Discourses on Various Important Subjects, Discourse 1 (2 of 3)

Discourses on Various Important Subjects · Discourse 1 (2 of 3)

p. 44If there were no other Text in the Bible about Juſtification but this, this would clearly and invincibly prove that we are not juſtified by any of our own Goodneſs, Vertue, or Righteouſneſs or for the Excellency or Righteouſneſs of any Thing that we have done in Religion; becauſe 'tis here ſo fully and ſtrongly aſſerted: But this Text does abundantly confirm other Texts of the Apoſtle, where he denies Juſtification by Works of the Law: There is no doubt can be rationally p. 45made but that, when the Apoſtle here ſhews that God ſaves us according to his Mercy, in that he don't ſave us by Works of Righteouſneſs that we have done, v. 5, And that ſo we are juſtified by Grace. v. 7. herein oppoſing Salvation by Works, and Salvation by Grace, he means the ſame Works as he does in other Places, where he in like manner oppoſes Works and Grace, the ſame Works as in Rom 11. 6▪ And if by Grace then it is no more of Works; otherwiſe Grace is no more Grace: But if it be of Works, then it is no more Grace; otherwiſe Work is no more Work. And the ſame Works as in Rom. 4. 4▪ Now to him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of Grace but of Debt. And the ſame Works that are ſpoken of in the Context of the 24. v. of the foregoing Chapter, which the Apoſtle there calls Works of the Law, being juſtified freely by his Grace—And of the 4 Chap. 16. v. Therefore 'tis of Faith, that it might be by Grace. Where in the Context, the Righteouſneſs of Faith, is oppoſed to the Righteouſneſs of the Law: For here God's ſaving us according to his Mercy, and juſtifying us by Grace, is oppoſed to ſaving us by Works of Righteouſneſs that we have done, in the ſame manner as in thoſe Places juſtifying us by his Grace, is oppoſed to juſtifying us by Works of the Law

10. The Apoſtle could not mean only Works of the ceremonial Law, when he ſays we are not juſtified by the Works of the Law, becauſe 'tis aſſerted of the Saints, under the Old Teſtament, as well as new If Men are juſtified by their ſincere Obedience, it will then follow that formerly, before the ceremonial Law was abrogated, Men were juſtified by the Works of the ceremonial Law, as w…ll as the moral. For if we are juſtified by our ſincere Obedience then it alters not the Caſe, whether the Commands be moral, or poſitive, provided they be God's Commands, and our Obedience be Obedience to God: And ſo the Caſe muſt be juſt the ſame under the Old Teſtament, with the Works of the moral Law, and ceremonial, according to the meaſure of the Vertue of Obedience, there was in either. p. 46'Tis true their Obedience to the ceremonial Law would have nothing to do in the Affair of Juſtification, unleſs it was ſincere; and ſo neither would the Works of the moral Law: Obedience to the moral Law would have been concerned in the Affair of Juſtification, if ſincere; and ſo would Obedience to the ceremonial. If Obedience was the Thing, then Obedience to the ceremonial Law, while that ſtood in Force, and Obedience to the moral Law, had juſt the ſame …ort of concern, according to the Proportion of Obedience that conſiſts in each. As now under the New-Teſtament, if Obedience is what we are juſtified by, that Obedience muſt doubtleſs comprehend Obedience to all God's Commands now in Force, to the poſitive Precepts of Attendance on Baptiſm and the Lord's Supper, as well as moral Precepts. If Obedience be the Thing, it is not becauſe 'tis Obedience to ſuch a kind of Commands, but becauſe 'tis Obedience. So that by this Suppoſition, the Saints under the Old Teſtament were juſtified, at leaſt in Part, by their Obedience to the ceremonial Law.

But 'tis evident that the Saints under the old Teſtament were not juſtified in any meaſure, by the Works of the ceremonial Law. This may be proved proceeding on the Foot of our Adverſaries own Interpretation of the Apoſtle's Phraſe of the Works of the Law; and ſuppoſing him to mean by it only the Works of the ceremonial Law. To Inſtance in David, 'tis evident that he was not juſtified in any wiſe, by the Works of the ceremonial law, by Rom. 4▪ 6, 7, 8▪ Even as David alſo deſcribed the bleſſedneſs of the Man, unto whom God imputeth Righteouſneſs without Works, ſaying, bleſſed are they whoſe Iniquities are forgiven▪ and whoſe Sins are covered; bleſſed is the Man to whom the Lord will not impute Sin. 'Tis plain that the Apoſtle is here ſpeaking of Juſtification, by the preceeding Verſe, and by all the Context; and the Thing ſpoken of, viz. forgiving Iniquities, and covering Sins, is what our Adverſaries themſelves ſuppoſe to be Juſtification, and even the whole of Juſtification. This Dav… ſpeaking of p. 47himſelf, ſays (by the Apoſtle's Interpretation,) that he had without Works. For 'tis manifeſt that David in the Words here cited, from the beginning of the 32d Pſalm, has a ſpecial Reſpect to himſelf: He ſpeaks of his own Sins being forgiven and not imputed to him: as appears by the Words that nextly follow, When I kept Silence, my Bones waxed old, through my roaring all the Day long; for Day and Night thy Hand was heavy upon me, my moiſture is turned into the drought of Summer I acknowledged my Sin unto thee, and mine Iniquity have I not hid: I ſaid I will confeſs my Tranſgreſſions unto the Lord; and thou forgaveſt the Iniquity of my Sin. Let us therefore underſtand the Apoſtle which way we will, by Works, when he ſays, David deſcribes the bleſſedneſs of the Man to whom the Lord imputes Righteouſneſs without Works, whether of all manner of Works, or only Works of the ceremonial Law, yet 'tis evident at leaſt, that David was not juſtified by Works of the ceremonial Law. Therefore here is the argument; if our own Obedience be that by which Men are juſtified, then under the Old Teſtament, Men were juſtified partly by Obedience to the ceremonial Law, (as has been proved;) but the Saints under the Old Teſtament were not juſtified partly by the Works of the ceremonial Law; therefore Mens own Obedience is not that by which they are juſtified.

11. Another Argument that the Apoſtle when he ſpeaks of the two oppoſite Ways of Juſtification, one by the Works of the Law, and the other by Faith, don't mean only the Works of the ceremonial Law, may be taken from that place, Rom 10. 5, 6. For Moſes deſcribeth the Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, that the Man which doth thoſe Things ſhall live by them; but the Righteouſneſs which is of Faith ſpeaketh on this wiſe, &c ▪ Here two Things are evident,

Firſt, That the Apoſtle here ſpeaks of the ſame two oppoſite Ways of Juſtification, one by the Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, the other by Faith, that he had treated of in the former Part of the Epiſtle; and therefore it muſt be the ſame Law that is here ſpoken p. 48of: The ſame Law is here meant as in the laſt Verſes of the foregoing Chapter, where he ſays the Jews had not attained to the Law of Righteouſneſs: Wherefore, becauſe they ſought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law. As is plain, becauſe the Apoſtle is ſtill ſpeaking of the ſame Thing, the Words are a Continuation of the ſame Diſcourſe, as may be ſeen at firſt Glance, by any one that looks on the Context.

Secondly, 'Tis manifeſt that Moſes when he deſcribes the Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, or the Way of Juſtification by the Law▪ in the Words here cited, He that doth thoſe Things ſhall live in them, don't ſpeak only, nor chiefly, of the Works of the ceremonial Law; For none will pretend that God ever made ſuch a Covenant with Man, that he that kept the ceremonial Law ſhould live in it, or that there ever was a Time that it was chiefly by the Works of the ceremonial Law, that Men lived and were juſtified. Yea, 'tis manifeſt by the forementioned Inſtance of David, mentioned in the 4th of Romans that there never was a Time wherein Men were juſtified in any Meaſure, by the Works of the ceremonial Law, … has been juſt now ſhewn. Moſes therefore in thoſe Words, which the Apoſtle ſays, are a Deſcription of the Righteouſneſs which is of the Law, can't mean only the ceremonial Law. And therefore it follows that when the Apoſtle ſpeaks of Juſtification by the Works of the Law, as oppoſite to Juſtification by Faith, he don't mean only the ceremonial Law, but alſo the Works of the moral Law, which are the Things ſpoken of by Moſes, when he ſays he that doth th…ſe Things ſhall live in them; and which are the Things … the Apoſtle in this very Place is arguing that we can't be juſtified by; as is evident by the Context, the laſt Verſes of the preceeding Chapter, But Iſrael which followed after the Law of Righteouſneſs, hath not attained to the Law of Righteouſneſs: Wherefore? Becauſe they ſought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law, &c. And in the 3d v, of this Chap For they being ignorant of God's p. 49Righteouſneſs, and going about to eſtabliſh their own Righteouſneſs, have not ſubmitted themſelves to the Righteouſneſs of God.

And further, how can the Apoſtle's Deſcription that he here gives from Moſes, of this exploded Way of Juſtification by the Works of the Law, conſiſt with the Arminian Scheme of a Way of Juſtification by the Vertue of a ſincere Obedience, that ſtill remains as the true and only Way of Juſtification, under the Goſpel. 'Tis moſt apparent that 'tis the deſign of the Apoſtle to give a Deſcription of both the legal rejected, and the evangelical valid Ways of Juſtification, in that wherein they differ, or are diſtinguiſhed the one from the other: But how is that, that he that doth thoſe Things ſhall live in them, that wherein the Way of Juſtification by the Works of the Law, differs, or is diſtinguiſhed from that in which Chriſtians under the Goſpel are juſtified, according to their Scheme; for ſtill, according to them, it may be ſaid, in the ſame Manner, of the Precepts of the Goſpel, he that doth theſe Things ſhall live in them: The difference lies only in the Things to be done, but not at all, in that that the doing of them is not the Condition of living in them, juſt in the one Caſe, as in the other. The Words, He that doth them ſhall live in them, will ſerve juſt as well for a Deſcription of the latter as the former.—By the Apoſtle's ſaying, the Righteouſneſs of the Law is deſcribed thus, he that doth theſe Things ſhall live in them, but the Righteouſneſs of Faith, faith thus, plainly intimates that the Righteouſneſs of Faith faith otherwiſe, and in an oppoſite manner.—But beſides, if theſe Words cited from Moſes, are actually ſaid by him of the moral Law as well as ceremonial, as 'tis moſt evident they are, it renders it ſtill more abſurd to ſuppoſe them mentioned by the Apoſtle, as the very Note of Diſtinction between Juſtification by a ceremonial Obedience, and a moral ſincere Obedience, as the Arminians muſt ſuppoſe.

Thus I have ſpoken to a ſecond Argument, to prove that we are not juſtified by any manner of Virtue or p. 50Goodneſs of our own, viz. That to ſuppoſe otherwiſe is contrary to the Doctrine that is directly urged, and abundantly inſiſted on by the Apoſtle Paul, in his Epiſtles.

I proceed now to a

Third Argument, viz That to ſuppoſe that we are juſtified by our own ſincere Obedience, or any of our own Virtue or Goodneſs, derogates from Goſpel Grace.

