Opposition to Errors of William Sherlock, Chapter 4 · Section 3 (1 of 3)

Opposition to Errors of William Sherlock · Chapter 4 · Section 3 (1 of 3)

p. 579SECT. 3. Concerning the Nature of our Union to Christ, Whereby, we are entituled to all his fulness, Righteousness, &c.

WHen the Arm is in danger of being lost by a Gangraen, it were unseasonable Diligence to attend the Cure of a Cut-finger. When that Vessel in which all our common Concerns are embarqued is ready to sink, it would be unpardonable folly in the the Passengers to study the security of their particular Cabbins: like those whom the great Orator laughs at, for presuming their Gardens, Orchards, and private Walks would be indemnified in the general Ruine of the City. In this Section our Author lays his Axe to the Root of the Christian Religion; leaving therefore particular persons to shift for themselves, The Righteousness of Christs Life, and the Sacrifice of his Death, with that influence that they have upon our acceptance with God, call for defence. Many have been infamous for horrid Murders: Cain is upon Record for a Fra…ricide, Saul for a Suicide, Herod's Ambition was to have been a Deicide; but this last Age seems to have out-done all in an Attempt to Murder the Death of Christ it self: As if, because Christ by his Death had destroyed him that had the power of Death, these Men would avenge the Devils Quarrel, and become his second, hoping they may one day triumph over it and sing, O Death p. 580we will be thy Death! In Pag. 320. Our Author propounds this great Question: What Influence the Sacrifice of Christ's Death, and the Righteousness of his Life, have upon our acceptance with God? And he gives us both a Reason, why he moves the Question, and an Answer to it. 1. The Reason why he moves this Question upon it, Lest any should suspect that his Design is to lessen the Grace of God, or to disparage the Merits, and Righteousness of Christ. Now I would make a question upon it; Whether his Answer to the Question will probably heal us of our suspicions, or rather beget Iealousies where there were none, and heighten those already conceived into violent presumptions, if not plain demonstrations, that such is his Design? 2. His Answer to the Question is this: All that I can find in Scripture about this, is: That to this we owe the Covenant of Grace: That God being well pleased with the Obedience of Christ's Life, and the Sacrifice of his Death, for his sake entred into a New-Covenant with Mankind, wherein he promises Pardon of sin, and Eternal Life to those who believe, and obey the Gospel. This Answer contains three things: 1. A Description of the Covenant of Grace. 2. An Assertion that this Covenant is owing to the Sacrifice of Christ's Death, and the Righteousness of his Life. 3. a Supposition, that the Righteousness and Sacrifice of Christ, has no other Influence upon our Acceptance with God, but that for his sake he entred into such a Covenant (as he has here described) with Man-kind.

(1.) His Description of the Covenant is this: A promise of the Pardon of sin, and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel. A Description so liable to exceptions, that it describes neither p. 581the whole of the Covenant, nor a New-Covenant, nor (upon the matter) any Covenant at all.

§. 1. This Description gives us little, very little of the true Covenant of Grace: for (1.) though he thinks to put us off with a promise of Pardon and Life to those who believe and obey; the true Covenant of Grace has given us a Promise of that Faith, whereby we may believe, and of that New-heart whereby we are enabled to obey the Gospel. And first we have a Promise of the right Faith made to us in the true Covenant, Ioh. 6. 37. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me, and him that cometh to me I will in no-wise cast out, Eph. 2. 8. By Grace ye are saved through Faith, and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God. And lest it should be Answered, that Faith is indeed God's gift as all other things are, wherein the Common Providence of God concurs with Humane industry: The Apostle, as if aware of such a petty Answer, has laid in a Reply ready, ch. 1. v. 19. That they who believe, do so by the exceeding greatness of God's power, even according to the working of his Mighty power, which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead. Secondly, we have a direct, and express Promise too of that New-heart from which we give to God New-obedience; nay, of that New-obedience it self, which proceeds from the New-heart, or renewed Nature: Ezek. 36. A new heart also will I give you, and a new Spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the heart of Stone out of your Flesh, and will give you a heart of Flesh: (there's the new Heart.) and v. 27. I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my Statutes, and ye shall keep my Iudgments and p. 582do them: (there is new obedience) thus also, Heb. 8. 10. This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my Laws into their minds, and write them in their hearts &c. wherein it's easy to observe: 1. That this New-Covenant was founded upon God's free Grace, v. 9. They continued not in my Covenant (the old Covenant) and I regarded them not, saith the Lord: They were a Covenant-breaking people, deserved utter rejection, yet God will make another, a better, a New-Covenant with them. 2 That the promises of this Covenant were purely Spiritual; writing his Laws in their minds and hearts. 3. The parties▪ Covenanting, God and his Israel; not all and every individual Son of Adam: But (2.) This Description gives us very little of the true Covenant of Grace; here's a Promise of Pardon and Life to them who believe and obey; but perseverance in Faith and Obedience, is left to the desultory and lubricous power of free-will: whereas in the true Covenant of Grace, there's an undertaking that the Covenant shall be immutable, both on God's part and the Believers, Jer. 32. 38, 40. They shall be my people and I will be their God; and I will make an everlasting Covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts that they shall not depart from me. There are but two things that we can possibly Imagine should make the Covenant fall short of perpetuity, either God's turning away from his people, or (which is only to be suspected) their turning away from their God: Against both of these God has made sufficient Provision. 1. God has promised that he will not turn away from them to do them good. p. 5832. He has promised that they shall not depart from him, and to fix and determine their backsliding Natures, he has promised to put his fear into their hearts, which is the great preservative against Apostacy.

§. 2. As it describes not the whole of the Covenant, so it describes not the Nature of a New-Covenant. The Gospel-Covenant may be called a New Covenant, either in opposition to the Old Covenant of Works; or the old Administration of the Covenant of Grace: Now, 1. This Covenant which he has here described is no new Covenant in opposition to the Old-Covenant of works. The Covenant which God made with Adam promised Life upon condition of Obedience; Now the Commands which God gave to Adam, were as easy as those which are now given to all Mankind: and much easier too, if we consider, first; That he had more natural strength to obey and keep them, and as for supernatural strength, our Author will allow us none, unless by a desperate Catachresis we will call Moral Arguments so; which to a Creature dead in trespasses and sins, signify just nothing, without special power from on high, to render them efficacious, which neither will be allowed us. And Secondly, we are told that Christ has added to the Moral Law, which is to lay more Load on those who were before overcharged; so that (as he makes Covenants) Adam's was much the better Covenant of the two: But he has wisely shuffled in a Promise of the Pardon of Sin, which may seem to give his Covenant a preheminence above that of Adam: But that will not mend the matter; both because it's better to have no sin in our Natures p. 584than such a Remedy, better to have no Wound than such a Plaister, and also because the Promise of Pardon is suspended upon the condition of Faith and Obedience, which without supernaturally real influx of immediate Divine Power reduces the promise to an impossibility of performance. 2. This Covenant which he has here described, is no NewCovenant in opposition to the old Administration of the Covenant of Grace. There were the same promises then that we have now, the same moral precepts to observe that we have now; and though the word [Gospel] comes in for a blind, yet the Apostle assures us, Gal. 3. 8. That Abraham had the Gospel Preached to him.

§. 3. Upon the matter, it's no Covenant of Grace at all. For, 1. A Promise of Pardon and Life, upon Condition of Believing and Obeying, is neither better nor worse, than a threatning of Condemnation and Death, to them who Believe not, and Obey not. It may with equal right be called a threatning of Death, as a Promise of Life: It's no more a Covenant of Grace than a Covenant of Wrath; and therefore, 2. (if it be lawful to consider Man as the Word of God describes him, as dead in Sins and Trespasses, as one that of himself cannot think a good thought, that can do nothing at all without Christ) It's no Covenant at all to him under his present circumstances; for what is the nice difference between a Promise of Life, to him that obeys, when it's certain before-hand he cannot obey, and no Promise at all? 3. This Covenant which he calls New, (and well he may, for it's of his own making, or however of his own new-vamping) assigns the same conditions p. 585of Pardon and Eternal Life; but the Scripture requires other qualifications for Eternal Life, than for the Pardon of Sin. A Believer may be justified without a sinless perfection, but without such a sinless perfection none shall enter into Glory: He may be actually justified, that has not persevered in Holy Obedience to the Death; but without such perseverance he can never be made partaker of Eternal Life. 4. This Covenant of his is supposed to be made with all Mankind, and yet all Mankind never heard of it: Now is it not very admirable, and to be placed amongst the wonders of the New-Divinity, that God should enter into a Covenant with all the World to Pardon and save them upon condition of Faith & Obedience, and yet not let many of them know a syllable of it? Nay, that he should expresly countermand the promulgating of the Gospel to them? And yet so has God done even by the preaching of the true Covenant of Grace: Acts 16. 6, 7. Now when they had gone throughout all Phrygia, and the Region of Galatia, and were forbidden by the Holy Ghost to Preach the word in Asia; After they were come to Mylia, they assayed to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit suffered them not.

