A Fresh Antidote Against Neonomian Bane, Chapter 17
CHAP. XVII. Of the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs.
Section 1. Christ's Righteouſneſs is Imputed to us, and Paul ſaith ſo. §. 2. Argument 1. §. 3. Arg. 2. and 3. §. 4. Arg. 4. §. 5. Arg. 5. §. 6. Arg. 6. §. 7. Arg. 7. §. 8. Arg. 8. §. 9. Arg. 9. §. 10. Arg. 10.11.
Section 1. OUr Adverſaries ſay they own the Imputation of Righteouſneſs to Juſtification; but they ſay, its there own, not Chriſt's: Now we ſhall prove that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is Imputed. They ſay, its no where ſaid that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is Imputed. We ſay, it is in all that is ſaid by the Apoſtle Paul, ſo plain, that all but he that will ſhut his Eyes perverſly muſt ſee it. I ſhall but give brief hints of it, 1. The Apoſtle Paul, Rom. 4. ſpeaking ſo often of Imputation, gives us plainly to underſtand, that he means no Imputation but of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to Juſtification; for his Diſcourſe in the 4th chap. is continued from ver. 25. of the 3d to prove the Doctrine of Juſtification by the Propitiation, Blood and Righteouſneſs of Chriſt; and ſhews how Faith honours this Righteouſneſs, and wrongs not the law by it, but eſtabliſheth it. In the 4th ch. he goes on to exclude all Juſtification by any works, and ſhews in Abraham and David, they took Chriſt's Righteouſneſs. viz. that ſpoken ch. 3.25. by Faith, for their Imputed righteouſneſs, unto juſtification and remiſſion, and covering of them from the Eye of God's juſtice; wherefore Chriſt is call'd our Propitiation, in alluſion to the Golden cover of the Ark, that hid the Law and was the mercy ſeat; now briefly to ſhew that by Imputation ſo often mention'd in this chap. he meant the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt to our Juſtification he tells us ver. 22. that what God had promiſed to Abraham, viz. the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, which he was fully by Faith perſwaded of, was Imputed to him for Righteouſneſs; now ſaith the Apoſtle, it was not written for the ſake of Abraham only, but for us alſo to whom it ſhall be Imputed, i. e. the Righteouſneſs in the Promiſe; if we believe on him, that raiſed up the Lord Jeſus Chriſt from the dead, who was delivered for our offences and raiſed again for our Juſtification i. e. if we believe in God, thro' the full perfect and compleat righteouſneſs of Chriſt, for our Righteouſneſs could not have been full and compleat without his Reſurrection, and his Juſtification as a publick head of all the Elect; who raiſed was Juſtified, as having wrought out a full and compleat Juſtifying righteouſneſs for them, they are incouraged and invited to take it for their Righteouſneſs by Faith, and they might aſſure themſelves of the Imputation thereof; and proceeds in the next chap. to ſay, that having taken this Imputed righteouſneſs by Faith, they are ſaid to be juſtified by Faith, and to have peace with God, and acceſs unto the grace of God thro the ſaid righteouſneſs.
§. 2. Arg. 1. Now then I Argue, if Chriſt in the promiſe be Imputed for Righteouſneſs to Abraham and every believer, and the Apoſtle ſaith ſo, then the Imputation here ſpoken of, is the Imputation of Chriſt's righteouſneſs; but the antecedent is true, from Gal. 3.21, 22. its plain, that it was what God had promiſed to him was Imputed to him. The conſequence needs no proof, for it was Chriſt was promiſed, and he ſaw Chriſt's day in that promiſe, and the Promiſe of Chriſt was the Goſpel preached to him.
Again, to prove the Apoſtle means the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is imputed, If the delivery of Chriſt for our ſins, and raiſing him again for Juſtification, was the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt for Juſtification; then this is that which was imputed not to Abraham for righteouſneſs only, but alſo to every Believer by the Text; and therefore the minor is fully there proved; and I think as to the major, that none can deny the Life, Death and Reſurrection of Chriſt to be his compleat Righteouſneſs.
