The Method of Grace in the Justification of Sinners, Chapter 16
CHAP. XVI.
A reply to Mr. Eyrs twentieth chapter, containing the ſolution of his Arguments, tending to prove, that God is the God of his people before they beleeve.
SECT. I.
FRom the Apoſtles deſcription of the New Covenant,§. 1. Heb. 8. I retorted▪ this argument upon Mr. Eyre. If God be not the God of any, nor they his people before they beleeve, then none are in Covenant with God before they beleeve. But God is not the God of any before they beleeve. Ergo. Hereupon Mr. Eyre diſputes againſt the aſſumption largely: and advanceth many arguments to prove, that God is the God of his people before they beleeve. Let us take them in their order.
Firſt, If God be their God whom he doth peculiarly love,§. 2. and whom he hath choſen, then is he a God to ſome before they beleeve. But God is their God whom he hath choſen.
Anſw. If by chooſing be meant from eternity, of which the Apoſtle ſpeaks, Eph. 1. 4. I deny the Minor, God is never ſaid in Scripture to be the God of any in reference to his eternal election of them: that being no more then a purpoſe of making them his people, and of becoming a God to them. God is not the God of them that are not, Matth. 22. 32. Let us ſee the proofes. God was the God of Iſrael: now he became their God by ſetting his love upon them and chuſing them, and by ſeparating them from other people, Deut. 7. 6, 7, 8. Lev. 20. 24, 25. Anſw. 1. I deny, that either the chuſing of them, Deut. 7. or the ſeparating of them, Lev. 20. are to be underſtood of eternal election; of which nevertheleſſe Mr. Eyre pretends to be underſtood in his Major, by quoting for proof, Eph. 1. 4. otherwiſe I would have denyed the Major for even in vocation (which alſo is ſometimes in Scripture called chooſing, as we have ſhewed elſewhere, God ſeparates men to himſelf from the reſt of mankind: yet will it by no means follow that therefore he is the God of ſome that believe not: for vocation is the giving of faith. As to the texts before us, it is manifeſt that the chuſing, ſpoken of, Deut. 7. is a temporall act, for the cauſe of it is ſet down, ver. 8. Becauſe he would keep the oath which he had ſworne unto their Fathers: expreſſed more plainely, chap. 4. 37. Becauſe he loved their Fathers, therefore he choſe their ſeed after them. So alſo chap. 10. 15. 2. Much leſſe is it ſaid, that this love or chuſing them was the thing in reſpect of which he is ſaid to be their God and they his people: but the contrary is implyed, verſe 6. The Lord thy God hath choſen thee to be a ſpecial people to himſelf above all people, &c. Where the making of them to be his people (which alſo includes the correlate of becoming their God) is mentioned as the end and effect of his chuſing them: which effect, when it is wrought is eaſie to learne from Exod. 19. 5. Now therefore if you will obey my voice indeed, and keep my Covenant, then ye ſhall be a peculiar treaſure unto me above all people.
Again (ſaith Mr. Eyre) the Lord, Ezek. 16 8. declares concerning ſpiritual Iſrael, that they became his, whileſt they were in their blood; that he ſware unto them and entred into Covenant with them: which ſwearing, as it referres to ſpiritual Iſrael muſt be underſtood of the oath which he made to Chriſt concerning the bleſſing of his ſeed.
Anſw. Nothing but uncertainties. 1. It is not faire in a diſpute to ground a concluſion upon Types, unleſſe we have firme demonſtrations of the Antitype. Mr. Eyre ſhould therefore prove that the words there ſpoken are not peculiar to Iſrael in the letter. 2. That the ſpiritual Iſrael typified are the Elect as ſuch, and not believers as ſuch. 3. That the Iſrael there ſpoken of were his, before he entred into Covenant with them. The text is expreſſe againſt it. I entred into Covenant with thee, and thou becameſt mine; Which way doth this prove that Gods eternall Election is the thing in reſpect of which he is our God and we his people? 4. That the ſaid Covenant was a type of the Covenant made with Chriſt.
Yet againe, The Prophet inferres this their relation unto God from his everlaſting love, Jeremiah 31. 1, 3. Anſw. Negatur.
