{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_64185/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_64185","id":"gutenberg_64185","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/64185","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Religion/Spirituality","Presbyterian Church -- Doctrines","Presbyterianism","Theology, Doctrinal","Westminster Assembly (1643-1652). Larger catechism"],"text":"A Body of Divinity\n\n\n\n\n A BODY OF DIVINITY:\n\n WHEREIN THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION ARE EXPLAINED AND\n DEFENDED.\n\n BEING THE SUBSTANCE OF SEVERAL LECTURES ON THE ASSEMBLY\u2019S LARGER\n CATECHISM.\n\n BY THOMAS RIDGLEY, D. D.\n\n WITH NOTES, ORIGINAL AND SELECTED,\n BY JAMES P. WILSON, D. D.\n\n IN FOUR VOLUMES.\n\n _VOL. III._\n\n FIRST AMERICAN, FROM THE THIRD EUROPEAN EDITION.\n\n PHILADELPHIA:\n\n PRINTED BY AND FOR WILLIAM. W. WOODWARD, CORNER OF CHESNUT AND SOUTH\n SECOND STREETS.\n\n 1815.\n\n\n\n\n THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD VOLUME.\n\n\nQUEST. LXV, LXVI. Of the benefits which the invisible church enjoy by\nChrist.\n\n\n_What these benefits are_, _Page_ 9\n\n _Union with Christ, and Communion in grace and glory_ 10\n\n_Union with Christ illustrated_ 11\n\n _by a conjugal union in particular_ 12\n\n_The elect united to Christ_ 13\n\n _In their effectual calling_ 15\n\n\nQUEST. LXVII, LXVIII. Of effectual calling.\n\n\nThe Gospel-call _described_ 16\n\n _Its difference from effectual calling_ _ibid._\n\n _How far improved without special grace_ 20\n\n _A note_ 19\n\n _Not saving without it_ 20\n\n _Its efficacy depends on the power of God_ 39\n\n _Its issue and consequence_ 26\n\n_Offers of grace explained_ 16\n\n _God\u2019s design therein_ _ibid._\n\n_Effectual calling_ 39\n\n _A work of almighty power_ 40\n\n _A work of grace_ 59\n\n _Wrought by the Spirit_ 54\n\n _This doctrine does not savour of enthusiasm_ 55\n\n _Objections answered_ _ibid._\n\n _His work internal and super-natural_ 57\n\n _Objections answered_ 58\n\n _God\u2019s power and grace irresistible_ 61\n\n _The seasons of effectual calling_ 63\n\n _The state of man before and after it_ 28\n\n _The_ Pelagians\u2019 _notion of it_ 30\n\n _Their account of conversion absurd_ 31\n\n_The nature of human liberty_ 34\n\n_In what respects the will acts freely_ 35\n\n _In what not_ _ibid._\n\n_Regeneration before faith_ 26\n\n _How it differs from conversion_ _ibid._\n\n _A note_ 38\n\n _A principle of grace implanted therein_ 46\n\n _A note_ 45\n\n _Whether good works prepare for it_ 51\n\n _Scriptures thought to prove this explained_ 52\n\n _Man merely passive therein_ 48\n\n _But active after it_ 49\n\n\nQUEST. LXIX. Of Communion with Christ in _grace_ 65\n\n\nQUEST. LXX, LXXI. Of Justification _ibid._\n\n\n_Justification. Its importance_ 66\n\n _Wherein it consisteth_ 67\n\n _The privileges contained in it_ 69\n\n _Pardon and eternal life connected_ 69\n\n _Privileges attending it_ 72\n\n _Its foundation_ 73\n\n _Considered as an act of free-grace_ 74\n\n _Note on righteousness_ 74\n\n _Man cannot work out a righteousness for it_ 75\n\n_Forgiveness of sin explained_ 70\n\n_Christ our surety_ 77\n\n _He suffered and obeyed as such_ 77\n\n _Properties of a surety applied to him_ 78\n\n _The Father accepted him as such_ 79\n\n _What he did as a surety_ 81\n\n _His righteousness imputed for our justification_ 86\n\n_God provided a surety_ 95\n\n _Note on imputation_ 85, 94\n\n _We could not have provided one for ourselves_ 96\n\n\nQUEST. LXXII, LXXIII. Of justifying Faith.\n\n\n_Justifying faith, a note_ 98\n\n_Justification is by Faith_ 99\n\n _This not rightly explained by some_ 104\n\n _Explained agreeably to scripture_ 106\n\n _It cannot be before Faith; how_ 117\n\n _It cannot be by works_ 101\n\n _Not by repentance_ 101\n\n_A full price required by justice_ 103\n\n _Forgiveness free, notwithstanding_ 115\n\n_God reconciled, not made reconcileable by Christ\u2019s death_ 114\n\n_Faith, its various kinds_ 121\n\n _Of the Faith of miracles_ 122\n\n _Of an historical Faith_ 124\n\n _Of a temporary Faith_ 124\n\n_Saving Faith explained_ 125\n\n _Other graces are joined with it_ 99\n\n _But that alone justifies_ _ibid._\n\n _How it justifies a sinner_ 98\n\n _A note_ 110\n\n _It brings in a plea_ 107\n\n _What it pleads_ _ibid._\n\n _How imputed for righteousness_ 112\n\n _Its various objects and acts_ 125\n\n _A note_ 126\n\n _By Faith we receive Christ_ 127\n\n _And give up ourselves to him_ 129\n\n _What this supposes_ 130\n\n _A note_ 128\n\n _Its assent and trust considered_ 119\n\n _Of trust in Christ_ 121\n\n _Its direct and reflex acts_ 132\n\n _When strong, when weak_ 135\n\n _Its use in the conduct of life_ 138\n\n _How it works in common actions_ 138\n\n _How in religious duties_ 140\n\n _How it excites other graces_ 141\n\n _How to be attained and increased_ 142\n\n _How wrought by the word_ 134\n\n\nQUEST. LXXIV. Of Adoption 148\n\n\n_This Adoption differs from Man\u2019s_ 145\n\n _What is understood by sons of God_ 144\n\n_Believers God\u2019s sons in Christ_ 146\n\n _Their privileges as such_ 147\n\n _Privileges consequent upon Adoption_ 149\n\n_How it agrees with justification_ 151\n\n _How with sanctification_ 152\n\n\nQUEST. LXXV. Of Sanctification 152\n\n\n_The meaning of the word Sanctify_ 152\n\n _In Sanctification the soul devoted to God_ 154\n\n _And sin mortified_ _ibid._\n\n_Proper means of mortification_ 155\n\n _Wrong methods taken for it_ 159\n\n _Vivification, what it imports_ 159\n\n_Holiness, motives to it_ 160\n\n _How it differs from moral virtue_ 161\n\n_Heathens have, in some things, excelled Christians_ 163\n\n _And yet were not sanctified_ _ibid._\n\n_Practical inferences from Sanctification_ 165\n\n\nQUEST. LXXVI. Of Repentance unto life 166\n\n\n _Repentance what, a note_ 167\n\n _The subjects of it_ 167\n\n _It is the work of the Holy Spirit_ 169\n\n _How wrought by the word_ 169\n\n _It differs from a legal Repentance_ 172\n\n _Its various acts_ 173\n\n _Inferences from this doctrine_ 175\n\n\nQUEST. LXXVII. Wherein Justification and Sanctification differ 176\n\n\nQUEST. LXXVIII. Of the Imperfection of Sanctification in this life 178\n\n\n_The proof of this Imperfection_ 179\n\n_Why Sanctification not perfected at once_ 182\n\n_Wherein this Imperfection appears_ 183\n\n_The conflict of a renewed soul_ 186\n\n _Of an enlightened conscience_ 184\n\n _Of the spirit against the flesh_ 187\n\n _How this is maintained_ 188\n\n_Consequences when sin prevails_ 190\n\n_Inferences from this Imperfection_ 192\n\n\nQUEST. LXXIX. Of the saints Perseverance in Grace 194\n\n\n_This doctrine explained_ 197\n\n _Preferable to the contrary_ 195\n\n _The Father and the Son glorified by it_ 216\n\n _The saints kept by God\u2019s power_ 199\n\n_This doctrine proved_\n\n _From God\u2019s unchangeable love_ 201\n\n _From the covenant of Grace_ 202\n\n _From the promises_ 203\n\n _An objection answered_ 204\n\n _From the saints union to Christ_ 207\n\n _From Christ\u2019s intercession_ 209\n\n _From the Spirit\u2019s indwelling_ 210\n\n _From_ 2 Tim. ii. 19. 217\n\n_How the saints cannot sin_ 212\n\n_The principle of Grace ever abides_ 213\n\n_Shipwreck made of doctrines_ 218\n\n _Not of the Grace of faith_ 219\n\n_Objections answered, taken_\n\n _From instances of apostacy_ 220\n\n Solomon\u2019s _case cleared_ 221\n\n _He was a true penitent_ 222\n\n _Therefore no apostate_ 224\n\n _From the apostacy of_ Judas 225\n\n _And of the_ Jewish _church_ 226\n\n _From the parable of the debtor_ 238\n\n _From_ Ezek. xviii. 24. 227\n\n Heb. x. 38. 229\n\n Chap. vi. 4-6. 232\n\n Chap. x. 29. 234\n\n 2 Pet. ii. 20-22. 237\n\n 1 Cor. ix. 27. 240\n\n_Inferences from the saints\u2019 Perseverance_ 241\n\n\nQUEST. LXXX. Of Assurance of Salvation 243\n\n\n_What we are to understand by it_ 243\n\n _It is attainable in this life_ 245\n\n _Without extraordinary revelation_ 247\n\n_The Spirit promised, to give it_ 250\n\n _In an ordinary way_ 251\n\n _How it arises from his witness_ 266\n\n_This doctrine savours not of Enthusiasm_ 252\n\n_To whom assurance belongs_ 253\n\n _The means of attaining it_ 254\n\n _Self examination a duty_ 256\n\n _How to be performed_ _ibid._\n\n_Rule for trying marks of grace_ 259\n\n _Uncertain marks of grace_ 260\n\n _True marks of grace_ 262\n\n_What they must do who know not the time of their conversion_ 263\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXI. Some true believers destitute of Assurance 268\n\n\n_What Assurance essential to faith_ 270\n\n _And what not so_ _ibid._\n\n_Texts relating to this explained_ 271\n\n_Assurance may be long waited for_ 272\n\n _Lost by manifold distempers_ 273\n\n _By sins and temptations_ 274\n\n_Deserted believers want Assurance_ 276\n\n _Yet supported by God_ _ibid._\n\n_Inference from this subject_ 278\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXII, LXXXIII. Of Communion in glory with Christ enjoyed in\nthis life 279\n\n\n_Saints have an earnest of glory_ 280\n\n_Wherein this consisteth_ 283\n\n_Of the vision of God by faith_ 284\n\n_The triumphant death of some saints_ 285\n\n_Sinners filled with wrath here_ 288\n\n _Inferences from those terrors_ 290\n\n _And from the saints present joy_ 291\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXIV, LXXXV. Of Death 292\n\n\n_Death, the appointment of God_ 293\n\n _Redounds to the saints advantage_ 297\n\n _Its empire universal_ 294\n\n _Its time uncertain_ 295\n\n _Its sting is sin_ 297\n\n _How it should be improved_ 295\n\n _Its effects on the Spirit, a note_ 300\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXVI. Of the saints Communion with Christ in glory after death\n301\n\n\n_Of the immortality of the soul_ 302\n\n _How this is to be understood_ _ibid._\n\n _Asserted by some Heathens_ 303\n\n _Denied or questioned by others_ 304\n\n _Proved from scripture_ 307\n\n _Objections answered_ 310\n\n_A note_ 311\n\n_The saints perfected at death_ 312\n\n_Of purgatory_ 313\n\n _No proof for it in scripture_ 314\n\n_Heaven the only paradise after death_ 316\n\n_Of the soul\u2019s sleeping at death_ 318\n\n _How this notion is explained_ 320\n\n _How to be opposed_ _ibid._\n\n _Proved to be false from scripture_ 321\n\n_The soul, at death, waits for the full redemption of the body_ 324\n\n_The miseries which the souls of the wicked shall then endure_ 325\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXVII. Of the doctrine of the Resurrection 326\n\n\n_The Resurrection not contrary to reason_ 328\n\n _Clearly revealed in scripture_ 329\n\n_Fabulous accounts, by Heathens, of persons raised from the dead_ 330\n\n _Certain accounts of it in scripture_ 330\n\n_The Resurrection proved_\n\n _From the Old Testament_ 332\n\n _An emblem of it in_ Ezek. xxxvii. 1, _& seq._ 335\n\n _From_ Job xix. 25-27. 337\n\n _From_ Chap. xiv. 13-15. 339\n\n _From_ Dan. xii. 2. 340\n\n _The_ Jews _belief of it_ 335\n\n Abraham\u2019s _belief of it_ 341\n\n _From the New Testament_ 342\n\n _From scripture-consequences_ 345\n\n _From Christ\u2019s dominion_ 346\n\n _Objections answered_ 348\n\n_The Resurrection universal_ 353\n\n Jews _speak obscurely of it_ 355\n\n_The saints shall be raised in glory_ 356\n\n _How raised by the Spirit_ 357\n\n_The saints found alive at Christ\u2019s coming shall be changed_ 356\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXVIII. Of the general and final Judgment 359\n\n\n_A sense of it impressed on conscience_ 360\n\n _Christ shall be the Judge_ 362\n\n _The solemnity of his appearing_ 363\n\n _The manner of his proceeding_ 367\n\n_The persons to be judged_ 365\n\n _Fallen angels, and all men_ 366\n\n_The place of Judgment_ 372\n\n _The time of it_ 373\n\n _The matter of it_ 369\n\n_Whether the sins of the saints shall be published_ 371\n\n_Practical inferences_ 374\n\n\nQUEST. LXXXIX. Of the Punishment of the wicked 376\n\n\n_The punishment of sin in hell_ 377\n\n _Of loss, and sense_ 378\n\n _Its degree and duration_ 379\n\n_How these subjects should be insisted on_ 381\n\n\nQUEST. XC. Of the Privileges and Honours of the saints at the last day\n382\n\n\n_They shall be acknowledged and acquitted_ 383\n\n _They shall judge the world, and angels_ 384\n\n _What meant thereby; qu\u00e6re tamen._ _ibid._\n\n_They shall be received into heaven_ 387\n\n_Whether known to one another there_ 393\n\n_They shall be freed from sin and misery_ 388\n\n _Made perfectly happy_ 389\n\n _And joined with angels_ _ibid._\n\n_Their happiness shall be eternal_ 399\n\n_Of the language of heaven_ 390\n\n_Of the beatific vision and fruition of God_ 399\n\n_A note_ 394, 397\n\n_Of degrees of the heavenly glory_ 399\n\n_Whether any additions shall be made thereunto_ 399\n\n_Inferences from the heavenly happiness_ 403\n\n\nQUEST. XCI, XCII.\n\n\n _Of man\u2019s obligation to obedience_ 405\n\n _Note on the foundation of moral obligation_ 405\n\n _God\u2019s revealed will a law_ 408\n\n\nQUEST. XCIII, XCIV, XCV, XCVI, XCVII. Of the Moral Law 409\n\n\n_What it is_ 410\n\n _What obedience it requires_ 411\n\n_Its sanction_ 412\n\n_Its use to all men_ 413\n\n _To the unregenerate_ 414\n\n _To the regenerate_ 415\n\nAntinomians, _who are such_ 418\n\n_Unguarded expressions hurtful_ 420\n\n\nQUEST. XCVIII. The Moral Law, where summarily comprehended 421\n\n\n_Of the law given from mount_ Sinai 421\n\n _Of the judicial law_ 422\n\n _Of the ceremonial law_ 423\n\n_Holy places, with the vessels thereof_ 424\n\n_Of ministers in holy things_ 426\n\n_Of holy times or festivals_ 427\n\n\nQUEST. XCIX. Rules for the understanding the Ten Commandments 428 to 431\n\n\nQUEST. C, CI, CII. The Sum of the Ten Commandments 432\n\n\n_The preface to them_ 432\n\n_Their division into two tables_ 433\n\n_Remarks on their subject-matter_ 434\n\n_The sum of the first four_ _ibid._\n\n\nQUEST. CIII, CIV. The Duties required in the First Commandment 435 to\n438\n\n\nQUEST. CV, CVI. The Sins forbidden in the First Commandment 438\n\n\n_Of atheistical thoughts_ 439\n\n_Of idolatry. The origin of it_ 443\n\n_Of heart-idolatry_ 447\n\n _In idolizing self_ _ibid._\n\n _In loving the world_ 448\n\n _In regarding the dictates of Satan_ 449\n\n_Of the case of the witch of_ Endor 451\n\nJoseph _no sorcerer_ 452\n\nMoses _no astrologer_ 454\n\n _But learned in all the wisdom of_ Egypt _ibid._\n\n\nQUEST. CVII, CVIII, CIX, CX. An Explication of the Second Commandment\n455\n\n\n_The duties required_ 456\n\n_The sins forbidden_ 459\n\n_The reasons annexed_ 465\n\n_Of Popish superstition_ 460\n\n _Of making to ourselves images_ 461\n\n _Of image-worship and idolatry_ 462\n\n _The Papists guilty of both_ _ibid._\n\n\nQUEST. CXI, CXII, CXIII, CXIV. An Explication of the Third Commandment\n466\n\n\n_The duties required in it_ 468\n\n_The sins forbidden in it_ 469\n\n_The reasons annexed to it_ 476\n\n_Of religious oaths_ 472\n\n _Various forms used therein_ 471\n\n _Swearing by God\u2019s Name a duty_ 470\n\n_Of profane oaths and curses_ 470\n\n_When God\u2019s Name is taken in vain_ 473\n\n\nQUEST. CXV, CXVI. An Explication of the Fourth Commandment 477\n\n\n_The sabbath. Its original institution_ 482\n\n _A note_ _ibid._\n\n _In what respect moral_ 478\n\n _In what positive_ 479\n\n _Its morality proved_ 480\n\n _Objections answered_ 481\n\n _Was no ceremonial institution_ 481\n\n _Its change proved_ 486\n\n _From the example of Christ_ 488\n\n_Objections answered_ 488\n\n _From the practice of the Apostles_ 491\n\n _And of the Christian church_ 494\n\n_The proportion of time to be observed_ 495\n\n\nQUEST. CXVII, CXVIII. Of sanctifying the Sabbath or Lord\u2019s-day 497\n\n\n_The duties preparatory for it_ 497\n\n_The rest required upon that day_ 500\n\n _Works of necessity then lawful_ 502\n\n_The whole day to be sanctified_ 505\n\n_The duties of the evening of that day_ 506\n\n\nQUEST. CXIX, CXX, CXXI. Of Sins forbidden in the Fourth Commandment 508\n\n\n _The omission of holy duties_ 509\n\n _A careless performance of them_ _ibid._\n\n_The reasons annexed to this Commandment_ 510\n\n _Objections answered_ 511\n\n_The import of the word_ Remember 512\n\n _Inferences_ 513\n\n\nQUEST. CXXII. The Sum of the six Commandments, respecting our duty to\nman; or, of doing as we would be done by 514\n\n\nQUESTIONS CXXIII, CXXIV, CXXV, CXXVI, CXXVII, CXXVIII. An Explication of\nthe Fifth Commandment 517\n\n\n_Relations, how founded_ 518\n\n _Duties of each differ_ _ibid._\n\n _Superiors, why called fathers_ _ibid._\n\n_Duties of inferiors to superiors_ 520\n\n _Of children to parents_ _ibid._\n\n _Of servants to masters_ 523\n\n _Of subjects to magistrates_ 525\n\n_The necessity and advantage of civil government_ 524\n\n_Papists arguments for deposing princes, answered_ 526\n\n_The sins of inferiors_ 529\n\n\nQUESTIONS CXXIX, CXXX, CXXXI, CXXXII, CXXXIII. The Duties of superiors,\n_&c._ 530\n\n\n_The duties of parents to their children_ 531\n\n _Of masters to servants_ 533\n\n _Of magistrates to subjects_ 534\n\n_The sins of superiors_ _ibid._\n\n_The duties of equals_ 535\n\n_The sins of equals_ 536\n\n_Reasons annexed to this Commandment_ _ibid._\n\n_Of the promise of long life_ 537\n\n _Old age how far to be desired_ 538\n\n\nQUEST. CXXXVII, CXXXV, CXXXVI. An Explication of the Sixth Commandment\n539\n\n\n_The life of others to be preserved_ 540\n\n _When lawful to take it away_ 541\n\n_Of duels_ 542\n\nElijah _not guilty of murder_ 543\n\n _Nor_ Abraham _in offering_ Isaac 544\n\n _Nor_ Moses _in killing the_ Egyptian 545\n\n_Self-murder a great sin_ _ibid._\n\n _Whether_ Samson _was guilty of it_ 546\n\n_God\u2019s judgments on murderers_ 547\n\n_Sinful anger is heart-murder_ 548\n\n_Passionate men, their sin and guilt_ 549\n\n _How to be dealt with_ 550\n\n\n\n\n THE _DOCTRINES_ OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION EXPLAINED AND DEFENDED.\n\n\n Quest. LXV., LXVI.\n\n\n QUEST. LXV. _What special benefits do the members of the invisible\n church enjoy by Christ?_\n\n ANSW. The members of the invisible church, by Christ, enjoy union\n and communion with him in grace and glory.\n\n QUEST. LXVI. _What is that union which the elect have with Christ?_\n\n ANSW. The union which the elect have with Christ, is the work of\n God\u2019s grace, whereby they are spiritually and mystically, yet really\n and inseparably joined to Christ, as their head and husband, which\n is done in their effectual calling.\n\nWe have, in the foregoing part of this work, considered man as made\nupright at first; but not continuing in that state, plunged into those\ndepths of sin and misery, which would have rendered his state altogether\ndesperate, without the interposition of a Mediator; whose designation to\nthis work, his fitness for, and faithful discharge thereof, have been\nparticularly considered in several foregoing answers, wherein we have\nhad an account of his Person as God-man; his offices of Prophet, Priest,\nand King, his twofold estate, to wit, of humiliation and exaltation; and\nthe benefits which accrue to the church thereby. This church has also\nbeen considered as _visible_ or _invisible_; and the former of these, as\nenjoying many privileges which respect, more especially, the ordinary\nmeans of salvation.\n\nWe are now led to consider the benefits which the members of the\n_invisible_ church, to wit, the whole number of the elect, who have\nbeen, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ, their head,\nenjoy by him. And these are contained in two general heads; namely,\nunion and communion with him in grace and glory; which comprise in them\nthe blessings of both worlds, as the result of their relation to, and\ninterest in him. First, they are united to him, and then made partakers\nof his benefits. All grace imparted to us here, is the result thereof;\nas the apostle says, _Of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made\nunto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption_,\n1 Cor. i. 30. And elsewhere our Saviour says, _He that abideth in me,\nand I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit_, John xv. 5. And the\ncontrary hereunto is inconsistent with the exercise of any grace:\n_Without me ye can do nothing_.\n\nMoreover, that communion which the saints have with Christ in glory,\nwhereby they who are brought to a state of perfection, participate of\nthose graces and comforts which flow from their continued union with\nhim; and the first fruits, or foretastes of glory, which they have in\nthis world, are also founded on it. Thus the apostle calls Christ in his\npeople, _The hope of glory_, Colos. i. 27. and speaking of his giving\neternal life to them, he considers them as being _in his hand_, from\nwhence _none shall pluck them out_, John x. 28. or separate them from\nhim. So that they shall enjoy everlasting happiness with him, inasmuch\nas they shall _be found in him_, Phil. iii. 9. which leads us more\nparticularly to consider,\n\nWhat this union with Christ is. The scripture often speaks of Christ\u2019s\nbeing, or abiding in his people, and they in him; and assigns it as an\nevidence of their interest in the blessings he has purchased for them:\nand, indeed, it is from hence that all internal and practical godliness\nis derived.\n\nThis privilege argues infinite condescension in him, and tends to the\nhighest advancement of those who are the subjects thereof. Now that we\nmay understand what is intended thereby, let us take heed that we do not\ninclude in it any thing that tends to extenuate it on the one hand; or\nto exalt those who are made partakers of it above the station or\ncondition into which they are brought thereby, on the other.\n\nIt is not sufficient to suppose that this union contains in it no more\nthan that his people have the same kind of nature with him, as being\nmade _partakers of flesh and blood_; he having _himself taken part of\nthe same_, Heb. ii. 14. He is indeed allied to us, as having all the\nessential perfections of our nature: and this was an instance of\ninfinite condescension in him, and absolutely necessary to our\nredemption: nevertheless, this similitude of nature; abstracted from\nother considerations, accompanying or flowing from his incarnation,\ncontains in it no other idea of union, between Christ and his people,\nthan that which they have with one another; nor is it a privilege\npeculiar to believers, since Christ took on him the same human nature\nthat all men have, though with a peculiar design of grace to those whom\nhe came to redeem. This I the rather take notice of, because the\nSocinians, and others, that speak of this privilege, inasmuch as it is\noften mentioned in scripture, appear to have very low thoughts of it,\nwhen they suppose nothing more than this to be intended thereby.\n\nAgain, this union includes in it more than what is contained in that\nmutual love that is between Christ and believers, in that sense in which\nthere is an union of affection between those who love one another; as it\nis said, _The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David; and\nJonathan loved him as his own soul_, 1 Sam. xviii. 1. In which respect\nbelievers are united to one another; or, as the apostle expresses it,\ntheir hearts are _knit together in love_, Col. ii. 2. _being like\nminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind_, Phil.\nii. 2. or, as he adds, _Let this mind also be in you, which was also in\nChrist Jesus_, ver. 5. I say it includes more than this, which is rather\nthe fruit and consequence of our union with Christ, than that wherein it\nprincipally consists.\n\nMoreover we must take heed that we do not, in explaining this union\nbetween Christ and believers, include more in it than what belongs to\ncreatures infinitely below him, to whom they are said to be united:\ntherefore we cannot but abhor the blasphemy of those who speak of an\nessential union of creatures with God; or, as though they had hereby\nsomething derived to them in common with Christ the great Mediator.[1]\n\nBut passing by this method of accounting for the union between Christ\nand believers, there are two senses in which it is taken in scripture;\none is, that which results from Christ\u2019s being their federal head,\nrepresentative, or surety; having undertaken to deal with the justice of\nGod in their behalf, so that what he should do, as standing in this\nrelation to them, should be placed to their account, as much as though\nit had been done by them in their own persons: this is what contains in\nit their concern in the covenant of grace, made with him in their\nbehalf; of which something has been said under a foregoing answer;[2]\nand it is the foundation of their sins being imputed to him, and his\nrighteousness to them; which will be farther considered, when we treat\nof the doctrine of justification under a following answer.[3]\n\nTherefore this union with Christ, which is mentioned in the answer we\nare now explaining, is of another nature, and, in some respects, may be\nproperly styled a _vital union_, as all spiritual life is derived from\nit; or a _conjugal union_, as it is founded in consent, and said to be\nby faith. Now there are two things observed concerning it.\n\n1. It is expressed by our being spiritually and mystically joined to\nChrist: it is styled a _spiritual_ union, in opposition to those gross\nand carnal conceptions which persons may entertain concerning things\nbeing joined together in a natural way; and, indeed, whatever respects\nsalvation is of a spiritual nature.\n\nIt is moreover called a _mystical_ union, which is the word most used by\nthose who treat on this subject; and the reason is, because the apostle\ncalls it _a great mystery_, Eph. v. 32. by which we are not to\nunderstand the union there is between man and wife, as contained in the\nsimilitude by which he had before illustrated this doctrine, as the\nPapists pretend,[4] but the union that there is between Christ and his\nchurch. And it is probably styled _a mystery_, because it could never\nhave been known without divine revelation: and as Christ\u2019s\ncondescension, expressed herein, can never be sufficiently admired; so\nit cannot be fully comprehended by us. This is such a nearness to him,\nand such a display of love in him _as passeth knowledge_. However, there\nare some similitudes used in scripture to illustrate it. As,\n\n(1.) The union that there is between the _vine_ and the _branches_, John\nxv. 1, 2, 5. whereby life, nourishment, growth and fruitfulness are\nconveyed to them: in like manner all our spiritual life together, with\nthe exercise and increase of grace, depend on our union with, abiding\nin, and deriving what is necessary thereunto, from him.\n\n(2.) It is also compared to the union there is between the _head_ and\n_members_, as the apostle farther illustrates it, when he styles _him\nthe head, from which all the body, by joints and bands, having\nnourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase\nof God_, Col. ii. 19. which is a very beautiful similitude, whereby we\nare given to understand, that as the head is the fountain of life and\nmotion to the whole body, as the nerves and animal spirits take their\nrise from thence, so that if the communication that there is between\nthem and it, be stopped, the members would be useless, dead, and\ninsignificant: so Christ is the fountain of spiritual life and motion,\nto all those who are united to him.\n\n(3.) This union is farther illustrated, by a similitude taken from that\nunion which there is between the foundation and the building; and\naccordingly Christ is styled, in scripture, _the chief corner stone_,\nEph. ii. 20. and a _sure foundation_, Isa. xxviii. 16. And there is\nsomething peculiar in that phrase which the apostle uses, which is more\nthan any similitude can express; when he speaks of Christ as the _living\nstone_, or rock, on which the church is built; and of believers, as\n_lively stones_, 1 Pet. ii. 4, 5. to denote, that they are not only\nsupported and upheld by him, as the building is by the foundation, but\nenabled to put forth living actions, as those whose life is derived from\nthis union with him.\n\n(4.) There is another similitude taken from that nourishment which the\nbody receives, by the use of food; and therefore our Saviour styles\nhimself the _bread of life_, or the _bread which cometh down from\nheaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die_; and proceeds to speak\nof his _giving his flesh for the life of the world_; and adds, _he that\neateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him_,\nJohn vi. 48-56.\n\n(5.) There is another similitude, by which our being united to Christ by\nfaith, is more especially illustrated, taken from the union which there\nis between man and wife; accordingly this is generally styled, a\nconjugal union, between Christ and believers. Thus the prophet says,\n_Thy Maker is thine Husband, the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy\nRedeemer, the holy One of Israel_, Isa. liv. 5. And the apostle,\nspeaking of a man\u2019s _leaving his father and mother, and being joined\nunto his wife, and they two being one flesh_, Eph. v. 31, 32. applies\nit, as was before observed, to the union that there is between Christ\nand the church; and adds, that _we are members of his body, of his\nflesh, and of his bones_, ver. 30. which expression, if not compared\nwith other scriptures, would be very hard to be understood; but it may\nbe explained by the like phraseology, used elsewhere. Thus, when God\nformed Eve at first, and brought her to Adam, and thereby joined them\ntogether in a conjugal relation: he says upon this occasion, _This is\nnow bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh_, Gen. ii. 23. And we find\nalso, that other relations, which are more remote than this, are\nexpressed by the same mode of speaking. Thus Laban says to Jacob,\n_Surely thou art my bone and my flesh_, Gen. xxix. 14. And Abimelech\npleading the relation he stood in to the men of Shechem, as a pretence\nof his right to reign over them, tells them, _I am your bone and your\nflesh_, Judges ix. 2. Therefore the apostle makes use of the same\nexpression, agreeably to the common mode of speaking used in scripture,\nto set forth the conjugal relation which there is between Christ and\nbelievers.\n\nThe apostle, indeed, elsewhere alters the phrase, when he says, _He that\nis joined to the Lord is one Spirit_, 1 Cor. vi. 17. which is so\ndifficult an expression, that some who treat on this subject, though\nconcluding that there is in it something that denotes the intimacy and\nnearness of this union, and more than what is contained in the other\nphrase, of their _being one flesh_, nevertheless, reckon it among those\nexpressions which are inexplicable; though I cannot but give into the\nsense in which some understand it; namely, that inasmuch as the same\nSpirit dwells in believers that dwelt in Christ, though with different\nviews and designs, they are hereby wrought up, in their measure, to the\nsame temper and disposition; or as it is expressed elsewhere, _The same\nmind_ is in them _that_ was _in Christ_, Phil. ii. 5. which is such an\neffect of this conjugal relation that there is between him and them, as\nis not always the result of the same relation amongst men. The reason\nwhy I call this our being united to Christ, by faith, is because it is\nfounded in a mutual consent; as _the Lord avouches them_ on the one\nhand, _to be his people_, so they, on the other hand, _avouch him to be\ntheir God_, Deut. xxvi. 17, 18. the latter of which is, properly\nspeaking, an act of faith; whereby they give up themselves to be his\nservants, to all intents and purposes, and that for ever.\n\nIt is farther observed in this answer. That union with Christ is a work\nof God\u2019s grace: this it must certainly be, since it is the spring and\nfountain from whence all acts of grace proceed; and indeed, from the\nnature of the thing, it cannot be otherwise: for if there be a wonderful\ninstance of condescending grace in God\u2019s conferring those blessings that\naccompany salvation; this may much more be deemed so. If Christ be\npleased to _dwell_ with, and _in_ his people, and to _walk_ _in_ them, 2\nCor. vi. 16. or as it is said elsewhere, to _live in them_, Gal. ii. 20.\nas a pledge and earnest of their being forever with him in heaven; and\nif, as the result hereof, they be admitted to the greatest intimacy with\nhim; we may from hence take occasion to apply what was spoken by one of\nChrist\u2019s disciples, to him, with becoming humility and admiration; _how\nis it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?_\nJohn xiv. 22. Is it not a great instance of grace, that the Son of God\nshould make choice of so mean an habitation, as that of the souls of\nsinful men; and not only be present with, but united to them in those\ninstances which have been before considered?\n\n2. It is farther observed in this answer, that we are united to Christ\nin effectual calling; which leads us to consider what is contained in\nthe two following answers.\n\nFootnote 1:\n\n _The first that seems to use this unsavoury mode of speaking, is\n Gregory Nazianzen; who did not consider how inconsistent some of those\n rhetorical ways of speaking, he seems fond of, are with that doctrine,\n which, in other parts of his writings, he maintained. Those words_\n \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, _and_ \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, _which he sometimes uses to express the\n nature, or consequence of this union between Christ and believers, are\n very disgustful. In one place of his writings, (Vid. ejusd. Orat. 41.)\n exhorting Christians to be like Christ, he says, That because he\n became like unto us_, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, efficiamur Dii propter\n ipsum; _and elsewhere, (in Orat. 35. de Folio.) he says_, Hic homo\n Deus effectus postea quam cum Deo coaluit \u1f31\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2\n \u1f41\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03ba \u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bfc \u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b8\u03b7, ut ipse quoque tantum Deus efficiar\n quantum ipse homo. _And some modern writers have been fond of the same\n mode of speaking, especially among those who, from their mysterious\n and unintelligible mode of expressing themselves, have rather exposed\n than defended the doctrines of the gospel. We find expressions of the\n like nature in a book put forth by Luther, which is supposed to be\n written by Taulerus, before the Reformation, called Theologia\n Germanica, and some others, since that time, such as Parcelsus,\n Swenckfelt, Weigelius, and those enthusiasts, that have adhered to\n their unintelligible and blasphemous modes of speaking._\n\nFootnote 2:\n\n _See Vol. II. Quest. 31. page 167._\n\nFootnote 3:\n\n _Quest. 70._\n\nFootnote 4:\n\n _This is the principal, if not the only scripture, from which they\n pretend to prove marriage to be a sacrament, and they argue thus. The\n Greek church had no other word to express what was afterwards called a\n sacrament by the Latin church, but_ \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, a mystery: _therefore\n since the apostle calls marriage, as they suppose, a mystery, they\n conclude that it is a sacrament; which is a very weak foundation for\n inserting it among those sacraments which they have added to them that\n Christ had instituted; for the sacraments are no where called\n mysteries in scripture: and therefore we are not to explain doctrines\n by words which were not used till some ages after the apostles\u2019 time:\n and if there were any thing in their argument_, viz. _that that which\n is called a mystery in scripture, must needs be a sacrament, it does\n not appear that the apostle calls marriage_ a great mystery, _but the\n union that there is between Christ and his church; as he expressly\n says in the following words_; I speak concerning Christ and the\n church.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXVII., LXVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXVII. _What is effectual calling?_\n\n ANSW. Effectual calling is the work of God\u2019s almighty power and\n grace; whereby, out of his free and special love to his elect, and\n from nothing in them moving him thereunto, he doth, in his accepted\n time, invite and draw them to Jesus Christ by his word and Spirit,\n savingly enlightening their minds, renewing, and powerfully\n determining their wills; so as they, although in themselves dead in\n sin, are hereby made willing and able, freely to answer his call,\n and to accept and embrace the grace offered and conveyed therein.\n\n QUEST. LXVIII. _Are the elect effectually called?_\n\n ANSW. All the elect, and they only, are effectually called; although\n others may be, and often are, outwardly called by the ministry of\n the word, and have some common operations of the Spirit; who, for\n their wilful neglect and contempt of the grace offered to them,\n being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus\n Christ.\n\nWe have, in these answers, an account of the first step that God takes,\nin applying the redemption purchased by Christ; which is expressed, in\ngeneral, by the word _calling_; whereby sinners are invited, commanded,\nencouraged, and enabled, to come to Christ, in order to their being made\npartakers of his benefits: the apostle styles it an _high_, _holy_, and\n_heavenly calling_, Phil. iii. 14. 2 Tim. i. 9. Heb. iii. 1. and a being\n_called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord_, 1 Cor. i.\n8. Herein we are _called out of darkness into his marvellous light_, 1\nPet. ii. 9. and _to his eternal glory by Jesus Christ_, chap. v. 10.\nAnd, indeed, the word is very emphatical: For,\n\n1. A call supposes a person to be separate, or at a distance from him\nthat calls him; and it contains an intimation of leave to come into his\npresence. Thus, in effectual calling, he who was departed from God, is\nbrought nigh to him. God, as it were, says to him, as he did to Adam,\nwhen flying from him, and dreading nothing so much as his presence, when\napprehending himself exposed to the stroke of his vindictive justice,\n_Where art thou?_ Gen. iii. 9. which is styled, _God\u2019s calling unto\nhim_. Or, it is like as when a traveller is taking a wrong way, and in\ndanger of falling into some pit, or snare; and a kind friend calls after\nhim to return, and sets him in the right way: thus God calls to sinners,\nor says, as the prophet expresses it; _Thine ears shall hear a word\nbehind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it; when ye turn to the\nright hand, and when ye turn to the left_.\n\n2. Herein God deals with men as reasonable creatures; which is by no\nmeans to be excluded from our ideas of the work of grace; though this\nwork contain in it some superior, or supernatural methods of acting, in\norder to bring it about; yet we may be under a divine influence, as\nturning to God, or effectually called by him, and accordingly acted by a\nsupernatural principle; and at the same time our understandings, or\nreasoning powers, not rendered useless, but enlightened or improved\nthereby; by which means, every thing that we do, in obedience to the\ncall of God, appears to be most just and reasonable. This gives no\nground for any one to conclude, that, according to our method of\nexplaining this doctrine, we lay ourselves open to the absurd\nconsequence fastened upon it; as though God dealt with us as stocks and\nstones: but more of this may be considered under a following head.\n\nWe now proceed, more particularly, to consider the subject-matter of\nthese two answers; wherein we have an account of the difference between\nthe _external_ call of the gospel, which is explained in the latter of\nthem, and the _internal_, saving, and powerful call, which is justly\ntermed _effectual_; and is considered in the former of them. And,\n\n_First_, Concerning the outward and common call, together with the\npersons to whom it is given; the design of God in giving it, and also\nthe issue thereof, with respect to a great number of those who are said\nto be called.\n\nThe reason why we choose to insist on this common call, in the first\nplace, is because it is antecedent, and made subservient to the other in\nthe method of the divine dispensation; inasmuch as we are first favoured\nwith the word and ordinances, and then they are made effectual to\nsalvation.\n\n1. Therefore we shall consider what we are to understand by this common\ncall.\n\nIt is observed, that it is by the ministry of the word, in which Christ\nis set forth in his person and offices, and sinners are called to come\nto him; and in so doing, to be made partakers of the blessings which he\nhas purchased. This is the sum and substance of the gospel-ministry; and\nit is illustrated Matt. xxii. 1, & _seq._ by the parable of the\n_marriage-feast_, which the _king made for his son, and sent his\nservants_; by which is signified gospel-ministers, to _call_ or invite,\nand therein to use all persuasive arguments to prevail with persons to\ncome to it: this is styled their being _called_. And the observation\nmade on persons refusing to comply with this call, when it is said,\n_Many are called, but few are chosen_, ver. 14. plainly intimates, that\nour Saviour here means no other than a common or ineffectual call. And\nin another parable it is illustrated by an _householder\u2019s hiring\nlabourers into his vineyard_, Matt. xx. 1, & _seq._ at several hours of\nthe day: some were hired early in the morning, at the _third hour_;\nothers at the _sixth_ and _ninth_; which denotes the gospel-call, that\nthe Jewish church had to come to Christ before his incarnation, under\nthe ceremonial law; and others were hired at the _eleventh_ hour,\ndenoting those who were called, at that time, by the ministry of Christ\nand his disciples: that this was only a common and external call, is\nevident, not only from the intimation that they, who had _borne the\nburden and heat of the day_; that is, for many ages had been a\nprofessing people, _murmured_, because others, who were called at the\neleventh hour, had an equal share in his regard; but also from what is\nexpressly said, (the words are the same with those wherewith the other\nparable before-mentioned, is closed) _Many are called, but few are\nchosen_, ver. 16.\n\nMoreover, the apostle intends this common call, when he speaks of some\nwho have been _called into the grace of Christ_; not called by the power\nand efficacious grace of Christ, as denoting that the call was\neffectual; but called, or invited to come and receive the grace of\nChrist; or called externally, and thereby prevailed on to embrace the\ndoctrine of the grace of Christ: these are said to be _soon removed unto\nanother gospel_, Gal. i. 6. And elsewhere, chap. v. 7. he speaks of\nsome, who, when _the truth_, or the doctrines of the gospel, were first\npresented to them, expressed, for a time, a readiness to receive it;\nupon which account he says, _Ye did run well_, or, ye began well; but\nyet they did not afterwards yield the obedience of faith, to that truth\nwhich they seemed, at first, to have a very great regard: upon which\noccasion the apostle says, _This persuasion cometh not of him that\ncalleth you_, ver. 8.\n\nThey who express some regard to this call, are generally said to have\n_common_ grace, as contradistinguished from others, who are under the\npowerful, and efficacious influences of the Spirit, which are styled\n_special_. The former of these are oftentimes under some impressive\ninfluences by the common work of the Spirit, under the preaching of the\ngospel; who, notwithstanding, are in an unconverted state; their\nconsciences are sometimes awakened, and they bring many charges and\naccusations against themselves; and from a dread of the consequences\nthereof, abstain from many enormous crimes, as well as practise several\nduties of religion; they are also said to be made partakers of some\ngreat degrees of restraining grace; and all this arises from no other\nthan the Spirit\u2019s common work of conviction; as he is said, _to reprove\nthe world of sin_, John xvi. 8.\n\nThese are styled, in this answer, the common operations of the Spirit:\nthey may be called operations, inasmuch as they contain in them\nsomething more than God\u2019s sending ministers to address themselves to\nsinners, in a way of persuasion or arguing; for, the Spirit of God deals\nwith their consciences under the ministry of the word. It is true, this\nis no more than common grace; yet it may be styled the Spirit\u2019s work:\nfor though the call be no other than common, and the Spirit considered\nas an external agent, inasmuch as he never dwells in the hearts of any\nbut believers, yet the effect produced, is internal in the mind and\nconsciences of men, and, in some degree, in the will; which is almost\npersuaded to comply with it. These operations are sometimes called the\nSpirit\u2019s _striving with man_, Gen. vi. 3. but inasmuch as many of these\ninternal motions are said to be resisted and quenched, when persons\nfirst act contrary to the dictates of their consciences, and afterwards\nwholly extinguish them; therefore the Spirit\u2019s work in those whom he\nthus calls, is not effectual or saving; these are not united to Christ\nby his Spirit, nor by faith; and this is generally styled common grace,\nin speaking to which, we shall consider,\n\n(1.) That there are some things presented to us, in an objective way,\nwhich contain the subject matter of the gospel, or that call, which is\ngiven to sinners to pursue those methods, which, by divine appointment,\nlead to salvation. As _faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word\nof God_, Rom. x. 17. so do common convictions, and whatever carries in\nit the appearance of grace in the unregenerate. In this respect God\ndeals with men as intelligent creatures, capable of making such\nimprovement of those instructions and intimations, as may tend, in many\nrespects, to their advantage. This must be supposed, or else the\npreaching of the gospel could not be reckoned an universal blessing to\nthem who are favoured with it, abstracting from those saving advantages\nwhich some are to receive hereby. This is here called the grace which is\noffered to them, who are outwardly called, by the ministry of the word.\n\nOffers of grace, and invitations to come to Christ, are words used by\nalmost all who have treated on this subject: though some, of late, have\nbeen ready to conclude, that these modes of speaking tend to overthrow\nthe doctrine we are maintaining; for they argue to this purpose; that an\noverture, or invitation, supposes a power in him to whom it is given to\ncomply with it. Did I think this idea necessarily contained in these\nwords, I should rather choose to substitute others in the room of them:\nhowever, to remove prejudices, or unjust representations, which the use\nthereof may occasion, either here or elsewhere, I shall briefly give an\naccount of the reason why I use them, and what I understand thereby. If\nit be said, This mode of speaking is not to be found in scripture; this,\nit is true, should make us less tenacious of it. Nevertheless, it may be\nused without just offence given, if it be explained agreeably\nthereunto.[5] Therefore let it be considered,\n\n(2.) That the presenting an object, whatever it be, to the understanding\nand will, is generally called, an _offering_ it; as God says to David,\nfrom the Lord; _I offer thee three things, choose thee one of them_, &c.\n1 Sam. xxiv. 12. So if God sets before us life and death, blessing and\ncursing, and bids us choose which we will have; this is equivalent to\nwhat is generally called, an offer of grace.\n\nAnd as for invitations to come to Christ, it is plain, that there are\nmany scriptures that speak to that purpose; namely, when it is said, _In\nthe last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried,\nsaying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink_, John vii.\n37. And, _Ho every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters_, Isa. lv.\n1. And elsewhere Christ says, _Come unto me all ye that labour, and are\nheavy laden, and I will give you rest_, Matt. xi. 28. And, _Let him that\nis athirst come; and whosoever will, let him take of the water of life\nfreely_, Rev. xxii. 17.\n\n(3.) When an offer, or invitation to accept of a thing, thus objectively\npresented to us, is made, it always supposes the valuableness thereof;\nand how much it would be our interest to accept of it; and that it is\nour indispensable duty so to do; which are the principal ideas that I\nintend, in my sense of the word, when I speak of offers of grace in the\ngospel, or invitations to come to Christ. Nevertheless, taking them in\nthis sense, does not necessarily infer a power in us to accept them,\nwithout the assistance of divine grace: thus it may be said, that Christ\ncame into the world to save sinners; and that he will certainly apply\nthe redemption, which he has purchased, to all, for whom this price was\ngiven; and also, that a right to salvation is inseparably connected with\nfaith and repentance; and that these, and all other graces are God\u2019s\ngifts; and that we are to pray, wait, and hope for them, under the\nministry of the word; and if we be, in God\u2019s own time and way, enabled\nto exercise these graces, this will be our unspeakable advantage: and\ntherefore it cannot but be our duty to attend upon God in all his holy\ninstitutions, in hope of saving blessings: these things may be done; and\nconsequently the gospel may be thus preached, without supposing that\ngrace is in our own power: and this is what we principally intend by\ngospel-overtures or invitations.\n\n(4.) Nevertheless we cannot approve of some expressions subversive of\nthe doctrine of special redemption, how moving and pathetic soever they\nmay appear to be; as when any one, to induce sinners to come to Christ,\ntells them, that God is willing, and Christ is willing, and has done his\npart, and the Spirit is ready to do his; and shall we be unwilling, and\nthereby destroy ourselves? Christ has purchased salvation for us: the\nSpirit offers his assistances to us; and shall we refuse these\novertures? Christ invites us to come to him, and leaves it to our\nfree-will, whether we will comply with, or reject these invitations: he\nis, at it were, indeterminate, whether he shall save us or no, and\nleaves the matter to our own conduct; we ought therefore to be persuaded\nto comply with the invitation. This method of explaining offers of\ngrace, and invitations, to come to Christ, is not what we intend when we\nmake use of these expressions.\n\n2. We are now to consider the persons to whom this common call is given.\nIt is indefinite, not directed only to the elect, or those, with respect\nto whom God designs to make it effectual to their salvation; for,\naccording to the commission which our Saviour gave to his apostles, the\ngospel was to be preached to all nations, or to every creature in those\nplaces to which it was sent: and the reason of this is obvious; namely,\nbecause the counsel of God, concerning election, is secret, and not to\nbe considered as the rule of human conduct; nor are they, whom God is\npleased to employ in preaching the gospel, supposed to know whether he\nwill succeed their endeavours, by enabling those who are called, to\ncomply with it.\n\n3. We shall now shew how far the gospel-call may, without the superadded\nassistance of special grace, be improved by men, in order to their\nattaining some advantage by it, though short of salvation: this may be\ndone in two respects.\n\n(1.) Gross enormous crimes may hereby be avoided: this appears in many\nunconverted persons, who not only avoid, but abhor them; being induced\nhereunto by something in nature that gives an aversion to them. And it\nmay be farther argued, from the liableness of those who commit them, to\npunishment in proportion to their respective aggravations; which must\neither suppose in man, a power to avoid them: or else, the greatest\ndegree of punishment would be the result of a necessity of nature, and\nnot self-procured by any act of man\u2019s will; though all suppose the will\nto be free, with respect to actions that are sinful. It would be a very\npoor excuse for the murderer to allege, that he could not govern his\npassion, but was under an unavoidable necessity to take away the life of\nanother. Shall the man that commits those sins, which are contrary to\nnature, say, That his natural temper and disposition is so much inclined\nthereunto, that he could, by no means, avoid them? If our natural\nconstitution be so depraved and vitiated, that it leads us, with an\nuncommon and impetuous violence, to those sins that we were not formerly\ninclined to: whence does this arise, but from the habits of vice, being\nincreased by a wilful and obstinate continuance therein, and many\nrepeated acts which they have produced? and might not this, at least, in\nsome degree, have been avoided? We must distinguish between habits of\nsin, that immediately flow from the universal corruption of nature, and\nthose that have taken deeper root in us, by being indulged, and exerting\nthemselves, without any endeavours used, to restrain and give a check to\nthem.\n\nAnd if it be supposed that our natures are more habitually inclined to\nsin than once they were, might we not so far use the liberty of our\nwills, as to avoid some things, which, we are sensible, will prove a\ntemptation to those particular acts thereof; whereby the corruption of\nnature, that is so prone to comply with it, might be in some measure,\nrestrained, though not overcome: this may be done without converting\ngrace; and consequently some great sins may be avoided. To deny this,\nwould be not only to palliate, but open a door to all manner of\nlicentiousness.\n\n(2.) Man has a power to do some things that are materially good; though\nnot good in all those circumstances in which actions are good that\naccompany or flow from regenerating grace. Ahab\u2019s humility, 1 Kings xxi.\n29. and Nineveh\u2019s repentance, Jonah iii. 5. and seq. arose from the\ndread they had of the divine threatenings; which is such an inducement\nto repentance and reformation, as takes its rise from nothing more than\nthe influence of common grace. Herod himself, though a vile person,\n_feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy: and when he\nheard him, did many things, and heard him gladly_, Mark vi. 20. And the\nGentiles are said to _do by nature, the things_; that is, some things\n_contained in the law_; insomuch that _they are a law unto themselves_,\nRom. ii. 14. Therefore they did them by the influence of common grace.\nAnd these things, namely, abstaining from grosser sins, and doing some\nactions materially good, have certainly some advantage attending them;\nas thereby the world is not so much like hell as it would otherwise be:\nand as to what respects themselves, a greater degree of punishment is\nhereby avoided.\n\n3. We are now to consider the design of God in giving this common call\nin the gospel, which cannot be the salvation of all who are thus called:\nthis is evident; because all shall not be saved; whereas, if God had\ndesigned their salvation, he would certainly have brought it about;\nsince his purpose cannot be frustrated. To say that God has no\ndeterminations relating to the success of the gospel, reflects on his\nwisdom: and to conclude that things may happen contrary to his purpose,\nargues a defect of power; as though he could not attain the ends he\ndesigned: but this having before been insisted on, under the heads of\nelection and special redemption, I shall pass it by at present, and only\nconsider, that the ends which God designed in giving the gospel, were\nsuch as were attained by it, namely, the salvation of those who shall\neventually be saved, the restraining of those who have only common\ngrace, and the setting forth the glorious work of redemption by Jesus\nChrist; which, as it is the wonder of angels, who desire to look into\nit; so it is hereby designed to be recommended as worthy of the highest\nesteem, even in those who cast contempt on it: and hereby they are\nconvicted, who shut their eyes against, and neglect to behold that\nglorious light which shines so brightly therein.\n\n_Object._ To this it is objected, that if Christ invites and calls men\nto come to him, as he often does in the New Testament; and when they\nrefuse to do it, mentions their refusal with a kind of regret; as when\nhe says, _Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life_, John v. 40.\nthis, they suppose, is no other than an insult on mankind, a bidding\nthem come without the least design that they should; as if a magistrate\nshould go to the prison door, and tell the unhappy man, who is not only\nunder lock and key, but loaded with irons, that he would have him leave\nthat place of misery and confinement, and how much he should rejoice, if\nhe would come out; and upon that condition, propose to him several\nhonours that he has in reserve for him: this, say they, is not to deal\nseriously with him. And if the offer of grace in the gospel, answers the\nsimilitude, as they suppose it exactly does, then there is no need for\nany thing farther to be replied to it; the doctrine confutes itself; as\nit argues the divine dealings with men illusory.\n\n_Answ._ This similitude, how plausible soever it may appear to be to\nsome, is far from giving a just representation of the doctrine we are\nmaintaining: for when the magistrate is supposed to signify his desire\nthat the prisoner would set himself free, which he knows he cannot do;\nhereby it is intimated, that though God knows that the sinner cannot\nconvert himself, yet he commands him to do it, or to put forth\nsupernatural acts of grace, though he has no principle of grace in him:\nbut let it be considered, that this God no where commands any to do.