Baxters Aphorisms, Part 1 · Part 1 · Chapter 19
CHAP. XIX.
Arg. Whether Chriſt hath ſatisfied for ſinnes againſt the Old Covenant, and not for ſinnes againſt the New alſo.
Theſ. 32, 33, 34, 35. UNto this I may ad the quodlibetarie & quidlibetarie doctrines of Mr Baxter, his Niceties, quiddities, and nimble nothings, whereof he diſputes profoundly in the four next Theſes, viz. the 32 &c. and in his Appendix, in anſwer to the third queſtion, pag. 12. of the appendix, and thence to pag. 27. in which many notable and rare ſpeculations are unfolded. viz.
1. Whether the rope wherewith Judas hanged himſelfe, were made of hair or hemp?
2. Whether it were Simon, alias called Peter, or Peter, alias called Simon, that denyed Chriſt; and whether it were Pontius, or elſe Pilate that condemned him.
3. Whether it were Chriſts Croſſe, or elſe the Croſſe of Chriſt that Simon of Cyrene was compelled to bear? Item whether hee carried it on his right or his left ſhoulder? and which end of the Croſſe was before, and whether the contrary end were behind in carriage?
4. Whether when Joab was put to death for killing two men, Abner and Amaſa, for which of theſe two murthers he ſuffered, for the former or the latter, or for neither?
The ſame or like to theſe are the diſputes of Maſter Baxter, in theſe Theſes and their explications, and in the forementioned part of the Appendix. viz. 1. Whether, when himſelfe hath laid it down for a poſition no leſſe firm and unrepealable than the Lawes of the Medes and Perſians which alter not, that there is no ſinne prohibited in the Goſpel, which is not a breach of ſome precept of the Decalogue, and a ſinne againſt the Old Covenant, &c. Yet nevertheleſſe there be any ſinnes againſt the New Covenant which are not alſo againſt the Old Item whether there be any ſinnes, conſiderable in any of their reſpects againſt the Goſpel onelyonly, and not againſt the Moral Law? and then conſequently, whether Chriſt hath ſatisfied by his death for ſuch ſinnes as himſelf affirmes never have been, never ſhall be, or can be committed. Theſ. 30. pag. 148. that is, for imaginary ſins which never were ſins, nor ſhall be? Theſ. 32.
2. When he hath aſſerted, and peremptorily concluded, Theſ. 32. That Chriſt was not to ſatisfie for any ſin committed againſt the New Covenant, which was not, is not alſo a ſin againſt the Old: Yet whether it be not very needfull to be queſtioned in the 33. Theſ. Whether Chriſt hath done, what he was not to doe? whether he hath ſatisfied for ſins that violated the New Covenant, as well as for thoſe that violate the Old Covenant? And conſequently if he ſhould have ſo done, whether this were to have been reckoned as a work of ſupererogation above, and beyond his duty, to have merited ſuperexcedently for us; or an act of ſin againſt his duty, putting him into an incapacity to merit at all for us? yea whereas Mr. Baxter concludeth abſolutely as an undeniable truth, Theſ. 32. Therefore Chriſt dyed not for any ſin againſt the Goſpel, or Covenant of Grace, whether that be not a ſufficient argument to prove in Theſ. 33. that Chriſt hath not by his paſſive obedience ſatisfied for the ſinnes that violate the Covenant of Grace? who can evade the force of ſuch an argument, Chriſt hath not ſatisfied, ergo he hath not ſatisfied; ſpecially when it hath been before proved in words at length, that there is no ſin againſt the New Covenant, but is a ſin againſt the Old alſo; and it is ſatisfied for, as to the Old Covenant, what reaſon is there then that it ſhould bee ſatisfied, as to the New Covenant too? When the Creditor is payd his full debt in the hall, and hath yeelded up the bond, will he expect to have the ſame debt payd to him in the parlor alſo?
