Three Questions, Title page – Dedication
The three Questions OF
Free Iuſtification.
Chriſtian Liberty.
The uſe of the Law.
Explicated in a briefe Comment on St. PAVL to the Galatians, from the 16. ver. of the ſecond Chapter, to the 26. of the third.
By SAM. TORSHELL Paſtor of Bunbury in Cheſhire.
foreign. Baſil hom. 29. adv Ca um S. Trin.
LONDON. Printed by I.B. for H. Overton, and are to be ſold at his ſhop in Popes-head-Alley, at the entring into Lumbardſtreet. 1632.
The right Worſhipful, the MASTER, the WARDENS, and the reſt of the Company of HABERDASHERS in London.
TIs not cuſtome but a right, that challenges the Dedication; They are Sermons, which were preached, in that Interim while I was yours, though at London, and to that people whom I ſtill equally both love and honour, and who at that time owned my Preac ings, yet after your choyce had ſeparated mee from them to a remoter Countrey, and greater task, Their deſire firſt cald it to the Preſſe; but 'tis a trodden Complement to pleade Importunity; nor doe I love it, but muſt freely confeſſe, That it is not onelyonly by enforcement that I am abroad. Every one that vouchſafes to beſtow his eye ſo meanely, may reade, and with welcome. Nor would I beg acceptance from Cenſure; let men verdict as they pleaſe: It were Pride, and Selfe-ſeeking to crouch unto opinion. My intendments are but to doe ſervice to my great Maſter, and them that are his, The Humble; and therefore from him onelyonly are my expectations. If God might have honour, and Gods people benefit, harſheſt Cenſure ſhold not diſcourage mee from publiſhing this, or more.
I affect not their Niceneſſe, that will bee their owne Cloſets, and Cabinet up their owne labours. If wee have but one Talent, it muſt bee put unto the Banke; God endures not the Napkin. Let God & the Church have our Studies, if we be conſcionable, wee cannot loſe by our ſweat. The Subiect of this diſcourſe cannot be unuſefull, the frame is but rude, I intended not ornament; much ornament becomes not a Sermon: That Trumpet of the Goſpell, the learned Paul, determins to know nothing among his Corinths, ſave Ieſus Chriſt, and him crucified. But what ere it is, I have made it you-s, as a teſtimony of thoſe reſpects I beare you, and how iuſtly I owe them, upon Bonds not few, nor ordinary. The Lord adde unto what he hath beſtowed upon you, and make you anſwerable to your wonted goodneſſe; It is the prayer of
Your ſervant in the buſineſſe of God, SAM. TORSHEL. Bunbary. 1631.
OF JVSTIFICATION BY FAITH.
THE Queſtions of Free Iuſtification, of our Chriſtian Liberty, and of the uſe of the Law, are agitated of late, not without much heat, while one ſide carefull, the other ſide fearful of good works, doe both ſtrive for Chriſt, and miſtake each others grounds. They are untoward names wherewith Chriſtians brand one the other: while one is called a Legaliſt, another pointed at for an Antinomiſt, and this man repayes the former, with the hateful name of Iuſticiary; peeviſh expreſſions of weake minds; Can we not diſpute unleſſe we contend? It were a preſumption to endevour a reconcilement, unfit for my few years, and not much fit for this place. I ſhall onelyonly ſay ſo much as may beſt ſuit for popular Sermons, for an audiēce not nicely curious.
If we begin an analyſe at this chapter, there are two parts.
Gal. 2.I. The continuation of the Apoſtles narration, where hee relates two paſſed Acts:
1. That at Ieruſalem, with the Apoſtles, from the firſt, to the eleventh verſe.
2. That at Antioch, with Peter; In which,
1. The ſum of the whole buſineſſe; verſ. 11.
2. The particulars of the ſeverall paſſages, they, theſe:
1. What Peter did, v. 12.
2. The conſequent of that error, verſ. 13.
3. Pauls following reprehenſion: In which wee have,
1. The manner of it by way of an interrogation, to preſſe it therby more cloſely.
2. The matter of it; That is double:
1. Hee prooves the Hypotheſis, that thoſe preſent Gentiles ought not in that to have Iudaized; which he proves from Peters owne contrary fact, verſ. 14.