That Scheme of Juſtification that manifeſtly takes from, or diminiſhes the Grace of God, is undoubtedly to be rejected; for 'tis the declared Deſign of God in the Goſpel to exalt the Freedom and Riches of his Grace, in that Method of Juſtification of Sinners, and Way of admitting them to his Favour, and the bleſſed Fruits of it, which it declares. The Scripture teaches that the Way of Juſtification that is appointed in the Goſpel Covenant, is appointed, as it is, for that end, that free Grace might be expreſs'd, and glorified; Rom. 4. 16▪ Therefore it is of Faith, that it might be by Grace. The exerciſing, and magnifying the free Grace of God in the Goſpel contrivance for the Juſtification and Salvation of Sinners, is evidently the chief Deſign of it: And this Freedom and Riches of the Grace of the Goſpel is every where ſpoken of in Scripture as the chief Glory of it. Therefore that Doctrine that derogates from the free Grace of God in juſtifying Sinners, as it is moſt oppoſite to God's Deſign, ſo it muſt be exceeding offenſive to him.

Thoſe that maintain that we are juſtified by our own ſincere Obedience, do pretend that their Scheme does not diminiſh the Grace of the Goſpel; for they ſay that the Grace of God is wonderfully manifeſted in appointing ſuch a Way and Method of Salvation, by ſincere Obedience, in aſſiſting us to perform ſuch an Obedience, and in accepting our imperfect Obedience, inſtead of perfect.

Let us therefore examine that Matter, whether their Scheme of a Man's being juſtified by his own Vertue, and ſincere Obedience, does derogate from the Grace of God or no; or whether free Grace is not mo… exalted, p. 51in ſuppoſing as we do, that we are juſtified without any … of Goodneſs of our own. In order to this, I … down this ſelf evident

… poſition, That whatſoever that be, by which the abundant Benevolence of the giver is expreſs'd, and Gratitude in the receiver is obliged, that magnifies free Grace. This I ſuppoſe none will ever controvert or diſpute.

And it is not much leſs evident, that it doth both ſhew a more abundant Benevolence in the Giver when he ſhews kindneſs without Goodneſs or Excellency in the Object, to move him to it; and that it enhanſes the Obligation to gratitude in the Receiver.

1. It ſhews a more abundan… goodneſs in the Giver, when he ſhews kindneſs without any Excellency in our Perſons or Actions that ſhould move the giver to Love and Beneficence. For it certainly ſhews the more abundant and overflowing Goodneſs, or Diſpoſition, to communicate Good, by how much the leſs Lovelineſs or Excellency there is to entice Beneficence: The leſs there is in the receiver to draw good Will and Kindneſs, it argues the more of the Principle of good Will and Kindneſs in the Giver; For one that has but a little of a principle of Love and Benevolence, may be drawn to do Good, and to ſhew Kindneſs, when there is a great deal to draw him, or when there is much Excellency and Lovelineſs in the Object to move good Will; when he whoſe Goodneſs and Benevolence is more abundant, will ſhew Kindneſs, where there is leſs to draw it forth; for he don't ſo much need to have it drawn from without, he has enough of the principle within … move him, of it ſelf. Where there is moſt of the principle, there it is moſt ſufficient for itſelf; and ſtands in leaſt need of ſomething without to excite it: For certainly a more abundant Goodneſs, more eaſily flows forth, with leſs to impell or draw it. Than where there is leſs; or which is the ſame Thing, the more any one is diſpoſed of himſelf, the leſs he needs. From without himſelf, to put him upon it, or ſtir him up to it. And therefore his Kindneſs and Goodneſs appears the more exceeding p. 52great, when it is beſtowed without any, Excellency or Lovelineſs at all in the receiver, or when the receiver is reſpected in the Gift, as wholly without Excellency: And much more ſtill when the Benevolence of the Giver not only finds nothing in the receiver to draw it, but a great deal of Hatefulneſs to repel it: The abundance of Goodneſs is then manifeſted, not only in flowing forth without any Thing extrinſick to put it forward, but in overcoming great Repulſion in the Object. And then does Kindneſs and Love appear moſt Triumphant, and wonderfully Great, when the receiver is reſpected in the Gift, as not only wholly without all Excellency or Beauty to attract it, but altogether, yea infinitely vile and hateful.

2. 'Tis apparent alſo that it enhanſes the Obligation to Gratitude in the Receiver. This is agreeable to the common Senſe of Mankind, that the leſs worthy or excellent the Object of Benevolence, or the receiver of Kindneſs is, the more he is obliged, and the greater Gratitude is due. He therefore is moſt of all obliged, that receives Kindneſs without any Goodneſs or Excellency in himſelf, but with a total and univerſal Hatefulneſs. And as 'tis agreeable to the common Senſe of Mankind; ſo 'tis agreeable to the Word of God: How often does God in the Scripture inſiſt on this Argument with Men, to move them to love him, and to acknowledge his Kindneſs? How much does he inſiſt on this as an Obligation to Gratitude, that they are ſo ſinful and …deſerving, and illdeſerving.

Therefore it certainly follows, that that Doctrine that teaches that God, when he juſtifies a Man, and ſhews him that great Kindneſs, as to give him a Right to eternal Life, don't do it for any Obedience, or any manner of Goodneſs of his; but that Juſtification reſpects a Man as ungodly, and wholly without any manner of Vertue, Beauty, or Excellency. … ſay, this Doctrine does certainly more exalt the free Grace of God in Juſtification, and Man's Obligation to Gratitude to him, for ſuch a Favour, th…n the contrary Doctrine, viz. That God in ſhewing this Kindneſs to Man, reſpects him as ſincerely p. 53obedient and vertuous, and as having ſomething in him that is truly Excellent, and Lovely, and Acceptable in his Sight, and that this Goodneſs or Excellency of Man is the very fundamental Condition of the beſtowment of that Kindneſs on him, or of the diſtinguiſhing him from others by that Benefit. But I haſten to a

Fourth Argument for the Truth of the Doctrine, That to ſuppoſe that a Man is juſtified by his own Vertue or Obedience, derogates from the Honour of the Mediator, and aſcribes that to Man's Vertue, that belongs only to the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt: It puts Man in Chriſt ſtead, and makes him his own Saviour, in a reſpect, in which Chriſt only is his Saviour: And ſo 'tis a Doctrine contrary to the Nature, and Deſign of the Goſpel which is to abaſe Man, and to aſcribe all the Glory of our Salvation to Chriſt the Redeemer.—It is inconſiſtent with the Doctrine of the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, which is a Goſpel Doctrine.

Here I would

1. Explain what we mean by the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs.

2. Prove the Thing intended by it to be true.

3. Shew that this Doctrine is utterly inconſiſtent with the Doctrine of our being juſtified by our own Vertue, or ſincere Obedience.

Firſt, I would explain what we mean by the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs. Sometimes the Expreſſion is taken by our Divines in a larger Senſe, for the Imputation of all that Chriſt did and ſuffered for our Redemption, whereby we are free from Guilt, and ſtand Righteous in the ſight of God; and ſo implies the Imputation both of Chriſt's Satisfaction, and Obedience. But here I intend it in a ſtricter Senſe, for the Imputation of that Righteouſneſs, or moral Goodneſs, that conſiſts in the Obedience of Chriſt. And by that Righteouſneſs being imputed to us, is meant no other than this, that that Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is accepted for us, and admitted inſtead of that perfect inherent Righteouſneſs that ought to be in our ſelves: Chriſt's perfect Obedience p. 54ſhall be reckoned to our Account, ſo that we ſhall have the Benefit of it, as tho' we had performed it our ſelves: And ſo we ſuppoſe that a Title to eternal Life is given us as the reward of this Righteouſneſs. The Scripture uſes the Word impute in this Senſe, viz. For reckoning any Thing belonging to any Perſon, to another Perſon's Account: As Philem. v. 18. If he have wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine Account. In the Original it is foreign impute that to me. 'Tis a Word of the ſame Root with that which is tranſlated impute, Rom 4. 6. To whom God imputeth Righteouſneſs without Works. And 'tis the very ſame Word that is uſed, Rom. 5. 13. that is tranſlated impute; ſin is not imputed, where there is no Law.

The oppoſers of this Doctrine ſuppoſe that there is an abſurdity in it: They ſay that to ſuppoſe that God imputes Chriſt's Obedience to us, is to ſuppoſe that God is miſtaken, and thinks that we perform'd that Obedience that Chriſt performed. But why can't that Righteouſneſs be reckoned to our Account, and be accepted for us, without any ſuch abſurdity? Why is there any more abſurdity in it, then in a Merchant's transferring Debt or Credit from one Man's Account to another, when one Man pays a Price for another, ſo that it ſhall be accepted as if that other had paid it? Why is there any more abſurdity in ſuppoſing that Chriſt's Obedience is imputed to us, than that his Satisfaction is imputed? If Chriſt has ſuffered the Penalty of the Law for us, and in our ſtead, then it will follow, that his ſuffering that Penalty is imputed to us, i. e. That it is accepted for us, and in our ſtead, and is reckon'd to our Account, as tho' we had ſuffered it. But why mayn't his obeying the Law of God be as rationally reckon'd to our Account, as his ſuffering the Penalty of the Law? Why may not a Price to bring into Debt, be as rationally transferr'd from one Perſon's Account to another, as a Price to pay a Debt—Having thus explain'd what we mean by the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, I proceed,

p. 55Secondly, To prove that the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is thus imputed.

1. There is the very ſame need of Chriſt's obeying the Law in our ſtead, in order to the Reward, as of his ſuffering the Penalty of the Law, in our ſtead, in order to our eſcaping the Penalty; and the ſame Reaſon why one ſhould be accepted on our Account, as the other▪ There is the ſame need of one as the other, that the Law of God might be anſwered: One was as requiſite to anſwer the Law as the other, This is certain, that that was the Reaſon why there was need that Chriſt ſuffer the Penalty for us, even that the Law might be anſwered; for this the Scripture plainly teaches: This is given as the Reaſon why Chriſt was made a curſe for us, that the Law threatned a curſe to us, Gal. 3, 10, 13. But the ſame Law that fixes the curſe of God, as the conſequent of not continuing in all Things written i… the Law to do them, (v. 10.) has as much fixed doing thoſe Things as an antecedent of living in them, (as v. 1. the next Verſe but one;) There is as much of a Co… nection eſtabliſhed in one Caſe as in the other. The… is therefore exactly the ſame need from the Law of perfect Obedience being fulfill'd, in order to our obtaining the Reward, as there is of Death's being ſuffered, in order to our eſcaping the Puniſhment, or the ſame Neceſſity by the Law, of perfect Obedience preceeding Life, as there is of Diſobedience being ſucceeded by Death: The Law is without doubt, as much of an eſtabliſhed Rule in one Caſe as in the other.

Chriſt by ſuffering the Penalty, and ſo making Attonement for us, only removes the Guilt of our Sins and ſo ſets us in the ſame State that Adam was in the firſt Moment of his Creation: And it is no more fit, that we ſhould obtain eternal Life, only on that Account, than that Adam ſhould have the Reward of eternal Life, or of a confirmed and unalterable State of Happineſs, the firſt Moment of his exiſtence, without any Obedience at all.— Adam was not to have the Reward meerly on the Account of his being innocent; if ſo, he would have had it fixed upon him at once, as ſoon p. 56as ever he was created; for he was as innocent then as he could be: But he was to have the Reward on the Account of his Activeneſs in Obedience; not on the Account meerly of his not having done ill, but on the Account of his doing well.