[6]\nOur Saviour intends as much as this, when he speaks of the _tree\u2019s being\nmade good_, before the fruit it produces can be so, Matt. xii. 33. or\nthat it is impossible for _men to gather grapes of thorns, or figs of\nthistles_, chap. vii. 17. implying, that there must be an internal\ndisposition wrought, before any acts of grace can he put forth: this is\nsupposed in the preaching of the gospel, or the call to sinners to\nrepent and believe, which they have no reason to conclude that they can\ndo without the aids of divine grace, and these they are to wait, pray\nand hope for, in all God\u2019s instituted methods.\n\nMoreover, as for those promises which are made to us, if we would\nrelease ourselves from the chains of sin, and the account given, how\nmuch God would rejoice in our being set free, when the thing is, in\nitself, impossible; this is no otherwise true than as it contains a\ndeclaration of the connexion there is between conversion and salvation,\nor freedom from the slavery of sin, and God\u2019s conferring many spiritual\nhonours and privileges on those who are converted; not that it does, in\nthe least, denote that it is in our own power to convert ourselves: but\nthat this may be more clearly understood, we shall consider it with\nrelation to the two branches before mentioned, and so speak of God,\neither as commanding, calling, and inviting men to do what is out of\ntheir power, namely, to repent, and believe; or else, as holding forth\npromises of that salvation which they shall not attain; because these\ngraces are out of their power, which contains the substance of what is\nusually objected against the doctrine we are maintaining, by those who\nare on the other side of the question; who suppose that this method of\nprocedure is illusory, and therefore unbecoming the divine perfections.\nAnd,\n\n1. Concerning God\u2019s commanding, calling, and inviting men to do what is\nout of their own power; as for instance, bidding a dead man to arise, or\none that is blind to see, or those that are shut up in prison, to come\nout from thence. This is to be explained, and then, perhaps, the\ndoctrine we are maintaining, will appear to be less exceptionable. We\nhave, elsewhere, in defending the head of particular redemption, against\nan objection not much unlike to this, considered how Christ is said to\nbe offered in the gospel,[7] or in what sense the overture may be said\nto be made to all that are favoured with it; and yet the efficacy\nthereof, only extend to those whom Christ has redeemed, and shall be\neffectually called. But that we may a little farther explain this\nmatter, let us consider,\n\n(1.) That the gospel contains a declaration, that God designs to save a\npart of this miserable world; and, that in subserviency thereunto, he\nhas given them a discovery of Christ, as the object of faith, and the\npurchaser and author of salvation.\n\n(2.) He does not therein give the least intimation to any, while in a\nstate of unregeneracy, that they shall be enabled to believe: and, as\nthe consequence thereof, be saved. Their names, characters, or places of\nabode, or their natural embellishments, who shall attain this privilege,\nare no where pointed at in scripture; nor is the book of God\u2019s secret\npurpose, concerning election to eternal life, opened, so as that any one\ncan discern his name written in it, before he be effectually called; for\nwe have no warrant to look any farther than God\u2019s revealed will, which\nassigns no evidence of our interest in the saving blessings of the\ngospel, till they are experienced by us, in this effectual call.\n\n(3.) God plainly discovers to men, in the gospel, that all those graces,\nwhich are inseparably connected with salvation, are his work and gift,\nand consequently out of their own power; or that _it is not of him that\nwilleth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy_, Rom.\nix. 16. Therefore he no where tells the man, who _is tied and bound with\nthe chain of his sin_, that he is able to set himself free; but puts him\nupon expecting and praying for it, from the _pitifulness of his great\nmercy_. He no where tells him, that he can implant a principle of\nspiritual life and grace in himself; or that he ought so much as to\nattempt to do any thing to atone for his sins, by his obedience and\nsufferings, but suggests the contrary, when he says, _Surely, shall one\nsay, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength_, Isa. xlv. 24.\n\n(4.) He gives none the least ground to expect, or lay claim to\nsalvation, till they believe; and as faith and salvation are both his\ngifts, he puts them upon seeking, and desiring them, in their respective\norder; first grace, and then glory.\n\n(5.) The gospel-call is designed to put men upon a diligent attendance\non the ordinances, as means of grace, and to leave the issue and success\nthereof to God, who _waits that he may be gracious_; that so his\nsovereignty may appear more eminently in the dispensing this privilege;\nand, in the mean time, assigns it as their duty to _wait for him_, chap.\nxxx. 18. And while we are engaged in this duty, we are to acknowledge,\nthat we have nothing that can give us any right to this privilege. So\nthat God might justly deny success to his ordinances. Nevertheless, if\nhe is pleased to give us, while we are attending on them, those earnest\ndesires of their being made effectual to our conversion and salvation,\nwe may conclude this to be a token for good, that he designs us some\nspecial advantage thereby; and we do not know but that even this desire\nof grace may be the beginning of the Spirit\u2019s saving work, and therefore\nan earnest of his carrying it on.\n\n(6.) When God commands persons, in the gospel, to do those things which\ncannot be performed without his special grace, he sometimes supposes\nthem, when he gives forth the command, to have a principle of spiritual\nlife and grace, which is, in effect to bid one that is made alive, to\nput forth living actions; which respect, more especially, the progress\nof grace after the work is begun; in which sense I understand those\nwords of the apostle, _Work out your salvation with fear and trembling;\nfor it is God which worketh; that is, hath wrought, in you both to will\nand to do, of his good pleasure_, Phil. ii. 12.\n\n2. If we consider the gospel as holding forth promises of salvation,\nwhen, at the same time, it is not in our power to exercise those graces\nthat accompany it; which gives farther occasion to those that except\nagainst the doctrine we are maintaining, to conclude, that it represents\nGod as offering those blessings which he does not design to bestow: This\nmay give us occasion to explain what we mean, when we consider salvation\nas offered in the gospel; whereby we understand nothing else but a\ndeclaration, that all who repent and believe, shall be saved; which\ncontains a character, or description of the persons who have ground to\nexpect this privilege: not that salvation is founded on dubious and\nuncertain conditions, which depend upon the power and liberty of our\nwill; or impossible conditions; as though God should say, if man will\nchange his own heart, and work faith, and all other graces in himself,\nthen he will save him: but all that we mean by it is, that those graces,\nwhich are inseparably connected with salvation, are to be waited for in\nour attendance on all God\u2019s ordinances, and when he is pleased to work\nthem, then we may conclude, that we have a right to the promise of\nsalvation. Thus concerning the gospel-call, what it is, how far it may\nbe improved by those who are destitute of special grace, and what is\nGod\u2019s design in giving it: we now proceed to consider,\n\n3. The issue and consequence thereof, as it is farther observed in this\nanswer, that many wilfully neglect, contemn, or refuse to comply with\nit, with respect to whom it is not made effectual to their salvation.\nThis appears from the report that Christ\u2019s disciples brought to him,\nconcerning the excuses that many made when called to come to the\nmarriage feast, in the parable: One pretended, that he had _bought a\npiece of ground, and must needs go see it_; and another, that he had\n_bought five yoke of oxen, and_ must _go to prove them_; and another\n_had married a wife, and_ therefore _could not come_. It is elsewhere\nsaid, that _they all made light of it, and went their ways; one to his\nfarm, another to his merchandise; and the remnant took his servants, and\nentreated them spitefully, and slew them_, Luke xiv. 18-20. compared\nwith Matt. xxii. 5, 6.\n\nAnd the prophet introduces our Saviour himself as complaining, _I have\nlaboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought_, Isa. xlix. 4, 5.\nAnd the reason hereof is, because Israel is _not gathered_; which words\nare to be understood in a comparative sense, as denoting the fewness of\nthose who complied with his gracious invitations, to come to him, or\nwere convinced, by the miracles which he wrought to confirm his\ndoctrine.\n\nThis is also farther evident, from the small number of those who are\neffectually prevailed upon under the gospel dispensation, which the\napostle calls _the grace of God that brings salvation, that hath\nappeared to all men, teaching them to deny all ungodliness and worldly\nlusts; and to live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present\nworld_. And also, from the great opposition and hatred, which many\nexpress to the person of Christ, who is the subject matter thereof;\nwhich the prophet not only relates, as what was observed in his day, but\nforetells, that in after-ages, a great part of mankind would not believe\nthe report made concerning him; but that he should be _despised and\nrejected of men_, who would _hide_, as it were, _their faces from him_,\nand _not esteem him_, Isa. liii. 1, 3. This is certainly the highest\ncontempt of the gospel; for it is an undervaluing the greatest\nprivileges, as though they were not worthy to be embraced, desired, or\nsought after; and inasmuch as this is wilful, arising from the enmity of\nthe will of man against God, and the method of salvation which he has\nprescribed therein, it has a tendency to provoke his wrath; so that\nbeing justly left in their unbelief, they will not come to Christ, that\nthey may have life. And as they are judicially left to themselves, they\ncontract a greater degree of alienation from, and averseness to God, and\nso never truly come to Jesus Christ; which is an awful and tremendous\nconsideration.\n\nThis is the consequence of it, with respect to those who have only this\ncommon call; and therefore we must not conclude, that it is sufficient\nto salvation, unless there be an internal effectual call; and what this\nis, will be considered under our next head; but before we enter thereon,\nit is necessary for us to enquire, whether all, at least, those who sit\nunder the sound of the gospel, have sufficient grace given them, so as\nthat, by their own conduct, without the internal powerful influences of\nthe Spirit, they may attain to salvation. This argument is much insisted\non by those who adhere to the Pelagian scheme; and therefore we cannot\nwholly pass it over: and for our setting this matter in a just light,\nlet it be considered; that every one must allow, that all who sit under\nthe sound of the gospel, have sufficient objective grace, or sufficient\nexternal means, to lead them in the way of salvation; for to deny this,\nwould be to deny that the gospel is a perfect rule of faith: this\ntherefore is allowed on both sides; and we think nothing more is\nintended, when God says, concerning the church of the Jews, _What could\nhave been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it_, Isa. v.\n4.\n\nBut the question is, whether there be a sufficiency of power, or ability\nin man; so that without the internal efficacious grace of God,\ndetermining and inclining the will, to make a right improvement of it,\nit may be sufficient to the salvation of those to whom it is given? This\nis what we cannot but deny. Now, that the external means of grace are\nnot rendered effectual to the salvation of all who are favoured with\nthem, is evident; because, as was but now observed, many neglect and\ncontemn the gospel: and as to others who improve it, so that the means\nof grace become effectual, it must be enquired; what it is that makes\nthem so? How comes it to pass, that the preaching thereof is styled, to\nsome, a savour of life, to others, a savour of death? The answer which\nthe Pelagians give to this, is, that they, in whom it is effectual,\nrender it so, by their improving the liberty of their will; so that they\nchoose what is represented in the gospel, as eligible, and refuse the\ncontrary. And if the question be asked, who maketh thee to differ from\nanother? they have, when disposed to speak agreeably to their own\nscheme, this answer ready at hand, I make myself to differ; that is as\nmuch as to say, I have a natural power of improving the means of grace,\nwithout having recourse to God for any farther assistance, in a\nsupernatural way.\n\nIt may easily be observed, that this supposition is greatly derogatory\nto the glory of God; and renders all dependance on him, both to will and\nto do, unnecessary: It supposes that we have sufficient ability to work\nthose graces in ourselves that accompany salvation; otherwise it is not\nsufficient to salvation; and therefore it is contrary to all those\nscriptures which speak of them as the work, or the effect of the\nexceeding greatness of the power of God: which leads us to consider,\n\n_Secondly_, The doctrine of effectual calling, as contained in the\nformer of the answers, which we are explaining; in which we may observe,\n\nI. The character of those who are effectually called antecedent\nthereunto. They have nothing that can recommend them to the divine\nfavour; for being considered as fallen, guilty creatures, they are not\nonly unable to make atonement for sin, but to do what is spiritually\ngood: thus the apostle represents them, _as without strength_, Rom. v.\n6. which is the immediate consequence of man\u2019s first apostacy from God;\nand universal experience, proves that we have a propensity to every\nthing that is evil, which daily increases: And to this we may add, that\nthe mind is blinded, the affections stupified, the will full of\nobstinacy, the conscience disposed to deal treacherously, whereby we\ndeceive ourselves; so that the whole soul is out of order. The apostle\nspeaks of man _by nature_, as _dead in trespasses and sins, walking\naccording to the course of this world, according to the prince of the\npower of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of\ndisobedience; having their conversation in the lusts of the flesh,\nfulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind_, Eph. ii. 1-3. And\nthe prophet speaks of the _heart_ of man, as being _deceitful above all\nthings, and desperately wicked_, Jer. xvii. 9. And the apostle describes\nsome as \u2018walking in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding\ndarkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance\nthat is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; who being past\nfeeling, have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all\nuncleanness with greediness,\u2019 Eph. iv. 17-19. and others, as being\n\u2018filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness,\nmaliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity,\nwhisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters,\ninventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding,\ncovenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful,\u2019\nRom. i. 29-31. This, indeed, is spoken of the Gentiles, who were\ndestitute of the means of grace, and had contracted greater degrees of\nimpiety than many others; but they, who are effectually called, would\nhave run into the same abominations, their natures being equally\ninclined thereunto, without preventing grace; as some of the church of\nCorinth are said to have done before their conversion, whom he speaks of\nas once having been \u2018unrighteous, fornicators, idolaters, adulterers,\neffeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind, thieves; covetous,\ndrunkards, revilers, extortioners,\u2019 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, 11. And elsewhere\nhe says, \u2018We ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient,\ndeceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy,\nhateful, and hating one another,\u2019 Tit. iii. 3. And the obstinacy and\nperverseness of men, going on in a course of sin, is so great, that God\nreproves a professing people, by telling them, that _their neck was as\nan iron sinew, and their brow brass_, Isa. xlviii. 4. Thus they were,\nbefore he _refined_ and _chose_ some of _them, in the furnace of\naffliction_, ver. 10. From hence it evidently appears, that men are not\nnaturally inclined to comply with the gospel-call; but this is a\nprivilege conferred on them, when, by the Spirit, it is made effectual\nto their salvation.\n\n_Objec._ It is objected, to what has been said concerning persons being\ndead in sin, before they are effectually called; that that is no other\nthan a metaphorical expression; and therefore the sense thereof is not\nto be strained so far as to suppose from hence, that they are altogether\nwithout a power to do that which is spiritually good.\n\n_Answ._ When the state of men, before they are effectually called,\nis styled, a death in sin, which is a metaphorical expression, we\nmust suppose, that there is a sense affixed to it, which, in some\nrespects, is adapted to those ideas that we have of the word. If\nscripture-metaphors prove nothing, because the words are transferred\nfrom their literal sense to some other that is intended thereby, we\nshall be at the greatest loss to understand many important doctrines\ncontained in the sacred writings, which abound very much with such\nmodes of speaking. We do not suppose the metaphor to be extended so\nfar, as that a person, dead in sin, is incapable of acting, as\nthough he was a stock or a stone, the contrary to which is evident,\nfrom what has been before said concerning the power which they, who\nare in an unregenerate state, have of doing things materially good;\nbut we are now considering men as unable to do what is good in all\nits circumstances, which may render their actions the object of the\ndivine approbation, as agreeable to God\u2019s revealed will; and this,\nwe suppose, an unregenerate person is as unable to do, as a dead man\nis to put forth living actions; and the reason is, because he is\ndestitute of a supernatural principle of spiritual life. Scripture\nand experience, not only evince the weakness, blindness, and\ndisinclination of such, to what is good, but their averseness to it:\nSo that whatever we do, either in the beginning or progress of the\nlife of faith, must proceed from a renewed nature, or a supernatural\nprinciple implanted in the soul; which is sometimes called, a _new\nheart_, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. a _divine nature_, 2 Pet. i. 4. as well as\na quickening, or being raised from the dead. This leads us to\nconsider,\n\nII. The change that is wrought in this effectual calling, together with\nthe grounds we have to conclude, that it is a supernatural work, or, as\nit is styled in this answer, the work of God\u2019s almighty power and grace.\nThose whom we more especially oppose in this head of argument, are the\nPelagians, and others; who, though in some things they seem to recede\nfrom them, yet cannot support their cause without giving into their\nscheme, when treating on the subjects of free-will, nature and grace:\nthese all allow that there is a change made in conversion or effectual\ncalling; but they suppose that it is a change in man\u2019s natural temper\nand disposition, rather than what arises from a supernatural principle,\nwhich, according to them, consists in overcoming those habits of sin,\nwhich we have contracted, and acquiring habits of virtue, a ceasing to\ndo evil, and learning to do well; and that it is in their own power\nsupposing the concurrence of God as a God of nature, or at least, some\nsuperadded assistances, from the external dispensations of providence,\nwhich have an influence on the minds of men, to produce this change; by\nthis means they think that grace is first attained, and we disposed to\ncomply with the external call of the gospel, whereby it is rendered\neffectual.\n\nThey sometimes indeed, use the word conversion, and speak of the power\nand grace of God herein; and that they may not seem to detract from the\nglory thereof, they profess themselves to adore and magnify God as the\nauthor of this work; but all this amounts to no more than nature acting\nunder the influence of common providence. Something, indeed, they\nascribe to God; but much less than what we think the scripture does.\n\nThat which they ascribe to him therein, is,\n\n1. That he has made man an intelligent creature, having a power capable\nof choosing whatever seems advantageous, or refusing what appears to be\ndestructive to him; and in order hereunto, he is able to discern, what\nis his duty and interest; and when the will duly attends to these\ndictates of the understanding, it has a power inclining it to be\ninfluenced thereby, and embrace whatever overtures are made conducive to\nhis future happiness.\n\n2. Whereas the understanding and reasoning powers and faculties, are\noftentimes impaired and hindered, in their method of acting, by some\naccidental inconveniences of nature, such as the temperament of the\nbody, or those diseases which it is sometimes liable to, which affect\nthe mind; these God, by his powerful providence, removes, or fences\nagainst, that the work may go on successfully.\n\n3. Sometimes our outward circumstances in the world, give a different\nturn to our passions, and hinder us from entertaining any inclinations\nto religion; therefore, they suppose, that there is a farther hand of\nprovidence in ordering the various changes or conditions of life, as to\nwhat concerns the prosperous or adverse circumstances thereof, whereby a\nsanguine temper is changed to that which has more of a melancholy or\nthoughtful disposition in it, more inclined to be afraid of those sins\nthat are like to be prejudicial to him; an angry and choleric temper,\nchanged to another that has a greater mixture of meekness and humility;\nand whatever hinderance may arise from his conversing with those who\ntempt him to lay aside all thoughts about religion, or by loading it\nwith reproach, to make him ashamed to pretend to it, the providence of\nGod so orders circumstances and things, as to make them unacceptable to\nhim, or him disinclined to converse with them: by this means there\narises a congruity, as they call it, between men\u2019s natural dispositions\nand that grace which they are called, by the gospel, to exert, when they\nare persuaded to comply with it, without which the overture would be in\nvain.\n\n4. Providence farther performs its part, by over-ruling some concurring\ncircumstances external to, and thought of, by him, in casting his lot\namong those who are able and desirous to persuade him to alter his\nsentiments, in matters of religion whose industry and zeal for his good,\naccompanied with their skilfulness in managing those persuasive\narguments used to convince him, have a great tendency to prevail upon\nhim; hereby he is persuaded to give the hearing to that which before he\ndespised, and made the subject of ridicule; and sometimes the motives\nand inducements that are used, accompanied with the pathetic way of\naddress, in those whose ministry he attends on, is very conducive to\nanswer the end attained thereby, namely, his conviction and altering his\nconduct of life, pursuant thereunto; all which is under the unforeseen\ndirection of providence.\n\n5. They add, that there is a kind of internal work in exciting the\npassions, by a general influence upon them, leaving it, notwithstanding,\nin man\u2019s power to determine them, with respect to their proper objects;\nand as for the will, that still remains free and unbiassed; but by this\nmoral suasion, or these rational arguments, it is prevailed upon to\ncomply with that which is for its advantage. According to this method of\naccounting for the work of conversion, what they attribute to the grace\nof God, is nothing more than what is the result of common providence;\nand it is supposed to act no otherwise than in an objective way; and\nthat which gives the turn to all is, the influence of moral suasion,\nwhereby men are prevailed on; but in all these respects, they are only\nbeholden to God, as the God of nature: and when this is called, by them,\na display of divine grace, nature and grace, in this matter, are made to\nsignify the same thing, without scripture warrant.\n\nMoreover, since, it is plain, all this may be done, and yet persons\nremain in an unconverted state, and the gospel-call be ineffectual, they\nsuppose there is something to be performed on man\u2019s part, which gives a\nsanction to, and completes the work: accordingly he must rightly use and\nimprove the power of reasoning, which God has given him, by diligently\nobserving and attending to his law; and he must persuade himself, that\nit is highly reasonable to obey it; and must also duly weigh the\nconsequence of his compliance or refusal, and endeavour to affect\nhimself with the consideration of promised rewards and punishments, to\nexcite his diligence, or awaken his fears; and must make use of those\nmotives that are proper to induce him to lead a virtuous life; and when\nhe is brought to conclude this most eligible, then he must add hereunto,\nthe force of the strongest resolutions, to avoid occasions of sin,\nperform several necessary duties, and associate himself with those whose\nconversation and example may induce him to be virtuous; he must attend\non the word preached, with intenseness of thought, and a disposition to\nadhere, with the greatest impartiality, to what is recommended to him\ntherein, as conducive to his future happiness: by this means he is\npersuaded; and from thence proceed those acts of grace, which\nafterwards, by being frequently repeated, arrive to a habit, which, if\nit be not lost by negligence, stupidity, and impenitency, or adhering to\nthe temptations of Satan, being brought into a state of conversion, he\nis in a fair way to heaven, which, notwithstanding this, he may of by\napostasy, since the work is to be carried on by him, as it was at first\nbegun, by his own conduct.\n\nThis account of effectual calling or conversion, supposes it to be\nlittle more than a work of common providence; and all the grace they\nseem to own, is nothing more than nature exerting itself under the\nconduct of those reasoning powers which God has given it. None pretend\nto deny that our reasoning powers are herein to be exerted and improved;\nor that those arguments, which tend to give conviction, and motives to\nenforce obedience, must be duly attended to: neither do we deny that\nthere is a kind hand of providence seen in over-ruling our natural\ntempers and dispositions, in giving a check to that corruption that is\nprevalent in us; and in rendering our condition of life, some way or\nother conducive to a farther work, which God designs to bring about. We\nalso assert, that providence greatly favours us in bringing us under the\nmeans of grace, or casting our lot in such places where we have the\nadvantages of the conversation and example of others, who are burning\nand shining lights in their generation; nor is it less seen in adapting\na suitable word to our condition, or in raising our affections, while\nattending to it: but all this falls very short of effectual calling, as\nit is a display of God\u2019s power and grace. This work is no more than\nnatural; whereas conversion is a supernatural work. Hitherto we may be\nled by common grace; but effectual calling is a work of special grace;\nthe effect of this is only a change of life: but we assert, and have\nscripture ground for it, that there is in that a change of heart. This\nscheme supposes the very principle and spring of grace to be acquired by\nman\u2019s improving his natural powers, under the conduct of God\u2019s\nprovidence: whereas, we suppose, and shall endeavour to prove, under a\nfollowing head, that it is not acquired, but infused, and is the effect\nof divine power. This supposes the work to be brought about by moral\nsuasion; and that the understanding, taking in the arguments that are\nmade use of in an objective way, the will is induced to compliance, by\nchoosing that which is good, and refusing that which is evil: whereas,\nwe assert, that the will of man is bowed and subjected to Christ, its\nenmity overcome; and accordingly we are said to be made willing in the\nday of his power.\n\nBut since that which bears the greatest share in this work, according to\nthem, is the will and power of man, determining itself, by proper\nmotives and arguments, to what is good; which supposes, that it acts\nfreely therein. This may give us occasion to consider the nature of\nhuman liberty; we do not deny, in general, that man is endowed with a\nfree will, which exerts itself in things of a lower nature, to that\nwhich we are speaking of, for this is as evident, as that he is endowed\nwith an understanding: we shall therefore, in speaking concerning the\nliberty of the will of man, (1.) Consider what are the essential\nproperties of liberty,[8] without which, an action would cease to be\nfree. And, (2.) How far the power of man\u2019s free-will may be extended,\nwith a particular view to the matter, under our present consideration.\n\n1. Concerning the nature and essential properties of human liberty.\nThey, whose sentiments of free-will and grace we are opposing, suppose\nthat it is essential to a free action, or otherwise it could not be\ndenominated free, that it be performed with indifferency, that is, that\nthe will of man should be so equally poised, that as it determines\nitself to one extreme, it might as well have determined itself to the\nother: therefore, he that loves God freely, might, by a determination of\nhis will, as well have inclined himself to hate him; and on the other\nhand, he that hates God, might, by an act of his will, have determined\nhimself to love him: the balance is supposed to be equal, and it is the\nmethod that the person uses to determine his will, that gives a turn to\nit. And from hence they infer, that they who persevere in grace, which\nthey do freely, may, for the same reason, apostatize; yea, they proceed\nfarther, at least some of them, who have maintained, that our Saviour\nmight have sinned, and consequently the work of our redemption have\nmiscarried in his hands; because, according to this notion of liberty,\nhe acted freely in all those exercises of grace; which, we suppose, were\nno less free, because they were necessary; and also, from this account\nthey give of liberty, they infer that the angels and glorified saints\nmight sin, and so lose that state of blessedness, which they are\npossessed of; otherwise their obedience is not free; which absurdities\nare so apparently gross, that they who duly weigh them, will not easily\ngive into this notion of liberty. And there is another absurdity, which\nthe Pelagians dare not assert; for it would be the greatest blasphemy\nthat could be contained in words, though it equally flows from this\nmethod of explaining the nature of liberty; that either God must not act\nfreely, or else he might act the contrary, with respect to those things\nin which he acts, like himself, as a God of infinite perfection; and\naccordingly, if he loves or delights in himself freely, or designs his\nown glory, as the highest end of all that he does, and uses means to\nbring about those ends which are most conducive thereunto; wherein his\nholiness, wisdom, justice, and faithfulness appear, I say, it will\nfollow from their scheme, and I cannot but tremble to mention it, that\nhe might do the contrary; and what is this but to say, that he might\ncease to be God.\n\nThe arguments which they who attempt to support this notion of liberty,\ninsist on, are taken from the ideas which we generally have of a\nperson\u2019s acting freely; as for instance, if a man performs any of the\ncommon actions of life, such as walking, sitting, standing, reading,\nwriting, &c. freely, he may do the contrary.\n\nBut to this I answer, That there is a vast difference between asserting,\nthat many of the actions of life are arbitrary or indifferent, so that\nwe might do the contrary; and saying that indifferency is essential to\nliberty; for that which is essential to an action must belong to every\nindividual action of the same kind.[9] Thus concerning their notion of\nliberty, whom we oppose.\n\nBut on the other hand, that which we acquiesce in, is, that its\nessential property or nature, consists in a person\u2019s doing a thing\nwithout being laid under a natural necessity to do it;[10] or doing it\nof his own accord, without any force laid on him.[11] Others express it\nby a person\u2019s doing a thing out of choice, as having the highest reason\nto determine him so to do.[12] This is that notion of liberty which we\ncannot but approve of; and we are now to shew,\n\n(2.) How far the power of man\u2019s free-will may be extended, with a\nparticular view to the matter under our present consideration. Here let\nit be observed,\n\n_1st_, That the power of man\u2019s will extends itself to things, within its\nown sphere, and not above it; all actions and powers of acting, are\ncontained within certain limits, agreeable to the nature and capacity of\nthe agent. Creatures below man, cannot put forth rational actions: and\nman cannot put forth supernatural actions, if he be not made partaker of\na divine or spiritual nature, as being endowed with a supernatural\nprinciple, such as that which is implanted in regeneration. Consider him\nas an intelligent creature, and it is agreeable to his nature to put\nforth free actions, under the conduct and direction of the\nunderstanding; but if we consider him as renewed, converted, or\neffectually called, and acting agreeably thereunto, then he is under the\ninfluence of an higher principle, which I call a _divine nature_,\naccording to the phrase which the apostle uses, 2 Pet. i. 4. The former\nof these supposes no more than the concourse of common providence, which\nat first gave, and then maintains our reasoning faculties; whereas the\nlatter supposes, that we are under the influence of the Spirit; whereby\nwe are enabled to act in a supernatural way, our natures being renewed\nand disposed thereunto, in which we are not divested of the liberty of\nour wills; but they are improved and enabled, to do what before they\nwere averse and disinclined to.\n\nThat man acts freely in those things which are agreeable to his nature,\nas an intelligent creature, all will allow. Moreover, we consider the\nunderstanding and will, as both concurring in actions that are free, and\nthat one of these is subservient to the other; as for instance, we\ncannot be said to desire, delight in, choose, or refuse a thing unless\nwe have some idea of it, as an object, which we apprehend meet to be\ndesired or rejected.\n\nAnd if it be farther enquired, Whether the will has, in itself, a power\nto follow the dictates of the understanding, in things that are\nagreeable to our nature, and be generally disposed to do it, unless\nbiassed by the passions, inclining and determining it another way? This,\nI think, is not to be denied; but in our present argument, we are to\nconsider the will of man as conversant about things supernatural, and\naccordingly, must give a different account of Christian liberty, from\nthat which is merely human, as before described. The Pelagians will\nallow what has been said concerning the nature of liberty in general;\nbut the difference between us and them is, that we confine it within its\nown sphere; whereas they extend it farther, and apply it to\nregeneration, effectual calling, and conversion; in which respect it\ndiscovers itself no otherwise than as enslaved to, or a servant of\nsin;[13] and the powers and faculties of the soul, with relation\nhereunto, are weakened by the prevalency of corruption, so that we are\nnot able to put forth those actions which proceed from, and determine a\nperson to be _renewed in the spirit of his mind_; or to have _put on the\nnew man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness_.\n\nAgain, if it be farther enquired; whether the will necessarily follows\nthe dictates of the understanding, so that the grace of God takes its\nfirst rise from thence? that which I would say in answer thereunto is,\nThat the understanding, indeed, represents things spiritual and heavenly\nto us, as good and desirable, and worthy of all acceptation; and gives\nus an undeniable conviction, that all the motives used in scripture, to\nchoose and embrace them, are highly probable; but yet it does not follow\nfrom hence, that the will of man is always overcome thereby;[14] and the\nreason is, because of that strong propensity and inclination that there\nis in corrupt nature to sin, which bids defiance to all those arguments\nand persuasions that are used to the contrary, till we are brought under\nthe influence of a supernatural principle, implanted in the soul in\neffectual calling.\n\nAnd this leads us farther to enquire: Whether, supposing a man has this\nprinciple implanted in effectual calling, he then acts freely; or, what\nis the liberty of man\u2019s will, when internally moved and influenced by\ndivine grace? In answer to which, we must consider, that special grace\ndoes not destroy, but improve the liberty of man\u2019s will: when there is a\nnew nature implanted in him, it discovers its energy, and makes a change\nin all the powers and faculties of the soul; there is a new light\nshining in the understanding, vastly different from, and superior to\nthat which it had before; and it may truly be called, _The light of\nlife_, John viii. 12. not only as it leads to eternal life; but as it\nproceeds from a principle of spiritual life: and this is what we\ngenerally call _saving knowledge_; as it is said, _This is life eternal,\nthat they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom\nthou hast sent_, chap. xvii. 13. Now this light in the understanding,\nbeing attended with power in the will, it is hereby induced to comply\nwith its dictates, not barely as being prevailed on by rational\narguments, but as there is a divine power accompanying them; it is not\nindeed prevailed on without arguments; for the Spirit makes use of the\nword to persuade, as well as to direct; though we do not, with the\nPelagians, say, that the will is overcome only by arguments, as though\nthe victory was owing to our power of reasoning; yet we freely own, that\nwe act with judgment, and see the highest reason for what we do: we are\nenabled to use our reasoning powers indeed; but these are sanctified by\nthe Spirit, as well as the will renewed; and both concur together, in\norder to our receiving and improving the doctrines contained in the\ngospel; and the Spirit of God also removes those rooted prejudices which\nwe had entertained against the way of salvation by Christ: so that upon\nthe whole, the gospel has its use, as it directs and excites our faith:\nour reasoning powers and faculties have their use also, as we take in,\nand are convinced, by what is therein contained; all this would be to no\npurpose, if there were not a superior power determining the will to a\nthorough compliance therewith. We do not deny that moral suasion\noftentimes has a tendency to incline a man to the performance of moral\nduties; but it is what I rather choose to call evangelical persuasion,\nor the Spirit of God setting home upon the heart and conscience, what is\ncontained in the gospel, that makes it effectual to salvation.[15] Thus\nconcerning the nature and extent of human liberty; but inasmuch as this\nis not to be assigned as that which renders the gospel-call effectual,\nlet it be farther considered,\n\nIII. That this is brought about by the almighty power of God, as it is\nobserved in this answer, that it is a work of God\u2019s almighty power and\ngrace: this is that which enhances the excellency and glory of it, above\nall the works of common providence: however, when we say that it is a\ndivine work, this is hardly sufficient to distinguish it from what the\nPelagians often call it, by which they intend nothing more, than the\npowerful work of God, as the God of nature and providence; therefore we\nmust farther consider it as a work of divine power, exerting itself in a\nsupernatural way and not only excluding the agency of creatures, as\nbearing a part therein, but as opposed to those works which are brought\nabout by the moral influence of persuasive arguments, without any change\nwrought in the will of man; in this sense we understand effectual\ncalling to be a work of God\u2019s almighty power.\n\nAnd that this may appear, let it be premised, that it is not\ninconsistent with God\u2019s dealing with men as intelligent creatures,\nendowed with liberty of will, for him to exert this power, since special\nprovidence, or efficacious grace, does no more destroy man\u2019s natural\npowers, by its internal influence, enabling and exciting them to do what\nis supernaturally good, than common providence\u2019s being conversant about\nthe free actions of men, makes them cease to be free; only the former\nexerts itself in a different and superior way, producing effects much\nmore glorious and excellent.\n\nThis being supposed, we shall, without pretending fully to explain the\nmanner of the divine agency, which is principally known by its effects,\nendeavour to shew,\n\n1. That effectual calling is, in a way of eminency, the work of divine\npower as distinguished from other works, which are, in their kind, the\neffects of power in a natural way.\n\n2. We shall also observe what effects are produced thereby, and in what\norder.\n\n3. Consider it, as it is, in a peculiar manner, attributed to the Spirit\nof God; and also shew, that it is a wonderful instance of his grace.\n\n4. We shall consider this divine power as irresistible, and consequently\nsuch as cannot but be effectual to produce what is designed to be\nbrought about thereby. And,\n\n5. Speak something concerning the season in which this is done, which is\ncalled God\u2019s accepted time.\n\n1. Effectual calling is eminently a work of divine power; for the proof\nhereof, we have not only many express texts of scripture that\nsufficiently establish it, but we may appeal to the experience of those\nwho are made partakers of this grace. If they compare their former and\npresent state together, they may easily perceive in themselves, that\nthere is such a change wrought in them, as is contrary to the\ninclinations of corrupt nature; whereby the stubbornness and obstinacy\nof their wills have been subdued, and such effects produced in them, as\nthey never experienced before; and the manner of their production, as\nwell as the consequences thereof, give them a proof of the agency of God\nherein, and the glory of his power exerted, so that they who deny it\nmust be unacquainted with themselves, or not duly observe that which\ncarries its own evidence with it.[16]\n\nBut we shall principally take our proofs from scripture, in which we\nhave an account of the beginning of this work, which is styled the new\nbirth; wherein we are said to be made _partakers of the divine nature_,\n2 Pet. i. 4. that is, a nature that is produced by divine power; and we\nare said to be _born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of\nthe will of man, but of God_, John i. 13. And the gospel, which is the\ninstrument that he makes use of in calling effectually, is styled, _The\nrod of his strength_, Psal. cx. 2. the effect thereof, ascribed to the\n_revelation of his arm_, Isa. liii. 1. the season in which this is done,\nis called, _The day of his power_, Psal. cx. 3. and it is, by a\nmetonymy, called, _His power_, 1 Cor. i. 18. Rom. i. 16. The cross of\nChrist is also, when preached, and made effectual for the answering this\nvaluable end, styled, The _power of God_, 1 Cor. i. 24. Moreover, the\nprogress of this work is ascribed to the _power of God_, 1 Thess. i. 5.\nit is this that _keeps_ those who are effectually called _through faith\nunto salvation_, 1 Pet. i. 5. And that this power may appear to be\nextraordinary, the apostle uses an uncommon emphasis of expression, when\nhe calls it, _The exceeding greatness of his power_, and, _the working\nof his mighty power_, Eph. i. 19, 20. which words[17] can hardly be\ntranslated without losing something of their force and beauty; and,\nindeed, there is not an expression used in scripture, to signify the\nefficacy of divine power, that exceeds, or, I may say, that equals them.\nAnd that it may appear more strong, the apostle, in the following words,\nrepresents it as being no less than _that power which wrought in Christ,\nwhen God raised him from the dead_.\n\nAnd to all this let me add, that something to the same purpose may be\ninferred from those metaphorical expressions, by which it is set forth,\nas it is called a _creation_: thus, when we are made partakers of this\nprivilege, we are said to _be created in righteousness and true\nholiness_, Eph. iv. 24. And the apostle seems to compare this with the\ncreation of man at first, after the image of God, which consisted\nprincipally in righteousness and true holiness, and accordingly\nconsiders this image as restored, when a principle of grace is\nimplanted, whereby we are again disposed to the exercise of\nrighteousness and holiness: and elsewhere he says, _We are his\nworkmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, that we should\nwalk in them_, chap. ii. 16. where he supposes, that this creating power\nmust be exerted before we can put forth good works; and therefore it can\nbe nothing less than the power of God; and it would not have been styled\na _creation_, if it had not been a supernatural work, and therefore it\nis, in that respect, more glorious than many other effects of the divine\npower.\n\nIt is also styled, _a resurrection from the dead_: thus the apostle\nsays, _You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins_,\nchap. ii. 1, 5. in this respect it certainly exceeds the power of men. A\nphysician, by his skill, may mend a crazy constitution, or recover it\nfrom the confines of death; but, to raise the dead, exceeds the limits\nof finite power. This mode of speaking our Saviour makes use of to\nsignify the conversion or effectual call of sinners, when he says, _The\nhour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the\nSon of God; and they that hear shall live_, John v. 25. He had, in the\nforegoing verse been speaking of their _having eternal life_, and _not\ncoming into condemnation, and being passed from death to life_, who hear\nhis words and believe; and then it follows, that _the hour is coming_,\nthat is, the time is near at hand, to wit, when the Spirit shall be\npoured forth, and the gospel-dispensation be begun, and it _now is_, in\nsome degree, namely, in those who were converted by his ministry, _when\nthe dead shall hear his voice and live_, or pass from a state of\nspiritual death to life, as a means for their attaining eternal life.\nThis is much more agreeable to the context, than to conclude, as some\ndo, to evade the force of this argument; that our Saviour speaks\nconcerning some who were then, or should hereafter be raised from the\ndead, in a miraculous manner; which, they suppose, contains the sense of\nthe words, _now is_, and that _the hour is coming_, refers to the\ngeneral resurrection; but this seems not to be the sense of the text;\nbecause our Saviour supposes them, in a following verse, to be\nastonished at this doctrine; as though it was too great an instance of\npower for him to implant a principle of spiritual life in dead sinners;\nand therefore he proves his assertion from his raising the dead at the\nlast day: _Marvel not, for the hour is coming_, that is, at the end of\nthe world, _when all that are in their graves shall hear his voice_,\nJohn v. 28. This cannot well agree with the sense before given, of\nChrist\u2019s raising the dead, as referring to the general resurrection; for\nthat would be to answer their objection, or put a stop to their wonder\nat what he had said concerning it, by asserting the same thing in other\nwords; whereas, if you suppose the dead\u2019s _hearing his voice_, to imply\na spiritual resurrection; and _the dead raised out of their graves_, to\nbe an argument to convince them that his power was sufficient to bring\nabout this great effect; there is much more beauty in the expression,\nand strength in the reasoning, than to take it otherwise.\n\nThis is so plain a proof of the argument, we are endeavouring to defend,\nthat nothing farther need be added: however, I cannot but mention\nanother scripture, in which our Saviour says, that _no one can come to\nhim, except the Father draw him_, chap. vi. 44. where Christ, by _coming\nto him_, does not mean attending on his ministry, which did not require\nany power to induce them to it; but _believing on him_, so as to _have\neverlasting life_, in which sense, _coming to him_, is often taken in\nthe gospels, ver. 47. and this is the immediate consequence of effectual\ncalling. Now when our Saviour says, that _none can_ thus _come to him_,\nwithout being _drawn by the Father_, we may understand what he means\nhere, by what is said in a following verse, namely, their being _taught\nof God_, and having _heard and learned of the Father_, ver. 45. such,\nsays he, _Come unto me_. Now this _teaching_ certainly implies more than\ngiving a rule of faith contained in divine revelation, for Christ is not\nhere proving the necessity of divine revelation, as elsewhere; but is\nspeaking concerning the saving efficacy thereof; and none can deny that\nmany have been objectively taught, and instructed by the word, who have\nnot come to Christ, or believed in him to everlasting life: the words\nare a quotation from the prophets, to which he refers; who intimate,\nthat they should be _all taught of God_; which certainly implies more\nthan an objective teaching and instructing; for in this sense, they,\nhaving divine revelation, were always taught of God: and it is a special\nprivilege, which the prophet Isaiah mentions, when he foretels this\nmatter, as appears by his connecting it with that great peace which they\nshould have, or the confluence of saving blessings, which should attend\nit, Isa. liv. 13. And the prophet Jeremiah, who speaks to the same\npurpose, says, _They shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and\nevery man his brother, saying, know the Lord; for they shall all know me\nfrom the least of them, even to the greatest_, Jer. xxxi. 33, 34. that\nis, they shall not only have an objective revelation, or that which some\ncall moral suasion; but this shall be made effectual to their salvation;\nand in order thereunto, God promises that he would _put his law in the\ninward part, and write it in the heart_; and elsewhere, to _give_ them\n_a new heart_, and to _put a new spirit within them_, and hereby to\n_cause them to walk in his statutes_, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. So that it is not\nbarely a rectifying some mistakes which they were liable to; but\nproducing in them something, which they had not before; not building\nupon the old foundation, but laying a new one, and so working a change\nin the powers and faculties of the soul; and as they were before,\nobdurate and hardened in sin, he promises to _take away the heart of\nstone, and give them an heart of flesh_; and by his _word_, which is\ncompared to an _hammer, to break the rock in pieces_, Jer. xxiii. 29.\nThis is certainly a work of power; but that it is so, will farther\nappear from what follows, in considering the work itself; which leads us\nto shew,\n\n2. What effects are produced by the power of God, when we are thus\ncalled.\n\n(1.) The first step that he is pleased to take in this work, is in his\nimplanting a principle of spiritual life and grace, which is absolutely\nnecessary for our attaining to, or receiving advantage by the external\ncall of the gospel; this is generally styled regeneration, or the new\nbirth; or, as in the scripture but now referred to, a _new heart_.\n\nIf it be enquired, What we are to understand by this principle? We\nanswer, that since principles are only known by the effects which they\nproduce; springs of acting, by the actions themselves, we must be\ncontent with this description; that it is something wrought in the heart\nof man, whereby he is habitually and prevailingly biassed and inclined\nto what is good: so that by virtue hereof, he freely, readily, and\nwillingly chooses those things which tend to the glory of God; and\nrefuses, abhors, and flees from what is contrary thereunto; and, as this\nmore immediately affects the understanding, whereby it is enabled to\ndiscern the things which God reveals in the gospel in a spiritual way,\nit is styled, his _shining in the heart_, 2 Cor. iv. 6. _to give us the\nlight of the knowledge of his glory_, or, his giving _an eye to see, and\nan ear to hear_, Deut. xxix. 4. As it respects the will, it contains in\nit a power, whereby it is disposed and enabled to yield the obedience of\nfaith, to whatever God is pleased to reveal to us as a rule of duty, so\nthat we are made willing in the day of his power; and, as it respects\nthe affections, they are all inclined to run in a right channel, to\ndesire, delight and rejoice in every thing that is pleasing to God, and\nflee from every thing that is provoking to him. This is that whereby a\ndead sinner is made alive, and so enabled to put forth living actions.\n\nConcerning this principle of grace let it be observed, that it is\ninfused and not acquired. The first principle or spring of good actions,\nmay, with equal reason, be supposed to be infused into us, as\nChristians, as it is undoubtedly true, that the principle of reasoning\nis infused into us as men: none ever supposed that the natural power of\nreasoning may be acquired, though a greater facility or degree thereof\nis gradually attained; so that power, whereby we are enabled to put\nforth supernatural acts of grace, must be supposed to be implanted in\nus; which, were it acquired, we could not, properly speaking, be said to\nbe born of God.\n\nFrom hence I am obliged to infer, that the regenerating act, or\nimplanting this principle[18] of grace, which is, at least, in order of\nnature, antecedent to any act of grace, put forth by us, is the\nimmediate effect of the power of God, which none who speak of\nregeneration as a divine work, pretend to deny: and therefore, I cannot\nbut conclude, that it is wrought in us without the instrumentality of\nthe word, or any of the ordinary means of grace: my reason for it is\nthis; because it is necessary, from the nature of the thing, to our\nreceiving, improving, or reaping any saving advantage by the word, that\nthe Spirit should produce the principle of faith; and to say, that this\nis done by the word, is in effect, to assert that the word produces the\nprinciple, and the principle gives efficacy to the word; which seems to\nme little less than arguing in a circle. The word cannot profit, unless\nit be mixed with faith; and faith cannot be put forth, unless it\nproceeds from a principle of grace implanted; therefore this principle\nof grace is not produced by it: we may as well suppose, that the\npresenting a beautiful picture before a man that is blind, can enable\nhim to see; or the violent motion of a withered hand, produce strength\nfor action, as we can suppose that the presenting the word in an\nobjective way, is the instrument whereby God produces that internal\nprinciple, by which we are enabled to embrace it. Neither would this so\nwell agree with the idea of its being a new creature, or our being\n_created unto good works_; for then it ought rather to be said, we are\ncreated by faith, which is a good work: this is, in effect, to say, that\nthe principle of grace is produced by the instrumentality of that which\nsupposes its being implanted, and is the result and consequence thereof.\n\nI am sorry that I am obliged, in this assertion, to appear, at least, to\noppose what has been maintained by many divines of great worth; who\nhave, in all other respects, explained the doctrine of regeneration,\nagreeably to the mind and will of God, and the analogy of faith.[19] It\nmay be, the principal difference between this explication and theirs is,\nthat they speak of regeneration in a large sense, as including in it,\nnot barely the implanting the principle, but the exciting it, and do not\nsufficiently distinguish between the principle, as implanted and deduced\ninto act; for, I readily own, that the latter is by the instrumentality\nof the word, though I cannot think the former so; or, it may be, they\nconsider the principle as exerted: whereas I consider it as created, or\nwrought in us; and therefore can no more conclude, that the new creation\nis wrought by an instrument, than I can, that the first creation of all\nthings was.