2. He proves the Theſis, That the Gentiles ought not at all to ſeeke righteouſneſſe from the law: This,
1. Hee proves from the common fact of all the Apoſtles, verſ. 15. Wee who are Iewes by nature, &c. If any might looke for righteouſneſſe from the law, then we might by the beſt reaſon doe it, having privilege above all other people; for we are borne Iewes, born to the righteouſneſſe of the Law; wee have the Fathers, the Covenant, the Promiſes; and are not ſinners of the Gentiles; alieni faederis, ſtrangers from the Covenant, as they are; yet we know that a man cannot be juſtified by the Law.
2. He confirms it from the general doctrine of Iuſtification, verſ. 16.
II. The ſecond part, is, the Returne of the Apoſtles ſpeech to the Galatians: wherein
1. Hee layes downe the doctrine of free Iuſtification, the maine Argument o his Epiſtle, verſ. 16. For this verſe is both the cloſe of the former, and beginning of this part, by an artfull, and almoſt unperceiued tranſition, paſſing from one to the other.
2. He proves it by ſeverall arguments, which take up the reſt of this Chapter, and eighteene verſes of the next.
3. He makes uſe of it by deduction of ſome conſequents from the 19. verſe of the third Chapter, and ſo following.
I ſhall goe on in an eaſie method, and follow Paul in his; therfore I lay downe for the ground of my following diſcourſe, this generall Doctrine: That a man is not iuſtified by the workes of the Law, but by the Faith of Ieſus Chriſt.
This truth I ſhall, firſt, explicate; ſecondly, confirme; thirdly, apply▪ which being done, we ſhall ſomewhat comprehend thoſe controverted tenents.
The explication is in this 16. verſe; Knowing, that is,1 Explicat. Wee doe know: foreign, for foreign. But that we may take the explication more full, we will obſerve thoſe particulars which the verſe affords us; they are theſe:
1. What Iustification is.
2 The excluſion of falſe cauſes of it.
3. The true meritorious cauſe.
4. The meanes of application.
Concerning the firſt, that we may take the whole nature of it, we will ſee,
1. What Iuſtice is.
2. What is Iuſtification.
1. Concerning Iuſtice; Thus: Iuſtice, or righteouſneſſe, is a perfect conformity, or agreement with the Divine Law; which admits a double name.
1. Legall, which is that righteouſnes or conformity to Gods Law, which is inherent in our ſelves; a iuſtice of workes; and it is either,
1. A iuſtice of obedience in doing all, in leaving undone nothing. Or,
2. A iuſtice of ſatisfaction, in enduring the penalty for default of obedience.
2. Evangelicall, which is that rig…teouſneſſe or conformity to Divine law, not inherent in our ſelves, but being in another, is reckoned ours. A iuſtice of faith.