So on the ſame Account we han't eternal Life meerly on the Account of being void of Guilt, (as Adam was at firſt exiſtence,) which we have by the Attonement of Chriſt; but on the Account of Chriſt's activeneſs in Obedience, and doing well. Chriſt is our ſecond …edeal. Head, and is called the ſecond Adam. 1 Cor. 15, 22. becauſe he acted the Part for us, that the firſt Adam ſhould have done: When he had undertaken for us to ſtand in our ſtead, he was looked upon, and treated as tho' he were guilty with our Guilt; and by his ſatisfying, or bearing the Penalty, he did as it were free himſelf from this Guilt. But by this, the ſecond Adam did only bring himſelf into the State that the firſt Adam was in on the firſt Moment of his Exiſtence, viz a State of mee… freedom from Guilt; and hereby indeed was free from any Obligation to ſuffer Puniſhment: But this being ſuppoſed, there was need of ſomething further, even a poſitive Obedience, in order to his obtaining, as our ſecond Adam, the Reward of eternal Life.

God ſaw meet to place Man firſt in a State of Trial, and not to give him a Title to eternal Life, as ſoon as he had made him: becauſe it was his will that he ſhould firſt give Honour to his Authority, by fully ſubmitting to it, in Will and Act, and perfectly obeying his Law. God inſiſted upon it that his holy Majeſty and Law ſhould have their due Acknowledgement, and Honour from Man, ſuch as became the Relation he ſtood in to that Being that created him, before he would beſtow the Reward of confirmed and everlaſting Happineſs upon him; and therefore God gave him a Law when he created him, that he might have Opportunity, by giving due Honour to his Authority in obeying it, to obtain this Happineſs. It therefore became Chriſt, ſeeing that in aſſuming Man to himſelf, he …ought a Title to this eternal Happineſs for him, after he had p. 57broken the Law, that he himſelf ſhould become ſubject to God's Authority, and be in the Form of a Servant, that he might do that honour to God's Authority for him, by his Obedience, which God at firſt required of Man, as the Condition of his having a Title to that Reward. Chriſt came into the World to that end, to render the Honour of God's Authority and Law, conſiſtent with the Salvation and eternal Life of Sinners; he came to ſave them, and yet withal to aſſert and vindicate the Honour of the Lawgiver, and his holy Law. Now if the Sinner after his Sin was ſatisfied for, had eternal Life beſtowed upon him, without active Righteouſneſs, the Honour of his Law would not be ſufficiently vindicated. Suppoſing this were poſſible, that the Sinner himſelf could by ſuffering pay the Debt, and afterwards be in the ſame State that he was in before his Probation, that is to ſay, negatively righteous, or meerly without Guilt; if he now at laſt ſhould have eternal Life beſtowed upon him, without performing that Condition of Obedience, then God would recede from his Law, and would give the promiſed Reward, and his Law never have Reſpect and Honour ſhewn to it, in that Way of being obeyed▪ But now Chriſt by ſubjecting himſelf … the Law and obeying of it, has done great Honour to the Law, and to the Authority of God who gave it: That ſo glorious a Perſon ſhould become ſubject to the Law, and fulfil it, has done much more to honour it, than if meer Man had obeyed it: It was a Thing infinitely honourable to God that a Perſon of infinite Dignity was not aſhamed to call him his God, and to adore and obey him as ſuch: This was more to God's Honour than if any meer Creature, of any poſſible Degree of Excellency and Dignity, had ſo done.

'Tis abſolutely neceſſary that in order to a Sinner's being juſtified, the Righteouſneſs of ſome other ſhould be reckoned to his Account; for 'tis declared that the Perſon juſtified is looked upon as (in himſelf) ungodly; but God neither will nor can juſtify a Perſon without a Righteouſneſs; for Juſtification is manifeſtly a p. 58forenſick Term, as the Word is uſed in Scripture, and the Thing a judicial Thing, or the act of a Judge: So that if a Perſon ſhould be juſtified without a Righteouſneſs, the Judgment would not be according to Truth: The Sentence of Juſtification would be a falſe Sentence, unleſs there be a Righteouſneſs performed that is by the Judge properly looked upon as his. To ſay, that God don't juſtify the Sinner without ſincere, tho' an imperfect Obedience, don't help the Caſe; for an imperfect Righteouſneſs before a Judge is no Righteouſneſs. To accept of ſomething that falls ſhort of the Rule, inſtead of ſomething elſe that anſwers the Rule, is no judicial Act, or act of a Judge, but a pure Act of ſovereignty. An imperfect Righteouſneſs is no Righteouſneſs, before a Judge; For Righteouſneſs [as one obſerves] is a relative Thing, and has always Relation to a Law: The formal Nature of Righteouſneſs, properly underſtood, lies in a conformity of Actions to that which is the Rule and Meaſure of them. Therefore that only is Righteouſneſs in the Sight of a Judge that anſwers the Law**That it is perfect Obedience, that is what is called Righteouſneſs in the New-Teſtament, and that this Righteouſneſs or perfect Obedience is by God's fixed unalterable Rule, the Condition of Juſtification, is from the plain Evidence of Truth confeſs'd, by a certain great Man, that no Body will think to be a likely Perſon to be blinded by a Prejudice in favour of the Doctrine we are maintaining, and one who did not receive this Doctrine, viz. Mr. Locke in his Reaſonableneſs of Chriſtianity as delivered in the Scriptures, Vol. 2d of his▪ Works. p 4…4. To one that thus unbiaſ…ed reads the Scripture, what Adam fell from is viſible … the State of perfect Obedience, which is called Juſtice … the New Teſtament, though the Word which in the Original ſignifies Juſtice, be tranſlated Righteouſneſs. Ibid. p. … For Righteouſneſs, or an exact Obedience to the Law▪ ſeem… by the Scripture to have a Claim of Right to eternal Life, Rom. 4▪ 4. To him that w…r…eth i. e. does the Works of the Law, i… the Reward not reckon'd of Grace but of Debt.—… other Side it ſeems the unalterable purpoſe of the … Juſtice, that no unrighteous Perſon, no one that is Guilty of any Breach of the Law, ſhould be in Paradiſe; but that the Wages of Sin ſhould be to every Man, as it was to Adam, an excluſion of him out of that happy State of Immortality, and being Death upon him. And this is ſo conformable to the eternal and eſtabliſhed Law of right and wrong, that it is ſpoke of too as it could not be otherwiſe.—Here then we have the ſtanding and fixed Meaſures of Life and Death; Immortality and Bliſs belonging to the Righteous: Theſe who have l…ved in an exact Conformity to the Law of God are out of the Reach of Death: But an excluſion from Paradiſe, and loſs of Immortality, is the Portion of Sinners, of all thoſe who have any way broke that Law, and failed of a compleat Obedience to it, by the Guilt of any one Tranſgreſſion. And thus Mankind by the Law are put upon the Iſſues of Life or Death, as they are Righteous or Unrighteous, Juſt or Unjuſt, i e exact Performers, or Tranſgreſſors of the Law. Again in 477. p. The Law of Works then in ſhort, is that Law which requires perfect Obedience, without any Remiſſion or Abatement; ſo that by that Law a Man cannot be juſt, or juſtified, without an exact Performance of every Tittle ▪ Such a perfect Obedience in the New Teſtament is termed foreign, which we tranſla… Righteouſneſs. In which laſt Paſſage 'tis alſo to be noted, that Mr. Locke by the Law of Works don't underſtand the Ceremonial Law, but the Covenant of Works: as he more fully expreſſes himſelf in the next Paragraph but one. Where this Law of Works was to be found, the New Teſtament tells us, viz in the Law delivered by Moſes, John 1 17. The Law was given by Moſes, but Grace and Truth came by Jeſus Chriſt. Chap. …. 19. Did not Moſes give you the Law, ſays our Saviour, and yet none of you keep the Law ▪ And this is the Law which he ſpeaks of, v. 28 … do and thou ſhalt live. This is that which St. Paul ſo often … the Law without any other Diſtinction Rom. 2. 13. Not the Heavers of the Law are juſt before God, but the … of the Law are juſtified. 'Tis needleſs to quote any more Places, his Epiſtles are all full of it, eſpecially this to the ….Rom 4:4John 1:17Rom 2:13 p. 59The Law is the Judges Rule: If he pardons and hides what really is, and ſo don't paſs Sentence according to what Things are in themſelves, he either don't act the Part of a Judge, or elſe judges falſly. The very Notion p. 60of judging, is to determine what is, and what is not, in any one's Caſe. The Judge's Work is two fold, it is to determine firſt what is fact, and then whether what is in fact be according to Rule, or according to the Law. If a Judge has no Rule or Law eſtabliſhed before Hand, by which he ſhould proceed in judging, he has no Foundation to go upon in judging, he has no Opportunity to be a Judge; nor is it poſſible that he ſhould do the Part of a Judge. To judge without a Law or Rule by which to judge, is impoſſible, for the very Notion of judging is to determine whether the Object of Judgment be according to Rule; and therefore God has declared that when he acts as a Judge he will not juſtifie the Wicked, and cannot clear the Guilty; and by parity of Reaſon cannot juſtify without Righteouſneſs.

And the Scheme of the old Law's being abrogated, and a new Law introduced, won't help at all in this difficulty; for an imperfect Righteouſneſs cannot anſwer the Law of God that we are under, whither that be an old one or a new one; for every Law requires perfect Obedience to it ſelf: Every Rule whatſoever requires perfect conformity to it ſelf; 'tis a Contradiction to ſuppoſe otherwiſe; for to ſay, that there is a Law that don't require perfect Obedience to it ſelf, is to ſay that there is a Law that don't require all that it requires. That Law that now forbids Sin, is certainly the Law that we are now under, (let that be an old one, or a new one;) or elſe it is not ſin: That which is not forbidden, and is the Breach of no Law, is no Sin: But if we are now forbidden to commit Sin, then 'tis by a Law that we are now under, for ſurely we are neither under the forbiddings, nor commandings of a Law that we are not under. Therefore if all Sin is now forbidden, then we are now under a Law that requires perfect Obedience; and therefore nothing can be accepted as a Righteouſneſs in the ſight of our Judge, but perfect Righteouſneſs So that our Judge cannot juſtify us, unleſs he ſees a perfect Righteouſneſs, ſome way belonging, to us, … performed by our ſelves, or by another, and juſtly and duly reckon'd to our Account.

p. 61God doth in the Sentence of Juſtification pronounce a Man perfectly Righteous, or elſe he would need a further Juſtification after he is juſtified: His Sins being removed by Chriſt's Atonement, is not ſufficient for his Juſtification; for juſtifying a Man, as has been already ſhewn, is not meerly pronouncing him innocent or without Guilt, but ſtanding Right, with regard to the Rule that he is under, and righteous unto Life; But this according to the eſtabliſhed Rule of Nature, Reaſon, and Divine Appointment, is a poſitive perfect Righteouſneſs.

As there is the ſame need that Chriſt's Obedience ſhould he reckon'd to our Account, as that his Atonement ſhould; ſo there is the ſame Reaſon why it ſhould. As if Adam had perſevered, and finiſhed his courſe of Obedience, we ſhould have received the Benefit of his Obedience, as much as now we have the Miſchief of his Diſobedience; ſo in like Manner, there is Reaſon that we ſhould receive the Benefit of the ſecond Adam's Obedience, as of his Atonement of our Diſobedience: Believers are repreſented in Scripture as being ſo in Chriſt, as that they are legally one, or accepted as one, by the ſupreme Judge: Chriſt has aſſumed our Nature, and has ſo aſſumed all, in that Nature, that belong to him, into ſuch an Union with himſelf, that he is become their Head, and has taken them to be his Members: And therefore what Chriſt has done in our Nature, whereby he did honour to the Law and Authority of God by his Acts, as well as the Reparation to the honour of the Law, by his ſufferings, is reckon'd to the believers Account; ſo as that the believer ſhould be made happy, becauſe it was ſo well, and worthily done by his Head, as well as freed from being miſerable, becauſe he has ſuffered for our ill and unworthy doing.

