hand-maid and so free and which is to be wondered eoque magis ancilla quò magis libera Hence therefore no wicked or ungodly man can have any excuse for himselfe to say the fates or necessity drove him for besides that by his fault he hath cast himselfe into this necessity and so is as if a man in debt who was once able to pay but by his wilfull prodigall courses hath spent all should think to be excused because he cannot pay Besides I say this just and full answer this also is to be said that no man sins constrainedly but every one is carried on with that delight to sin as if he were independent upon any providence or predefinitive permissive decrees of God or any such corrupt necessity within him Hereby he pitieth not himselfe hee seeth not his undone estate nihil miserius misero non miserante scipsum Hence it is that a mans whole damnation is to be ascribed to himselfe Wee ourselves have destroyed our owne soules wee cannot cast it upon Gods decrees And this is necessarily to be urged because of that naturall corruption in us with Adam to cast our sinne upon God 8. A man may acknowledge grace and give much to it and yet not give the totall efficacy unto it This is a maine particular to consider for Pelagius and Arminius and Papists all doe acknowledge grace Pelagius it 's noted of him that hee did foure times incrustate his opinion and held grace in every one of them Hee did gratiae vocabulo uti ad frangendum invidiam as you heard before yea by this meanes hee deceived all the Easterne Churches and they acquitted him when he said thus If any man deny grace to be necessary to every good act wee doe let him be an anathema So Papists and Arminians they all acknowledge grace but not grace enough Gratia non est gratia nisi sit omni modo gratuita As for example First they acknowledge grace to be onely as an universall help which must be made effectuall by the particular will of man so that grace is efficacious with them not by any inward vertue of it self antecedaneous to and independent upon the Will but eventually only because the will doth yeeld and therefore Bellarmine compareth it to Sol homo generant hominem one as the universall cause the other as the particular cause Thus grace and free-will produce a good action grace as the generall cause and free-will as the particular but how derogatory is this to grace how can our actions be said to be the fruit of grace For If I should aske Who is the father of such a man it would be very hard to say The Sun in the firmament so it would be as absurd to say Grace regenerated and converted this man Again they make grace a partiall cause only so that it stirreth up our naturall strength to work this or that good thing and therefore we are synergists or co-workers with God in the work of conversion but this supposeth us not dead in sinne 9. Men may naturally performe the outward act of a commandement Now though we be thus corrupt yet for all that men by nature may doe that outward act which is commanded by God or abstaine from the matter prohibited Thus Alexander abstained from the Virgins hee took captives which is so much related in stories and many other famous instances of the Heathens though some indeed think they had a speciall helpe and aide from God to doe that but here the Apostle in the Text is cleare They doe by nature the things of the law Some doe not like that dictinction They may doe the substance of the work but not the manner of a good worke because they think the substance doth comprehend that indeed which makes a good work howsoever they agree that the externall act may be done Thus Ahab hee externally humbled himselfe and some think that Uriah which Esay calls The faithfull witnesse he took to him to be the same with him that brought in the Altar of Damascus so that though he was an idolater and an ungodly man yet hee was reputed a faithfull man in his word And certainly this is something to make many men inexcusable They may
legall and one that was not affected with the goodnesse of God to him It is true if a man obey God out of love to any thing more then God or equally with God this is unlawfull according to that Minus te amat qui tecum Domine aliquid amat 3. That hereby Adams obedience might be the more willing and free An absolute law might seeme to extort obedience but a covenant and agreement makes it to appeare more free and willing as if Adam would have obeyed though there could have been no obligation upon him to doe it 5. Consider that the nature of this Covenant was of works and not of faith It was not said to Adam Beleeve and have life eternall but Obey even perfect and entire obedience It is true indeed there was faith of adherence and dependance upon God in his promise and word and this faith doth not imply any imperfection of the state of the subject as sinfull which justifying faith doth for it was in Christ who in his temptations and tryalls did trust in God And what the Old Testament calls trusting the New calls beleeving yea some say that this kind of faith shall be in heaven viz a dependance upon God for the continuance of that happinesse which they doe enjoy This faith therefore Adam had but in that Covenant it was considered as a gracious act and work of the soul not as it is now an organ or instrument to receive and apply Christ With us indeed there is justifying faith and repentance which keeps up a