2. Concerning Iuſtification; therein,
1. Of the Name.
2. Of the Thing. For one gives light to the other.
1. Of the name; the word Iuſtifico is not of ancient uſe, as not being found in old Latin Authors, but ſignifies to make one juſt. Now a man may be made juſt;
1. By infuſion, when an habituall quality of Iuſtice is wrought any way in any perſon. So was Adam juſt, God made man righteous, but they ſought out many inventions, Eccleſ. 7.29. So are regenerate Chriſtians juſt, being ſanctified, having grace infuſed. This the Schoole cals formall righteouſneſſe, and the corrupter Schoolemen ſay, that Chriſtian righteouſnes is ſuch, ſo in them, as whiteneſſe is in a wal Inherent; and that a man is in this ſenſe Iuſtified. But the ſenſe is different from our uſual acception, and therefore,
2. A man may bee Iuſt by Plea: that is, when being accuſed, he is Iudicially acquitted; when his Iuſtice being queſtioned, is cleared. Such formes wee have in our uſual ſpeaking; I'll make him a knave, whē we mean to convict a man; or, I'll make him an honeſt man, when wee meane to cleare him. So the word is uſed, Eſa. 5.23. Woe to them which iuſtifie the wicked for reward, and take away the righteouſneſſe of the righteous from him. Not that our undue praiſes can make a wicked man juſt, nor that our unjuſt ſlanders can make a good man unrighteous. Take the ſenſe but in one other expreſſion; we ſay, when a Iudge condemnes a malefactor, the law will juſtifie him; not that the law doth make the Iudge juſt, but doth approve and juſtifie the ſentence that he gives: This is the more proper ſenſe. And thus much of the name
2. Of the Thing it ſelfe: herein,
1. The nature of it.
2. The Degrees.
3. The Kinds.
1. The nature of it; this, It is the declaring or approving one Iuſt, when ſuſpect, and accuſed. So we gather it, Deut. 25.1. The matter of Iuſtification, is Iuſtice, which muſt be before this, in nature, as the ground. The forme, is the pleading of ſuch a juſtice. Then it is little differenced from Plea, or Apology.
2 The degrees, are,
1. In regard of matter:
1. Compleat, which is, full; or incompleat, to which referre Iuſtification by compariſon.
2. Vniverſal, which we cal Iuſtification of the perſon; or particular, which we cal, Iuſtification of the cauſe.
2. In regard of forme:
1. By aſſertion onelyonly, or both by aſſertion and demonſtration.
2. In colour, or in truth: ſeparately or joyntly.
3. The kinds are,
1 Of one inherently juſt: here Iuſtification is made, either by pleading the act committed, no fault; or if a fault, not committed. This is to bee juſtified by a righteouſnes of ones own, by declaring the party cleare, the accuſation falſe. It is of uſe, and onelyonly in the Court of man: Ierem, 26.15, 16.
2. Of ſuch as are not inherently juſt: here Iuſtification is by confeſſing the fault done, and by pleading ſatisfaction. For ſatisfaction, and Non-commiſſion, are alike equall in Iuſtice. Now ſatisfaction may bee made legally in a mans owne perſon, or Evangelically, by another, a Surety. Theſe things in the generall premiſed, we proceed to the other particulars to be explicated, where wee ſhall apply what hath been laid.
The ſecond is the Excluſion of falſe cauſes; A man is not juſtified by the works of the Law. The whole law is here meant, therefore the morall too. The Papiſts have an untoward conceit of a double merit, whereby they would bring in works. Take what they ſay, plainly and briefly: There is a Merit of congruence: It is the doing of that worke which is good in it ſelfe, and though it deſervedly merit not, yet being good, there is a congruence or fitneſſe that God ſhould reward it, hee being alſo good, and a lover of good, where he ſees it: So that if a man, meerely naturall, do ſay a Maſſe, give an Almes, or the like, there is a fitnes, or congruence to reward. There is a merit alſo of condignity, which is a juſt deſerving upon the former merit. A man by doing a good worke, deſerves by Congruence, though he be yet natural, that God ſhold give him grace; and having grace, now hee juſtly deſerves, becauſe Gratia gratum facit, and being gracious in Gods eye, God muſt needs reward him. This is all, and all is nothing, comming under this ſtrict excluſion, with the workes of the Law. But they have one refuge ſomwhat more ſubtill.
They ſay, the workes of the Law, which are excluded from Iuſtification, are the works of Free-will, ſuch as goe before faith: but ſuch as follow after faith, are not excluded. They would ſeeme to draw this gloſſe from the words of the Text, reading them according to the vulgar Latin Tranſlation, Non ex operibus, niſi per fidem; Not of the workes of the Law, unleſſe by faith.
