A Reply to a Pretended Christians Plea for the Church of Rome, Part 11
Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3.
IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs speech to Asa and all Iudah; that Israel was without the true God, without teaching Priest, and without Law, 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therfore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace.
Mine opposite †Chr. pl… pag. 65.laboureth to bring Iudah it self also within this estate: but that hath no colour with it. The distinction of names, Iudah and Israel; the state of Iudah under Solomon, Roboam, Abijah, and Asa, (though corruptions were come in,) plainly sheweth it otherweise; and I leave it to the readers judgment. 2. he granteth, it may well be understood of the 10. tribes, and sheweth good reasons for it: how then doth he take away the weight of the reason, that Israel being without the true God, without a teaching Priest, (Gods true ministerie) and without Law, could not in that estate be Gods true church, in his covenant of grace▪ or have the true seales therof unto them? He fayrly denyeth the conclusion, Jt wil not prove (sayth he) that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah, were false and deceytfull signes &c. Jf it would, then it might be urged against Iudah also; and where then was circumcision? &c. I answer; If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God, without his ministerie, and without his Law: then was there no true circumcision in the world. For if we consider the first institution of circumcision, Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it, in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. & 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptisme now, answerable to circumcision of old: it is impossible that that people should have the true seale of righteousnes and salvation from God in Christ, that are without God, and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions wil here availe… except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent & beleeve or no: whether they be in God and Christ or no: Which is contrary to all the scriptures. Wherfore this one testimonie is ynough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel; as if they in this synfull stare, unrepentant, continued stil actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation. And what colour maketh he, against this plaine scripture? He first speaketh of forsaking God, what it meaneth, and how it is spoken of the Iewes in the Prophets: namely of forsaking his Law, Temple, Worship, and service: and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself, as the bare words and letter it self. might seem to imply.▪ For even in the defection of Israel, when Ieroboam set up the calves, yet stil they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt &c. 1 King. 12. 28.
Answ. First observe, how here he would not have the bare words and letter▪ of the scripture to be insisted upon: yet is it his continuall practise, and onelyonly colourable reasons. For the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God, are his mayn grounds for the church of Rome, and of apostate Israel. 2. He omitteth the words which I cited, that Israel was without the true God &c: and speaketh of an other phrase, of their forsaking the Lord; to ease his burden, which he found too heavy. 3. It is granted him, that by forsaking the Lord, is meant the forsaking of his Law, Temple, Worship and service: and not that they did professedly renounce God, but stil pretended and intended to serve the true God: what would he inferr hereupon? This maketh the more against his plea for them. The scripture sayth, they were without the true God, without teaching Priest, without Law: this was true, eyther in their own account, or in Gods; not in their own account, for they thought they stil reteyned the true God, (even as the heathens of old, hereticks, Antichristians and Iewes at this day, perswade themselves that they serve the true God;) therfore they were such in Gods account. Now Gods judgment is alwayes according to trueth, when mans judgment erreth, and deceiveth himself. Thus then, though Israel thought themselves the true church, and to have the true God (as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them;) yet in the Lords account, which is trueth, they were without the true God, and without Law. So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgment to help him; I have the Lords judgment & his Prophets, against both him and them.
He then referreth us to his former book, where he shewed diverse respects, how on their part they brake the covenant, but the Lord brake it not on his part, but called them to repentance &c. To which book of his I gave answer, and have in this also before shewed, how he yieldeth me the mayn ground; namely that the covenant of grace is conditional onelyonly, if men repent and beleeve▪ Which seing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not, 2 King. 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. they remayned still without the true God, without teaching Priest, and without Law; til the Lord cast them out of the land, and scattred them among the heathens, which were without God and without Law, before them. And now what could their circumcision, Passover, sacrifices &c availe them; but seale up their further judgment, who had rejected the true God, but falsly reteyned and abused the signes of his favour, to their condemnatió.