The Apoſtle likewiſe, Romans 8. 31. Anſwer. Negatur.
So 2 Tim. 2. 19. The foundation of God standeth ſure—The Lord knoweth who are his. Implying, that the Election and foreknowledge of God doth make men his. Anſ. Mr. Eyre knows how Mr. Mede and others expound this place.
Prove, 1. That by Gods foundation and knowledge is meant his Election and foreknowledg. 2. That his are meant of, his by Election. It may be meant of ſuch as are his by ſincerity of faith. 3. That if men were called his in reference to his Election of them, it muſt therefore needs be underſtood in the ſame ſenſe, as when he is ſaid to be our God and we his people.
The ſecond Argument is this. God is a God not only to his§. 3. people who are called and do believe, but to their ſeed, who are not called and do not yet beleeve. As the God of Abraham and his ſeed. So Act. 2. 39. The promiſe is to you and your children. This is the ground of Infant Baptiſme.
Anſw. It is not then in reference to Election that God is ſaid to be our God and we his people, for certainly all the children of faithful Parents are not elected. 2. The children of the faithful are altogether in the ſame Covenant with their Parents, whiles by reaſon of their infant age, they are in morall conſideration, ra…er parts of their parents then divided from them by a perſonal ſubſiſtence of their own, as not being then able either to owne or reject their Fathers Covenant: Nevertheleſſe when they come of age they muſt themſelves anſwer and fulfill the conditions of the Covenant, as their Fathers did: elſe will God call them (as he did Iſrael, Hoſ. 1. 6, 9.) Lo Ammi, & Lo Ruhama; ye are not my people, nor will I be your God; And thus I think are all thoſe Covenants to be underſtood, wherein God promiſeth mercy to the faithful and to their ſeed. God promiſed mercy to David and his houſe, yet ſo that thy children take heed to their way, to walk in my Law as thou haſt walked before me, 2 Chron. 6. 16. and chap. 7. 17, 18, 19. God promiſed mercy to Abraham and his ſeed: by vertue of which promiſe he was gracious to the children that had not rebelled againſt him: though the ſame promiſe profited not their Parents becauſe of their unbelief, Deut. 1. 39, 40. With Heb. 4. 1, 2. and often doth the Lord require of them to return to him, and obey his voice, that he might give them the bleſſings of their Fathers Covenant. See Lev. 26. 40, 41, 42. Deut. 29. 12, 13. and other places innumerable. In like manner the promiſe is to you and your children (ſaith Peter) Act. 2. 39. therefore are they exhorted to repent and be baptized, that they and their children might continue the people of God, and partake in the full bleſſedneſſe promiſed long before, and now exhibited in Chriſt Jeſus. The ſame promiſe is left to all in the Church under the Goſpel, Heb. 4. 1, 2, &c. But it concerns them to ſee that they do not fall ſhort of it through unbelief, as the Apoſtle there ſpeaks. The ſum is, God is the God of the infants of faithful Parents (in ſigne whereof they are baptized.) But they when they are grown up muſt ſee that they perſonally fulfill the conditions of the Covenant: otherwiſe God remaines no longer their God; unleſſe it be externall, and in regard of outward Adminiſtrations, which doth not concerne our queſtion.
Thirdly, thus he argues. They whom the Lord hath purchaſed§. 4. to be a peculiar people to himſelf, have the Lord to be their God.
Anſw. I deny this propoſition. Chriſt purchaſed his wife before he made her his wife: and he purchaſed a people out of the hands of thoſe Lords that ruled over them, (Sin, Satan, the Law,) and God himſelfe as the Judge and Executioner of his Law before he made them his people. Indeed Mr. Eyre tells us a little below, that by the purchaſe of the blood of Chriſt we were made foreign a peculiar people, Tit. 2. 14. when the text ſaies no ſuch thing, but the juſt contrary. He gave himſelf for us that he might purifie to himſelf a peculiar people zealous of good works. He might as well ſay that by the death of Chriſt immediately we are made zealous of good works, or redeemed from all iniquity, that is, made to deny all ungodlineſſe and worldly luſts (for that's the meaning of thoſe words here, as appears by their oppoſition to verſe 12.) That which makes us a p…culiar (or a choiſe and excellent) people is Chriſts purifying us: which purifying being the effect and end of his death, is ſome other act then his dying for us. Compare Eph. 5. 25, 26. 2. This Argument contradicts the firſt. There Mr. Eyre argued that God was our God and we his people by the act of eternal election: if that be true, then the purchaſe of Chriſt is not that which immediately makes God our God and us his people. 3. The promiſe, that God will be our God and we his people, is no effect of Chriſts death if his purchaſe immediately made, that God was our God and we his people; for what was already done could not be promiſed to be done.