Thus they argue, Indeed works are excluded, unleſſe they be done by faith; but from faith, they receive a Iuſtifying power: and thus they bring in workes to ſhare in the buſineſſe.
But to this we anſwer,
1. That the works of the Law, and the workes of Faith, are not ſet in oppoſition, but the workes of the Law, and Faith. For they would have a falſe ſuppoſition granted, that though Works of Law are excluded, yet Workes of Faith are not.
2. That ſuch workes as are done in Faith, are peremptorily excluded. Look onelyonly upon Abraham, a faithfull man, the father of the faithfull, his workes were many, they were glorious, nor can wee deny them to proceed frō faith, yet the Apoſtle fully enough proves it, Rom. 4. that hee had not in his workes, whereof to glory before God.
3. But wee anſwer more preſſely, by vindicating the Text: foreign, which they tranſlate, Niſi, unleſſe, is not Conditionall; but either excluſive, ſo it is taken for foreign, onelyonly; or adverſative, ſo it is taken for foreign, but: and thus it is uſed in many Scriptures, Gal. 1.7. foreign, But there are ſome that trouble you: Matth. 12.4. foreign, But to the Prieſts onelyonly: Revel. 21.27. foreign, But they that are written in the Lambs booke. Beſides, foreign and foreign, or foreign, ſeeme to be the ſame in the very word; for Alla, is of the Syriacke, Ellós, which is from the Hebrew Im ló, and that is in Greeke rendring, Ean mé. Moreover, to clear Hierome, by Hierome: hee, though he tranſlate it, Niſi unleſſe, So Aug. de Spir. & lit. c. 13.yet in the allegation of the place, hee frequently uſeth, Sed, But. But there neede no other words, where Saint Paul determines it ſo plainly in another place, Rom. 3.28. We conclude that a man is iuſtified by faith, foreign. Abſque operibus, Without the workes of the law. I will but name one other cavill, becauſe 'tis obvious; They ſay, If workes be excluded, then are we iuſtified by faith alone, if by faith alone, then would …atch iuſtifie if it were alone. Si ſola, tum ſi eſſet ſola.
I anſwere, That faith which iuſtifies, cannot bee alone, ſo the Apoſtle to theſe Galatians, cap. 5. ver. 6. foreign, Faith that workes by love: yet the inference is unworthy the quickneſſe of a Ieſuite, as if a man ſhould ſay, If the eie ſee alone, then it wil ſee if it be alone. Whereas we know, (to give you the thing cleare by this ſimilitude) that although the eye alone ſee, yet if it were by it ſelfe alone, it could not ſee at all. There is no part of my body can ſee an obiect viſible and preſented, not my eye-lid, not my fore-head, not my braine, but my eye onelyonly: yet if my eye were taken out of my head, I could diſcerne nothing. Wee dare not ſeparate workes from faith, that were to leave it naked, and ſhew it dead: yet it is an untoward tranſlation which Bellarmine renders,Bel. de Iuſt. lib. 2. c. 4. not without a manifeſt barbariſme, when he reads thus, Faith that is wrought by love: ſo making charity the forme and ſoule of faith. But let us retaine that forme of words, Wee are iuſtified, Sola fide, by faith alone. The Fathers are ſo uſuall in that phraſe, that I could eaſily weary you with the allegations. Let mee referre to ſome that have the very word, Sola fide; Orig. in loc. Baſil in conc. de humil. Ambr. cap. 9. in Rom. 3. Hier. in Rom. 4. Pet. Chryſol. ſerm. 34. de Haemorroiſſa Bern. ſerm. 22. in Can. Auguſt. in 83. Quaeſtionibus, quaeſt. 76. But no more, for I remember where I ſpeak, onelyonly let mee adde the words of two teſtimonies. That of Chryſoſtome in 3. ad Galat. is very pertinent: foreign. Againe (ſaith hee) ſome ſay, hee that relyes on faith alone, is execrable: But the Apoſtle ſpeakes the contrary, hee that relyes on Faith alone, is bleſſed. This Theodoret, ſeptimo Therapeuticon, almoſt repeats, foreign. Nor do wee obtaine thoſe ſecret good things, by any of our owne merits, but by faith alone.
