Gods Love to Man and Mans Duty Towards God, Part 1
Part I.
Gen. 2.17.
But of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil thou ſhalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eateſt thereof, thou ſhalt ſurely dye, or dying thou ſhalt dye.
I Deſign (God aſſiſting) to Diſcourſe of the two Covenants betwixt God and Man. The Introduction.The right opening and underſtanding whereof might help to ſet and keep our Judgments right in many points of Divinity, and prevent our falling into many dangerous and prevailing errors. And as Luther ſaid (as I remember) upon his underſtanding of the point of free Juſtification by Chriſt's righteouſneſs, that thereupon he thought himſelf apertis portis in ipſum paradiſum intrâſſe, to have ſtrait way entered into Paradiſe: And ibi continuò alia mihi facies totius Scripturae apparuit, forthwith the whole Scripture appeared to him with a new face; ſo it would no doubt to many, could they attain to a right and true notion of the Covenants.
Now I have made choice of this Text of Scripture, whereupon to ground my Diſcourſe of the Covenant of works: As this was part of it; part of that firſt Covenant, God was pleaſed to make with Man in innocency.
I confeſs the Covenant of Works made with Adam in innocency, is more darkly ſpoken of than the Covenant of Grace.
And the Reaſon is obvious, becauſe the firſt Covenant was ſoon broken, on man's part, that he can claim no priviledge or benefit by it. In this reſpect it is, as if it had never been. All man's hope of happineſs depends wholly on that which is called the Covenant of Grace.
Therefore the promiſſory part of that firſt Covenant is not mentioned here, not ſpoken of expreſly: but only implyed, and included in the threatning. The Text indeed runneth in the Form of a Law with a threatning. As we have no more expreſſed here; but,
1. A Precept, not to eat.—
2. The Sanction or penalty threatned, death in caſe man did eat, contrary to the charge, and precept God had given him.
Yet there is more included and implyed here: As,
1. A Promiſe: A promiſe of the continuance of Adam's life and happineſs, upon Condition that he continued his Obedience.
When it is ſaid [If thou diſobeyeſt thou ſhalt dye.] it fairly intimates thus much, Poena enim denunciata inobedientiae non expectatur, ubi eſt obedientia. Cocceide ſoed. c. 2. Sect. 24. p. 29.[If thou wilt be Obedient in this thing, and whatſoever elſe I command thee, thou ſhalt ſurely live ſtill, and be happy, thou ſhalt not dye.]
2. The Tenor of the firſt Covenant is included here, that it was [Do this and live, diſobey and dye.] That the Stipulation, or Condition required of man in the firſt Covenant, was his perfect obedience to the will of God in all things, not only to the Law of Nature implanted in him, but alſo to any further Command of God's giving Forth.
As we ſee in this poſitive Law, where the thing forbidden was lawful in it ſelf, and only ſinful becauſe forbidden, and forbidden, to prove and try his obedience. As this was indeed a fit trial of it, by a Law to reſtrain him from that, whereunto he had a Natural inclination, as unto other fruits in Paradiſe (Gen. 3.6.) and which was indifferent, (within mans liberty to take and eat) before the giving of that Law.
But I ſay the Condition of the firſt Covenant was obedience to the will of God in all things; therefore it is rightly called the Covenant of works. As Rom. 3.27. we read of a Law of works contradiſtinguiſhed and oppoſed to the Law of Faith. The Tenor of it being [do this and live] implyed here in the threatning, If thou diſobeyeſt in any thing, be it but ſo much as in taſting of this fruit, (which here to try thy Obedience, I forbid thee to eat of) Thou ſhalt dye. As Grotius (de Satiſ. c. 3.) per unam Speciem peccati omne peccati genus indicatur, ut exprimit Lex eadem clarius explicata, Maledictus qui non manſerit in omnibus praeceptis Legis, Deut. 27.26. Gal. 3.10.
This [In the day thou eateſt thereof, dying thou ſhalt dye, meaneth as much as that [Curſed is he that continueth not obedient in all things.
3. That the Law of works, the Law given to Adam, was more than a penal, and praemiant Law, more than a Law with a promiſe, It is true Gods Law with its Sanction may be called his Covenant, before mans conſent, as containing the matter of it; but it is moſt properly a Covenant when it is conſented unto, having then alſo the form of a Covenant.and threatning annexed, that it was alſo a Covenant. I have this to ſay further, viz. that we cannot but ſuppoſe, that innocent Adam did fully conſent to, and readily and thankfully accept of Gods Terms and propoſals here [Obey and live, Diſobey and dye.] When God had done ſo much for man in his Creation, making him a reaſonable Creature; in, or after his own Image, able to yield perfect obedience, and when the ſaid obedience was indiſputably, indiſpenſably his duty, whether God promiſed ſuch a reward or not, to ſuppoſe now that man was not fully conſenting to the Terms offered, (which were moſt juſt and reaſonable) for the continuation of his happineſs, were to ſuppoſe that man was not what he was indeed, (i. e. reaſonable, and innocent,) This were to ſuppoſe, that God did not make man upright or perfect, but rather perverſe, and to ſuppoſe that man lay croſs to his Maker, even before he fell, which is (no doubt) prodigiouſly falſe.
4. One thing more included here, and to be inferred, is, that this Covenant, and Compact, was not made with Adam alone, but with him, and his poſterity together. Their want of perfect conformity to Gods Will and Law, (the thing required, and inſiſted on in the Covenant of works) rendring his poſterity guilty of death, even as if they had ſet their teeth in the forbidden fruit. The penalty threatned to Adam's breach of Covenant, we ſee inflicted on his poſterity, that certainly they were involved in the Covenant with him, to be dealt withall upon the ſame Terms. Even Infants, who have not ſinned after the ſimilitude of Adam's Tranſgreſſion, yet through his diſobedience (mediante corruptione, their nature by that means being corrupted) are ſubjected to the ſame death, and puniſhment.
Though Corrinus takes it thus, Cenſ. Amat. Arm. c. 9. p. 138.death being threatned unto Adam that very day he ſinned, therefore his poſterity could not but partake of his puniſhment. As they muſt all of neceſſity dye in him, who were in his loins. Yet by his leave, this account he gives of the matter is utterly ſhort of that account the holy Scripture giveth of it. The Apoſtle concludeth further, Rom. 5.12. That by Adam's Sin, all the world of mankind became ſubject unto death; ſo as they are ſubject to it, not only to dye vertually in him; but formally to undergoe the Sentence of death in their own perſons.
Now hence I lay down this Doctrinal Concluſion.
Doct. That God was pleaſed to Covenant with man at firſt, when in the ſtate of innocency, promiſing to give him eternal life, upon Condition of his obeying perfectly and conſtantly; withall threatning death, if in the leaſt point he ſhould diſobey.
And to help your underſtandings, and to lead you on to a clearer conception, and apprehenſion of the Nature of this firſt Covenant, I ſhall proceed by certain ſteps, laying down ſeveral propoſitions about it: humbly begging the Spirit of truth ſo to guide me, that I may not miſlead you here.