§. 3. Arg. 2. He that was made of God righteouſneſs to us is made by imputation of his righteouſneſs to us; but Chriſt is made ſo of God, 1 Cor. 1.30. but ſaith Mr. Cl. he is made righteouſneſs as he is made Wiſdom. So Righteouſneſs, Sanctification and Redemption, but it follows not only that he be made of great advantage to a Chriſtian, but theſe ſeveral ways, that he is not one thing as the other; he is not a Prophet as a Prieſt; and if he ſhould mean made righteouſneſs in Mr. Cl's. ſence, then he ſhould be but made ſanctification twice taken, for Mr. Cl's juſtifying righteouſneſs is but Sanctification; its, he is made the Spring, Head and Root of Sanctification, and legally made righteouſneſs to us.
Arg. 3. Again, If we be made the righteouſneſs of God in Chriſt, [where its plain this righteouſneſs of God is in Chriſt] then the righteouſneſs of Chriſt is imputed to us, but we are made the righteouſneſs of God in him, Ergo. the antecedent is proved by, 2 Cor. 5.21. as to the major, the Neonomians ſay, the righteouſneſs of God is our own righteouſneſs: We ſay, nay, the righteouſneſs of God is ſaid to be in Chriſt, and we are made ſo by imputation, for Chriſt could not be made Sin for us, but by Imputation, and if it is meant of a Sacrifice for Sin, even ſuch were made Sin by Imputation, and therefore we are made the righteouſneſs of God in Chriſt by Imputation.
§. 4. Arg. 4. Again, If Chriſt hath merited our Juſtification, Chriſts Merits are imputed in themſelves to Juſtification; but Chriſt hath merited our Juſtification: The minor is granted by theſe Gentlemen: They tell us, that Chriſts Merits are id propter quod, we are juſtified for the ſake, or rather by reaſon of Chriſts Merits; but they mean not that Chriſt purchaſed the Sinner's perform'd condition of the New law, but that he procured of God a new law for man to perform the condition of: Now this is no more to be the cauſe of Juſtification, than God in making a Law was a cauſe of Sin; for ſin is not Imputed where there's no law; and where there is a Law, there will be Juſtification or Condemnation: Chriſt merited a Law and made one, therefore for the ſake of Chriſt, we are Juſtified by this Law; here's Chriſts law cauſa ſine qua non with a Witneſs. As to the conſequence, if Juſtification be an effect of Merits, and it be a Juridical effect, then Merits which is the cauſe, muſt be imputed to the perſon on whom theſe effects muſt fall: What moves the Court or Judge to juſtify this or that perſon, his own Merits or the Merits of another? Not his own, but the Merits of another: Then theſe Merits are imputed, for it quickly and plainly appears what is imputed to any, whether merits of Condemnation or merits of Juſtification, for Juſtice goes by nothing but Merit; and therefore mens own righteouſneſs cannot juſtify-becauſe it cannot Merit: And do not our Neonomians ſpeak as the Socinians in this point, and mumble as if their mouths were full of plumbs? Now therefore, if Chriſts Merit be brought into Court, as a meritorious cauſe of the Sinners Juſtification, they are imputed to him for his Juſtification as if he had merited himſelf.
§. Arg. 5. They ſay, Chriſts Merits cannot be Imputed, but the Effects are Imputed. And I Argue, If Chriſts Righteouſneſs be Imputed, its Imputed as a cauſe of Juſtification, or in the Effect; [It ſhould be as an Effect or the Disjunction is ridiculous] but its not Imputed in the Effect, Ergo. In and as the Cauſe, for the Effect is not the Cauſe but contrary, its another thing; ſo that to ſay Chriſts Merits are imputed, and ſo imputed to the perſon Juſtified is nonſenſe. But what are the effects imputed? All the Benefits purchaſed by Chriſt. For is Juſtification an effect imputed? Sure not. Is Juſtification imputed to Juſtification? Sure that's moſt abſur'd. Is Mortification imputed to Juſtification? That looks very odd. Is Vocation and Adoption, or Glorification, all or any of them Imputed to Juſtification? for they are Effects of Chriſts Merits. But ſuppoſe they ſay, ſome of theſe or all, are to us imputed for righteouſneſs unto Juſtification; I then Query, Whether the Righteouſneſs perform'd by us in the new law Juſtification, be merited by Chriſt as an Effect? Do not I ſee them ſneak away now and give no Anſwer, but upon another Subject, they will tell you that Faith and the condition of the New law, was not purchaſed by Chriſt, but are by the gift of Election only. And now I pray what's become of Juſtification, by Effects of Chriſts Merits? They will ſay, we are Juſtified by Imputing the Spirits operations to us for righteouſneſs. Now this cannot be,
1. The Spirit never was incarnate, nor his Office to work a Righteouſneſs for Juſtification; this was peculiar to Chriſt.