But (ſaith Mr. Eyre) What a man purchaſeth he obtains a Legal right and propriety in, therefore the Apoſtle concludes from hence that we are not our own but Gods, becauſe we are bought with a price, 1 Cor. 6. 19, 20.
Anſw. A right! Why, I doubt not but God and Chriſt have a right, not onelyonly by creation, but by redemption to the obedience and ſubjection of all the world (at leaſt whereſoever he comes by the Goſpel to challenge it) that they ſhould not live to themſelves, but ſhould wholly addict themſelves to glorifie God in their ſouls and bodies. Otherwiſe let Mr. Eyre tell me how men can be ſaid to deny the Lord that bought them, 2 Pet. 2. 1. 2. But if this were not ſo, and that it were no ſin in men to deny the Redeemer to be their rightfull Lord (as the Apoſtle ſayes he is, Rom. 14. 9.) What hath Mr. Eyre gained? If I buy a piece of Land to make it a Garden an Orchard, or a Vineyard, 'tis neither of theſe till I have made it ſo. Or, if I purchaſe a ſervants freedome that I may make him my heire; ſome other act beſides the meer purchaſe is neceſſary that he may be my heir: In like manner, if Chriſt purchaſe ſinners, that he may purifie them and make them his peculiar people, they are not his people, nor is he their God, meerly becauſe of his purchaſe. See Exod. 19. 5. We ſhall cleare all this by a diſtinction at the end of Mr. Eyres Arguments.
Mr. Eyre proceeds fourthly. We receive faith it ſelf upon this§. 6. account, becauſe we are Gods people. Ergo, God is our God before we believe. The antecedent he proves, Gal. 4. 6. Becauſe ye are ſons, God hath ſent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba father. So. Iſa. 48. 17. I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to prof…t.
Anſw. I deny the Antecedent. The proof is ſuch as I never expected to have met with from a Scholar and a Divine. To Gal. 4. 6. I deny that the Spirit of the Sonne there mentioned is to be underſtood of faith, but of that Spirit of prayer (which includes that boldneſſe, liberty and confidence ſpiritual) which God gives to them that are his Sonnes by faith; For we are the Sonnes of God by faith in Jeſus Chriſt, ſaith this Apoſtle, not farre before chap. 3. 26. and receive the Spirit of the Sonne through faith, ver. 14. a Spirit given to believers, not a Spirit given to make men believers, Joh. 7. 38, 39. Rom▪ 8. 14, 15. for we are believers before we are Sons, Joh. 1. 12. as to the other text, Iſa. 48. 17. I conſent to Junius that the meaning is, Praeſto quod mearum eſt partium: not that they had actually believed (which ſenſe the very next ver. contradicts) but (as Piſcator in his Scholia upon the place) becauſe he had taught them, ea quae apta, vel comparata ſunt ad prodeſſendum, thoſe things which if they had obſerved, would have been very much for their profit and advantage.
Fifthly, (ſaith Mr. Eyre.) None do or can believe and repent§. 7. but they to whom the Lord doth manifeſt this grace; That he is their God. Erg…, the Lord is our God before we beleeve and repent.
Anſw. This is ſtrange Divinity, that the ſoul muſt be aſſured by revelation that God is his God, before he can believe or repent. If this be true, ſouls are in worſe condition after they have repented and believed then before: many faithful ſouls are groaning all their daies after this manifeſtation of God to be their God. But what is the proof? We ch…ſe and love him becauſe he choſe and loved us firſt, Joh. 15. 16. 1 Joh. 4. 10, 19. H…. 2. 23. And Burroughs, Rivet and Zanchy are quoted to prove, what? That God begins with us firſt, and makes us his people, before we owne… ▪ him for our God.