\n\nAnd I am ready to conjecture, that that which leads many divines into\nthis way of thinking, is the sense in which they understand the words of\nthe apostle; _Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of\nincorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever_, 1\nPet. i. 23. and elsewhere, _Of his own will begat he us with the word of\ntruth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures_, James\ni. 16. Whereas this does not so much respect the implanting the\nprinciple of grace, as it does our being enabled to act from that\nprinciple; and it is as though he should say, he hath made us believers,\nor induced us to love and obey Him by the word of truth, which supposes\na principle of grace to have been implanted: otherwise the word of truth\nwould never have produced these effects. Regeneration may be taken, not\nonly for our being made alive to God, or created unto good works, but\nfor our putting forth living actions, proceeding from that principle\nwhich is implanted in the soul. I am far from denying, that faith, and\nall other graces, are wrought in us by the instrumentality of the word;\nand it is in this sense that some, who treat on this subject, explain\ntheir sentiments, when they speak of being born again by the word:\ntherefore I persuade myself, that I differ from them only in the\nacceptation of words, and not in the main substance of the doctrine they\nmaintain.[20]\n\n(2.) The principle of grace being implanted, the acts of grace in those\nwho are adult, immediately ensue; which implies a change of our\nbehaviour, a renovation of our lives and actions; which may properly be\ncalled conversion.\n\nHaving explained what we mean by regeneration, under our last head, it\nis necessary, in this, to consider how it differs from conversion; in\nwhich I shall take leave to transcribe a few passages from that\nexcellent divine, but now mentioned. \u201cRegeneration is a spiritual\nchange; conversion is a spiritual motion; in regeneration there is a\npower conferred; conversion is the exercise of this power; in\nregeneration there is given us a principle to turn; conversion is our\nactual turning: in the covenant, the new heart, and God\u2019s putting the\nSpirit into them, is distinguished from their walking in his statutes,\nfrom the first step we take, in the way of God, and is set down as the\ncause of our motion: in renewing us, God gives us a power; in converting\nus, he excites that power. Men are naturally dead, and have a stone upon\nthem; regeneration is a rolling away the stone from the heart, and a\nraising to newness of life; and then conversion is as natural to a\nregenerate man, as motion is to a lively body: a principle of activity\nwill produce action. The first reviving us is wholly the act of God,\nwithout any concurrence of the creature; but, after we are revived, we\ndo actively and voluntarily live in his sight. Regeneration is the\nmotion of God in the creature; conversion is the motion of the creature\nto God, by virtue of that first principle; from this principle all the\nacts of believing, repenting, mortifying, quickening, do spring. In all\nthese a man is active; in the other, he is merely passive.\u201d[21] This is\nwhat we may call the second step, which God takes in effectual calling;\nand it is brought about by the instrumentality of the word. The word\nbefore this, was preached to little or no purpose; or, it may be, was\ndespised, rejected, and disregarded; but now a man is enabled to see a\nbeauty, and a glory in it, all the powers and faculties of the soul,\nbeing under the influence of that spiritual life implanted in\nregeneration, and inclined to yield a ready and cheerful obedience to\nit; and this work is gradual and progressive; and as such, it is called\nthe work of sanctification; of which more under a following answer,[22]\nand is attended with repentance unto life, and all other graces that\naccompany salvation; and in this respect we are drawn to Christ by his\nword and Spirit, or by his Spirit making use of his word, our minds\nsavingly enlightened, our wills renewed, and determined to what is good,\nso that hereby we are made willing and able freely to answer the call of\nGod, and to accept of, and embrace the grace offered and conveyed\ntherein; as it is expressed in the answer we are explaining.\n\nThe first thing in which that change, which is wrought in effectual\ncalling, manifests itself is, in our understandings\u2019 being enlightened\nto receive the truths revealed to us in the word of God; and accordingly\nwe see things with a new and different light; behold a greater beauty,\nexcellency and glory in divine things, than ever we did before: we are\nalso led into ourselves, and convinced of sin and misery, concluding\nourselves, by nature, to be in a lost and undone condition; and then the\nsoul sees the glory of Christ, the greatness of his love, who came to\nseek and save those that were lost, who is now precious to him, as he is\nsaid to be to them that believe; and pursuant hereunto the will, being\ndetermined, or enabled so to do, by the Spirit of God exciting the\nprinciple of grace, which he had implanted, accepts of him on his own\nterms; the affections all centre in, and desire to derive all spiritual\nblessings from him; Thus the work of grace is begun in effectual\ncalling, which is afterwards carried on in sanctification.\n\nAnd inasmuch as we are considering the beginning of the work of grace in\neffectual calling, I cannot but take notice of a question, which\nfrequently occurs under this head, namely, Whether man, in the first\nmoment thereof, _viz._ in regeneration, be merely passive, though active\nin every thing that follows after it? This we cannot but affirm, not\nonly against the Pelagians, but others, whose method of treating the\ndoctrine of divine grace, seems to agree with theirs. And here, that we\nmay obviate a popular objection, usually brought against our assertion,\nas though hereby we argued, that God dealt with men as though they were\nmachines, and not endowed with understanding or will let it be observed;\nthat we consider the subjects of this grace no otherwise than as\nintelligent creatures, capable of being externally excited and disposed\nto what is good; or else God would never work this principle in them.\nNor do we suppose, however men are said to be passive in the first\nmoment in which this principle is implanted, that they are so\nafterwards, but are enabled to act under the divine influence; even as\nwhen the soul of Adam was created at first, it could not be said to be\nactive in its own creation, and in the implanting those powers which\nwere concreate with it; yet it was active, or those powers exerted\nthemselves immediately after it was created. This is the state of the\nquestion we are now debating; and therefore we cannot but maintain, that\nmen do not concur to the implanting the principle of grace; for then\nthey would be active in being created unto good works; which are the\nresult, and not the cause of that power which is infused into them, in\norder thereunto.\n\nThis is sufficiently evident, not only from the impotency of corrupt\nnature, as to what is good, but its utter averseness thereunto, and from\nthe work\u2019s being truly and properly divine; or (as has been before\nobserved) the effect of almighty power. This is not a controversy of\nlate date; but has been either defended or opposed, ever since\nAugustine\u2019s and Pelagius\u2019s time. Many volumes have been written\nconcerning the aids and assistances of divine grace in the work of\nconversion. The School-men were divided in their sentiments about it, as\nthey adhered to, or receded from Augustine\u2019s doctrine: both sides seem\nto allow that the grace of God affords some assistance hereunto; but the\nmain thing in debate, is, Whether the grace of God only bears one part\nin this work, and the will of man the other; like two persons lifting at\nthe same burden, and carrying it between them. Some have allowed the\ndivine concourse as necessary hereunto, who yet have not been willing to\nown that man bears no part in this work; or, _that it is God that works\nin us, both to will and to do of his own good pleasure_, Phil. ii. 13.\nwhich, the apostle asserts in so plain terms, that the most known sense\nthereof, cannot well be evaded; and, indeed, were it otherwise, it could\nhardly be said, that _we are not sufficient of ourselves, to think any\nthing as of ourselves_; which, though it be immediately applied to\nministers, is certainly, by a parity of reason, applicable to all\nChristians, 2 Cor. iii. 5. nor would it be, in all respects, true, that\nwe are _born of God_; or, that we, who before were dead in sin, are\nraised to a spiritual life, or made, with respect to the principle of\nspiritual actions, new creatures; all which is done in regeneration.[23]\n\nWe might also take occasion, under this head, to observe, what we often\nmeet with in practical discourses and sermons, concerning preparatory\nworks, or previous dispositions, which facilitate and lead to the work\nof conversion. Some assert, that we must do what we can, and by using\nour reasoning powers and faculties, endeavour to convert, or turn\nourselves, and then God will do the rest, or finish the work which we\nhave begun: and here many things are often considered as the steps which\nmen may take in the reformation of their lives, the abstaining from\ngross enormities, which they may have been guilty of, thinking on their\nways, and observing the tendency of their present course of life, and\nsetting before themselves those proper arguments that may induce them to\nrepent and believe; and then they may be said to have prepared\nthemselves for the grace of God, so that it will ensue hereupon. And if\nthere be any thing remaining, which is out of their power, God has\nengaged to succeed their endeavours, so that he will bring them into a\nstate of regeneration and conversion.\n\nThis method of accounting for the work of grace, is liable to many\nexceptions, particularly as it supposes man to be the first mover in his\nown conversion, and the divine energy to be dependent upon our conduct;\nthe contrary to which, is not only agreeable to scripture, but the\ndivine perfections; as well as to the doctrine we have been maintaining,\nconcerning effectual calling\u2019s, being a divine work in the most proper\nsense thereof. But that we may impartially consider this matter, and\nset, what some call a preparatory work, in a just light, let it be\nobserved,\n\n1. That these preparatory works must either be considered as good in all\nthose circumstances that are necessary to denominate them good, and\nparticularly they must proceed from a good principle, that is to say, a\nprinciple of regeneration; or else they are only such works as are\nmaterially good, such many perform who are never brought into a state of\nconversion; or if, on the other hand, they are supposed to proceed from\nsuch a principle, then they are not, from the nature of the thing, works\npreparatory to the first grace, but rather consequent upon it.\n\n2. It is one thing for us to assert, that it is our duty to perform all\nthose works which some call preparatory, for conversion; such as\nmeditation, attendance on the ordinances, duly weighing those arguments,\nor motives, that should lead us to repentance, and the exercise of all\nother graces; and another thing to say, that every one who performs\nthese duties, shall certainly have regenerating grace; or, it is one\nthing to apply ourselves to the performance of those duties, as far as\nit is in our own power, and, at the same time, to wait, pray, and hope\nfor success to attend them; and another thing to assert, that it shall\nalways attend them, as though God had laid himself under an obligation\nto give special grace to those, who, in this respect, improve that which\nis common, the contrary whereunto may be observed in many instances. And\nwhen we have done all, we must conclude, that the grace of God, if he is\npleased to give success to our endeavours, is free and sovereign.\n\n3. They who say, That if we do all we can, God will do the rest, advance\nvery little to support their argument, since there is no one who can\npretend that he has done what he could: and may we not farther suppose,\nthat God, in a judicial way, as punishing us for the many sins we\ncommit, may deny this success: therefore, how can it be said, that it\nwill necessarily ensue.\n\n4. When we perform any of those duties, which some call preparatory to\nconversion, these are to be considered as the Spirit\u2019s preparing his own\nway thereby, rather than corrupt nature\u2019s preparing itself for grace. We\nare far from denying that there is a beautiful order in the divine\ndispensations; the Spirit of God first convinces of sin, and then shews\nthe convinced sinner where his help is to be had; and enables him to\nclose with Christ by faith. He first shews the soul its own corruption\nand nothingness, and then leads him to see Christ\u2019s fulness; or that all\nhis salvation is reposed in his hands, and enables him to believe in him\nto the saving the soul; one of these works, indeed, prepares the way for\nthe other: nevertheless, none of them can be said to prepare the way for\nregeneration, which is the work of the Spirit of God; and without it, no\nother can be said to be a saving work.\n\n_Object._ It is objected, that there are several scriptures which seem\nto speak of common grace, as being preparatory for special. Thus the\nscribe, mentioned in the gospel, who expressed himself _discreetly_, in\nasserting, that _to love God with all the heart, and with all the\nunderstanding, soul, and strength; and to love our neighbour as\nourselves, is better than all whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices_, is\nsaid not to be _far from the kingdom of God_, Mark xii. 34. And\nelsewhere, we are exhorted _to ask_, and a promise is annexed thereunto,\nthat _it shall be given us, to seek and we shall find_, Matt. vii. 7.\nAnd in another place, _to turn at God\u2019s reproof and he will pour out his\nSpirit_ unto us, _and make known his words unto us_, Prov. i. 25. And\nseveral other scriptures, in which super-added grace is connected with\nduty enjoined, which duty is supposed to be in our own power, and to be\npreparatory for it.\n\n_Answ._ (1.) As to the first of these scriptures, in which our Saviour\ntells the scribe, that he was not _far from the kingdom of God_; he\nintends nothing else hereby, but that the profession he made, which he\ncalls, his _answering discreetly_, was not very remote from that which\nwas made by them, who were the subjects of his kingdom: it was the\ndoctrine he mentions, that Christ commends; and therefore it must not be\ninferred from hence, that he had regard to his state, as though his\ninward temper of mind, or moral conduct of life, was such as more\nimmediately disposed him for a state of grace, so that he was, at the\nsame time, hovering between a state of unregeneracy and conversion.\n\n(2.) As for that instance, in which persons are supposed to prepare\nthemselves for that grace which God gives in answer to prayer, by\nperforming that duty, as though he had obliged himself to give whatever\nthey ask for, relating to their own salvation; this cannot be the sense\nof the scripture but now mentioned, or any other, to the like purpose;\nunless it be understood of the prayer of faith, under the influence of\nthe Holy Spirit; but this supposes regenerating grace; and therefore it\nis foreign to the argument, in which man is considered as preparing\nhimself for the grace of God, and not as expecting farther degrees of\ngrace, upon his being inclined, by the Spirit of God, to seek them.\n\n(3.) As for the other instance in the objection, relating to God\u2019s\nengaging _to give the Spirit_, and to _make known his words_ to those\nthat _turn at his reproof_; this, I conceive, contains in it nothing\nelse but a promise of the Spirit, to carry on the work of grace, in all\nthose in whom it is begun. Though _turning_, in scripture, be sometimes\ntaken for external reformation, which is in our own power, as it is our\nindispensable duty; yet, whenever a promise of saving blessings is\nannexed to it, as in this scripture, it is to be understood as denoting\nthe grace of repentance. And if it be said, that this is God\u2019s gift, and\ntherefore cannot be the subject of an exhortation, it may be replied\nhereunto; that saving grace is often represented, in scripture, as our\nact, or duty, in order to the performance whereof we ought to say, as\nthe church is presented speaking, _Turn thou me, and I shall be turned_,\nJer. xxxi. 18. that is, I _shall return unto thee with my whole heart,\nand not feignedly_, chap. iii. 10.\n\nThe same reply might be given to their sense of several other scriptures\nbrought to maintain the doctrine of preparatory works, performed by us,\nas necessarily inferring our obtaining the special grace of God. But I\nshall close this head with a few hints taken from that excellent divine\nbefore mentioned. \u201cMan cannot prepare himself for the new birth: he\nhath, indeed, a subjective capacity for grace, above any other creature\nin the inferior world; and this is a kind of natural preparation, which\nother creatures have not; a capacity, in regard of the powers of the\nsoul, though not in respect of the present disposition of them. He hath\nan understanding to know, and when it is enlightened, to know God\u2019s law;\na will to move and run, and when enlarged by grace, to run the ways of\nGod\u2019s commandments; so that he stands in an immediate capacity to\nreceive the life of grace, upon the breath and touch of God, which a\nstone doth not; for in this it is necessary, that rational faculties\nshould be put as a foundation of spiritual motions. Though the soul be\nthus capable, as a subject, to receive the grace of God, yet it is not\ntherefore capable, as an agent, to prepare itself for it, or produce it.\nIt is capable to receive the truths of God; but, as the heart is stony,\nit is incapable to receive the impressions of those truths. Though some\nthings, which man may do by common grace, may be said to be\npreparations, yet they are not formally so; as that there is an\nabsolute, causal connexion between such preparations, and regeneration;\nthey are not disposing causes of grace: grace is all in a way of\nreception by the soul, not of action from the soul: the highest morality\nin the world is not necessary to the first infusion of the divine\nnature: if there were any thing in the subject that was the cause of it,\nthe tenderest, and softest dispositions would be wrought upon; and the\nmost intelligent men would soonest receive the gospel. Though we see\nthem sometimes renewed, yet many times the roughest tempers are seized\nupon by grace. Though morality seems to set men at a greater nearness to\nthe kingdom of God, yet, with all its own strength it cannot bring it\ninto the heart, unless the Spirit open the lock: yea, sometimes it sets\na man farther from the kingdom of God, as being a great enemy to the\nrighteousness of the gospel, both imputed and inherent; and other\noperations upon the soul, which seem to be nearer preparations; such as\nconvictions, &c. do not infer grace; for the heart, as a field, may be\nploughed by terrors, and yet not planted with any good seed; planting\nand watering are preparations, but not the cause of fruit; the increase\ndepends upon God:\u201d[24] thus this learned author. And he also farther\nproves, that there is no obligation on God, by any thing that may look\nlike a preparation in men; and adds, that if any preparations were our\nown, and were pure, which they are not: yet they cannot oblige God to\ngive supernatural grace: which leads us,\n\n3. To consider that this work is, in a peculiar manner, attributed to\nthe Spirit of God; the only moving cause whereof, is his grace. That the\nSpirit is the author of this work, is not to be proved by experience, as\nthe expressions of divine power therein are, but by scripture; and the\nscripture is very express as to this matter. Thus, when God promises to\n_give a new heart; to take away the heart of stone, and to give an heart\nof flesh, and to cause his people to walk in his statutes_, Ezek. xxxvi.\n26, 27. he would _put his Spirit within them_; and elsewhere they are\nsaid to have _purified their souls in obeying the truth, through the\nSpirit_, 1 Pet. i. 22. And our Saviour asserts the necessity of our\nbeing _born of the Spirit_, John iii. 5. in order to our entering into\nthe kingdom of God: so that from these, and several other scriptures,\nthat might be referred to, it appears, that effectual calling is the\ninternal powerful work of the Holy Ghost.[25]\n\n_Obj. 1._ It is objected, by some, that this doctrine savours of\nenthusiasm; since it supposes that there is no difference between the\nSpirit\u2019s internal influences, and inspiration; and to pretend to this,\nnow the miraculous dispensation, which was in the apostle\u2019s days, is\nceased, is vain and enthusiastic.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That the charge of enthusiasm is very\nunjustly deduced from this doctrine; for we must distinguish between the\nextraordinary, and the ordinary influence of the Holy Ghost; the former\nis allowed by all, to be now ceased; and therefore they who pretend to\nit, are liable to this charge; but it is a very great dishonour cast\nupon the Holy Ghost to deny his powerful influence or agency in the work\nof grace; and it renders the condition of the church, at present, in a\nvery material circumstance, so much inferior to what it was of old, that\nit is incapable of attaining salvation; unless it could be proved that\nsalvation might be attained without the divine energy.\n\nBut, that we may farther reply to this objection, let it be considered;\nthat the Spirit\u2019s influence, as subservient to the work of grace, is\nevidently distinguished from imputation: the latter of these was a\npeculiar honour which was conferred upon some persons, who were either\nto transmit to the church a rule of faith, by the immediate dictates of\nthe Holy Ghost; or else they were favoured with it to answer some\nextraordinary ends, which could not be attained without it, namely,\ntheir being furnished with wisdom, as well as courage and boldness, to\nmaintain the cause, which they were not otherwise furnished to defend,\nagainst the opposition that it met with from their persecuting and\nmalicious enemies, that so it might not suffer through their weakness;\nas when our Saviour bids his disciples _not to take thought what they\nshould say_, when brought before rulers, _&c._ but promises, that _the\nSpirit should speak in them_, Matt. x. 18-20. And in some other\nparticular instances we read, especially in the church at Corinth, that\nwhen ministers had not those advantages to qualify themselves to preach\nthe gospel, which they afterwards were favoured with, some had this\nextraordinary gift, so that they spake by the Spirit; but this was only\nconferred occasionally, and for some special reasons: and therefore,\nthose scriptures that speak of the influences of the Spirit, which were\nmore common, and immediately subservient to the work of grace in the\nsouls of those who were the subjects thereof, were, at that time, the\nsame with them that we are pleading for, which were designed to continue\nin the church, in all the ages thereof: thus when persons are said,\n_through the Spirit to mortify the deeds of the body_, Rom. viii. 13.\nthis does not respect any extraordinary dispensation, which they were\nthen under, since it is the duty of all men, in all ages, without the\nextraordinary influences of the Spirit, to mortify the deeds of the\nbody; and therefore we may expect this powerful energy as well as they,\nor else our condition would be very deplorable.\n\nAnd besides, we never find that extraordinary gifts were immediately\nsubservient to the subduing corruption, or, at least, that every one\nthat had them, did mortify sin, and so appear to be internally\nsanctified: whereas, this is a character of those who are so; and not to\nhave these influences, determines a person to be in an unregenerate\nstate, or _to live after the flesh_, which is opposed to it, and so to\nbe liable to death, ver. 12. No one can suppose, the apostle intends, in\nthe foregoing verse, when he says, _If ye live after the flesh, ye shall\ndie_; that if ye are not under inspiration, ye shall die, as living\nafter the flesh: but the method of reasoning is strong and conclusive,\nif we understand the divine influence as what is distinct from\ninspiration, and consequently a privilege necessary for the beginning\nand carrying on the work of grace, and so belongs to believers in all\nages.\n\nAgain, when the Spirit is said _to help our infirmities_, ver. 26. in\nprayer: is not prayer as much a duty now as it was when they had\nextraordinary gifts? therefore, ought we not to hope for the assistance\nof the Spirit, in all ages? and consequently the Spirit\u2019s help, in this\nrespect is not confined to that age, when there was a miraculous\ndispensation, or extraordinary inspiration.\n\nAnd when it is elsewhere said, _As many as are led by the Spirit of God,\nthey are the sons of God_, ver. 14. can we suppose, that none were the\nsons of God but such as had extraordinary gifts? Does not this privilege\nbelong to us, as well as unto them? If therefore we are the sons of God,\nas well as they, we have this evidence hereof, according to this\nscripture; namely, our _being led by the Spirit of God_; though we\npretend not to be led by him, as a Spirit of inspiration.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that the apostle elsewhere speaks of some who\nwere _sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise; which is the earnest of\nour inheritance_: and these are described as _trusting in Christ after\nthey had heard the word of salvation_, and _believing in him_, Eph. i.\n13, 14. But this belongs to the church in all ages; therefore sealing is\nnot a privilege confined to those who had the extraordinary gifts of the\nHoly Ghost; but to believers as such.\n\nMoreover, it is said, _The Spirit beareth witness with our spirits, that\nwe are the children of God_, Rom. viii. 16. Therefore, some persons may\nknow themselves to be the children of God, in a way of self-examination,\nby the witness of the Spirit, which is common to all believers; without\npretending to be inspired therein; which would be to know this matter\nwithout the concurring testimony of our own spirits. Many things, of the\nlike nature, might be observed, concerning the other scriptures, that\nare generally brought to prove, that believers, in our day, are made\npartakers of the powerful influences of the Holy Ghost; though they\npretend not to the Spirit of inspiration; which is a sufficient answer\nto this objection.\n\n_Object._ 2. If it be farther objected, that if the Spirit does work\ninternally in the souls of men, we are not to suppose, that he works a\nchange in their wills, but only presents objects to them, which they by\ntheir own power, improve, and make use of, for their good; even as a\nfinite Spirit may suggest good or bad thoughts, without disposing us to\ncomply with them; or, as the devil is said to work in men, who is\ncalled, _The Spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience_,\nEph. ii. 2.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that an objective influence, properly\nspeaking, is no influence at all; much less is it becoming the dignity\nof the Holy Ghost, to say, That he hath no more an hand in the work of\nconversion, than that which a mere creature might have. I will not deny\nthat the Greek word,[26] which signifies energy, or internal working, is\nsometimes taken for such a kind of influence as is not properly the\neffect of power, as in the instance contained in the objection; yet, let\nit be considered, that the same word is often used, in various other\ninstances, in senses very different, when applied to God and the\ncreature; where the word, in itself, is indeterminate; but the\napplication of it sufficiently determines the matter; so as to leave no\ndoubt, as to the sense of it. Thus to make, form, or produce, when\napplied to God, and the thing made, formed, or produced, is represented\nas an instance of his almighty power, which exceeds the limits of finite\npower, this determines the sense to be very different from making,\nforming, or producing, when applied to men, acting in their own sphere:\nso the apostle speaks of building, in a very different sense, as applied\nto God and the creature, which no one is at a loss to understand, who\nreads the words; _Every house is builded by some man; but he that built\nall things is God_, Heb. iii. 4. Now, to apply this to our present\npurpose, we do not deny, that a finite spirit has an energy, in an\nobjective way; but when the same word is applied to God\u2019s manner of\nacting; and is represented as has been before observed, as an instance\nof his almighty power, producing a change in the soul; and not only\npersuading, but enabling him to perform good works, from a principle of\nspiritual life, implanted, this may easily be understood as having a\nvery different sense from the same word, when applied to the internal\nagency of a finite spirit; and therefore this objection does not\noverthrow the argument we are maintaining.\n\n_Object._ 3. It is farther objected against what has been said\nconcerning this powerful work of the Spirit, as being illustrated by the\nsimilitude of a person\u2019s being raised from the dead; that this contains\nin it nothing supernatural, or out of the power of man; since the\napostle says, _Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and\nChrist shall give the light_, Eph. v. 14. If arising from the dead be\nthe effect of almighty power, when applied to the work of grace, it\nseems preposterous for this to be recommended as our duty: and if it be\nnot a work of almighty power, then those scriptures that illustrate\neffectual calling by the resurrection of the dead, are nothing to the\nargument for which they have been brought.\n\n_Answ._ Some suppose, that its being assigned as a matter of duty for\nsinners to rise from the dead, does not infer, that it is in their own\npower; but, that it only signifies, that none can expect eternal life\nbut those who rise from the death of sin; and accordingly, as the\npromise, here mentioned, relating to our _having light_, is said to be\n_Christ\u2019s gift_, so the power to perform that duty, which is inseparably\nconnected with it, to wit, _rising from the dead_, is to be sought for\nat his hand. But if this answer be not reckoned sufficient, I see no\nabsurdity in supposing, that these two expressions, _Awake, thou that\nsleepest, and arise from the dead_, import the same thing. Sleep is, as\nit were, the image of death; and therefore, by a metaphorical way of\nspeaking, it may be here called _death_; and if so, the apostle commands\nbelievers to awake out of their carnal security, or shake off their\nstupid frames, as they expect the light of eternal life: however, if it\nbe taken in this sense here; yet when we meet with the words\n_quickened_, or _raised from the dead_, elsewhere, they may be\nunderstood in a different sense, as denoting the implanting a principle\nof grace in regeneration, as will appear by the context: thus when God\nis said to _quicken those who were dead in trespasses and sins; who\nwalked according to the course of this world, fulfilling the desires of\nthe flesh, and of the mind; and were, by nature, the children of wrath_;\nand to do this with a design to shew the _exceeding riches of his grace,\nand kindness towards them_; and as the consequence thereof, to work that\nfaith which accompanies salvation, which is not of themselves, but his\ngift: I say, if these things are mentioned when we are said to be\n_quickened_, or _raised from the dead_, certainly it argues more than a\nstupid believer\u2019s awaking from that carnal security, which he is under,\nwho is supposed to have a principle of spiritual life, whereby he may be\nenabled so to do.\n\n_Object._ 4. It is also objected to what has been said, concerning\neffectual calling\u2019s being a work of divine power, that those scriptures,\nwhich speak of it as such, denote nothing else but the power of working\nmiracles; whereby they to whom the gospel was preached, were induced to\nbelieve; as when the apostle says, _His preaching was in demonstration\nof the Spirit, and of power_, 1 Cor. ii. 4. that is, the doctrines he\npreached, were confirmed, and the truth thereof demonstrated by the\npower of the Holy Ghost, enabling them to work miracles: and _the\nkingdom of God is not in word, but in power_, chap. iv. 20. that is, the\ngospel is not only preached, but confirmed by miracles: _Our gospel came\nto you in power, and in the Holy Ghost_, 1 Thes. i. 5. that is, as some\nunderstand it, the gospel which we preach, was confirmed by the power\nand miraculous works of the Holy Ghost; which has no reference to the\ninternal efficacious influences of the Spirit put forth in effectual\ncalling.\n\n_Answ._ Though we often read that the gospel was confirmed by miracles:\nnevertheless, I cannot see that this is the principle, much less the\nonly sense of these scriptures, and some others that might have been\nproduced to the same purpose.\n\nAs to the first of them in which the apostle speaks _of his preaching,\nbeing in the demonstration of the Spirit, and of power_; it may be\nobserved, that in the preceding chapter he had been speaking concerning\nChrist preached, and his glory set forth among them, as the power of\nGod; that is to say, the power of God rendered the preaching thereof\neffectual to the conversion of them that believed; which he concludes to\ncontain in it no less a conviction of the truth of the Christian\nreligion, than if he had wrought signs or miracles, which the Jews\ndemanded, and which he had no design to work among them: therefore, why\nshould we suppose, that when he speaks _of his preaching being in the\ndemonstration of the Spirit, and of power_, that he intends the\nconfirming his doctrine by miracles, and not in the same sense as he had\nbefore signified Christ to be the power of God.\n\nAnd as for the other scripture, in which it is said, _The kingdom of God\nis not in word, but in power_; that is to be understood by comparing it\nwith what immediately goes before, in which he says, that _I will come\nto you shortly, if the Lord will and know not the speech of them who are\npuffed up, but the power_. It we suppose, that by _them who are puffed\nup_, he means some of their teachers, who swelled either with pride or\nenvy, and probably were sowing some seeds of error among them; it does\nnot seem to be a just sense of the text, to explain the words when he\nsays, _I will know not the speech of them who are puffed up, but the\npower_, q. d. I will not so much regard the doctrines they deliver, as I\nwill enquire and be convinced, that they have confirmed them by\nmiracles. For he would rather regard their doctrine than their pretence\nto miracles; or have said, I will not enquire whether ever they have\nwrought any miracles or no, but what efficacy their doctrine has had:\nand therefore the apostle, by _knowing the power_, does not mean that of\nworking miracles, but he intimates that he would know, not only what\ndoctrines these persons taught, but what success attended their\npreaching; and then he adds, that _the kingdom of God_, that is, the\ngospel-state is advanced and promoted, not barely by the church\u2019s\nenjoying the means of grace, such as the preaching of the word; but _by\nthe power of God_, which makes the word preached effectual to salvation,\nwhereby sinners are converted, and many added to the church, such as\nshall be saved.\n\nAs to the last scripture mentioned, in which the apostle says, _Our\ngospel came to you, not in word only, but in power_, I cannot think that\nhe has any reference in that place, to the confirming the gospel by\nmiracles; because this is assigned as a mark of their election,\n_knowing, brethren, your election of God; for our gospel came unto you,\nnot only in word, but in power_, &c. Now, whether we take election for\nGod\u2019s eternal design to save them, or for the execution thereof, in his\napplying the graces of the Spirit to them; or if we take it in the\nlowest sense, which they, on the other side of the question, generally\ngive into, for their being a choice, religious unblameable society of\nChristians, excelling many others in piety: this could not be evinced by\nthe gospel\u2019s being confirmed by miracles; and therefore this sense seems\nnot agreeable to the apostle\u2019s design; and consequently the objection\ntaken from those scriptures, that speak of the power of God in\nconversion, as implying nothing else but his power, exerted in working\nmiracles, will not, in the least, be sufficient to weaken the force of\nthe argument we are maintaining. Thus concerning effectual calling\u2019s\nbeing a work of power, attributed, in particular, to the Holy Spirit.\n\nThere is one thing more observed, in the answer we are explaining, which\nmust be briefly considered; namely, that it is a work of grace, which\nwas the internal moving cause thereof; or, the reason of God\u2019s exerting\nhis divine power therein. Effectual calling must be a work of grace,\nwithout any motive taken from them, who are the subjects thereof;\ninasmuch as they had before this, nothing in them, that could render\nthem the objects of divine love, being described as _dead in trespasses\nand sins, alienated from the life of God_, and _enmity_ itself _against\nhim_: so that their condition, antecedent hereunto, cannot be supposed\nto be the moving cause hereof; for that which is in itself, altogether\nunlovely, cannot afford a motive for love to any one that weighs the\ncircumstances of persons and things, and acts in pursuance thereof.\n\n_Object._ But whereas it is objected, that though the present condition\nof unregenerate persons cannot afford any motive inducing God thereunto,\nyet the foresight of their future conduct might.\n\n_Answ._ To this we answer, That all the good which shall be found in\nbelievers, is God\u2019s gift; he is the finisher as well as the author of\nfaith; and therefore it cannot be said, that any thing out of himself,\nwas the moving cause hereof. And to this we may add, That God foresaw\nthe vile and unworthy behaviour of believers, proceeding from the\nremainders of corrupt nature in them, as well as those graces which he\nwould enable them to act: so that there is as much in them that might\ninduce him to hate them, as there is to move him to love them; and\ntherefore we must conclude, that his love proceeds from another cause;\nor that it is by the grace of God alone, that we are what we are: which\nleads us to consider,\n\n4. That the power and grace of God, displayed in effectual calling, is\nirresistible, and consequently such as cannot but be effectual to\nproduce that which is designed to be brought about thereby. To deny\nthis, would be to infer, that the creature has an equal, if not a\nsuperior, force to God: for, as, in nature, every thing that impedes or\nstops a thing that is in motion, must have an equal force to resist with\nthat which is affected by it; so, in the work of grace, if the will of\nman can render the power of God of none effect, or stop the progress of\ndivine grace, contrary to his design or purpose, this must argue the\ncreature\u2019s power of resisting, equal to that which is put forth by God,\nin order to the bringing this work to perfection. This consequence is so\nderogatory to the divine glory, that no one who sees it to be just, will\nmaintain the premises from whence it is deduced.\n\nIf it be said, that God may suffer himself to be resisted; and his\ngrace, that would otherwise have been effectual, to be defeated; this\nwill not much mend the matter; but only, in order to the avoiding one\nabsurd consequence, bring in another; for if every one would have, what\nhe purposes to be done brought to pass, and would not be disappointed,\nif he could help it, the same must be said of the great God. Now if God\ncould have prevented his purpose from being defeated, but would not,\nthis argues a defect of wisdom; if his own glory was designed, by\npurposing to do that which the creature renders ineffectual, then he\nmisses of that end, which cannot but be the most valuable, and\nconsequently most desirable: therefore, for God to suffer a purpose of\nthis nature, to be defeated, supposing he could prevent it, is to suffer\nhimself to be a loser of that glory which is due to his name. Moreover,\nthis is directly contrary to what the apostle says, _Who hath resisted\nhis will_, Rom. ix. 19. or who hath rendered the grace, which he\ndesigned should take effect, ineffectual, or, which is the same thing,\nwho can do it?\n\nThe ground on which many have asserted, that the grace of God may be\nresisted, is taken from some scriptures, that speak of man\u2019s being in\nopen hostility against him. Thus we read of a bold daring sinner, as\n_stretching out his hand against God, and strengthening himself against\nthe Almighty, running upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses\nof his bucklers_, Job xv. 25, 26. And Stephen reproves the Jews as\nhaving _always resisted the Holy Ghost, both they and their fathers_,\nActs vii. 51, 52. and the Pharisees are said to _have rejected_, Luke\nvii. 30. or, as the word[27] might have been rendered, _disannulled the\ncounsel of God against themselves_. And elsewhere, the prophet speaks of\nGod\u2019s _stretching out his hand all the day unto a disobedient and\ngainsaying people_, Rom. x. 21. These, and such like scriptures give\noccasion to some to suppose, that the power and grace, as well as the\npurpose of God, may be resisted.\n\nBut that we may understand the sense of these scriptures, and, at the\nsame time not relinquish the doctrine we are maintaining, and thereby\ninfer the consequence above-mentioned; we must distinguish between our\nopposition to God\u2019s revealed will, contained in his word, which is the\nrule of duty to us; and resisting his secret will, which determines the\nevent. Or, as it may be otherwise expressed, it is one thing to set\nourselves against the objective grace of God, that is, the gospel, and\nanother thing to defeat his subjective grace, that when he is about to\nwork effectually in us, we should put a stop to his proceedings. The\nformer no one denies; the latter we can, by no means, allow of. Persons\nmay express a great deal of reluctancy and perverseness at that time,\nwhen God is about to subdue their stubborn and obstinate wills; but the\npower of God will break through all this opposition; and the will of man\nshall not be able to make his work void, or without effect. The Jews, as\nabove-mentioned, might _resist the Holy Ghost_, that is, oppose the\ndoctrines contained in scripture, which were given by the Spirit\u2019s\ninspiration; and they might make this revelation of no effect, with\nrespect to themselves; but had God designed that it should take effect,\nthen he would have prevented their resisting it. Israel might _be a\ngainsaying people_, that is, they might oppose what God communicated to\nthem by the prophets, which it was their duty and interest to have\ncomplied with; and so the offers of grace in God\u2019s revealed will, might\nbe in vain with respect to them; but it never was so with respect to\nthose whom he designed to save: and if the hardened sinner, _stretching\nout his hand against God_, may be said hereby to express his averseness\nto holiness, and his desire to be exempted from the divine government;\nhe may be found in open rebellion against him, as hating and opposing\nhis law; but he cannot offer any real injury to his divine perfections,\nso as to detract from his glory, to render his purpose of no effect.\nMoses speaking concerning God\u2019s works of providence, says, _They are\nperfect; for all his ways are judgment_, Deut. xxxii. 4. And elsewhere,\nGod, by the prophet Isaiah, says, _I will work, and who shall let it_,\nIsa. xliii. 13. From whence he argues, his eternal Deity, and\nuncontroulable power, when he says, _before the day was, I am he, and\nthere is none that can deliver out of my hand_; so that if a stop might\nbe put to his works of providence, he would cease to be a God of\ninfinite perfection; and may we not from hence infer, that his works of\ngrace are not subject to any controul; so that when he designs to call\nany effectually, nothing shall prevent this end\u2019s being answered, which\nis what we intend, when we speak of the power and grace of God as\nirresistible; which leads us to consider,\n\n5. The season or time in which persons are effectually called; which in\nthis answer, is said to be God\u2019s accepted time. If the work be free and\nsovereign, without any motive in us, the time in which he does it, must\nbe that which he thinks most proper. Here we may observe,\n\n(1.) That some are regenerate in their infancy, when the word can have\nno instrumentality, in producing the least acts of grace; these have\ntherefore the seeds thereof, which spring up, and discover themselves,\nwhen they are able to make use of the word. That persons are capable of\nregeneration from the womb, is no less evident, than that they are\ncapable of having the seeds or principle of reason from thence, which\nthey certainly have; and if it be allowed, that regeneration is\nconnected with salvation, and that infants are capable of the latter, as\nour Saviour says, that _of such is the kingdom of God_; then they must\nbe certainly capable of the former; and not to suppose some infants\nregenerate from the womb, would be to exclude a very great part of\nmankind from salvation, without scripture-warrant.\n\n(2.) Others are effectually called in their childhood, or riper years,\nand some few in old age; that so no age of life may be an inducement to\ndespair, or persons be thereby discouraged from attending on the means\nof grace. Thus it is said concerning Josiah, That _in the eighth year of\nhis reign, while he was yet young, he began to seek after the God of\nDavid, his father_, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 1. and David was converted when he\nwas a _youth, a stripling of a ruddy and beautiful countenance_, 1 Sam.\nxvi. 12. compared with chap. xvii. 56, 58. And Moses seems to have been\neffectually called, when he left Pharaoh\u2019s court; and _it came into his\nheart to visit his brethren the children of Israel_; at which time he\nwas _forty years old_, Acts vii. 23. And Abraham seems to have been made\npartaker of this grace, when he was called to leave his country, when he\nwas seventy-five years old; before which, it is probable, that he,\ntogether with the rest of his father\u2019s family, served other gods, Josh.\nxxiv. 2. compared with Gen. xii. 4. And we read, in one single instance,\nof a person converted in the very agonies of death, _viz._ the thief\nupon the cross, Luke xxiii. 43.\n\n(3.) Sometimes, when persons seem most disposed hereunto, and are under\nthe greatest convictions, and more inclined to reform their lives, than\nat other times, the work appears, by the issue thereof, to be no more\nthan that of common grace, which miscarries and leaves them worse than\nthey were before; and, it may be, after this, when they seem less\ninclined hereunto, that is, God\u2019s accepted time, when he begins the work\nwith power, which he afterwards carries on and completes. Some are\nsuffered to run great lengths in sin, before they are effectually\ncalled; as the apostle Paul, _in whom God was pleased to shew forth all\nlong suffering, as a pattern to them which should hereafter believe_, 1\nTim. i. 16. So that the time and means being entirely in his hand, as we\nought not to presume, but wait for the day of salvation in all his\nordinances; so, whatever our age and circumstances are, we are still\nencouraged to hope for the mercy of God, unto eternal life; or, that he\nwill save and call us, with an holy calling.\n\nFootnote 5:\n\n That the invitations of the gospel are not restricted to a few amongst\n a larger number who hear them, is clear, from various considerations.\n\n The term evangel, or gospel, importing good tidings, evinces, that it\n is designed not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance and\n salvation.\n\n The blessings, which it announces, lead to the same conclusion;\n liberty is offered to the captives, and the opening of the prison to\n those who are bound; those who labour and are heavily laden, are\n invited to seek, and obtain rest: those who hunger and thirst after\n righteousness, are assured that they shall be filled; the riches of\n grace and of glory are promised to the poor in Spirit; sight is\n offered to the blind; and howsoever diseased, those who are afflicted\n are invited to come to the great Physician; and even those who are\n dead in sin are revived by his life-giving word. Such are the\n circumstances of the worst of men, who are consequently the objects of\n the mercies proffered in the gospel.\n\n The unregenerate elect, who stand amongst those who will not be saved,\n are like them, possessed of prevailing inclinations to sin, and\n equally impotent to good: they are all equally guilty of an aversation\n of heart from God, and so possess in themselves nothing which can\n evidence a right to gospel blessings more than others.\n\n The invitations of the gospel are in universal terms, and although\n such terms are sometimes restricted by the sense, yet where no such\n restriction appears, they are to be taken in their own unlimited\n extent; the ransom is asserted to have been rendered for all; the Lord\n willeth not the destruction of any, but that all should turn and live;\n Christ proclaimed to sinners, _if any man thirst, let him come unto me\n and drink_; and directed his disciples to go and _teach all nations_;\n and it is his will, that the gospel should be preached _unto every\n creature_.\n\n If in the day of final account, the abominable crimes of Sodom and\n Gomorrha shall evince less guilt than the impenitency of Chorazin and\n Bethsaida; the aggravation of guilt, which the gospel produces,\n demonstrates that its messages are directed unto the worst of men, as\n well as others.\n\n Those who are guided by the light of nature, are guilty, because they\n violate the rule of conscience: such as possessed the law of God were\n still more guilty, but sinners under the light of the gospel, who\n trample under foot the blood of Christ, and despise and reject the\n mercies of the gospel, are guilty in the highest degree. It is just\n that they should not receive the offered pardon, but remain under the\n condemnation of the law, the dominion of iniquity, the slavery of\n Satan, and be left in their beloved darkness until they sink in\n despair. Yet nothing but their own aversion rejects the invitation, or\n prevents their salvation: they are straitened in their own bowels, and\n are the causes of their own destruction. Thus salvation is offered in\n general, and God is just, though the application of it is plainly\n special.\n\nFootnote 6:\n\n Vide Fuller\u2019s \u201cGospel worthy of all Acceptation.\u201d\n\nFootnote 7:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 333._\n\nFootnote 8:\n\n _This is what is generally called the_ formalis _ratio of liberty._\n\nFootnote 9:\n\n _We generally say, that whatever is essential to a thing, belongs to\n it as such. And there is a known rule in logic_, A quatenus ad omne\n valet consequentia; _and the then absurd consequences, above\n mentioned, would necessarily follow from it._\n\nFootnote 10:\n\n _In this respect divines generally consider liberty as opposed to\n co-action: but here we must distinguish between a natural co-action\n and a moral one. Liberty is not opposed to a moral co-action, which is\n very consistent with it. Thus an honest man cannot allow himself in a\n vile action; he is under a moral constraint to the contrary; and yet\n he abstains from sin freely. A believer loves Christ freely, as the\n apostle Paul certainly did; and yet, at the same time, he was under\n the constraint of the love of Christ; as he himself expresses it_, _2\n Cor._ v. 14.\n\nFootnote 11:\n\n _This divines generally call_ spontaneity.\n\nFootnote 12:\n\n _This some call_ lubentia rationalis.\n\nFootnote 13:\n\n _This some divines call_ voluntas serva.\n\nFootnote 14:\n\n _The question between us and the Pelagians, is not whether the will\n sometimes follows the dictates of the understanding, but, whether it\n either always does so? or, if it be otherwise, whether that which\n hinders it does not arise from a defect in these dictates of the\n understanding? Accordingly they speak of the dictates of the\n understanding as practical, and not barely speculative, and with a\n particular application to ourselves. They also consider the will as\n having been before in some suspense; but that dictate of the\n understanding which it follows, is the last, after mature\n deliberation; and it is supposed to have compared things together; and\n therefore presents a thing, not only as good, but more eligible than\n any thing else, which they call a comparate dictate of the\n understanding; and by this means the will is persuaded to a\n compliance. But though this may be true in many instances that are\n natural; yet daily experience proves, that it does not hold good with\n respect to things divine and supernatural._\n\nFootnote 15:\n\n The manners and maxims of the world accord with the inclinations of\n the human mind, because they spring from them: the dispositions and\n the pursuits of men are at variance with the laws of God, the\n doctrines of the gospel, and the practice of the saints, this will\n appear by comparing them. That the human mind should be brought to\n submit to the self-denial requisite to the character of a true\n christian, its bias or bent must be changed. Because men are moral\n agents, various motives are addressed to them to induce such change,\n when not attended to, they aggravate their guilt: when they are\n followed by the change, which they have a tendency to produce, those\n who yield are said to be \u201cborn of the word.\u201d Were it not for the\n information we derive from the scriptures we should probably look no\n further than the proximate cause, and give man the glory; but these\n teach us, that the Spirit of God is always in such change, if it be\n real, the efficient cause: \u201cGod sanctifies _by_ the truth,\u201d he\n \u201c_opens_ the heart to attend\u201d to the word, and when any have _learned_\n from and been _taught_ or _drawn_ by the Father they come unto Christ;\n they are therefore also in a higher sense _born of the Spirit_.\n\n This work of God immediately upon the mind, is possible to him, who\n formed, sustains, and knows the secrets of the heart; if we are\n unconscious of our creation, support in existence, and the access of\n the Searcher of hearts to our minds, we may be unconscious of his\n influence to change them. If this were sensible, it might be a motive\n incompatible with the safety and moral government of beings, who at\n best, whilst here, are imperfectly holy.\n\n The communication of the knowledge of saving truths immediately is\n unnecessary: we have the sacred scriptures, which are competent to\n make us wise unto salvation. The inspiration anciently given, is\n distinct from the change of bias, or disposition necessary to a\n preparation for heaven, might exist without, and is therefore inferior\n to it.\n\n It is not the sole effect of moral suasion, it is a work of the spirit\n not the letter, of power not the word: it is a birth, not by \u201cblood,\n nor by the will of the flesh, nor _by the will_ of man, but of God,\u201d\n and those only \u201cwho are of God, hear,\u201d believe, and obey his word.\n\n This influence is sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, riches to\n the poor, health to the sick, and life to the dead. It is not\n incompatible with moral agency, for the holy disposition is as free in\n its operation, as the former sinful inclinations had been in theirs.\n The necessity of it to salvation, is no excuse for the impenitent;\n grace is not necessary to the vindication of Divine justice: the\n preponderancy of inclinations to evil is the essence of, not an\n apology for sin. It is very strange if, because a man is so intent\n upon sinning that nothing can change him but the almighty power of the\n Divine Spirit, he is on this very account innocent.\u2014It does not render\n the preaching of the word unnecessary, for besides that it is\n commanded, and important to call men to repentance and faith, when the\n grace has been given, God also usually accompanies his ordinances with\n his Spirit\u2019s influences, and seems in most cases, to direct in his\n providence the blessings of his instructions to those whom he makes\n the subjects of his grace.\n\nFootnote 16:\n\n \u201cI have seen it objected, that to suppose a change effected in the\n heart of man, otherwise than by the power of moral means, is palpably\n absurd; as implying an evident impossibility in the nature of things.\n It has been said, by a divine of advanced age, and good sense; \u2018The\n moral change of the mind in regeneration, is of an essentially\n different kind from the mechanical change of the body, when that is\n raised from the dead; and must be effected by the exertion of a\n different kind of power. Each effect requires a power suited to its\n nature: and the power proper for one can never produce the other. To\n argue from one to the other of these effects, as the apostle has been\n misunderstood to do, in Eph. i. 20, is therefore idle and\n impertinent.\u2014The Spirit of God is possessed of these two kinds of\n power, and exerts the one or the other, accordingly as he wills to\n produce a change of the moral or physical kind, in moral beings or\n inanimate matter.\u2019\n\n \u201cBut to this philosophical objection, however plausible and\n unanswerable it may appear, I think the reply of our Saviour to the\n difficulty started by the Sadducees, respecting the resurrection and a\n future state, is neither idle, nor impertinent: \u2018Ye do err, not\n knowing the scriptures, nor the power of _God_.