Christians life as the Naturalists say the calor innatus and humidum radicale doe the naturall life Faith is like the calor innatus and Repentance is like the humidum radicals and as the Philosopher saith if the innate heat devoure too much the radicall moisture or the radicall moisture too much the heat there breed presently diseases so it is with us if beleeving make a man repent lesse or repenting make a man beleeve the lesse this turneth to a distemper Yet though it were a Covenant of works it cannot be said to be of merit Adam though in innocency could not merit that happinesse which God would bestow upon him first because the enjoying of God in which Adams happinesse did consist was such a good as did farre exceed the power and ability of man It 's an infinite good and all that is done by us is finite And then in the next place Because even then Adam was not able to obey any command of God without the help of God Though some will not call it grace because they suppose that onely cometh by Christ yet all they that are orthodox do acknowledge a necessity of Gods enabling Adam to that which was good else he would have failed Now then if by the help of God Adam was strengthned to do the good he did he was so farre from meriting thereby that indeed he was the more obliged to God 6. God who entred into this Covenant with him is to be considered as already pleased and a friend with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Therefore here needed no Mediatour nor comfort because the soul could not be terrified with any sin Here needed not one to be either medius to take both natures or Mediatour to performe the offices of such an one In this estate that speech of Luthers was true which he denieth in ours Dens est absolute considerandus Adam dealt with him as absolutely considered not relatively with us God without Christ is a consuming fire and we are combustible matter chaffe and straw we are loathsome to God and God terrible to us but Adam he was Deo proximo amicus Paradisi colonus as Tertullian and therefore was in familiarity and communion with him But although there was not that ordered administration and working of the three Persons in this Covenant of works yet all these did work in it Hence the second Person though not as incarnated or to be incarnated yet he with the Father did cause all righteousnesse in Adam and so the holy Ghost he was the worker of holinesse in Adam though not as the holy Spirit of Christ purchased by his death for his Church yet as the third Person so that it is an unlikely assertion which one maintains That the Trinity was not revealed in this Covenant to Adam so that this sheweth a vast difference between that Covenant in innocency and this of grace What ado is here for the troubled soul to have any good thoughts of God to have any faith in him as reconciled but then Adam had no fear nor doubt about it 7. This Covenant did suppose in Adam a power being assisted by God to keep it and therefore that which is now impossible to us waâ— possible to him And certainly if there had been a necessity to sin it would have been either from his nature or from the devill Not from his nature for then he would have excused himself by this when he endeavoured to clear himself But Tertullian speakâ— wittily Nunquam figulo suo dixit Non prudenter definxisti me rudis admodum haereticus fuit non obaudiit non tamen blasphemavit creatorem lib. 2. ad Mar. cap. 2. Nor could any necessity arise from the devill whose temptations cannot reach beyond a moral swasion Therefore our Divines doe well argue that if God did not work in our conversion beyond a morall swasion he should no further cause a work good then Satan doth evil Nor could this necessity be of God who made him good and righteous nor would God subtract his gifts from him before he sinned seeing his fall was the cause of his defection not Gods deserting of him the cause of his fall Therefore although God did not give Adam such an help that de facto would hinder hiâ— fall yet he gave him so much that might and ought to preventâ— it And upon this ground it is that we answer all those cavills why God doth command of us that which is impossible for us to doe for the things commanded are not impossible in themselves but when required of Adam he had power to keep them but he sinned away that power from himself and us Neither is God bound as the Arminians fancy to give every one power to beleeve and repent because Adam in innocency had not ability to doe these for he had them eminently and virtually though not formally But more of these things in the Covenant of grace Use 1. To admire with thankfulnesse Gods way of dealing with us his creatures that he condescends to a promise-way to a covenant-way There is no naturall or Morall necessity that God should doe thus We are his and he might require an obedience without any covenanting but yet to shew his love and goodnesse he condescends to this way Beloved not onely we corrupted and our duties might be rejected not onely we in our persons might be abashed but had we all that