Alas, the thing to be proved is, not that God gives faith and repentance (of which there was never an… queſtion between Mr. Eyre and me) but that he is our God and we his people▪ before he give it us: we have ſhewed from Scripture that he gives faith that he may be our God and we his people. And if God make us his people (viz. by giving us faith and repentance) before he be our God, (which is the ſenſe of the Authours whom Mr. Eyre quotes) have they not fairely proved his propoſition, viz. That none can believe and repent but they to whom God hath manifeſted himſelfe to be their God?
His ſixth and laſt Argument is. They to whom God is a Father§. 8. and a Shepheard, have the Lord for their God. But God was our Father and Shepheard before we believed. All the Elect are the ſheep and children of Jeſus Chriſt before they believed, Joh. 10. 16. Iſa. 53. 10. Heb. 2. 13. Jer. 3. 19.
Anſw. I deny the aſſumption. Indeed the Elect are called the ſheep of Chriſt, Joh. 10. 16. not that they were his ſheep at preſent (for none of the qualities of ſheep mentioned or not ment oned in that Chapter a gree to men dead in ſinne and ungodlineſſe: and much leſſe to men that are not: and a ſhepheard actually there cannot be where there are no ſheep;) but pro…eptically from what they ſhould be: of which manner of ſpeech we have given many inſtances before from Scripture. Thus ſaith Abraham to his ſervant, Gen. 24. 4, 38. Thou ſhalt go unto my kindred and take a wife unto my Son Iſaac. Not that ſhe was his wife, or any mans elſe before he took her: but becauſe ſhe was to be made his wife, or ſhe whom God had appointed for him, ver. 44. and if Abraham knowing Rebeckah, had ſaid to his man (as is uſual to be ſaid amongſt our ſelves in like caſes) I have a wife for my ſon in ſuch a place: it would have argued no more, then that he had an intention (if he could) to make ſuch a one his ſonnes wife. Thus aQ…eſt. ſuper. L…v…t. cap. 23. & Hieron. in Ez…k. 30.Auguſtine obſerves, that before the ordination and ſanctification of the Prieſts, they are yet called by the name of Prieſts, Exod. 19. 22. Non quia jam ſacerdotes erant, ſed quia futuri erant, hoc eos jam tunc Scriptura app…llavit, per anticipationem: ſicut ſunt pleraque talium locutionum. Nam & filius Nave, Jeſus appellatus eſt, cum longe poſtea hoc nomen ei Scriptura narret impoſitum. As to Iſa. 53. 10. and Heb. 2. 13. We have ſpoken to them often. It ſhould be proved, and not only ſaid that the ſeed and children there mentioned are meant preciſely of the Elect. As to Jer. 3. 19. But I ſaid, how ſhall I put thee among the children, and give thee a pleaſant land—and I ſaid, Thou ſhalt call me my Father, and ſhalt not turn away from me. Deodate gives the true ſenſe, viz. my will indeed is firme to re-eſtabliſh you, but true converſion is the only means and neceſſary condition of it. God according to the order of government he hath▪ eſtabliſhed, cannot give the inheritance of children to any but thoſe whom he hath converted and made his children, Junius upon the place to the ſame purpoſe.