(2.) Let us now briefly consider his Assertion: That the Covenant of Grace (such a one as he has made for us) is owing to the Sacrifice of Christ's death, and the Righteousness of his Life: That God being pleased with these, for Christ's sake entred into a New Covenant with Mankind. I must tell the Reader that I have narrowly pryed into this Section, wherein I find frequent assertions of this Doctrine, That the Covenant of Grace is owing to, procured by, founded on the Obedience of Christ's Life, and the Sacrifice of his p. 586Death; and yet so unhappy have I been in my search that I cannot find any Proof, or any attempt to prove it▪ and therefore (till I see evidence to the contrary) I shall take it for granted, that the Covenant of Grace is owing to, founded on, and given forth by that free Grace of God, from whence it is justly denominated A Covenant of Grace; though the intervention of a Mediator, such a Mediator, was absolutely necessary to put us into the Actual possession of those rich mercies designed for us by God in that Covevenant; which Mediator himself is owing to, founded on that Covenant of Grace, and therefore the Covenant of Grace is not founded upon him: but indeed for that Covenant which he is pleased to call a New-Covenant, and a Covenant of Grace, it's no great matter where 'tis founded, and therefore let him dispose of his own Creature as he pleases.

(3.) He supposes that Christ's Obedience and Sacrifice had no other influence upon our acceptance with God, but that for his sake he entred into such a Covevenant with Mankind. This is all, however that he can find; But this is a most miserable All, and either is just nothing, or very near it. For, §. 1. Let him of Courtesy Answer one Question more since he is so good at it, Whether God was ever at any time unwilling to pardon sin, and give Eternal Life, to those who did believe his Promises, and obey his Precepts? If he was unwilling; Then let him shew how Christ's Obedience and Sacrifice, did operate upon God to alter his will, and of unwilling to make him willing: what could there be in the Sacrifice of Christ's Death, or the Righteousness of his Life, that should make God more in Love with Faith and Obedience, than he had been before? But if God was willing, and p. 587that without respect to Christ: then how does he give the Pardon of sin and Eternal Life, to them who Believe and Obey for Christ's sake? I am sure of our Authors good-Nature in this point; he will say, he has said it; That some, that many were saved without respect to Christ; The mercy and Grace of God (it seems) accepting their Belief of particular Revelations, and their sincere Obedience to his Commands; Repentance supplying the defects, and shortness of their Conformity to the Law: Now if God did all this without regard to Christ, how does he do it for the sake of Christ? But there's an Answer to this, that lies Dormant in the word [Promise] God did indeed Pardon sin, and give Eternal Life, to those who believed his Revelations, and obeyed his Commandements; but he never promised he would do it. But now he has drawn out his Grace and good-will into a Promise to pardon sin and give Eternal Life; upon the terms aforesaid, and this he has done for Christ's sake: And let us Audit the Account; and all the influence that Christ's Obedience and Sacrifice bath upon our acceptation with God, is, that we have got a promise from God to do that which he would have done before; to give us that he would have given us before; only he would not promise to do it for us, to give it to us. Two things I shall briefly return. 1. That God under the Old-Testament made explicite promises of the pardon of Sin, and Eternal Life; and if under that Dispensation, I am sure our Author will say, without respect to Christ: that this was the Doctrine of the Old-Testament, the Apostle asserts, Act. 13. 40. To him give all the Prophets witness, that through his Name, whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 2 Sam. p. 5887. 14. I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son: and there's enough in that to secure a promise of pardon to a repenting Child. Mal. 3. 17. They shall be mine, and I will spare them as a Father spares his own son that serves him: but it it is added; If he sin against me, I will chasten him with the Rod of Men, but my Mercy shall not depart from him. Ps. 99. 8. Thou answeredst them, O Lord our God, thou wast a God that forgavest them, though thou tookest vengeance on their inventions. And as the pardoning Grace that was in God's Nature was revealed to them, as the foundation of their Faith and obedience, Ps. 130. 4. There is forgiveness with thee that thou mayst be feared; So it is drawn out into a promise, v. 8. He shall redeem Israel from all his Iniquities, which without the pardon of them is simply impossible. As for the Promises of Eternal Lise, we find good old Iacob now giving up the Ghost, and having no hope in this Life; expressing his Faith thus, Gen. 49. 18. I have waited for thy Salvation, O Lord! Which doubtless was Eternal Salvation▪ beyond the Verge of that short time of his Life, which he knew was expired; Ps. 73. 24. Thou shalt guide me with thy Counsel, (in my pilgrimage) and afterwards receive me to glory: but a more convenient place will offer it self for the discussing of this matter. 2. If then this be all that the Obedience of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of his Death do contribute to our acceptance with God, that for Christ's sake we have got a Promise, or a more explicite Promise of the pardon of sin, and Eternal Life than before; then I must be of the same mind still, that it contributes just nothing to the acceptance of our Obedience with God. Let me have Liberty to put the Case of two Persons, v. g. p. 589David and Paul; let us suppose these two, equally obedient to God's commands, the former without such an express and explicite promise of Reward the other, encouraged by stronger Arguments of clear and numerous Promises of Pardon, and Eternal Life: Which of these two is more accepted of God? He that performed equal Obedience, upon more feeble encouragements; or he that upon stronger Motives▪ yet gave but equal Obedience? If Reason might determine this Controversy, it would clearly carry it for him, that bore equal burden with less strength, performed equal duty upon less inducements: If then this be all the influence that the Obedience and death of Christ have upon our Acceptation with God; that thereby we have got a greater help to obedience, the best Answer to the Question had been, that it has no influence upon our Acceptance with God. §. 2. His Answer signifies nothing or very near it: For the Question was, What Influence Christ's Active and Passive Obedience have upon our Acceptance with God? And he has framed an Answer to another Question; What Influence Christ's Active and Passive Obedience have upon our Obedience? Which is quite another thing. If Christ's Obedience have any influence upon our acceptation with God, then God for Christ's sake must accept us, and our Obedience for the sake of Christ, which otherwise he had not, would not have done; and Christ must be supposed to have done and suffered something, which had such an influence upon God, as to procure the favour of God towards our persons and services, which without that consideration had not been, could not be procured: But if this be all; That God has made us a Promise to accept that Obedience p. 590for Christ's sake, which (without any respect to Christ) would have accepted, though not say be would accept; then if our obedience be little, Christ will not make it reputed much, if imperfect, Christ's Obedience will not render it perfect; and thus in plain Terms, The Sacrifice of his Death, and Righteousness of his Life procure no acceptance at all, no not the least of our Persons or Obedience with God. (3.) His Answer is so like nothing, as cannot be discerned from nothing: The Question was, What influence Christ's Righteousness and Sacrifice have upon our acceptance with God? The Answer is, God for Christ's sake entred into a New-Covenant with Mankind, &c. which is to leave the Question just as he found it (and if he leave it no worse it's pardonable) for it will be enquired still; What influence the Righteousness of Christ's Life, and the Sacrifice of his Death had upon God to move him to enter, into such a Covenant? Under what Notion did his Life and Death operate upon God? Did Christ make a proper Reconciliation and Atonement with God? Was his Death a proper Sacrifice? Did it expiate the Guilt of Sin? No! not a syllable of all this; only for fashions sake it must be said to have had An influence; though what it is, or how it had that influence, he cannot tell: But he will speak to these things more distinctly.