and poured out his pirit giving eternall life as plentifully under the Law as under the Gospel But to aske why he did thus would be as presumptuous and arrogant as to aske why he created the world no sooner If the School-master teach the new beginner in another way then he doth the proficient in study no man doth blame his wisedom As in the Paschall Lamb they were to eate the flesh but to throw away the bones so in all matters of religion those things that are revealed and profitable we may feed upon and whatsoever is abstruse and difficult we may let goe Praestat per Deum nescire quia ipse non revelaverit quà m per hominem scire quia ipse praesumpserit Tert. de Anima Now to conclude I come to give the difference between the Law strictly taken as requiring exact and perfect obedience promising eternall life upon no other termes and the Gospel strictly taken as a solemne promulgation of Christ and his benefits to a broken sinner And the first is this The Law in some measure of it is made knowne by naturall light and so agreeable to a naturall conscience I say in some measure for there is much of the duty of the Law that is unknown to naturall consciences yet the most externall and outward duties are knowne and accordingly as the truth of them is discerned by naturall light so the will doth joyne with them as good to be done though not in a godly way But it is otherwise with the Gospel for the very truth of it must be wholy revealed by God so that no naturall acumen in the world could ever excogitate this wonderfull remedy of justification and salvation by Christ And as it is thus above knowledg so the heart is more averse from this way And by this you may see why it is such an hard thing to beleeve why the people of God are so hardly perswaded when loaden with guilt to roule their soules upon Christ The reasorris there is nothing in his natural conscience to further him in this duty Press a man against murder theft adultery here is naturall conscience joyning for this duty but urge him to beleeve this is altogether above nature Hence it is also that naturally we seek to be justified by the works we do so that to be justified by faith is another way then corrupted nature in us or right nature in Adam would have inclined unto Therefore let not the people of God be so discouraged in their agonies and combats about their unbeliefe Let them know that a little degree of faith is of great consequence And if he said that Christi anity was perpetua naturae violentia a perpetuall violence offered to nature this is most sure in a matter of faith We are as froward in rejecting of a promise as stubborn in refusing of a command The second difference is in the object matter The Law holdeth forth a perfect righteousness and will not admit of any other but the Gospel that condescends and brings pardon through Christ And this is the maine difference and in which they can never be made one Now the Papists Arminian Socinian and others do overthrow this grand and maine difference holding justification by works under some notion or other whereas the Apostle maketh an immediate opposition If of faith then not of works The Apostle doth not distinguish of works of nature and works of grace or works of grace perfect imperfect but speaketh absolutely so doth also exclude that subtile opinion of making faith to justifie as a work for the Apostle making an opposition between faith and works must necessarily take faith under such a notion as cannot be a work And this truth is that which is the pillar of the Church of God and that which differenceth us from Jews Turks Papists and many Hereticks The third difference is from the manner of obtaining the good thing promised He that shall obtain eternall life by the Law hath it of debt and by way of justice Rom. 4. 4. Not as if Adam in the state of innocency could have merited at Gods hands or as if God became in strict justice a debtor seeing Adam was beholding to God for all but in some sense it would have been so Hence boasting would not then have been excluded eternall life being the reward of those holy works which he should have done but now all is of grace through Christ our righteousness is meerly Gods indulgence not the holiness that is in us but the sinn pardoned makes us acceptable So that the broken contrite heart can never sufficiently admire the grace and goodness of God in the Gospel-way And no marvell if so be that Paul is so frequently ravished with the considerations thereof This may well be caIled good newes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if our hearts were spiritually affected we should say How beautifull are the feet of those that bring these glad tydings The fourth difference is in respect of the subject The Law strictly taken is only for those who have a perfect and holy nature therefore it 's a Covenant as you heard of friendship and not of reconciliation so that there is no necessity of any Mediatour Indeed there is good use of urging it to proud Pharisaicall men to bring them out of love with themselves to gross sinners that their hearts might be broken seeing the curses belong to them yea to the godly also to teach them the faire copy they are to write after but in respect of justification by it and eternall life there is none can have that benefit but such who shall be found perfectly holy It was not Moses but the serpent that did heale so it is not the Law but Christ that can comfort broken hearts stung with sin The Priest and the Levite they pass by not pitying of him But now the Subject to whom the Gospel is given is a broken hearted sinner one that feeleth himselfe ready to be covered over with all confusion one that