3. Whether, when both Law and Goſpel, Old, and New Covenant, command the ſame thing; that Chriſt then ſatisfyeth for the breach of that duty, as to the Law, but not as to the Goſpel? The Goſpel then damneth men for that fault that in reference to the Law is ſatisfied for? and conſequently many poor wretches are damned by the Goſpel, and New Covenant, which by the Law, and Old Covenant ſhould be ſaved? Or if it be not ſo, whether then it be not the Law that damneth even finall unbelief it ſelf, taking advantage from the violating of the grace of the New Covenant, to aggravate their condemnation, that under the means of Grace have lived, and dyed contemners thereof?
4. Whether all other ſinnes which the Goſpel precepts do prohibit, be againſt Chriſt and his Goſpel, as the object of thoſe ſins, onelyonly the breaking of the conditions of the Goſpel, be not a ſin againſt Chriſt and his Goſpel, as the object of that ſin? for ſo Mr. Baxter pag. 159. diſtinguiſheth between thoſe ſinnes that have Chriſt, and the Goſpel for their object, and thoſe breaches of the conditions of the New Covenant, as if theſe had not Chriſt and his Goſpel for their object. What then is the object of theſe ſins? or have they no object? or how many thouſand conditions of the New Covenant are there, the breach whereof is by no ſacrifice to be purged? Hee tells us indeed, Theſ. 32. pag. 159. that the Goſpel threatneth death to no other ſin, but final unbelief and rebellion. But this finall unbelief, and finall rebellion hath its belly ſo full of other ſmall ſins threatned in the womb of their Mother, [Rebellion] as ever a man found of the berries in the belly of a breeding Lobſter. And in his Appendix, pag. 23. he makes finall unbelief the genus, to which he attributes but three ſpecies, of which the firſt, viz. Ordinary finall unbelief, is not to bee conſidered as ſpecies ſpecialiſſima, but ſubalterna, which being looked upon as a genus, hath ſo many ſpecies, or as a ſpecies hath ſo many individuals under it (according to Mr. Baxters doctrine) as the beſt Arithmetician in the world, ſaving himſelfe, will not dare to yeeld up, upon his caſting, the true ſumme of them to ſatisfie Mr. Baxters cenſure therein; as it will appear when Mr. Baxter comes to unlace, and rip abroad his Juſtifying Faith in its largeſt ſenſe. Theſ. 70.
To theſe I might adde many more quaintiſies of the ſame nature, breathing out themſelves from the veins of this his diſpute. But all the reſt, as thoſe already mentioned, are but tarrying irons to take up the time of men that are Malè feriati, rather love to play with the buttons, then to cloſe with the body, and drink in the ſpirit of true Chriſtianity. And what other end can Mr. Baxter have in theſe his chippings and mincings, but to ſhew the delicacy of his wit? Whom hath he in the ſubſtance of what he ſpeaketh, his adverſary? We grant and teach with him.
1. That there is no ſin prohibited by the Goſpel, or New Covenant, which is not a ſin againſt the Law, and Old Covenant alſo.
2. That finall unbelief, and rebellion, are ſins (if not unpardonable) as if they exceeded the bounds of Gods grace, and Chriſts merits to pardon them, yet) which have no futurition of pardon, ſhall never be pardoned in this life, or in that which is to come: For ſo hath the Lord declared his purpoſe in reference to theſe ſins.
3. That both the Law and the Goſpel concurre in damning ſuch perſons; the Law as a Covenant of Workes properly, for their refuſall to ſubmit (even till death it ſelf) to the will and authority of God, requiring Faith in Chriſt for their redemption from vengeance. The Goſpel improperly, by withholding its ſhelter from the Laws ſentence againſt them, becauſe they would never be perſwaded to come under the ſhelter of it: yea more in ſtrengthning the hand of the Law to give them the ſorer puniſhment, for the contempt of Gods grace, as well as of his Authority and Juſtice. And thus not onelyonly the mountains of their ſinnes againſt the Law, but alſo Chriſt the Rock ſhall fall upon them to their greater ſhivering, for that they dared to daſh themſelves againſt him, and would not be induced to be built againſt all the ſtroakes of vengeance upon him.