Upon the ſurvey of this whole diſpute, I have onelyonly two things to§. 9. obſerve. 1. That whereas I have proved the words of thoſe covenant, I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people, to be a promiſe made to them that beleeve; of the many places in Scripture, where thoſe words are uſed, Mr. Eyre cannot find us ſo much as one, wherein they are applyed to men that are not converted unto God. 2. His arguings from ſuch paſſages of Scripture, wherein men are ſometimes ſaid to be the Lords, or to be Gods, or the Lord thy God, and the like, conclude nothing, till it be proved that ſuch expreſſions imply as much and the ſame with thoſe words in the Covenant, I will be their God, &c. foraſmuch as men may be ſaid to be his, and he theirs ſometimes in ſome other ſenſe then thoſe words in the Covenant ſignifie. All the earth is Gods, and all the fullneſſe thereof, Pſal. 50. 12, 10. 11. All men are his, Ez…k. 18. 4. generally, whatſoever is made by him, or uſed to his glory, or ſubject to his government, or ſeparated more immediately to his ſervice: as the Levites were, Numb. 3. 12. and the firſt borne, Exod. 13. 2, 12. or the like: theſe in a generall ſenſe are his. So the Lord thy God (a phraſe which God often uſeth when he ſpeaks to Iſrael) moſtly ſignifies, the God whom they profeſſed and externally worſhipped: or at leaſt, whom they ought to have worſhipped▪ as is to be ſeen in places without number. Therefore it is not every ſenſe, in which we are called his, or he ours, which will conclude him to be our God in the covenant ſenſe, Jer, 7. 23. compared with Jer. 31. 33. where it is plainly a promiſe of ſpiritual, eternal, univerſal and perfect bleſſedneſſe, though gradually accompliſhed. Accordingly, neither did I uſe any of the foreſaid texts or phraſes (though I might have uſed many with great advantage) to prove, either that I will be thy God, &c. contained all the bleſſings of the covenant on Gods part, or that it is a promiſe made to them that beleeve and are converted: but thoſe plaine texts, where theſe words are ſet down ſyllabically, as the matter and ſumme of the Covenant: nor can Mr. Eyre gaine any thing by the uſe of them, till he hath better reconciled the Scriptures to his cauſe.
As to the following obſervation, which I had from ſome learned Jewiſh and Chriſtian writers, viz. That God is never ſaid to be our§ 10. God in reference to his giving the firſt grace, but onelyonly in reference to the bleſſings which he promiſeth to them that have faith. My memory did a little faile me in the words, but not at all in their ſenſe. If Mr. Eyre muſt needs know my authors, they are bUpon Gen. 28. 13.R. Solomon Jarchi, who ſaies, that God is not in Scripture ſaid, to be the God of any, whiles they are alive: endeavouring to prove it out of Job 15. 15.c It is in Tanchum fol. 13. Col. 3 foreign id eſt N…n in venimus in Scriptura, Deum nomen ejus junxiſſe▪ hominibus juſtis …um in vivis ſunt, ut ſcribe. retur …eus cujuſ…bet, &c. … In Berachoth fol. 5. Col. 4 &c. and aſſignes a peculiar reaſon, why in that place of Gen. 28. 13. God ſaith he is the God of Iſaack, whileſt Iſaack was yet alive. The ſame author doth there alſo repeat the words in Tanchuma (though he do not quote the place) where it is ſaid, The holy bleſſed God, doth not joyne his name to the Saints while they are alive, but when they are dead, as it is ſaid, to the Saints which are on the earth, &c. and to the ſame purpoſe the Jeruſalem (d) Targum, though I know ſome of them, and particularly More N… ▪ voch. part. 3 cap. 51Maim…des give a farre different reaſon of Gods calling himſelf the God of any one: though with farre leſſe probability. As to the notion it ſelf, I ſeek no more from it, then that God is called the God of a people or perſon, in reference to the bleſſedneſſe and rewards which he gives to them, eſpecially that of a heavenly and eternal life. And thus farre forth it is grounded on Scripture, Rev. 21. 3, 7. Otherwiſe I cannot conceive how our Lord concludes the reſurrection from hence, that he calls himſelf the God of Abraham, the God of Iſaack, and the God of Jacob, Matth. 22. 32. and the Apoſtle ſo expounds it, Heb. 11. 16. He is not aſhamed to be called their God, for he hath prepared for them a City; which place firml… ſhews that God is called their God, in reference to the reward of a heavenly bleſſedneſſe ſpecially, which he gave them. Mr. Eyre (whether willingly or ignorantly, himſelf beſt knows) quite miſtakes the Argument from the place, as if it were no more but this, God was the God of Abraham Iſ…ack▪ and Jaco…, who were beleevers: Ergo he is not the God of any before they do beleeve. No. The Argument is grounded in the Apoſtles interpretation of the phraſe: He is called their …o…, inaſmuch as he hath prepared for them a City. Nevertheleſſ…, …f I had argued in his ſenſe, the Argument had been ſtrong and unde…iable; for their faith is mentioned as the reaſon upon w…ch God became a God unto them: as appeares by the note of inference … wer…f…re. Wherefore he is not aſhamed to be called their God. Hence the Argument is (and let Maſter Fyre anſwer it if he can) If Gods being the God of Abraham, Iſaack, and Jacoh were a conſequent of their faith, then is it alſo a conſeque…t of all other mens faith, or he is not the God of any other before they beleeve: the reaſon is, becauſe he is the God of all men in the ſame way. Rom. 3. 29, 30. But the firſt is cleare from the te…t; Wherefore▪ Ergo, ſo is the laſt, Mr. Eyres parallel, if he will review it, he will acknowledge to be rediculous and unworthy of an anſwer.
