The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted and Vindicated, Lecture 9
LECTURE IX.
JER. 50.20.
In thoſe dayes, and at that time, the iniquity of Judah ſhall be ſought for, and there ſhall be none, &c.
Ninth ſort of Arguments.I Shall now conclude with the laſt ſort of Arguments, which are from thoſe Scriptures that ſpeak how God is affected with his people when they have ſinned, which affections do neceſſarily imply Gods ſeeing of ſin, ſo as to be angry with them, yea in ſome reſpects Gods anger is more to them then others, and we ſay, in ſome ſenſe God doth more ſee and take notice of the ſins of believers then others.
The places of Scripture which ſpeak in what manner God takes the ſins of believers, are theſe, Epheſ. 4.30. Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, &c. where the godly in their ſins are ſaid to grieve Gods Spirit. Now can the Spirit of God, which is alſo God, be grieved (to ſpeak after the manner of men) at our ſins, and not take notice of them? certainly if they grieve God, they ought to grieve us, let us not neglect that which the Spirit of God is ſo offended with. This place ſeemeth to be taken out of Iſa. 63.10. They vexed his holy Spirit. So that it is ſuch a grieving, as doth vex and imbitter the holy Spirit of God. O what a dreadfull conſideration ſhould this be againſt all falſhoods in this point▪ Doth not God, doth not the Spirit of God take notice of thy corruptions, yet it is grieved and vexed at them? furthermore the aggravation of this ſin is ſeen in that it is againſt the Spirit that doth ſeal us to the day of redemption. A Metaphor, ſaith Zanchy (in loc.) from Merchants, who having bought ſuch goods, ſeal them as their own, that ſo leaving others, they may tranſport them. Now for the godly to ſin, it is to deface this ſeal, and if it be ſo great an offence to violate humane ſeals, how much more divine? Obſerve likewiſe that paſſage of God to Moſes, Ex. 4.14. where Moſes out of the ſenſe of his infirmity, refuſing the office God called him to twice or thrice, it is ſaid, The Lords wrath was kindled againſt him. In the Hebrew it is very emphatical, The fury of the Lord was angry againſt Moſes, and the LXX, foreign, by which expreſſion was ſignified, God was not lightly, but grievouſly angry with him; So Pſ. 74.1. the Church crieth out, Why doth thine anger ſmoke againſt the ſheep of thy paſture? and in many other places. Now, can God be angry, and that in ſo high a degree, with that which he doth not ſee, or take notice of? It is true Iſidor. Peluſ. l. 1. ep. 144. will not ſuffer, that notice and affliction which God layeth upon us, to be called foreign or foreign, but then anger is to be taken in a ſtrict ſenſe, for puniſhment by way of ſatisfaction, but otherwiſe the Scripture doth frequently uſe this word, and that of God to his own people, yea vengeance, which is more, Pſ. 96.8. But that it may the better appear, how great the guilt of ſin in believers, even in the ſight of God is, and what his account is of it, take notice of theſe particulars.Particulars expreſſing how great the guilt of ſin is in believers even in Gods ſight.
