A Christian, Chapter 5
CHAP. V. Opening that place in Acts 2.39. foreign.
THIS Text I firſt hold forth as fit to diſcover the New Teſtament application of the Covenant of grace, and its continuation to believers and their ſeed, as to Abraham and his in the Old Teſtament: It's the firſt Argument uſed after Chriſts Aſcenſion, to provoke the Jews to repent, and ſubmit to Goſpel ordinances; and the firſt open promulgation of the Covenant both to Jew and Gentile, with the prime priviledges of it; in which is contained the Goſpel-Covenant made with believers and their ſeed.
1. Here is (foreign) the promiſe; which can be no other then the promiſe of remiſſion of ſins, and ſo of ſalvation; ſutable to that in Gen. 17.7. and repeated at large in Jer. 31.34. For it muſt either be a promiſe of temporal things, or ſpiritual; of temporal things it cannot be; for there is no abſolute promiſe of theſe things in the New Teſtament, but as included in, or following ſpiritual mercies, as Mat. 6.33. Neither is there a ſyllable in this Chapter preſſing men to look after temporal enjoyments, or engaging them to embrace the Goſpel by any outward emoluments.
Ob. The great and only interpretation of this promiſe by theſe that differ, is, that it hath reference to v. 16. and is meant of the promiſe of the holy Ghoſt propheſied of by Joel, Chap. 2.28. which was to be poured forth in the latter daies, and now viſibly and eminently begun to be fulfilled at the day of Pentecoſt.
To which the Anſwer will be clear and fair, though that be granted; and not at all weaken, but ſtrengthen the former ſenſe: For,
1. That promiſe is a ſpiritual promiſe, and more large and comprehenſive of ſpiritual mercies then any other; the promiſing of the ſpirit is as much as to promiſe all at once, graces, gifts, yea Heaven it ſelf, for all are but the fruits of this promiſe; Chriſt in the Old Teſtament, and the Spirit in the New, contain all the promiſes in an eminency. When Jeſus Chriſt was to leave the World, and ſpeak all his heart at once, and leave his laſt bleſſing, that ſhould be better then his bodily preſence among them, he expreſſes all in this, that he would ſend the Spirit, Joh. 14.16, 26. Ch. 15.26. 16.7. And of this large promiſe, as well according to Chriſt's promiſe before his Aſcenſion, as Joels Propheſy, the Apoſtles and Believers received the firſt fruits in this ſolemn day of Chriſts triumph: So that to ſay it's the promiſe of the Spirit, is as much as to ſay it's the promiſe of all ſpiritual things: For this read in Gal. 3.14. the Apoſtle ſpeaking of the fruits of Chriſts death, ſaith, It was that the bleſſing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Ieſus Chriſt, that we might receive the promiſe of the Spirit through faith: The ſame phraſe that is in this 38. And in the promiſe of the ſpirit, which is to be received by faith, is included juſtification, ſanctification, yea all graces, and it's here joyned with the bleſſing of Abraham: But,
2. If they take the promiſe of the Spirit in a limited and reſtrictive ſenſe, for the external gifts, as the moſt do, for the gifts of tongues, and miracles, and propheſy, they both clip the promiſe, and make the argument and comfort from it invalid, and of no efficacy.
1. It's a mighty wrong to that famous promiſe of the Spirit, to circumſcribe it in theſe accidental gifts which were eſpecially neceſſary, and almoſt only for that ſeaſon: when it's a promiſe that reacheth all the latter daies, and is ſtill accompliſhing, though all theſe extraordinary gifts are ceaſed.
2. This ſtraitned ſenſe is expunged by the manner of the expreſſions of that Propheſy, both in Joel, and this in the Acts, I will pour out of my ſpirit on all fleſh, and on your ſervants and handmaids will I pour out of my ſpirit: Which ſhews the univerſality and variety of the ſubjects, and bleſſings in this promiſe, that it ſhall be ſo large and full a mercy, as if there were to be no limitation of its meaſure.
3. If it were meant meerly of theſe gifts, why then there is no more benefit of that promiſe after the Apoſtles daies, but that Chriſt was out of date, and did expire with that age; whereas it is a promiſe made for all the time of the New Teſtament, which is expreſt by the latter daies, and the laſt daies, up and down the Scripture.
A parallel promiſe to this you have in Iſa. 44.3. I will pour water on him that is thirſty, and floods on the dry ground; I will pour my ſpirit on thy ſeed, and my bleſſing on thy off-ſpring: Now the promiſe of the ſpirit is alwaies appropriated to the New Teſtament daies.