[1.] What influence the Death of Christ has upon our Acceptation with God? But it is to be supposed that we have had our Answer, and must sit down by it. That God was so well pleased with the Sacrifice of Christ's Death, that for his sake he entred into a NewCovenant with Mankind: The Proof is all in all; Why, this is plain (says he) in reference to his Death; Hence the Blood of Christ is called the Blood of the Covenant▪ p. 591Heb. 10. 29. It's plain, that God for Christ's sake entred into this Covenant, because his Blood is called the Blood of the new Covenant: but yet it's not so very plain neither; A man may possibly mistake it for all that he has said to satisfy him: well! But then Christ is called the great Shepherd, and Bishop of Souls through the blood of the everlasting Covenant, Heb. 13. 20. but I can find no such Scripture: well; However, The Blood of Christ is called the Blood of sprinkling, which speaks better things than the Blood of Abel, Heb. 12. 24. which is an Allusion to Moses his sprinkling the Blood of the Sacrifice, wherewith he confirmed and ratified the Covenant, between God and the Children of Israel, &c. I expected it would come to this at long run▪ God entred into the Covenant for the sake of Christ's Death, because his Death confirmed the Covenant: A very trim Reason! The confirming of a Covenant, supposes a Covenant in being; If then all the design of the Blood of Christ was to confirm and ratifie a Covenant, it will not follow that therefore God did enter into such a Covenant for the sake of the Blood, but therefore he did not. I deny not that the Death of Christ was a great Confirmation of the true Covenant of Grace to our Faith: For what stronger Confirmation could the most jealous Soul desire of the reality of free Grace promising to pardon sin, and bestow Eternal Life upon believers, than that the Son of God himself should first take upon him our Nature, and in that Nature offer up himself to God, to atone and reconcile him to us; that he should make satisfaction to God's rectoral Iustice, and pay the price of our Redemption, thereby removing out of the way of our Faith the grand impediments of it▪ the p. 592Justice of God and the Commination of the Law, which stood in the way of our Pardon, and Salvation? But to obviate our Author's design, I shall a little divert the Reader with the consideration of these Propositions: 1. The Confirmation of such a Covenant as he has described (viz. a Promise of the Pardon of sin and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel) was not the main end of the Death of Christ: 1. Because there is such an end ascribed to his Death, which the Death of no other person in the world, could in any wise reach: but now to confirm the Gospel, and all the Promises thereof was an end which the Death of another might reach; therefore this was not the main end of the Death of Christ. The crucifying of Peter, the Martyrdom of Paul, were a great Confirmation of the Doctrine which they Preached; the Doctrine which they Preach't was the Gospel, and all its Promises; yet neither was the Death of the one, or other, able to reach the great Design of the Death of Christ: 1 Cor. 1. 18. Was Paul Crucified for you? Or were you Baptized into the Name of Paul? None could be Crucified for Sinners in that way that Christ was Crucified for them, into whose Name they might not be Baptized: but into the Name of no mere Man might they be Baptized; therefore no mere Man could be Crucified for sinners in that way, and for those ends which Christ was Crucified for▪ Paul▪ suffered Death for the Churches good, but not in the Churches stead: He dyed to Confirm what he Preacht, and he Preacht the Covenant of Grace with all its Promises; yet he was not Crucified for the Church, his Soul was not made an Offering for sin, God laid not upon him all our Iniquities; his Death was p. 593not a Sacrifice of Propitiation: And yet all this may be said of Paul's Death, if those expressions applyed to the Death of Christ, signify no more than a Confirmation of the Gospel. 2. The Scripture assigns greater ends to the Death of Christ, than confirmation of Promises: 1. His Death as a Sacrifice atoned God. 2. His Death as a Price paid to God redeemed us. 3. His Death as a Punishment exacted of God, satisfied his Iustice. For the first, Isa. 53. 10. his Soul was made an Offering for sin: and therefore as on a Sacrifice of Atonement, God laid on him the Iniquities of us all, V. 6. For the second, 1 Tim. 2. 6. He gave himself a Ransom, or Price of Redemption for all. For the third, Rom. 3. 25, 26. The Blood of Christ is said to be a Declaration of God's Righteousness, that he might be just in justifying the Believer; which Testimonies will call for clearing and vindication in due time. And these indeed are such ends of the Death of Christ, as will undeniably prove, that his Death had an Influence upon our Acceptance with God. 3. The Scripture owns Christ as a proper Priest; and therefore his Work must be somewhat more, than confirming a Doctrine. A Prophet will abundantly answer that design: But our Author prudently having cut out Christ some work to do, has fitted him with an Office too, which is proportionable to it; for to what purpose should Christ be a Priest, that has nothing to do with his Sacrifice, but to confirm his Doctrine? The direct and immediate Object of Christ's Sacerdotal Office was God, Heb. 9. 14, 15. How much more shall the Blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself to God, purge your Consciences? I know these Men will say that Christ offered up himself to God in He… ven, p. 594but not upon the Cross: whereas the Blood of Christ is here compared with, though preferred to the Blood of Bulls and Goats, and the Ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, some of which were never carried into the Holy Place; and the Blood of those which were, was first shed at the Altar, before it could be sprinkled at the Mercy-Seat: And the word here used foreign, is a sacred and religious Word, applied to the Sacrifices which were brought to, and …ffered at the Altar. Again, Heb. 5. 1. Christ i… ordained a Priest in things pertaining to God. His Priestly Employment lay mainly with him, to confirm promises that relate to us men; but a Priest offers not Sacrifice to the People, though for the People. Christ's Business as our High-Priest was with God, and in his Undertaking with him, lyes the true Reason of the Acceptation of our Persons & Services with God. 4. The Scripture every-where expresses Christ's Innocency, nay his perfect Holine…, the cheerfulness, self-denyal, constancy, universality of his Obedience to his Fathers Will, especially the Law of the Mediator. He always did the Things that pleased his Father, Joh. 8. 29. He fulfilled all Righteousness, Mat. 3. 15. His Meat and Drink was to do the Will of him that sent him, and to finish his Work, Joh. 4. 34. He came not to do his own Will, but the Will of him that sent him, Joh. 6. 38. And the Father has witnessed it most solemnly by a Voice from Heaven, That he was well-pleased with his beloved Son, Mat 17. 5. and yet notwithstanding all this, and much more that might be said, It pleased the Father to bruise him, and make his Soul an Offering for Sin, Isa. 53. 10. He loved him, and yet shewed all imaginable tokens of displeasure; p. 595he was amazed, sore troubled in Soul, and (as to the apprehension of his Soul) in respect of comfort forsaken of God, so that he cried out of it most b…tterly; My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? And in the view of his approaching Sufferings was in such an Agony, and conflict of Soul, that it exprest Clods of Blood from his labouring Body: Upon consideration of which unexpressible, inconceivable Torments of the Lord Jesus, the Ancient Church did use to pray, foreign, By thy unknown Torments, Lord deliver us; In imitation whereof perhaps the Liturgy of the present Church of England uses the like; By thy Agony and Bloody Sweat, by thy Cross and Passion, &c. Now I would have it resolved to satisfaction, without such pittyful dry evasions, and paltry answers as we meet with from some kind of men: 1. How God could at the same time be well-pleased with Christ, and be so well-pleased to bruise him? 2. How it could consist with the Iustice of God, to punish a Person so Innocent, so Holy, so compleatly Righteous, over whom the condemning Part of the Law had no power, seeing he had never violated it, in its preceptive Part, unless he stood in the st…ad of Sinners, bore their Iniquities, and was charged with their Guilt? They will tell us, that God used his Prerogative, and Soveraignty over Jesus Christ; and yet in other causes will not allow him an absolute and irrespective Soveraignty over the poorest W…etch in the World: They will tell us too, That all this was not proper penalty or punishment; but here was the matter of punishment to purpose: and still the difficulty remains, Why an Innocent Person should suffer the same things materially, which were only p. 596formally to be inflicted upon those who had deserved them? Let none say, If Christ bore the Punishment due to sin, he must suffer Eternal Death; seeing no less was due to our Transgressions: For 1. The Eternity of punishment is only due to sin by accident, as it is found in a finite Person, who being not able to bear at once, or in the longest time, that Wrath which his Sins have demerited; Divine Justice exacts of him an Eternity of suffering. 2. Whereas sin is only infinite, or of infinite demerit, objectivè, as committed against an infinite God: The Sufferings of Christ are infinite also subjectivè, being the Sufferings of that Person who is God, though not as God; and therefore Christ in a finite time was able to give infinite Satisfaction. 3. Christ was such an High-Priest, as being God and Man, was able to give an infinite Value to his Sacrifice of himself as Man: nor let any say that if Christ suffered in a way of Satisfaction to Divine Justice, and bore what the Sinner should have born, or that which was equivalent to it, that then the Sinner ought immediately to be delivered from the Curse due to his sin; for seeing that the Satisfaction was not made in the Person of the Offender, but his Substitute, it was necessary that the benefit of another's Satisfaction should be communicated in such a way as might best please that God, whose Grace was the only Motive to his Acceptation of a Substitute: It's the undoubted priviledg of the Giver to dispose of his own Gift in his own Way; and it was absolutely and indispensibly necessary that the Sinner should be duly qualified to receive so transcendent Favours, purchased at so dear rates, and fitted to return the Glory due to a Redeemer, p. 597which an unhumbled, unbelieving, unconverted, & unsanctified Sinner could not possibly be.