2. The fruits of the Spirit, when they come to be exerted, are called our works, and juſtly ſo, becauſe Graces exerciſed, or Duties performed by us are ſo, theſe are all renounced as ſuch by the Apoſtle Paul. Phil. 3.8. and elſewhere.
3. What the Spirit doth in Juſtification, its office is by way of Application, it takes of Chriſts, and gives it to us; it applies and brings home to a ſinner the Impetration of Chriſt, as Righteouſneſs unto his Juſtification; hence the Spirit is ſaid to juſtifie, 1 Cor. 6.11. in bringing to the Soul the Grace of Juſtification, and enſtating him therein by faith, as he ſanctifies by bringing in the Grace of Sanctification. Now then, if Chriſt's Righteouſneſs cannot be imputed in the effect, and is imputed at all, then as the cauſe meritorious of Juſtification.
But they ſay, God cannot impute Chriſts Righteouſneſs to us, becauſe we did not perform it, and God is a God of Truth, he cannot impute that to us which we did not. To which I anſwer,
1. That God doth not reckon we performed Chriſts Righteouſneſs.
2. God may give us his Son for righteouſneſs, Rom. 8. and give us this righteouſneſs, Rom. 5.5.
3. He may accept it for us on law terms, as our righteouſneſs to Juſtification, and all this is according to Truth and Righteouſneſs imputing it to us in a Law Senſe.
4. The Argument will fall upon Neonomian Juſtification, for that's to call that righteouſneſs which is unrighteouſneſs, and not according to Truth, as hath been ſhewed: Mr. Cl. makes it a great Argument that the active righteouſneſs of Chriſt muſt not be imputed, becauſe Chriſt did not obey that we ſhould not obey, and where's the Antinomian that ſays ſo? but we ſay, that Chriſt did and ſuffered all that the law required of him as a Second Adam, and our Surety, and his obeying in doing is no hindrance, but a Goſpel ground and reaſon of our doing and obeying: As Chriſt did not ſuffer that we ſhould not ſuffer, but not ſuffer the Penally, ſo Chriſts doing was not that we ſhould not obey Evangelically, but that we ſhould but not obey legally, with expectation of our Juſtification by our works, or from a law, for that is to be under a Law, and not under Grace, and to ſin inſtead of obeying, Rom. 6, &c.
Laſtly, If Chriſt's righteouſneſs be taken as a meritorious cauſe in a ſinner's Juſtification, it is imputed as ſuch to the perſon juſtified; the effect of this cauſe is the ſinner's Juſtification, which is his proper Diſcharge, and this is not Imputation, but Judgment upon it, and Delivery in Law, and ſuppoſe the effects of Merit could be imputed, the cauſe and reaſon thereof muſt be firſt imputed; for the Law doth nothing in way of Condemnation or Juſtification but upon a meritorious cauſe imputed unto Condemnation or Juſtification; and how abſurd is it to ſay Condemnation is imputed, but its proper to ſay, the ſin that merits it is imputed.
§. 6. Arg. 6. That Righteouſneſs which is accepted in law unto Juſtification is imputed to the perſon juſtified, but Chriſt's Merits are accepted of God to the Sinner's Juſtification. The major muſt be owned for Truth by the Neonomians, otherwiſe they could not aſſert their Juſtification by Works. The minor hath been counted ſound Divinity by moſt Proteſtants, and many Papiſts; but whether it be or be not, the Scripture affirms it roundly; ſee for a taſte, Eph. 5.2. chap. 1.6. for an acceptation in law, muſt be an imputation of Merit to Juſtification, and can be upon no other account, either of a man's own, or of another's for him, the law looks at the value of his Money or Works that he brings into Court, not how he came by either, whether by Gift or otherwiſe.