lyeth wounded in conscience crying for some oyle to be poured into his wounds Oh! what miserable comforters then must all Popish and Socinian Doctors be who will advise the sinfull tempted man to seek out works for the Law which is as uncomfortable as to bid a sick diseased man get some of the Philosophers stone or to eat a piece of a Phoenix and then and not till then he shall be in ease Lastly The Law differeth in the forme of it from the Gospel The Law is conditionall but the Gospel absolute I find this Question a very troublesome one Whether the Gospel be absolute or no Whether Gospel be a doctrine of works Whether it hath precepts or threatnings Now the meaning of this Question is not Whether the Gospel be so absolute that it requireth not faith as a condition Or Whether it be so absolute as that it excludeth all repentance and holiness he is an infant in Scripture that
thinketh so But Whether the Gospel doth promise eternall life to a man for any dignity intention merit work or any disposition in us under any distinction or notion whatsoever or only to faith apprehending Christ Now the Answer is that if we take the Gospel largly for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles there is no question but they pressed duty of mortification sanctification threatning those that do not so but if you take the Gospel strictly then it holdeth forth nothing but remission of sins through Christ not requiring any other duty as a condition or using any threatning words thereunto But then it may be demanded To which is repentance reduced Is it a duty of the Law or a duty of the Gospel Of the Law strictlytaken it cannot be because that admitteth none Must it not therefore be of the Gospel And I find in this particular different either expressions or opinions and generally the Lutheran Divines do oppose the Antinomians upon this very ground that the Gospel is not a Sermon of repentance nor doth exhort thereunto but it must be had from the Law which doth prepare them for Christ I shall therefore because this was the foundation of Antinomianisme and it had it's rise from hence handle the next day this Question Whether the Gospel doth command repentance or no. Or Whether it be only from the Law LECTVRE XXVII ROM 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works Nay but by the Law of faith I Proceed to the handling of this Question Whether the Gosspel preach repentance or no seeing this made the great commotion at first between the Orthodox and Antinomians I shall dispatch this in few words 1. The word Repentance is taken sometimes largely and sometimes strictly when it is taken largely it comprehends faith in it and is the whole turnign unto God Rev. 2. 5. sometimes it is used strictly for sorrow about sin and so distinguished from faith Thus they repented not that they might beleeve and faith and repentance are put together Now all the while a man hath trouble and sorrow for sin without faith it is like the body without the soul yea it carrieth a man with Cain and Judas into the very pit of dispair when a man seeth how much is against him and not how much is for him it cannot but crush and weigh him down to the ground The tears of repentance are like those waters very bitter till Christ sweeten them 2. Consider this that the Law was never meerly and solely administred nor yet the Gospel but they are twins that are inseparably united in the Word and Ministery Howsoever strictly taken there is a vast gulf of opposition between each other yet in their use they become exceeding subservient and helpfull mutually It is not good for the Law to be alone nor yet the Gospel Now the old Antinomians they taught repentance by the Gospel only that so the Law might be wholly excluded thus they did not consider what usefull subserviencie they had to one another The Law directeth commandeth and humbleth The Gospel that comforteth refresheth and supporteth And it is a great wisedom in a Christian when he hath an eye upon both Many are cast down because they only consider the perfection of the Law and their inability thereunto on the other side some grow secure and loose by attending to free-grace only I do acknowledge that free-grace will melt the heart into kindness and the fire will melt as well as the hammer batter into pieces but yet even this cannot be done without some use of the Law 3. Therefore being there is such a neer linck between both these in their practicall use we need not with some learned men make two Commandements of the Gospel only to wit the command to beleeve and the other command to repent neither need we with others make these commands Appendices to the Gospel but conclude thus that seeing Faith and Repentance have something initial in them and something consummative in them therefore they are both wrought by Law and Gospel also so that as they say there is a legal repentance and an evangelical so we may say there is a legal faith which consists in believing of the threatnings the terrours of the Lord and there is an evangelical faith which is in applying of Christ in the Promises So that legal faith and repentance may be called so initially and when it is evangelical it may be said to be consummate If therefore you aske Whether Faith and Repentance be by the Law or by the Gospel I answer It is by both and that these must not be seperated one from the other in the command