(2) The Death of Christ (devested of those its proper respects of a Sacrifice offered to God to atone and reconcile him: a price paid to ransom, and redeem us, and a Punishment born to satisfie Divine Iustice, was no infallible proof of the Doctrine which he preached: For 1. Many have laid down their lives to Abett, and endured extremity of Tortures rather than renege the Doctrine they have openly preached; their Confidence (the mean while) supported either by a mistaken Conscience, or perhaps some sinister respects. All that it can prove in the largest judgment of Charity is, That they suppose their Doctrine to be true, or else would hardly lose their All, rather than lose a Principle; but not that therefore the Doctrine is true, because the Preacher dies for it. That which is false in it self, will not become true, by laying down our life for it. In the Memory of the last Age, there were some who sacrificed their lives to the Flames in defence of Contradictory Doctrines: So that to say that the Death of Christ has no other use, but To confirm the Truth of that Doctrine which he preacht, is but a more modest, civil▪ and gentle way of saying it has no use at all. 2. To whom should the Death of Christ confirm the Truth of his Doctrine, to his Enemies or his Friends? For his Enemies: Many of his Sufferings, the very greatest and sorest of his Sufferings were out of their notice; either privately in the Garden, or more privately in his Soul, such as whereof they could take no cognizance: and for these which were visible; they looked on them as the just rewards of his violation of the Law. As for p. 598his Friends, his Death considered singly in it self, without respect to its proper Ends, was so far from confirming of their Faith, or Belief of his Doctrine, that it was that which shook their hopes, and dasht their expectations out of countenance: their Hearts died in his Death; and those two expressed the Sense of more than their own diffidence, Luk. 24. We trusted that it had been he that should have redeemed Israel. But whether to Friends, or Enemies, the Death of Christ (considered without his antecedent Miracles, and subsequent Resurrection, and concomitant Sacrifice) was so improper a means to confirm, that it had proved the clearest Confutation of his Doctrine that malice could have desired. (3.) The Death of Christ was so far from confirming this Doctrine, That God would pardon Sinners, that separate this one Consideration of it as satisfactory to Divine Iustice, from his Death; and it quite overthrows the credibility of the Doctrine, and runs all the World down into utter despair: For our Author must have a happy dexterity, if he can conclude, that because God dealt so severely with an innocent holy Person, that therefore he will not fail to pardon repenting Sinners. We must despair that ever repentance should make us personally equal with Christ: If then God did these things in the green Tree, what will be done in the Dry? If Iudgment begun at God's own House, where shall the Ungodly and Sinner appear? He that spared not his own Son, how much less will he spare the Sinner? It could not be expected that any should believe Christ, telling them God would pitty and pardon others, who found him so severe to himself: But that indeed the true Reason why God deals so graciously p. 599with the repen…ing Sinner, is because he had dealt so justly with his own Son, voluntarily becoming his Surety and Substitute. (4.) There were proper proofs designed by God for the Confirmation of the Doctrine of Christ; and no need at all to take sanctuary in that which (nakedly considered) was not so. Those frequent, clear, stupendious Miracles wrought by Christ, were fully adequate, and commensurate to that End. Reason will teach us to believe that God will not alter the course of Nature, nor reverse its standing Laws, to confirm a Lye, to bear witness to a grand Imposture. And surely they who would not believe Christ to be sent of God, upon his Testimony to him in those Extraordinary Works, would never believe it for his Death which was no wonder at all; otherwise than as the fruit of his ineffable Love, offering himself to God as a Sacrifice for Sin; and so indeed it was the greatest Wonder of them all. The Enemies of Christ triumpht in his Death, that they had nailed his Cause with his Person to the Cross; and that which they feared was his Resurrection: A Miracle so far beyond all exception, to confirm that he was sent of God, and therefore his Doctrine must needs be true, that their greatest care was to have prevented it, by sealing the Stone, and setting a Watch. (5.) But supposing that the Death of Christ had confirmed his Doctrine, and particularly this, That God would pardon, and save the Believing, and Obedient Sinner: Yet still what influence has this upon our Acceptance with God? Will God accept our Obedience the more, because we have greater helps to obey? May our duty expect a greater Reward because we come easier by it? But when all is said that our Author can say, it's our p. 600Obedience that hath the Influence upon our Acceptance with God, and Christ's Death has only an Influence upon our Obedience. The same Obedience given to the Commands of the Gospel, without the motive of his Death, had found equal, if not greater Acceptance from him, than when drawn from us by so cogent an Argument. But if the Death of Christ may be said to have any influence upon our Acceptance with God, because he thereby confirmed his Doctrine; then the Death of the Martyrs also may be said to have an Influence upon our Acceptance with him; for they by their Deaths confirmed the Truth which they preacht, which Truth was the true Covenant of Grace. And whereas many of them laid down their Lives with that Heroical Magnanimity, with that gallantry of Spirit, with more than that boasted Stoical valour, kissing the Stake, embracing the Flames, triumphantly singing in the midst of their Torments, professing they felt no more pain than in a Bed of Roses, as if they were to ascend Heaven in that fiery Chariot, to the Confutation of their Enemies, the encouraging of their Friends, and the credit of that Gospel they died for; evidently assuring all, that they were immediately supported from above to bear with patience, nay with exultation, those extremities which to Flesh and Blood were intolerable. We see our Blessed Saviour (on the contrary) in his Sufferings strangely dejected, amazed, troubled in Soul, earnestly begging that if it were possible that Cup might pass from him, and crying out in the bitterness of his Soul, That he was forsaken of God; which consideration is enough to satisfy an impartial Enquirer, That the Sufferings of Christ were fitted for some higher design than the confirming p. 601of Truth, for which end (had there been nothing more in't) the Death of the Martyrs had clearly out-gone it.

But it's high time to recollect our selves, and return into the way again; for those pittiful things which stand for proof, that this was all the design of the Death of Christ, call aloud for examination.

The Blood of Christ says he) is called the Blood of Sprinkling which speaks better things than the Blood of-Abel, Heb. 12. 24. which is an allusion to Moses his Sprinkling the Blood of the Sacrifice, whereby he confirmed the Covenant between God and the Children of Israel, Heb. 9. 20, 21. For when Moses had spoken every precept to the People according to the Law, he took the Blood of Calves and Goats, and sprinkled both the Book and all the People, saying: This is the Blood of the Testament, which God hath ordained for you. Thus the Blood of Christ is called the Blood of Sprinkling, because by his Blood God did seal and confirm the Covenant of Grace, as the sprinkling of Blood did confirm the Mosaical Covenant.

There are four things which I shall offer, any one of which cleared up, will shew the vanity of this Period.

§. 1. The Blood of Christ, is not called the Blood of Sprinkling, which speaks better things than the Blood of Abel; only in allusion to the Sprinkling of that Blood which confirmed the Mosaical Covenant: There is a further, a higher design in the Expression. The Blood of Abel cried to God from the Earth, for vengeance upon the Head of Cain; and with the same importunity does the violation of every Law of God sollicite Divine Justice against the Transgressour; and that with great justice: For the same p. 602God, who hath establisht his Holy Law, in the Promise, Do this and live, hath bound, and confirm'd it also with the threatning, If thou sinnest thou shalt die. Such dreadful things did the Blood of Abel (shed in defiance of the Law) speak to God; But O what sweet, how much better things does the Blood of Christ speak! It speaks better things to the Justice of God, than if the Sinner himself should suffer his utmost Indignation: It speaks better things to the Law, than if the Sinner had felt the weight of its severest Curse: It speaks better things to the Conscience, than if we had wrought out our inward Peace by our own Righteousness: It satisfies God's Justice, answers the Law, and quiets the Conscience: And in reference to this use of the Sprinkling of Blood, viz. the Atoning, and Reconciling of God, is the Blood of Christ, called the Blood of Sprinkling; and to this the Apostle refers, Heb. 11. 28. By Faith Moses kept the Passeover, and the Sprinkling of Blood, that he who destroyed the first-Born might not touch them. The Apostle evidently points to Exod. 12. 14. The Blood shall be to you a token upon your Houses, and when I see the Blood, I will passe over you, and the Plague shall not be upon you. v. 21, 22. Kill the Passeover, and you shall take a Bunch of Hyssop and dip in the Blood, and strike the Lintel, and the two side-Posts, and none of you shall go out of his House until the Morning. Now here are several things observeable: 1. That it was a respect to the Blood of the Paschal-Lamb duly used and applyed, in consideration whereof God would not destroy them with the rest. 2. That if they expected any benefit from that Blood, they must abide under the shelter and protection of it. 3. This p. 603Blood must be sprinkled upon the Lintel, not upon the Threshold, to mind them, (as the Jews observe) that they ought not to trample it under their Feet: And surely that Blood which turns away the deserved wrath of God from their head, might claim more reverence than to be trampled under their feet. 4. That this Blood thus sprinkled was considerable in God's eyes, as it was the Blood of such a Lamb, so chosen …t of the flock, without any spot or blemish, and so slain, precisely according to God's appointment: I just proportion, the Lord Jesus Christ is called expresly our Passeover, 1 Cor. 5. 7. Christ our Passeover is Sacrificed for you. Now as the Blood of Christ has the same influence, so it has the same plea: It has the same Influence upon God, it turns away his Anger, he has a respect to the Blood of Jesus; under this Blood do we take shelter and Sanctuary; and therefore it pleads with us that we account it not a prophane and unholy thing, for that will be interpreted a trampling under foot the Son of God himself, Heb. 10. 29. which is to despise all the Grace and Mercy of God, for what-ever Mercy we receive from God, it is through the intervention of that Blood.