This for the ſecond, The excluſiō of falſe cauſes; the third thing propounded for explication, is, The deſignement of the true meritorious cauſe of our Iuſtification: The Text declares it to be Ieſus Chriſt. His merits,Hic videtur eſſe implicatio terminorum. Conſule pa. 14, ad finem his obedience, in doing, in ſuffering. Take it in a briefe head, thus; Where there cannot be Iuſtification by plea, it muſt bee by ſome other proportionable means, which we call, Satisfaction. This Satisfaction muſt be proportioned to the offence; this being infinite, that muſt be alike infinite. Man therefore cannot ſatisfie, for both his doings, and his ſufferings, are limited. It muſt be done by another; now all creatures are both unholy, and finite; and the two requiſits neceſſ…rily to be in the ſatisfier, are, righteouſneſſe and infinitenes: Theſe are ſolely in God, but God cannot be ſatisfied by himſelfe, that were onelyonly to forgive, ſo he ſhould not be fully iuſt. It fals therefore into this, that he who muſt ſatisfie, muſt be God, truly righteous, truly infinite; and in ſomewhat different from God, that there may be a compleat fitnes. Let nature ſearch this myſtery, ſhe wil eaſily be confounded; nay, let the ſoule that ſinned, bee put upon the ſearch, it leaves ſtudying, and fals to deſpairing. Briefly, it muſt fal, upō the appointment of an higher wiſdome, namely, Chriſt, in whom thoſe fitneſſes do all meet. Therefore, the Righteouſneſſe of the Iuſtified, is that which formally is in Chriſt only. See how the Apoſtle inlarges and explaines himſelfe in this, in his holy zeale, againſt proud Zelots: they being ignorant of Gods righteouſneſſe, and going about to eſtabliſh their owne righteouſneſſe, have not ſubmitted themſelves to the righteouſneſſe of God, Rom. 10 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
See the ſame Apoſtle, in a more practique expreſſion, his owne Reſolve; I count all things but loſſe, for the excellency of the knowledge of Chriſt Ieſus my Lord; and doe count them but dung, that I may winne Chriſt, and bee found in him, not having mine owne Righteouſneſſe, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Chriſt: Phil. 3.8, 9. The determination of a ſpirit, made Divine: Let us ſo goe out of our ſelves, and flye unto our Chriſt. Hee is our hiding place, and muſt be our ſtrength Surely, ſhall one ſay, In the Lord have I righteouſneſſe and ſtrength, even to him ſhall men come, and all that are incenſed againſt him ſhall be aſhamed: In the Lord ſhall all the ſeed of Iſrael be iuſtified, and ſhall glory, Eſay 45.24, 25. We muſt not looke upon the Law, or Works, but ſee them hid in Chriſt. This myſtery was excellently ſhadowed, whē God commanded the Ark, wherin were the Tables of the Covenant, to bee covered with a Propitiatory, upon which the Cherubs ſtretcht their wings, Exod. 25.17, 18, 19, &c. Heb. 9.4, 5. Chriſt is that Pro…itiatory, Rom. 3.25. Let us not preſume to uncover the Arke, or to take out the Decalogue, for it is happy, that the Law is kept ſhut, and incloſed from us: but let us faſten our eyes upon the Mercy-ſeat, ſee how ſweetely the Cherubs ſit, and minde not what the Cheſt containes; for to lift up the lid of that, were like the opening of the boxe of the harmfull Pandora, and would preſent horrour to the curious, the unwiſe Iuſticiary.