When Chriſt had once undertaken with God, to ſtand for us, and put himſelf under our Law, by that Law he was obliged to ſuffer and by the ſame Law he was obliged to obey: By the ſame Law, after he had taken Man's Guilt upon him▪ he himſelf being our Surety, could not be acquitted, till he had ſuffer'd, nor p. 62rewarded 'till he had obey'd: But he was not acquitted as a private Perſon, but as our Head, and Believers are acquitted in his Acquittance; nor was he accepted to a Reward for his Obedience as a private Perſon, but as our Head, and we are accepted to a Reward in his Acceptance. The Scripture teaches us, that when Chriſt was raiſed from the dead, he was juſtified; which Juſtification as I have already ſhewn, implies, both his Acquittance from our Guilt, and …is Acceptance to the Exaltation and Glory that was the Reward of his Obedience: But believers, as ſoon as they Believe are admitted to partake with Chriſt in this his Juſtification: Hence we are told that he was raiſed again for our Juſtification, Rom 4. 25. Which is true, not only of that Part of his Juſtification that conſiſts in his Acquittance; but alſo his Acceptance to his Reward: The Scripture teaches us that he is exalted, and gone to Heaven, to take Poſſeſſion of Glory in our Name, as our forerunner. Heb 6 20 We are as it were both raiſed up together with Chriſt, and alſo made to ſet together with Chriſt, in heavenly Places, and in Him. Eph 2. 6.

If it be objected here, that there is this Reaſon, why what Chriſt ſuffer'd ſhould be accepted on our Account rather than the Obedience he performed, that he was obliged to Obedience for himſelf, but was not obliged to ſuffer but only on our Account. To this I anſwer, that Chriſt was not obliged on his own Account, to undertake to obey. Chriſt in his original Circumſtances, was in no ſubjection to the Father, being altogether equal with him: He was under no Obligation to put himſelf in Man's ſtead, and under Man's Law, or to put himſelf into any State of Subjection to God whatſoever. There was a Tranſaction between the Father and the Son, that was antecedent to Chriſt's becoming Man▪ and being made under the Law, wherein he undertook to put himſelf under the Law, and both to obey and to ſuffer▪ in which Tranſaction theſe Things were already vertually done in the ſight of God; as is evident by this, that God acted on the Ground of p. 63that Tranſaction, juſtifying and ſaving Sinners, as if the Things undertaken had been actually performed long before they were performed indeed▪ And therefore, without doubt, in order to the eſtimating the value, and validity of what Chriſt did and ſuffered, we muſt look back to that Tranſaction, wherein theſe Things were firſt undertaken, and vertually done in the ſight of God, and ſee what Capacity and Circumſtances Chriſt acted in then, and then we ſhall find that Chriſt was under no manner of Obligation, either to obey the Law, or ſuffer the Penalty of it. After this he was equally under Obligation to both; for henceforward he ſtood as our Surety or Repreſentative: And therefore this conſequent Obligation, may be as much of an Objection againſt the validity of his ſuffering the Penalty, as againſt his Obedience. But if we look to that original Tranſaction between the Father and the Son, wherein both th…ſe were undertaken and accepted, as vertually done in the ſight of the Father, we ſhall find Chriſt acting with Regard to both, as one perfectly in his own Right, and under no manner of previous Obligation, to hinder the validity of either.

2. To ſuppoſe that all that Chriſt does is only to make Atonement for us by ſuffering, is to make him our Saviour but in Part. 'Tis to rob him of half his Glory as a Saviour. For if ſo, all that he does is to deliver us from Hell, he don't purchaſe Heaven for us. The adverſe Scheme ſuppoſes that he purchaſes Heaven for us, in this Senſe, that he ſatisfies for the imperfections of our Obedience, and ſo purchaſes that our ſincere imperfect Obedience might be accepted as the Condition of eternal Life; and ſo purchaſes an opportunity for us to obtain Heaven by our own Obedience. But to purchaſe Heaven for us, only in this Senſe, is to purchaſe it in no Senſe at all; for all of it comes to no more than a Satisfaction for our Sins, or removing the Penalty by ſuffering in our ſtead: For all the purchaſing they ſpeak of, that … imperfect Obedience ſhould be accepted, is only his ſatisfying p. 64for the ſinful imperfection of our Obedience, or (which is the ſame Thing) making Atonement for the Sin that our Obedience is attended with. But that is not purchaſing Heaven, meerly to ſet us at Liberty again, that we may go, and get Heaven by what we do our ſelves: all that Chriſt does is only to pay a Debt for us; there is no poſitive Purchaſe of any Good.—We are taught in Scripture that Heaven is purchaſed for us, 'tis called the purchaſed Poſſeſſion, Eph. 1. 14. The Goſpel propoſes the eternal Inheritance, not to be acquired, as the firſt Covenant did, but as already acquired and purchaſed: But he that pays a Man's Debt for him, and ſo delivers him from Slavery, can't be ſaid to purchaſe an Eſtate for him, meerly becauſe he ſets him at Liberty, ſo that henceforward he has an opportunity to get an Eſtate by his own hand Labour. So that according to this Scheme, the Saints in Heaven have no Reaſon to thank Chriſt for purchaſing Heaven for 'em, or redeeming them to God, and making them King's and Prieſt's, as we have an Account that they do in Rev.5. 9

3. Juſtification by the Righteouſneſs and Obedience of Chriſt, is a Doctrine that the Scripture teaches in very full Terms. Rom. 5. 18, 19. By the Righteouſneſs of one, the free Gift came upon all Men unto Juſtification of Life. For as by one Man's Diſobedience many were made Sinners, ſo by the Obedience of one ſhall many be made Righteous. Here in one verſe we are told that we have Juſtification by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs; and that there might be no room to underſtand the Righteouſneſs ſpoken of meerly of Chriſt's Atonement, by his ſuffering the Penalty, in the next verſe, 'tis put in other Terms, and aſſerted that 'tis by Chriſt's Obedience that we are made Righteous. 'Tis ſcarce poſſible any Thing ſhould be more full and determined: The Terms, taken ſingly, are ſuch as do fix their own meaning, and taken together, they fix the meaning of each other: The Words ſhew that we are juſtified by that Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, that conſiſts in his Obedience, and that we are made righteous or juſtified p. 65by that Obedience of his, that is his Righteouſneſs, or moral Goodneſs before God.

Here poſſibly it may be objected, that this Text means only that we are juſtified by Chriſt's paſſive Obedience.

To this I anſwer, whether we call it active or paſſive, it alters not the Caſe as to the preſent Argument, as long as 'tis evident by the Words that 'tis not meerly under the Notion of an Atonement for Diſobedience, or a Satisfaction for Unrighteouſneſs, but under the Notion of a poſitive Obedience, and a Righteouſneſs, or moral Goodneſs, that it juſtifies us, or makes us righteous; becauſe both the Words Righteouſneſs, and Obedience are uſed, and uſed too as the Oppoſites to Sin and Diſobedience, and an Offence. Therefore, as by the Offence of one, Judgment came upon all Men to Condemnation; even ſo by the Righteouſneſs of one, the free Gift came upon all Men to Juſtification of Life. For as by one Man's Diſobedience▪ many were made Sinners; ſo by the Obedience of one, ſhall many be made Righteous. Now what can be meant by Righteouſneſs, when ſpoken of as the Oppoſite to Sin, or moral Evil, but only moral Goodneſs? What is the Righteouſneſs that is the Oppoſite of an Offence; but only the Behaviour that is well pleaſing? and what can be meant by Obedience, when ſpoken o… as the Oppoſite of Diſobedience, or going contrary to a Command, but a poſitive obeying and an actual complying with the Command? So that there is no Room for any invented Diſtinction of active and paſſive, …o hurt the Argument from this Scripture, as long as 'tis evident by it as any Thing can be, that Believers are juſtified by the Righteouſneſs and Obedience of Chriſt under the Notion of his moral Goodneſs, and his poſ…ive obeying, and actual complying with the Commands of God, and that Behaviour of his, that, becauſe of it's Conformity to his Commands, was well-pleaſing in his Sight. This is all that ever any need to deſire to have granted in this Diſpute.

By this it appears, that if Chriſt's dying be here included in the Words, Righteouſneſs and Obedience, it is p. 66not meerly as a Propitiation, or bearing a Penalty of a broken Law in our ſtead, but as his voluntary ſubmitting and yielding himſelf to thoſe Sufferings, was an Act of Obedience to the Father's Commands, and ſo was a Part of his poſitive Righteouſneſs, or moral Goodneſs.

Indeed all Obedience conſidered under the Notion of Obedience or Righteouſneſs, is ſomething active, ſomething that is done in active and voluntary Compliance with a Command; whether that which we do in Obedience is ſomething eaſy, and ſomething that may be done without Suffering, or whether it be ſomething hard and difficult; yet as 'tis Obedience, or Righteouſneſs, or moral Goodneſs▪ it muſt be conſidered as ſomething voluntary and active. If any one is commanded to go through Difficulties, and Sufferings, and he in Compliance with this command voluntarily does it, he properly obeys in ſo doing; and as he voluntarily does it, in Compliance with a Command, his Obedience is as active as any whatſoever: 'Tis the ſame ſort of Obedience, a Thing of the very ſame Nature, as when a Man in Compliance with a Command, does a piece of hard Service, or goes through hard Labour; and there is no Room to diſtinguiſh between ſuch Obedience and other that is more eaſy, and to make a different ſort of Obedience of it, as if it were a Thing of quite a different Nature, by ſuch oppoſite Terms as active and paſſive: all the Diſtinction that can be pretended, is that which is between obeying an eaſy Command and a difficult one: But is not the Obedience it ſelf of the ſame Nature, becauſe the Commands to be obeyed, are ſome of 'em more difficult than others? Is there from hence any Foundation to make too Species of Obedience, one active and the other paſſive?—There is no Appearance of any ſuch Diſtinction ever entring into the Hearts of any of the Penmen of Scripture.

'Tis true that of late, when a Man refuſes to obey the Precept of an human Law, but patiently yields himſelf up to ſuffer the Penalty of the Law, it is called p. 67paſſive Obedience; but this I ſuppoſe is only a modern Uſe of the Word Obedience; beſure it is a Senſe of the Word, that the Scripture is a perfect Stranger to; and it is improperly called Obedience, unleſs there be ſuch a Precept in the Law, that he ſhall yield himſelf patiently to ſuffer, to which his ſo doing ſhall be an active voluntary Conformity. There may in ſome Senſe be ſaid to be a Conformity to the Law in a Perſon's Suffering the Penalty of the Law; but no other Conformity to the Law is properly called Obedience to it, but an active voluntary Conformity to the Precepts of it: The Word obey is often found in Scripture with Reſpect to the Law of God to Man, but never in any other Senſe.