Firſt, What the Scripture ſtiles them, 1 Sam. 2.29. There God reproveth Eli in his indulgence about his ſons, with this remarkable expreſſion, Thou honoureſt thy ſons above me. Is not this an aggravation which God taketh notice of? and yet Eli did reprove his ſons, but becauſe he failed in the meaſure of zeal, therefore is God thus angry with him; ſo that God doth not only ſee the groſſe ſins committed by his people, but a leſſe meaſure of their graces, and is angry for that. So Rev. 2. becauſe the Church abated in her firſt love, and her works were not perfect, therefore doth God threaten her. As the godly are ſaid to honour the creature above him when they ſin, ſo they are likewiſe ſaid to deſpiſe God; and can God but be offended with them that deſpiſe him? 1 Sam. 2.13. They that deſpiſe me, ſhall be lightly eſteemed, ſaith God again to Eli. Thus likewiſe to David, 2 Sam. 12.9. Wherefore haſt thou deſpiſed the commandment of the Lord? God cannot but take notice of that which is a deſpiſing, and contemning of him. As their ſins are a deſpiſing of God, ſo are they ſaid to diſpleaſe God, which cannot be if God ſee no ſin; for if God ſee no ſin, it is all one in reference to God, whether a believer wallow in the mire of ſin, or whether he live holily; ſo that this Doctrine muſt needs eat and conſume like a Gangrene. Is God as well pleaſed with Peter denying Chriſt, as Peter repenting? as much pleaſed with David in his adultery and murder, as when making his penitential Pſalm? The Papiſts indeed would faſten ſuch prodigious conſequences upon the Proteſtants Doctrine, but they abhor it, whereas it followeth naturally from the Antinomian aſſertion. Indeed the Orthodox ſay, David and Peter in their lapſes, did not fall from the ſtate or grace of Iuſtification; but wherein the Antinomian and they differ, is hereafter to be ſhewen. That God is thus diſpleaſed with juſtified perſons, when they thus ſin, is plain, 2 Sam. 11.29. where what we tranſlate (diſpleaſed) according to the original, is, was evil in the eyes of the Lord; where you ſee expreſſe Scripture, That God did ſee ſin in David, becauſe that which he had done, was evil in Gods eyes: ſo again, 1 Chron. 21.7. Davids numbering of the people, is ſaid to be evil in the eyes of the Lord. Thus the very letter of the Scripture is againſt them. Laſtly, Their ſins are offences againſt God, and can God be offended with that which he doth not behold? Elihu ſpeaks true and excellent Doctrine, Iob 34.32. though he erred in the application, Surely it is meet to be ſaid unto God, I have born chaſtiſement, I will offend no more; where he acknowledgeth, That chaſtiſements are for ſins, and that ſins are offences. If then the ſins of Gods people are a diſhonour to him, a deſpiſing of him, a diſpleaſing of him, they are evil in his eyes, and an offence to him, it cannot be but that he muſt ſee ſin in his people.
Secondly, The Scripture deſcribeth Gods threatning and upbraiding of them with all his kindneſſes he did to them, ſo that God doth not only take notice of them, but in the ſeveral aggravations of their ingratitude and unkindneſſe unto him, in all that they offend. Thus obſerve Gods dealing with Eli, 1 Sam. 2.28. Did not I chooſe thy father out of all the Tribes of Iſrael to be my Prieſt, to offer upon my Altar? Did I not give unto thy father all the offerings by fire of the children of Iſrael? wherefore kick ye at my ſacrifice? What a cutting ſword muſt this needs be in Eli's heart? and becauſe the children of God have a Spirit of love in them, theſe upbraidings muſt needs wound their heart the more. Again, ſee the like dealing with David, 2 Sa. 11.12.8, 9. I anointed thee King over Iſrael, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul: and if that had been too little, I would have given thee ſuch and ſuch things, wherefore haſt thou deſpiſed the commandment of God? &c. Muſt not this pierce into the very bowels of David? Shall God upbraid his people falling into ſin, ſpread before their eyes the manifold mercies he hath beſtowed upon them, and all this while ſee no ſin in them? Therefore when it is ſaid, Iam. 1.5. That God upbraideth not, that is to be underſtood, in reſpect of his frequent and liberal giving, as men uſe to ſay, I have given thus often, and I will give no more; which kinde of giving Seneca cals panem lapidoſum; but if men walk unworthy of the benefits received, he doth then upbraid, as Mar. 16.14. He is ſaid to upbraid the Diſciples, becauſe of their unbelief.