This is the ſumme of all that which Mr. Baxter here in ſubſtance ſaies. To what purpoſe then are his elaborate diſtinctions of the differing reſpects and aſpects, ſenſes and non-ſenſes, in which Chriſt hath either ſatisfied, or not ſatisfied for mans ſins, unleſſe it be Balaam-like, to lay a ſtumbling block in the way of the ſimpler people of Gods Iſrael, to occaſion their fall? to puzzle their judgements and conſciences? and to make the way of grace, which is in it ſelf as diſcovered by the Lord Chriſt, eaſie and plaine, to be unto them by his evill working therein, intricate, perplexed, and full of ſnares? To all ſober men it ſufficeth to know,
1. That there is no one of their ſins, in whatſoever conſideration it be taken, but hath death and hell in the tayl of it.
2. That there cannot be any other way of exemption from the death & hel which every ſuch ſin of theirs meriteth, by any other meanes but by the redemption which is by, and in the Lord Jeſus.
3. That the blood of Chriſt hath in it a perfect efficacy to cleanſe from all ſin whatſoever, no one excepted, if it be applyed to cleanſe; Not the very ſin againſt the Holy Ghoſt, which it hath not power totally to purge out from the conſcience, if it were truly applyed. But therefore is that ſin never pardoned, and purged from the ſoul, becauſe the Spirit of God never doth, nor will apply the blood of Chriſt to the ſoul that is guilty of it; nor generates Faith in ſuch a ſoul to run unto, and waſh in the Fountain of Chriſts blood, that it may be clean. Let there be any one ſin named of all the ſins whereof our corrupt nature is pregnant, that is ſo much a ſin againſt the Goſpel, but that the purging, or not purging away of it, the abſolving of the conſcience from it, or retaining of it upon the conſcience, doth not wholly depend upon the application, or not application of the blood of Chriſt to the ſoul, and I ſhall acknowledge that I have ſeen but the Letter, and was never yet acquainted with the Spirit, and drift of the Scriptures.
Or ſuppoſe we ſhould take a delight to contend about that which is a meer lana caprina, whether it be hair or wooll that grows upon the Goats ſhoulders, how feeble might we manifeſt the reaſons to be which Mr. Baxter beingeth to prove, that the ſins againſt the New Covenant are not ſatisfied for, by the ſacrifice of Chriſts death.
As 1. When the Apoſtle affirmeth Chriſt to have ſuffered death for the redemption of the tranſgreſſions under the firſt Teſtament, Heb. 9. 15. Doth it follow thence that he hath not redeemed from the tranſgreſſions againſt the New Covenant alſo? If I ſay that Chriſt forgave to Peter, or Paul, or Mary Magdalen all their ſins committed before converſion, do I thereby as much as imply that he retains ſtill, and revengeth upon them all the ſinnes they committed after they were converted? Or ſhould one of Mr. Baxters acquaintance ſay, that whatſoever Mr. Baxter preached, and wrote, untill four or five years ſince, was good, and Orthodox, doth it follow that all that he hath ſince preached, and written, is heretical, and erroneous? Nay the purpoſe of the Apoſtle here is to convince the Hebrews that ſought in part for righteouſneſſe by the Law, or Old Teſtament, that it could not make its obſervers perfect: For Chriſt dyed to redeem the tranſgreſſions of them that were under the firſt Covenant, which he needed not to have done, if all the Sacrifices under the Law could have purged them. And thus the Morall Law is not here at all oppoſed to the Goſpel, that the Goſpel, or New Covenant doe purge the ſinnes onelyonly that were committed under, and againſt the Morall Law, becauſe all the righteouſneſſe of the Morall Law could not purge them; but the ſacrifice of Chriſt, the Mediator of the New Covenant, is here oppoſed to the Leviticall ſacrifices under the Legall Covenant. What theſe could not, the ſacrifice of Chriſt hath expiated.