'Tis true that Chriſt's willingly undergoing thoſe Sufferings which he endured, is a great Part of that Obedience o… Righteouſneſs by which we are juſtified. The Sufferings of Chriſt are reſpected in Scripture under a twofold Conſideration, either meerly as his being ſubſtituted for us, or put into our ſtead, in ſuffering the Penalty of the Law; and ſo his Sufferings are conſidered as a Satisfaction and Propitiation for Sin: Or as he in Obedience to a Law, or Command of the Father, voluntarily ſubmitted himſelf to thoſe Sufferings, and actively yielded himſelf up to bear them; and ſo they are conſidered as his Righteouſneſs, and a Part of his active Obedience. Chriſt underwent Death in Obedience to the Command of the Father, Pſalm 40 6, 7, 8. Sacrifice and Offering thou didſt not deſire: mine Ears haſt thou bored. Burnt Offering and Sin Offering thou haſt not required: Then ſaid I, ſo I come; in the Volume of the Book it is written of me: I delight to do thy Will, O my God, and thy Law is within my Heart. John 10. 17, 18. I lay down my Life that I may take it again: No Man taketh it from me; but I lay it down of my ſelf: I have Power to lay it down, and I have Power to take it again: This Commandment have I received of my Father▪ John 18. 11. The Cup which my Father hath given me to drink, ſhall I not drink it? And this is Part, and indeed the principal Part of that active Obedience that we are juſtified by▪

p. 68It can be no juſt Objection againſt this, that that Command of the Father to Chriſt that he ſhould lay down his Life, was no Part of the Law that we had broken, and therefore that his obeying this Command could be no Part of that Obedience that he performed for us, becauſe we needed that he ſhould obey no other Law for us, but only that which we had broken or fail'd of obeying▪ For altho' it muſt be the ſame legiſlative Authority, whoſe Honour is repair'd by Chriſt's Obedience, that we have injured by our Diſobedience; yet there is no need that the Law that Chriſt obeys ſhould be preciſely the ſame that Adam was to have obeyed, in that Senſe that there ſhould be no poſitive Precepts wanting, nor any added: There was wanting the Precept about the forbidden Fruit, and there was added the ceremonial Law. The Thing required was perfect Obedience: It is no Matter whether the poſitive Precepts were the ſame, if they were equivalent. The poſitive Precepts that Chriſt was to obey, were much more than equivalent to what was wanting, becauſe infinitely more difficult, particularly the Command that he had received to lay down his Life, which was his principal Act of Obedience, and which above all others, is concern'd in our Juſtification. As that Act of Diſobedience by which we fell, was Diſobedience to a poſitive Precept that Chriſt never was under, viz. that of abſtaining from the Tree of Knowlege of Good and Evil, ſo that Act of Obedience by which principally we are redeemed, is Obedience to a poſitive Precept that Adam never was under, viz the Precept of laying down his Life▪ It was ſutable that it ſhould be a poſitive Precept that ſhould try both Adam's and Chriſt's Obedience: Such Precepts are the greateſt and moſt proper Trial of Obedience, becauſe in them, the meer Authority and Will of the Legiſlator is the ſole Ground of the Obligation, (and nothing in the Nature of the Things themſelves;) and therefore they are the greateſt Trial of any Perſon's Reſpect to that Authority and Will.

The Law that Chriſt was ſubject to, and obeyed, was in ſome Senſe the ſame that was given to Adam: There p. 69are innumerable particular Duties that are required by the Law only conditionally; and in ſuch Circumſtances, are comprehended in ſome great and general Rule of that Law. Thus for Inſtance, there are innumerable Acts of Reſpect and Obedience to Men, which are required by the Law of Nature, (which was a Law given to Adam,) which yet ben'… required abſolutely, but upon many prerequiſite Conditions; as that there be Men ſtanding in ſuch Relations to us, and that they give forth ſuch Commands, and the like: So many Acts of Reſpect and Obedience to God, are included, in like manner, in the moral Law conditionally, or ſuch and ſuch Things being ſuppoſed▪ as Abraham's going about to ſacrifice his Son, the Jews circumciſing their Children when eight Days old, and Adam's not eating the forbidden Fruit; they are virtually comprehended in that great general Rule of the moral Law, that we ſhould obey God, and be ſubject to him in whatſoever he pleaſes to command us. Certainly the moral Law does as much require us to obey God's poſitive Commands, as it requires us to obey the poſitive Commands of our Parents▪ And thus all that Adam, and all that Chriſt was commanded, even his obſerving the Rites and Ceremonies of the jewiſh Worſhip, and his laying down his Life, was virtually included in this ſame great Law.**Thus Mr. Locke in his Reaſonableneſs of Chriſtianity, as deliver'd in the Scriptures, Vol. 2d. of his Work, p 478. Nay whatever God requires any where to be done. without making any Allowance for Faith, that is a Part of the Law of Works. So that forbidding Adam to eat of the Tree of Knowlege, was Part of the Law of Works: Only we muſt take notice here, that ſome of God's poſitive Commands being for peculiar Ends, and ſu…ed to particular Circumſtances of Times, Places and Perſons, have a limited, and only temporary Obligation, by Virtue of God's poſitive Injunction: Such as was that Part of Moſes's Law▪ which concerned the outward Worſhip, or …olitical Conſtitution of the Jews, and is called the ceremonial and judaical Law. Again, p 4. 9. Thus then, as to the Law in ſhort, the civil and ritual Part of the Law delivered by Moſes obliges nor Chriſtians, though to the Jews it were a Part of the Law of Works; it being a Part of the Law of Nature, that Men ought to obey every poſitive Law of God, whenever …e ſhall pleaſe to make any ſuch Addition to the Law of his Nature.

p. 70'Tis no Objection againſt the laſt mention'd Thing, even Chriſt's laying down his Life, its being included in the moral Law given to Adam, becauſe that Law it ſelf allowed of no Occaſion for any ſuch Thing; for the moral Law virtually includes all right Acts, on all poſſible Occaſions, even Occaſions that the Law it ſelf allows not: Thus we are obliged by the moral Law to mortify our Luſts, and repent of our Sins, tho' that Law allows of no Luſt to mortify, or Sin to repent of.

There is indeed but one great Law of God, and that is the ſame Law that ſays, if thou ſinneſt thou ſhalt die, and curſed is every one that continues not in all Things contained in this Law to do them: All Duties of poſitive Inſtitution, are virtually comprehended in this Law: and therefore if the Jews brake the ceremonial Law, it expoſed 'em to the Penalty of the Law, or Covenant of Works, which threaten'd, thou ſhalt ſurely die. The Law is the eternal and unalterable Rule of Righteouſneſs, between God and Man, and therefore is the Rule of Judgment, by which all that a Man does ſhall be either juſtified or condemn'd; and no Sin expoſes to Damnation, but by the Law: So now he that refuſes to obey the Precepts that require an Attendance on the Sacraments of the New-Teſtament, is expoſed to Damnation, by Virtue of the Law or Covenant of Works.—It may moreover be argued, that all Sins whatſoever, are Breaches of the Law or Covenant of Works, becauſe all Sins, even Breaches of the poſitive Precepts, as well as others▪ have Atonement by the Death of Chriſt: But what Chriſt died for, was to ſatisfy the Law, or to bear the Curſe of the Law; as appears by Gal. 3. 10, 11, 12, 1…. and Rom 8. 3, 4

p. 71So that Chriſt's laying down his Life might be Part of that Obedience by which we are juſtified, tho' it was a poſitive Precept, not given to Adam. It was doubtleſs Chriſt's main Act of Obedience, becauſe it was Obedience to a Command that was attended with immenſely the greateſt Difficulty, and ſo to a Command that was the greateſt Trial of his Obedience; his Reſpect ſhown to God in it, and his Honour to God's Authority, was proportionably great: It is ſpoken of in Scripture as Chriſt's principal Act of Obedience. Philip. 2. 7, 8. But made himſelf of no Reputation, and took upon him the Form of a Servant, and was made in the Likeneſs of Man, and being found in Faſhion as a Man, he humbled himſelf and became obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Croſs Heb. 5. 8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he Obedience by the Things that he ſuffered. It was mainly by this Act of Obedience, that Chriſt purchaſed ſo glorious a Reward for himſelf; as in that Place in Philippians 2. 8, 9. He became obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Croſs; wherefore God alſo hath highly exalted him, and given him a Name, which is above every Name: And it therefore follows from what has been already ſaid, that it's mainly by this Act of Obedience, that Believers in Chriſt alſo, have the Reward of Glory, or come to partake with Chriſt in his Glory. We are as much ſaved by the Death of Chriſt, as his yielding himſelf to die was an Act of Obedience, as we are, as it was a Propitiation for our Sins: For as it was not the only Act of Obedience that merited, he having performed meritorious Acts of Obedience through the whole Courſe of his Life; ſo neither was it the only Suffering that was propitiatory; all his Sufferings through the whole Courſe of his Life being propitiatory, as well as every Act of Obedience meritorious: Indeed this was his principal Suffering; and it was as much his principal Act of Obedience.

Hence we may ſee how that the Death of Chriſt did not only make Atonement, but alſo merited eternal Life; and hence we may ſee how by the Blood of Chriſt we are not only redeemed from Sin, but redeemed unto p. 72God; and therefore the Scripture ſeems every where to attribute the whole of Salvation to the Blood of Chriſt: This precious Blood is as much the main Price by which Heaven is purchaſed, as 'tis the main Price by which we are redeemed from Hell. The poſitive Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, or that Price by which he merited, was of equal Value with that by which he ſatisfied; for indeed it was the ſame Price: He ſpill'd his Blood to ſatisfy, and by Reaſon of the infinite Dignity of his Perſon, his Sufferings were looked upon as of infinite Value, and equivalent to the eternal Sufferings of a finite Creature: And he ſpill'd his Blood out of Reſpect to the Honour of God's Majeſty, and in Submiſſion to his Authority, who had commanded him ſo to do, and his Obedience there in was of infinite Value; both becauſe of the Dignity of the Perſon that performed it, and becauſe he put himſelf to infinite Expence to perform it, whereby the infinite Degree of his Regard to God's Authority appear'd.

One would wonder what Arminians mean by Chriſt's Merits: They talk of Chriſt's Merits as much as any Body, and yet deny the Imputation of Chriſt's poſitive Righteouſneſs: What ſhould there be that any one ſhould merit or deſerve any Thing by, beſides Righteouſneſs or Goodneſs? If any Thing that Chriſt did or ſuffered, merited or deſerved any Thing▪ it was by Virtue of the Goodneſs, or Righteouſneſs, or Holineſs of it: If Chriſt's Sufferings and Death merited Heaven, it muſt be becauſe there was an excellent Righteouſneſs, and tranſcendent moral Goodneſs in that Act of laying down his Life: And if by that excellent Righteouſneſs he merited Heaven for us, then ſurely that Righteouſneſs is reckon'd to our Account, that we have the Benefit of it, or which is the ſame Thing, it is imputed to us.