And ſecondly, This cannot be the meaning of this phraſe, if we conſider to whom the Apoſtle ſpeaks, to perſons pricked in their hearts, wounded for their ſins in crucifying of Ieſus Chriſt, crying out, v. 37. Men and Brethren, what ſhall we do to be ſaved? Now what comfort could this be to tell them they ſhould have extraordinary gifts? their hearts were bleeding under ſin, their eye was on ſalvation, they ſaw no hopes of it, nor knew the way to obtain it; the Apoſtle bids them repent and be baptized; they might have ſaid, What ſhall we be the better? why (ſaith the Apoſtle) You ſhall receive the gift of the holy Ghoſt; for the promiſe is unto you: What promiſe? of gifts, of tongues and miracles: What is this to our ſouls? how will this ſave us? might they well object. It would be but a poor comfort to a wounded ſoul for to tell him of a promiſe of gifts, not of ſpiritual grace; and the holy Ghoſt is a better Phyſician then to apply ſuch a raw improper plaiſter to a wounded heart, which would hardly heal the skin: this promiſe is brought in as a cordial, to keep them from fainting, and to give them ſpirits to believe, and lay hold on Jeſus Chriſt: And truly no other promiſe but that of free grace, in order to ſalvation, can be imagined to give them comfort in that condition.
But to put all out of queſtion, That the promiſe propheſied of in Joel, and quoted here, was the promiſe of ſalvation, and the ſame with the Covenant of Grace, Conſult the Original in Joel, and the parallel in this of the Acts; in Joel 2.27. the Prophet founds all the promiſes that went before, and all that come after, on this, That he is the Lord their God, and none elſe; which was the very expreſs words in that Covenant made with Abraham: And then afterwards, viz. in the New Teſtament, to make out this fully, He will pour out his ſpirit on all fleſh, &c. v. 32. which is a part of that propheſy, and is quoted again in v. 21. Whoſoever ſhall call on the name of the Lord ſhall be ſaved; one grace put for all; and ſalvation being put at the end of the promiſe, muſt needs be the aim of it. The ſame expreſſion you have again repeated, Rom. 10.13.
And in the former v. 38. he exhorts them to repent, foreign, for the remiſſion of ſin; the exhortation is to a Goſpel duty; the effect and profit of it was to be remiſſion of ſins, and receiving the gift of the holy Ghoſt; and the promiſe muſt needs be anſwerable, by which all is enforced; and it muſt needs have been a mighty low and diſproportionable way of perſwaſion, to put them upon ſuch high things in the former verſe, and to encourage them only by the narration of a promiſe of ſome temporary gifts in the following, when their eye and heart was ſet on remiſſion of ſins, and ſalvation by Jeſus Chriſt; and nothing but a promiſe holding forth theſe mercies could have been conſiderable to them.
And it's very obſervable, in that verſe he joyns remiſſion of ſins with the gift of the holy Ghoſt; and then adds the promiſe to both, as the ground of one and the other, and comprehending both: And for that expreſſion of Receiving the gift of the holy Ghoſt, it may well be noted, that it is foreign, the free gift; not foreign, the gifts of the holy ſpirit; noting the very ſending of the ſpirit as a free gift to beſtow all mercies on them; and ſo reſpecting rather the free and bounteous manner of beſtowing the holy Ghoſt on them, then any limited effects of his reception.
By all which it is demonſtrated, that this is no ordinary, common, no temporal promiſe, or of meer gifts, though never ſo extraordinary, but a promiſe of free grace.
I only adde this to all the reſt, as undeniable by the principles of theſe that differ; it's a promiſe made not only to theſe Jews, but it's univerſally to the Gentiles, and to all the called of God: but all that are called have not received ſuch gifts of the holy Ghoſt which then were given: but every one that is effectually called doth receive the promiſe of remiſſion of ſins, and the free favour of God, and therefore this promiſe muſt be taken mainly in that ſenſe.
But the great difficulty is in the following part of the verſe, and about the intereſt of their Children in this promiſe; and therefore the next work muſt be to make out this, that the Children as well as the Parents are included in this promiſe, as they were in the promiſe made with Abraham.
1. Let us conſider to whom the Apoſtle ſpeaks: to the Jews, who were prickt in their hearts; The promiſe is to you and your Children: He ſpeaks to them after the wonted manner of expreſſion in the Old Teſtament, when ever the promiſe is mentioned; and uſeth their own language in which they were trained up in from their Fathers; I will be the God of thee and thy ſeed, Gen. 17. The promiſe is to you and your Children: If the Apoſtle had intended to exclude their Children from the ſame priviledges they had formerly by the Covenant, he would never have ſpoken in ſuch a known dialect of the Old Teſtament; and to Jews, who could take it in no other ſenſe but this, that the promiſe ſhall run as formerly, to them and their ſeed.