§. 2. The whole concern of the Blood of Christ is … exprest by the Blood of Sprinkling. Sprinkling was one way, and but one way of employing the Blood of the Sacrifices: but it must be shed, before it could be sprinkled, and therefore sprinkled, because it had been shed as a Sacrifice. What-ever other use there was of the Blood of Sacrifices, yet the efficacy of all was derived from this, that that Blood had been once shed at the Altar, Lev. 17. 11. It was Blood upon the Altar (and that not merely as Blood, p. 604but as it was the Life-Blood of the Sacrifice substituted in the room of the offender) that made an Atonement for their Souls. And this is evident in that the Blood of many of the Sacrifices for sin, atoneing, expiating Sacrifices, were not sprinkled, but only shed at the Altar: What an unrighteous dealing is this then with the Blood of Christ, to allot it no service but only the Confirmation of a Covenant, because it's called the Blood of sprinkling? whereas the Blood of the Sacrifices of old as it was sprinkled, did not express all the ends and uses of the Blood of Christ.

§. 3. That which comes home to our Author is this: The whole design of the Blood of sprinkling … not to confirm a Covenant. As Blood was larger than sprinkling of Blood; so sprinkling of Blood was larger than the confirming of a Covenant. (1.) The Blood of the Sacrifice was sometimes sprinkled … turn away God's Anger: thus in the Passeover and thus in that very place which our Author insists upon, Heb. 9. 19. which the Apostle cites from Exod. 24. 5, 6, 7. where we read of a twofold Use of the Blood: First, one half of the Blood of the Burnt-Offering, and the Peace-Offering which had been shed at the Altar, Moses sprinkled upon the Altar: Now all the use of Blood upon the Al…r was Atonement, Propitiation, and Reconciliation of God. Secondly, With the other half of the Blood, Moses consecrates and dedicates the People to the Lord, to walk before him according to the Tenour of that Covenant: whereas then he will argue, that the Blood was sprinkled only to confirm a Covenant, because one half of it was reserved for that as a secondary Use; some surly, ill-conditioned People p. 605would conclude, that it was not used to confirm a Covenant, because the other half was not imployed for that use. (2.) Another use of the Blood of the Sacrifice sprinkled, was to procure the favour of God, 2. Chron. 29. 21, 22. where we read: 1. That all these Lambs, Bullocks, Rams, Goats, were offered to God at the Altar; Hezekiah commanded the Priests to offer them on the Altar. 2. That when the Blood had been shed at the Altar, it was afterwards sprinkled on the Altar. 3. To shew that the great operation of the Blood (even as sprinkled) was by vertue of his having been once shed at the Altar. The two Goats of the Sin-Offering were only slain by the Priests, after they had laid their hands on them, and thereby laid the sins of the People upon them, in their Typical way; but their Blood was not at all sprinkled upon the Altar, and yet the greatest efficacy is ascribed to them as the Sin-Offering. 4. The design of all these Sacrifices, their Offering upon the Altar, the shedding and then sprinkling of the Blood; is said to be v. 24. to make Reconciliation with their Blood upon the Altar and to make Atonement for all Israel. 5. And that none might harp upon the old humour, that surely the People were fallen out among themselves, were all in Mutiny and Civil-Wars, and this Blood was to reconcile them, and make them friends; We are told, It was for all Israel, for the Kingdom, the Sanctuary, for Iudah, for Church and State, Prince and People: All had offended God, and this was the Typical way of recovering his favour, and regaining a Communion with him in his Temple. (3.) The Blood was sprinkled also for Purification and Cleansing, Lev. 14. 5. Answerable hereto, God has promised in the Covenant of Grace, that he will p. 606sprinkle his people with clean water, and from all their Idols and Abominations will be cleanse them, Ezek. 36. which he effects by the power of the Holy Spirit, and by the Blood of Iesus. Therefore are Saints called elect according to the foreknowledg of God the Father, through the Sanctification of the Spirit u…to obedience, and sprinkling of the Blood of Iesus Christ. 1 Pet. 1. 2. (4.) The Blood was sprinkled before the Mercy-Seat, Lev. 16. 15. When the Priest had shed the blood of the Sacrifice at the Altar, and offer'd it to God, he carries in some of the Blood into the most Holy place, and by that Blood intercedes with God for the People: Thus our Lord Jesus, when by the once offering of himself he had made an Atonement with God for sin, discharges the other great part of … Priesthood, becomes our intercessor at the throne of Grace, and in the merit and vertue of that Blood which was once shed for the reconciling of God, and procuring his favour, he lives for ever to make intercession for us. And now I suppose it may be left to all indifferent Persons to judg, whether our Author has not most barbarously Murdered the Death of Christ it self, and trampled his sacred Blood under his feet, allowing no other end or use to it, but that o… confirming a Covenant; whereas considered as the Blood of sprinkling, it has far greater and higher ends, and yet the Blood as sprinkled, comprehends not the whole design of that Blood.

§. 4. But yet supposing, That all the ends of the Death of Christ were wrap't up in that one expression [the Blood of sprinkling] and supposing also that the Blood of the Sacrifices as sprinkled, had no other end or use but the confirming of a Covenant; yet how p. 607will this prove his main Assertion, That we owe the Covenant of Grace to the Death of Christ? All that will follow is, that we owe the Confirmation of the Covenant to it, and only the Confirmation of the Covenant; and then another thing will follow too, that we do not owe the Covenant it self to it, unless he can prove that procuring and confirming are Terms of the same importance.

The advantage our Author has got by this way of Reasoning is, that he has found out a way how to own all Scripture-Expressions, and yet accommodate them to his own preconceived Opinions. [1.] Hence (says he) we are said to be justified by the Blood of Christ, Rom. 5. 9. That is, by the Gospel-Covenant which was confirmed, and ratified by his Death: To which I Answer. 1. If we may be said to be justified by his Blood, because his Blood confirmed the Covenant, then we may be said more properly to be justified by his Miracles; for they indeed had a proper, direct, immediate, and sufficient evidence in them to confirm the Doctrine which he Preacht; and it's a Miracle almost as great as any of them, that the Scripture should never once intimate that we are justified by Miracles, which directly and properly confirmed his Doctrine; and yet constantly affirm it of his Death, which directly and properly confirmed it not. 2. Then also, with the same propriety of Speech, we may be said to be justified by the Blood of the Martyrs, which was a convincing Testimony that they believed their Doctrine to be true; and then the old Popish Rhime will come in fashion again: Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro te impendit, Da nos Christe scandere, quo Thomas ascendit. 3. If the Blood of Christ contribute no more to our justification than▪ as p. 608it confirmed the Truth of this proposition amongst others; He that Believes, and obeys the Gospel, shall be pardoned and saved; then it's possible to be justified without the Blood of Christ: God has given us many Arguments to confirm the Truth of the Gospel: If then I believe the Truth of what Christ preached upon those Arguments, which are suited to its confirmation, (as upon the evidence of Miracles, &c.) and accordingly obey all its Commands; It were very hard if I should miss of Pardon and Life for not believing it upon one single Argument, and that but a probable one neither: What if I Believe the Promise upon nine of God's Arguments, and hit not upon the Tenth, obey upon nine of God's Motives, and want only that single String to my Bow; shall my Faith and Obedience be rejected because not grounded upon every particular Reason that may possibly be Muster'd up to confirm them? 4. It will be in vain ever to speak or write again, if such far-fetcht Consequences be allowed to interpret what is spoken and written. There are no two things in the world so remote each from other, but they have some kind of Relation and Affinity; and if this way will salve all, there will hardly be found that thing in the World, if it may but be conceived to have had any Relation as an Argument to our Faith and Obedience, but we may be said to be justified by it. We are said to be justified by the Blood of Christ; True! But how? Why thus: The Blood of Christ signifies his Death; His Death confirmed his Doctrine; His Doctrine was he that believes and obeys, shall be justified and saved; Hereupon we believe it to be true, and in process of time come to obey it, & our obedience justifies us, and therefore the Blood of p. 609Christ may be said to justifie us. And whereas Iudas his Covetousness, the Jews Envy, Herod's Cruelty; & Pilates Flattery, had a direct tendency to the Death of Christ; why we may not be properly said to be justified by them also at this rate, I profess I cannot apprehend. Religion is fallen into most cruel and unmerciful hands in this latter Age, who to give a …aint colour to any little sorry fancies of their own, care not to interpret Scripture in such ways as shall certainly open a dore to elude the plainest Truths. God is said to have made the World; Now if any has a mind to eternize his Name, which without some rare discovery cannot be, let him take our Author's Course, and he is secure of a Monument. That is indeed a Scripture phrase; but if you examine it throughly, it signifies no more, than that God made a company of Atoms, and put them in Motion; and then let them alone, they will dance you so long in infinite spaces till they jostle themselves into that form wherein you see things at this day: And thus here's a fair Account how God may be said to have made the World, because he made that which made the World; and the Cause of the Cause, (you know) may be said to be a Grand-Father-Cause of the thing Caused. But this is infinitely beyond what our Author will allow the Blood of Christ of Causality in our justification: for it's only a Confirming Cause of the Promise, and that in Commission with other things, and they have a greater stroke in the business than it self, & then when we come to believe that Promise, and that belief proves strong enough to perswade us into Obedience, then we are justified for the sake of that Obedience. But 5. The Consideration of the Text it self; Rom. 5. 9. is enough to discredit this p. 610idle conceit for ever; for Christ is said to dye for us, and in order to our justification, in the same sence that the foreign of old …, who laid down Life for Life, Blood for Blood, Body for Body. v. 6. Christ dyed for the …ngodly. v. 7. For scarcely for a righteous Man will one dye; yet peradventure for a good Man some one would even dare to dye. v. 8. But God commendeth his love to us that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us. v. 9. Much more then being now justified by his Blood, &c.