\u2019 The Almighty is not\n limited, as men are, to these two modes of operation, by moral and\n mechanical means. The Spirit of God is possessed of a power of working\n in a manner different from either of these; that is, supernaturally.\n The means by which effects are brought to pass in a natural way, must\n indeed be different; according to the nature of those effects, and of\n the subjects on which the operations are performed: but when once we\n admit the idea of a work properly supernatural\u2014an effect produced not\n by the power of any means at all, we instantly lose sight of all\n distinctions in the kind of power, or manner of working, adapted to\n things of different natures. When God, by his omnipotent word alone,\n called all nature into being at first, are we to suppose that he\n exerted different powers, according to the natures of the things\n designed to be created; and that the power proper to create inanimate\n matter, could never create a thinking mind! Are we to conceive that\n angels and the souls of men were persuaded into being, by arguments\n and motives; and that the material world was forced out of nothing, by\n the power of attraction! So, in regard to quickening the dead, are we\n to imagine that God can give new life to a soul dead in sin, only by\n moral suasion; and that, if he will reanimate bodies which have slept\n thousands of years in the dust of the earth, he has no other way to do\n it than by a physical operation! The body of Christ was raised to\n life, I should suppose, not by any mechanical power, but\n supernaturally. In this manner God always works, when he quickeneth\n the dead, and calleth things that are not, as though they were. And\n what absurdity can there be in supposing Him able to give a new\n principle of action, as well as to give existence to any thing else,\n in this immediate manner?\n\n \u201cSome sound and sensible divines, it must be granted, in order to\n guard against the notion of regeneration\u2019s being effected by moral\n suasion, have called it a physical work, and a physical change; but\n very needlessly, I apprehend, and with very evident impropriety. The\n change is moral: the work producing it, neither moral nor physical;\n but supernatural.\u201d\n\n DR. SMALLEY\n\nFootnote 17:\n\n \u1f5d\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 18:\n\n The change in regeneration has been often called the communication of\n _a principle of spiritual life_. It is described as life, in the\n scriptures. Sensible objects make no impressions on dead bodies,\n because insensible; and those, who receive no impressions from divine\n truths, but remain unaffected by the charms of holiness, are\n figuratively denominated _dead_. Life being the opposite of death,\n such as are sensible of the Divine excellencies, and receive the\n impressions which religious truths are calculated to make, may, in the\n same manner, be termed _living_. Such also are called _spiritual_,\n because this holy activity is communicated by the Spirit of God. \u201cYou\n hath he quickened;\u201d and, because it has for its object the things\n which have been revealed by the Holy Spirit.\n\n These terms are derived from the Scriptures, but the word _principle_\n is destitute of such support. It is found in the Epistle to the\n Hebrews: there it is used for those fundamental doctrines, which are\n the _beginnings_ of the doctrine of the gospel; but this is not the\n meaning of the term in the above description. This change is the\n immediate work of God, and not the communication of some operative\n axiom of truth. There are natural principles of action; as habit,\n affection, and passion: and there are moral; as sense of duty, fear of\n God, and love of holiness. These are all termed principles, because\n they excite to action, and so are the beginnings, or causes of it. But\n it is scarcely in this sense, that the term principle is used in the\n description of regeneration; for it is said to be communicated, and so\n must mean something distinct from, and the effect of the work of the\n Spirit. Accordingly it has been called \u201ca fixed impression of some\n spiritual truth upon the heart.\u201d But there is no truth, or other\n motive, sufficient to prevail against the obduracy of the unrenewed\n heart; or to become a _principle_ of action to a soul dead in sin.\n Whatever that is in fallen man, which repels such motives, and\n prevents their influence until some more worthy motive is thrown into\n the scale, it is the work of the Spirit to remove it, and to give the\n soul an activity towards holy things. No intervention of mediate\n causes seems necessary; the Spirit of God is the agent; the soul of\n the man is the subject of influence; and He is said to _open the\n heart, to give a new heart, to create anew, to enlighten the mind in\n the knowledge of the truth, to work in us to will and to do_, or _to\n give sight to the blind, and hearing to the deaf_. From such\n scriptural expressions it may be gathered that sight, knowledge, new\n dispositions, and a change of inclinations, are the _effects_ of\n regeneration, and not the _thing itself_.\n\n This change is more important than all the gifts of providence, if man\n therefore be the author of it, he is his own greatest benefactor, and\n must have the highest glory. If the Holy Spirit acts no otherwise on\n the human soul, than by addressing motives, angelic natures do also\n this; and no more power is ascribed to the Searcher of hearts, than to\n them. Then also it will follow, that all professing christians are of\n the same kind; and that it was improperly said, that they \u201cwere not of\n us,\u201d who afterwards have \u201cdeparted from us.\u201d Then also the advice to\n those who are in the visible church \u201cto examine,\u201d and \u201cprove\n themselves,\u201d whether Christ be \u201cin them,\u201d is without meaning, or\n utility; because the thing to be inquired for is notorious, that is,\n their visible profession. And to \u201cbe born again,\u201d is but \u201cto see the\u201d\n visible \u201ckingdom\u201d of Christ: and so the proposition spoken to\n Nicodemus was merely identical.\n\nFootnote 19:\n\n _See Charnock, Vol. II. page 220, 221, &c. and Cole on Regeneration._\n\nFootnote 20:\n\n _See Charnock, Vol. II. page 232, who speaking concerning its being an\n instrument, appointed by God, for this purpose, says, That God hath\n made a combination between hearing and believing; so that believing\n comes not without hearing, and whereas he infers from hence, that the\n principle of grace is implanted, by hearing and believing the word, he\n must be supposed to understand it, concerning the principle deduced\n into act, and not his implanting the principle itself._\n\nFootnote 21:\n\n _See Charnock on Regeneration, Vol. II. page 70, 71._\n\nFootnote 22:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxv.\n\nFootnote 23:\n\n When it is said \u201c_no man can come unto me, except the Father who hath\n sent me, draw him_,\u201d the negation must be understood as expressive of\n _moral_ impotency, and as if it had been said \u201c_ye will not come unto\n me that ye might have life_;\u201d but nevertheless as direct proof of the\n absolute necessity of divine grace to the salvation of every person\n who is saved. That the aid is not merely necessary to the\n _understanding_ is evident from the guilt of unregeneracy, and from\n the supposition of the Saviour whose reproof implies that it was the\n carnality of the _heart_ which created the impotency to come unto or\n believe on him.\n\n The propriety of exhortations to turn, repent, believe, and work out\n our own salvation, is obvious; because such impotency is chiefly an\n aversion of heart. When such motives are ineffectual, they prove the\n inveteracy of the opposition to God, and argue the greater guilt. They\n are no evidence that grace is unnecessary, because they have an\n important effect in the change of the man\u2019s views, and pursuits, when\n the Spirit of God has \u201c_opened the heart_\u201d to receive the necessary\n impressions; and because these motives are rendered effectual by the\n Divine Spirit. He grants us repentance, turns us, helps our unbelief,\n strengthens our faith, and works in us both to will and to do of his\n own good pleasure.\n\n Because it is charged upon the evil that they \u201cresist\u201d the grace of\n God, and therefore his Spirit will not always \u201cstrive\u201d with men, it by\n no means follows, that the success of grace depends merely upon our\n yielding; as often as men yield to the strivings of the Spirit, a\n victory is obtained; for the carnal heart inclines to evil until\n subdued by him: we are \u201cmade willing in a day of his power.\u201d Were it\n otherwise the glory of man\u2019s salvation would belong to himself, at\n least in part; but the language of the believer is \u201c_not unto us, O\n Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name, be the glory given_.\u201d Nor is\n there any need to suppose man\u2019s salvation thus imputable to himself in\n order that the evil may be charged with the blame of his destruction;\n for nothing excludes him but his own evil heart, and this is his sin.\n\n It does not result that the man, who is thus \u201cmade willing,\u201d is in\n such manner constrained as that his holiness, being the effect of\n compulsion, possesses no moral beauty; because he acts as freely as\n the evil man does; and even more so, for the latter is a slave to his\n preponderating evil inclinations. The believer chooses holiness, and\n though he has nothing to boast of before God, his good works may well\n justify him before men.\n\n If it be yet objected, that this is a discouraging representation of\n the way of obtaining happiness; it may be answered, that it can\n discourage only those, who wish for happiness, at the same time that\n they more strongly incline to sensuality; and such ought to be\n discouraged in their vain expectations: but it is highly consolatory\n to such as prefer holiness and heaven; for it not only discovers to\n them, that God has wrought in them to will and to do, but that he is\n engaged for them, and will accomplish their salvation.\n\nFootnote 24:\n\n _See Charnock on Regeneration, Vol. II. page 147, 148, &c._\n\nFootnote 25:\n\n _When we speak of effectual calling\u2019s being the work of the Spirit,\n the agency of the Father and Son is not excluded, since the divine\n power, by which all effects are produced, belongs to the divine\n essence, which is equally predicated of all the persons in the\n Godhead; but when any work is peculiarly attributed to the Spirit,\n this implies his personal glory\u2019s being demonstrated thereby,\n agreeably to what is elsewhere called the oeconomy of the divine\n persons; which see farther explained in Vol. I. page 292, 293_, &c.\n\nFootnote 26:\n\n \u0395\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 27:\n\n \u0391\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXIX.\n\n\n QUEST. LXIX. _What is the communion in grace, which the members of\n the invisible church have with Christ?_\n\n ANSW. The communion in grace, which the members of the invisible\n church have with Christ, is, their partaking of the virtue of his\n mediation, in their justification, adoption, sanctification, and\n whatever else, in this life, manifests their union with him.\n\nHaving considered the vital union which the members of the invisible\nchurch have with Christ in their effectual calling, we are now led to\nspeak concerning that communion in grace, which they have with him.\n\nCommunion with Christ doth not, in the least, import our being made\npartakers of any of the glories or privileges which belong to him as\nMediator; but it consists, in our participation, of those benefits which\nhe hath purchased for us; and it implies, on his part, infinite\ncondescension, that he will be pleased to communicate such blessings on\nus, and on our\u2019s, unspeakable honours and privileges, which we enjoy\nfrom him: it is sometimes called _fellowship_, 1 John i. 3. which is the\nresult of friendship, and proceeds from his love: thus our Saviour\nspeaks of his _loving them, and manifesting himself unto them_, John\nxiv. 21. It also proceeds from union with him, and is the immediate\neffect and consequence of effectual calling: therefore God is said to\n_have called us unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ_, 1 Cor. i.\n9.\n\nAnd it is farther said in this answer, to be a manifestation of our\nunion with him. He has received those blessings for us, which he\npurchased by his blood; and, accordingly is the treasury, as well as the\nfountain of all grace; and we are therefore said to _receive of his\nfulness, grace for grace_, John i. 16. And the blessings which we are\nsaid to receive, by virtue of his mediation, are justification,\nadoption, and sanctification, with all other benefits that either\naccompany or flow from them; which are particularly explained in the\nfollowing answers.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXX., LXXI.\n\n\n QUEST. LXX. _What is justification?_\n\n ANSW. Justification is an act of God\u2019s free grace unto sinners, in\n which he pardoneth all their sins, accepteth and accounteth their\n persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them,\n or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full\n satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by\n faith alone.\n\n QUEST. LXXI. _How is justification an act of God\u2019s free grace?_\n\n ANSW. Although Christ, by his obedience and death, did make a\n proper, real, and full satisfaction to God\u2019s justice, in the behalf\n of them that are justified; yet, inasmuch as God accepteth the\n satisfaction from a surety, which he might have demanded of them,\n did provide this surety, his own only Son, imputing his\n righteousness to them, and requiring nothing of them for their\n justification, but faith; which also is his gift; their\n justification is, to them, of free grace.\n\nHitherto we have been led to consider that change of heart and life\nwhich is begun in effectual calling; whereby a dead sinner is made\nalive, and one that was wholly indisposed for, and averse to the\nperformance of good works, is enabled to perform them by the power of\ndivine grace: and now we are to speak concerning that change of state\nwhich accompanies it; whereby one, who being guilty before God, was\nliable to the condemning sentence of the law, and expected no other than\nan eternal banishment from his presence, is pardoned, received into\nfavour, and has a right to all the blessings which Christ has, by his\nobedience and sufferings, purchased for him. This is what we call\njustification; and it is placed immediately after the head of effectual\ncalling, as being agreeable to the method in which it is insisted on in\nthat golden chain of salvation, as the apostle says, _Whom he called,\nthem he also justified_, Rom. viii. 30.\n\nThis is certainly a doctrine of the highest importance, inasmuch as it\ncontains in it the way of peace, the foundation of all our hope, of the\nacceptance both of our persons and services, and beholding the face of\nGod, at last, with joy. Some have styled it the very _basis_ of\nChristianity; and our forefathers thought it so necessary to be insisted\non and maintained, according to the scripture-account thereof, that they\nreckoned it one of the principal doctrines of the reformation. And,\nindeed, the apostle Paul speaks of it as so necessary to be believed,\nthat he concluded that the denying or perverting of it was the ground\nand reason of the Jews being rejected; _who being ignorant of God\u2019s\nrighteousness, and going about to establish a righteousness of their\nown, have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God_: and\nwhen they shall be called, if their call be intended, in that account\nwhich we have, of _the marriage of the Lamb, and his wife having made\nherself ready_, Rev. xix. 7. as many suppose, it is worth observing,\nthat she is described as _arrayed in fine linen, which is the\nrighteousness of saints_, or Christ\u2019s righteousness, by which they are\njustified: this is that in which they glory; and therefore are\nrepresented as being convinced of the importance of that doctrine which,\nbefore, they were ignorant of. This we have an account of in these two\nanswers, which we are now to explain, and shall endeavour to do it in\nthe following method.\n\nI. We shall consider what we are to understand by the word _justify_.\n\nII. What are the privileges contained therein, as reduced to two heads,\nto wit, pardon of sin; and God\u2019s accounting them who are justified,\nrighteous in his sight? And,\n\nIII. What is the foundation of our justification? namely, a\nrighteousness wrought out for us.\n\nIV. The utter inability of fallen man to perform any righteousness, that\ncan be the matter of his justification in the sight of God.\n\nV. That our Lord Jesus Christ has wrought out this righteousness for us,\nas our surety, by performing active and passive obedience; which is\nimputed to us for our justification.\n\nVI. We shall consider it as an act of God\u2019s free grace. And,\n\nVII. Shew the use of faith in justification, or in what respects faith\nis said to justify.\n\nI. We shall consider in what sense we are to understand the word\n_justify_. As there are many disputes about the method of explaining the\ndoctrines of justification; so there is a contest between us and the\nPapists, about the sense of the word; they generally supposing, that _to\njustify_, is to make inherently righteous and holy; because\nrighteousness and holiness sometimes import the same thing; and both of\nthem denote an internal change in the person who is so denominated; and\naccordingly they argue, that as to _magnify_ signifies to make great; to\n_fortify_, to make strong; so to _justify_ is to make just or holy: and\nthey suppose, that whatever we do to make ourselves so, or whatever good\nworks are the ingredients of our sanctification, these must be\nconsidered as the matter of our justification. And some Protestant\ndivines have supposed, that the difference between them and us, is\nprincipally about the sense of a word; which favourable and charitable\nconstruction of their doctrine, would have been less exceptionable, if\nthe Papists had asserted no more than that justification might have been\ntaken in this sense, when considered, not as giving us a right to\neternal life, or being the foundation of that sentence of absolution,\nwhich God passes upon us: but since this is the sense they give of it,\nwhen they say that we are justified by our inherent holiness, we are\nbound to conclude, that it is very remote from the scripture sense of\nthe word.\n\nWe do not deny that justification is sometimes taken in a sense\ndifferent from that which is intended by it, when used to signify the\ndoctrine we are explaining. Sometimes nothing more is intended hereby,\nthan our vindicating the divine perfections from any charge which is\npretended to be brought against them. Thus the Psalmist says, _That thou\nmightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou\njudgest_, Psal. li. 4. And our Saviour is said to be justified, that is,\nhis person or character vindicated or defended from the reproaches that\nwere cast on him; as it is said, _Wisdom is justified of her children_,\nMatt. xi. 19. Luke vii. 35. Also we frequently read of the justification\nof the actions or conduct of persons, in scripture; in which sense their\nown works may be said to justify or vindicate them from the charge of\nhypocrisy or unregeneracy. Again, to justify is sometimes taken, in\nscripture, for using endeavours to turn many to righteousness: and\ntherefore our translators have rendered the words, in the prophecy of\nDaniel, which signify, _they who justify many, they who turn many to\nrighteousness, shall shine as the stars_, Dan. xii. 3.[28]\n\nThere are various other senses which are given of this word, which we\npass over as not applicable to the doctrine we are maintaining, and\ntherefore shall proceed to consider the sense in which it is used, when\nimporting a sinner\u2019s justification in the sight of God; wherein it is to\nbe taken only in a forensick sense, and accordingly signifies a person\u2019s\nbeing acquitted or discharged from guilt, or a liableness to\ncondemnation, in such a way as is done in courts of judicature: thus we\nread in the judicial law, that _if there be a controversy between men,\nand they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they\nshall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked_, Deut. xxv. 1.\nwhere _to justify the righteous_, is to be understood for acquitting or\ndischarging one that appears to be righteous, or not guilty, from\ncondemnation; whereas _the wicked_, that is, they who appear to be\nguilty, are to be _condemned_: and in this sense the word is used, when\napplied to the doctrine of justification, in the New Testament, and\nparticularly in Paul\u2019s epistles; who largely insists on this subject.\n\nNow that we may understand how a sinner may expect to be discharged at\nGod\u2019s tribunal, let us consider the methods of proceeding used in human\ncourts of judicature: herein, it is supposed, that there is a law that\nforbids some actions which are deemed criminal; and also, that a\npunishment is annexed to this law, which renders the person that\nviolated it, guilty; and then persons are supposed to be charged with\nthe violation thereof; which charge, if it be not made good, they are\nsaid to be justified, that is, cleared from presumptive, not real guilt:\nbut if the charge be made good, and he that fell under it, liable to\npunishment; if he suffer the punishment he is justified, as in crimes\nthat are not of a capital nature; or if he be any otherwise cleared from\nthe charge, so that his guilt be removed, then he is deemed a justified\nperson: and so the law has nothing to lay to his charge, with respect to\nthat which he was before accused of. Thus when a sinner, who had been\ncharged with the violation of the divine law, found guilty before God,\nand exposed to a sentence of condemnation, is freed from it, then he is\nsaid to be justified; which leads us to consider,\n\nII. The privileges contained in justification; which are forgiveness of\nsin and a right and title to eternal life. These are sufficiently\ndistinguished, though never separated; so that when we find but one of\nthem mentioned in a particular scripture, which treats on this subject,\nthe other is not excluded. Forgiveness of sin is sometimes expressed in\nscripture, by a not imputing sin; and a right to life, includes in it\nour being made partakers of the adoption of children, and a right to the\ninheritance prepared for them. The apostle mentions both these together,\nwhen he speaks of our having _redemption through the blood of Christ,\neven the forgiveness of sins_; and being _made meet to be partakers of\nthe inheritance of the saints in light_, Col. i. 12, 14. And elsewhere\nhe speaks of Christ\u2019s _redeeming them that were under the law_; which\nincludes the former branch of justification, and of their _receiving the\nadoption of children_, which includes the latter. And again he considers\na justified person as _having peace with God_, which more especially\nrespects pardon of sin, and of their _having access to the grace wherein\nthey stand_, and their _rejoicing in hope of the glory of God_, Rom. v.\n1, 2. which is what we are to understand by, or includes in it, their\nright to life.\n\nThat justification consists of both these branches, we maintain against\nthe Papists, who suppose that it includes nothing else but forgiveness\nof sin, which is founded on the blood of Christ; whereas, according to\nthem, our right to life depends on our internal qualifications, or\nsincere obedience. And besides these, there are some Protestant divines,\nwho suppose that it consists only in pardon of sin; and this is\nasserted, by them, with different views; some do it as most consistent\nwith the doctrine of justification by works, which they plead for;\nwhereas, others do it as being most agreeable to another notion which\nthey advance, namely, that we are justified only by Christ\u2019s passive\nobedience; which will be considered under a following head. Again, there\nare others, whose sentiments of the doctrine of justification are\nagreeable to scripture, who maintain, that it includes both forgiveness\nof sins, and a right to life; but yet they add, that the former is\nfounded on Christ\u2019s passive obedience, and the latter on his active:\nwhereas, we cannot but think, that the whole of Christ\u2019s obedience, both\nactive and passive, is the foundation of each of these; which will also\nbe considered, when we come to speak concerning the procuring cause of\nour justification.\n\nAll that we shall observe at present, is, that these two privileges are\ninseparably connected; therefore, as no one can have a right to life,\nbut he whose sins are pardoned; so no one can obtain forgiveness of sin,\nbut he must, as the consequence hereof, have a right to life. As by the\nfall, man first became guilty, and then lost that right to life which\nwas promised in case he had stood; so it is agreeable to the divine\nperfections, provided the guilt be removed, that he should be put in the\nsame state as though it had not been contracted, and consequently, that\nhe should not only have forgiveness of sins, but a right to life.\nForgiveness of sin, without a right to eternal life, would render our\njustification incomplete; therefore, when any one is pardoned by an act\nof grace, he is put in possession of that which, by his rebellion, he\nhad forfeited, he is considered, not only as released out of prison, but\nas one who has the privileges of a subject, such as those which he had\nbefore he committed the crime. Without this he would be like Absalom,\nwhen, upon Joab\u2019s intercession with David, the guilt of murder, which he\nhad contracted, was remitted so far, as that he had liberty to return\nfrom Geshur, whither he was fled: nevertheless, he reckons himself not\nfully discharged from the guilt he had contracted, and concludes his\nreturn to Jerusalem, as it were, an insignificant privilege; unless, by\nbeing admitted to see the king\u2019s face, and enjoy the privileges which he\nwas possessed of before, he might be dealt with as one who was taken\ninto favour, as well as forgiven, 2 Sam. xiv. 2. which was accordingly\ngranted. This leads us to consider these two branches of justification\nin particular. And,\n\n1. Forgiveness of sin. Sin is sometimes represented as containing in it\nmoral impurity, as opposed to holiness of heart and life; and\naccordingly is said, _to defile a man_, Matt. xv. 19, 20. and is set\nforth by several metaphorical expressions in scripture, which tend to\nbeget an abhorrence of it as of things impure; in which sense it is\nremoved in sanctification rather, than in justification; not but that\ndivines sometimes speak of Christ\u2019s redeeming us from the filth and\ndominion of sin, and our deliverance from it in justification: but these\nare to be understood as rendering us guilty; inasmuch as all moral\npollutions are criminal, as contrary to the law of God; otherwise our\ndeliverance from them would not be a branch of justification; and\ntherefore, in speaking to this head, we shall consider sin as that which\nrenders men guilty before God, and so shew what we are to understand by\nguilt.\n\nThis supposes a person to be under a law, and to have violated it;\naccordingly sin is described as the _transgression of the law_, 1 John\niii. 4. The law of God, in common with all other laws, is primarily\ndesigned to be the rule of obedience; and in order thereunto, it is a\ndeclaration of the divine will, which, as creatures and subjects, we are\nunder a natural obligation to comply with; and God, as a God of infinite\nholiness and sovereignty, cannot but signify his displeasure in case of\ndisobedience; and therefore he has annexed a threatening to his law, or\npast a condemning sentence, as that which is due for every\ntransgression: this divines sometimes call the sanction of the law, or a\nfence, with which it is guarded, that so, through the corruption of our\nnature, we may not conclude, that we may rebel against him with\nimpunity: this the scripture styles, _The curse of the law_, Gal. iii.\n10. So that guilt is a liableness to the curse or condemning sentence of\nthe law, for our violation of it: this is sometimes called a debt of\npunishment, which we owe to the justice of God, for not paying that debt\nof obedience which was due from us to his law. Thus, when our Saviour\nadvises us to pray, that our sins may be forgiven; he expresses it by\n_forgiving us our debts_, Luke xi. 4. Matt. vi. 12. so that forgiveness,\nas it is a freeing us from guilt, discharges us from the guilt of\npunishment which we were liable to.\n\nThere is a twofold debt which man owes to God; one he owes to him as a\ncreature under a law; this is that debt of obedience, which he cannot be\ndischarged from; and therefore, a justified person is, in this sense, as\nmuch a debtor as any other. There is also a debt which man contracts as\na criminal, whereby he is liable to suffer punishment; this alone is\nremoved in justification.\n\nMoreover, we must carefully distinguish between the demerit of sin, or\nits desert of punishment; and the sinner\u2019s obligation to suffer\npunishment for it. The former of these is inseparable from sin, and not\nremoved, or, in the least lessened, by pardoning mercy; for sin is no\nless the object of the divine detestation; nor is its intrinsic evil, or\ndemerit, abated by its being forgiven; and therefore, a justified\nperson, remaining still a sinner, as transgressing the law of God, has\nas much reason to condemn himself, in this respect, as though he had not\nbeen forgiven. The Psalmist speaking concerning a person that is\nactually forgiven or justified, says, notwithstanding, that _if thou\nLord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?_ Psal. cxxx. 3.\nHe was, at the same time, in a justified state; but yet he concludes,\nthat there is a demerit of punishment in every sin that he committed;\nthough, when it is pardoned, the obligation to suffer punishment is\ntaken away:[29] and therefore, the apostle speaking of such, says,\n_There is no condemnation to them_, Rom. viii. 1. We must farther\ndistinguish between our having matter of condemnation in us; this a\njustified person has; and there being no condemnation to us; that is,\nthe immediate result of being pardoned.\n\nThere are several expressions in scripture, whereby forgiveness is set\nforth, namely, God\u2019s covering sin: thus the Psalmist says, _Blessed is\nhe whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered_, Psal. xxxii.\n1. or, his hiding his face from it, and blotting it out; or, _when it is\nsought for_, Psal. li. 9. its _not being found_, Jer. l. 20. and,\n_casting our sins into the depths of the sea_, Micah vii. 19. And\nelsewhere it is said, That when God had pardoned the sins of his people,\n_he did not behold iniquity in Jacob, nor see perverseness in Israel_,\nNumb, xxiii. 21. which amounts to the same thing as the foregoing\nexpressions of its being covered, hid, blotted out, _&c._\n\nI am sensible there have been many contests about the sense of this\nscripture; which might, without much difficulty, have been compromised,\nhad the contending parties been desirous to know each others sense,\nwithout prejudice or partiality. It is not to be thought, that when God\nforgives sin, he does not know, or suppose that the person forgiven,\nhad, before this, contracted guilt by sins committed; for without this,\nhe could not be the object of forgiveness. When God is said not to look\nupon, or hide his face from their sins, it is not to be supposed, that\nhe knows not what they have done, or what iniquities they daily commit\nagainst him; for that would be subversive of his omniscience: and when\nhe is said not to mark our iniquities, we are not to understand it, as\nthough he did not look upon the sins we commit, though in a justified\nstate, with abhorrence; for the sinner may be pardoned, and yet the\ncrime forgiven be detested. But God\u2019s not seeing sin in his people, is\nto be taken in a forensic sense; and accordingly, when an atonement is\nmade for sin, and the guilt thereof taken away, the criminal, in the eye\nof the law, is as though he had not sinned; he is as fully discharged\nfrom the indictment, that was brought in against him, as though he had\nbeen innocent, not liable to any charge founded upon it; and therefore\nthe apostle says, _Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God\u2019s elect?\nIt is God that justifieth_, Rom. viii. 33. and it is the same, as for\nGod _not to enter into judgment_, as the Psalmist elsewhere expresses\nit; or to _punish us less than our iniquities have deserved_, Psal.\ncxliii. 2. In this sense the indictment that was brought against him, is\ncancelled, the sentence reversed, and prosecution stopped; so that\nwhatever evils are endured as the consequence of sin, or with a design\nto humble him for it, as bringing sin to his remembrance, with all its\naggravating circumstances, he is, nevertheless, encouraged to hope, that\nthese are not inflicted in a judicial way, by the vindictive justice of\nGod demanding satisfaction; but to display and set forth the holiness of\nhis nature, as infinitely opposite to all sin, and the dispensations of\nhis providence agreeably thereunto; and that with a design to bring him\nto repentance for it.\n\nAnd, that this privilege may appear to be most conducive to our\nhappiness and comfort, let it be considered; that wherever God forgives\nsin, he forgives all sin, cancels every debt that rendered him liable to\npunishment, otherwise our condition would be very miserable, and our\nsalvation impossible; our condition would be like that of a person who\nhas several indictments brought in against him, every one of which\ncontain an intimation that his life is forfeited; it would avail him\nvery little for one indictment to be superseded, and the sentence due to\nhim for the others, executed: thus the apostle speaks of the _free\ngift_, being _of many_, that is, of the multitude of our _offences unto\njustification_, Rom. v. 16. And elsewhere he speaks of God\u2019s forgiving\nhis people _all trespasses_, Col. ii. 13. And as he forgives all past\nsins, so he gives them ground to conclude, that iniquity shall not be\ntheir ruin; and therefore, the same grace that now abounds towards them\nherein, together with the virtue of the atonement made for sin, shall\nprevent future crimes being charged upon them to their condemnation.\nThus concerning forgiveness of sin.\n\n2. The other privilege, which they who are justified are made partakers\nof, is the acceptation of their persons, as righteous in the sight of\nGod: thus they are said to be _made accepted in the Beloved_, Eph. i. 6.\nand as their persons are accepted, so are their performances,\nnotwithstanding the many defects that adhere to them. Thus God is said\nto have _had respect unto Abel, and to his offering_, Gen. iv. 4. And,\ntogether with this, they have a right and title to eternal life; which\nis that inheritance which Christ has purchased for, and God, in his\ncovenant of grace, has promised to them. This is a very comprehensive\nblessing; for it contains in it a right to all those great and precious\npromises, which God has made, respecting their happiness both here and\nhereafter. But since we shall have occasion to insist on this in a\nfollowing answer, under the head of adoption, which some divines, not\nwithout good reason, conclude to be a branch of justification, or, at\nleast, to contain in it those positive privileges, which they, who are\njustified, partake of, either here of hereafter, we shall proceed to\nconsider,\n\nIII. What is the foundation of our justification; and that must be\neither some righteousness wrought out by us; or for us. Since\njustification is a person\u2019s being _made righteous_, as the apostle\nstyles it, Rom. v. 29. we must consider what we are to understand\nhereby; and accordingly a person is said to be righteous who never\nviolated the law of God, nor exposed himself to the condemning sentence\nthereof: in this respect man, while in a state of innocency, was\nrighteous; his perfect obedience was the righteousness which, according\nto the tenor of the covenant he was under, gave him a right to eternal\nlife; especially it would have done so, had it been persisted in, till\nhe was possessed of that life; but such a righteousness as this, cannot\nbe the foundation of our justification, as the apostle says, _By the\nworks of the law shall no flesh be justified_, Gal. ii. 16. Therefore,\nthe righteousness we are now speaking of, must be something wrought out\nfor us, by one who stood in our room and stead, and was able to pay that\ndebt of obedience, and endure those sufferings that were due for sin,\nwhich the law of God might have exacted of us, and insisted on the\npayment of, in our own persons, which, when paid by Christ for us, is\nthat, (as will be considered under a following head,) which we generally\ncall Christ\u2019s righteousness, or what he did and suffered in our stead,\nin conformity to the law of God; whereby its honour was secured and\nvindicated, and justice satisfied; so that God hereby appears to be, as\nthe apostle says, _Just, and the justifier of him which believeth in\nJesus_, Rom. iii. 26.[30]\n\nIV. We are now to consider the utter inability of fallen man to perform\nany righteousness that can be the matter of his justification in the\nsight of God; whereby it will appear, as it is observed in this answer,\nthat we are not accounted righteous in his sight, for any thing wrought\nin us, or done by us. That we cannot be justified by suffering the\npunishment that was due for sin, appears from the infinite evil thereof;\nand the eternal duration of the punishment that it deserves; as our\nSaviour observes in the parable concerning the debtor, who did not\n_agree with his adversary while in the way_, but was _delivered to the\nofficer_, and _cast into prison_; from whence he was not to come out\n_till he had paid the uttermost farthing_, Matt. v. 25, 26. that is to\nsay, he shall never be discharged. A criminal who is sentenced to endure\nsome punishments short of death, or which are to continue but for a term\nof years, when he has suffered them, is, upon the account hereof,\ndischarged, or justified: but it is far otherwise with man, when fallen\ninto the hands of the vindictive justice of God; therefore the Psalmist\nsays, _enter not into judgment with thy servant_, or do not punish me\naccording to the demerit of sin; _for in thy sight shall no flesh living\nbe justified_.\n\nNeither can any one be justified by performing active obedience to the\nlaw of God; for nothing is sufficient to answer that end, but what is\nperfect in all respects; it must be sinless obedience, and that not only\nas to what concerns the time to come, but as respecting the time past;\nand that is impossible, from the nature of the thing, to be said of a\nsinner; for it implies a contradiction in terms. This farther appears\nfrom the holiness of God, which cannot but detest the least defect; and\ntherefore will not deal with a sinful creature, as though he had been\ninnocent: and as for sins that are past, they render us equally liable\nto a debt of punishment, with those which are committed at present, or\nshall be hereafter, in the sight of God. Moreover, the honour of the law\ncannot be secured, unless it be perfectly fulfilled; which cannot be\ndone if there be any defect of obedience.\n\nAs for those works which are done by us, without the assistance of the\nSpirit of God, these proceed from a wrong principle, and have many other\nblemishes attending them, upon the account whereof, they have only a\npartial goodness; and for that reason Augustine gives them no better a\ncharacter than shining sins[31]: but whatever terms we give them, they\nare certainly very far from coming up to a conformity to the divine law.\nAnd as for those good works which are said to be wrought in us, and are\nthe effect of the power and grace of God, and the consequence of our\nbeing regenerated and converted, these fall far short of perfection;\nthere is a great deal of sin attending them, which, if God should mark,\nnone could stand. This is expressed by Job, in a very humble manner;\n_How should man be just with God? if he will contend with him, he cannot\nanswer him one of a thousand_. And, _if I wash myself with snow water,\nand make my hands never so clean, yet shalt thou plunge me in the ditch,\nand mine own clothes shall abhor me: for he is not a man as I am, that I\nshould answer him, and we should come together in judgment_, Job ix. 2,\n3, 30-32. when God is said to _work in us that which is well pleasing in\nhis sight_, Heb. xiii. 21. we are not to understand, that the grace\nwhich he works in us, renders us accepted in his sight, in a forensic\nsense, or, that it justifies us; for in this respect we are only _made\naccepted in the Beloved_, that is, in Christ, Eph. i. 3.\n\nMoreover, as what is wrought in us, has many defects attending it; so it\nis not from ourselves, and therefore cannot be accepted as a payment of\nthat debt of obedience which we owe to the justice of God; and\nconsequently we cannot be justified thereby. Some, indeed, make the\nterms of acceptance, or justification in the sight of God, so very low,\nas though nothing were demanded of us but our sincere endeavours to\nyield obedience, whatever imperfections it be chargeable with. And\nothers pretend, that our confessing our sins will be conducive hereunto;\nand assert, that our tears are sufficient to wash away the guilt of sin.\nThe Papists add, that some penances, of acts of self-denial, will\nsatisfy his justice, and procure a pardon for us; yea, they go farther\nthan this, and maintain, that persons may perform works of\nsupererogation, or pay more than the debt that is owing from them, or\nthan what the law of God requires, and thereby not only satisfy his\njustice, but render him a debtor to them; and putting them into a\ncapacity of transferring these arrears of debt, to those that stand in\nneed of them, and thereby lay an obligation on them, in gratitude, to\npay them honours next to divine. Such absurdities do men run into, who\nplead for human satisfactions, and the merit of good works, as the\nmatter of our justification: and, indeed, there is nothing can tend more\nto depreciate Christ\u2019s satisfaction, on the one hand, and stupify the\nconscience on the other; and therefore, it is so far from being an\nexpedient for justification, that it is destructive to the souls of men.\n\nAs for our sincere endeavours, or imperfect obedience, these cannot be\nplaced by the justice of God, in the room of perfect; for that is\ncontrary to the nature of justice: We cannot suppose, that he who pays a\npepper-corn, or a few mites, instead of a large sum, really pays the\ndebt that was due from him; justice cannot account this to be a payment;\ntherefore, a discharge from condemnation, upon these terms, cannot be\nstyled a justification. And if it be said that it is esteemed so by an\nact of grace: this is to advance the glory of one divine perfection,\nand, at the same time, detract from that of another; nothing therefore\ncan be our righteousness, but that which the justice of God may, in\nhonour, accept of for our justification: and our own righteousness is so\nsmall and inconsiderable a thing, that it is a dishonour for him to\naccept of it in this respect; and therefore we cannot be justified by\nworks done by us, or wrought in us.\n\nThis will farther appear, if we consider the properties of this\nrighteousness; and in particular, that it must not only be perfect, and\ntherefore, such as a sinful creature cannot perform; but it must also be\nof infinite value, otherwise it could not give satisfaction to the\ninfinite justice of God; and consequently cannot be performed by any\nother than a divine person. And it must also bear some resemblance to\nthat debt which was due from us, inasmuch as it was designed to satisfy\nfor the debt which he had contracted; and therefore must be performed by\none who is really man. But this having been insisted on elsewhere, under\nthe head of Christ\u2019s Priestly office[32], we shall not farther enlarge\non it; but proceed to consider,\n\nV. That our Lord Jesus Christ has wrought out this righteousness for us,\nas our Surety, by performing active and passive obedience; which is\nimputed to us for our justification. We have before considered that it\nis impossible that such a righteousness, as is sufficient to be the\nmatter of our justification, should be wrought out by us in our own\npersons; it therefore follows; that it must be wrought out for us, by\none who bears the character of a surety, and performs every thing that\nis necessary to our justification; such an one is our Lord Jesus Christ.\nIn considering this head, we must,\n\n1. Shew what we are to understand by a _surety_, since it is the\nrighteousness of Christ, under this relation to us, which is the matter\nof our justification. A surety is one who submits to be charged with,\nand undertakes to pay a debt contracted by another, to the end that the\ndebtor may hereby be discharged: thus the apostle Paul engages to be\nsurety to Philemon, for Onesimus, who had fled from him, whom he had\nwronged or injured, and was hereby indebted to him; concerning whom, he\nsays, _If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine\naccount; I, Paul, have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it_,\nPhilem. ver. 18. And elsewhere, we read of Judah\u2019s overture to be surety\nfor his brother Benjamin, that he should return to his father, as a\nmotive to induce him to give his consent that he should go with him into\nEgypt: _I will be surety for him; of my hand shalt thou require him: if\nI bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the\nblame for ever_, Gen. xliii. 9. This is so commonly known in civil\ntransactions of the like nature, between man and man, that it needs no\nfarther explication; however, it may be observed,\n\n(1.) That a person\u2019s becoming surety for another, must be a free and\nvoluntary act: for to force any one to bind himself to pay a debt, which\nhe has not contracted, is as much an act of injustice, as it is in any\nother instance to exact a debt where it is not due.\n\n(2.) He that engages to be surety for another must be in a capacity to\npay the debt, otherwise he is unjust to the creditor, as well as brings\nruin upon himself: therefore it is said, _Be not thou one of them that\nstrike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts, if thou hast\nnothing to pay; why should he take away the bed from under thee?_ Prov.\nxxiii. 26, 27.\n\n(3.) He who engages to be surety for another, is supposed not to have\ncontracted the debt himself; and therefore the creditor must have no\ndemands upon him, as being involved together with the debtor, and so\nbecoming engaged antecedent to his being surety: nevertheless, he is\ndeemed, in the eye of the law, consequent thereunto, to stand in the\ndebtor\u2019s room, and to be charged with his debt, and equally obliged to\nthe payment thereof, as though he had contracted it, especially if the\ncreditor be resolved to exact the payment of him, rather than of the\noriginal debtor[33].\n\n(4.) As debts are of different kinds, so the obligation of a surety\nagreeably thereunto admits of different circumstances: thus there are\npecuniary debts resulting from those dealings or contracts which pass\nbetween man and man in civil affairs; and there are debts of service or\nobedience; as also debts of punishment, as has been before observed, for\ncrimes committed; in all which cases, as the nature of the debt differs,\nso there are some things peculiar in the nature of suretyship for it. In\npecuniary debts the creditor is obliged to accept of payment at the hand\nof any one, who at the request of the debtor is willing to discharge the\ndebt which he has contracted, especially, if what he pays be his own;\nbut in debts of service or punishment, when the surety offers himself to\nperform of suffer what was due from another, the creditor is at his\nliberty to accept of, or refuse satisfaction from him, but might insist\non the payment of the debt by him in his own person, from whom it was\ndue.\n\n2. Christ was such a surety for us, or substituted in our room, with a\ndesign to pay the debt which was due to the justice of God from us.\nHere, that we may assume the ideas of a surety but now-mentioned, and\napply them to Christ, as our surety, let it be considered;\n\n(1.) That what he did and suffered for us was free and voluntary; this\nappears from his readiness to engage therein, expressed by his saying,\n_Lo, I come to do thy will_, Heb. x. 9. And therefore whatever he\nsuffered for us did not infer the least injustice in God that inflicted\nit[34].\n\n(2.) He was able to pay the debt, so that there was not the least injury\noffered to the justice of God by his undertaking. This is evident, from\nhis being God incarnate; and therefore in one nature he was able to do\nand suffer whatever was demanded of us, and in the other nature to add\nan infinite value to what he performed therein.\n\n(3.) He was not rendered incapable of paying our debt, or answering for\nthe guilt which we had contracted by any debt of his own, which involved\nhim in the same guilt, and rendered him liable to the same punishment\nwith us, as is evident from what the prophet says concerning him, who\nspeaks of him, as charged with our guilt, though _he had done no\nviolence, neither was any deceit found in his mouth_, Isa. liii. 9. That\nwhich the prophet calls _doing no violence_, the apostle Peter referring\nto, and explaining it, styles _doing_, or committing _no sin_ of any\nkind. He was not involved in the guilt of Adam\u2019s sin, which would have\nrendered him incapable of being a surety to pay that debt for us;\nneither had he the least degree of the corruption of nature, being\nconceived in an extraordinary way, and sanctified from the womb[35]. Nor\ndid he ever commit actual sin, for he was holy, harmless, undefiled, and\nseparate from sinners.\n\n(4.) Another thing observed in the character of a surety, which is very\nagreeable to Christ, is; that what he engaged to pay was his own, or at\nhis own disposal, he did not offer any injury to justice, by paying a\ndebt that was before due to it, or by performing any service which he\nhad no warrant to do. It is true, he gave his life a ransom, but\nconsider him as a divine Person, and he had an undoubted right to\ndispose or of, lay down that life which he had as man. Did he consent,\nin the eternal transaction between the Father and him, to be incarnate,\nand in our nature to perform the work of a Surety? this was an act of\nhis sovereign will; and therefore whatever he paid as a ransom for us,\nwas, in the highest sense, his own. The case was not the same as though\none man should offer to lay down his life for another, who has no power\nto dispose of his life at pleasure. We are not lords of our own lives;\nas we do not come into the world by our own wills, we are not to go out\nof it when we please; but Christ was as God, if I may so express myself,\nlord of himself, of all that he did and suffered as man; by which I\nunderstand that he had a right as God to consent or determine to do, and\nsuffer whatever he did and suffered as man; therefore the debt which he\npaid in the human nature was his own.\n\n(5.) As it has been before observed, that in some cases he that is\nwilling to substitute himself as a surety in the room of the debtor,\nmust be accepted, and approved by him to whom it was due; and in this\nrespect our Saviour\u2019s substitution as our surety in our room, had a\nsanction from God the Father; who gave many undeniable evidences that\nwhat he did and suffered for us, was accepted by him as really as though\nit had been done by us in our own persons, which, as was before\nobserved, might have been refused by him, it being the payment of a debt\nof obedience and sufferings. Now that God the Father testified his\nacceptance of Christ as our surety, appears,\n\n1. From his well-pleasedness with him, both before and after his\nincarnation; before he came into the world, God seems to speak with\npleasure in the fore-thought of what he would be, and do, as Mediator,\nwhen he says, _Behold my servant whom I uphold, mine elect, in whom my\nsoul delighteth_, Isa. xlii. 1. And he is also said to be _well pleased\nfor his righteousness sake_, ver. 21. or in his determining before hand\nthat he should, as Mediator, bring in that righteousness which would\ntend to magnify the law, and make it honourable.\n\nMoreover, his having anointed him by a previous designation to this\nwork, as the prophet intimates, speaking of him before his incarnation,\nIsa. lxi. 1, 2. is certainly an evidence of his being approved to be our\nsurety. And when he was incarnate, God approved of him, when engaged in\nthe work which he came into the world about: thus, when he was solemnly\nset apart, by baptism to the discharge of his public ministry, we read\nof a voice from heaven, saying, _This is my beloved Son, in whom I am\nwell pleased_, Matt. iii. 17. And to this we may add, that there was the\nmost undeniable proof of God\u2019s well pleasedness with him, as having\naccomplished this work, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at\nhis own right hand, in heavenly places.\n\n2. This may be farther argued from his justifying and saving those for\nwhom he undertook to be a surety, before the debt was actually paid; and\nhis applying the same blessings to his people, since the work of\nredemption was finished. The application of what Christ undertook to\npurchase, is an evidence of the acceptableness of the price. And this\nmay be considered, either as respecting those that were saved before his\nincarnation and death; or those who are, from that time, in all\nsucceeding ages, made partakers of the saving benefits procured thereby.\nBefore the actual accomplishment of what he undertook to do and suffer,\nas our surety, God the Father trusted him, and, by virtue of his\npromising to pay the debt, discharged the Old Testament saints from\ncondemnation, as effectually as though it had been actually paid. There\nare some cases in which a surety\u2019s undertaking to pay a debt, is\nreckoned equivalent to the actual payment of it; namely, when it is\nimpossible that he should make a failure in the payment thereof, either\nthough mutability, or a fickelness of temper, inducing him to change his\npurpose; or from unfaithfulness, which might render him regardless of\nhis engagement to pay it: or from some change in his circumstances\nwhereby, though he once was able to pay it, he afterwards becomes\nunable: I say, if none of these things can take place, and especially,\nif the creditor, by not demanding present payment, receives some\nadvantage, which is an argument that he does not stand in need thereof:\nin these cases the promise to pay a debt is equivalent to the payment of\nit.\n\nNow these things may well be applied to Christ\u2019s undertaking to pay our\ndebt: it was impossible that he should fail in the accomplishment of\nwhat he had undertaken; or change his purpose, and so, though he\ndesigned to do it, enter into other measures; or, though he had promised\nto do it, be unfaithful in the accomplishment thereof, these things\nbeing all inconsistent with the character of his person who undertook\nit; and, though he suffered for us in the human nature, it was his\ndivine nature that undertook to do it therein, which is infinitely free\nfrom the least imputation of weakness, mutability, or unfaithfulness:\nand, whereas the present payment was not immediately demanded, nor\ndesigned to be made till the fulness of time was come, his forbearance\nhereof was compensated by that revenue of glory which accrued to the\ndivine name, and that honour that redounded to the Mediator, by the\nsalvation of the elect, before his incarnation; and this was certainly\nan undeniable evidence of God\u2019s approving his undertaking.\n\nAnd since the work of redemption has been completed, all those who are,\nor shall be brought to glory, have, in themselves, a convincing proof of\nGod\u2019s being well pleased with Christ, as substituted in their room and\nstead, to pay the debt that was due from them to his justice, as the\nfoundation of their justification. From hence it plainly appears, that\nChrist was substituted as a surety in our room and stead, to do that for\nus which was necessary for our justification; and we have sufficient\nground to conclude, that he was so from scripture, from whence alone it\ncan be proved, it being a matter of pure revelation. Thus he is said, in\nexpress terms, to have been _made a surety of a better testament_, Heb.