2. Let us mind on what ground this is brought in, viz. as an argument and ſtrong inducement of them to repent and be baptized, as in the former verſe; for the promiſe is to you and your ſeed: He encourageth them from this to receive the Ordinance of Baptiſm themſelves, for the promiſe was ſtill the ſame to them and their Children; only now they muſt firſt believe and be baptized themſelves, ere their Children could be conſidered in the promiſe: If the Apoſtle had not intended to hold forth to them now believing and being baptized, and their Children, the ſame priviledges they had before as to the promiſe, it would have been the greateſt deluſion inſtead of an argument to perſwade them to be baptized on this ground, becauſe the promiſe was to them and their Children; they had been rather deceived by it then enlightned; and ſtumbled by ſuch a propoſition more then informed of a New Teſtament adminiſtration.
3. Upon what hinge can this Exhortation turn? where is the vertue and ſtrength it hath to move them to be baptized themſelves, but on this conſideration, that they ſhould not only enjoy bleſſings themſelves, through the promiſe, but their Children with them? The promiſe to them was enough for themſelves to ſubmit to that Ordinance: but the height of the enforcement is from the riches of the promiſe, that it was not only to them, but their Children; they might bleſs themſelves and theirs by ſubmitting to the Goſpel; elſe to put in the name of their Children ſpeaking to the Jews, was but to lay a temptation before them, and rather to puzzle them then encourage them: And doubtleſs the Holy Ghoſt would never in the firſt opening of the Goſpel, and encouraging ſouls to embrace it, uſe ſuch a language and expreſſion that might deceive thoſe he ſpake unto: for what could the Jews imagine or conceive upon ſuch a diſcovery, but that if they themſelves did repent and were baptized, the promiſe ſhould be the ſame in the N. T. to them and their Children, as it was formerly to Abraham, upon his believing and being circumciſed, to him and his ſeed? there being no expreſſion the Jews were ſo accuſtomed to, and more delighted in, then that of the promiſe to them and their Children: And but to mention their Children with the promiſe, if it was not meant to hold forth that they were ſtill in the promiſe, was ſufficient to have deceived them, who were never inſtructed in any other method: The great deſign of the Apoſtle was to open the N. T. promiſe, and by that to encourage the poor wounded Jews to repent and be baptized: And that they might have no cloud on their apprehenſions, or diſcouragement, he utters it in lingua vernacula, in the phraſe the promiſe was always expreſt in the Old Teſtament.
4. If the intent of the Apoſtle were not to hold forth the ſameneſs and identity of the priviledge of the promiſe to the Jews and Gentiles now believing, as was formerly; he would never have mentioned Children when he mentions Baptiſm, and eſpecially not in the ſame line with the promiſe made to the Parents; and with one breath expreſs the promiſe to both, and make that the ſtrength of his argument to put them on the practice of that Ordinance: And doubtleſs it had not been ſo candid a way, nor ſutable to the ſimplicity of the Goſpel, to tell them of their Children, juſt when he tels them of being baptized themſelves; and name them immediatly with the promiſe, if the deſign was utterly to exclude them both from the promiſe and Baptiſm. I have been the longer inculcating theſe conſiderations, becauſe there is much in them, and engaged perſons can ſlightly paſs over the moſt eminent places with a meer glance.
Ob. But it's objected, That the latter clauſe, (foreign) As many as the Lord ſhall call, is a limitation of the verſe, and no more are under the promiſe; and ſo Children, if God ſhall call them, ſhall alſo enjoy the promiſe.
Sol. For anſwer to this laſt Objection, which is the ſtrength of their confidence from this place, we muſt conſider theſe particulars.
1. That in this verſe you have an exact diſtribution of the world into Jew and Gentile, according to the uſual diſtribution in other Scriptures; the Gentiles being uſually called theſe afar off, and the promiſe equally diſtributed among; only he adds (as many as the Lord ſhall call) to theſe which are afar, as moſt proper in that place: but it can in no ſenſe be referred to the former part of the verſe, either to Parents or Children: For,
1. He changes the tenſe in both parts of the verſe; in the firſt part unto the Jews, he ſpeaks de praeſenti, of the preſent application of the promiſe; Repent you, and be baptized—for the promiſe is to you and your Children; even now the promiſe is offered to you; and they were then under the call of God: But when he ſpeaks of the Gentiles, becauſe they were yet afar off, and not at all called, he ſpeaks de futuro, as many as God ſhall call, even of them alſo; which is the firſt expreſs hint of the calling of the Gentiles in all the Acts of the Apoſtles.