And as thus, Gods being our God, is clearly made a conſequent of§. 11. faith, ſo elſewhere our being his people is made a conſequent of the ſame faith, 1 Pet. 2. 10. In times paſt you were not a people, but are now the people of God.
This (ſaith Mr. Eyre) is to be underſtood in reference to the external adminiſtration of the Covenant, and not the reall participation or intereſt in the bleſſings of it.
Rep. 1. If the words be ſpoken of Jews (to whom this Epiſtle is written, chap. 1. 1.) they were externally the people of God before: and in reference to them it muſt be therefore ſomething more that is here promiſed then that they ſhall be externally the people of God. 2. If of Gentiles (whom the Apoſtle alſo includes in this promiſe, Rom. 9. 25.) their condition had been happy, if the want of an externall covenant had been the worſt: and they had had right and intereſt in Chriſt and everlaſting life by ſome Covenant internall. But all gentiles equally in their gentile ſtate are ſtrangers from the Covenants of promiſe, Eph. 2. 12. that is, have no right to any of thoſe bleſſings which pertaine to the houſhold and City of God, v. 19. no more then Spaniards, or any other forreigners have a right to any of the priviledges, honours, preferments of the City of London, or an Indian in America, hath right to inherit with the Son of an Engliſhman. 3. To be externally in covenant, is to be in covenant by viſible profeſſion: and it is oppoſed to him that is in covenant internally by true faith: this is the uſual ſenſe of that diſtinction; uſed by the Apoſtle (for ſubſtance) when he diſtinguiſheth between: a Jew outwardly, and a Jew inwardly, Rom. 2. 28, 29 if M. Eyre have here the ſame ſenſe (as he ſeemes to ha…e, or at leaſt willing to have) then when the Apoſtle ſayes, you are now a people, and Mr. Eyre interprets him of a people onelyonly viſible and external; either he ſuppoſeth that they had faith long before the time he ſpeaks of, or that they were but hypocrites now, both which are abſurd. If he uſe the diſtinction in any other ſenſe, I know neither Scripture nor reaſon to juſtifie it. 4. What manner of people they now were, and formerly had not been, is ſet down, v. 9. Yea are a choice generation, a royall prieſthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, &c. all which they were internally (if Mr. Eyres gloſſe be true) even while they were a generation of Vipers, baſe idolaters, a prophane people, defiled with all manner of abominations: yea and multitudes, many years before they are borne: for this internall covenant is nothing elſe but Gods election or Chriſts purchaſe. 5. Theſe words in Peter, are taken out of Hoſ. 2. 23. which text Mr. Eyre urged but even now in that very ſenſe which here he oppoſeth. 6. The former part of the verſe is an univerſal negative: you are ſometimes foreign, not a people: Ergo, whatſoever God had done for them towards their ſalvation, before their converſion, was not ſufficient to denominate them to be a people of God. 7. Eſpecially when it follows, but now you are the people of God: which being the accompliſhment of that promiſe ſo frequent in Scripture, they ſhall be my people, containes more then a promiſe of that, whereof a hypocrite, or a hypocritical people is as capable as themſelves.