\nvii. 22. and that as our surety, he has paid that debt of sufferings\nwhich was due from us, is evident, in that he is said to _offer himself\na sacrifice for our sins_, ver. 27. and to have been _once offered to\nbear the sins of many_, chap. ix. 28. and from his being holy, harmless,\nundefiled, and separate from sinners, the apostle argues, that he had no\noccasion to offer a sacrifice for himself, or that he had no sin of his\nown to be charged with, therefore, herein he bore or answered for our\nsins: thus the apostle Peter says, _He bare our sins in his own body, on\nthe tree, by whose stripes we are healed_, 1 Pet. ii. 24. And elsewhere,\nwe read of _his being made sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be\nmade the righteousness of God in him_, 2 Cor. v. 21. that is, he, who\nhad no guilt of his own to answer for, submitted to be charged with our\nguilt, to stand in our room and stead, and accordingly to be made a\nsacrifice for sin; all this implies as much as his being made a surety\nfor us. But this having been particularly insisted on elsewhere in\nspeaking concerning Christ\u2019s satisfaction, which could not be explained\nwithout taking occasion to mention his being substituted in the room and\nstead of those for whom he paid a price of redemption; and, having also\nconsidered the meaning of those scriptures that speak of his bearing our\nsins, we shall proceed to consider[36],\n\n3. What Christ did, pursuant to this character, namely, as our surety,\nas he paid all that debt which the justice of God demanded from us,\nwhich consisted in active and passive obedience. There was a debt of\nactive obedience demanded from man as a creature; and upon his failure\nof paying it, when he sinned, it became an out-standing debt, due from\nus; but such as could never be paid by us. God determines not to justify\nany, unless this out-standing debt be paid; Christ, as our surety,\nengages to take the payment of it on himself: and, whereas this defect\nof obedience, together with all actual transgressions, which proceeded\nfrom the corruption of our nature, render us guilty or liable to the\nstroke of vindictive justice, Christ, as our surety, undertakes to bear\nthat also: this we generally call the imputation of our sin to Christ,\nthe placing our debt to his account, and the transferring the debt of\npunishment, which was due from us to him, upon which account he is said\nto yield obedience, and suffer in our room and stead, or to perform\nactive and passive obedience for us; which two ideas the apostle joins\nin one expression, when he says, that he _became obedient unto death_,\nPhil. ii. 8. But this having been been insisted on elsewhere, under the\nhead of Christ\u2019s satisfaction[37], where we shewed, not only that Christ\nperformed active as well as passive obedience for us, but endeavoured to\nanswer the objections that are generally brought against Christ\u2019s active\nobedience, being part of that debt which he engaged to pay for us; we\nshall pass it by at present.\n\nBut that which may farther be added, to prove that our sin and guilt\nwere imputed to him, may be argued from his being said to be _made a\ncurse for us_, in order to his redeeming us from the curse of the law,\nGal. iii. 13. and also from his _being made sin for us, that we might be\nmade the righteousness of God in him_, 2 Cor. v. 21. And also from other\nscriptures, that speak of him as suffering, though innocent; punished\nfor sin, though he was at the same time the Lamb of God, without spot or\nblemish; dealt with as guilty, though he had never contracted any guilt,\nand being made a sacrifice for sin, though sinless, which could not have\nbeen done consistently with the justice of God, had not our sins been\nplaced to his account, or imputed to him.\n\nIt is indeed a very difficult thing to convince some persons, how Christ\ncould be charged with sin, or have sin imputed to him, in consistency\nwith the sinless purity of his nature, which some think to be no better\nthan a contradiction, though it be agreeable to the scripture mode of\nspeaking, _viz._ _He was made sin for us_, and yet _knew no sin_, 2 Cor.\nv. 21. However, when we speak of sin\u2019s being imputed to him, we are far\nfrom insinuating, that he committed any acts of sin; or, that his human\nnature was, in the least, inclined to, or defiled thereby; we choose\ntherefore to use the scripture phrase, in which he is said to have\n_borne our sins_, rather than to say, that he was a sinner; much less\nwould I give countenance to that expression which some make use of, that\nhe was the greatest sinner in the world; since I do not desire to apply\na word to him, which is often taken in a sense not in the least\napplicable to the holy Jesus. We cannot be too cautious in our\nexpressions, lest the most common sense in which we understand the\ngreatest sinner, when applied to men, should give any one a wrong idea\nof him, as though he had committed, or were defiled with sin. All that\nwe assert is, that he was charged with our sins, when he suffered for\nthem, not with having committed them; but with the guilt of them, which,\nby his own consent, was imputed to him; otherwise his sufferings could\nnot have been a punishment for sin; and if they had not been so, our sin\ncould not have been expiated, nor would his sufferings have been the\nground of our justification. This leads us to consider,\n\n4. The reference that Christ\u2019s suretyship-righteousness has to our\njustification. This is generally styled its being imputed; which is a\nword very much used by those who plead for the scripture-sense of the\ndoctrine of justification, and as much opposed by them that deny it; and\nwe are obliged to defend the use of it; otherwise Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness, how glorious soever it be in itself, would not avail for\nour justification. Here it is necessary for us to explain what we mean\nby the imputation of Christ\u2019s righteousness.\n\nThere are some who oppose this doctrine, by calling it a putative\nrighteousness, the shadow or appearance of that which has in it no\nreality, or our being accounted what we are not, whereby a wrong\njudgment is passed on persons and things. However, we are not to deny it\nbecause it is thus misrepresented, and thereby unfairly opposed: it is\ncertain, that there are such words used in scripture, and often applied\nto this doctrine, which, without any ambiguity or strain on the sense\nthereof, may be translated, to reckon, to account, or to place a thing\ndone by another to our account; or, as we express it, to impute.[38] And\nthat, either respects what is done by us; or something done by another\nfor us. The former of these senses our adversaries do not oppose; as\nwhen it is said, that Phinehas _executed judgment, and it was counted\nunto him for righteousness_, Psal. cvi. 31. that is, it was approved by\nGod as a righteous action; which expression seems to obviate an\nobjection that some might make against it; supposing, that Phinehas\nherein did that which more properly belonged to the civil magistrate;\nor, that this judicial act in him, was done without a formal trial, and,\nit may be, too hastily; but God owns the action, and, in a way of\napprobation, places it to his account for righteousness, that it should\nbe reckoned a righteous action throughout all generations.\n\nAgain, sometimes that which is done by a person, is imputed to him, or\ncharged upon him, so that he must answer for it, or suffer the\npunishment due to it: thus Shimei says to David, _Let not my Lord impute\niniquity unto me_, 2 Sam. xix. 19. that is, do not charge that sin,\nwhich I committed, upon me, so as to put me to death for it, which thou\nmightest justly do. And Stephen prays, _Lord, lay not this sin to their\ncharge_, Acts vii. 60. impute it not to them, or inflict not the\npunishment on them that it deserves. No one can deny that what is done\nby a person himself, may be placed to his own account; so that he may be\nrewarded or punished for it; or it may be approved or disapproved: but\nthis is not the sense in which we understand it when speaking concerning\nthe imputation of Christ\u2019s righteousness to us; for this supposes that\nwhich is done by another, to be placed to our account. This is the main\nthing which is denied by those who have other sentiments of the doctrine\nwe are maintaining; and, they pretend, that for God to account Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness ours, is to take a wrong estimate of things, to reckon\nthat done by us which was not; which is contrary to the wisdom of God,\nwho can, by no means, entertain any false ideas of things; and if the\naction be reckoned ours, then the character of the person performing it,\nmust also be applied to us; which is to make us sharers in Christ\u2019s\nMediatorial office and glory.\n\nBut this is the most perverse sense which can be put on words, or a\nsetting this doctrine in such a light as no one takes it in, who pleads\nfor it: we do not suppose, that God looks upon man with his all-seeing\neye, as having done that which Christ did, or to sustain the character\nwhich belongs to him in doing it; we are always reckoned, by him, as\noffenders, or contracting guilt, and unable to do any thing that can\nmake an atonement for it. Therefore, what interest soever we have in\nwhat Christ did, it is not reputed our action; but God\u2019s imputing\nChrist\u2019s righteousness to us, is to be taken in a forensic sense, which\nis agreeable to the idea of a debt being paid by a surety: it is not\nsupposed that the debtor paid the debt which the surety paid; but yet it\nis placed to his account, or imputed to him as really as though he had\npaid it himself. Thus what Christ did and suffered in our room and\nstead, is as much placed to our account, as though we had done and\nsuffered it ourselves; so that by virtue hereof we are discharged from\ncondemnation.[39]\n\nThis is the sense in which we understand the imputation of Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness to us; and it is agreeable to the account we have thereof\nin scripture: thus we are said to be _made the righteousness of God in\nhim_, 2 Cor. v. 21. the abstract being put for the concrete; that is, we\nare denominated and dealt with as righteous persons, acquitted and\ndischarged from condemnation in the virtue of what was done by him, who\nis elsewhere styled, _The Lord our righteousness_; and the apostle\nspeaks of his _having Christ\u2019s righteousness_, Phil. iii. 9. that is,\nhaving it imputed to him, or having an interest in it, or being dealt\nwith according to the tenor thereof; in this respect he opposes it to\nthat righteousness which was in him, as the result of his own\nperformances: and elsewhere Christ is said to be _made of God unto us\nrighteousness_; that is, his fulfilling the law is placed to our\naccount; and the apostle speaks of _Christ\u2019s being the end of the law\nfor righteousness to every one that believeth_, Rom. x. 4. which is the\nsame with what he asserts in other words elsewhere concerning the\n_righteousness of the law\u2019s being fulfilled in us_, chap. viii. 3, 4.\nwho could not be justified by our own obedience to it, in _that it was\nweak through the flesh_, or by reason of our fallen state; therefore\nChrist did this for us; and accordingly God deals with us as though we\nhad fulfilled the law in our own persons, inasmuch as it was fulfilled\nby him as our surety.\n\nThis may farther be illustrated, by what we generally understand by\nAdam\u2019s sin being imputed to us, as one contrary may illustrate another;\ntherefore, as sin and death entered into the world by the _offence of\none_, to wit, the first Adam, _in whom all have sinned; so by the\nrighteousness of one the free gift_, Rom. v. 18. that is, eternal life\n_came upon all men_, to wit, those who shall be saved _unto\njustification of life_; and for this reason the apostle speaks of Adam\nas the _figure of him that was to come_, ver. 14. Now as Adam\u2019s sin was\nimputed to us, as our public head and representative, so that we are\ninvolved in the guilt thereof, or fall in him; so Christ\u2019s righteousness\nis imputed to us, as he was our public head and surety: and accordingly,\nin the eye of the law, that which was done by him, was the same as\nthough it had been done by us; and therefore, as the effect and\nconsequence hereof, we are justified thereby. This is what we call\nChrist\u2019s righteousness being imputed to us, or placed to our account;\nand it is very agreeable to the common acceptation of the word, in\ndealings between man and man. When one has contracted a debt, and\ndesires that it may be placed to the account of his surety, who\nundertakes for the payment of it, it is said to be imputed to him; and\nhis discharge hereupon is as valid as though the debtor has paid it in\nhis own person. This leads us,\n\nVI. To consider justification as it is an act of God\u2019s free grace, which\nis particularly insisted on in one of the answers we are explaining; for\nthe understanding of which, let it be observed, that we are not to\nsuppose, that when we are justified by an act of grace, this is opposed\nto our being justified upon the account of a full satisfaction made by\nour surety to the justice of God; in which respect we consider our\ndischarge from condemnation, as an act of justice. The debtor is,\nindeed, beholden to the grace of God for this privilege, but the surety\nthat paid the debt, had not the least abatement thereof made, but was\nobliged to glorify the justice of God to the utmost, which accordingly\nhe did. However, there are several things in which the grace of God is\neminently displayed, more particularly,\n\n1. In that God should be willing to accept of satisfaction from the\nhands of our surety, which he might have demanded of us. This appears\nfrom what has been before observed, namely, that the debt which we had\ncontracted was not of the same nature with pecuniary debts, in which\ncase the creditor is obliged to accept of payment, though the overture\nhereof be made by another, and not by him that contracted the debt:\nwhereas the case is different in debts of obedience to be performed, or\npunishment to be endured; in which instances, he, to whom satisfaction\nis to be given, must accept of one to be substituted in the room of him\nfrom whom the obedience or sufferings were originally due; otherwise,\nthe overture made, or what is done and suffered by him, pursuant\nthereunto, is not regarded, or available to procure a discharge for him,\nin whose room he substituted himself. God might have exacted the debt of\nus, in our own persons, and then our condition had been equally\nmiserable with that of fallen angels, for whom no mediator was accepted,\nno more than provided.\n\n2. The grace of God farther appears, in that he provided a surety for\nus, which we could not have done for ourselves; nor have engaged him to\nperform this work for us, who was the only person that could bring about\nthe great work of redemption.\n\nThe only creatures who are capable of performing perfect obedience, are\nthe holy angels; but these could not do it, for, as has been before\nobserved, whoever performs it must be incarnate, that they may be\ncapable of paying the debt, in some respects, in kind, which was due\nfrom us; therefore they must suffer death, and consequently have a\nnature which is capable of dying; but this the angels had not, nor could\nhave, but by the divine will.\n\nBesides, if God should have dispensed with that part of satisfaction,\nwhich consists in a subjection to death, and have declared, that active\nobedience should be sufficient to procure our justification; the angels,\nthough capable of performing active obedience, would, notwithstanding,\nhave been defective therein; so that justice could not, in honour, have\naccepted of it, any more than it could have dispensed with the\nobligation to perform obedience in general; because it would not have\nbeen of infinite value; and it is the value of things that justice\nregards, and not barely the matter of perfection thereof in other\nrespects: so that it must be an obedience that had in it something\ninfinitely valuable, or else it could not have been accepted by God, as\na price of redemption, in order to the procuring our justification: and\nthis could be performed by none but our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious\nauthor and procurer of this privilege.\n\nIt was impossible for man to have found out this Mediator or Surety; so\nthat it had its first rise from God, and not from us; it is he that\nfound a ransom, and laid help upon one that is mighty; this was the\nresult of his will: therefore our Saviour is represented as saying, _Lo\nI come to do thy will_, Heb. x. 7. as the apostle expresses it. That we\ncould not, by any means, have found out this surety, or engaged him to\nhave done that for us which was necessary for our justification, will\nevidently appear, if we consider,\n\n(1.) That when man fell, the Son of God was not incarnate; and provided\nwe allow that fallen man had some idea of a Trinity of persons, in the\nunity of the divine Essence, which is not unreasonable to suppose; since\nit was necessary that that should be revealed to him before he fell, in\norder to his performing acceptable worship; yet, can any one suppose\nthat man could have asked such a favour of a divine person, as to take\nhis nature, and put himself in his room and stead, and expose himself to\nthe curse of that law which he had violated; this could never have\nentered into his heart; yea, the very thought, if it had taken its rise\nfirst from him, would have savoured of more presumption than had he\nentreated that God would pardon his sin without a satisfaction. But,\n\n(2.) If he had supposed it impossible for the Son of God to be\nincarnate, or had conjectured that there had been the least probability\nof his being willing to express this instance of condescending goodness,\nhow could he have known that God would have accepted the payment of our\ndebt, at the hands of another, or have commended his love to us, who\nwere such enemies to him, in not sparing him, but delivering him up for\nus? if God\u2019s accepting of a satisfaction be necessary, in order to its\ntaking effect, as well as the perfection or infinite value of it; it is\ncertain, man could not have known that he would have done it; for that\nwas a matter of pure revelation. Moreover,\n\n(3.) Should we suppose even this possible, or that man might have\nexpected that God would have been moved to have done it by intreaty; yet\nsuch was the corruption, perverseness, and rebellion of his nature, as\nfallen; and so great was his inability to perform any act of worship,\nthat he could not have addressed himself to God, in a right manner, that\nhe would admit of a surety; and God cannot hear any prayer but that\nwhich is put up to him by faith, which supposes a Mediator, whose\npurchase and gift it is; and therefore, since the sinful creature could\nnot plead with God by faith, that he would send his Son to be a\nMediator, how could he hope to obtain this blessing? it therefore\nevidently follows, that as a man could not give satisfaction for\nhimself; so he could not find out any one that could or would give it\nfor him. And therefore, the grace of God, in the provision that he has\nmade of such a surety as his own Son, unasked for, unthought of, as well\nas undeserved, is very illustrious.\n\n3. It was a very great instance of grace in our Saviour, that he was\npleased to consent to perform this work for us, without which the\njustice of God could not have exacted the debt of him; and he being\nperfectly innocent, could not be obliged to suffer punishment, which it\nwould have been unjust in God to have inflicted, had he not been willing\nto be charged with our guilt, and to stand in our room and stead. And\nhis grace herein more eminently appears, in that though he knew\nbefore-hand all the difficulties, sorrows, and temptations, which he was\nto meet with in the discharge of this work; yet this did not discourage\nhim from undertaking it; neither was he unapprised of the character of\nthose for whom he undertook it: he knew the rebellion, and guilt\ncontracted thereby, that rendered this necessary, in order to their\nsalvation; and he knew before-hand, that they would, notwithstanding all\nthe engagements he might lay on them to the contrary, discover the\ngreatest ingratitude towards him; and, instead of improving so great an\ninstance of condescending goodness, that they would neglect this great\nsalvation, when purchased by him, and thereby appear to be his greatest\nenemies, notwithstanding this act of friendship to them, unless he not\nonly engaged to purchase redemption for, but apply it to them, and work\nthose graces in them whereby they might be enabled to give him the glory\nwhich is due to him for this great undertaking. And this leads us,\n\nVII. To consider the use of faith in justification, and how,\nnotwithstanding what has been said concerning our being justified by\nChrist\u2019s righteousness, we may, in other respects, be said to be\njustified by faith; and also shew what this faith is, whereby we are\njustified: which being particularly insisted on in the two following\nanswers, we shall proceed to consider them.\n\nFootnote 28:\n\n \u05d5\u05de\u05e6\u05d3\u05d9\u05e7.\n\nFootnote 29:\n\n _The former of these divines call_ reatus potentialis, _the latter_,\n reatus actualis; _the former is the immediate consequence of sin, the\n latter is taken away by justification._\n\nFootnote 30:\n\n Righteousness is taken ordinarily to signify a conformity to laws, or\n rules of right conduct. Actions, and persons may respectively be\n denominated righteous. The moral law, which is both distinguishable by\n the moral sense, and expressly revealed, requires perfect and\n perpetual rectitude in disposition, purpose, and action. Because none\n are absolutely conformed to this law, none can fairly claim to be in\n themselves, simply, and absolutely righteous. Men are said therefore\n to be righteous comparatively, or because the defects of many of their\n actions are few, or not discernible by their fellow men. _To be made_,\n (or constituted) _righteous_, or, to _be justified_, in the sight of\n God, in scriptural language cannot mean, _to be made inherently\n righteous_. It is God who justifies, he cannot call evil good, and\n cannot be ignorant of every man\u2019s real demerit. This righteousness of\n the saint has not consisted, under any dispensation, in his own\n conformity to the Divine law; \u201c_In the Lord have I righteousness_;\u201d\n \u201c_That I may win Christ and be found in him, not having my own\n righteousness_.\u201d If it did, there would be no necessity for the aid of\n God\u2019s Spirit to sanctify the nature of the justified person. To be\n justified or constituted righteous, is therefore to be _treated and\n accepted as righteous_. If God _justifies the ungodly_, his truth and\n justice must be clear. He cannot be induced to depart from perfect\n rectitude, and strict propriety. When the ungodly are justified, or\n treated as if righteous, it is not on their own account, for their\n righteousness is defective; but _by the obedience of one_, (that is\n Christ,) _many are made righteous_. The term _obedience_ excludes the\n essential righteousness of Christ as God. And his righteousness which\n he rendered in our nature can neither be transfused into, nor\n transferred unto his people, so as to be theirs inherently. Nor can an\n infinitely wise God consider the righteousness of one man to be the\n personal righteousness of another. But one person may receive\n advantages from the righteousness of another. Sodom would have been\n spared if there could have been found ten holy men in it. Millions may\n be treated kindly, because of favour or respect had for one of their\n number espousing the cause of the whole. One man may become the surety\n of, and perform conditions for many, or pay a ransom for them, and\n purchase them from slavery. If it be said that one may not lay down\n his life, especially if it be important, for the preservation of\n another\u2019s; yet Christ was the _Lord of life_ and possessed what no\n mere creature can, the right to lay down his life, and power to take\n it up again. The importance of the satisfaction should be adequate to\n the honour of the law. But that every objection to such substitution\n might be removed, it is shewn that, this was the very condition upon\n which the restoration of the saints was suspended in the purposes of\n God before man was created; and was _promised us in Christ Jesus\n before the world began_. Justice therefore can neither object to the\n substitution, nor withhold the rewards.\n\nFootnote 31:\n\n _Splendida peccata._\n\nFootnote 32:\n\n _See Vol. II. Page 275._\n\nFootnote 33:\n\n _The distinction often used in the civil law between_ fide-jussor\n _and_ expromissor, _or a person\u2019s being bound together with the\n original debtor, and the creditor\u2019s being left to his liberty to exact\n the debt of which of the two he pleases, which is called_ fide-jussor;\n _and the surety\u2019s taking the debt upon himself, so as that he who\n contracted it is hereby discharged, which is what we understand by_\n expromissor, _has been considered elsewhere. See Vol. II. Page 174,\n 186._\n\nFootnote 34:\n\n _Volenti non fit injuria._\n\nFootnote 35:\n\n _See Vol. II. Page 281._\n\nFootnote 36:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 288._\n\nFootnote 37:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 280-293._\n\nFootnote 38:\n\n \u05d7\u05e9\u05d1 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u03c9.\n\nFootnote 39:\n\n I am not without painful apprehension, said Peter to John, that the\n views of our friend James on some of the doctrines of the gospel, are\n unhappily diverted from the truth. I suspect he does not believe in\n the proper _imputation_ of sin to Christ, or of Christ\u2019s righteousness\n to us; nor in his being our _substitute_, or representative.\n\n _John._ Those are serious things; but what are the grounds, brother\n Peter, on which your suspicions rest?\n\n _Peter._ Partly what he has published, which I cannot reconcile with\n those doctrines; and partly what he has said in my hearing, which I\n consider as an avowal of what I have stated.\n\n _John._ What say you to this, brother James?\n\n _James._ I cannot tell whether what I have written or spoken accords\n with brother Peter\u2019s ideas on these subjects: indeed I suspect it does\n not: but I never thought of calling either of the doctrines in\n question. Were I to relinquish the one or the other, I should be at a\n loss for ground on which to rest my salvation. What he says of my\n avowing my disbelief of them in his hearing must be a\n misunderstanding. I did say, I suspected that _his views_ of\n imputation and substitution were unscriptural; but had no intention of\n disowning the doctrines themselves.\n\n _Peter._ Brother James, I have no desire to assume any dominion over\n your faith; but should be glad to know what are your ideas on these\n important subjects. Do you hold that sin was properly imputed to\n Christ, or that Christ\u2019s righteousness is properly imputed to us, or\n not?\n\n _James._ You are quite at liberty, brother Peter, to ask me any\n questions on these subjects; and if you will hear me patiently, I will\n answer you as explicitly as I am able.\n\n _John._ Do so, brother James; and we shall hear you not only\n patiently, but, I trust, with pleasure.\n\n _James._ To impute,[40] signifies in general, to _charge_, _reckon_,\n or _place to account_, according to the different objects to which it\n is applied. This word, like many others, has a _proper_, and an\n _improper_ or figurative meaning.\n\n First: It is applied to the _charging_, _reckoning_, or _placing to\n the account_ of persons and things, THAT WHICH PROPERLY BELONGS TO\n THEM. This I consider as its _proper_ meaning. In this sense the word\n is used in the following passages. \u201cEli _thought_ she, (Hannah,) had\n been drunken\u2014Hanan and Mattaniah, the treasurers were _counted_\n faithful\u2014Let a man so _account_ of us as the ministers of Christ, and\n stewards of the mysteries of God\u2014Let such an one _think_ this, that\n such as we are in word by letters when we are absent, such will we be\n also indeed when we are present\u2014I _reckon_ that the sufferings of this\n present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall\n be revealed in us.\u201d[41] Reckoning or accounting, in the above\n instances, is no other than judging of persons and things _according\n to what they are, or appear to be_. To impute sin in this sense is to\n charge guilt upon the guilty in a judicial way, or with a view to\n punishment. Thus Shimei besought David that his iniquity might _not be\n imputed to him_; thus the man is pronounced blessed to whom the Lord\n _imputeth not iniquity_: and thus Paul prayed that the sin of those\n who deserted him might _not be laid to their charge_.[42]\n\n In this sense the term is ordinarily used in common life. To impute\n treason or any other crime to a man, is the same thing as charging him\n with having committed it, and with a view to his being punished.\n\n Secondly: It is applied to the _charging_, _reckoning_, or _placing to\n the account_ of persons and things, THAT WHICH DOES NOT PROPERLY\n BELONG TO THEM, AS THOUGH IT DID. This I consider as its _improper_ or\n figurative meaning. In this sense the word is used in the following\n passages\u2014\u201cAnd this your heave-offering shall be _reckoned_ unto you\n _as though it were_ the corn of the threshing-floor and as the fulness\n of the wine-press\u2014Wherefore hidest thou thy face, and _holdest_ me for\n thine enemy\u2014If the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law,\n shall not his uncircumcision be _counted_ for circumcision\u2014If he hath\n wronged thee, or oweth thee aught, _put that on mine account_.\u201d[43]\n\n It is in this _latter_ sense that I understand the term when applied\n to justification. \u201cAbraham believed God, and it was _counted_ unto him\n for righteousness\u2014To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that\n justifieth the ungodly, his faith is _counted_ for righteousness.\u201d The\n counting, or reckoning, in these instances, is not a judging of things\n _as they are_; but _as they are not, as though they were_. I do not\n think that faith here means the righteousness of the Messiah: for it\n is expressly called \u201cbelieving.\u201d It means believing, however, not as a\n virtuous exercise of the mind which God consented to accept instead of\n perfect obedience, but _as having respect to the promised Messiah_,\n and so to his righteousness as the ground of acceptance.[44]\n Justification is ascribed to faith, as healing frequently is in the\n New Testament; not as that from which the _virtue_ proceeds, but as\n that which _receives_ from the Saviour\u2019s fulness.\n\n But if it were allowed that faith in these passages really means the\n object believed in, still this was not Abraham\u2019s _own_ righteousness,\n and could not be properly _counted_ by him who judges of things as\n they are, as being so. It was _reckoned_ unto him _as if it were_ his;\n and the effects, or benefits of it were actually imparted to him: but\n this was all. Abraham did not become meritorious, or cease to be\n unworthy.\n\n \u201cWhat is it to place our righteousness in the obedience of Christ,\n (says Calvin,) but to affirm that hereby only we are _accounted_\n righteous; because the obedience of Christ is imputed to us AS IF IT\n WERE OUR OWN.\u201d[45]\n\n It is thus also that I understand the imputation of sin to Christ. He\n was accounted in the divine administration _as if he were, or had\n been_ the sinner, that those who believe in him might be accounted _as\n if they were, or had been_ righteous.\n\n Brethren, I have done. Whether my statement be just or not, I hope it\n will be allowed to be explicit.\n\n _John._ That it certainly is; and we thank you. Have you any other\n questions, brother Peter, to ask upon the subject?\n\n _Peter._ How do you understand the apostle in 2 Cor. v. 21. _He hath\n made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the\n righteousness of God in him?_\n\n _James._ Till lately I cannot say that I have thought closely upon it.\n I have understood that several of our best writers consider the word\n \u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 (_sin_) as frequently meaning a _sin-offering_. Dr. Owen so\n interprets it in his answer to Biddle,[46] though it seems he\n afterwards changed his mind. Considering the opposition between the\n sin which Christ was made, and the righteousness which we are made,\n together with the same word being used for that which he was _made_,\n and that which he _knew not_, I am inclined to be of the doctor\u2019s last\n opinion; namely, that the sin which Christ was made, means _sin\n itself_; and the righteousness which we are made, means _righteousness\n itself_. I doubt not but that the allusion is to the sin-offering\n under the law; but not to its being _made a sacrifice_. Let me be a\n little more particular. There were two things belonging to the\n sin-offering. _First_: The imputation of the sins of the people,\n signified by the priest\u2019s laying his hands upon the head of the\n animal, and confessing over it their transgressions; and which is\n called \u201cputting them upon it.\u201d[47] That is, it was _counted_ in the\n divine administration _as if the animal had been_ the sinner, and the\n only sinner of the nation. _Secondly_: Offering it in sacrifice, or\n \u201ckilling it before the Lord for an atonement.\u201d[48] Now the phrase,\n _made sin_, in 2 Cor. v. 21. appears to refer to the _first_ step in\n this process in order to the last. It is expressive of what was\n preparatory to Christ\u2019s suffering death rather than of the thing\n itself, just as our being _made righteousness_ expresses what was\n preparatory to God\u2019s bestowing upon us eternal life. But the term\n _made_ is not to be taken literally; for that would convey the idea of\n Christ\u2019s being really the subject of moral evil. It is expressive of a\n divine _constitution_, by which our Redeemer with his own consent,\n stood in the sinner\u2019s place, as though he had been himself the\n transgressor; just as the sin-offering under the law was, in mercy to\n Israel, reckoned or accounted to have the sins of the people \u201cput upon\n its head,\u201d with this difference; that was only a shadow, but this went\n really to take away sin.\n\n _Peter._ Do you consider Christ as having been _punished, really and\n properly_ PUNISHED?\n\n _James._ I should think I do not. But what do you mean by punishment?\n\n _Peter._ An innocent person may _suffer_, but, properly speaking, he\n cannot be _punished_. Punishment necessarily supposes _criminality_.\n\n _James._ Just so; and therefore as I do not believe that Jesus was in\n any sense criminal, I cannot say he was really and properly punished.\n\n _Peter._ Punishment is the infliction of natural evil for the\n commission of moral evil. It is not necessary, however, that the\n latter should have been committed by the party\u2014Criminality is\n supposed: but it may be either personal or imputed.\n\n _James._ This I cannot admit. Real and proper punishment, if I\n understand the terms, is not only the infliction of natural evil for\n the commission of moral evil; but the infliction of the one _upon the\n person who committed the other, and in displeasure against him_. It\n not only supposes criminality, but that the party punished was\n literally the criminal. Criminality committed by one party, and\n imputed to another, is not a ground for real and proper punishment. If\n Paul had sustained the punishment due to Onesimus for having wronged\n his master, yet it would not have been real and proper punishment _to\n him_, but _suffering_ only, as not being inflicted in displeasure\n against him. I am aware of what has been said on this subject, that\n there was a more intimate _union_ between Christ and those for whom he\n died, than could ever exist between creatures. But be it so, it is\n enough for me that the union was not such as THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE\n ONE BECAME THOSE OF THE OTHER. Christ, even in the act of offering\n himself a sacrifice, when, to speak in the language of the Jewish law,\n the sins of the people were put or laid upon him, gave himself\n nevertheless THE JUST FOR THE UNJUST.\n\n _Peter._ And thus it is that you understand the words of Isaiah, _The\n Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all_?\n\n _James._ Yes, he bore the punishment due to our sins, or that which,\n considering the dignity of his person, was equivalent to it. The\n phrase \u201cHe shall bear his iniquity,\u201d which so frequently occurs in the\n Old Testament, means, he shall bear the punishment due to his\n iniquity.\n\n _Peter._ And yet you deny that Christ\u2019s sufferings were properly\n _penal_.\n\n _James._ You would not deny eternal life which is promised to\n believers to be properly _a reward_; but you would deny its being _a\n real and proper reward_ TO THEM.\n\n _Peter._ And what then?\n\n _James._ If eternal life, though it be a reward, and we partake of it,\n yet is really and properly the reward of Christ\u2019s obedience, and not\n our\u2019s; then the sufferings of Christ, though they were a punishment,\n and he sustained it, yet were really and properly the punishment of\n our sins, and not his. What he bore _was_ punishment: that is, it was\n the expression of divine displeasure against transgressors. So what we\n enjoy is reward: that is, it is the expression of God\u2019s\n well-pleasedness in the obedience and death of his Son. But neither is\n the one a punishment _to him_, nor the other, properly speaking, a\n reward _to us_.\n\n There appears to me great accuracy in the scriptural language on this\n subject. What our Saviour underwent is almost always expressed by the\n term _suffering_. Once it is called a _chastisement_: yet there he is\n not said to have been chastised; but \u201cthe chastisement of our peace\n was _upon him_.\u201d This is the same as saying he bore _our_ punishment.\n He was made a curse for us: that is, having been reckoned, or\n accounted the sinner, as though he had actually been so, he was\n treated accordingly, as one that had deserved to be an outcast from\n heaven and earth. I believe the wrath of God that was due to us was\n poured upon him, but I do not believe that God for one moment was\n angry or displeased _with him_, or that he smote him from any such\n displeasure.\n\n There is a passage in Calvin\u2019s _Institutes_, which so fully expresses\n my mind, that I hope you will excuse me if I read it. You will find it\n in Bk. ii. chap. xvi. \u00a7 10, 11. \u201cIt behoved him that he should, as it\n were, hand to hand, wrestle with the armies of hell, and the horror of\n eternal death. The chastisement of our peace was _laid upon him_. He\n was smitten of his Father for our crimes, and bruised for our\n iniquities: whereby is meant that he was put in the stead of the\n wicked, as surety and pledge, yea, and as the very guilty person\n himself, to sustain and bear away all the punishments that should have\n been laid upon them, save only that he could not be holden of death.\n Yet do we not mean that God was at any time either his enemy, or angry\n with him. For how could he be angry with his beloved Son, upon whom\n his mind rested? Or how could Christ by his intercession appease his\n Father\u2019s wrath towards others, if, full of hatred, he had been\n incensed against himself? But this is our meaning\u2014that he sustained\n the weight of the divine displeasure; inasmuch as he, being stricken\n and tormented by the hand of God, DID FEEL ALL THE TOKENS OF GOD WHEN\n HE IS ANGRY AND PUNISHETH.\u201d\n\n _Peter._ The words of scripture are very express\u2014He hath _made him to\n be sin for us_\u2014He was _made a curse for us_.\u2014You may, by diluting and\n qualifying interpretations, soften what you consider as intolerable\n _harshness_. In other words, you may choose to correct the language\n and sentiments of inspiration, and teach the apostle to speak of his\n Lord with more decorum, lest his personal purity should be impeached,\n and lest the odium of the cross, annexed by divine law, remain\n attached to his death: but if you abide by the obvious meaning of the\n passages, you must hold with _a commutation of persons_, the\n _imputation_ of sin and of righteousness, and a _vicarious\n punishment_, equally pregnant with _execration_ as with _death_.\n\n _John._ I wish brother Peter would forbear the use of language which\n tends not to convince, but to irritate.\n\n _James._ If there be any thing convincing in it, I confess I do not\n perceive it. I admit with Mr. _Charnock_, \u201cThat Christ was \u2018made sin\u2019\n _as if he had_ sinned all the sins of men; and we are \u2018made\n righteousness,\u2019 _as if we had_ not sinned at all.\u201d What more is\n necessary to abide by the obvious meaning of the words? To go further\n must be to maintain that Christ\u2019s being _made sin_ means that he was\n literally rendered wicked, and that his being _made a curse_ is the\n same thing as his being punished for it according to his deserts.\n Brother Peter, I am sure, does not believe this shocking position: but\n he seems to think there is a medium between his being treated _as if\n he were_ a sinner, and his _being one_. If such a medium there be, I\n should be glad to discover it: at present it appears to me to have no\n existence.\n\n Brother Peter will not suspect me, I hope, of wishing to depreciate\n his judgment, when I say, that he appears to me to be attached to\n certain terms without having sufficiently weighed their import. In\n most cases I should think it a privilege to learn of him: but in some\n things I cannot agree with him. In order to maintain the _real_ and\n _proper punishment_ of Christ, he talks of his being \u201cguilty by\n imputation.\u201d The term _guilty_, I am aware, is often used by\n theological writers for _an obligation to punishment_, and so applies\n to that voluntary obligation which Christ came under to sustain the\n punishment of our sins: but strictly speaking, guilt is the _desert_\n of punishment; and this can never apply but to the offender. It is the\n opposite of innocence. A voluntary obligation to endure the punishment\n of another is not guilt, any more than a consequent exemption from\n obligation in the offender, is innocence. Both guilt and innocence are\n transferable in their effects, but in themselves they are\n untransferable. To say that Christ was _reckoned_ or _counted_ in the\n divine administration _as if he were_ the sinner, and came under an\n obligation to endure the curse or punishment due to our sins, is one\n thing: but to say he _deserved_ that curse, is another. Guilt,\n strictly speaking, is the inseparable attendant of transgression, and\n could never therefore for one moment occupy the conscience of Christ.\n If Christ by imputation became _deserving_ of punishment, we by\n non-imputation cease to deserve it; and if our demerits be literally\n transferred to him, his merits must of course be the same to us: and\n then, instead of approaching God as _guilty_ and _unworthy_, we might\n take consequence to ourselves before him, as not only guiltless, but\n meritorious beings.\n\n _Peter._ Some who profess to hold that believers are justified by the\n righteousness of Christ, deny, nevertheless, that his _obedience\n itself_ is imputed to them: for they maintain that the scripture\n represents believers as receiving only the _benefits_, or effects of\n Christ\u2019s righteousness in justification, or their being pardoned and\n accepted for Christ\u2019s _righteousness sake_.\u2014But it is not merely _for\n the sake_ of Christ, or of what he has done, that believers are\n accepted of God, and treated as completely righteous; but it is IN him\n as their Head, Representative, and Substitute; and by the imputation\n of that _very obedience_ which as such he performed to the divine law,\n that they are justified.\n\n _James._ I have no doubt but that the imputation of Christ\u2019s\n righteousness presupposes a _union_ with him; since there is no\n perceivable fitness in bestowing benefits on one _for another\u2019s sake_\n where there is no union or relation subsisting between them. It is not\n such a union, however, as that THE ACTIONS OF EITHER BECOME THOSE OF\n THE OTHER. That \u201cthe scriptures represent believers as _receiving_\n only the benefits or the effects of Christ\u2019s righteousness in\n justification,\u201d is a remark of which I am not able to perceive the\n fallacy: nor does it follow that his obedience itself is not imputed\n to them. Obedience itself may be and is imputed, while its effects\n only are _imparted_, and consequently _received_. I never met with a\n person who held the absurd notion of imputed benefits, or imputed\n punishments; and am inclined to think there never was such a person.\n Be that however as it may, sin on the one hand and righteousness on\n the other, are the proper objects of imputation; but that imputation\n _consists_ in charging or reckoning them to the account of the party\n in such a way as to _impart_ to him their evil or beneficial effects.\n\n _Peter._ The doctrine for which I contend as taught by the apostle\n Paul, is neither novel, nor more strongly expressed than it has\n formerly been by authors of eminence.\n\n _James._ It may be so. We have been told of an old protestant writer\n who says, that \u201cIn Christ, and by him, every true Christian may be\n called _a fulfiller of the law_:\u201d but I see not why he might not as\n well have added, Every true Christian may be said to have been slain,\n and, if not to have redeemed himself by his own blood, yet to be\n worthy of all that blessing, and honour, and glory, that shall be\n conferred upon him in the world to come.\u2014What do you think of Dr.\n CRISP\u2019S Sermons? Has he not carried your principles to an extreme?\n\n _Peter._ I cordially agree with WITSIUS, as to the impropriety of\n calling Christ _a sinner, truly a sinner, the greatest of sinners_,\n &c. yet I am far from disapproving of what Dr. CRISP, and some others,\n _meant_ by those exceptionable expressions.\n\n _James._ If a Christian may be called _a fulfiller of the law_, on\n account of Christ\u2019s obedience being imputed to him, I see not why\n Christ may not be called _a transgressor of the law_, on account of\n our disobedience being imputed to him. Persons and things _should be\n called what they are_. As to the _meaning_ of Dr. CRISP, I am very\n willing to think he had no ill design: but my concern is with the\n meaning which his words convey to his readers. He considers God in\n charging our sins on Christ, and accounting his righteousness to us,\n as reckoning of things _as they are_. (p. 280.) He contends that\n Christ was _really_ the sinner, or guilt could not have been laid upon\n him. (p. 272.) Imputation of sin and righteousness, with him, is\n literally and actually A TRANSFER OF CHARACTER; and it is the object\n of his reasoning to persuade his believing hearers that from\n henceforward Christ is the sinner, and not they. \u201cHast thou been an\n idolater, says he; a blasphemer, a despiser of God\u2019s word, a profaner\n of his name and ordinances, a thief, a liar, a drunkard\u2014If thou hast\n part in Christ, _all these transgressions of thine become actually the\n transgressions of Christ, and so cease to be thine; and thou ceasest\n to be a transgressor from the time they were laid upon Christ, to the\n last hour of thy life_: so that now thou art _not_ an idolater, a\n persecutor, a thief, a liar, &c.\u2014thou art not a sinful person. Reckon\n whatever sin you commit, when as you have part in Christ, you are all\n that Christ was, and Christ is all that you were.\u201d\n\n If the _meaning_ of this passage be true and good, I see nothing\n exceptionable in the expressions. All that can be said is, that the\n writer explicitly states his principle and avows its legitimate\n consequences. I believe the principle to be false.\u2014(1.) Because\n neither sin nor righteousness are _in themselves_ transferable. The\n act and deed of one person may _affect_ another in many ways, but\n cannot possibly become his act and deed.\u2014(2.) Because the scriptures\n uniformly declare Christ to be sinless, and believers to be sinful\n creatures.\u2014(3.) Because believers themselves have in all ages\n _confessed_ their sins, and applied to the mercy-seat for\n _forgiveness_. They never plead such an union as shall render their\n sins not theirs, but Christ\u2019s; but merely such a one as affords ground\n to apply for pardon _in his name_, or _for his sake_; not as worthy\n claimants, but as unworthy supplicants.\n\n Whatever reasonings we may give into, there are certain times in which\n _conscience_ will bear witness, that notwithstanding the imputation of\n our sins to Christ, _we are actually the sinners_; and I should have\n thought no good man could have gravely gone about to overturn its\n testimony. Yet this is what Dr. Crisp has done. \u201cBelievers _think_,\n says he, that they find their transgressions in their own consciences,\n and they _imagine_ that there is a sting of this poison still behind,\n wounding them: but, beloved, if this principle be received for a\n truth, that God hath laid thy iniquities on Christ, how can thy\n transgressions, belonging to Christ, be found in thy heart and\n conscience?\u2014Is thy conscience Christ?\u201d p. 269.\n\n Perhaps no man has gone further than Dr. CRISP in his attempts at\n consistency; and admitting his principle, that imputation consists in\n a transfer of character, I do not see who can dispute his conclusions.\n To have been perfectly consistent, however, he should have proved that\n all the confessions and lamentations of believers, recorded in\n scripture, arose from their being under the _mistake_ which he labours\n to rectify; that is, _thinking_ sin did not cease to be theirs, even\n when under the fullest persuasion that the Lord would not impute it to\n them, but would graciously cover it by the righteousness of his Son.\u2014\u2014\n \u2014\u2014\n\n _John._ I think, brother Peter, you expressed at the beginning of our\n conversation, a strong suspicion that brother James denied the\n _substitution of Christ_, as well as the proper imputation of sin and\n righteousness. What has passed on the latter subject would probably\n tend either to confirm or remove your suspicions respecting the\n former.\n\n _Peter._ I confess I was mistaken in some of my suspicions. I consider\n our friend as a good man; but am far from being satisfied with what I\n still understand to be his views on this important subject.\n\n _John._ It gives me great pleasure to hear the honest concessions of\n brethren, when they feel themselves in any measure to have gone too\n far.\n\n _Peter._ I shall be glad to hear brother James\u2019s statement on\n _substitution_, and to know whether he considers our Lord in his\n undertaking as having sustained the character of a _Head_, or\n _Representative_; and if so, whether the persons for whom he was a\n substitute were the elect only, or mankind in general.\n\n _James._ I must acknowledge that on this subject I feel considerably\n at a loss, I have no consciousness of having ever called the doctrine\n of substitution in question. On the contrary, my hope of salvation\n rests upon it; and the sum of my delight, as a minister of the gospel,\n consists in it. If I know any thing of my own heart, I can say of my\n Saviour as laying down his life _for, or instead of_ sinners, as was\n said of Jerusalem by the captives\u2014_If I forget_ THEE, _let my right\n hand forget: If I do not remember_ THEE, _let my tongue cleave to the\n roof of my mouth_!\n\n I have always considered the denial of this doctrine as being of the\n essence of Socinianism. I could not have imagined that any person\n whose hope of acceptance with God rests not on any goodness in himself\n but entirely on the righteousness of Christ, imputed to him _as if it\n were his own_, would have been accounted to disown his substitution.\n But perhaps, my dear brother, (for such I feel him to be,\n notwithstanding our differences,) may include in his ideas of this\n subject, that Christ was so our _head_ and _representative_, as that\n what he did and suffered, we did and suffered in him.\u2014If no more were\n meant by this, resumed James, than that what he did and suffered is\n graciously accepted on our behalf _as if it were ours_, I freely, as I\n have said before, acquiesce in it. But I do not believe, and can\n hardly persuade myself that brother Peter believes, the obedience and\n sufferings of Christ to be so ours, as that we can properly be said to\n have obeyed and suffered.\n\n Christ was and is our _head_, and we are his members: the union\n between him and us, however, is not in all respects the same as that\n which is between the head and the members of the natural body: for\n that would go to explain away all distinct consciousness and\n accountableness on our part.\n\n As to the term _representative_, if no more be meant by it than that\n Christ so personated us as to die in our stead, that we, believing in\n him, should not die, I have nothing to object to it. But I do not\n believe that Christ was so our representative, as that what he did and\n suffered, we did and suffered; and so became meritorious, or deserving\n of the divine favour.\u2014But I feel myself in a wide field, and must\n entreat your indulgence while I take up so much of the conversation.\n\n _Peter and John._ Go on, and state your sentiments without apology.\n\n _James._ I apprehend then that many important mistakes have arisen\n from considering the interposition of Christ under the notion of\n _paying a debt_. The blood of Christ is indeed the _price_ of our\n redemption, or that for the sake of which we are delivered from the\n curse of the law: but this metaphorical language, as well as that of\n _head and members_, may be carried too far, and may lead us into many\n errors. In cases of debt and credit among men, where a surety\n undertakes to _represent_ the debtor, from the moment his undertaking\n is accepted, the debtor is free, and may claim his liberty, not as a\n matter of favour, at least on the part of the creditor, but of strict\n justice. Or should the undertaking be unknown to him for a time, yet\n as soon as he knows it, he may demand his discharge, and, it may be,\n think himself hardly treated by being kept in bondage so long after\n his debt had been actually paid. But who in their sober senses will\n imagine this to be analagous to the redemption of sinners by Jesus\n Christ? Sin is a debt only in a metaphorical sense: properly speaking,\n it is a _crime_, and satisfaction for it requires to be made, not on\n pecuniary, but on moral principles. If Philemon had accepted of that\n part of Paul\u2019s offer which respected property, and had placed so much\n to his account as he considered Onesimus to have \u201cowed\u201d him, he could\n not have been said to have _remitted_ his debt; nor would Onesimus\n have had to thank him for remitting it. But it is supposed of Onesimus\n that he might not only be in debt to his master, but have \u201cwronged\u201d\n him. Perhaps he had embezzled his goods, corrupted his children, or\n injured his character. Now for Philemon to accept of that part of the\n offer, were very different from the other. In the one case he would\n have accepted of a pecuniary representative; in the other of a moral\n one; that is, of a mediator. The satisfaction in the one case would\n annihilate the idea of remission; but not in the other. Whatever\n satisfaction Paul might give to Philemon respecting the wound\n inflicted upon his character and honour as the head of a family, it\n would not supersede the necessity of pardon being sought by the\n offender, and freely bestowed by the offended.\n\n The reason of this difference is easily perceived. Debts are\n transferable; but crimes are not. A third person may cancel the one;\n but he can only obliterate the _effects_ of the other; the _desert_ of\n the criminal remains. The _debtor_ is accountable to his creditor as a\n _private_ individual, who has power to accept of a surety, or if he\n please, to remit the whole, without any satisfaction. In the one case\n he would be just; in the other merciful: but no place is afforded by\n either of them for the _combination_ of justice and mercy in the same\n proceeding. The _criminal_, on the other hand, is amenable to the\n magistrate, or to the head of a family, as a _public_ person, and who,\n especially if the offence be capital, cannot remit the punishment\n without invading law and justice, nor in the ordinary discharge of his\n office, admit of a third person to stand in his place. In\n extraordinary cases, however, extraordinary expedients are resorted\n to. A satisfaction may be made to law and justice, as to the _spirit_\n of them, while the _letter_ is dispensed with. The well-known story of\n Zaleucus, the Grecian law-giver, who consented to lose one of his eyes\n to spare one of his son\u2019s eyes, who by transgressing the law had\n subjected himself to the loss of both, is an example. Here, as far as\n it went, _justice and mercy were combined_ in the same act: and had\n the satisfaction been much fuller than it was, so full that the\n authority of the law, instead of being weakened, should have been\n abundantly magnified and honoured, still it had been _perfectly\n consistent with free forgiveness_.\n\n Finally: In the case of the debtor, satisfaction being once accepted,\n justice _requires_ his complete discharge: but in that of the\n criminal, where satisfaction is made to the wounded honour of the law,\n and the authority of the lawgiver, justice, though it _admits_ of his\n discharge, yet no otherwise _requires_ it than as it may have been\n matter of promise to the substitute.\n\n I do not mean to say that cases of this sort afford a competent\n representation of redemption by Christ. That is a work which not only\n ranks with extraordinary interpositions, but which has no parallel: it\n is a work of God, which leaves all the petty concerns of mortals\n infinitely behind it. All that comparisons can do, is to give us some\n idea of the _principle_ on which it proceeds.