Thus I hope I have made it evident, that the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is indeed imputed to us. I proceed now to the

Third, and laſt Thing under this Argument, That this Doctrine of the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is utterly inconſiſtent with the Doctrine of our being p. 73juſtified by our own Virtue, or ſincere Obedience. If Acceptance to God's Favour, and a Title to Life, be given to Believers, as the Reward of Chriſt's Obedience, then it is not given as the Reward of our own Obedience. In what reſpect ſoever, Chriſt is our Saviour, that doubtleſs excludes our being our own Saviours, in that ſame reſpect. If we can be our own Saviours in the ſame reſpect that Chriſt is, it will thence follow that the Salvation of Chriſt is needleſs, in that reſpect; according to the Apoſtle's reaſoning, Gal. 5. 4. Chriſt is render'd of no effect unto you, whoſoever of you are juſtified by the Law. Doubtleſs 'tis Chriſt's Prerogative to be our Saviour, in that Senſe wherein he is our Saviour: And therefore if it be by his Obedience that we are juſtified, then it is not by our own Obedience.

Here perhaps it may be ſaid, that a Title to Salvation is not directly given as the Reward of our Obedience; for that is not by any Thing of ours; but only by Chriſt's Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs; but yet an Intereſt in that Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs is given as a Reward of our Obedience.

But this don't at all help the Caſe; for this is to aſcribe as much to our Obedience, as if we aſcribed Salvation to it directly, without the Intervention of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs: For it would be as great a Thing for God to give us Chriſt, and his Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs, in Reward for our Obedience, as to give us Heaven immediately; it would be as great a Reward, and as great a Teſtimony of reſpect to our Obedience. And if God gives as great a Thing as Salvation, for our Obedience, why could he not as well give Salvation it ſelf directly? And then there would have been no need of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs. And indeed if God gives us Chriſt, or an Intereſt in him, properly in reward of our Obedience, he does really give us Salvation in reward for our Obedience; for the former implies the latter; yea it implies it as the greater implies the leſs. So that indeed it exalts our Vertue and Obedience more, to ſuppoſe that God gives us Chriſt in reward of that Vertue and Obedience, than if he ſhould give Salvation without Chriſt.

p. 74The Thing that the Scripture guards, and militates againſt, is our imagining that 'tis our own Goodneſs, Vertue, or Excellency, that inſtates us in God's Acceptance and Favour. But to ſuppoſe that God gives us an Intereſt in Chriſt… in Reward for our Vertue, is as great an Argument that it inſtates us in God's Favour, as if he beſtowed a title to eternal Life, as it's direct reward. If God gives us an Intereſt in Chriſt, as a reward of our Obedience, it will then follow, that we are inſtated in God's Acceptance and Favour by our own Obedience, antecedent to our having an Intereſt in Chriſt. For a rewarding any one's Excellency, ever-more ſuppoſes Favour and Acceptance on the Account of that Excellency: It is the very Notion of a reward, that it is a good Thing, beſtowed in Teſtimony of reſpect and Favour for the Vertue or Excellency rewarded. So that it is not by Vertue of our Intereſt in Chriſt and his Merits, that we firſt come into Favour with God, according to this Scheme; for we are in God's Favour before we have any Intereſt in thoſe Merits; in that we have an Intereſt in thoſe Merits given as a Fruit of God's Favour for our own Vertue. If our Intereſt in Chriſt be the Fruit of God's Favour, then it can't be the Ground of it. If God did not accept us, and had no Favour for us, for our own Excellency, he never would beſtow ſo great a Reward upon us, as a Right in Chriſt's Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs. So that ſuch a Scheme deſtroys it ſelf, for it ſuppoſes that Chriſt's Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs are neceſſary for us to recommend us to the Favour of God; and yet ſuppoſes that we have God's Favour and Acceptance▪ before we have Chriſt's Satisfaction and Righteouſneſs, and have theſe given as a Fruit of God's Favour

Indeed, neither Salvation it ſelf, nor Chriſt the Saviour, are given as a Reward of any Thing in Man: They are not given as a Reward of Faith, nor any Thing elſe of ours: W… are not united to Chriſt as a Reward of our Faith, but have Union with him by Faith, only as Faith is the very Act of uniting, or cloſing on our Part. p. 75As when a Man offers himſelf to a Woman in Marriage, he don't give himſelf to her as a Reward of her receiving him in Marriage: Her receiving him is not conſider'd as a worthy Deed in her, for which he rewards her▪ by giving himſelf to her; but 'tis by her receiving him, that the Union is made, by which ſhe hath him for her Husband: 'Tis on her Part the Unition it ſelf.—By theſe Things it appears how contrary to the Scheme of the Goſpel of Chriſt, their Scheme is, who ſay that Faith juſtifies as a 'Principle of Obedience, or as a leading Act of Obedience; or (as others) the Sum, and Comprehenſion of all evangelical Obedience: For by this 'tis the Obedience or Virtue that is in Faith, that is the Thing, that gives it its juſtifying Influence; and that is the ſame thing as to ſay, that we are juſtified by our own Obedience, Virtue or Goodneſs.

Having thus conſidered the Evidence of the Truth of the Doctrine, I proceed now to the

IIId Thing propoſed, viz. To ſhew in what Senſe the Acts of a chriſtian Life, or of evangelical Obedience, may be looked upon to be concern'd in this Affair.

From what has been ſaid already, it is manifeſt that they cannot have any Concern in this Affair as good Works, or by Virtue of any moral Goodneſs in them; not as Works of the Law, or as that moral Excellency, or any Part of it, that is the anſwering or Fulfilment of that great, and univerſal, and everlaſting Law or Covenant of Works, that the great Lawgiver has eſtabliſhed, as the higheſt and unalterable Rule of Judgment; which Chriſt alone anſwers, or does any Thing towards it.

And it having been ſhown, out of the Scripture, that 'tis only by Faith, or the Soul's receiving, and uniting to the Saviour, that has wrought out Righteouſneſs, that we are juſtified; it therefore remains that the Acts of a chriſtian Life can't be concerned in this Affair any otherwiſe, than as they imply, and are the Expreſſions of Faith, and may be looked upon as ſo many Acts of Reception of Chriſt the Saviour.

p. 76But the determining what concern Acts of chriſtian Obedience can have in Juſtification in this Reſpect, will depend on the reſolving of another Point, viz Whether any other Act of Faith beſides the firſt Act, has any Concern in our Juſtification, or how far Perſeverance in Faith, or the continued and renewed Acts of Faith, have Influence in this Affair.

And it ſeems manifeſt that Juſtification is by the firſt Act of Faith, in ſome Reſpects, in a Peculiar Manner, becauſe a Sinner is actually and finally juſtified as ſoon as he has performed one Act of Faith; and Faith in its firſt Act does, virtually at leaſt, depend on God for Perſeverance, and intitles to this among other Benefits. But yet the Perſeverance of Faith is not excluded in this Affair; it is not only certainly connected with Juſtification, but it is not to be excluded from that on which the Juſtification of a Sinner has a Dependance, or that by which he is juſtified.

I have ſhown that the Way in which Juſtification has a Dependance on Faith, is that it is the Qualification on which the Congruity of an Intereſt in the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt depends, or wherein ſuch a Fitneſs conſiſts. But the Conſideration of the Perſeverance of Faith, can't be excluded out of this Congruity or Fitneſs, for it is congruous that he that believes in Chriſt ſhould have an Intereſt in Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and ſo in the eternal Benefits purchaſed by it, becauſe Faith is that by which the Soul hath Union or Oneneſs with Chriſt, and there is a natural Congruity in it, that they that are one with Chriſt, ſhould have a joint Intereſt with him in his eternal Benefits; but yet this Congruity depends on its being an abiding Union. As it is needful that the Branch ſhould abide in the Vine, in order to its receiving the laſting Benefits of the Root, ſo it is neceſſary that the Soul ſhould abide in Chriſt, in order to its receiving thoſe laſting Benefits of God's final Acceptance and Favour. John 15. 6, 7. If a Man abide not in me, he is caſt forth as a Branch. If ye abide in me, and my Words abide you, ye ſhall ask what ye will, and it ſhall be done unto you. Verſes 9, 10. Continue ye in my Love: If p. 77ye keep (or abide in) my Commandments, ye ſhall abide in my Love, even as I have kept my Father's Commandments, and abide in his Love. There is the ſame Reaſon why it is neceſſary that the Union with Chriſt ſhould remain, as why it ſhould be begun, why it ſhould continue to be, as why it ſhould once be: If it ſhould be begun without remaining, the beginning would be in vain. In order to the Soul's being now in a juſtified State, and now free from Condemnation, 'tis neceſſary that it ſhould now be in Chriſt, and not only that it ſhould once have been in him. Rom. 8. 1. There is no Condemnation to them are in Chriſt Jeſus. The Soul is ſaved in Chriſt, as being now in him, when the Salvation is beſtowed, and not meerly as remembring that it once was in him. Philip. 3 9. That I may be FOUND IN HIM, not having mine own Righteouſneſs, which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Chriſt, the Righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith. 1 John 2. 28. And now little Children abide in him; that when he ſhall appear, we may have Confidence, and not be aſhamed before him at his Coming. In order to Perſons being bleſſed after Death, 'tis neceſſary not only that they ſhould once be in him, but that they ſhould die in him. Rev. 14. 13. Bleſſed are the Dead that die in the Lord

And there is the ſame Reaſon why Faith, the uniting Qualification, ſhould remain, in order to the Union's remaining, as why it ſhould once be, in order to the Union's once being.

So that altho' the Sinner is actually, and finally juſtified on the firſt Act of Faith, yet the Perſeverance of Faith, even then, comes into Conſideration, as one Thing on which the Fitneſs of Acceptance to Life depends▪ God in the Act of Juſtification, which is paſſed on a Sinner's firſt believing, has Reſpect to Perſeverance, as being virtually contain'd in that firſt Act of Faith; and 'tis looked upon and taken by him that juſtifies, as being as it were a Property in that Faith that then is: God has Reſpect to the Believer's Continuance in Faith, and he is juſtified by that, as tho' it already were, becauſe by divine Eſtabliſhment it ſhall follow; and it being p. 78by divine Conſtitution connected with that firſt Faith, as much as if it were a Property in it, it is then conſider'd as ſuch, and ſo Juſtification is not ſuſpended; but were it not for this it would be needful that it ſhould be ſuſpended, till the Sinner had actually perſevered in Faith.

And that it is ſo, that God in that Act of final Juſtification that he paſſes at the Sinner's Converſion, has Reſpect to Perſeverance in Faith, and future Acts of Faith, as being virtually implied in that firſt Act, is further manifeſt by this, viz. That in a Sinner's Juſtification at his Converſion, there is virtually contained a Forgiveneſs as to eternal, and deſerved Puniſhment, not only of all paſt Sins, but alſo of all future Infirmities and Acts of Sin, that they ſhall be guilty of; becauſe that firſt Juſtification is deciſive and final. And yet Pardon, in the Order of Nature, properly follows the Crime, and alſo follows thoſe Acts of Repentance and Faith that reſpect the Crime pardoned, as is manifeſt both from Reaſon and Scripture. David in the beginning of Pſalm 32. ſpeaks of the Forgiveneſs of Sins of his, that were doubtleſs committed long after he was firſt godly, as being conſequent on thoſe Sins, and on his Repentance and Faith with Reſpect to them; and yet this Forgiveneſs is ſpoken of by the Apoſtle in the 4th of Romans, as an Inſtance of Juſtification by Faith. Probably the Sin David there ſpeaks of is the ſame that he committed in the Matter of Uriah, and ſo the Pardon the ſame with that Releaſe from Death, or eternal Puniſhment, that the Prophet Nathan ſpeaks of, 2 Sam 12. 13. The Lord alſo hath put away thy Sin; thou ſhalt not die. Not only does the Manifeſtation of this Pardon follow the Sin in the Order of Time, but the Pardon it ſelf, in the Order of Nature, follows David's Repentance and Faith with Reſpect to this Sin; for it is ſpoken of in the 32nd Pſalm as depending on it.