The laſt head propounded for explication, was the means of application: Chriſt is that Righteouſnes, how is he ours? By Faith … man is iuſtified, not by the works of the Law, but by faith in Ieſus Chriſt; ſo the Text. We will here conſider,
1. What Faith is.
2. How Faith juſtifies.
1. I intend not a diſpute, a word may give us what may ſuffice the preſent purpoſe. It hath ſeat both in the intellect, and in the will; and we obſerve in it, both Aſſent and Appreſion. This, indeed, is faith; or if we looke upon it, a little extended, wee perceive the thruſting away of ſomwhat, the accepting of ſomwhat, the excluſion of workes of worth, the acceptation of Chriſt. The Apoſtle to the Hebrewes gives us this in a like phraſe ſpeaking of the Patriarchs faith; Theſe dyed in the faith, not having received the promiſes, but having ſeene them a farre off, foreign, and were perſwaded of them, foreign and embraced them, Hebr. 11.13.
2. This faith juſtifies, the Scripture is full, Rom. 3.24, 25.30. Rom. 10, 10. Epheſ. 2.8. Concerning the manner, take it negatively, poſitively, in theſe Theſes.
1. It iuſtifies not by bare profeſſion, then ſhould all hypocrites be iuſtified: but S. Iames diſputes ſtrongly in his ſecond Chapter, againſt them, and againſt that Faith. In that ſenſe he laies down his cavilled and miſtaken concluſion v. 24. foreign. By workes a man is iuſtified, and not by faith onelyonly. His intent is but the ſame with Paul, in that place alleaged and vindicated, Gal. 5.6.
2. Nor are we iuſtified by faith, as by an action which hath worth and merit in it, whereby to deſerve our iuſtification.
3. Nor is Faith ſuch an action, which, though it have not merit, yet by favourable acceptance, is taken as if it were the perfect righteouſneſſe of the law.
4. But it iuſtifies, as it is in relation to that obiect which it embraces, and which obiect is our Iuſtification. It iuſtifies, Relativè et Organicè, relatively and inſtrumentally: ut terminatur in foreign Chriſti, Faith lookes upon, layes hold on Chriſt, on his merits, on his ſufficiencies, and thus is termed Iuſtifying Faith.
Theſe I laid in this manner, to cleare this Truth from a double error.
1. One is of the Papiſts, and more groſſe, who ſay, That Faith iuſtifies per modum cauſae efficientis et meritoriae, as an efficient and meritorious cauſe. This is delivered by Cardinall Bellarmine, lib. 1. de Iuſt. cap. 17. and by the Ieſuite Pererius, Com. in Gen. cap. 15. I anſwer, if Faith had merit to juſtifie, it ſhould then goe before Iuſtification, et ratione, et tempore, both in nature, and time; which we may not grant; for Faith is by it ſelfe, a part of ſanctification, and that wee cannot conceive to goe before our Iuſtification; that, namely, which is Foro Divino, in Gods ſight. But I meant but to name this, becauſe it is enough knowne.
2. The other is later, and a little more ſubtile; They ſay, Faith juſtifies, ſenſu proprio, in a proper ſenſe; That, foreign credere, the very beleeving, is imputed for righteouſneſſe: Non quidem merito ſuo, ſed propter gratuitam acceptilationem Dei; Not (ſay they) for its owne merit, but becauſe of favourable allowance, it is accepted, as if it had merit: ſo in a gracious acceptilation, it is received for righteouſneſſe. This was delivered by Fauſtus Socinus, lib. 4. cap. 4. pag. 334. F…rwarded by others alſo.
But to cleare our ſelves of this, we argue againſt it briefly, thus:
1. No man is Iuſtified by an act of his owne; This propoſition is true from expreſſe Scripture, Eph. 2.5. By grace ye are ſaved; ver. 9. Not of workes: Now the chayne is ſurely linckt, juſtification and ſalvation; Rom. 8 29, 30. Or more in the words, Tit. 3.6, 7. Not by works of righteouſneſſe which wee have done, but according to his mercy he ſaved us, being Iuſtified by his grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of workes, otherwiſe grace is no more grace, Rom. 11.6. But to beleeve, is an act of our own; I meane not any excluſion of the ſpirits helpe, for God workes all our works in us; onelyonly this I would ſay, that the work takes its denomination from the next agent, and man is ſaid to beleeve: Therfore it is cleare, no Iuſtification by the Act of beleeving.