\n\n If the following passage in our admired _Milton_ were considered as\n the language of the law of innocence, it would be inaccurate\u2014\n\n \u201c\u2014\u2014Man disobeying,\n\n\n He with his whole posterity must die:\n Die he, or justice must; unless for him\n Some other able, and as willing, pay\n The rigid satisfaction, death for death.\u201d\n\n Abstractedly considered, this is true; but it is not expressive of\n what was the revealed law of innocence. The law made no such\n condition, or provision; nor was it indifferent to the law-giver who\n should suffer, the sinner, or another on his behalf. The language of\n the law to the transgressor was not _thou shalt die, or some one on\n thy behalf_; but simply _thou shalt die_: and had it literally taken\n its course, every child of man must have perished. The sufferings of\n Christ in our stead, therefore, are not a punishment inflicted in the\n ordinary course of distributive justice; but an extraordinary\n interposition of infinite wisdom and love: not contrary to, but rather\n above the law, deviating from the letter, but more than preserving the\n spirit of it. Such, brethren, as well as I am able to explain them,\n are my views of the substitution of Christ.\n\n _Peter._ The objection of our so stating the substitution of Christ,\n as to leave no room for the free pardon of sin, has been often made by\n those who avowedly reject his satisfaction; but for any who really\n consider his death as an atonement for sin, and as essential to the\n ground of a sinner\u2019s hope, to employ the objection against us, is very\n extraordinary, and must, I presume, proceed from inadvertency.\n\n _James._ If it be so, I do not perceive it. The grounds of the\n objection have been stated as clearly and as fully as I am able to\n state them.\n\n FULLER\n\nFootnote 40:\n\n \u05d7\u05e9\u05d1; \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 41:\n\n 1 Sam. i. 13. Neh. xiii. 13. 1 Cor. iv. 1. 2 Cor. x. 11. Rom. viii.\n 18.\n\nFootnote 42:\n\n 2 Sam. xix. 19. Ps. xxxii. 2. 2 Tim. iv. 16.\n\nFootnote 43:\n\n Num. xviii. 27-30. Job xiii. 24. Rom. ii. 26. Philem. 18.\n\nFootnote 44:\n\n Expository Discourses on Gen. xv. 1-6. Also Calvin\u2019s Inst. bk. iii.\n ch. xi. \u00a7 7.\n\nFootnote 45:\n\n Inst. bk. iii. ch. xi. \u00a7 2.\n\nFootnote 46:\n\n p. 510.\n\nFootnote 47:\n\n Lev. xvi. 21.\n\nFootnote 48:\n\n Lev. i. 4, 5.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXII., LXXIII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXII. _What is justifying Faith?_\n\n ANSW. Justifying faith is a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a\n sinner, by the Spirit and word of God; whereby he, being convinced\n of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself, and all\n other creatures, to recover him out of his lost condition, not only\n assenteth to the truth of the promise of the gospel, but receiveth\n and resteth upon Christ and his righteousness therein held forth,\n for pardon of sin, and for the accepting and accounting of his\n person, righteous in the sight of God for salvation.\n\n QUEST. LXXIII. _How doth faith justify a sinner in the sight of\n God?_\n\n ANSW. Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God; not because of\n those graces which do always accompany it, or of those good works\n that are the fruits of it; nor as if the grace of faith, or any act\n thereof, were imputed to him for justification; but only as it is an\n instrument, by which he receiveth and applieth Christ and his\n righteousness.\n\nWe choose first to speak to the latter of these two answers, in which\nfaith is considered as that whereby a sinner is justified, before the\nformer of them, inasmuch as it seems better connected with what has been\nbefore insisted on, in explaining the doctrine of justification. And in\nconsidering the account we have of justifying faith, there are two\nthings, which may be taken notice of, in this answer.\n\nI. It is observed, that though there are other graces which always\naccompany faith and good works, that flow from it; yet none of these are\nsaid to justify a sinner in the sight of God.\n\nII. How faith justifies, or what it is to be justified by faith.[49]\n\nI. That though there are other graces which always accompany faith, and\ngood works that flow from it; yet none of these are said to justify a\nsinner in the sight of God. There is an inseparable connexion between\nfaith, and all other graces; which, though it be distinguished, is never\nseparate from them. They are all considered as _fruits of the Spirit_,\nGal. v. 22, 23. thus the apostle reckons up several other graces that\nare connected with faith, and proceed from the same Spirit, such as\n_love_, _peace_, _joy_, _long-suffering_, _gentleness_, _goodness_,\n_meekness_, _temperance_: and the same apostle commends the church at\nThessalonica for their _work of faith; and_ considers this as connected\nwith a _labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ_,\n1 Thess. i. 3. And the apostle Peter exhorts the church, to which he\nwrites, to _add to their faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, to\nknowledge temperance, to temperance patience, to patience godliness, to\ngodliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness charity_, 2 Pet.\ni. 5, 6, 7. which supposes that all these graces ought to be connected\ntogether. And the apostle James calls it a _dead faith_, James ii. 17.\nwhich has not other works or graces joined with it; and, indeed, these\ngraces are not only connected with it, but flow from it, or are the\nfruits thereof: thus we read of the _heart\u2019s being purified by faith_,\nActs xv. 9. that is, this grace, when acted in a right manner, will have\na tendency, in some degree, to purge the soul from that moral impurity,\nwhich proceeds out of the heart of man, and is inconsistent with saving\nfaith: and elsewhere we read of _faith as working by love_, Gal. v. 6.\nthat is, exciting those acts of love, both to God and man, which contain\na summary of practical religion. It is also said to _overcome the\nworld_, 1 John v. 4. and it enables Christians to do or suffer great\nthings for Christ\u2019s sake, of which the apostle gives various instances\nin the Old Testament saints, Heb. xi. But, notwithstanding the connexion\nof other graces with faith, and those works which flow from it, we are\nnever said, in scripture, to be justified thereby; not by love to God;\nnor by any act of obedience to him, which can be called no other than\nworks: whereas, when the apostle speaks of our justification by faith,\nhe puts it in opposition to works, when he says, that _a man is\njustified by faith, without the deeds of the law_, Rom. ii. 28.\n\n_Object._ To this it is objected, that the apostle here speaks\nconcerning the ceremonial law, which he excludes from being the matter\nof our justification, and not the moral law, or any evangelical duty,\nsuch as love and sincere obedience, which, together with faith is the\nmatter of our justification.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That when the apostle speaks of our\njustification by faith, without the deeds of the law, he does not hereby\nintend the ceremonial law; for those whom he describes as justified\npersons, are said to be, in a following verse, not only Jews, but\nGentiles, that were converted to the Christian faith; the former,\nindeed, were under a temptation to seek to be justified by the\nceremonial law, and so to conclude that they had a right to eternal\nlife; because of their being distinguished from the world, by the\nexternal privileges of the covenant which they were under, many of which\nwere contained in, or signified by that law: but the Gentiles had\nnothing to do with it, and therefore never expected to be justified by\nthe ceremonial law; accordingly, when the apostle speaks of\njustification by faith without the deeds of the law, he cannot hereby be\nsupposed to intend the ceremonial law. And if we look a little farther\ninto the context, we shall find, by his method of reasoning, that he\nexcludes all works in general, and opposes faith to them; for he argues,\nthat we are justified in such a way, as tends to exclude boasting; but\nhe that insists on any works performed by himself, as the matter of his\njustification, cannot do this any otherwise than in a boasting way,\nvaluing himself, and founding his right to eternal life, upon them. We\nare not therefore justified by them, but by faith; that is, we are\njustified in such a way as that, while we lay claim to the greatest\nprivileges from Christ, we are disposed to give him all the glory, or to\nrenounce our own righteousness at the same time that we have recourse to\nhis righteousness for justification, by faith.\n\nBut that it may farther appear, that our justification by faith, is\nopposed to justification by works, either those that accompany or flow\nfrom it, we may apply what has been before suggested, in considering the\nmatter of our justification to this argument. If we consider the demands\nof justice, or what it may in honour reckon a sufficient compensation\nfor the dishonour that has been brought to the divine name by sin, or\nwhat may be deemed a satisfactory payment of the outstanding debt of\nperfect obedience, which was due from us, or punishment, which we were\nliable to, according to the sanction of the divine law; we may easily\ninfer, that no obedience, performed by us, though including in it the\nutmost perfection, that a fallen creature is capable of attaining, is a\nsufficient satisfaction; and if there can be no justification without\nsatisfaction, then we cannot be justified thereby. Therefore it is a\nvain thing for persons to distinguish in this case, between works done\nbefore and after faith, as though the former only were excluded from\nbeing the matter of our justification; or to say, as some do, that we\nare not indeed justified by obedience to the moral law, but by our\nobeying the precepts which our Saviour has laid down in the gospel, such\nas faith, and repentance, _&c._ which they call obedience to the gospel\nas a new law: but let it be considered, that these evangelical duties\nare supposed to be performed as the result of a divine command, which\nhas the formal nature of a law, whether they be contained in the moral\nlaw or no; therefore, when we are justified by faith in opposition to\nthe works of the law, this must be opposed to obedience of any kind\nperformed by us.\n\nAnd this also appears from the nature of faith, to which justification,\nby the works of the law, is opposed; for faith is a soul-humbling grace,\nand includes in it a renouncing of all merit, or inducement taken from\nourselves, as a reason why God should bestow on us the blessings we\nstand in need of; it trusts in Christ for righteousness, and in him\nalone, and therefore turns itself from any thing that may have the least\ntendency to eclipse his glory, as the only foundation of our\njustification: therefore, when we are said to be justified by faith, and\nnot by the works of the law, the meaning is, we are justified in such a\nway as tends to set the crown upon Christ\u2019s head, acknowledging him to\nbe the only fountain from whence this privilege is derived.\n\nIt follows from hence that our justification cannot be founded on our\nrepentance; though this is often maintained by those who are on the\nother side of the question, who suppose, that justification contains in\nit nothing else but forgiveness of sin; and if offences are to be\nforgiven by men, upon their repentance, or confessing their fault, then\nforgiveness may be expected from God, on our repentance: and some use a\nvery unsavoury way of speaking, when they say, that our tears have a\nvirtue to wash away our sins; and that they may give farther countenance\nto this opinion, they refer to that scripture, in which it is said,\n_Repent, that your sins may be blotted out_, Acts iii. 19. and others of\nthe like nature; by which we are not to suppose, that the apostle means,\nthat forgiveness of sin is founded on our repentance, as the matter of\nour justification in the sight of God; but that there is an inseparable\nconnexion between our claim to forgiveness of sin, (together with all\nthe fruits and effects of the death of Christ, whereby this blessing was\nprocured) and repentance; so that one is not to be expected without the\nother; and though men are to forgive injuries in case the offender\nacknowledges his fault, and makes sufficient restitution; this they may\ndo, inasmuch as the offence is only committed against a creature; and\nespecially if the offence be of a private nature. But supposing this\nshould be applied to juridical and forensick cases, will any one say,\nthat the prince is obliged to forgive the criminal who is under a\nsentence of condemnation, because he is sorry for what he has done, or\nconfesses his fault? Would this secure his honour as a law-giver? And if\nhereupon the offender were to be discharged from his guilt, would not\nthis be a defect in the administration of the legislature? How then can\nthis be applied to forgiveness, expected at the hand of God; in which\njustice, as well as mercy, is to have the glory that is due to it; and\nwe are not only to be acquitted, but justified, or pronounced guiltless,\nsince our acknowledgment of our offence cannot be reckoned a sufficient\nsatisfaction to the justice of God?\n\n_Object._ It is objected, by those on the other side of the question,\nthat though repentance be not in itself a sufficient compensation to the\njustice of God for the crimes which we have committed; yet God may, by\nan act of grace, accept of it, as though it had been sufficient[50].\nThis they illustrate by a similitude taken from a person\u2019s selling an\nestate of a considerable value, to one who has no money to buy it,\nprovided he will pay a pepper-corn of acknowledgment. Thus, how\ninsignificant soever, repentance, or any other grace, which is deemed\nthe matter of our justification, be in itself, it is by an act of\nfavour, deemed a sufficient price.\n\n_Answ._ In answer to this I would observe, that the objection, which was\nbefore brought against the doctrine we have been maintaining, concerning\nthe imputation of Christ\u2019s righteousness, namely, that it was a putative\nrighteousness, a not judging of things according to truth, and the like,\nseems to be of no weight when it affects their own cause; otherwise we\nmight turn their argument against themselves, and ask them; whether this\nbe for God to judge according to truth, when that is accepted as a\nsufficient payment, by his justice, which is in itself of no value? But\npassing this by, we may farther observe, that this is wholly to set\naside the necessity of satisfaction, as the Socinians do; and therefore\nit is no wonder that they make use of this method of reasoning. As for\nothers who do not altogether deny this doctrine, yet think that a small\nprice may be deemed satisfactory for sin committed. That which may be\nreplied to it, is, that if justification, as tending to advance the\nglory of divine justice, in taking away the guilt of sin, depends upon a\nprice paid that is equivalent to the debt contracted; and nothing short\nof a price of infinite value can be reckoned an equivalent thereunto,\nthen certainly that which is performed by men, cannot be deemed a\nsufficient payment, or accepted of as such.\n\nIt is a vain thing for persons to pretend that there is a difference\nbetween satisfying God, and satisfying his justice; or, that to satisfy\nGod is to pay a price, be it never so small, that he demands; whereas,\nsatisfying justice is paying a price equal to the thing purchased; since\nwe must conclude, that God cannot deem any thing satisfactory to\nhimself, that is not so to his justice. Therefore, this distinction will\nnot avail, to free their argument from the absurdity that attends it.\n\nWe might here observe, that as some speak of pardon of sin\u2019s being\nfounded on our repentance; others speak of our justification as being by\nthe act of faith, or by faith considered as a work, and in defending\njustification by works, as though it were not opposed to justification\nby faith (the contrary to which has been before proved) they argue, that\nwe are often said, in scripture, to be justified by faith; but this\nfaith is a work; therefore it cannot be denied but that we are justified\nby works. To which it may be replied, that it is one thing to say, that\nwe are justified by faith, that is, a work, and another thing to say,\nthat we are justified by it as a work; or, it is one thing to say, that\nwe are justified for our faith, and another thing to say, that we are\njustified by it; which will more evidently appear under the following\nhead, which we proceed to consider; namely,\n\nII. What it is for us to be justified by faith, or how faith justifies.\nNone can, with the least shadow of reason, deny, that justification by\nfaith, is a scripture-mode of speaking, though some have questioned,\nwhether the apostle\u2019s words, _being justified by faith, we have peace\nwith God through our Lord Jesus Christ_, gives countenance to the\ndoctrine of justification by faith; for they observe, that by putting a\nstop immediately after the word _justified_, the sense would be, that\nthey who are justified by Christ\u2019s righteousness, have peace with God by\nfaith, through the Lord Jesus Christ: but though this will a little\nalter the reading of the text; yet it will not overthrow the doctrine of\njustification by faith, as contained therein. For if we understand our\n_having peace with God_, as importing, that peace which they have a\nright to, who are interested in Christ\u2019s righteousness, and not barely\npeace of conscience: then it will follow, that to have this peace by\nfaith, is, in effect, the same as to be justified by faith; and this\nfarther appears, from the following words, _by whom also we have access\nby faith into this grace, wherein we stand_. The _grace wherein we\nstand_, is that grace which is the foundation of our justification, and\nnot barely peace of conscience: when we are therefore said to have\naccess by faith unto this grace, it is the same as for us to be\njustified by faith.\n\nMoreover, this is not the only place in which we are said to be\njustified by faith; for the apostle says elsewhere, _We are justified by\nthe faith of Jesus Christ_, Gal. ii. 16. or by faith in Jesus Christ,\nand again, _the just shall live by faith_, Rom. i. 17. which, agreeably\nto the context, must be understood of their being justified by faith; in\nwhich sense the apostle particularly explains it elsewhere, Gal. iii.\n11. and in another place he speaks of _the righteousness of God which is\nby faith of Jesus Christ_, Rom. iii. 22. and also of a believer\u2019s\n_waiting for the hope of righteousness by faith_, Gal. v. 5. We must not\ntherefore deny that justification is by faith; but rather explain the\nsense of those scriptures that establish this doctrine, agreeably to the\nmind of the Holy Ghost therein.\n\nThere are various methods taken to explain the doctrine of justification\nby faith; particularly one that we think subversive of justification by\nChrist\u2019s righteousness: the other, that which is contained in the answer\nwhich we are explaining.\n\n1. As to the former of these, namely, that which is inconsistent with\nthe doctrine of justification by Christ\u2019s righteousness. This is\nmaintained by those who plead for justification by works; and\nconsequently, they say, that we are justified by faith, and all other\ngraces; which they call the conditions of our justification in the sight\nof God; and indeed to be justified by faith, according to them, is\nlittle other than to be justified for faith: whether they reckon it a\nmeritorious condition or no, they must own it to be a pleadable\ncondition; otherwise it would have no reference to justification; and if\nit be taken in this sense, our justification depends as much upon it, as\nthough it had been meritorious. This is the account which some give of\njustification; and to prepare the way for this opinion, they suppose,\nthat the terms of salvation, in the gospel, which are substituted in the\nroom of those which were required under the first covenant made with\nAdam, are faith, repentance and sincere obedience, instead of perfect;\nand that God in justifying a penitent, believing sinner, pursuant to the\nperformance of these conditions, declares his willingness, that there\nshould be a relaxation of that law which man was at first obliged to\nobey; and accordingly, that sincerity is demanded by him instead of\nperfection, or substituted in the room of it; this they call the new\nlaw, or others style it a remedial law: so that instead of being\njustified by Christ\u2019s yielding perfect obedience, or paying the\nout-standing debt, which we were obliged, by reason of the violation of\nthe first covenant, to pay, we are to be justified by our own imperfect\nobedience.\n\nBut that which may be objected to this method of reasoning, is, that it\nis inconsistent with the holiness of the divine nature, and the glory of\nthe justice of God, detracts from the honour of his law, and is, in\neffect, to maintain that we are justified without satisfaction given.\nFor though these terms of our justification, and acceptance in the sight\nof God, may be falsely styled a valuable consideration; yet none will\npretend to assert, that they are an infinite price; and nothing short of\nthat (which is no other than Christ\u2019s righteousness) is sufficient to\nanswer this end. I am sensible, that they who lay down this plan of\njustification, allege in defence thereof; that though these terms of\nacceptance are of small value in themselves; yet God, by an act of\ngrace, reckons the payment of a small debt equivalent to that of a\ngreater, as has been before observed. And they speak of faith and\nrepentance as having a value set upon them by their reference to the\nblood of Christ[51], who merited this privilege for us, that we should\nbe justified in such a way, or upon these conditions performed: they\ncall them indeed easier terms, or conditions, and include them all in\nthe general word sincerity, instead of perfection. But they are\nnevertheless somewhat divided in their method of explaining themselves,\ninasmuch as some suppose these conditions to be wholly in our own power,\nwithout the aids of divine grace, as much as perfect obedience was in\nthe power of our first parents; whereas others ascribe a little more to\nthe grace of God, according as they explain the doctrine of effectual\ncalling; though they do not suppose, that these conditions are\naltogether out of our own power; and they so far lay a foundation for\nthe sinner\u2019s glorying herein, as that, they suppose, our right to\njustification and eternal life is founded on them.\n\nI cannot but think this method of explaining the doctrine of\njustification to be subversive of the gospel, and that it is highly\nderogatory to the glory of God to assert that he can dispense with the\ndemand of perfect obedience, and justify a person on easier terms; which\nis little better than what the apostle calls _make void the law_: this,\nsays he, we are far from doing _by faith_, or by our asserting the\ndoctrine of justification by faith in Christ\u2019s righteousness; _but we\nrather establish it_ hereby: and to say that God sets such a value on\nour performing these conditions of the new covenant, as that they are\ndeemed equivalent to Christ\u2019s performing perfect obedience for us, this\nreflects on his glory, as set forth, to be a propitiation for sin, to\ndeclare God\u2019s righteousness in the remission thereof; and detracts from\nthe obligation which we are laid under to him, for what he did and\nsuffered in our behalf, for our justification.\n\nMoreover, to assert that God sets this value on our performances,\npursuant to Christ\u2019s merit; or that they are highly esteemed by him,\nbecause they are tinctured with his blood; this is contrary to the\ndesign of his death, which was, not that such an estimate might be set\non what is done by us; but rather, that the iniquities that attend our\nbest performances may be forgiven; and that (though, when we have done\nall, we are unprofitable servants,) we may be made accepted in the\nBeloved; and having no justifying righteousness of our own, may be\njustified, and glory in that which he hath wrought out for us.\n\nAnd as for the supposition, that faith, repentance, and new obedience,\nare not only conditions of justification, but easy to be performed: this\nplainly discovers, that they who maintain it, either think too lightly\nof man\u2019s impotency and averseness to what is good, and his alienation\nfrom the life of God, or are strangers to their own hearts, and are not\nduly sensible that it is God that works in his people both to will and\nto do, of his own good pleasure.\n\nThe only thing that I shall add, in opposition to the doctrine of\njustification by works, is, that whatever is the matter or ground of our\njustification in the sight of God, must be pleadable at his bar; for we\ncannot be justified without a plea, and if any plea, taken from our own\nworks, be thought sufficient, how much soever the proud and deluded\nheart of man may set too great a value upon them; yet God will not\nreckon the plea valid, so as to discharge us from guilt, and give us a\nright and title to eternal life on the account thereof; which leads us\nto consider,\n\n2. The method taken to explain this doctrine in the answer before us,\nwhich we think agreeable to the divine perfections, and contains a true\nstate of the doctrine of justification by faith. We before considered\njustification as a forensic act, that we might understand what is meant\nby our sins being imputed to Christ our Head and Surety, and his\nrighteousness imputed to us, or placed to our account. And we are now to\nspeak of this righteousness as pleaded by, or applied to us, as the\nfoundation of our claim to all the blessings that were purchased by it.\nHere we must consider a sinner as bringing in his plea, in order to his\ndischarge; and this is twofold.\n\n(1.) If he be charged by men, or by Satan, with crimes not committed, he\npleads his own innocency; if charged with hypocrisy, he pleads his own\nsincerity. Thus we are to understand several expressions in scripture to\nthis purpose; as for instance, when a charge of the like nature was\nbrought in against Job, Satan having suggested that he did not serve God\nfor nought; and that if God would touch his bone and his flesh, he would\ncurse him to his face: and his friends having often applied the\ncharacter they give of the hypocrite to him, and so concluding him to be\na wicked person, he says, _God forbid that I should justify you_; that\nis, that I should acknowledge your charge to be just; _till I die, I\nwill not remove mine integrity from me: my righteousness I hold fast,\nand will not let it go: my heart shall not reproach me so long as I\nlive_, Job xxvii. 5, 6. that is, I never will own what you insinuate,\nthat my heart is not right with God. And David, when complaining of the\nill-treatment which he met with from his enemies and persecutors, who\ndesired not only to _tread down his life upon the earth_, but to _lay\nhis honour in the dust_; to murder his name as well as his person, he\nprays, _Judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according\nto mine integrity that is in me_, Psal. vii. 8. What could he plead\nagainst maliciousness and false insinuations, but his righteousness or\nhis integrity? And elsewhere, when he says, _The Lord rewarded me\naccording to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands\nhath he recompensed me: For I have kept the ways of the Lord; his\njudgments were before me. I was also upright before him, and have kept\nmyself from mine iniquity_, 2 Sam. xxii. 21, _&c. seq._ it is nothing\nelse but an intimation, that how much soever he might be charged with\nthe contrary vices, he was, in this respect, innocent: and though God\ndid not justify him at his tribunal, for this righteousness; yet, in the\ncourse of his providence, he seemed to approve of his plea, so far as\nthat whatever the world thought of him, he plainly dealt with him as one\nwho was highly favoured by him; or whom, by his dealings with him, he\nevidently distinguished from those whose hearts were not right with him.\nIt is true, some who plead for justification by our own righteousness,\nallege these scriptures as a proof of it, without distinguishing between\nthe justification of our persons in the sight of God, and the\njustification of our righteous cause; or our being justified when\naccused at God\u2019s tribunal, and our being justified, or vindicated from\nthose charges that are brought against us at man\u2019s.\n\n(2.) When a person stands at God\u2019s tribunal, as we must suppose the\nsinner to do, when bringing in his plea for justification in his sight;\nthen he has nothing else to plead but Christ\u2019s righteousness; and faith\nis that grace that pleads it: and in that respect we are said to be\njustified by faith, or in a way of believing. Faith doth not justify by\npresenting or pleading itself, or any other grace that accompanies or\nflows from it, as the cause why God should forgive sin, or give us a\nright to eternal life; for they have not sufficient worth or excellency\nin them to procure these blessings. Therefore, when we are said to be\njustified by faith, it is by faith, as apprehending, pleading, or laying\nhold on Christ\u2019s righteousness; and this gives occasion to divines to\ncall it the instrument of our justification. Christ\u2019s righteousness is\nthe thing claimed or apprehended; and faith is that by which it is\nclaimed or apprehended; and, agreeably to the idea of an instrument, we\nare said not to be justified for faith, but by it. Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness is that which procures a discharge from condemnation for\nall for whom it was wrought out; faith is the hand that receives it;\nwhereby a person has a right to conclude, that it was wrought out for\nhim. Christ\u2019s righteousness is that which has a tendency to enrich and\nadorn the soul; and faith is the hand that receives it, whereby it\nbecomes ours, in a way of fiducial application: and as the righteousness\nof Christ is compared, in scripture, to a glorious robe, which renders\nthe soul beautiful, or is its highest and chief ornament; it is by faith\nthat it is put on; and, in this respect, as the prophet speaks, its\nbeauty is rendered _perfect through his comeliness, which is put upon\nhim_, Ezek. xvi. 14. so that Christ\u2019s righteousness justifies, as it is\nthe cause of our discharge; faith justifies as the instrument that\napplies this discharge to us; thus when it is said, _the just shall live\nby faith_, faith is considered as that which seeks to, and finds this\nlife in him; the effect is, by a metonymy, applied to the instrument; as\nwhen the husbandman is said to live or to be maintained by his plough,\nand the artist to live by his hands, or the beggar by his empty hand\nthat receives the donative. If a person was in a dungeon, like the\nprophet Jeremiah, and a rope is let down to draw him out of it, his\nlaying hold on it is the instrument, but the hand that draws him out, is\nthe principal cause of his release from thence; or, that we may make use\nof a similitude that more directly illustrates the doctrine we are\nmaintaining, suppose a condemned malefactor had a pardon procured for\nhim, which gives him a right to liberty, or a discharge from the place\nof his confinement, this must be pleaded, and his claim be rendered\nvisible; and after that he is no longer deemed a guilty person, but\ndischarged, in open court, from the sentence that he was under. Thus\nChrist procures forgiveness by his blood; the gospel holds it forth, and\ndescribes those who have a right to claim it as belonging to him in\nparticular: and hence arises a visible discharge from condemnation, and\na right to claim the benefits that attend it. If we understand\njustification by faith, in this sense, we do not attribute too much to\nfaith on the one hand, nor too little to Christ\u2019s righteousness on the\nother.\n\nAnd we rather choose to call faith an instrument, than a condition of\nour justification, being sensible, that the word _condition_ is\ngenerally used to signify that for the sake whereof, a benefit is\nconferred, rather than the instrument by which it is applied; not but\nthat it may be explained in such a way, as is consistent with the\ndoctrine of justification by faith, as before considered. We do not deny\nthat faith is the condition of our claim to Christ\u2019s righteousness; or\nthat it is God\u2019s ordinance, without which we have no ground to conclude\nour interest in it. We must therefore distinguish between its being a\ncondition of forgiveness, and its being a condition of our visible and\napparent right hereunto. This cannot be said to belong to us, unless we\nreceive it; neither can we conclude that we have an interest in Christ\u2019s\nredemption, any more than they for whom he did not lay down his life,\nbut by this medium. We must first consider Christ\u2019s righteousness as\nwrought out for all them that were given him by the Father; and faith is\nthat which gives us ground to conclude, that this privilege, in\nparticular, belongs to us.\n\nThis account of the use of faith in justification, we cannot but think\nsufficient to obviate the most material objections that are brought\nagainst our way of maintaining the doctrine of justification, _viz._ by\nChrist\u2019s righteousness, in one respect, and by faith in another. It is\nan injurious suggestion to suppose that we deny the necessity of faith\nin any sense, or conclude, that we may lay claim to this privilege\nwithout it; since we strenuously assert the necessity, on the one hand,\nof Christ\u2019s righteousness being wrought out for us, and forgiveness\nprocured thereby; and, on the other hand, the necessity of our receiving\nit, each of which is true in its respective place. Christ must have the\nglory that is due to him, and faith the work, or office that belongs to\nit.\n\nThus we have considered Christ\u2019s righteousness as applied by faith; and\nit may be also observed, that there is one scripture, in which it is\nsaid to be _imputed by faith_, as the apostle Paul, when speaking\nconcerning Abraham\u2019s justification by faith, in this righteousness,\nsays, _It was imputed to him for righteousness_; and adds, that _it was\nnot written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him, but for us\nalso, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe_, Rom. iv. 22, 23, 24.\nin which scripture, I conceive, that imputation is taken for\napplication; and accordingly the meaning is, the righteousness of Christ\nis so imputed, as that we have ground to place it to our own account, if\nwe believe; which is the same with applying it by faith.[52]\n\nAnd whereas the apostle speaks elsewhere of _faith\u2019s being counted for\nrighteousness_, ver. 5. it must be allowed, that there is a great deal\nof difficulty in the mode of expression. If we assert that the act of\nbelieving is imputed for righteousness, as they who establish the\ndoctrine of justification by works, or by faith as a work, we overthrow\nthat which we have been maintaining: and if, on the other hand, we\nunderstand faith, for the object of faith, _viz._ what was wrought out\nby Christ, which faith is conversant about, and conclude, (as I conceive\nwe ought to do,) that this, is imputed for righteousness, this is\nsupposed, by some, to deviate too much from the common sense of words,\nto be allowed of: but if there be such a figurative way of speaking used\nin other scriptures, why may we not suppose that it is used in this text\nunder our present consideration? If other graces are sometimes taken for\nthe object thereof, why may not faith be taken, by a metonymy, for its\nobject? Thus the apostle calls those whom he writes to, _his joy_, that\nis, the object, or matter thereof, Phil. iv. 1. And in the book of\nCanticles, the church calls Christ _her love_, Cant. iv. 8. that is, the\nobject thereof. And elsewhere, hope is plainly taken for the object of\nit, when the apostle says, _Hope that is seen, is not hope: for what a\nman seeth, why doth he yet hope for?_ Rom. viii. 24. By which he plainly\nintends, that whatever is the object of hope, cannot be in our present\npossession: and Christ is farther styled, _The blessed hope_, Tit. ii.\n13. that is, the person whose appearance we hope for. And Jacob speaks\nof God as _the fear of his father Isaac_, Gen. xxxi. 53. that is, the\nperson whom he worshipped with reverential fear; in all which cases the\nphraseology is equally difficult with that of the text, under our\npresent consideration. Thus concerning Christ\u2019s righteousness, as\nwrought out for us, and applied by faith; which is the foundation of all\nour peace and comfort, both in life and death; and therefore cannot but\nbe reckoned a doctrine of the highest importance: we shall now consider\nsome things that may be inferred from it. And,\n\n[1.] From what has been said concerning justification, as founded in\nChrist\u2019s suretyship-righteousness, wrought out for us, by what was done\nand suffered by him, in his human nature; and the infinite value\nthereof, as depending on the glory of the divine nature, to which it is\nunited, we cannot but infer the absurdity of two contrary opinions,\nnamely, that of those who have asserted, that we are justified by the\nessential righteousness of Christ as God[57]; and that of others, who\npretend, that because all mediatorial acts are performed by Christ only\nas man: therefore the infinite dignity of the divine nature, has no\nreference to their being satisfactory to divine justice. This is what\nthey mean when they say, that we are justified by Christ\u2019s righteousness\nas man, in opposition to our being justified by his essential\nrighteousness as God[58]: whereas, I think, the truth lies in a _medium_\nbetween both these extremes; on the one hand we must suppose, that\nChrist\u2019s engagement to become a surety for us, and so stand in our room\nand stead, and thereby to pay the debt which we had contracted to the\njustice of God, could not be done in any other than the human nature;\nfor the divine nature is not capable of being under a law, or fulfilling\nit, or, in any instance, of obeying, or suffering; and therefore, we\ncannot be justified by Christ\u2019s essential righteousness, as God; and, on\nthe other hand, what Christ did and suffered as man, would not have been\nsufficient for our justification, had it not had an infinite value put\nupon it, arising from the union of the nature that suffered with the\ndivine nature, which is agreeable to the apostle\u2019s expression, when he\nsays, _God purchased the church with his own blood_, Acts, xx. 28.\n\n[2.] From what has been said, concerning the fruits and effects of\njustification, as by virtue hereof our sins are pardoned, and we made\naccepted in the beloved, we infer; that it is not only an unscriptural\nway of speaking, but has a tendency to overthrow the doctrine we have\nbeen maintaining, to assert, as some do, that God is only rendered\nreconcileable by what was done and suffered by Christ. This seems to be\nmaintained by those who treat on this subject, with a different view.\nSome speak of God\u2019s being rendered reconcileable by Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness that they might make way for what they have farther to\nadvance, namely, that God\u2019s being reconciled to a sinner, is the result\nof his own repentance, or the amendment of his life, whereby he makes\nhis peace with him; which is to make repentance or reformation the\nmatter of our justification, and substitute it in the room of Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness: therefore, they who speak of God\u2019s being made\nreconcileable in this sense, by his blood, are so far from giving a true\naccount of the doctrine of justification, that, in reality, they\noverthrow it.\n\nBut there are others, who speak of God\u2019s being reconcileable as the\nconsequence of Christ\u2019s satisfaction, that they might not be thought to\nassert that God is actually reconciled by the blood of Christ, to those\nwho are in an unconverted state, which is inconsistent therewith;\ntherefore they use this mode of expression, lest they should be thought\nto give countenance to the doctrine of actual justification before\nfaith; but certainly we are under no necessity of advancing one\nabsurdity to avoid another: therefore, let it be here considered, that\nthe scripture speaks expressly of God\u2019s being reconciled by the death of\nChrist; and accordingly he is said to have _brought_ him _again from the\ndead_, as a _God of peace_, Heb. xiii. 20. And elsewhere, he speaks of\n_God\u2019s having reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ_, 2 Cor. v. 18.\nand not becoming reconcilable to us. Again, _When we were enemies we\nwere reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being\nreconciled, we shall be saved_, Rom. v. 10. that is, shall obtain the\nsaving effects of this reconciliation _by his life_. And again, _Having\nmade peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all\nthings to himself: and you that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in\nyour mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled, in the body of\nhis flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable, and\nunreprovable in his sight_, Col. i. 21, 22. Where he describes those who\nwere reconciled as once enemies, and speaks of this privilege as being\nprocured by the death of Christ, and of holiness here, and salvation\nhereafter, as the consequence of it; therefore it is such a\nreconciliation as is contained in our justification.\n\nBut though this appears very agreeable to the mind of the Holy Ghost, in\nscripture, yet it must be understood in consistency with those other\nscriptures, that represent persons in an unconverted state, as _children\nof wrath_, Eph. ii. 3. and being _hateful_, Tit. iii. 3. that is, not\nonly deserving to be hated by God, but actually hated, as appears by the\nmany threatnings that are denounced against them, and their being in a\ncondemned state, that we may not give countenance to the doctrine of\nsome, who, not distinguishing between God\u2019s secret and revealed will,\nmaintain that we are not only virtually, but actually justified before\nwe believe; as though we had a right to claim Christ\u2019s righteousness\nbefore we have any ground to conclude, that it was wrought out for us:\nbut what has been already suggested concerning justification by faith,\nwill, I think, sufficiently remove this difficulty.\n\nThe only thing that remains to be explained is; how God may be said to\nbe reconciled by the blood of Christ, to a person who is in an\nunconverted state, and as such, represented as a child of wrath? for the\nunderstanding of which, let us consider, that so long as a person is an\nunbeliever, he has no ground to conclude, according to the tenor of\nGod\u2019s revealed will, that he is reconciled to him, or that he is any\nother than a child of wrath. Nevertheless, when we speak of God\u2019s being\nreconciled to his elect, according to the tenor of his secret will,\nbefore they believe, that is in effect to say, that justification, as it\nis an immanent act in God, is antecedent to faith, which is a certain\ntruth, inasmuch as faith is a fruit and consequence thereof: whereas,\nGod does not declare that he is reconciled to us, or give us ground to\nconclude it; whereby we appear no longer to be children of wrath, till\nwe believe. If this be duly considered, we have no reason to assert,\nthat God is reconcileable, rather than reconciled by the death of\nChrist, lest we should be thought to maintain the doctrine of\njustification, or deliverance from wrath, as a declared act, before we\nbelieve. And to this we may add, that God was reconcileable to his\nelect, that is, willing to be reconciled to them before Christ died for\nthem; otherwise he would never have sent him into the world to make\nreconciliation for the sins of his people: he was reconcileable, and\ntherefore designed to turn from the fierceness of his wrath; and in\norder thereunto, he appointed Christ to make satisfaction for sin, and\nprocure peace for them.\n\n[3.] There is not the least inconsistency between those scriptures\nwhich speak of justification as being an act of God\u2019s free grace, and\nothers, which speak of it as being, by faith, founded on Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness; or between God\u2019s pardoning sin freely, without regard\nto any thing done by us to procure it; and yet insisting on, and\nreceiving a full satisfaction, as the meritorious and procuring cause\nof it. This is sometimes objected against what we have advanced in\nexplaining the doctrine of justification, as being, in some respects,\nan act of justice, and in others, of grace; as though it were\ninconsistent with itself, and our method of explaining it were liable\nto an absurdity, which is contrary to reason; as though two\ncontradictory propositions could be both true; namely, that\njustification should be an act of the strictest justice, without any\nabatement of the debt demanded, and yet of free grace, without\ninsisting on the payment of the debt: but this seeming contradiction\nmay be easily reconciled, if we consider that the debt was not paid by\nus in our own persons; which had it been done, it would have been\ninconsistent with forgiveness\u2019s being an act of grace; but by our\nsurety, and in that respect there was no abatement of the debt, nor\ndid he receive a discharge by an act of grace, but was justified as\nour head or surety, by his own righteousness, or works performed by\nhim; whereas, we are justified by his suretyship-righteousness,\nwithout works performed by us; and this surety was provided for us; as\nhas been before observed; and therefore, when we speak of\njustification, as being an act of grace, we distinguish between the\njustification of our surety, after he had given full satisfaction for\nthe debt which we had contracted; and this payment\u2019s being placed to\nour account by God\u2019s gracious imputation thereof to us, and our\nobtaining forgiveness as the result thereof, which can be no other\nthan an act of the highest grace.\n\n[4.] From what has been said concerning justification by faith, we\ninfer, the method, order and time, in which God justifies his people.\nThere are some who not only speak of justification before faith, but\nfrom eternity; and consider it as an immanent act in God in the same\nsense as election is said to be. I will not deny eternal justification,\nprovided it be considered as contained in God\u2019s secret will, and not\nmade the rule by which we are to determine ourselves to be in a\njustified state, and as such to have a right and title to eternal life,\nbefore it is revealed or apprehended by faith: if we take it in this\nsense, it is beyond dispute, that justification is not by faith; but\ninasmuch as the most known, yea, the only sense in which justification\nis spoken of, as applied to particular persons, is, that it is by faith:\ntherefore, we must suppose,\n\n_1st_, That it is a declared act. That which is hid in God, and not\ndeclared, cannot be said to be applied; and that which is not applied,\ncannot be the rule by which particular persons may judge of their state.\nThus, if we speak of eternal election, and say, That God has\nperemptorily determined the state of those that shall be saved, that\nthey shall not perish; this is nothing to particular persons, unless\nthey have ground to conclude themselves elected. So if we say that God\nhas, from all eternity, given his elect into Christ\u2019s hands; that he has\nundertaken before the foundation of the world, to redeem them; and that,\npursuant hereunto, God promised that he would give eternal life unto\nthem; or, if we consider Christ as having fulfilled what he undertook\nfrom all eternity, finished transgression, brought in everlasting\nrighteousness, and fully paid the debt which he undertook; consider him\nas being discharged, and receiving an acquittance, when raised from the\ndead; and all this as done in the name of the elect, as their head and\nrepresentative; and if you farther consider them, as it is often\nexpressed, as virtually justified in him; all this is nothing to them,\nwith respect to their peace and comfort; they have no more a right to\nclaim an interest in this privilege or relation, than if he had not paid\na price for them. Therefore, we suppose that justification, as it is the\nfoundation of our claim to eternal life, is a declared act.\n\n_2d._ If justification be a declared act, there must be some method\nwhich God uses, whereby he declares, or makes it known. Now it is\ncertain, that he, no where in scripture, tells an unbeliever that he has\nan interest in Christ\u2019s righteousness, or that his sins are pardoned, or\ngives him any warrant to take comfort from any such conclusion; but, on\nthe other hand, such an one has no ground to conclude any other,\nconcerning himself, but that he is a child of wrath; for he is to judge\nof things according to the tenor of God\u2019s revealed will. Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness is nothing to him in point of application; he is guilty of\nbold presumption if he lays claim to it, or takes comfort from it, as\nmuch as he would be were he to say, some are elected, therefore I am.\nNevertheless,\n\n_3d_, When a person believes, he has a right to conclude, that he is\njustified, or to claim all the privileges that result from it; and this\nis what we call justification by faith, which therefore cannot be before\nfaith; for that which gives a person a right to claim a privilege, must\nbe antecedent to this claim; or, that which is the foundation of a\nperson\u2019s concluding himself to be justified, must be antecedent to his\nmaking this conclusion; and in this respect, all who duly consider what\nthey affirm, must conclude that justification is not before faith.\n\n[5.] From what has been said concerning the office or use of faith in\njustification, as it is an instrument that applies Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness to ourselves, we infer; that it is more than an evidence\nof our justification: we do not indeed deny it to be an evidence that we\nwere virtually justified in Christ as our head and representative, when\nhe was raised from the dead, in the same sense as it is an evidence of\nour eternal election: but this is equally applicable to all other\ngraces, and therefore cannot be a true description of justifying faith.\nIf we are justified by faith, only as it is an evidence of our right to\nChrist\u2019s righteousness, we are as much justified by love, patience, and\nsubmission to the divine will, or any other grace that accompanies\nsalvation; but they who speak of faith as only an evidence, will not say\nthat we are justified by all other graces, in the same sense as we are\njustified by faith; and indeed, the scripture gives us no warrant so to\ndo.\n\n[6.] From what has been said concerning faith as giving us a right to\nclaim Christ\u2019s righteousness, we infer; that a person is justified\nbefore he has what we call, the faith of assurance; of which more\nhereafter: therefore we consider the grace of faith, as justifying or\ngiving us a right to claim Christ\u2019s righteousness, whether we have an\nactual claim or no. This must be allowed, otherwise the loss of this\nassurance would infer the suspension or loss of our justification, and\nconsequently would render our state as uncertain as our frames, or our\npeace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, as liable to be lost as\nthat peace and joy which we sometimes have in believing, and at other\ntimes are destitute of.\n\n[7.] From what has been said concerning justifying faith\u2019s being\naccompanied with all other graces, we infer; that that faith which is\njustifying, is also a saving grace, or a grace which accompanies\nsalvation; but yet there is this difference between saving faith, as we\ngenerally call it, and justifying, in that the former respects Christ in\nall his offices, the latter considers him only in his Priestly office,\nor as set forth to be a propitiation for sin. And this leads us to\nconsider the grace of faith in its larger extent, both with respect to\nits acts and objects, as contained in the former of the answers we are\nexplaining: and therefore,\n\nWe are now to consider the nature of faith in general, or of that faith,\nwhich, as before explained, we call justifying. There are some things in\nthis grace which are common to it with other graces; particularly, it is\nstyled a saving grace, not as being the cause of our salvation, but as\nit accompanies, or is connected with it. Again, it is said to be wrought\nin the heart of a sinner, to distinguish it from other habits of a lower\nnature, which are acquired by us; and it is said to be wrought by the\nSpirit and Word of God; by his Spirit, as the principal efficient, who,\nin order thereunto, exerts his divine power; and by the word, as the\ninstrument which he makes use of. The Word presents to us the object of\nfaith; and it is God\u2019s ordinance, in attending to which, he works and\nexcites it.\n\nMoreover, there are several things supposed or contained in this grace\nof faith, which are common to it, with other graces. As when a believer\nis said to be first convinced of sin and misery, and of his being unable\nto recover himself out of the lost condition in which he is, by nature;\nand the impossibility of his being recovered out of it by any other\ncreature; in all these respects, faith contains in it several things in\ncommon with other graces; particularly with conversion, effectual\ncalling, and repentance unto life. These things, therefore, we shall\npass over as being considered elsewhere, and confine ourselves to what\nis peculiar to this grace mentioned in this answer; only some few things\nmay be observed concerning it, as it is styled a saving grace, and\nwrought in the heart of man, by the Spirit and Word of God; and we shall\nadd some other things, of which we have no particular account in this\nanswer; which may contain a more full explication of this grace: in\nspeaking to which, we shall observe the following method;\n\nI. We shall consider the meaning of the word _faith_, in the more\ngeneral idea of it.\n\nII. We shall speak particularly concerning the various kinds of _faith_.\nAnd,\n\nIII. The various objects and acts of saving faith; especially as it\nassents to the truth of the promise of the gospel, and receives, and\nrests upon, Christ and his righteousness, held forth therein.\n\nIV. We shall consider it as a grace that accompanies salvation, and\nwrought in the heart by the power of the Spirit, and instrumentality of\nthe word.\n\nV. We shall consider it as strong or weak, increasing or declining, with\nthe various marks and evidences thereof.\n\nVI. We shall speak of the use of faith in the whole conduct of our\nlives; as every thing we do in an acceptable manner, is said to be done\nby it.\n\nVII. We shall shew how it is to be attained or increased, and what are\nthe means conducive thereunto.\n\nI. Concerning the meaning of the word _faith_, in the more general idea\nthereof. It is either an assent to a truth, founded on sufficient\nevidence; or a confiding or relying on the word or power of one, who is\nable and willing to afford us sufficient help or relief.[59]\n\n1. As to the former of these, as it contains an assent to a truth\nproposed and supported by sufficient evidence. This is more especially\nan act of the understanding; and it is necessary, in order hereunto,\nthat something be discovered to us, as the matter of our belief, which\ndemands or calls for our assent; and that is considered either only as\ntrue, or else, as true and good: if it be considered only as true, the\nfaith, or assent that is required thereunto is speculative; but if we\nconsider it not only as true, but good, or, as containing something\nredounding to our advantage; then the faith resulting from it is\npractical, and seated partly in the understanding, and partly in the\nwill; or, at least, the will is influenced and inclined to embrace what\nthe understanding not only assents to as true, but proposes to us as\nthat which if enjoyed would tend very much to our advantage.\n\nAs to this general description of faith, as an assent to what is\nreported, founded upon sufficient evidence, we may farther consider;[60]\nthat it is not in our power to believe a thing, unless the judgment be\nconvinced, and we have ground to conclude it to be true, and accordingly\nthere must be something which has a tendency to give this conviction;\nand that it is what we call evidence: every thing that is reported is\nnot to be credited; since it has very often no appearance of truth in\nit: and it is reasonable for the understanding, to demand a proof before\nit yields an assent; and if it be a matter of report, then we are to\nconsider the nature of the evidence, whether it be sufficient, or\ninsufficient to persuade us to believe what is reported; and according\nto the strength or credibility thereof, we believe, hesitate about it,\nor utterly reject it. If, according to our present view of things, it\nmay be true or false, we hardly call it the object of faith; we can only\nsay concerning it, that it is probable; if it be, on the other hand,\nattested by such evidence, as cannot, without scepticism be denied;\nhence arises what we call certainty, or an assurance of faith, supported\nby the strongest evidence.