§. 7. Arg. 7. That righteouſneſs through which Sin is not imputed to condemnation is the righteouſneſs through which a man is imputed righteous unto Juſtification: But Chriſts righteouſneſs is that through which ſin is not imputed to condemnation, Ergo. The minor is very clear from Rom. 8.1.34. who is he that condemneth, it is Chriſt that died, chap. 4.6, 7, 8: Bleſſed is the man whoſe ſins are forgiven, to whom God doth not impute ſin; and this is told us is a righteouſneſs without works, that which comes on Jews and Gentiles, that which covers Sin from the Eye of God's Juſtice, therefore that which lies in the Death and Reſurrection of Chriſt, v. 24, 25. likewiſe 2 Cor. 5.15. God was in Chriſt reconciling the world, i. e. juſtifying, for God reconciles none but by Juſtification; reconciliation is eſſential to it, and therefore non imputation of ſin; for while a man lies under a law charge of ſin he is unrighteous, till he be imputed righteous by the law. The major is evident from what is ſaid in proof of the minor, for non imputation of ſin to a ſinner is eſſential to his Juſtification, which can be no otherwiſe then by a covering righteouſneſs; and when a law imputes ſin, the ſame law muſt juſtify by imputing to him an adequate and ſatisfactory righteouſneſs.
§. 8. Arg. 8. The Sins of Sinners under the old Teſtament were Imputed Typically to the High-Prieſt and Sacrifices, which is very eaſie to make appear, Ergo. The Sins of all ſav'd ſinners are Imputed really to Chriſt, and his righteouſneſs to them. See 1 Cor. 5.21. Rom. 3.25. Heb. 9.15.
§. 9. Arg. 9. That which cannot be pleaded for Pardon or Juſtification unleſs it be Imputed, is when its pleadibly imputed unto Juſtification: But Chriſts very righteouſneſs is pleadible, &c. Ergo. The minor I ſuppoſe theſe Gentlemen dare not deny, for I find tho they will not have it their immediate righteouſneſs by imputation, yet they will have it for ſome remote and as a reſerve at a dead lift, when conſcience ſees that neither the New Law, nor the righteouſneſs thereof will ſerve the turn. Now that Chriſts righteouſneſs is not pleadible without Imputation to us, neither by Chriſt in heaven nor by us on earth its plain, for if Chriſt be never ſo righteous, his plea is anſwerered in ſaying thou art righteous for thy ſelf; I never imputed thy righteouſneſs to theſe, let them plead for their own Juſtification. If they plead it with God, the anſwer is, Chriſt is righteous for himſelf; his righteouſneſs not imputed to thee, no more then the righteouſneſs of one of the Angels; and therefore Chriſts righteouſneſs being pleadible its imputed; without Imputation its not pleadible for us or by us.
§. 10. Arg. 10. That righteouſneſs which is a Suretiſhip righteouſneſs muſt be imputed, elſe its of no value to the offender; but Chriſts righteouſneſs is a Suretiſhip righteouſneſs, he being a Surety his righteouſneſs muſt be ſuch. And as for the major its plain that the juſtice that accepts one perſon to be Surety for another, doth impute or account the righteouſneſs of the Surety to that other, or elſe it accepts not, the Surety is rejected now that Chriſt was accepted as a Surety is beyond all queſtion, Heb. 7.22.
§. 11. Arg. 11. The righteouſneſs of the ſecond Adam is an Imputed righteouſneſs, for 1. as Adam was a Publick perſon that had a Covenant ſtanding for all his Seed, ſo the 2d Chriſt was, and had for his. 2. As Adam's Sin came by Imputation upon his Seed ſo Chriſts righteouſneſs on his as fully appears from Rom. 5. But this I muſt not now enlarge upon, the Apoſtle is ſo full and plain therein, that I never could ſee any thing ſaid to oppoſe, that could have weight with any learned and rational Interpreter, if unprejudiced againſt Truth.