[2.] Christ (says he) is called a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood, that is, by a belief of the Gospel Covenant, Rom. 3. 25. But how short this comes of the Apostle's design is obvious from the place. Christ is set forth by God to be a propitiation through faith in his Blood, to declare his Righteousness that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believes in Iesus: But is God ever the more declared to be a just God, demonstrated to be a Righteous God, because Christ has confirmed his Doctrine, and we believe and obey it? The obedience of most men is so imperfect, that when they have done all, they will need mercy, and that will declare one of God's attributes. But what provision is here made, that God may be declared Righteous and Iust? All that he has assigned to the Blood of Christ turns not away the least of God's displeasure against sin or the sinner; Christ dyed to confirm the Doctri…e! Well, but still God is displeased with sinners; for what Reason is there why God should be less displeased with them, because Christ dyed to confirm his Doctrine? Well, but hereupon Man believes this Doctrine to be true; but yet God's Anger is never the more turned away from the sinner, because he believes what p. 611God says is true. For what Reason is there why God should be less displeased with him, who believes the Truth, and yet will not obey his Commands? So that neither the Blood of Christ, nor Faith neither, do reconcile God to us, or propitiate him for us: well, at last Man gives obedience to the Commands, and then God is propitiated and reconciled. So that the true Scripture should have been (had our Author had the p…nning of it) God hath set forth Man to be his own propitiation through his own obedience. And why might it not have been said, that God set forth the Martyrs to be a propitiation through Faith in their Blood? For they willingly and chearfully shed their dearest Blood to confirm the Truth of the Gospel; and upon their Confirmation of it some have believed it, and upon their believing it have obeyed it, and then by that obedience are reconciled to God. And thus may Paul be said to have dyed for our sins, and Peter to have been Crucified for us, and both of them to have been set forth by God to be a propitiation through Faith in their Blood. Nor let any say, that the Death of the Martyrs was not so strong a confirmation of the Gospel as the Death of Christ: For if we believe the Truth, and obey it upon more infirm Evidence; yet if that evidence produce a strong Faith, and that a vigorous obedience, such an obedience will not find less acceptance with God, because it was begotten by weaker Motives.

[3] The Scripture (says he) uses these Phrases promiscuously, to be justified by Faith; and to be justified by the Faith of Christ; and to be justified by Christ; and to be justified through Faith in his Blood; and to be justified, and saved by Grace: Nay, by believing that Christ is the Son of God, John 20. 31. And p. 612that God raised him up from the dead. When our Author has a design upon any great Truth of the Gospel, then the clearest expressions the wisdom of God's Spirit shall use, are Phrases, allusive, figurative, metaphorical, tropical forms of Speech: But the Scripture uses not these expressions promiscuously, only our Author confounds them craftily. Each of them have indeed something in common with the rest; and no wonder, all the Offices, the Active and Passive Obedience of Christ, the whole work of the Spirit, the actings of Faith, and every saving-Grace, meet in this one great Project, the glorifying of God, the Electing love of the Father, the Redeeming Love of the Son, and the Sanctifying love of the Holy Spirit, in the Iustification and Salvation of a Believer: But yet each of these expressions carries in it something peculiar to it self: for the Scripture abhors to speak at his dull and cloudy rate, who by diversifying one and the same thing in twenty several shapes, can vend it for so many several things, when 'tis but the same notion disguised in a new-fashioned expression. One denotes the interest of Faith; another speaks the concern of him who is Iehovah our Righteousness; a third may particularly point at the influence of his Blood in this matter; another, the evidence of all this: But by this Argument he may fancy (and that may stand for Proof) that all things under Heaven signify one and the same thing: for I know no two things so perfect strangers but have some cognation, some common and general agreement, and meet in some Latudinarian Third that will clasp their Interests: They must be related either as Cause and effect, or Concauses of the same effect; or as joynt-effects of the same universal Cause, &c. but p. 613now to say that all these signify the same thing formally because of some general coherence, is no more to my edification, than if our Author would prove himself a-kin to the great Mogul, because they have two Elbows a-piece: A way of Reasoning very much unbecoming a Rational Divine, especially one who trades so much in the essential differences of things. But suppose that all these expressions do signify one and the same thing: what is that one thing which they signify? The Answer is ready, That we are justified by believing and obeying the Gospel: This is the one thing, and this is the one thing that should have been proved; for if by [Gospel] he understand no more than the commands of the Gospel, and all the rest, as Promises and confirmations of Promises, thrown in as Motives and Arguments to that Obedience; then I say we are justified by something else than the Gospel, (that which he cal's Gospel) even by the Blood of Christ, which is more than a Motive to Faith, or an Argument to Obedience (though a most excellent Motive, and Argument to both) being a proper propitiatory, expiatory, Sacrifice, to remove God's just displeasure, procure his favour and take away Guilt. But I shall willingly hear him practise upon the partic… lars.

(1.) Faith, or Faith in Christ, signifies such a firm stedfast belief of the Gospel, as brings forth all the fruits of Odience: Therefore what? Why theref…re to be justified by Faith, or by the Faith of Christ, or by Christ, signify to be justified by believing, and obeying the Gospel. Here's nothing but evidence wanting, for we have confidence enough: But then, 1. If a justifying Faith be such a firm and stedfast belief. p. 614of the Gospel as brings forth all the fruits of obedience, then no Man can be justified till he be in Heaven, or at least within one step of the actual possession of glory. One of the fruits of obedience is final perseverance; now Faith may produce one, or two, or twenty of the fruits of obedience; but yet if it fail before it has brought forth all the rest, it falls shorts of a justifying Faith. 2. If this be the true Notion of a justifying Faith, I doubt not to affirm that the Devils have as true a justifying Faith (as far as the essence of Faith reaches) as the best Saint on earth. It's true their Faith, does not bring forth the fruits of obedience: but that's only to say, they want a saving obedience, a justifying obedience; for all that is of the essence of Faith (as 'tis Faith) they have; they firmly and stedfastly believe the Gospel to be true, though their Faith produces not the fruits of obedience. That Faith which justifies will in due season produce all the fruits of obedience, yet a justifying Faith (as it justifies) does not include all the fruits of obedience. We read, 1 Ioh. 3. 2. He that hath this Hope in him [God] purifies himself as God is pure; whence it's plain, that a well-grounded hope will purify the heart: but if from thence any will infer that the Grace of hope, and the effects of hope, are formally the same, he will miserably expose his own ignorance.