2. Where he tels us, that Chriſt could not ſatisfie for ſinnes committed againſt the New Covenant, becauſe the New Covenant threatens no death to ſuch ſinnes, therefore no need if Chriſts mediating death here for us: For where no death is threatned, there is none explicitely due, ſaith he. But will he ſay none is either explicitely, or implicitely due? Or when Mr. Baxter tels us pag. 15. that in the Old Covenant the promiſe of life is not expreſſed, but plainly implyed in the threatning of death: Will it not follow by the ſame reaſons, that when Mr. Baxter in the after part of this his Tractate alleageth ſuch multitudes of Scriptures, that promiſe life to the performance of ſuch and ſuch acts of Goſpel righteouſneſſe, that there is implyed the threat of death againſt the non-performance of the ſame? Or if it ſhould have been printed (as it is moſt probable, becauſe he ſo ſpeaketh elſwhere in reference to the covenants) that where death is not explicitely threatned, there it is not due, and Chriſt hath not ſuffered it in our behalfe. What ſhall we think then of all the fathers from Adam to Moſes? where was this death explicitely threatned to any actual ſinne, untill the Law was given by Moſes? The Scripture mentions it not, and Mr. Baxter hath told us (though I doubt ſomewhat raſhly, and Magiſterially) that to Adam himſelf in his perfection the form of the Covenant was not known (as written in his heart) but by ſuperadded revelation, pag. 14. Yea what ſhall we ſay of all the Nations of the world (Iſrael alone excepted) that even untill Chriſt, had no revealed Covenant with God, much leſſe death threatned explicitely by ſuch a Covenant? Will Mr. Baxter deny death to have been due to them for their ſinnes, becauſe not explicitely threatned? Doth not the Apoſtle, Rom. 1. 32. & alibi, affirm the contrary? Thus if it were; but it is not proved, that the New Teſtament doth not ſo threaten death.
3. When he tels us that Chriſt is ſaid to have been made under the Law, and to have born the curſe of the Law, and to have freed us from it, but no where is this affirmed of him, in reſpect of the Goſpel, pag. 161. This is an Argument of the ſame nature, with that before, from Heb. 9. 15. The Apoſtle to daſh the creſt of their ſelf-confidence, in ſeeking to be in part juſtified (as Mr. Baxter alſo doth) by their own perſonall righteouſneſſe done in conformity to the Law, tels them that even the Iſrael of God, that were priviledged above all other people with a Law of Righteouſneſs, were under the curſe of the Law, and could not be ſaved but by a Redeemer; much leſs they that had not the help of ſuch a Law. It bears the ſame ſenſe with that of Gal. 2. 15, 16. We that are Jews by nature, and not ſinne…s of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not juſtified by the works of the Law, but by the Faith of Jeſus Chriſt, even we have beleeved in Jeſus Chriſt that we may be juſtified, &c. What a monſtrous deluſion were it then for us to teach the ſinners of the Gentiles to ſeek after Juſtification by their perſonal righteouſneſs, according to the Law. And though it be no where, totidem verbis, ſaid, or affirmed of him in reſpect of the Goſpel, yet is it ſaid in the words equivalent, Heb 9. 15. That he is the Mediator of the New Teſtament: whence Pareus on the place concludeth, That if he hath ſatisfied for the ſins againſt the Old, much more for the ſinnes againſt the New Teſtament, ſeeing he is the Mediator of this, not of that. And the blood of Jeſus Chriſt cleanſeth us from all ſinne, 1 Joh. 1. 7. Ergo from ſins alſo againſt the Goſpel. I cannot ſay from ſinns which are onelyonly againſt the Goſpel, for there are none ſuch. Or if Mr. Baxter will take the words ſo ſtrictly as hee ſeems to take them, that Chriſt hath redeemed onelyonly from ſins againſt the Law, hee muſt exclude himſelf, with all the Churches and Saints of the Gentiles that are, or have been, from the redemption which is by Chriſt; for ſo then muſt that paſſage in Gal. 4. 4, 5. be read; Chriſt was made under the Law to redeem them [onelyonly] that were under the Law. i. e. Only the Jews, for they onelyonly were under the Law of Moſes, and of this Law Mr. Baxter muſt needs confeſs the Apoſtle here to ſpeak. So that this argument of his, if it pleaſe not a Jew, it will pleaſe no body.