\n\nMoreover, according to the nature of the evidence, or testimony, on\nwhich it is founded, it is distinguished into human and divine; both of\nthese are contained in the apostle\u2019s words, _If we receive the witness\nof men, the witness of God is greater_, 1 John v. 9. As for human\ntestimony, though it may not be termed false, yet it can hardly be\ndeemed any other than fallible, since it cannot be said concerning\nsinful man, that it is impossible for him to lie or deceive, or be\ndeceived himself; but when we believe a thing on the divine testimony,\nour faith is infallible: it is as impossible for us to be deceived as it\nis for God to impart that to us, which is contrary to his infinite\nholiness and veracity. It is in this latter sense that we consider the\nword _faith_, when we speak of it as an act of religious worship, or\nincluded or supposed in our idea of saving faith; and so we style it a\nfirm assent to every thing that God has revealed as founded on the\ndivine veracity.\n\nLet us now consider faith as it contains an assent to a thing, not only\nas true, but as good; upon which account we call it a practical assent,\nfirst seated in the understanding; and then the will embraces what the\nunderstanding discovers to be conducive to our happiness; we first\nbelieve the truth of it, and then regulate our conduct agreeably\nthereunto. As when a criminal hears a report of an act of grace being\nissued forth by the king, he does not rest in a bare assent to the truth\nthereof, but puts in his claim to it. Or, as when a merchant is credibly\ninformed, that there are great advantages to be obtained by trading into\nforeign countries; he receives the report with a design to use all\nproper methods to partake of the advantage; as our Saviour illustrates\nit, when he compares _the kingdom of heaven unto a merchant man seeking\ngoodly pearls; who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and\nsold all that he had, and bought_, Matt. xiii. 45. We have sufficient\nevidence to support our faith, that there is forgiveness of sin, through\nthe blood of Christ; and that all spiritual blessings are treasured up\nin him, for the heirs of salvation: in this respect faith does not\ncontain a bare speculative assent to the truth of this proposition; but\nit excites in us an endeavour to obtain these blessings in that way\nwhich is prescribed by him, who is the giver thereof.\n\n2. Faith may be farther considered, as denoting an act of trust or\ndependence on him, who is the object thereof. This is very distinct from\nthe former sense of the word: for though it supposes indeed an assent of\nthe understanding to some truth proposed; yet this truth is of such a\nnature, as that it produces in us a resting or reliance on one who is\nable, and has expressed a willingness to do us good; and whose promise\nrelating hereunto, is such, as we have ground to depend on. This\nsupposes in him, who is the subject thereof, a sense of his own weakness\nor indigence, and in him that is the object of it, a fitness to be the\nobject of trust, for his attaining relief: thus the sick man depends\nupon the skill and faithfulness of the physician, and determines to look\nno farther for help, but relies on his prescriptions, and uses the means\nthat he appoints for the restoring of his health; or, as when a person\nis assaulted by one who threatens to ruin him, and is able to do it, as\nbeing an over-match for him, he has recourse to, and depends on the\nassistance of one that is able to secure and defend him, and thereby\nprevent the danger that he feared. Thus Jehoshaphat, when his country\nwas invaded by a great multitude of foreign troops, being apprehensive\nthat he was not able to withstand them; he exercises this faith of\nreliance on the divine power, when he says, _We have no might against\nthis great company, that come against us; neither know we what to do,\nbut our eyes are upon thee_, 2 Chron. xx. 12. And God is very often, in\nscripture, represented as the object of trust: so the church says, _I\nwill trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord Jehovah is my strength_; and\nelsewhere, _he that walketh in darkness and hath no light_, Isa. xii. 2.\nthat is, knows not which way to turn, is helpless and destitute of all\ncomfort, is encouraged to _trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon\nhis God_, chap. l. 10. This is truly and properly a divine faith, and\naccordingly an act of religious worship; and is opposed to a _trusting\nin man, and making flesh his arm_, Jer. xvii. 5. and it supposes a firm\npersuasion, that God is able to do all that for us which we stand in\nneed of; and that he has promised that he will do us good, and that he\nwill never fail nor forsake them that repose their trust or confidence\nin him: with this view the soul relies on his perfections, seeks to him\nfor comfort, and lays the whole stress of his hope of salvation on him,\nnot doubting concerning the event hereof, but concluding himself safe,\nif he can say, that _the eternal God is his refuge, and underneath are\nthe everlasting arms_, Deut. xxxiii. 27. This leads us,\n\nII. To consider the various kinds of faith, as mentioned in scripture.\nThus we read of a faith that was adapted to that extraordinary\ndispensation of providence, in which God was pleased to confirm some\ngreat and important truths by miracles; which is therefore styled a\nfaith of miracles. There is also a faith that has no reference to a\nsupernatural event, or confined to any particular age or state of the\nchurch, in which miracles are expected, but is founded on the\ngospel-revelation, which, how much soever it may resemble saving faith,\nyet falls short of it; and there is a faith which is inseparably\nconnected with salvation.\n\n1. Concerning the faith of miracles. This is what our Saviour intends,\nwhen he tells his disciples, That _if they had faith as a grain of\nmustard-seed, they should say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder\nplace, and it should remove; and nothing should be impossible unto\nthem_, Matt. xvii. 20. This is such a faith that many had, who were not\nin a state of salvation; as is plain from what our Saviour says, that\n_many will say to him in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in\nthy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have\ndone many wonderful works? to whom he will profess I never knew you_;\nand his commanding them to _depart from him_ as having _wrought\niniquity_, chap. vii. 22, 23. And the apostle Paul supposes, that a\nperson might have _all faith_, that is, this kind of faith; _so that he\nmight remove mountains_, 1 Cor. xiii. 2. which is a proverbial\nexpression, denoting, that extraordinary and miraculous events might\nattend it; and yet, at the same time, be destitute of _charity_, or love\nto God, and consequently without saving grace; and so appear, in the\nend, to _be nothing_.\n\nSome have questioned whether this faith of miracles was peculiar to the\ngospel-dispensation, in the time of our Saviour and the apostles, and so\nwas not required in those who wrought miracles under the Old Testament\ndispensation; though others suppose, that, from the nature of the thing,\nit was always necessary that faith should be exercised, when a miracle\nwas wrought; though it is true, we have little or no account of this\nfaith, as exercised by those that wrought miracles before our Saviour\u2019s\ntime; and therefore, we cannot so peremptorily determine this matter;\nbut according to the account we have thereof in the New Testament, there\nwere several things necessary to, or included in this faith of miracles.\n\n(1.) Some important article of revealed religion must be proposed to be\nbelieved; and in order thereunto, an explicit appeal made to God, in\nexpectation of his immediate interposure in working a miracle for that\nend: every thing that was the object of faith, was not, indeed, to be\nproved true by a miracle, but only those things which could not be\nsufficiently evinced without it, so as to beget a divine faith in those\nwho were the subjects of conviction. We never read that miracles were\nwrought to convince the world that there was a God, or a providence; or,\nto persuade men concerning the truth of those things that might be\nsufficiently proved by rational arguments: but when there could not be\nsuch a proof given without the finger of God being rendered visible by a\nmiracle wrought, then they depended on such an instance of divine\ncondescension; and the people who were to receive conviction, were to\nexpect such an extraordinary event.\n\n(2.) It was necessary that there should be a firm persuasion of the\ntruth of the doctrine, to be confirmed by a miracle in him that wrought\nit, together with an explicit appeal to it for the conviction of those\nwhose faith was to be confirmed thereby: and sometimes we read, that\nwhen miracles were to be wrought in favour of them, who before had a\nsufficient proof that our Saviour was the Messiah, it was necessary that\nthey should have a strong persuasion concerning this matter, and that he\nwas able to work a miracle; otherwise they had no ground to expect that\nthe miracle should be wrought: in the former instance we read of\nChrist\u2019s disciples working miracles for the conviction of the Jews, and\nexercising, at the same time, this faith of miracles; and in the latter\na general faith was demanded, that our Saviour was the Messiah, before\nthe miracle was wrought; in which sense we are to understand his reply\nto the man who desired that he would cast the Devil out of his son; _If\nthou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth_, Mark\nix. 23. _q. d._ Thou hast had sufficient conviction that I am the\nMessiah, by other miracles, and consequently hast no reason to doubt but\nthat I can cast the Devil out of thy son; therefore, if thou hast a\nstrong persuasion of the truth hereof, the thing that thou desirest\nshall be granted: and elsewhere it is said, _He did not many mighty\nworks because of their unbelief_, Matt. xiii. 58.\n\n(3.) How much soever a person might exercise this strong persuasion,\nthat a miracle should be wrought, which we generally call a faith of\nmiracles; yet I cannot think that this event always ensued without\nexception. For sometimes God might refuse to work a miracle, that he\nmight hereby cast contempt on some vile persons, who pretended to this\nfaith of miracles; who, though they professed their faith in Christ as\nthe Messiah, yet their conversation contradicted their profession, and\ntherefore God would not put that honour upon them so as to work a\nmiracle at their desire; much less are we to suppose, that he would work\na miracle at any one\u2019s pleasure, if they were persuaded that he would do\nso. Again, sometimes God might refuse to exert his divine power, in\nworking a miracle, in judgment, when persons had had sufficient means\nfor their conviction by other miracles, but believed not. And finally,\nwhen the truth of the Christian religion had been sufficiently confirmed\nby miracles, they were less common; and then we read nothing more of\nthat faith which took its denomination from thence.\n\n2. There is another kind of faith, which has some things in common with\nsaving faith, and is sometimes mistaken for it, but is vastly different\nfrom it. This, in some, is called an historical faith; and in others, by\nreason of the short continuance thereof, a temporary faith. An\nhistorical faith is that whereby persons are convinced of the truth of\nwhat is revealed in the gospel, though this has very little influence on\ntheir conversation: such have right notions of divine things, but do not\nentertain a suitable regard to them; religion with them is little more\nthan a matter of speculation; they do not doubt concerning any of the\nimportant doctrines of the gospel, but are able and ready to defend them\nby proper arguments: nevertheless, though, in words, they profess their\nfaith in Christ, in works they deny him: such as these the apostle\nintends when he says; _Thou believest that there is one God, thou dost\nwell: the devils also believe and tremble_, James ii. 19. And he charges\nthem with a vain presumption, in that they expected to be justified\nhereby; whereas their faith was without works, or those fruits which\nwere necessary to justify, or evince its sincerity; or to prove that it\nwas such a grace as accompanies salvation; and therefore he gives it no\nbetter a character than that of a dead faith.\n\nAs for that which is called a temporary faith, this differs little from\nthe former, unless we consider it, as having a tendency, in some\nmeasure, to excite the affections; and so far to regulate the\nconversation, as that which is attended with a form of godliness, which\ncontinues as long as this comports with, or is subservient to their\nsecular interest: but it is not such a faith as will enable them to pass\nthrough fiery trials, or part with all things for Christ\u2019s sake, or to\nrejoice in him, as their portion, when they meet with little but\ntribulation and persecution, in the world, for the sake of the gospel.\nThis will evidently discover the insincerity thereof; for it will wither\nlike a plant that is without a root: our Saviour speaks of it in the\nparable, of the _seed that fell upon stony places, where they had not\nmuch earth, and forthwith they sprang up, because they had no deepness\nof earth; and when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they\nhad no root they withered away_; which he explains of him, _who heareth\nthe word, and anon with joy receiveth it; yet hath he not root in\nhimself, but endureth for a while; for when tribulation or persecution\nariseth, because of thy word, by and by he is offended_, Matt. xiii. 5,\n6. compared with ver. 20, 21. This parable had a particular relation to\nthe Jews, who heard John the Baptist gladly, rejoicing in his light for\na season; and seemed to be convinced, by his doctrine, concerning the\nMessiah, who was shortly to appear; but when they apprehended that his\nkingdom, instead of advancing them to great honours in the world, was\nlike to expose them to tribulations and persecutions they were offended\nin him; and this is also applicable to all those who think themselves\nsomething, and are thought so by others, as to the profession they make\nof Christ and his gospel; but afterwards appear to be nothing, deceiving\ntheir own souls. This leads us,\n\n3. To consider faith as a grace that is inseparably connected with\nsalvation, which is called justifying faith, and also a saving grace, in\nthis answer, in which the nature thereof is explained; and what may be\nfarther said concerning it will be considered under the following heads,\nwhich we proposed to insist on in the general method before laid down;\nand therefore we shall proceed,\n\nIII. To speak concerning the various objects and acts of saving faith.\n\n1. Concerning its objects. Every thing that is the object thereof, must\ntake its rise from God; for we are now speaking concerning a divine\nfaith; and inasmuch as saving faith supposes and includes in it an\nassent to the truth of divine revelation, we are bound to believe\nwhatever God has revealed in his word; so that as all scripture is the\nrule of faith, the matter thereof is the object of faith: and as\nscripture contains an historical relation of things, these are the\nobjects of faith, and we are to yield an assent to what God reveals, as\nbeing of infallible verity. As it is a rule of duty and obedience, we\nare bound to believe so as to adore the sovereignty of God, commanding\nto submit to his authority therein, as having a right to give laws to\nour consciences, and acknowledge ourselves his subjects and servants,\nunder an indispensable obligation to yield the obedience of faith to\nhim: as it contains many great and precious promises, these are the\nobjects of faith, as we are to desire, hope for, and depend on the\nfaithfulness of God for the accomplishment of them; and more\nparticularly considering them as they are all, yea and amen, in Christ\nto the glory of God. As for the threatnings which relate to the wrath of\nGod, due to sin, and warnings to fence the soul against it, and induce\nus to abhor and hate it; these are objects of faith, so far as that we\nmust believe and tremble, and see the need we stand in of grace, which\nwe receive by faith to enable us to improve them, that through the\nvirtue of Christ\u2019s righteousness we may hope to escape his wrath; and by\nhis strength be fortified against the prevalency of corruption, that has\nproved destructive to multitudes.\n\nBut the principal object of faith is God in Christ, our great\nMediator:[61] thus our Saviour says, _Ye believe in God, believe also in\nme_, John xiv. 1. This is sometimes styled coming to the Father by him;\nas it is elsewhere said, _No man cometh unto the Father but by me_: or\nelse, coming to him as Mediator immediately, that in him we may obtain\nwhatever he has purchased for us, and thereby may have access to God, as\nto our reconciled God and Father; and in so doing, obtain eternal life,\nas he expresses it; _He that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he\nthat believeth on me shall never thirst_, chap. vi. 35. Which leads us\nto consider,\n\n2. Those particular acts of saving faith, in which we have to do with\nChrist as Mediator, whereby we have access to God, through him: there\nare several expressions in scripture, by which these acts of saving\nfaith are set forth, some of which are metaphorical; more particularly\nit is called a looking to him; thus he is represented, by the prophet,\nas saying, _Look unto me, and be ye saved all the ends of the earth_,\nIsa. xlv. 22. Sometimes by coming to him, pursuant to the invitation he\ngives, _Come unto me all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, and I will\ngive you rest_, Mat. xi. 25. which coming is elsewhere explained, as in\nthe scripture before-mentioned, by _believing in him_, John vi. 35. And\nas we hope for refreshment and comfort in so doing, it is set forth by\nthat, metaphorical expression, of _coming to the waters_ and _buying\nwine and milk without money and without price_, Isa. lv. 1. that is,\nreceiving from him those blessings which tend to satisfy and exhilirate\nthe soul, which are given to such as have nothing to offer for them; and\nsometimes it is represented by flying to him; or, as the apostle\nexpresses it, _flying for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before\nus_, Heb. vi. 18. as alluding to that eminent type thereof, contained in\nthe man-slayer\u2019s flying to the city of refuge, from the avenger of\nblood, and therein finding protection and safety: this is a description\nmore especially of faith as justifying; in which respect it is elsewhere\ndescribed, as _a putting on the Lord Jesus Christ_, Rom. xiii. 14. or\nthe glorious robe of his righteousness, on which account we are said to\nbe _clothed with the garments of salvation, and covered with the robe of\nrighteousness_, Isa. lxi. 10. And when we are enabled to apprehend our\ninterest in him by faith, together with the blessings that are the\nresult hereof, we are said to rejoice in Christ Jesus. There are many\nother expressions by which this grace is set forth in scripture; but\nthose acts thereof, which we shall more especially consider, are our\nreceiving Christ, giving up ourselves to him, and trusting in, or\nrelying on him.\n\n(1.) Faith is that grace whereby we receive Christ. Thus it is said, _as\nmany as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,\neven to them that believe on his name_, John i. 12. This contains in it\nthe application of an overture made by him; not barely of something that\nhe has to bestow, which might contribute to our happiness, but of\nhimself. Christ has many things to bestow upon his people; but he first\ngives himself; that is, he expresses a willingness to be their Prince\nand Saviour, their Prophet, Priest, and King; that being thus related,\nand adhering to him, they may be made partakers of his benefits, which\nare the result thereof; and accordingly the soul, by faith applies\nitself to him, and embraces the overture. Hereupon he is said to be\nours; and, as the consequence thereof, we lay claim to those benefits\nwhich he has purchased for us, as our Redeemer. Christ is considered as\nthe first promised blessing in the covenant of grace; and _with him_ God\n_freely gives_ his people _all things_ that they stand in need of, which\nrespect their everlasting salvation, Rom. viii. 32.\n\nThis supposes the person receiving him to be indigent and destitute of\nevery thing that may tend to make him happy, brought into the greatest\nstraits and difficulties, and standing in need of one who is able to\nafford relief to him. He has heard in the gospel, that Christ is able to\nsupply his wants; and that he is willing to come and take up his abode\nwith him; accordingly the heart is open to embrace him, esteeming him to\nbe altogether lovely and desirable, beholding that excellency and glory\nin his person, that renders him the object of his delight, as he is said\nto be _precious to them that believe_, 1 Pet. ii. 7. looking upon him as\nGod-man Mediator, he concludes, that he is able to save, to the\nuttermost, all that come unto God by him; and that all the treasures of\ngrace and glory are purchased by him, and given into his hand to apply\nto those who have an interest in him: he expects to find them all in\nChrist, as the result of his being made partaker of him; and accordingly\nhe adheres to him by this which is called an appropriating act of faith;\nwhereby he that was before represented in the gospel, as the Saviour and\nRedeemer of his people, the fountain of all they enjoy or hope for, and\nby whom they have access to God, as their reconciled God and Father, is\napplied by the soul, to itself, as the spring of all its present and\nfuture comfort and happiness.[62]\n\n(2.) Another act of faith is giving up ourselves to Christ. As, in the\ncovenant of grace, God says, _I will be to them a God, and they shall be\nto me a people_, faith builds on this foundation; it first apprehends\nthat he is able and willing to do them good, and make them happy in the\nenjoyment of himself; and with this encouragement the soul receives him,\nas has been but now observed; and pursuant hereunto devotes itself to\nhim, as desiring to be amongst the number of his faithful Servants and\nfollowers. God sanctifies or separates them to himself as the objects of\nhis discriminating grace and love; and they desire, as the consequence\nhereof, to give up themselves to him. Two things are supposed in this\nact of self-dedication.\n\n_1st_, A firm persuasion and acknowledgment of his right to us; not only\nas the possessor of all things, which he has an undoubted right to as\nGod, as the potter has a right to his clay, the Creator to the work of\nhis hands; but that he has a right to us by purchase, as Mediator, in\nwhich respect faith, and in particular, that which we call saving, of\nwhich we are now speaking, has more especially an eye to him; _Ye are\nnot your own_, says the apostle, _for ye are bought with a price_, 1\nCor. vi. 20. and therefore this act of faith is an ascribing to him that\nglory which he lays claim to by right of redemption: and as God has\nconstituted him heir of all things, more especially of those who are\ncalled his peculiar treasure: so the believer gives up himself to him.\nBefore this, the matter in dispute was, who is Lord over us? Whether we\nought to be at our own disposal or his? Whether it be expedient to serve\ndivers lusts and pleasures, or be subject to him as our supreme Lord and\nLawgiver? But the soul is thoroughly convinced, by the internal\nefficacious work of the Spirit, that our great Mediator is made of God,\nboth Lord and Christ; and that no one has a right to stand in\ncompetition with him; and that we owe not only what we can do, but even\nourselves unto him; and as the result hereof, devotes itself to him by\nfaith.\n\n_2d_, This also supposes that we are sensible of the many blessings that\nhe has in store for his people; and therefore we give up ourselves to\nhim in hope of his doing all that for us, and working all that grace in\nus which is necessary to our salvation; but more of this will be\ninsisted on, when we consider him as the object of trust. All that I\nshall add at present, under this head, is, that having this view of the\nperson of Christ, as one who demands obedience, love and gratitude from\nus, we give up ourselves entirely, and without reserve, to him: thus the\napostle says, _They first gave their own selves to the Lord_, 2 Cor.\nviii. 5. and exhorts the church to _yield themselves unto God, as those\nthat were alive from the dead_, Rom. vi. 13. and, to _present their\nbodies_, that is, themselves, and not barely the lower or meaner part of\nthemselves, _a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is\ntheir reasonable service_, chap. xii. 1. and as the result hereof, we\nsay by faith, Lord, truly I am thy servant, and desire to be so for\never; work in me what thou requirest, and then command what thou\npleasest: I am entirely at thy disposal, do with me as seemeth good in\nthy sight; only let all the dispensations of thy providence be instances\nof thy love, and made subservient to my salvation.\n\nThis is represented as our solemn act and deed; whereby, with the most\nmature deliberation, we make a surrender of ourselves to him: the\nprophet speaks of it as though it were done by an instrument or deed of\nconveyance; and our consent to be his, is represented by a giving up our\nnames to him; _One shall say, I am the Lord\u2019s, and another shall call\nhimself by the name of Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand\nunto the Lord, and sirname himself by the name of Israel_, Isa. xliv. 5.\nThis is done with the highest veneration, as an act of religious\nworship, and with the greatest humility, as being sensible that we give\nhim nothing more than his own; that he is not profited hereby, but the\nadvantage redounds entirely to us. We do it with judgment; as faith\nalways supposes a conviction of the judgment, it considers those\nrelations which Christ stands in to his people, and endeavours to behave\nitself in conformity thereunto: we are desirous hereby to give up\nourselves to him as a Prophet, to be led and guided by him in the way of\nsalvation; as a Priest, to give us a right to eternal life, as the\npurchase of his blood; as an Advocate to plead our cause; and as a King\nto give laws to us, and defend us from the insults of our spiritual\nenemies, and advance us to those honours which he has laid up for his\nfaithful subjects. We give up ourselves to him to worship him in all his\nordinances, in hope of his presence and blessing to attend them, in\norder to our spiritual and eternal advantage; and we do all this without\nthe least reserve or desire to have any will separate from, or contrary\nto his.\n\n(3.) Another act of faith consists in a fixed, unshaken trust and\nreliance upon him. This, as was before observed, is a very common and\nknown acceptation of the word _faith_. As we depend on his promise, as a\nGod that cannot lie, and give up ourselves to him, as one that has a\nright to us; so we trust him, as one whom we can safely confide in, and\nlay the whole stress of our salvation upon. This act of faith is more\nfrequently insisted on in scripture than any other, it being a main\ningredient in all other graces that accompany salvation; and there is\nnothing by which God is more glorified: it is not one single perfection\nof the divine nature that is the object thereof; but every thing which\nhe has made known concerning himself, as conducive to our blessedness;\nwe trust him with all we have, and for all that we want or hope for.\nThis implies in it a sense of our own insufficiency and nothingness, and\nof his all-sufficient fulness. The former of these is what is sometimes\nstyled a soul emptying act of faith; it is that whereby we see ourselves\nto be nothing, not only as we cannot be profitable to God, or lay him\nunder any obligations to us, as those who pretend to merit any good at\nhis hand, but as unable to perform any good action without his\nassistance; in this respect it says, _surely, in the Lord have I\nrighteousness and strength_, Isa. xlv. 24. and there is nothing tends\nmore to humble and abase the soul before him than this.\n\nAnd hereby we are led to another act, which more immediately contains\nthe formal nature of faith; in which it depends on the all-sufficiency\nof God, and his faithfulness to supply our wants, and bestow the\nblessings which he has promised: God the Father is the object of this\ntrust or dependence, as the divine All-sufficiency is glorified, grace\nimparted, and the promises thereof fulfilled by him, through a Mediator;\nand Christ is the object thereof, as the soul apprehends him to be full\nof grace and truth; sees the infinite value of his merit, and his\nability to make good all the promises of the covenant of grace, and\nthereby to render him completely blessed. When we trust Christ with all\nwe have, or hope for, this supposes that there is something valuable\nwhich we either enjoy or expect; and that we are in danger of losing it,\nunless it be maintained by him, who has undertaken to _keep_ his people\n_by his power through faith unto salvation_, 1 Pet. i. 5. and to perfect\nwhat concerns them. We have souls more valuable than the whole world,\nand we _commit the keeping of our souls to him in well-doing as unto a\nfaithful Creator_, chap. iv. 19. and merciful Redeemer; being assured\nthat _none shall_ be able to _pluck them out of his hand_, John x. 28.\nand we also commit all the graces which he has wrought in us to him, to\nmaintain and carry on to perfection. And since we are assured, that all\nthe promises are in his hand, and that he has engaged to make them good\nto us, we are encouraged to trust him for all that we expect, namely,\nthat he will conduct us safely and comfortably through this world, and\nat last receive us to glory; and in so doing, we have the highest\nsatisfaction; or, as the apostle expresses it, _We know whom we have\nbelieved_, or trusted, _and are persuaded that he is able to keep what\nwe have committed unto him against that day_, 2 Tim. i. 12. or the day\nof his second coming, when grace shall be consummate in glory.\n\nThese acts of faith are generally styled, by divines, _direct_; in which\nwe have more immediately to do with Christ, as our great Mediator, or\nGod the Father in him; and being, properly speaking, acts of religious\nworship, the object thereof must be a divine person. But there is\nanother sense of the word _faith_; which, as it does not contain in it\nany act of trust or dependence, as the former does, so it has not God\nfor its immediate object, as that has; and this is what we call the\n_reflex_ act of faith, or the soul\u2019s being persuaded that it believes;\nthat those acts of faith which have God or Christ for their object, are\ntrue and genuine. This every one cannot conclude at all times, who is\nreally enabled to put forth those direct acts of faith, that we have\nbeen speaking of; and it is the result of self-examination, accompanied\nwith the testimony of the Holy Spirit to his own work.\n\nSome indeed have questioned the propriety of the expression, when this\nis styled an act of faith; as supposing that nothing can be so called,\nbut what hath a divine person for its object: but we have before\nconsidered that faith, in a sense different from that in which we have\nnow explained it, may be conversant about divine things; therefore, as\nwe may be said, by a direct act of faith, to trust in Christ; we may be\npersuaded, by this reflex act, that we do so: and this is more\nimmediately necessary to assurance, together with that joy and peace\nwhich we are said to have in believing. But this we shall have occasion\nto insist on under a following answer.[63]\n\nIV. We are now to consider this grace of faith as that which accompanies\nsalvation, upon which account it is called a _saving grace_; and also,\nthat it is wrought in the heart by the power of the Spirit, and by the\ninstrumentality of the word. We do not suppose that every act of faith\ndenominates a person to be in a state of salvation; for there is a bare\nassent to the truth of divine revelation, that may, in a proper sense,\nbe styled _faith_; and there may be an external dedication to God, a\nprofessed subjection to him, which falls short of that faith which has\nbeen before described, as it does not proceed from a renewed nature, or\na principle of spiritual life implanted in the soul. There may be a\nwillingness and a desire to be saved, when the heart is not purified by\nfaith; a hearing the word with gladness, rejoicing in the light that is\nimparted thereby, for a season, and doing many things pursuant\nthereunto, in some, who shall not be saved: but faith is often-times\ndescribed as referring to and ending in salvation; thus we are said to\n_believe to the saving of the soul_, Heb. x. 39. and, to _receive the\nend of our faith, even the salvation of our souls_, 1 Pet. i. 9. This\nconsists, more especially, in those acts of faith, that contain in them\nan entire subjection of all the powers and faculties of the soul to\nChrist, arising from the views which it has of his glory, and its\nexperience of his almighty power, which is not only the way to, but the\nfirst fruits of everlasting salvation. This is such a receiving and\nresting on Christ for salvation, as has been before described.\n\nAnd this grace is farther said to be wrought in the heart of a sinner,\nby the Spirit. We have before considered effectual calling, as a work of\ndivine power, and proved, that the Spirit is the author of it;[64] and\nthat they, who are effectually called, are enabled to accept of, and\nembrace the grace offered in the gospel; from whence it is evident, that\nfaith is the fruit and consequence of our effectual calling; and\ntherefore it must be a work of the almighty power and grace of the Holy\nSpirit. And, this it farther appears to be, from that account which we\nhave thereof in several scriptures: thus the apostle Peter, describing\nthose he writes to, as having _obtained like precious faith, through the\nrighteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ_; and also as having\n_all things that pertain unto godliness_, in which faith is certainly\nincluded, he ascribes this to the _divine power_, 2 Pet. i. 1. compared\nwith the 3rd verse. And elsewhere we read _of the exceeding greatness of\nthe power_ of God exerted _in them that believe_, Eph. i. 19. And when\nthe work of faith is carried on, or fulfilled in the souls of those in\nwhom it was begun, it is considered as an effect of the same power, 2\nThess. i. 11. And, as all that grace, which is the effect of divine\npower, is ascribed to the Holy Ghost, when he is said hereby, as acting\nin subserviency to the Father and Son, to demonstrate his Personal\nglory: so the work of faith, in this respect, is represented as his\nwork; upon which account he is called the _Spirit of faith_, 2 Cor, iv.\n13.\n\nBut that which we shall more particularly consider is, that this grace\nof faith is wrought by the instrumentality of the word. We have before\nobserved, that the principle of grace, implanted in regeneration, is the\nimmediate effect of the divine power, without the instrumentality of the\nword; but when the Spirit works faith, and all other graces, which\nproceed from that principle, then he makes use of the word: thus the\napostle says, _Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God_,\nRom. x. 17. As it is necessary, in order to our seeing any object, that\nthe eye be rightly disposed and fitted for sight, and the object\npresented to it: so there are two things necessary to faith, namely, the\nsoul\u2019s being changed, renewed, quickened, and so prepared to act this\ngrace; and the objects being presented to it, about which it is to be\nconversant; which latter is done by the word of God: so that the soul is\nfirst internally disposed to receive what God is pleased to reveal\nrelating to the way of salvation by Jesus Christ before it believes; and\nthis revelation is contained in the gospel, which is adapted to the\nvarious acts of faith, as before described.\n\n1. As faith implies a coming to Christ, or receiving him; the word of\nGod reveals him to us as giving an invitation to sinners, encouraging\nthem thereunto; thus our Saviour says, _If any man thirst, let him come\nunto me, and drink_, John vii. 37. And, as a farther inducement to this,\nit sets forth the advantages that will attend it, to wit, that he will\nnot reject them, how unworthy soever they be; as, he says, _Him that\ncometh to me, I will in no wise cast out_, John vi. 37. And there are\nmany other privileges which he will bestow on them, namely, the\nblessings of both worlds, grace here, and glory hereafter, all which\ncontain the very sum and substance of the gospel.\n\n2. If we consider faith as including in it a giving up ourselves to\nChrist, to be intirely his; the word of God represents him as having an\nundoubted right to all who do so, inasmuch as they are bought with the\nprice of his blood, given to him as his own, by the Father. And as they\ndevote themselves to him, to be his servants, it sets before them the\nprivileges which attend his service, as they are delivered from the\ndominion of sin, and a servile fear and dread of his wrath; lets them\nknow the ease, pleasure, and delight that there is in bearing his yoke,\nand the blessed consequences thereof, in that as they _have their fruit\nunto holiness, the end thereof shall be life everlasting_, Rom. vi. 22.\n\n3. As faith looks to Christ for forgiveness of sin, in which respect it\nis called justifying faith; so the word of God represents him to us, as\nhaving made atonement for sin; as set forth to be a propitiation to\nsecure us from the guilt which we were liable to, and the condemning\nsentence of the law; as bearing the curse, and, as the consequence\nthereof, giving us a right to all the privileges of his children. It\nalso represents this forgiveness as full, free, and irreversible; and\nthe soul, by faith rejoices in its freedom from condemnation, and that\nright and title to eternal life, which is inseparably connected with it.\n\n4. As faith includes in it a trusting or relying on Christ, the gospel\nrepresents him as an all-sufficient Saviour, _able to save to the\nuttermost all that come unto God by him_, Heb. vii. 25. and as faith\ntrusts him for the accomplishment of all the promises, it considers him\nas having engaged to make them good, inasmuch as _they are yea and amen\nin him, unto the glory of God_, 2 Cor. i. 20. And therefore, he runs no\nrisque, or is at no uncertainty as to this matter; for Christ\u2019s\nMediatorial glory lies at stake. If there be the least failure in the\naccomplishment of any promise; or any blessing made over to his people\nin the covenant of grace, which shall not be conferred upon them, he is\ncontent to bear the blame for ever: but this is altogether impossible,\nsince he that has undertaken to apply the blessings promised, is\nfaithful and true, as well as the Father that gave them; and this\naffords them _strong consolation, who are fled for refuge, to lay hold\non the hope set before them_ in the gospel, Heb. vi. 18. Thus Christ is\nset forth; and agreeably to this discovery made of him, faith takes up\nits rest in him, and therein finds safety and peace.\n\nV. We shall now consider faith as strong or weak, increasing or\ndeclining, with the various marks and signs thereof. As habits of sin\nare stronger or weaker, the same may be said concerning habits of grace.\nIt is one thing for them to be entirely lost; and another thing to be in\na declining state: their strength and vigour may be much abated, and\ntheir energy frequently interrupted; nevertheless God will maintain the\nprinciple of grace, as we shall endeavour to prove under a following\nanswer.[65] Grace is not always equally strong and lively; the prophet\nsupposes it to be a declining, when he says, _Revive thy work, O Lord,\nin the midst of the years_, Heb. iii. 2. and our Saviour\u2019s advice to the\nchurch at Sardis, implies as much, when he exhorts them _to strengthen\nthe things which remain, that are ready to die_, Rev. iii. 2. and when\nhe bids the church at Ephesus to _remember from whence they were fallen,\nand repent and do their first works_, chap. ii. 5. Some are said, as\nAbraham, to be _strong in faith, giving glory to God_, Rom. iv. 20. and\nothers are reproved, as our Saviour does his disciples, at some times,\nwhen he says, _O ye of little faith_, Matt. vi. 30. As our natural\nconstitution is not always equally healthy and vigorous, nor our\ncondition in the world equally prosperous, the same may be said\nconcerning the habits of grace; sometimes they are strong, and then, as\nthe apostle says concerning his beloved Gaius, 3 John ver. 2. _the soul\nprospereth_, and we _go from strength to strength_, Psal. lxxxiv. 7.\nfrom one degree of grace to another; but, at other times, we are ready\nto _faint in the day of adversity_, and our _strength is small_, Prov.\nxxiv. 10. This cannot but be observed by all who are not strangers to\nthemselves, or who take notice of the various frame of spirit, which are\nvisible in those whom they converse with.\n\nBut if it be enquired; by what marks or evidences we may discern the\nstrength or weakness of faith? though this will more evidently appear\nfrom what will be said under a following answer,[66] when we are led to\nspeak concerning the reason of the imperfection of sanctification in\nbelievers; yet we shall not wholly pass it over in this place; and\ntherefore, it may be observed, that the strength or weakness of faith,\nis to be judged of by that degree of esteem and value which the soul has\nfor Christ, and the steadiness, or abatement of its dependence on him.\nThe greater diffidence or distrust we have of self, and the more we see\nof our own emptiness and nothingness, the stronger is our faith; on the\nother hand, self-confidence, or relying on our own strength is a certain\nsign of the weakness thereof.\n\nAgain, strong faith is that which carries the soul through difficult\nduties; as the apostle says, _I can do all things through Christ which\nstrengtheneth me_, Phil. iv. 13. Whereas weak faith is ready to sink\nunder the discouragements that it meets with; the former is _stedfast,\nunmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord_, 1 Cor. xv. 58.\nthe latter is like a reed shaken with the wind. Strong faith, as it is\nsaid of Job, Job i. 21. blesses God when he strips him of all earthly\nenjoyments, and rejoices that the soul is _counted worthy to suffer\nshame for his name_, Acts v. 41. and this carries him above those fears\nwhich have a tendency to deject and dishearten him: _He shall not be\nafraid of evil tidings, his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord_, Psal.\ncxii. 7. Whereas, weak faith is borne down, with discouragements; he\nfinds it hard to hold on in the performance of his duty, and sees\nmountains of difficulties in his way; whereby the soul is ready to\nconclude, that he shall not be able to get safely to his journey\u2019s end.\nHe does not rightly improve the consideration of the almighty power of\nGod, and his faithfulness to his promise, in which he has engaged, that\n_the righteous shall hold on his way; and he that hath clean hands shall\nwax stronger and stronger_, Job xvii. 9. And when we sustain losses and\ndisappointments in the world, or things go contrary to our expectation,\nthen we are ready to say with the Psalmist, _Hath God forgotten to be\ngracious? hath he, in anger, shut up his tender mercies?_ Psal. lxxvii.\n9. and sometimes conclude, that we have no interest in the love of God,\nbecause the dispensations of his providence are afflictive, and fill us\nwith great uneasiness. In this case fear looks upon every adverse\nprovidence, as it were, through a magnifying glass, and apprehends this\nto be but the beginning of sorrows; for it cannot say with the prophet,\n_I will trust and not be afraid_, chap. xii. 2. _for in the Lord Jehovah\nis everlasting strength_, chap. xxvii. 4.\n\nMoreover, the strength or weakness of faith may farther be discerned by\nour enjoying, or being destitute of communion with God; our conversing\nwith him in ordinances, or being deprived of this privilege. We may\nconclude our faith to be strong, when we can say as the apostle does,\n_Our conversation is in heaven_, or we live above: but when, on the\nother hand, we have too great an anxiety or solicitude about earthly\nthings, and an immoderate love to this present world, this argues the\nweakness thereof. The difference between these two may also be\ndiscerned, by the frame of our spirit in prayer. When faith is strong,\nthe soul has a great degree of boldness or liberty of access to the\nthrone of grace; a greater measure of importunity and fervency,\naccompanied with an expectation of the blessings prayed for, by a secret\nand powerful intimation from the Spirit, as a Spirit of grace and\nsupplication; from whence it infers, that he that excites this grace\nwill encourage it, as he _says not to the seed of Jacob, seek ye me in\nvain_, chap. xlv. 19.\n\nWe might also add, in the last place, that strong faith may likewise be\ndiscerned, when it is accompanied with an assurance of an interest in\nChrist\u2019s righteousness, and our right and title to eternal life founded\nthereon, or that God will guide us by his counsel, and afterwards\nreceive us to glory, and a persuasion wrought in the soul by the Spirit,\nthat nothing shall separate us from his love: whereas weak faith is\nattended with many doubts concerning our interest in Christ; sometimes\nfearing that our former hope was no other than a delusion, our present\nexperiences not real, the ground we stand on sinks under us; and we are\nready to conclude, that we shall one day fall by the hands of our\nspiritual enemies. When I speak of these doubts and fears, as an\ninstance of weak faith, I do not say that they are ingredients in faith;\nfor they are rather to be considered as a burden and incumbrance that\nattends it, so that though there be some good thing in us towards the\nLord our God, or a small degree of faith, like a grain of mustard seed,\nthese doubts proceed from the weakness thereof, as opposed to that which\nis strong, and would denote the soul to be in a happy and flourishing\ncondition; which leads us,\n\nVI. To speak concerning the use of faith in the whole conduct of our\nlives; as every thing that we do in an acceptable manner, is said to be\ndone by it. It is one thing occasionally to put forth some acts of\nfaith, and another thing to live by faith; which, as it is the most\nnoble and excellent life, so nothing short of it can, properly speaking,\nbe called a good life, how much soever many are styled good livers, who\nare wholly strangers to this grace. The apostle Paul speaks of this way\nof living, and considers it as exemplified in himself, when he says,\n_The life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son\nof God_, Gal. ii. 20. He speaks of it as his constant work, or that\nwhich ran through the whole business of life. Whether we are engaged in\ncivil or religious duties, they are all to be performed by faith. Here\nwe shall consider the life of faith;\n\n1. As it discovers itself in all the common actions of life; in these we\nact as men: but that faith, which is the principal ingredient in them,\nand their chief ornament, denotes us to walk as Christians; and this we\nare said to do,\n\n(1.) When we receive every outward mercy, as the purchase of the blood\nof Christ, as well as the gift of his grace; and consider it as a\nblessing bestowed by a covenant-God, who, together with outward things,\nis pleased to give himself to us; which infinitely enhances the value of\nthe blessing, and induces us to receive it with a proportionable degree\nof thankfulness.\n\n(2.) When we set loose from all the enjoyments of this world, not taking\nup our rest in them, as though they were our portion or chief good; and\ntherefore, the esteem and value we have for them is very much below that\nwhich we have for things divine and heavenly. When we use them to the\nglory of God; and account the best outward enjoyments nothing, if\ncompared with Christ; as the apostle says, _I count all things but loss\nfor the excellency of the knowledge of Christ, and do count them but\ndung, that I may win Christ_, Phil. iii. 8. This act of faith will quiet\nour spirits under afflictions, and induce us to submit to the disposing\nprovidence of God; when our best outward enjoyments are removed, or we\ncalled to suffer the loss of all things for Christ\u2019s sake, or by his\nsovereign will.\n\n(3.) When all the success which we hope for in our secular employments,\nis considered as an instance of that care which Christ takes of his\npeople, in which he over-rules and orders all things for his own glory,\nand their welfare; and therefore, we are persuaded that he will cause\nwhatever we take in hand, to prosper, provided he sees that it is best\nfor us; and if not, we are disposed to acquiesce in his will. This is\nsuch an instance of faith as will put us upon doing every thing in the\nname and to the glory of Christ, and fortify us against any\ndisappointment that may attend our expectation, in every employment\nwherein we are engaged.\n\n(4.) When outward blessings, instead of proving a snare and temptation,\nto draw off our hearts from Christ, are a means to bring us nearer to\nhim, so that if our circumstances are easy and comfortable in the world,\nand we have more frequent opportunities offered to us, to engage in\nreligious duties than others, we are accordingly inclined to embrace\nthem; and when every thing we enjoy, as an instance of distinguishing\nfavour from God, above what many in the world do, excites in us a due\nsense of gratitude, and an earnest desire and endeavour to use the world\nto his glory.\n\n(5.) When adverse providences, which sometimes have a tendency to drive\nthe soul from Christ, and occasion repining thoughts, as though the\ndivine distributions were not equal, are made of use to bring us nearer\nto him, so that whatever we lose in the creature, we look for, and\nendeavour to find in him. And when, with a submissive spirit, we can\nsay, that he does all things well for us, as we hope and trust that he\nwill make even those things that run counter to our secular interests,\nsubservient to our eternal welfare; and as the result hereof, endeavour\nto keep up a becoming frame of spirit, in such a condition of life, as\nhas in itself a tendency to cast down the soul and fill it with great\ndisquietude.\n\n(6.) When we devote and consecrate all we have in the world to God,\nconsidering, that as we are not our own but his; so all we have is his;\nand when hereupon we are endowed with a public spirit, desirous to\napprove ourselves blessings to mankind in general, to the utmost of our\npower; and when we have done all, not only say with David, _Of thine own\nwe have given thee_, 1 Chron. xxix. 14. but as our Saviour taught his\ndisciples to say, _We are unprofitable servants_.\n\n(7.) The life of faith discovers itself in the government of our\naffections, namely, as they are kept within due bounds, set upon right\nobjects, and rendered subservient to promote Christ\u2019s glory and\ninterest. Hereby are we prevented from setting our affections\nimmoderately on things of this world, when faith shews us that there are\nfar better things to draw them forth, which deserve our highest love: it\nalso prevents our being worldly and carnal, as though we were swallowed\nup with the things of sense, and had nothing else to mind, and religion\nwere only to be occasionally engaged in; or, as though an holy, humble,\nself-denying frame of spirit were inconsistent with worldly business.\nFaith suggests the contrary; puts us upon making religion our great\nbusiness, and engaging in secular affairs, rather as a necessary\navocation from it, than that which is the chief end of living. It also\nputs us upon glorifying Christ in our secular concerns, as we manage\nthem in such a way as he ordains; and hereby the soul is kept in a\nspiritual frame, while abiding with God in the calling whereunto he is\ncalled. This we attribute more especially to the grace of faith, not\nonly as it is connected with, and (as will be observed under our next\nhead) excites other graces; but as it has its eye constantly fixed on\nChrist as its object, and by this steers its course, and takes an\nestimate of the valuableness and importance of all the affairs of this\nlife, by their subserviency to our salvation, and the advancement of his\nglory therein.\n\n2. Faith discovers itself in the performance of all religious duties,\nand the exercise of all other graces therein. Thus we read of the prayer\nof faith, whereby a soul hath access to God as a father, in the name of\nChrist; firmly relies on the promises which are established in him, and\nhas a liberty to plead with him, and hope of acceptance in his sight.\nMoreover, when we wait on God to hear what he has to impart to us in his\nword, faith having experienced some degree of communion with him\nalready, and had some displays of his love, puts the soul upon desiring\nmore, as the Psalmist says, _My soul thirsteth for thee; my flesh\nlongeth for thee, to see thy power and thy glory, so as I have seen thee\nin the sanctuary_, Psal. lxiii. 1, 2. And whatever other ordinances of\ndivine appointment, we are engaged in, we are hereby encouraged to hope\nfor his presence, and draw nigh unto him herein, with a reverential fear\nand delight, in him: and it puts us upon the exercise of those graces\nwhich are necessary for the right performance of gospel worship in\ngeneral.\n\nThese are not only joined with it, but may be said to be excited\nthereby; so that faith is, as it were, the principal of all other\ngraces. Thus when the heart is drawn forth in love to Christ, it may be\nsaid, that _faith worketh by love_, Gal. v. 6. and when this love is\naccompanied with _joy unspeakable and full of glory_; this we have in a\nway of believing, and that which tends to excite the grace of love, is\nthe view that faith takes of Christ\u2019s mediatorial glory and\nexcellencies, and the obligations we are under to love him, from his\ngrace of love to us; and this is a strong motive, inducing us to express\nour love to him, by universal obedience, which is called, _the obedience\nof faith_, Rom. xvi. 26.\n\nWhen we exercise the grace of repentance, and thereby hate and turn from\nall sin, and are, in a peculiar manner, sensible, as we ought to be, of\nthe sin of unbelief; it is faith that gives us this sense thereof, as it\nis best able to see its own defects. When we confess sin, or humble\nourselves before God for it, faith views it not only as a violation of\nthe divine law, but as an instance of the highest ingratitude; and when\nwe desire, in the exercise of repentance, to forsake sin, faith makes us\nsensible of our own weakness, and puts us upon a firm and stedfast\ndependence on Christ, to enable us thereunto; and when, in the exercise\nof this grace, our consciences are burdened with a sense of guilt and\nunbelief is ready to suggest, that our sins are so heinously aggravated,\nthat there is no room to hope for pardoning mercy, faith relieves us\nagainst these despairing thoughts, and encourages us to wait for the\nmercy of God, who will _abundantly pardon_, Isa. lv. 7. and with whom\nthere is _forgiveness, that he may be feared_, Psal. cxxx. 4.\n\nAnd when we use endeavours to mortify sin, this is to be done by a\nfiducial view of Christ crucified; and when we encourage ourselves to\nhope that the indictment brought against us for it, was nailed to the\ncross of Christ; and that there is _no condemnation to us_, as being in\nhim, Rom. viii. 1. and that, as the apostle says, _Our old man is\ncrucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed: that\nhenceforth we should no longer serve sin_, chap. vi. 6. all this is to\nbe done by faith.\n\nWe might also observe, that the grace of patience is connected with, and\nwe excited, thereunto by faith. The apostle, Heb. vi. 12. joins both\nthese together, as supposing that faith affords a motive to patience;\nand elsewhere we read, not only of what faith enables us to do, but\nbear, in the account which we have, of the great things which the Old\nTestament saints did, and suffered by this grace: and therefore,\nwhatever graces are exercised under the afflictions of this present\nlife; faith excites in us a resignation to the will of God, and consider\nthem as the chastisements of a merciful Father, and as _bringing forth\nthe peaceful fruit of righteousness unto them that are exercised\nthereby_, chap. xii. 11. and we are encouraged to bear them with such a\ncomposed frame of spirit that they seem light, and not worthy to be\ncompared with the glory that shall be revealed. This, faith has\nconstantly in view, setting one against the other; whereby that which\nwould otherwise be an hindrance to us in our way, is improved, by us, to\nour spiritual advantage; and we enabled, not only to go on safely, but\ncomfortably, till we arrive at the full fruition of what we now behold\nat a distance, and rejoice in the fiducial expectation thereof: which\nleads us to the last thing proposed to be considered, concerning faith,\nnamely,\n\nVII. How it is to be attained or increased, and what are the means\nconducive thereunto. Though faith, in common with all other graces, be\nwrought in us by the power of God, yet we are far from asserting, that\nthere is no duty incumbent on us, in the performing whereof, we are to\nhope and wait for the divine blessing, upon which all the success\nthereof depends. To deny this would give just occasion to charge the\ndoctrine of efficacious grace, as though it led to security, or\nlicentiousness; which many do without ground. Though grace and duty are\nvery distinct, yet they are not inconsistent with each other; the former\nis God\u2019s work, the latter our act.