(2.) To be justified by the grace of God that signifies the same thing too, viz. That we are justified by believing and obeying the Gospel. Now this is truly wonderful! but how does he prove it? why thus! The Grace of God is the Gospel of Christ, expresly so called in Tit. 2. 11. as being the Effect of the free Grace and Goodness of God to Mankind. To which I return; 1. It is very true, that the Gospel of Christ p. 615is called Grace; as being the product of mere Grace, and contains the Methods of God's Grace in the justifying and recovering of Sinners. The word Grace signifies either the free Love and Favour of God towards us, or the effects of that Grace for us, or upon us: and thus the Revelation of God's Mind and Will, being one of the Effects of Grace, may be called Grace. But now that the Grace of God is the Gospel, that is, the Revelation of God's Mind and Will, is not true: Grace is larger than Gospel-Revelation▪ The Gospel reveals more Grace than what consists in Revelation. But he argues thus: The Gospel of Christ is called Grace, therefore the Grace of God is called the Gospel: as if he would conclude, that because every man is a living Creature, therefore every living Creature is a Man. But I wonder why any should pray so earnestly for true Repentance and the Holy Spirit, if Grace signifie nothing but the Revelation of the Gospel? which a Man may purchase, filleted, and guilded for five Shillings: And all the Supplications of Christians for Grace, signifie no more but that we may have the Scriptures, which is Grace indeed but not all the Grace promised in the Scriptures. 2. To be justified by Grace is quite another thing. Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ: foreign: justified in a way of free Gift, which excludes the consideration of any thing inherent in us: for though to be saved by Grace, might allow some consideration of Obedience, and yet such is the infinite Disproportion between the Obedience and the Reward, that it may be called Grace; yet that will not satisfy the Expression, To be justified foreign, gratis, without p. 616any consideration at all on the part of the Person justified, for which he is so justified. (3.) Faith in the Blood of Christ is a belief of the Gospel which was confirm'd by his Blood. Then farewel for ever all discourse, and writing: The Builders of Babel might …ooner have guest at one anothers meaning, after that the Curse of God had cleft their Tongues into seventy two Dialects, than here-after we shall understand the Conceptions of Men's Minds by the expressions of their Mouths. For if when the Apostle says we are justified through Faith in his Blood, he designs no more than that we are justified by believing and obeying the Gospel; then for ought I know our Author may intend as Orthodoxly as any Man living: and when he says we are justified by believing and obeying the Gospel, he may intend it only by way of evidence; but that we are really justified through Faith in the Blood of Christ. (4.) To be justified by believing that Christ is the Son of God, signifies the same thing too, Joh. 20. 31. But here our Author has relieved himself from his old Artifice which never failed him: the forceing Scripture over to him, when he is lazy, and will not stir a step to go to the Scripture. The Text speaks its own Language thus: These things are written that ye might believe that Iesus is the Son of God, and believing ye may have life through his Name; where the Evangelist says not, They are justified by believing that Iesus is the Son of God, but that having first satisfied their Faith from Scripture that Jesus is the Son of God, (which Truth being well studied, well digested, and improved, will give us a marvelous light into the Mystery of the Gospel, and without which, the whole of the Gospel is involved in eternal Night) p. 617and then believing, they have eternal Life through his Name, by his satisfactory Blood and Righteousness, and the Authority which he has thereby with the Father. But believe it, here is harder work than all this behind; for our Author will propound several Questions, and when he has done answer them. 1. Quest. What is it to believe that Christ is the Son of God? Ans. That is, (says he) That Messiah, and Prophet whom God sent into the World. Very good! Now as I remember p. 4. he told us, That Christ was anointed to be the Messiah at his Baptism, (let the Reader examine it): Now if to be the Son of God, be to be the Messiah, and that he was not the Messiah till his Baptism, then he was not the Son of God till his Baptism; and then for about 30 years he was foreign, a mere Man; and yet this is a great favour I assure you, for his Baptism was about three or four years before his Resurrection, and then they are to blame who will suspect this Principle to be Socinian: well! But yet to believe Christ to be the Son of God, is to believe him to be the Messiah! Ay, But there's one odd misadventure more in the thing; that is, that Hebrew is easier than Greek; for if Messiah explain Christ any better, I am very much out in my reckoning. Some from hence will pretend to give us a Scheme of our Author's Faith about the Deity of Christ; and perhaps should they deal with him as he has dealt with others, or half so uncharitably, it would be found dissonant to what he professedly owns in subscribing the three Symbols of Faith: but I see no reason to fix an Opinion upon any Man that he will not openly avow. 2. Quest. But what is the Messiah? Ans. Why, The Prophet whom God sent into the World to p. 618reveal his Will to us: To believe him to be the Son of God, is to believe him to be the Messiah, and to believe him to be the Messiah is to believe him to be a Prophet, and that is (as near as I can measure it) just one third part of his Mediatory Employment. Surely he has mean thoughts of his Reader's Intellectuals, or great presumptions upon their good-Natures, or a high esteem of the persuasiveness of his own Rhetorick, that can hope to proselyte them into a belief (without one Argument) That the Son of God signifies no other than Messiah, Messiah no more than Prophet, and that the Prophetical-Office of this Messiah, is the just, compleat Object of our Faith. 3. Quest. But what does this Belief of Christ to be the Messiah, the Prophet, include? Ans. A general Belief of the Gospel which he preacht: most rare Divinity! I suppose we may be saved upon very cheap terms by and by: For 1. A general Belief of the Gospel, will serve the turn to justify … well enough, that is as far as Faith has ought to do in Justification. If Faith believes Christ to be the Messiah, that is, a Prophet whom God sent to reveal his Will to us, it has got a general Belief of the Gospel, which may be without understanding in particular one syllable of what Christ has revealed of his Father's Will; and then I suppose, a general Obedience will serve well enough for a general Faith. 2. We may believe Christ to be the Messiah, yet if we believe not also what that Person is, in whom the Office of Mediator resides, we shall understand very little of its Nature, Dignity, and Efficacy. To believe Christ to be Anointed, signifies very little unless we understand also who it is that is so Anointed. (5.) To believe that God raised Christ from the Dead, doth the p. 619same: Doth the same? the same what? Why, it includes a general Belief of the Gospel, because his Resurrection was the last, and great Confirmation of the Gospel. Let us now put all this together: We are said to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead, and that signifies the same with being justified by the Blood of Christ; and both these signify to be justified by believing and obeying the Gospel; and yet to believe that God raised up Christ from the Dead includes only a general belief of the Gospel: In all which there is nothing but what is rotten at the Core. 1. Let us examine in what sense we are said to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead. The place assigned is Rom. 10. v. 9. If thou shalt confess with thy Mouth, the Lord Iesus Christ, and shalt believe in thine Heart that God …ath raised up him from the Dead, thou shalt be saved. Where Salvation is not promised to a Belief of this Proposition▪ That God raised Christ from the Dead, but to a Believing it with the Heart; such a Faith as closes with the Redeemer included in that Proposition, as is evident from the Faith of Thomas, Joh. 20. 28. Our Lord Jesus willing to satisfy his doubts and scruples about the Truth of his Resurrection, shews him his Hands and Feet, gives him leave to put his H…nd into the Print of the Nails, and the Hole of his Side; upon this he is satisfied and expresses the Belief of his Heart in these words, My Lord and my God. When therefore the Apostle tells us, That by believing with the Heart that God has raised Iesus from the Dead, we shall be saved, he intends such a Faith, as accepts of, and gives up the Soul mutually to a Redeemer as its own God and Lord; and not a general Belief that Christ must needs be the Messiah, p. 620because he was raised from the Dead; and if the Messiah his Doctrine must needs be true, be it what it will, though we know nothing of it. 2. It may be enquired whether such a general Belief that God raised up Iesus from the Dead, be a true justifying Faith? If it be: An Implicite Faith will serve tum for all the Particulars of the Gospel; and this would save abundance of needless pains that men take in reading of, meditating upon the Scriptures: and now instead of the Colliers Faith, who believed as the Church believed, at all adventures, right or wrong, he has introduced another full as easie, The Belief of the Resurrection of Christ from the Dead: A Faith happily contrived for the Genius of this sparing Age, which saves us two parts in three of Christ's Offices, and eleven parts in twelve of our very Creed. 3. Let it be modestly examined also, whether To be justified through Faith in the Blood of Christ, and to be justified by believing that God raised up Christ from the Dead, …e expressions of the same importance? If they be: then we may be said to be reconciled to God by the Resurrection, and that Christ in being raised from the Dead, was made sin for us, a Sacrifice for sin; and it's something strange that none of the Apostles could hit upon such expressions as might recommend them, and their writings to our Author's Charity. 4. Let it be considered also, whether Christ's Resurrection was the last Argument he gave to confirm the Truth of the Gospel: I think his visible Appearance to his Disciples after his Resurrection, and those Miraculous Operations he then put forth; his Ascension into Heaven, whilst his Disciples looked on; his pouring out the Spirit upon the Apostles, enabling them to speak with Tongues, p. 621his empowering them to work Miracles many years after his Resurrection and Ascension, were all Confirmations of the Truth of his Gospel, and all subsequent to his Resurrection. 5. Let it have a place in our Thoughts too; seeing Christ's Resurrection was the great Confirmation of his Doctrine, without which all the rest, and especially his Death, had been no Confirmation of it, and yet Atonement, Propitiation, Reconciliation, Redemption are not ascribed to it, whether the Death of Christ, to which all these are ascribed, have an Influence upon our Acceptance with God, only as it confirms his Doctrine? It is strange that the Apostles should word matters so crosly, to attribute those things to the Death of Christ, which do most properly belong to the Resurrection, and those things to the Resurrection which do most properly belong to his Death. And allout as strange that our Author should make such a noise with Atonement, Reconciliation, Redemption, and ascribe all these to his Death, when-as upon the sole-Reason of his Ascribing them to that Death, they are much more rationally applicable to his Resurrection. There are some well-meaning Souls no doubt that have read our Author's Book, who finding such Glorious things ascribed to the Death of Christ; Iustification by his Blood, Redemption by his Blood, Reconciliation by his Blood, lift up their Eyes and cry out, What pitty it is that such a sweet young Gentleman that has written such a precious Piece, of Union, Communion, Sacrifice, Atonement, Redemption, and Reconciliation, stuft so full with Orthodox Propositions, should be taken upon suspicion for a Socinian? and yet when we come to scan these fine words, they prove nothing but a p. 622company of sweet Flowers stuck about his Dead Body: And to be justified by Faith in the Blood of Christ, is no more but to believe that Christ is a Prophet sent to reveal God's Will to us. The Conclusion of the whole Matter then will be this: If the Death of Christ has no other influence upon our Acceptance with God, but that it confirms to us this Truth, That God will pardon and save them that believe and obey the Gospel, it has no influence at all upon God for that End; for which I refer my self to the Reader, and the Reader to the foregoing Discourse.