Thirdly, The Scripture applieth the threatnings of God to believe…s, as well as to others▪ making no difference between them, unleſs they repent. Indeed we ſay againſt the Papiſts, that all the ſins of juſtified perſons are venial, and not mortal, that is, ſuch as in the event will have pardon, but that is, becauſe the ſeed of grace will be operative in them, ſo that they ſhall either habitually or actually repent of their ſins. Neither when the Orthodox ſay, That Election is abſolute ▪ do they exclude the media inſtituta, means appointed by God, in which the fruit of Election is accompliſhed, but conditions antecedan…ous, as if that decree did remain ſuſpenſe and uncertain, till the will of man had determined, 1 Cor. 6.9, 10. The Apoſtle laieth down an univerſal rule, ſuch and ſuch groſſe offenders ſhall not inherit the kingdom of heaven, that is, thoſe who live ſo and do not repent, and this is to be extended not only to thoſe who are habitually ſo, but actually likewiſe▪ unleſſe they are reformed. Therefore no godly man falling into any of thoſe groſſe ſins, may deceive himſelf, and think he ſhall enter into the kingdom of heaven without a change. Godly or ungodly, yet if found in the committing of ſuch a groſs ſin, unleſs they do repent, God will not accept one or the other. As repentance is appointed for the wicked man as a duty, without which he cannot be ſaved; ſo confeſſion and forſaking of ſin, is preſcribed a godly man fallen into ſin, without which he cannot have remiſſion, 1 Jo. 1.9. There is no ſuch free grace or Goſpel▪ as faith to a believer, if fallen into a foul ſin, whether you repent or no, your ſins ſhall be pardoned to you. Hence 1 Cor. 11. the Apoſtle makes every man that receiveth unworthily (and yet ſome of them were godly) to receive their damnation, that is, their eternal damnation, without repentance and reformation; and after repentance, their judgement, though not of condemnation, yet affliction and caſtigation. How terrible likewiſe is Paul, He. 12.29. where ſpeaking to the godly that are to receive a kingdom that is eternal, he exhorteth them to duty, Let us have grace (foreign) that is, Let us retain and keep grace, foreign is for foreign, as Ro. 15.4. and obſerve the manner, with reverence and godly fear, foreign is ſuch a fear as relateth to puniſhment; compare this place with Pſ. 2.12. and thus the words following ſuppoſe, for our God is a conſuming fire; this is taken out of Deu. 4.24. and the meaning is, God is no leſs angry with Chriſtians ſinning against him, then formerly with the Iſraelites, & it is as eaſy for him to deſtroy whom he is offended with, as for the fire to deſtroy ſtubble. How directly doth this place overthrow that Antinomian aſſertion, God ſaw ſin in believers in the Old Teſtament, and therefore afflicted them, but it is not ſo under the New?
Now when its ſaid, God is a conſuming fire, this denoteth the great anger of God, compare it with Deu. 9.3. & Deu. 32.22. Fire is moſt efficacious, and leaſt capable of tranſmutation as other elements are, for which reaſon the Perſians worſhipped fire for a god, but fire might be extinguiſhed, whereas God is ſuch a fire as conſumeth all, and remaineth immutable. Know then (brethren) that as there are places in the New Teſtament, which ſpeak of the riches of his grace, ſo alſo of his conſuming anger. As therefore the promiſes of the Scripture are for conſolation & hope to the godly, ſo are the threatnings for a godly fear. Between theſe two milſtones a Chriſtian is made dulcis farina, as Luther once ſaid; and neither of theſe milſtones may be taken for a pledge, as the Law was in the Old Teſtament, becauſe one cannot work without the other. Therefore for a man to take only thoſe places of Scripture, which ſpeak of the goodneſſe of the promiſes, and to reject the terrors of the threatnings▪ is ſpiritual theft in an high degree. Doth not Paul, 2 Cor. 5 excite himſelf to run like a Gyant in his miniſterial race, becauſe of the terror of the Lord at the day of Judgement? See ver. 10. We muſt all appear (ſo to appear, as to be ſeen through and made manifeſt, before the judgement-ſeat of God (as thoſe that are to plead a cauſe in an eminent place before a Judge) to receive a reward ſutable to his life: n…w knowing this (ſaith the Apoſtle) we perſwade; it may relate to himſelf, and to thoſe whom he perſwadeth. Yet this apprehenſion of the Lords terror did not exclude love, for v. 14. he ſaith, The love of Chriſt conſtraineth us, foreign, either an expreſſion from thoſe who had a ſpirit of prophecie upon them, that was very powerfull, whereby they could not but ſpeak, or elſe from women in travell, Heb. 12.15. which through pain cannot but cry out, ſo efficacious was love in Paul.