2. How unequal would the diſtribution be of this verſe, not ſutable to the laws of expreſſion among rational men? If As many as the Lord ſhall call, ſhould be a limitation to the former part of the verſe, the word, Children, muſt needs be redundant and ſuperfluous; for Jews and Gentiles comprehend all the world. Now Children muſt either be one part of the world, or comprehended under one or both names, or be a diſtinct world by themſelves, neither Jews nor Gentiles: And this muſt needs follow on ſuch a reading of the words; for the deſign of the Apoſtle is to hold forth the freeneſs of the promiſe to Jew and Gentile, and their Children; to theſe Jews at preſent, to the Gentiles and their Children when God ſhould call the Parents, as he did theſe Jews. Now put Children by themſelves, as a third party, and add whom the Lord ſhall call, and you exclude them from being either Jews or Gentiles, and ſo excommunicate them from any hopes of calling, or being ſaved: Now this is,
1. Contrary to that known rule in Logick, That Omnis bona diſtributio debet eſſe bimembris; only of two members, and theſe oppoſite one to another; to bring in a third marrs all. So that it is moſt clear, the words muſt be underſtood as they are tranſlated; The promiſe is to you Jews, and your Children at preſent, and to thoſe afarre off alſo, and their Children, when God ſhall call them; elſe calling can with no ſenſe be applied to any tittle of the former part of the verſe, without you make it monſtrous, and unlike it ſelf.
2. It's againſt another rule about diſtribution, which is, That Partes diviſionis ambulent aequali paſſu, That the parts of a diſtribution ſhould be equally ſet together. Now here will be a mighty inequality, as to the communication of the promiſe; if the words ſhould be taken in their ſenſe, the Jews will have a greater priviledge then the Gentiles, if Children be not equally added to both; the Jews had the promiſe made to them and their Children at preſent; theſe afar off ſhall only have the promiſe to themſelves, but not their Children.
3. Conſider how comes this word (your Children) to be kept in, for what end and uſe, if it were not to ſhew ſome ſpecial priviledge they have with their Parents, when God cals or converts the Parent? what ſtands it for but a ſtone of offence to conſcientious hearts?
OBIECTION.
All they anſwer to this, is, that the Apoſtle names their Children to comfort their Parents, becauſe they had wiſhed Chriſts blood on their Children, and ſo to give them hopes they might yet be ſaved, if God ſhould call them.
SOLUTION.
To ſee the ſad ſhifts of errour, is wonderful: Can any man imagine, that the Parents could doubt more, or ſo much of their Childrens being accepted and ſaved, when God ſhould call them who were innocent, and only under the ſudden raſh curſe of their Parents, when they ſaw that the promiſe was to themſelves, and Chriſt offered pardon to themſelves, who were the actual murtherers of the Lord Jeſus.
2. Such a conſideration would rather ſadden them then refreſh them, to mention the calling of their Children: For they might more doubt of that, then of any thing, whether God would call them or no, and be as far to ſeek as ever they were, that they would have but cold comfort upon this account; this was enough to break their hearts if that were in their eye; the old way of conveying the promiſe is cut off, no promiſe but to called ones; our poor Children are uncalled, and God knows whether ever they may be called of God: Thus might they reaſon: But when he includes them in the ſame promiſe with Parents, and exhorts the Parents to repent, upon this ground, that the promiſe is to them and their Children; this ſavours like a Goſpel-comforting-exhortation, and could not be but of great efficacy upon their ſpirits.
4. What ſtrange myſterious tautologies would be in this one verſe? if that laſt ſentence ſhould refer to all the former expreſſions, we muſt read it thus to make out their ſenſe.
The promiſe is to you Parents of the Jews, when God ſhall call you (and they were then under the call) and to your grown Children, when God ſhall call them; and to all which are afar off, when God ſhall call them: Can any man with his underſtanding about him think the Holy Ghoſt ſhould faulter ſo much in common expreſſion of his mind, when there was no need of adding or calling to any part, but to theſe that were afar off, who were never yet under Gods Goſpel call?
Laſtly, the word, Children, may and muſt be underſtood of Little Ones, Infants, not of adult and grown perſons, for theſe reaſons,
1. The word here (foreign) properly ſignifies an off-ſpring, any thing brought forth, though it be but of a day, of a moment old: Thus when a woman is ſaid to be in pain, and to bring forth, this word is uſed, John 16.21. Luke 1.31. Mat. 1.26. Luke 1.57.
2. It's an indefinite word, and therefore may not be reſtrained to grown Children, except God had expreſt it in a peculiar phraſe.
3. It muſt needs be eſpecially meant of Little Ones, becauſe they are diſtinguiſhed from themſelves, who were men of years. Now when we diſtinguiſh between Men and Children, we ſuppoſe the one adult, the other under age, and not grown up; and it is contrary to all ways of expreſſion to think otherwiſe.
4. It cannot be rationally conjectured otherwiſe becauſe the Apoſtle doth joyn them with their Parents in the ſame promiſe, and not leave them to ſtand by themſelves, as grown perſons muſt.
So that all things weighed, this Text of Scripture, if there were no more, holds forth the fameneſs of the promiſe to Believers of the Goſpel, both Jew and Gentile, and their Children, as ever it was to Abraham, and his natural ſeed.