And beſides, if no other Act of Faith could be concerned in Juſtification but the firſt Act, it will then follow that Chriſtians ought never to ſeek Juſtification by any other Act of Faith. For if Juſtification is not to be p. 79obtain'd by after Acts of Faith, then ſurely it is not a Duty to ſeek it by ſuch Acts: And ſo it can never be a Duty for Perſons after they are once converted, by Faith to ſeek to God; or believingly to look to him for the Remiſſion of Sin, or Deliverance from the Guilt of it, becauſe Deliverance from the Guilt of Sin is Part of what belongs to Juſtification. And if it ben't proper for Converts by Faith to look to God through Chriſt for it, then it will follow that it is not proper for them to pray for it, for chriſtian Prayer to God for a Bleſſing is but an Expreſſion of Faith in God for that Bleſſing; Prayer is only the Voice of Faith. But if theſe Things are ſo, it will follow that that Petition of the Lord's Prayer, for give us our Debts, is not proper to be put up by Diſciples of Chriſt, or to be uſed in chriſtian Aſſemblies, and that Chriſt improperly directed his Diſciples to uſe that Petition, when they were all of them, except Judas, converted before. The Debt that Chriſt directs his Diſciples to pray for the Forgiveneſs of, can mean nothing elſe, but the Puniſhment that Sin deſerves, or the Debt that we owe to divine Juſtice, the ten thouſand Talents we owe our Lord. To pray that God would forgive our Debts, is undoubtedly the ſame Thing as to pray that God would releaſe us from Obligation to due Puniſhment; but releaſing from Obligation to the Puniſhment due to Sin, and forgiving the Debt that we owe to divine Juſtice, is what appertains to Juſtification.

And then to ſuppoſe that no after Acts of Faith are concerned in the Buſineſs of Juſtification, and ſo that it is not proper for any ever to ſeek Juſtification by ſuch Acts, would be forever to cut off thoſe Chriſtians, that are doubtful concerning their firſt Act of Faith, from the Joy and Peace of Believing. As the Buſineſs of a juſtifying Faith is to obtain Pardon and Peace with God, by looking to God and truſting in him for theſe Bleſſings, ſo the Joy and Peace of that Faith, is in the Apprehenſion of Pardon and Peace obtain'd by ſuch a Truſt. This a Chriſtian that is doubtful of his firſt Act of Faith, can't have from that Act, becauſe, by the Suppoſition, p. 80he is doubtful whether it be an Act of Faith, and ſo whether he did obtain Pardon and Peace by that Act: The proper Remedy, in ſuch a Caſe, is now by Faith to look to God in Chriſt for theſe Bleſſings; but he is cut off from this Remedy, becauſe he is uncertain whether he has Warrant ſo to do, for he don't know but that he has believed already; and if ſo, then he has no Warrant to look to God by Faith for theſe Bleſſings now, becauſe by the Suppoſition no new Act of Faith is a proper Means of obtaining theſe Bleſſings▪ And ſo he can never properly obtain the Joy of Faith; for there are Acts of true Faith, that are very weak Acts, and the firſt Act may be ſo as well as others; it may be like the firſt Motion of the Infant in the Womb, it may be ſo weak an Act that the Chriſtian by examining of it, may never be able to determine whether it was a true Act of Faith or n…; and it is evident from Fact, and abundant Experience, that many Chriſtians are forever at a Loſs to determine which was their firſt Act of Faith. And thoſe Saints that have had a good Degree of Satisfaction concerning their Faith, may be ſubject to great Declenſions and Falls, in which Caſe they are liable to great Fears of eternal Puniſhment; and the proper Way of Deliverance is to forſake their Sin by Repentance, and by Faith now to come to Chriſt for Deliverance from the deſerved eternal Puniſhment; but this it would not be, if Deliverance from that Puniſhment, was not this Way to be obtain'd.

But what is a ſtill more plain and direct Evidence of what I am now arguing for, is that that Act of Faith that Abraham exerciſed in the great Promiſe of the Covenant of Grace that God made to him, of which it is expreſly ſaid, Gen 15. 16. It was accounted to him for Righteouſneſs; which is the grand Inſtance and Proof, that the Apoſtle ſo much inſiſts upon throughout the 4th Chapter of Romans, and 3d. Chapter of Galatians, to confirm his Doctrine of Juſtification by Faith alone, was not Abraham's firſt A… of Faith, but was ex…ted long after he had by Faith forſaken his own Country, Heb. 11. 8. and had been treated as an eminent Friend of God.

p. 81Moreover, The Apoſtle Paul in the third Chapter of Philippians, tells us how earneſtly he ſought Juſtification by Faith, or to win Chriſt and obtain that Righteouſneſs which was by the Faith of him, in what he did after his Converſion. Verſes 8, 9 For whom I have ſuffered the loſs of all Things, and do count them but, Dung that I may win Chriſt, and be found in him, not having on mine own Righteouſneſs, which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Chriſt, the Righteouſneſs which is of God by Faith. And in the two next Verſes he expreſſes the ſame Thing in other Words, and tells us how …e went through Sufferings, and became conformable to Chriſt's Death, that he might be a Partaker with Chriſt in the Benefit of his Reſurrection; which the ſame Apoſtle elſewhere teaches us, is eſpecially Juſtification: Chriſt's Reſurrection was his Juſtification; in this, he that was put to Death in the Fl…ſh, was juſtified by the Spirit, and he that was delivered for our Offences, roſe again for our Juſtification. And the Apoſtle tells us in the Verſes that follow, in that third Chapter of Philippians, that he thus fought to attain the Righteouſneſs which is through the Faith of Chriſt, and ſo to partake of the Benefit of his Reſurrection, ſtill, as tho' he had not already attain'd, but that he continued to follow after it.

But in as much as a Sinner, in his firſt Juſtification, is forever juſtified and freed from all Obligation to eternal Puniſhment, it hence of neceſſity follows, that future Faith and Repentance are beheld in that Juſtification, as virtually contained in that firſt Faith and Repentance; becauſe Repentance of thoſe future Sins, and Faith in a Redeemer, with Reſpect to them, or, at leaſt, the Continuance of that Habit and Principle in the Heart, that has ſuch an actual Repentance and Faith, in it's Nature and Tendency, is now made ſure by God's Promiſe.

If Remiſſion of Sins, committed after Converſion, in the order of Nature, follows that Faith and Repentance that is after them, then it follows that future Sins are reſpected in the firſt Juſtification, no otherwiſe than as future Faith and Repentance are reſpected in it. And p. 82future Repentance and Faith are looked upon by him that juſtifies, as virtually implied in the firſt Repentance and Faith, in the ſame Manner as Juſtification from future Sins, is virtually implied in the firſt Juſtification; which is the Thing that was to be proved.

On the whole, it appears that the Perſeverance of Faith is neceſſary, even to the Congruity of Juſtification, and that not the leſs, becauſe a Sinner is juſtified, and Perſeverance promiſed on the firſt Act of Faith, but God in that Juſtification has Reſpect not only to the paſt Act of Faith, but to his own Promiſe of future Acts, and to the fitneſs of a Qualification beheld as yet only in his own Promiſe.

And, that Perſeverance in Faith is thus neceſſary to Salvation, not meerly as a ſine qua…non, or as an univerſal Concomitant of it, but by Reaſon of ſuch an Influence and Dependance, ſeems manifeſt by many Scriptures; I would mention two or three; Heb. 3. 6. Whoſe Houſe are we, if we hold faſt the Confidence, and the Rejoycing of the Hope, firm unto the End. Verſe 14. For we are made Partakers of Chriſt, if we hold the beginning of our Confidence, ſtedfaſt unto the End. Chap. 5 12. Be ye followers of them, who through Faith and Patience inherit the Promiſes. Rom 11. 20. Well, becauſe of Unbelief they were broken off, but thou ſtandeſt by Faith: Be not highminded, but fear.

And as the Congruity to a final Juſtification depends on Perſeverance in Faith, as well as the firſt Act, ſo oftentimes the Manifeſtation of Juſtification in the Conſcience, ariſes a great deal more from after Acts, than the firſt Act. And all the difference whereby the firſt Act of Faith has a Concern in this Affair that is peculiar, ſeems to be as it were only an accidental Difference, ariſing from the Circumſtance of Time, or its being firſt in Order of Time; and not from any peculiar Reſpect that God has to it, or any Influence it has of a peculiar Nature, in the Affair of our Salvation.

And thus it is that a truly chriſtian Walk, and the Acts of an evangelical, child like, believing Obedience, are concerned in the Affair of our Juſtification, and ſeem p. 83to be ſometimes ſo ſpoken of in Scripture, viz. as an Expreſſion of a perſevering Faith in the Son of God, the only Saviour. Faith unites to Chriſt, and ſo gives a Congruity to Juſtification, not meerly as remaining a dormant Principle in the Heart, but as being, and appearing in its active Expreſſions.

The Obedience of a Chriſtian, ſo far as it is truly evangelical, and performed with the Spirit of the Son ſent forth into the Heart, has all relation to Chriſt the Mediator, and is but an Expreſſion of the Soul's believing Unition to Chriſt: All evangelical Works are Works of that Faith that worketh by Love; and every ſuch Act of Obedience, wherein it is inward, and the Act of the Soul, is only a new effective Act of Reception of Chriſt, and Adherence to the glorious Saviour. Hence that of the Apoſtle, Gal 2. 20. I live, yet not I; but Chriſt liveth in me; and the Life that I now live in the Fleſh, is by the Faith of the Son of God. And hence we are directed, in whatever we do, whether in Word or Deed▪ to do all in the Name of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt. Col. 3. 17.

And that God in Juſtification has reſpect, not only to the firſt Act of Faith, but alſo to future perſevering Acts, in this Senſe, viz as expreſſed in Life, … ſeems manifeſt by Rom 1. 17. For therein is the Righteouſneſs of God revealed, from Faith to Faith: As it is written, the Juſt ſhall live by Faith. And Heb. 10. 38, 39. Now the Juſt ſhall live by Faith; but if any Man draw back, my Soul ſhall have no Pleaſure in him. But we are not of them that draw back unto Perdition, but of them that believe to the ſaving of the Soul.

So that as was before ſaid of Faith, ſo may it be ſaid of a child like, believing Obedience, it has no concern in Juſtification by any Vertue, or Excellency in it; but only as there is a Reception of Chriſt in it. And this is no more contrary to the Apoſtle's frequent Aſſertion of our being juſtified without the Works of the Law, than to ſay that we are juſtified by Faith; for Faith is as much a Work or act of chriſtian Obedience, as the Expreſſions of Faith, in ſpiritual Life and Walk. And p. 84therefore as we ſay that Faith don't juſtify as a Work, ſo we ſay of all theſe effective Expreſſions of Faith.

This is the reverſe of the Scheme of our modern Divines▪ who hold that Faith juſtifies only as an Act, or Expreſſion of Obedience; whereas in Truth▪ Obedience has no concern in Juſtification, any otherwiſe than as an Expreſſion of Faith.