of these duties Hence fourthly unbeliefe is a sin against the Law as well as against the Gospel Indeed the Gospel that doth manifest and declare the object of justifying faith but the Law condemneth him that doth not believe in him therefore Moses and the Law is said to bear witness of Christ and to accuse the Jews for refusing the Messias The Law that requireth belief in whatsoever God shall reveal The Gospel that makes known Christ and then the Law is as it were enlightened by the Gospel doth fasten a command upon us to beleeve in Christ This is true if you take the Law strictly and seperately from Moses his administration of it but if you take it largely as it was delivered by Moses then faith in Christ was immediately commanded there though obscurely because as is proved it was a Covenant of grace You see then that as in the transfiguration there was Christ and Moses together in glory so likewise may the Law and the Gospel be together in their glory and it is through our folly when we make them practically to hinder one another Though all this be true yet if the Gospel be taken strictly it is not a doctrine of repentance or holy works but a meere gracious promise of Christ to the broken heart for sin and doth comprehend no more then the glad tydings of a Saviour It is true learned men do sometimes speak otherwise calling Faith and repentance the two Evangelicall commands but then they use the word more largely for the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles but in a strict sense its only a promise of Christ and his benefits And in this sense we may say the Gospel doth not terrifie or accuse Indeed there are wofull threatnings to him that rejecteth Christ yea more severe then to him that refused Moses but this ariseth from the Law joyned in practicall use with the Gospel And in this sense also it is said to be the savour of death unto many This ariseth not from the nature of the Gospel but from the Law that is enlightened by the Gospel so that he being already condemned by the Law for not beleeving in Christ he needeth to be condemned again by the Gospel If you say May not the sufferings
of Christ were the same in kinde with the righteousness of works differing only gradually as an infant and a grown man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousness of faith without works so as neither the Papist or the Antinomian may incourage themselves thereby but of that in some other place As you take notice of the subject Beleever so the universality every one which doth take in both Jew and Gentile Therefore the Jew could not or ought not to think that those externall Rites and observations could bring them to a true righteousness Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the perfection of the Law and that is for righteousness The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousness of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousness of works and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousness then that of its own It it true the Law strictly taken will not properly and per se direct to any righteousness but that which the Law requireth yet by accident and indirectly it may yea as it was given by Moses it did directly and properly intend Christ though not primarily as some think but finding us unable to attain to its own righteousness did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unless in respect of justification and so indeed its impossible to be justified by both those waies otherwise they are both together in the same subject yea a righteousness of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousness of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Use Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousness Then let the beleever bless and praise God for providing a righteousness and such a righteousness for him How destitute and naked was thy condition Had justice taken thee by the throat and bid thee pay what thou owest thou couldst not have returned that answer Let me alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousness for thee Dost thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thanke him that he hath provided a righteousness for thy soul Thou troubled soul because of sin thou thinkest with thy selfe Oh if I had no sin if I were guilty of no corruption how well were it O ye glorious Angels and Saints ye are happy because ye have a righteousness Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousness whereby thou art accepted of him Again consider it is such a righteousness that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holiness cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darkness of the night only the light of the Sun can do that LECTVRE XXIX MAT 5. 17. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandements and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt glosses of the Pharisees he doth in the first place as Chrysostome thinketh remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law for it was then generally received that only was Law which the Pharisees declared to be so And this he doth ver 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law The reason he giveth is from the perpetuall nature of the Law heaven and earth the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces then any tittle of that And the Prophets are here joyned to the Law not so much in regard of their predictions as because they were Interpreters of the Law The second reason is from that evill which shall befall him that doth breake it and here he nameth a two-fold Antinomianisme one in life and practise the other in doctrine That in practise is aggravated though it be one of the least commandments They are called least either because the Pharisees thought them so or else indeed because all the commands of God were not concerning duties of the same consequence The other in doctrine is expressed in those words And teach men so I cannot consent to Beza's interpretation making this teaching to be by example and life or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although as if the meaning were He that doth break in his practice my commandment although he do teach them in doctrine There is no necessity of offering such violence to the Text. But if we interpret it of doctrinall breaking it will very well agree with the Pharisees who made void the commandements of God by the doctrines of men The evill that shall befall such is in those words He shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven Called is put for is or be He shall be the least By Kingdom of heaven some understand that Kingdome of glory in heaven and by least meane nullus none he shall not at all enter into the Kingdome of heaven Others by Kingdom of heaven do understand the Church of God and so they express it when there shall be a reformation in the Church and truth should break forth which was presently to come to pass then those corrupt teachers who would poyson men should be discovered and then they should be least that is of no account even as it fell out to the Pharisees though for a while they were highly esteemed among men I forbeare to touch upon that Question hotly disputed with some Whether our Saviour doe in this discourse meane only the Morall Law or the Ceremoniall also as being not to my purpose That it is meant cheifly of the Morall Law appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth From the Text thus opened I observe That any doctrine which teacheth tho abrogation or dissolution of the Law is highly offensive unto God For the opening of this consider that the doctrines of men may either directly and with an open face overthrow the Law as the Marcionites and Manichees did or else interpretatively and more covertly and that is done three waies 1. when they make not the Law of God to be so full and exensiue in it's obligation as indeed it is and thus the Pharisees they made void the Law when they affirmed outward acts to be only sins and thus the Papists do in part when they make the Law no further to oblige then it is possible for us to keep it These doctrines doe in tantum though not in totum destroy the Law 2. When men hold such principles that will
God and us 3. Because it performes all duties by way of compensation merit That there is a God may be known by the light of Nature The mysterie of the Trinitie and the Incarnation of Christ cannot be found out by the light of Nature The light of Nature insufficient for salvation The Patriarchs did not offer sacrifices by the light of Nature but God revealed his will to Adam to be so worshipped Originall sin can onely be truly knowne by Scripture-light Matth. 17. 12. expounded Communion of all things no precept of Nature and the Apostles practise of it was only occasionall not binding to posterity God is more off ended with those that abuse Gospel light then those that abuse the light of Nature Three sorts of Christians little better then Heathens There is in man a natural power by the help of Reason to chuse or refuse this or that thing This naturall power in man not able to performe naturall actions without Gods generall assistance Man by the power of nature wholly unable to performe good actions 1. Because our natures are full of sin and corruption 2. Because grace and conversion are the work of God 3. Because glory is to be given to God onely not to our selves Nature of it self cannot dispose for justification or sanctification and the reasons why There are and may be some preparatory and antecedaneous works upon the heart before justification or sanctification Determination to one kind of acts takes not away liberty A threefold liberty Determination to sinne takes not away that delight in sinne which man is inevitably carried out unto Much may be ascribed to grace and yet the totall efficacy not given unto it The outward act of a commandement may be preformed by the power of Nature Whatsoever meere naturall men doe is sin before God because 1. The act wants faith the person reconciliation with God 2. It proceeds not from a regenerate nature 3. 