2. God accounts that for perfect righteouſneſſe, which is ſo indeed: The Apoſtle witneſſeth the honour of Gods truth, Rom. 2.2. Wee are ſure that the Iudgement of God is according to truth. But they dare not but confeſſe it, that Faith is not indeed true righteouſneſſe of the Law: or, if otherwiſe, yet this were enough againſt it, that if Faith were that Righteouſneſſe, and Iuſtification were by it, then a man ſhould be Iuſtified by two righteouſneſſes, which no reaſon wil admit; for if one be ſufficient, there needeth not any other; and to grant it, what were it but to thruſt out Chriſt and all his merits, as if he were needleſſe, and they inſufficient.
They reply ſomewhat, and ſtrangely, in an odde diſtinction of a double Iudgement in God: Iudicium Iuſtitiae, et Iudicium miſericordiae: They ſay, God ſometimes iudgeth with a Iudgement of Iuſtice, and then hee accounts nothing for ſuch, but what is truly ſuch: Sometimes with a Iudgement of mercy, and then laying aſide rigour, he graciouſly allowes, what in truth is not ſuch.
But what impiety is this, indiſtinguiſhing of God, to ſeparate God from God, his Truth from his mercy; Nay, they doe ever meete in God. In another kinde, we wil admit the diſtinction, and not divide: God lookes upon the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt that is perfect, here is a Iudgement of Truth; God lookes upon that righteouſneſſe as imputed to us, not otherwiſe ours, here is a Iudgement of mercy; the double Iudgment that they ſpeake of, yet Mercy and Truth are met together.
…I have done with what I firſt named,2 Confirmation. the Explication: I propounded, ſecondly, to prove what is ſo explayned; and wee may ſee it ſtrengthened, partly, by Teſtimony, partly by Arguments.
1.1 By teſtimonies. The Teſtimonies of parallell Scriptures are plaine: ſee one or two.
Rom. 3.28. foreign, id eſt, foreign, We conclude, That a man is iuſtified by faith, without the deeds of the Law.
Rom. 5.1. Being iuſtified by Faith, we have peace.
Rom 4.6. David deſcribes the bleſſedneſſe of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteouſneſſe, without workes. Verſe 9 Wee ſay that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteouſneſſe. …his he tooke out of the witneſſe of ſacred hiſtory.
Gen. 15.6. He beleeved in the Lord, and hee accounted it to him for righteouſneſſe.
To omit others, the Apoſtle here ſubioynes one, in the latter end of this 16. verſe, which hee receives from that Pſalmiſt, Pſal. 143 2. In thy ſight ſhall no man living be iuſtified. The Hebrew originall, ſtrictly renders it ſelfe by the Septuagint, thus, All fleſh ſhall not be iuſtified: foreign, but the Greeke frames that Hebraiſme thus, foreign, No fleſh; and ſo the preſent Text reads it.
2 By Arguments.2. The arguments are many, which the Apoſtle hath diſpoſed into a juſt method, & is large in them, as containing in them a great deale of matter, full of myſtery, and ful of comfort.
1. The firſt argument is Argum. 1 laid out unto us, in the 17, 18, 19, 20. verſes.
The Text.
GAL. 2.17. But if while we ſeeke to bee iuſtified by Chriſt, we our ſelves alſo are found ſinners, is therfore Chriſt the miniſter of ſinne? God forbid.
VERS. 18. For if I build again the things that I deſtroyed, I make my ſelfe a Tranſgreſſor.
VERS. 19. For I through the Law, am dead to the Law, that I might live unto God.