He goes on: Hence is it also that the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, as are the proper, and immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant, and therefore all the Blessings of the Gospel are owing to the Blood of Christ, because the Gospel-Covenant it self was procured and confirmed by the Blood of Christ. I am now perfectly cured of my Ambition to be one of the Corporation of your Rational Divines: and if this be Reason, I do by these presents renounce it for ever. Here are two words, [Hence] and [Therefore] which always pretend to inference, and conclusion: I shall examine how well they make good their Pretences. First [Hence] I pray whence? Out of what Premises is this Conclusion deduced? That the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, as are the Proper and Immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant? Let us look back as far as fairly we may. To be justified by Faith, by the Faith of Christ, by Christ, by his Blood, &c. signifie one and the same thing: and Hence it is that the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, &c. And really turn it quite backwards and it will conclude as strongly. The p. 623Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel Covenant: and … it is, that To be justified by Faith, by the Faith of Christ, by Christ, by his Blood, &c. signify one and the same thing. Now when he can once bring matters into this Posture he is safe, and out of the Gun-shot of Reply, for which way soever you come to attaque him, you must deny the Conclusion. But let us leave out the [Hence,] and consider the words absolutely. The Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ as are the proper and immediate Effects of the Gospel-Covenant: To which I answer: 1. It's just as easie for another (if he had but a Licence) to say, The Apostles attribute such things to the Gospel-Covenant, as are the proper and immediate▪ Effects of the Blood of Christ; and with better Reason, because whatever acceptation our Services and Duties, our Repentance and Obedidience find with God, is clearly assigned to the Blood of Christ. But 2. This is a foul scandalous slander which he throws upon the Apostles; they give to the Blood of Christ its own proper and immediate Effects: they rob not Repentance and Obedience to adorn the Sacrifice of Christ with borrowed Plumes. They give to Christ the things that are Christ's; and to Faith, Repentance; and Obedience the things that are Theirs. They ascribe our Redemption to the Blood of Christ, as a proper Price paid to God; and they ascribe to Faith its own Efficiency to interest us in the Benefits of that Redemption. They ascribe Reconciliation to the Blood of Christ, as its immediate & proper Effect, without any intervening Act of the Creature for that End; and they ascribe to Faith, Repentance, and Obedience their proper and immediate p. 624Concerns, to put us into the actual and full Possession of all the Fruits of that Reconciliation made with God: They attribute Pardon of Sin to the Blood of Christ, who was made sin for us, an expiatory Sacrifice to remove guilt, that is, the Obligation of the Sinner to punishment; and they attribute the Application of that Pardon unto Individuals, unto Faith, as that whereby we receive Christ and all his Benefits. 3. If these be the proper and immediate Effects of the Covenant, and not of the Blood of Christ; What should move the Apostles always to speak improperly, to affix Reconciliation, Atonement, Redemption, &c. to the Blood of Christ, and never to our Obedience? when yet we are neither properly reconciled, properly redeemed, nor God properly atoned by Christ's Blood, but all these are the proper Effects of our Obedience.

And now one word to the [Therefore] And therefore (says he) All the Blessings of the Gospel are owing to the Blood of Christ, because the Gospel-Covenant it self was procured, and confirmed by the Blood of Christ: A very learned Argument! that is to say; We owe the Blessings of the Gospel to that which is no true and proper cause of them. The Blood of Christ is not the proper Cause of our Justification, therefore we owe our Iustification to it: His Blood is not the proper Cause of our Reconciliation, and therefore we are indebted to his Blood for our Reconciliation. All Effects are owing to their proper Causes; whatsoever therefore is the proper Cause of our Iustification, to that we are indebted for it: But how naturally would this Conclusion follow from his Premise? The Blood of Christ is not the proper Cause of Iustification, Reconciliation, and Redemption; and therefore we p. 625do not owe our Justification, Reconciliation, and Redemption to the Blood of Christ: Or thus; We owe all the Blessings of the Gospel to the Blood of Christ, and therefore the Blood of Christ is the proper Cause of those Blessings.

And now let the Reader observe, how his Reason brought up in the Rear, has routed his Reason that marched in the Van. The Blood of Christ is not the proper Cause of the Blessings of the Gospel: there's your Reason in the Front, why we do not owe the Blessings of the Gospel to it. And again: The Gospel-Covenant was procured and confirmed by it; There's your Reason in the Rear, why we do owe the Blessings of the Gospel to it.

But to do our Author justice, I shall look over these things more severely. The Gospel-Covenant it self (says he) was procured by the Blood of Christ. And does not this sound more honourably for the Blood of Christ, than to say it only confirm'd a Covenant? To procure (if we might measure the import of the Word by its sound) implies that the Blood of Christ had some Influence upon God, that moved him to enter into such a Covenant with Mankind, which without that Consideration he had never done; but to confirm a Covenant, that supposes there was such a Covenant in being, only the Blood of Christ gave security to Men that it should be made good: So that if we know when we are well, we had best keep our selves so, and sit down contented with this NewHonour and Efficiency ascribed to the Blood of Christ, that it procured as well as confirmed the Gospel-Covenant; lest whilst we labour to engross more than is due, we lose what the Charity of our Author has given us: But they who think they have right to All, will hardly be perswaded to be put off with p. 626half; and therefore I must a little further enquire into this new-start-up Notion of procuring the Covenant. What this Gospel-Covenant is, which our Author so frankly attributes to the Procurement of Christ's Blood, he has told us p. 320. A Promise of the Pardon of Sin, and Eternal Life to those who believe, and obey the Gospel: I confess a clear and distinct Notion of what he calls Gospel, would very much befriend us in our Enquiry: The best I can find, (and it's but a half-faced one neither) is p. 34. To preach Christ (says he) is to preach his Gospel, that is, to expound all those Rules of Life, and Articles of Faith, which are contained in it: Whether this be Gospel or no I shall not enquire, or whether this be the Covenant of the Gospel I shall not torment him with; but this is that which Christ has procured for us with his Blood, A Promise of Pardon, and Life to those who believe, and obey all that's revealed and commanded, either in the Scriptures, or the New-Testament, or the Four Evangelists, or in one of Christ's Sermons, (I think that must be it) Now I must here entreat the Reader to open his Eyes and see how he has been cheated all this while. (1.) It's very well known he propounded a Question at first, What Influence the Righteousness of Christ's Life, and the Sacrifice of his Death have upon our Acceptance with God? To this he answers separately concerning the Death of Christ and its Influence; and will come all in good time to shew us, What Influence the Righteousness of his Life hath upon God for that End. Concerning the Influence of his Death, he has been perswading us that it confirms the Covenant; and now in the Close he has stollen-in a Word we never dreamt of, that i procures this Covenant: Now I suspect some fraud; for what Influence has the Death of Christ p. 627upon God to procure us such a Govenant? Had he shew'd us that, he had deserved better of his Readers, than by all this Amusing Sophistry.