4. The ſins of godly men ceaſe not to be ſins, though they are juſtified. We may not ſay, that in Cain killing of another is murder, but in David it is not: We may not ſay, denying of Chriſt in Judas, is indeed a ſin, but in Peter it is not. No priviledge they have by juſtification, can alter the nature of a ſin. He that receiveth unworthily, is guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord, whether he be a wicked man or a Beleever. It is not with a Beleever and a wicked man, as with a man and a beaſt comparatively. If a beaſt kill a man, it is not ſin, becauſe the ſubject is not reaſonable, but a man if he do ſo, whether godly or ungodly, it is a ſin, becauſe againſt Gods Law. It is not ſafe to ſay, that God doth with the Beleever and wicked, as if a Magiſtrate ſhould make a Law, that whoſoever committeth ſuch a crime, if he be a free-man he ſhall only be impriſoned, but if a ſervant, he ſhall be put to death: ſo God, whoſoever murdereth or committeth adultery, if he be a Beleever, the wages due to his ſin, is only temporal chaſtiſements, but to a wicked man, it's eternal death. I ſay this is not ſafe: for although a Beleevers ſin ſhall not actually damn him, yet God hath made the ſame Law to both, and repentance as a means is preſcribed, ſo that we may by ſuppoſition ſay, If the wicked man repent, his ſin ſhall not damn him; If the juſtified perſon do not, his ſin will damn him. It's true, it is not proper to ſay of ſin in the abſtract, it ſhall be damned, no more, then that grace ſhall be ſaved; but we are to ſay, the perſon ſhall be damned or ſaved. Yet the guilt of the ſin will cauſe the guilt of the perſon, if not taken off by Chriſt as the meritorious, and faith as the inſtrumentall cauſe. The ſins then of Beleevers and ungodly are both alike, only that the guilt of them doth not redound upon the perſons alike, is becauſe the one takes the way appointed by God to obtain pardon, and the other doth not. Not that the godly man makes himſelf to differ from the wicked, but all is the work of grace. In ſome reſpects the ſins of godly men are more offenſive to God, then thoſe of wicked men; becauſe committed againſt more light, and more experience of the ſweetneſſe of Gods love, and the bitterneſ…e of ſin. What is the cauſe, Heb. 10.28, 29, 30. the Apoſtle maketh the condition of a wilfull Apoſtate to be ſo dreadfull, but becauſe of the excellency of the object in the Goſpel, above that in the Law? If he that deſpiſed Moſes his Law, died without mercy: of how much ſorer puniſhment, ſuppoſe ye, ſhall he be thought worthy? &c. Obſerve that interpoſition, foreign, think ye, do you not eaſily think that ſuch ſins offend God more? Now although the truly ſanctified can never fall into ſuch a condition, totally and finally, yet their ſins committed wilfully againſt the Goſpel, are gradually, and in ſome meaſure of ſuch a nature, and therefore they fall terribly into the hands of the living God, when they ſo ſin againſt him; and conſider how that the Apoſtle ſpeaks theſe things, even to them, of whom he hoped better things, and things that accompany ſalvation, Heb. 6. If therefore we ſee a godly man, who hath taſted much of Gods favour, play the prodigall, walk looſely, we may and ought (notwithſtanding Antinomian poſitions) powerfully and ſeverely ſet home theſe places of Scripture upon his conſcience. And obſerve how in the New Teſtament, the Apoſtle alledgeth two places out of the Old, Vengeance belongeth to me, Deut. 32.35. and the Lord will judge his people, Pſal. 135.14. To judge, is to avenge; ſo that the people of God, have thoſe conſiderations in their ſins to provoke God, which wicked men cannot have; and therefore have the ſame motives to humble them; as the Apoſtle argueth, To which of the Angels ſaid he, Sit at my right hand? &c. ſo may we, To what wicked man hath God poured out his love, revealed himſelf kindly, as unto the godly? therefore do they neglect the greater mercies.