4. The laſt Argument which he brings in the ſame 161 pag. to hit the white, and cleave the pin, and reſolve the queſtion ſo unanſwerably, that no tongue which cannot ſpeak may ever more utter, or mutter againſt it, is as ſtreight with his purpoſe, as a rams horn with a line. 4. But the queſtion is out of doubt, (ſaith he) becauſe that every man that performeth not the Goſpel-conditions, doth bear the puniſhment himſelf in eternall fire, and therefore Chriſt did not bear it. True, for Chriſt did bear the puniſhment of none of his ſins, neither of his lying, ſwearing, luſt, murther, drunkenneſſe, and other ſins againſt the Law, but he ſhall bear all himſelf: ſhall we therefore conclude that Chriſt dyed not to make ſatisfaction for thoſe ſinnes in reference to them that have part in his death? This were to pronounce Chriſt to have ſatisfied for no ſin at all, either againſt Law or Goſpel, and ſo no fleſh ſhall be ſaved, but ll ſuffer in eternal fire.
5. What is in this Argument, as alſo in the two next, and immediately put before this, in the ſame 161 pag. of his Saint-conditions which he worſhipeth as his Mediators to bring him into communion with Chriſt, no leſs then he doth Chriſt himſelf to bring him into communion with God, I have partly ſpoken to before, and ſhall have large, and frequent occaſions to ſpeak more fully and largely upon other parts of this Tractate of Mr. Baxter; here he doth but name conditions in general, and what he ſaith is not worthy of any particular Animadverſions in relation to it.
He confeſſeth himſelf pag. 160. To have been long of another judgement in this point, while he conſidered not the tenor of the Covenants diſtinctly: That is, as long as he derived his guidance therein from the Scripture it ſelf, and from the truly Evangelical, and Orthodox Commentators thereon. But ſince hee hath met with Apocryphal Doctors, the Jeſuits, and other nimble braines among the Papiſts, and with Grotius, and Voſſius, and others of that hair, which h…e divided their conſciences between the Papiſts and Socinians, little prizing the Word, where ſome quaint wit and invention of man ha…h not deſcanted upon it to make it ſhine in the paint and varniſh of humane ſpeculations and art: Now having found a C…ckows egge in a Finches neſt, the man is ſo taken with the pretty conveyance, that hee doth as it were neſt himſelfe by it, and accounts all other contemplations baſe in compariſon of this, defies Eagles, Swans, Turtles, yea the whole generation of other birds; cares not what becomes of them all, ſo that this one may come to maturity, and proſper, becauſe his fancy hath made it his own (as it were) though (as it is much to be feared) to the perverting, if not totall loſs of himſelf and others; He having aſcribed perfection and merit to it already, as fully as any of the moſt profeſſed Papiſts. See how he flaunts and glories in this imaginary peece of Huperephaneous learning (in the 20, 21, 22. pages of his Appendix) as if he had not received it from men, but Mahomet-like from a celeſtial Dove, or by the Angel Gabri…l from heaven, inſulting not over the Antinomians, but over their adverſaries alſo, (as he terms them) i. e. all the Orthodox Divines of all the Reformed Churches, ſcarce abſtaining from curſing their ignorance in this phantaſticall myſtery ſo revealed to him; when contrariwiſe himſelf hath received the ſubſtance of it (if indeed there were a new ſubſtance in it) from the Papiſts, and himſelf hath but licked it Bear-like, into a form of words beſt pleaſing his own imagination. The vanity of it will in its due place be diſcovered.