I now proceed to the

IV. Thing propoſed, viz To anſwer objections.

Object 1 We frequently find Promiſes of eternal Life and Salvation, and ſometimes of Juſtification itſelf, made to our own Vertue and Obedience. Eternal Life is promiſed to Obedience, in Rom. 2 7 To them who by patient Continuance in well doing, ſ…ek for Glory, Honour and Immortality, eternal Life. And the like in innumerable other Places. And Juſtification it ſelf is promiſed to that Vertue of a forgiving Spirit or Temper in us, Mat. 6 14 For if ye forgive Men their Treſpaſſe, your heavenly Father will alſo forgive you; but if ye forgive not Men their Treſpaſſes, neither will your Father forgive your Treſpaſſes. All allow that Juſtification in great Part conſiſts i… the forgiveneſs of Sins.

To this I anſwer,

1 Theſe Things being promiſed to our Vertue and Obedience, argues no more, than that there is a Connection between them and evangelical Obedience; which I have already obſerved is not the Thing in diſpute. All that can be proved by Obedience and Salvation being connected in the Promiſe, is that Obedience and Salvation are connected in fact; which no body denies, and whether it be own'd or denied, is as has been ſhewn, nothing to the Purpoſe. There is no need that an Admiſſion to a Title to Salvation, ſhould be given on the Account of our Obedience, in order to the Promiſes being true. If we find ſuch a Promiſe, that he that obeys ſhall be ſaved, or he that is holy ſhall be juſtified, all that is needful in order to ſuch Promiſes being true, is that it be really ſo, that he that obeys ſhall be ſaved, and that Holineſs and Juſtification ſhall indeed go together: That Propoſition may be a Truth, that p. 85he that obeys ſhall be ſaved, becauſe Obedience and Salvation are connected together in fact; and yet an Acceptance to a Title to Salvation not be granted upon the Account of any of our own Vertue or Obedience. What is a Promiſe, but only a Declaration of future Truth, for the Comfort and Encouragement of the Perſon to whom it is declared? Promiſes are conditional Propoſitions; and as has been already obſerved, it is not the Thing in Diſpute, whether other Things beſides Faith mayn't have the Place of the Condition in ſuch Propoſitions wherein Pardon and Salvation are the conſequent.

2. Promiſes may rationally …e made to Signs and Evidences of Faith, and yet the Thing promiſed not be upon the Account of the Sign, but the Thing ſignified. Thus for Inſtance, human Government may rationally make Promiſes of ſuch and ſuch Priviledges, to thoſe that can ſhew ſuch Evidences of their being free of ſuch a City, or Members of ſuch a Corporation, or deſcended of ſuch a Family; when it is not at all for the ſake of that which is the Evidence or Sign, in it ſelf conſider'd, that they are admitted to ſuch a Priviledge, but only, and purely, for the ſake of that which it is an evidence of.

And tho' God don't ſtand in need of Signs to know whether we have true Faith or not, yet our own Conſciences do; ſo that 'tis much for our Comfort that Promiſes are made to Signs of Faith. A finding in our ſelves a forgiving Temper and Diſpoſition, may be a moſt proper and natural Evidence to our Conſciences that our Hearts have, in a Senſe of our own utter unworthineſs, truly cloſed▪ and fallen in, with the way of free, and infinitely gracious forgiveneſs of our Sins, by Jeſus Chriſt; whence we may be enabled, with the greater Comfort to apply to our ſelves the Promiſes of forgiveneſs by Chriſt.

3. It has been juſt now ſhown▪ how that Acts of evangelical Obedience are indeed concern'd in our Juſtification it ſelf, and are not excluded from that Condition that Juſtification depends upon, without the leaſt Prejudice to that Doctrine of Juſtification by p. 86Faith, without any Goodneſs of our own, that has been maintain'd, and therefore it can be no Objection againſt this Doctrine, that we have ſometimes in Scripture, Promiſes of Pardon and Acceptance, made to ſuch Acts of Obedience.

4. Promiſes of particular Benefits implied in Juſtification and Salvation, may eſpecially be fitly made to ſuch Expreſſions and Evidences of Faith, as they have a peculiar natural Likeneſs and Suitableneſs to: As forgiveneſs is promiſed to a forgiving Spirit in us; obtaining Mercy is fitly promiſed to mercifulneſs in us, and the like: And that upon ſeveral Accounts; they are the moſt natural Evidences of our Heart's cloſing with thoſe Benefits by Faith; for they do eſpecially ſhew the ſweet Accord and Conſent that there is between the Heart and theſe Benefits; and by Reaſon of the natural Likeneſs that there is between the Vertue and the Benefit, the one has the greater Tendency to bring the other to mind; the Practice of the Vertue tends the more to renew the Senſe, and refreſh the Hope of the Bleſſing promiſed; and alſo to convince the Conſcience of the juſtice of being denied the Benefit, if the Duty be neglected.

And beſides the Senſe and Manifeſtation of divine Forgiveneſs in our own Conſciences; yea and many Exerciſes of God's forgiving Mercy, as it reſpects God's fatherly Diſpleaſure, that are granted after Juſtification, thro' the courſe of a chriſtian's Life, may be given as the proper Rewards of the Vertue of a forgiving Spirit, and yet this not be at all to the prejudice of the Doctrine we have maintain'd; as will more fully appear, when we come to anſwer another Objection hereafter to be mention'd.

Object. 2. Our own Obedience, and inherent Holineſs, is neceſſary to prepare Men for Heaven; and therefore is doubtleſs what recommends Perſons to God's Acceptance, as the Heirs of Heaven.

To this I anſwer,

1. Our own Obedience being neceſſary, in order to a Preparation for an actual beſtowment of Glory, is no p. 87Argument that 'tis the Thing, upon the Account of which we are accepted to a Right to it. God may, and does, do many Things to prepare the Saints for Glory, after he has accepted them as the Heirs of Glory. A Parent may do much to prepare a Child for an Inheritance in it's Education, after the Child is an Heir: yea there are many Things neceſſary to fit a Child for the actual Poſſeſſion of the Inheritance, that ben't neceſſary in order to it's having a Right to the Inheritance.

2. If every Thing, that is neceſſary to prepare Men for Glory, muſt be the proper Condition of Juſtification, then perfect Holineſs is the Condition of Juſtification. Men muſt be made perfectly Holy, before they are admitted to the Enjoyment of the bleſſedneſs of Heaven; for there muſt in no wiſe enter in there any ſpiritual Defilement: And therefore when a Saint dies he leaves all his Sin and Corruption, when he leaves the Body.

Object 3. Our Obedience is not only indiſſolubly connected with Salvation, and Preparatory to it, but the Scripture expreſly ſpeaks of beſtowing eternal Bleſſings as Rewards for the good Deeds of the Saints. Math. 10 42. Whoſoever ſhall give to drink, unto one of theſe little ones, a Cup of cold Water, only in the Name of a Diſciple, he ſhall in no wiſe loſe his Reward. 1 Cor. 3. 8. Every Man ſhall receive his own Reward, according to his own Labour. And in many other Places. This ſeems to militate againſt the Doctrine that has been maintain'd, two Ways, 1. The beſtowing a Reward carries in it a Reſpect to a moral Fitneſs, in the Thing rewarded, to the Reward: The very Notion of a Reward being a Benefit beſtowed in Teſtimony of Acceptance of, and reſpect to, the goodneſs or amiableneſs of ſome Qualification or Work, in the Perſon rewarded. And beſides the Scripture ſeems to explain it ſelf in this Matter, in Rev. 3. 4. Thou haſt a few Names, even in Sa…dis, which have not defiled their Garments; and they ſhall walk with me in Whi…e; for they are Worthy This is here given as the Reaſon why they ſhould have ſuch a Reward, becauſe they were Worthy: p. 88Which, tho' we ſuppoſe it to imply no proper Merit, yet it at leaſt implies a moral fitneſs, or that the excellency of their Vertue in God's Sight, recommends them to ſuch a Reward; which ſeems directly repugnant to what has been ſuppoſed, viz That we are accepted, and approved of God, as the Heirs of Salvation, not out of Regard to the Excellency of our own Virtue or Goodneſs, or any moral fitneſs therein to ſuch a Reward, but only on the Account of the Dignity, and moral fitneſs of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs. 2 Our being eternally rewarded for our own Holineſs, and good Works, neceſſarily ſuppoſes that our future Happineſs will be greater or ſmaller, in ſome Proportion, as our own Holineſs and Obedience is more or leſs; and that there are different Degrees of Glory, according to different Degrees of Vertue and good Works, is a Doctrine very expreſly, and frequently taught us in Scripture. But this ſeems quite inconſiſtent with the Saints all having their future bleſſedneſs as a Reward of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs: For if Chriſt's Righteouſneſs be imputed to all, and this be what entitles each one to Glory, then 'tis the ſame Righteouſneſs that entitles one to Glory, which entitles another: But if all have Glory as the Reward of the ſame Righteouſneſs, why han't all the ſame Glory? Don't the ſame Righteouſneſs merit as much Glory, when imputed to one, as when imputed to another.

In Anſwer to the firſt Part of this Objection. I would obſerve, that it don't argue that we are juſtified by our good Deeds, becauſe we ſhall have eternal Bleſſings in Reward for them; for 'tis in Conſequence of our Juſtification, that our good Deeds become rewardable, with ſpiritual and eternal Rewards. The acceptableneſs, and ſo the rewardableneſs of our Vertue is not antecedent to Juſtification, but follows it, and is built entirely upon it; which is the reverſe of what thoſe in the adverſe Scheme of Juſtification ſuppoſe, viz That Juſtification is built on the Acceptableneſs and Rewardableneſs of our Vertue. They ſuppoſe that a ſaving Intereſt in Chriſt is given as a Reward of our Vertue, or (which is p. 89the ſame Thing,) as a Teſtimony of God's Acceptance of our Excellency, in our Vertue. But the contrary is true; that God's reſpect to our Vertue, as our amiableneſs in his Sight, and his Acceptance of it as rewardable, is entirely built on our Intereſt in Chriſt already eſtabliſhed. So that that Relation to Chriſt, whereby Believers in Scripture Language, are ſaid to be in Chriſt, is the very Foundation of our Vertues, and good Deeds, being accepted of God, and ſo of their being rewarded; for a Reward is a Teſtimony of Acceptance. For we, and all that we do, are accepted only in the beloved, Eph 1. 6. Our Sacrifices are acceptable, only through our Intereſt in him, and through his Worthineſs, and Preciouſneſs, being as it were made ours. 1 Pet. 2. 4 5. To whom coming as unto a living Stone, diſallowed indeed of Men, but choſen of God and precious; ye alſo as lively Stones, are built up a ſpiritual Houſe, an holy Prieſthood, to offer up ſpiritual Sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jeſus Chriſt. Here a being actually built on this Stone, precious to God, is mentioned as all the Ground of the Acceptableneſs of our good Works to God, and their becoming, alſo precious in his Eves. So Heb. 13… 21. Make you perfect in every good Work, to do his Will, working in you that which is well pleaſing in his Sight, through Jeſus Chriſt▪ And hence we are directed, whatever we offer to God, to offer it in Chriſt's Name, as expecting to have it accepted no other Way, than from the Value that God has to that Name. Col. 3. 17. And whatſoever ye do, in Word or Deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jeſus, giving Thanks to God, and the Father by him To act in Chriſt's Name, is to act under him, as our Head, and as having him to ſtand for us, and repreſent us to God ward.