Verſ. 20. I am crucified with Chriſt. Nevertheleſſe I live, yet not I, but Chriſt liveth in mee, and the life which I now live in the fleſh, I live by the faith of the ſonne of God, who loved me, and gave himſelfe for me.
Chryſoſtome and Hierome referre this in the 17. verſ. to Peter; but more genuinely is it referred by others to the Galatians, to al, and the force of the Argument, This: Chriſt cals us frō the Law to faith, but if faith be not ſufficient, unleſſe the law be alſo broght in, then ſhall Chriſt ſeeme to patronize ſinne, by calling us from that Law, by vertue of which, ſin is expiated. If we, who, that we might bee Iuſtified, have given our names to Chriſt, doe yet want righteouſnes, unleſſe wee embrace Circumciſion, and the Ceremonies of the Law, then we ſhall bee enforced to acknowledge that Chriſt is a Miniſter of ſinne. A Miniſter of ſin is hee which teacheth us what to doe for Righteouſneſſe, and ſo terrifies and ſhuts us under ſinne; thus, in ſtead of a Saviour, Chriſt ſhould bee a tyrant, a deſtroyer. But this were falſe, and abominable to conceive, therefore the Apoſtle addes his Abſit, God forbid. Moſes onelyonly was a Miniſter of ſinne, Chriſt is a giver of righteouſneſſe, and the Scriptures are wont to promiſe it only by the benefit of him, The Redeemer ſhall come out of Zion.
In the 18. verſe, hee amplifieth the former argument; comparing the law to a Building, a ſimilitude frequent, & uſed elſewhere by Paul, who cals himſelfe A wiſe maſter builder, 1 Cor. 3.10. I have puld downe that frame and ſtructure of the Law, that it may not reigne in the Conſciences of Chriſtians; if I return to the Law which I have formerly forſaken, I ſhall manifeſt my ſelfe to bee a deceizer, ſo the vulgar, or as the Greeke carryes it; foreign, I declare my ſelfe to bee a ſinner, a Tranſgreſſor, and, as the Greeke Scholies adde, ſtill obnoxious to death and damnation. Hee hath given us his owne Character, & the true difference of Preachers: True ones, they deſtroy the Law, and build up the faith of Chriſt: Iuſticiaries, falſe Popiſh Teachers, deſtroy the kingdome of Chriſt, while they raiſe up the Building of the Law, and maintaine their owne Righteouſneſſe. The Argument is continued in the 19. verſe; no recourſe is to bee had unto the Law againe, for by the Law, I am dead unto the Law, Deo vivit qui ſub Deo eſt; Legi autem, qui ſub lege. Aug.that I might live unto God; So that now the Law hath no power over us, which he ſpeaks directly againſt them, who ſay, Wee muſt live unto the Law, if we meane to live unto God. Nay, wee are dead to the commands of the Law, not onelyonly free, but dead; ſo though the Law live ſtill, it hath nothing to do with us; a ſlave once dead, is no longer ſubiect to the hard uſages of his tyrannous Maſter, though he call upon, and urge him, he heares not, obeyes not, becauſe he is dead. So are we to the Law, in this buſineſſe of iuſtification. Here is mention of a law, and a law; ſome underſtand both to ſignifie the ſame: By the ſentence of the Law it ſelfe I am dead unto the Law: it ſelfe tels us, that it is not perpetuall, but Chriſt is the End of it, when Chriſt comes, it ceaſeth to rule. This affords a fit ſenſe; yet I ſee not, but that of Hierome may be rather admitted, who underſtands the former, of the Evangelicall Law, the Law of Faith: the Expoſition is ſweet; Our Savior is become our law, by him wee are dead unto that of Moſes: Now the Binding Law, is bound it ſelfe by Chriſt, and wee by him are ſet at liberty. By this interpretation, we are fallen, neceſſarily, upon that great Queſtion of Chriſtian Liberty, which becauſe it fals in ſo fitly into this verſe, I wil ſpend ſome more words upon it, more largely.