'T is not done in reference to Gods glory 4 There is no promise annexed to any act that wants faith There is in mans nature a passive capacity of grace which is not in stones and beasts To presse a duty and yet to acknowledge Gods grace or gift to do it is no contradiction Mans inability to observe Gods precepts maketh not voâ—d the nature of the precepts because this in ability proceeded from mans owne fault A thing said to be impossible three waies Gods commands though they be not a measure of our power may serve to convince humble c. Necessity of sinning hinders not the delight and willingnesse man hath in sin and consequently God may reprove him for his transgressions * Cap. 5. l. 3. Ethic. ad Nicom Though God works all our good in us yet exhortations are the instrument wherby he works it How conversion and repentance may be said to be our acts Gods working upon the heart of a sinner for conversion excludes not mans working Though wicked men cannot but sinne in praying and hearing yet they are bound to these duties God doth not bind himself to this way * Tanta fuit Adami recens conditi stupiditas ut major in infantos cadere non postit The tree of knowledge why so called God besides the naturall law engraven in Adams heaâ—â— did give a positive law 1. That the power which God had over him might be the more eminently held forth 2. To try and manifest Adams obedience The proper essentiall end of the positive law was to exercise Adams obedience * Altitudinem consilii ejus penetrare non possum longè supra vires meas esse confiteor Aug. The positive law did lay an obligation upon Adams posterity Adam by eating the forbidden fruit became mortall and in the state of death not naturall onely but spirituall and eternall also Adam before his sin was immortall A thing may be said to be immortall foure wayes The mortality of the whole man cannot be evinced from this threatning In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die Image and likenesse signifie one and the same thing An Image consists in likenesse to another pattern after which it is made A Four-fold image The image of God in Adam consisted in the severall perfections and qualifications in his soul 1. In his Understanding was exact knowledge of divine and naturall things 2. His Will was wonderfully good and furnished with many habits of goodnesse 3. In his Affections regularity and subjection 2. The image of God consisted in a freedome from all misery and danger 3. It consisted in that dominion and soveraignty Adam had over the creatures That righteousnesse and holiness fixed in Adam was 1. Originall 2. Universall 3. Harmonious 4. A perfection due unto him upon supposition of the end wherunto God made him Righteousness was a perfection sutable and connaturall to Adam Adam had power to beleeve so farre as it did not imply an imperfection in the subject Repentance as it flowes from a regenerate nature reductively the image of God Gods image not fully repaired in us in this life Doctr. The covenant with Adam before the fall more obscurely laid down then the covenant off grace after the fall That God dealt with Adam by way of Covenant appeares 1. From evil threatned and good promised 2. Because his posterity becomes guilty of his sin and obnoxious to his punishment A Covenant implies Gods decree will or promise to concerning his creatures whether rationall or irrationall God enters into Covenant with man by way of condescension makes promises unto him to confirme him in his hope and confidence in him God deales with man by way of covenant not of power 1. To indeare himself unto him 2. To incite man to more obedience 3. To make this obedience more willing and free The Covenant God made with Adam was of works not of faith God entring into Covenant with Adam must be looked upon as one already pleased with him not as a reconciled Father through Christ Gods Covenant did suppose a power and possibility in Adam to keep it 1. In Adam such qualities and actions may be considered as did flow from him as aliving creature endued with a rational soul 2 The principle and habit of righteousnesse was naturall to Adam but help from God to persevere supernaturall Adam in the state of innocency needed not Christ by way of reconciliation but of conservation in righteousnesse The obedience of Angels may be said to be imperfect negatively not privatively Christs incarnation cannot be supposed but upon supposition of Adams fall The tree of life was not a sacrament of Christ to Adam The Scripture doth not affirme any revelation of a Christ unto Adam The state of innocency excelled the state of reparation in rectitude immortality and outward felicity The state of reparation more happy then that of innocency in respect of the certainty of perseverance in the state of grace The imputation of Christs righteousness doth not inferre that therefore we are more
Although this may be answered without that of Pauls Who artthou O man c. for God did not give him this law to make him fall Adam had power to stand Therefore the proper essentiall end of this commandement was to exercise Adams obedience Hence there was no iniquity or unrighteousnesse in God Bellarmine doth confesse that God may doe that which if man should doe hee sinned as for instance Man is bound to hinder him from sin that he knoweth would doe it if it lay in his power but God is not so tyed both because hee hath the chiefe providence it 's fit he should let causes work according to their nature and therefore Adam being created free hee might sin as well as not sin as also because God can work evill things out of good and lastly because God if hee should hinder all evill things there would many good things be wanting to the world for there is nothing which some doe not abuse The English Divines in the Synod of Dort held that God had a serious will of saving all men but not an efficacious will of saving all Thus differing from the Arminians on one side and from some Protestant Authours on the other side and their great instance of the possibility of a serious will and not efficacious is this of Gods to Adam seriously willing him to stand and with all giving him ability to stand yet it was not such an efficacious will as de facto did make him stand for no question God could have confirmed the will of Adam in good as well as that of the Angels and the glorified Saints in heaven But concerning the truth of this their Assertion we are to enquire in its time But for the matter in hand if by a serious will be meant a will of approbation and complacency yea and efficiency in some sense no question but God did seriously will his standing when he gave that commandement And howsoever Adam did fall because he had not such help that would in the event make him stand yet God did not withdraw or deny any help unto him whereby he was enabled to obey God To deny Adam that help which should indeed make him stand was no necessary requisite at all on Gods part But secondly that of Austins is good God would not have suffered sin to be if he could not have wrought greater good then sin was evill not that God needed sin to shew his glory for he needed no glory from the creature but it pleased him to permit sin that so thereby the riches of his grace and goodnesse might be manifested unto the children of his love And if Arminians will not be satisfied with these Scripture considerations wee will say as Austine to the Hereticks Illigarriant nos credamus Let them prate while we beleeve 5. Whether this law would have obliged all posterity And certainly wee must conclude that this positive command was universall and that Adam is here taken collectively for although that Adam was the person to whom this command was given yet it was not personall but to Adam as an head or common person Hence Rom. 5. all are said to sin in him for whether it be in him or in as much as all have sinned it cometh to the same purpose for how could all be said to have sinned but because they were in him And this is also further to be proved by the commination In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye now all the posterity of Adam dyeth hereby Besides the same reasons which prove a conveniency for a positive law besides the naturall for Adam doe also inferre for Adams posterity It is true some Divines that doe hold a positive law would have been yet seem to be afraid to affirme fully that the posterity of Adam would have been tryed with the very same commandement of eating the forbidden fruit but I see no cause of questioning it Now all this will be further cleared when wee come to shew that this is not meerly a law but a covenant and so by that meanes there is a communicating of Adams sinne unto his posterity And indeed if God had not dealt in a covenant way in this thing there could be no more reason why Adams sinne should be made ours then the sinnes of our immediate parents are made ours I know Peter Martyr and he quoteth Bucer is of a minde that the sinnes of the immediate parents are made the sins of the posterity and Austin inclineth much to that way but this may serve to confute it that the Apostle Rom. 5. doth still lay death upon one mans disobedience Now if our parents and ancestors were as full a cause as Adam was why should the accusation be still laid upon him But of this more hereafter 6. How the threatning was fulfilled upon him when he did eat of the forbidden fruit We need not run to the answer of some that this was spoken onely by way of threatning and not positively as that sentence upon the Ninivites for these conclude therefore Adam died not because of his repentance but Adam did not immediately repent and when he did yet for all that he died Others reade it thus In the day thou eatest thereof and then make the words absolute that follow Thou shalt die as if God had said There is no day excepted from thy death when thou shalt eate But the common answer is best which takes to die for to be in the state of death and therefore Symmachus his translation is commended which hath Thou shalt be mortall so that hereby is implyed a condition and a change of Adams state as soon as he should eate this forbidden fruit And by death we are not onely to meane that of the actuall dissolution of soule and body but all diseases and paines that are the harbingers of it So that hereby Christians are to be raised higher to be more Eagle-eyed then Philosophers They spake of death and diseases as tributes to be paid they complained of Nature as a step-mother but they were not able to see sin the cause of this Yea in this threatning we are to understand spirituall death and eternall also Indeed it 's made a question Whether if Adam had continued be should have been translated into heaven or confirmed onely in Paradise but that his death would have been more then temporall appeareth fully by Rom. 5. Indeed the things that concern heaven and hell or the resurrection are not so frequently and plainly mentioned in the Old Testament as in the New yet there are sufficient places to convince that the Promises and threatnings in the Old Testament were not onely temporall as some doe most erroneously maintain 7. Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit And this indeed is a very famous question but I shall not be large in it The orthodox they hold that immortality was a priviledge of innocency and that Adams body then onely became mortall when