\n\nAs for those duties which are required of us, considered as expecting\nthe divine grace and blessing to attend them; these are, a diligent\nwaiting on God in all his ordinances; looking into the state of our\nsouls, by impartial self-examination; calling to mind our past\nmiscarriages, and what matter of humiliation we have for them in the\nsight of God, as also, our natural aversion and inability to do what is\ngood; our need of Christ\u2019s righteousness, to take away the guilt we have\ncontracted, and of his strength, to subdue our corruptions, and enable\nus to plead earnestly with him for these privileges.\n\nAs for the unregenerate, they must pray and wait on him, for the first\ngrace, and say, with Ephraim, _Turn thou me, and I shall be turned_,\nJer. xxxi. 18. They must be earnest with him, that he would bestow upon\nthem the grace of faith; which is styled, his gift; that he would remove\nevery thing that is, at present, an obstacle, or hindrance to this\ngrace, all the prejudices which corrupt nature has entertained against\nChrist, and the way of salvation by him; and that he would shine into\ntheir souls, to give them the knowledge of his glory in the face of\nChrist; reveal his arm, and incline them, by the internal working of his\npower, to receive the grace which is held forth in the gospel. These are\nduties incumbent on persons who are not called effectually, being\ndestitute of regenerating grace.\n\nBut, on the other hand, they who have ground to conclude that they have\nexperienced this grace, though, at present, they apprehend that their\nfaith is weak, and on the decline; they must be found waiting on God, in\nhis own way; and be importunate with him in prayer for the revival of\nhis work, that so they may recover their former experiences; they must\nbless him for the privileges they once enjoyed, and be humbled for their\npast backslidings, whereby they have provoked him to withdraw from them,\nand say with the church, _I will go and return to my first husband; for\nthen was it better with me than now_, Hos. ii. 7. and, as it says\nelsewhere, _Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously; so will\nwe render the calves of our lips_, chap. xiv. 2. They must lament the\ndishonour that they have brought to God; and consider how, by this\nmeans, they have grieved the Holy Spirit, wounded their own consciences,\nand made work for a bitter repentance and humiliation before God. They\nmust be sensible, that it is the same hand which wrought grace in them\nat first, that must now recover them from their fallen state, and, by\nexciting the principle of grace implanted, bring them into a lively\nframe; and when he has done this, they must still depend upon him to\nmaintain this frame of spirit, as considering that as the beginning so\nthe progress of grace, is owing to him who is the author and finisher of\nfaith; who worketh in us that which is pleasing in his sight, and\ncarries on his own work unto perfection.\n\nFootnote 49:\n\n That faith is a holy duty is evident, because it never obtains, except\n where the bent, or bias of the mind has been changed by the Holy\n Spirit; yet it is like all the other works of man, imperfect, and\n might be stronger. That it is necessary in every action is clear, for\n whatsoever is not of faith is sin; both because it is the work of an\n enemy, and because it cannot be accepted, having no reference to\n Christ. Faith is always accompanied by other holy traits of character,\n as repentance, love, patience, humility, and the like. The reason of\n which is evident; for faith is an act of the renewed man, and all the\n other graces must accompany. But it is even less holy than love; \u201cnow\n abideth faith, hope, charity, (love)\u2014the greatest of these is\n charity.\u201d It is incapable of procuring by its righteousness our\n justification, because imperfect. If it were the holiness of the duty\n of faith, which justifies the man before God, we should read of a\n justification by love, patience, humility, or holiness in general. No\n such declaration occurs in the scriptures, but the reverse; \u201cfor by\n the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified,\u201d which is manifestly\n spoken not merely of the corporal energy, but of the action taken with\n the intention.\n\n If the righteousness of the duty of faith justifies, there could be no\n propriety in saying that we are \u201cjustified by Christ,\u201d or his\n righteousness; there would have been no need of a Saviour, and all the\n sacrifices of former days were useless.\n\n If we are to depend upon the righteousness of our believing for our\n justification, the believing in Christ will be of no importance,\n because Christ is then not our Saviour; in proportion as our hopes are\n founded upon our own holiness, they are withdrawn from Christ.\u2014This\n will also destroy the righteousness of faith, for if it be useless\n there can be no holiness in believing.\n\n If the holiness consist not in the act of believing, but in the\n disposition of the believer, and if it is for this, that he is\n justified; salvation is then a debt, not grace; we have whereof to\n boast; we are justified by the deeds of the law; the offence of the\n cross has ceased; and Arians, Socinians, Unitarians, and Deists are\n seeking justification also in the same way.\n\n That repentance, and holiness are necessary to _salvation_ is true,\n because every man who is justified is also sanctified; and that faith,\n considered as a holy duty, is necessary in the same manner, is equally\n true; but faith is also useful in our _justification_, and in a\n manner, in which, it does not appear, that repentance and holiness can\n be.\n\n To say that they are conditions of salvation is to speak ambiguously;\n that we cannot be saved without them, is as certain as that we cannot\n be justified, without being also sanctified; but to say, that by\n performing them a title to happiness is vested in us, is to rob Christ\n of his glory, and to put the crown on man\u2019s head. Besides, the\n condition of holiness is not accomplished till death, and as the\n condition of our justification is not performed till then, we are\n never justified in life, which is plainly contrary to the scriptures.\n\nFootnote 50:\n\n _This is what is generally styled, by a diminutive word_, Acceptilatio\n gratiosa, _which is an accepting a small part of a debt, instead of\n the whole; a sort of composition, in which, though the payment be\n inconsiderable, yet the debtor\u2019s discharge is founded thereon, by an\n act of favour in the creditor, as though the whole sum had been paid._\n\nFootnote 51:\n\n _These works they speak of as_ Tincta sanguine Christi.\n\nFootnote 52:\n\n \u201cAbraham believed God and it was imputed or counted to him for\n righteousness.\u201d This passage of Scripture is found with little\n variation also in the Epistle to the Galatians (iii. 6.) and in the\n Epistle of James (ii. 23.) and in each of the places it seems to have\n been introduced in support of its context from the first book of\n Moses. (xv. 6.)\n\n Moses is giving at that place a visionary (as we suppose)\n correspondence between Jehovah and Abraham; in which the Lord promises\n to the patriarch to be his \u201cshield and exceeding great reward,\u201d and\n upon Abraham\u2019s complaining that he was childless, his attention is\n directed to the stars, and he is told that it will be equally\n impracticable to number his posterity, and then follow the words\n \u201cAbraham believed _in_[53] the Lord, and he counted it to him for\n righteousness.\u201d\n\n Here it is given as an old-testament proof of that which has been a\n little before asserted \u201cthat a man is justified by faith without the\n deeds of the law,\u201d but because this doctrine would seem to make void\n the law, the apostle states this objection, then denies it with\n abhorrence, and introduces for his support Abraham\u2019s justification\n before God, \u201cif Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to\n glory, but not before God; for what saith the scriptures? Abraham\n believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.\u201d\n\n In the letter to the christians of Galatia he aims to bring them back\n from depending on their obedience to the moral and ceremonial laws, to\n a reliance upon Christ for salvation, he declares that \u201cby the works\n of the law no flesh shall be justified\u201d in the sight of God; and that\n christians are \u201cdead to the law,\u201d \u201cseek to be justified by Christ,\u201d\n and \u201clive by the faith of the Son of God.\u201d He asserts \u201cif\n righteousness come by the law then Christ is dead in vain.\u201d He charges\n the Galatians with folly. After having heard, seen, and experienced\n the doctrines of the Gospel, its extraordinary and ordinary spiritual\n powers, to go back to dead works would argue something like\n fascination. And then to show that the Gospel mode of justification by\n faith was not peculiar to the Gospel he quotes from the book of\n Genesis these words; \u201cAbraham believed God, and it was accounted to\n him for righteousness.\u201d\n\n The apostle James reprehends such as profess to be believers and yet\n are not careful to maintain good works; such professions of faith are\n less credible than the fruits of holiness; \u201cshow _me_ thy faith\n without thy works, and I will show _thee_ my faith by my works.\u201d Faith\n without works he pronounces to be dead, not merely inoperative, but\n destitute of a living principle. He then introduces Abraham\u2019s example\n of offering up Isaac as a proof of his faith; this work being a\n manifest effect of his faith in God, justifies, in the sight of all\n men, his character as a believer, \u201cand the scripture\u201d he says \u201cwas\n _fulfilled_ which saith Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto\n him for righteousness.\u201d The offering up of Isaac, having taken place\n several years after it had been said that \u201cAbraham believed God,\u201d was\n an undeniable evidence of the truth, and a fulfilment, of that\n scripture.\n\n Abraham\u2019s faith here mentioned has been understood as implying both\n the act of believing God\u2019s promises and his yielding to the call of\n God by emigrating, &c.[54] which faith, and its fruits, though an\n imperfect righteousness, was, it is alleged, by the favour of God\n accepted as a justifying righteousness.\n\n But the apostle here contrasts faith with works, and denies a\n justification before God to be attainable by our obedience,\n consequently his introduction of Abraham\u2019s justification by his good\n deeds would have destroyed his own argument.\n\n Others[55] understand Abraham to have been justified on the account of\n the mere act of believing: and this has been confined to his faith in\n the one promise of a numerous posterity.\n\n That the Lord[56] \u201cin judging Abraham will place on one side of the\n account his duties, and on the other his _performances_, and on the\n side of his performances he will place _his faith_, and by mere favour\n value it equal to a complete performance of his duty, and reward him\n as if he were a perfectly righteous person.\u201d\n\n Faith is the mind\u2019s assent to external evidence; faith thus strictly\n considered as an act, is man\u2019s act, as much so as any can be, and as\n the understanding at least in its application to the evidence must be\n accompanied by the consent of the will, here is every thing that is\n necessary to constitute a work, and accordingly it is commanded as a\n duty, the neglect of which is criminal. If it be thus that faith\n justifies the believer in the sight of God, then there is no propriety\n in saying we are not justified by works, and if it were possible still\n less in adducing the example of Abraham\u2019s justification by that which\n was no more than a duty to prove that we cannot be justified by works,\n \u201cChrist being the end of the law for righteousness to every one who\n believeth.\u201d If man can be so justified boasting is not excluded he has\n whereof to glory.\n\n But the design of the apostle was to show that Abraham himself one of\n the holiest of men with all his good deeds, and implicit obedience to\n divine commands was not justified for his own holiness or godliness,\n for that is the opinion he is combating, but by what he calls faith.\n When the things which we are required to believe are of a spiritual\n nature, the \u201ccarnal mind\u201d requires to be freed from its prejudices\n before it will \u201creceive them,\u201d and because supernatural aid is\n necessary to such minds and all naturally possess them, such \u201cfaith\u201d\n must unquestionably be \u201cthe gift of God\u201d in a sense higher than that\n of every other species of faith exercised under the support of Divine\n Providence. If faith is a gift of God it merits nothing for us, can\n never create an obligation on Divine justice for remuneration, and so\n can never be a _justifying_ righteousness.\n\n In his epistle to the Galatians that which he terms a being \u201cjustified\n by faith\u201d he also denominates a being \u201cjustified by faith in Christ\u201d\n so that his justifying faith is not merely a belief of the truth of\n what God has spoken, but is connected in some manner with Christ, and\n that it is not the mere act of believing in Christ which is the ground\n of such justification is plain from this, that he expresses the same\n thing by the words, \u201cbeing justified by Christ.\u201d If it is true that we\n are justified by faith, and also justified by Christ, it must be meant\n in different senses, and to give effect to these words thus\n differently connected, it seems necessary to suppose the righteousness\n of Christ as the meritorious cause or ground of justification, and\n faith the instrumental. \u201cTo as many as received him to them gave he\n power to become the sons of God, even to as many as believed on his\n name,\u201d or at least as the concomitant of it, where all other\n requisites exist as well as grace for its production.\n\n It is not the _holiness of his faith_ that is accounted for\n righteousness to him: faith is a holy duty but not more so than some\n others, and not so much so as love, \u201cnow abide faith, hope, love, and\n the greatest of these is love;\u201d nor are christians ever said to be\n justified by love, joy, peace, patience, or by any other grace, except\n by faith. From whence it follows that it is not the holiness of faith\n for which the believer is justified, and yet that there is some\n property not common to any other grace or duty, which must be\n concerned in our justification; and no doubt it is because faith lays\n hold on him for whose sake alone we can be justified.\n\n Or faith may be put for its object, as the words fear, hope, joy, and\n love are; God is our fear, our hope, &c. \u201cThy faith hath saved thee,\u201d\n it was not her faith, but its object, Christ\u2019s power, that healed her.\n\n The seed which was promised embraced Christ, whose day Abraham saw\n afar off; so this faith had the Redeemer for its object. In the\n epistle to the Galatians there follow the quotation these words, \u201cas\n many as are of faith are the children of Abraham,\u201d these are called\n his spiritual seed, and believe in Christ, now if all who believe in\n Christ are thereby the children of Abraham, and Abraham their father\n or pattern of faith, his faith must have been of the same kind. There\n could have been little propriety in giving a faith of any other kind\n as a pattern to those who are to believe in Christ that they may be\n \u201cjustified by his blood.\u201d\n\nFootnote 53:\n\n The quotations of Paul and James follow the lxx. in omitting the _in_.\n\nFootnote 54:\n\n Hammond.\n\nFootnote 55:\n\n Whitby. Macknight.\n\nFootnote 56:\n\n Macknight.\n\nFootnote 57:\n\n _This opinion was propagated soon after the reformation, by Andr.\n Osiander, who lived a little before the middle of the sixteenth\n century._\n\nFootnote 58:\n\n _This opinion was propagated soon after by Stancarus, in opposition to\n Osiander, whom Du Pin reckons amongst the Socinians, or, at least,\n that after he had advanced this notion, he denied the doctrine of the\n Trinity._ [_See Du Pin\u2019s eccl. hist. sixteenth century, book_ iv.\n _chap._ 6.]\n\nFootnote 59:\n\n _This is commonly called_ fiducia, _and as such, distinguished from_\n fides, _by which the former is generally expressed._\n\nFootnote 60:\n\n _In this respect_ faith _is contra-distinguished from_ science;\n _accordingly we are said to know a thing that is contained in an\n axiom, that no one, who has the exercise of his understanding, can\n doubt of_, viz. _that the whole is greater than the part; or, that a\n thing cannot be, and not be at the same time, &c. And every thing that\n is founded on a mathematical demonstration, is included in the word_\n science; _to which we may add occular demonstration. Now these things\n are not properly the object of faith, or the assent we give to the\n truth hereof, is not founded barely upon evidence, in which respect\n faith is distinguished from it; for which reason we call it an assent\n to a truth, founded on evidence._\n\nFootnote 61:\n\n Truth in the abstract is not the object of faith, but that which is\n true. The word of God when represented as the object of faith is not\n to be understood of words and letters, nor even of axioms and\n propositions, nor is the Divine veracity, though certainly confided\n in, the object of faith, or that which is assented unto. The promises\n which the old testament-believers had, and reposed in, were not the\n objects of faith, but the things which they saw afar off, and which\n were the ground of their rejoicing. When we are required to believe\n _on_ Jesus Christ, it is not his human, not his Divine nature, not his\n person, nor even his mediatorial character which is the object of our\n faith; for any of these alone could be no ground of confidence of\n salvation, or hope, much less produce joy in the believer. Every thing\n essential to our salvation must be considered, as the object of our\n faith; the mercy of God, the love of Christ, the purpose and the act\n of offering, and accepting the sacrifice to Justice of our sins, and\n the warrant to us to fix our hope and trust in this atonement; the\n firm conviction of the truth of these things may be denominated faith.\n\n Yet this conviction, or free assent of the understanding is not the\n faith, which accompanies salvation; if we can suppose it possible,\n that there should not be a corresponding impression made upon the will\n and affections. _With the heart man believeth unto salvation._ In this\n expression the heart is not put for the intellectual, but moral\n powers, and must not be understood as if the will assumed the office,\n peculiar to the understanding, of judging of evidence; but only that\n the assent of the understanding must be of such a kind, and to such a\n degree, as to produce a decisive co-operation of all the powers of the\n man, both of soul and body, to be saved in the way, and by the means\n discovered.\n\n Such an effort for salvation supposes the bent, or bias of the mind to\n be inclined towards God, and his glory. And certain it is, that the\n work, or act of believing, depends so much upon the moral state of the\n man, that although he may assent to every article of faith, and desire\n an interest in the advantages of religion, he never believes with the\n heart in the sense above mentioned, until this charge has been wrought\n in him. On this account faith may well be denominated the work or gift\n of God, for he only, according to the scriptures can effect this\n change.\n\n Yet it is not because there is any defect in the evidence of these\n important truths; nor because of any natural, that is physical, defect\n of the intellectual powers of man, that he does not believe the Divine\n revelation; but because his affections are pre-occupied, and his\n inclinations directed into another channel, whereby he is unwilling to\n apply himself unto these truths, and is prejudiced against the\n holiness, which is required, and the self denial that is necessary to\n attain the blessings of salvation.\n\nFootnote 62:\n\n Faith, according to the beloved disciple John, and the great St. Paul,\n is the _belief of the truth_; the _believing that Jesus is the\n Christ_; or a giving _credit to the record that God gave of his Son_.\n These definitions are all of the same import, and are all divine.\n Being dictated by the Spirit of God, they cannot be contradicted by\n any, although some have glossed upon them, till they have brought in a\n sense diverse from the inspired writers. This faith, when it is\n _real_, as distinguished from that uninfluential assent to the gospel,\n which crowds, who hear it, profess to have, is an effect of the\n _divine influence in us_; hence it is said to be _of the operation of\n God_; and that it is _with the heart_ man believeth unto\n righteousness. As the righteousness by which the sinner is justified,\n is the sole work of Christ _for him_, so this is the work of the Holy\n Ghost _in him_, and no less necessary in its proper place; it being\n that, without which a sinner cannot apprehend, receive, and rest upon\n Christ for eternal life. By faith, as before observed, he becomes\n acquainted with the glories of the character of Jesus, the fulness of\n grace in him, and the suitableness and perfection of his\n righteousness; in consequence of this faith, he admires the Saviour\u2019s\n personal excellencies, flies to him, ventures all upon him, and\n rejoices in him. These, to speak plainly, are all so many effects of\n faith. The sinner must have a view of the Saviour\u2019s excellency,\n _before_ he will admire it. He must be persuaded, that Christ is the\n only safe refuge, _before_ he will _fly_ to him. He must know that\n there is in Christ sufficient matter of consolation, _before_ he will\n _rejoice_ in him. Of all these he is entirely satisfied _by faith_ in\n the testimony of God: subsequent to which is his _coming_, or _flying_\n to him, _trusting_ in, or _venturing_ all upon him, _rejoicing_ in\n him, &c. e. g. Joseph\u2019s brethren heard that there was corn enough in\n Egypt; they believed the report: this was faith; upon this they went\n down for a supply. Doubtless this was an _effect_ of their faith; for\n had they not believed the tidings, they would never have gone. So a\n sinner must _believe_ that Christ is a full and complete Saviour,\n _before_ he will _run_ or _fly_ to him. Sense of misery, and faith in\n his sufficiency, are the main stimulus. Or, I am sick, I hear of an\n able physician, I believe him to be so, upon which I apply to him: my\n _application_ to him, and my _belief_ of his character, are as\n distinct as any two things can be: my _trusting_ my life in his hands,\n is an effect of my _believing_ him to be an able physician. This\n distinction is obvious in the sacred writings, as well as in the\n nature of things. _He that_ cometh _to God, must_ believe _that he\n is_. Here is a manifest distinction between _coming_ and _believing_.\n\n I apprehend that the same distinction should be observed, between\n _believing_ in Christ, and _receiving_ him. If so, it will follow,\n that \u201cto receive Christ in all his offices, as a prophet, a priest,\n and a king,\u201d is not properly _faith_, but an _effect_ of it, and\n inseparably connected with it. It is certain that a man must believe\n that Jesus is the Christ, and that he sustains these offices, before\n he can or will receive him in this light. Christ _came unto his own_\n (meaning the Jews) _but his own received him not_. This refusing to\n _receive_ him was not unbelief, but an effect of it. Hence should you\n be asked, why they did not receive him? The answer is ready, _because_\n they did not believe him to be the Christ. Nothing is more plain than\n that unbelief was the grand _cause_ why they rejected him. On the\n other hand, nothing is more evident, than that _receiving_ Christ, is\n an effect of _believing_ in him. And should you ask the man who\n defines faith, \u201ca receiving Christ in all his offices,\u201d why he thus\n receives him? he himself will be obliged to observe this distinction;\n for the only just answer he can give you is, \u201c_because I believe_ he\n sustains them.\u201d\n\n Thus we see that faith is entirely distinct from the righteousness\n which justifies; at the same time it is indispensably necessary,\n answering great and good purposes. Under its influence the sinner\n _flies_ to Jesus, the hope set before him, and trusts his immortal\n interest in his hands, being perfectly satisfied with his adorable\n character. Faith is also the medium of peace and consolation. You may\n with equal propriety attempt to separate light and heat from the sun,\n as peace of conscience, and joy in the Holy Ghost, _from the faith of\n God\u2019s elect_. The degree of Christian consolation may be greater or\n less, according to the strength and influence of faith. At one time\n the believer may have an inward peace and tranquility, which is\n exceedingly agreeable. At another time he may be favoured with what\n St. Paul calls _joy unspeakable and full of glory_. At another, guilt\n may rob him of his comfort, and separate between him and his God. Such\n are his exercises in the present state of things. But he is far from\n making a righteousness of his _frames_, _feelings_, or _experiences_.\n The distinction between these he well understands. The _righteousness_\n by which he expects to be justified, is the work of Christ alone; the\n _faith_ by which he is enabled to receive it, is _of the operation of\n God_; the consolations that he enjoys are from this glorious Christ,\n in believing, or through faith: all as different as A, B, and C. His\n dependence for acceptance with God is neither on his faith nor\n experiences, but on Christ _alone_. At the same time he cannot\n conceive it possible, for a poor, wretched, undone sinner to be\n enabled to believe in Christ for eternal life, and not _rejoice_. A\n view of the glories of his person, and the fulness and freeness of his\n grace, cannot fail of introducing _strong consolation_.\n\n STILLMAN\u2019S SERMONS.\n\nFootnote 63:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxx.\n\nFootnote 64:\n\n _See page 39, ante._\n\nFootnote 65:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxix.\n\nFootnote 66:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxviii.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXIV.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXIV. _What is adoption?_\n\n ANSW. Adoption is an act of the free grace of God, in and for his\n only Son Jesus Christ; whereby all those that are justified, are\n received into the number of his children, have his name put upon\n them, the Spirit of his Son given to them, are under his fatherly\n care and dispensations, admitted to all the liberties and privileges\n of the sons of God, made heirs of all the promises, and fellow-heirs\n with Christ in glory.\n\nIn speaking to this answer we shall consider,\n\nI. The various senses in which persons are the sons of God; and\nparticularly, how they are so called by adoption.\n\nII. The difference between adoption as used by men, and as it is applied\nin this answer to God\u2019s taking persons into this relation, as his\nchildren; from whence it will appear to be an act of his free grace.\n\nIII. We shall consider the reference the sonship of believers has to the\nsuperior and more glorious Sonship of Jesus Christ; and how it is said\nto be for his sake.\n\nIV. The privileges conferred on, or reserved for them, who are the sons\nof God by adoption.\n\nI. We shall consider the various senses in which persons are called the\nsons of God.\n\n1. Some are called the sons of God, as they are invested with many\nhonours or prerogatives from God, as a branch of his image: thus\nmagistrates are called the _children of the Most High_, Psal. lxxxii. 6.\n\n2. Others are called God\u2019s children, by an external federal relation, as\nmembers of the visible church; in which sense we are to understand that\nscripture; wherein it is said, _The sons of God saw the daughters of\nmen_, &c. Gen. vi. 2. And when Moses went into Pharaoh, to demand\nliberty for the Israelites, he was ordered to say, _Israel is my son,\neven my first-born_, Exod. iv. 22. This privilege, though it be high and\nhonourable, by which the church is distinguished from the world; yet it\nis not inseparably connected with salvation; for God says, concerning\nIsrael, when revolting, and backsliding from him, _I have nourished and\nbrought up children; and they have rebelled against me_, Isa. i. 2. and\nmany of those who are called the _children of the kingdom shall be cast\ninto utter darkness, where shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth_,\nMatt. viii. 12.\n\n3. The word is sometimes taken in a more large sense, as applicable to\nall mankind: thus the prophet says, _Have we not all one father, hath\nnot God created us?_ Mal. ii. 10. And the apostle Paul, when disputing\nwith the Athenians, speaks in their own language, and quotes a saying\ntaken from one of their poets, which he applies to the great God, as\n_giving to all life and breath, and all things_; upon which account men\nare called his _off-spring_, Acts xvii. 25. compared with 28.\n\n4. They are called the sons of God, who are endowed with his\nsupernatural image, and admitted to the highest honours and privileges\nconferred upon creatures: thus the angels are called the _sons of God_,\nJob xxxviii. 7.\n\n5. Our Lord Jesus Christ is called the Son of God, in a sense not\napplicable to any other; as his Sonship includes in it his deity, and\nhis having, in his human nature, received a commission from the Father,\nto engage in the great work of our redemption, as becoming surety for\nus; which is the foundation of all those saving blessings which we enjoy\nor hope for.\n\n6. Believers are called the sons of God, by a special adoption; which is\nfarther to be considered, as being the subject-matter of this answer.\nAdoption is a word taken from the civil law; and it was much in use\namong the Romans, in the apostles time, in which it was a custom for\npersons, who had no children of their own, and were possessed of an\nestate, to prevent its being divided or descending to strangers, to make\nchoice of such who were agreeable to them, and beloved by them, whom\nthey took into this political relation of children; obliging them to\ntake their name upon them, and to pay respect to them, as though they\nwere their natural parents; and engaging to deal with them as though\nthey had been so; and accordingly to give them a right to their estates,\nas an inheritance. This new relation, founded in a mutual consent, is a\nbond of affection; and the privilege arising from thence is, that he who\nis, in this sense, a father, takes care of, and provides for the person\nwhom he adopts, as though he were his son by nature; and therefore\nCivilians calls it an act of legitimation, imitating nature, or\nsupplying the place of it: and this leads us to consider,\n\nII. The difference between adoption, as used by men, and as it is\napplied in this answer, to God\u2019s taking persons into this relation, as\nhis children.\n\n1. When men adopt, or take persons into the relation of children, they\ndo it because they are destitute of children of their own to possess\ntheir estates; and therefore they fix their love on strangers: but God\nwas under no obligation to do this: for if he designed to manifest his\nglory to any creatures, the holy angels were subjects capable of\nreceiving the displays thereof; and his own Son, who had all the\nperfections of the divine nature, was infinitely the object of his\ndelight, and, in all respects, fitted to be as he is styled, _Heir of\nall things_, Heb. i. 2.\n\n2. When men adopt, they are generally inclined to do it by seeing some\nexcellency or amiableness in the persons whom they fix their love upon.\nThus Pharaoh\u2019s daughter took up Moses, and nourished him for her own\nson, because he was _exceeding fair_, Acts vii. 20, 21. or, it may be,\nshe was moved hereunto, by a natural compassion she had for him, besides\nthe motive of his beauty; as it is said, _The babe wept, and she had\ncompassion on him_, Exod. ii. 6. And Mordecai adopted Esther, or took\nher for his own daughter; _for she was his uncle\u2019s daughter, and was\nfair and beautiful_, and an orphan, _having neither father nor mother_,\nEsther ii. 7. But when God takes any into this relation of children,\nthey have no beauty or comeliness, and might justly have been for ever\nthe objects of his abhorrance. Thus he says concerning the church of\nIsrael, when he first took them into this relation to him, _None eye\npitied thee, but thou wast cast out in the open field, to the loathing\nof thy person: and when I passed by thee and saw thee polluted in thine\nown blood, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live_, &c.\nEzek. xvi. 5. It might indeed be said concerning man, when admitted to\nthis favour and privilege, that he was miserable; but misery, how much\nsoever it may render the soul an object of pity, it could not, properly\nspeaking, be said to be a motive or inducement from whence the divine\ncompassion took its first rise, as appears from the account we have of\nthe mercy of God, as founded only on his sovereign will or pleasure; as\nhe says, _I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will have\ncompassion on whom I will have compassion_, Rom. ix. 15. and also, from\nthe consideration of man\u2019s being exposed to misery by sin, which\nrendered him rather an object of vindictive justice than mercy. This\ntherefore cannot be the ground of God\u2019s giving him a right to an\ninheritance; and consequently adoption is truly said, in this answer, to\nbe an act of the free grace of God.\n\n3. When men adopt, their taking persons into the relation of children,\nis not necessarily attended with any change of disposition or temper in\nthe persons adopted. A person may be admitted to this privilege, and yet\nremain the same, in that respect, as he was before: but when God takes\nhis people into the relation of children, he gives them, not only those\nother privileges which arise from thence, but also that temper and\ndisposition that becomes those who are thus related to him. This leads\nus to consider,\n\nIII. The reference which the sonship of believers has to the superior\nand more glorious Sonship of Jesus Christ; and how it is said to be for\nhis sake. Here we must suppose that there is a sense in which Christ is\nsaid to be the Son of God, as the result of the divine decree, which\ncontains in it an idea very distinct from his being a divine person; for\nthat was not the result of the will of the Father; whereas it is said\nconcerning him, _I will declare the decree; the Lord hath said unto me,\nThou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee_, Psal. ii. 7. And\nelsewhere, _he hath, by inheritance, obtained a more excellent name\nthan_ the angels; and this is the consequence of God\u2019s saying to him,\n_thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee_: and, _I will be to him\na Father, and he shall be to me a Son_, Heb. i. 4, 5. which plainly\nrefers to Christ as Mediator. Now when we consider this mediatorial\nSonship of Christ, if I may so express it, we are far from asserting,\nthat Christ\u2019s Sonship, and that of believers, is of the same kind; for,\nas much as he exceeds them as Mediator, as to the glory of his person\nand office, so much is his Sonship superior to theirs. This being\npremised, we may better understand the reference which the sonship of\nbelievers has to Christ\u2019s being the Son of God as Mediator; and\ntherefore let it be farther considered,[67]\n\n1. That it is a prerogative and glory of Christ, as the Son of God, that\nhe has all things which relate to the salvation of his elect, put into\nhis hand; and therefore, whatever the saints enjoy or hope for, which is\nsometimes called in scripture their inheritance, agreeably to their\ncharacter, as the children of God by adoption; this is considered as\nfirst purchased by Christ, and then put into his hand; in which respect\nit is styled his inheritance, he being constituted, pursuant to his\nhaving accomplished the work of redemption, heir of all things; and as\nsuch, has not only a right to his people, but is put in possession of\nall those spiritual blessings in heavenly places, wherewith they are\n_blessed in him_, Eph. i. 3.\n\n2. From hence it follows, that the sonship of believers, and their right\nto that inheritance, which God has reserved for them, depends upon the\nsonship of Christ, which is infinitely more glorious and excellent. As\nGod\u2019s adopted sons, they have the honour conferred upon them, of being\n_made kings and priests_ to him, Rev. i. 6. These honours are conferred\nby Christ; and, in order thereunto, they are first given to him to\nbestow upon them: thus he says, _I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my\nFather hath appointed unto me_, Luke xxii. 29. Christ is first appointed\nheir of all things, as Mediator; and then his people, or his children,\nare considered as _heirs of God_, as the apostle expresses it; _and\njoint heirs with Christ_, Rom. viii. 17. Not that they have any share in\nhis personal or mediatorial glory; but when they are styled\n_joint-heirs_ with him, we must consider them as having a right to that\ninheritance, which he is possessed of in their name as Mediator: and in\nthis sense we are to understand those scriptures that speak of God\u2019s\nbeing first the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; and then, to wit, in\nhim our Father; accordingly he says, _I ascend unto my Father, and your\nFather, and to my God, and your God_, John xx. 17. And elsewhere, God is\nstyled _the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ_, and then _the Father of\nmercies_, or, our merciful Father, 2 Cor. i. 3. And elsewhere the\napostle says, _Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ;\nwho hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings, in heavenly places, in\nChrist; having predestinated us unto the adoption of children, by Jesus\nChrist, to himself_, Eph. i. 3. compared with 5. and inasmuch as he\ndesigned to _bring many sons to glory_, as being _made meet to be\npartakers of the inheritance of the saints in light_; he first _made the\ncaptain of their salvation perfect through sufferings_, Heb. ii. 10.\ncompared with Col. i. 12. In this respect our right to the inheritance\nof children, is founded in the eternal purpose of God, relating\nhereunto, and the purchase of Christ, as having obtained this\ninheritance for us.\n\nIV. We are now to consider the privileges conferred on, or reserved for\nthem who are the sons of God by adoption. These are summed up in a very\ncomprehensive expression, which contains an amazing display of divine\ngrace; as it is said, _He that overcometh, shall inherit all things; and\nI will be his God, and he shall be my son_, Rev. xxi. 7. It is a very\nlarge grant that God is pleased to make to them; they shall inherit all\nthings. God is not ashamed to be called their God; and in having him,\nthey are said to possess all things, which are eminently and\ntranscendently in him; they have a right to all the blessings which he\nhad designed for, and which have a tendency to make them completely\nhappy: in this sense we are to understand our Saviour\u2019s words in the\nparable; _Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine_,\nLuke xv. 31. Nothing greater than this can be desired or enjoyed by\ncreatures, whom the Lord delights to honour. But, that we may be a\nlittle more particular in considering the privileges which God confers\non, or has reserved for his children, it may be farther observed,\n\n1. That they are all emancipated, or freed from the slavery which they\nwere before under, either to sin or Satan; they who were once the\n_servants of sin, are_ hereby _made free from sin, and become the\nservants of righteousness_, or become _servants to God_, Rom. vi. 17,\n18, 22. _have their fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life;\nthe Son makes them free_; and therefore _they are free indeed_, John\nviii. 36. Before this they are described as _serving divers lusts and\npleasures_, Tit. iii. 3. and are said to be _of their father the devil_,\nand to _do his works_, or follow his suggestions, John viii. 44.\nensnared, and _taken captive by him at his will_, 2 Tim. ii. 26. and, as\nthe consequence hereof, are in perpetual bondage, arising from a dread\nof the wrath of God, and that _fear of death_ impressed on their\nspirits, by him, who is said to have the _power of death_, Heb. ii. 14.\nthis they are delivered from, which cannot but be reckoned a glorious\nprivilege.\n\n2. They have God\u2019s name put upon them, and accordingly are described as\n_his people called by his name_, 2 Chron. vii. 14. This is an high and\nhonourable character, denoting their relation to him as a peculiar\npeople; and it is what belongs to them alone. Thus the church says, _We\nare thine; thou never bearest rule over them_, Isa. lxiii. 19. namely,\nthine adversaries; _they were not called by thy name_. They have also\nChrist\u2019s name put on them, _of whom the whole family in heaven and earth\nis named_, Eph. iii. 15. which not only signifies that propriety which\nhe has in them as Mediator, but their relation to him as the ransomed of\nthe Lord, his sheep, whom he leads and feeds like a shepherd; and they\nare also styled his children, _Behold I and the children which God hath\ngiven me_, Heb. ii. 13. and indeed, when he is called a surety, or an\nadvocate, or said to execute certain offices as a Saviour or Redeemer;\nthese are all relative terms; and whatever he does therein, is in their\nname, and for their advantage; as it is said, _of him are ye in Christ\nJesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification,\nand redemption_, 1 Cor. i. 31.\n\n3. They are taken into God\u2019s family, and dealt with as members thereof;\nand accordingly are styled _fellow citizens with the saints, and of the\nhousehold of God_, Eph. ii. 19. And as the consequence hereof, they have\nprotection, provision, and communion with him.\n\n(1.) They have safe protection; as the master of a family thinks himself\nobliged to secure and defend from danger, all that are under his roof,\nwhose house is, as it were, their castle; so Christ is his people\u2019s\ndefence, concerning whom it is said, _A man shall be as an hiding place\nfrom the wind, and a covert from the tempest, as rivers of water in a\ndry place, and as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land_, Isa.\nxxxii. 2. and, as the consequence hereof, it is added, _My people shall\ndwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet\nresting places_, ver. 18. _They dwell on high; their place of defence is\nthe munition of rocks_, chap. xxxii. 16. He who has subdued their\nenemies, and will in his own time, bruise them under their feet, will\ntake care that they shall not meet with that disturbance from them,\nwhich may hinder their repose or rest in him, or render their state\nunsafe, so as to endanger their perishing or falling from it.\n\n(2.) They enjoy the plentiful provisions of God\u2019s house, and therefore\nChrist is called their _shepherd_, Psal. xxiii. 1. not only as leading\nand defending them, but as providing for them; _He shall feed his flock\nlike a shepherd_, Isa. xl. 11. As all grace is treasured up in him, and\nthere is a fulness thereof, which he has to impart to the heirs of\nsalvation, that is sufficient to supply all their wants; so they shall\nnever have a reason to complain that they are straitened in him; the\nblessings of his house are not only exhilirating, but satisfying, and\nsuch as have a tendency to make them completely happy.\n\n(3.) They are admitted to the greatest intimacy, and have sweet\ncommunion with Christ; _the secret of the Lord is with them that fear\nhim_, Psal. xxv. 14. he deals with them as with friends, and in this\ninstance in particular, (as he tells his disciples,) that _all that he\nhas heard of the Father_, John xv. 15. that is, whatever he had a\ncommission to impart for their direction and comfort, he _makes known\nunto them_, which must needs be reckoned a very great privilege. As the\nqueen of Sheba, when beholding the advantages that they who were in\nSolomon\u2019s presence enjoyed, could not but with an extasy of admiration,\nsay, _Happy are thy men; happy are thy servants, which stand continually\nbefore thee, that hear thy wisdom_, 1 Kings x. 8. much more may they be\nhappy who are admitted into his presence, in whom _are hid all the\ntreasures of wisdom and knowledge_, Col. ii. 3.\n\n(4.) Another privilege which they enjoy, is access to God, as a\nreconciled Father, through Christ; they have a liberty to _come boldly\nto the throne of grace, that they obtain mercy, and find grace to help\nin time of need_, Heb. iv. 18. Whatever their straits and difficulties\nare, God holds forth his golden sceptre, invites them to come to him,\nasks, What is thy petition? and gives them ground to hope that it shall\nbe granted, so far as it may redound to his glory and their good. And,\ninasmuch as they are often straitened in their spirits, and unprepared\nto draw nigh to him; they have the promise of the Spirit to assist them\nherein; upon which account he is called the _Spirit of adoption, whereby\nthey cry Abba Father_, Rom. viii. 15. This privilege is said to be a\nconsequence of their being sons; _Because ye are sons, God hath sent\nforth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba Father_, Gal.\niv. 6. By this means they have becoming conceptions of the Divine\nMajesty, a reverential fear of, and a love to him, earnest desires of\ncommunion with him, and of being made partakers of what he has to\nimpart. They have a right to plead the promises; and in so doing, are\nencouraged to hope for the blessings contained therein.\n\n(5.) As God\u2019s children are prone to backslide from him, and so have need\nof restoring grace, he will recover and humble them, and thereby prevent\ntheir total apostacy: this he sometimes does by afflictions, which the\napostle calls fatherly chastisements, and reckons them not only\nconsistent with, but evidences of his love: _Whom the Lord loveth, he\nchasteneth; and if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are\npartakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons_, Heb. xii. 6, 8, 11. The\napostle does not here speak of afflictions as considered absolutely in\nthemselves, but as proceeding from the love of God, the design whereof\nis to do them good; and as they are adapted to this present state, in\nwhich they are training up for the glorious inheritance reserved for\nthem in heaven, and need some trying dispensations, which may put them\nin mind of that state of perfect blessedness which is laid up for them:\nand they are rendered subservient to their present and future advantage,\nas the afflictions of this present time _bring forth the peaceable\nfruits of righteousness_ to them; and when they are, in the end,\nperfectly freed from them, will tend to enhance their joy and praise;\nwhich leads us to consider another privilege, which is so great that it\ncrowns all those that they are now possessed of, namely,\n\n(6.) They shall, at last, be brought into God\u2019s immediate presence, and\nsatisfied with his likeness. The apostle calls the perfect blessedness\nof the saints, when raised from the dead, and so delivered from the\nbondage of corruption, and made partakers of the glorious liberty of the\nSons of God, by way of eminency, _the adoption, to wit, the redemption\nof their bodies_; which signifies not only the full manifestation of\ntheir adoption, but their taking possession of their inheritance, which\nthey are now waiting and hoping for, which is too great for the heart of\nman to conceive of in this present state; for the apostle says, _Now are\nwe the sons of God; and it doth not appear what we shall be: but we\nknow, that when he shall appear we shall be like him; for we shall see\nhim as he is_, 1 John iii. 2. So that all the blessings which we have,\neither in hand or hope, the blessings of both worlds, which are\nconferred upon us from our first conversion to our glorification: these\nare privileges which God bestows on those who are his adopted children.\n\nFrom what has been said concerning adoption, we may take occasion to\nobserve, how, in some respects it agrees with, or may indeed, be\nreckoned a branch of justification, and in other respects it includes in\nit something that is an ingredient in sanctification. We have before\nobserved, in treating on the former of these, _viz._ justification, that\nwhen God forgives sin, he confers on his people a right to life, or to\nall the blessings of the covenant of grace, in which are contained the\npromises that belong to the life that now is, and that which is to come.\nThese are the privileges which God\u2019s adopted children are made partakers\nof; and in this respect some divines suppose, that adoption is included\nin our justification.[68]\n\nAnd if justification be explained, as has been before observed, as\ndenoting an immanent act in God, whereby the elect are considered, in\nthe covenant between the Father and the Son, as in Christ, their federal\nhead; so they are considered as the adopted children of God, in Christ,\nand accordingly as they are described as chosen in Christ, unto eternal\nlife, they are said to be _predestinated unto the adoption of children_,\nEph. i. 6. which is a privilege to be obtained by Jesus Christ: in this\nrespect all the elect are called Christ\u2019s _seed, that shall serve him_,\nPsal. xxii. 30. whom he had a special regard to, when he made his soul\nan offering for sin, and concerning whom he had this promise made to him\nin the covenant, that passed between the Father and him, _that he should\nsee them, and the pleasure of the Lord_, with respect to their\neverlasting salvation, _should prosper in his hand_, Isa. liii. 10. Now\nwhen Christ is considered as the head of the elect, who are in this\nsense called his sons, whom he has engaged to bring to glory, faith is\nthe fruit and consequence of adoption; accordingly the apostle says,\n_Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into\nyour hearts, crying, Abba, Father_, Gal. iv. 6.\n\nBut as justification is a declared act, and is said to be by faith, so\nadoption agreeing with it, is of the same nature; and accordingly we are\nsaid to be the _children of God by faith_, chap. iii. 26. that is, it is\nby faith that we have a right to claim this relation, together with the\nprivileges which are the result thereof.\n\nMoreover, as adoption includes in it a person\u2019s being made meet for the\ninheritance, which God has reserved for him, and so is endowed with the\ntemper and disposition of his children, consisting in humility,\nheavenly-mindedness, love to him, dependence upon him, and a zeal for\nhis glory, a likeness to Christ; as the same mind is said to be in us,\nin some measure as was in him; in this respect adoption agrees with\nsanctification, which is what we are next to consider.\n\nFootnote 67:\n\n Vide Vol. I. page 279, in note.\n\nFootnote 68:\n\n _Vid. Turrett. Theol. Elenct. Tom. 2. Loc. 16. \u00a7 7._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXV.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXV. _What is sanctification?_\n\n ANSW. Sanctification is a work of God\u2019s grace, whereby they whom God\n hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in\n time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit, applying the\n death and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their whole\n man, after the image of God, having the seeds of repentance unto\n life, and of all other saving graces put into their hearts; and\n those graces so stirred up, increased and strengthened, as that they\n more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.\n\n1. We shall shew what we are to understand by the word _sanctify_. This\nis sometimes considered as what has God for its object: thus he is said\nto _sanctify himself_, when he appears in the glory of his holiness, and\ngives occasion to the world to adore that perfection, which he is\nsometimes represented as doing, when he punishes sin in a visible and\nexemplary manner. Thus when God threatens to call for _a sword_, and\n_plead against_ a rebellious people, _with pestilence and with blood_,\nhe is said, by this means, to _magnify and sanctify himself_, so as to\nbe _known_, to wit, as an holy God, _in the eyes of many nations_. And\nwhen he fulfils his promises, and thereby advances his holiness, as when\nhe brought his people out of captivity, and gathered them out of the\ncountries, wherein they had been scattered, he is said to be _sanctified\nin them_, Ezek. xxxviii. 21-23. And he is sanctified by his people, when\nthey give him the glory that is due to his perfection, as thus displayed\nand magnified by him: thus God\u2019s people are said to _sanctify the Lord\nof hosts_, when they make him the object of their _fear and of their\ndread_, Isa. viii. 13.\n\nHowever, this is not the sense in which we are here to understand it,\nbut as applied to men; in which respect it is taken in various senses,\nnamely, for their consecration, or separation unto God; thus our Saviour\nsays, when devoting and applying himself to the work, for which he came\ninto the world; _for their sakes I sanctify myself_, John xvii. 19. But\nthis is not the sense in which it is to be understood in this answer.\n\nMoreover, it is often taken, in scripture, for persons being devoted to\nGod, to minister in holy things: thus Aaron and his sons were\n_sanctified, that they might minister unto him in the priest\u2019s office_,\nExod. xxviii. 41. And it is sometimes taken for an external federal\ndedication to God, to walk before him as a peculiar people in observance\nof his holy institutions. Thus when Israel consented to be God\u2019s people\nthey are styled, _holiness unto the Lord_, Jer. ii. 3. _the holy seed_,\nEzra ix. 2. and _an holy nation_, 1 Pet. ii. 9. And the church, under\nthe gospel-dispensation, as consecrated, and professing subjection, to\nChrist, or separated to his service, and waiting for his presence, while\nengaged in all those ordinances, which he has appointed in the gospel,\nis described as _called to be saints_, Rom. i. 7. and they are hereby\nrelated to him, in an external and visible way. Neither is this the\nsense in which the word is taken in this answer; in which we are to\nunderstand sanctification as a special discriminating grace, whereby\npersons are not barely externally, but really devoted to Christ by\nfaith: it is the internal beauty of the soul, whereby all the faculties\nbeing renewed, and a powerful, effectual change wrought therein; they\nare enabled to turn from sin unto God, and exercise all those graces,\nwhereby _they walk in holiness and righteousness before him, all the\ndays of their lives_, Luke i. 75. till this work, which is gradually\ncarried on here, shall be brought to perfection hereafter.\n\n2. It may farther be observed, that sanctification as described in this\nanswer, may be considered as including in it several other graces, some\nof which have been already insisted on, namely, regeneration, effectual\ncalling, and faith; and there is another grace connected with it, which\nwill be particularly insisted on under the next answer, namely,\nrepentance unto life; all which graces are said to be wrought by the\npowerful operation of the Spirit, in those who were, before the\nfoundation of the world, chosen to be holy. Regeneration is styled, by\nsome, initial sanctification, as all graces take their first rise from\nthe principle which is therein implanted. Effectual calling, or\nconversion, is that whereby we are brought into the way of holiness, and\ninternally disposed to walk therein. Faith is that grace whereby this\nwork is promoted, as all holy actions proceed from it, as deriving\nstrength from Christ, to perform them. And repentance is that whereby\nthe work of sanctification discovers itself, in the soul\u2019s abhorring,\nand flying from, every thing that tends to defile it; approves itself to\nGod as one, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity without the\ngreatest detestation. But inasmuch as these graces either have been, or\nwill be particularly insisted on, in their proper place, we shall more\nespecially consider sanctification as a progressive work, whereby it is\ndistinguished from them, by which we daily consecrate, or devote\nourselves to God; and our actions have all a tendency to advance his\nglory; and, by the Spirit, we are enabled more and more to die unto sin,\nand to live unto righteousness; so that it is not barely one single act\nof grace, but it contains in it the whole progress of the work of grace,\nas gradually carried on till perfected in glory: this is what we are to\nspeak particularly to. And,\n\nI. It includes in it a continual devotedness to God. As the first act of\nfaith consists in a making a surrender of ourselves to Christ, depending\non his assistance in beginning the work of obedience in the exercise of\nall Christian graces; so sanctification is the continuance thereof. When\nwe are first converted, we receive Christ Jesus the Lord; and in\nsanctification we walk in him, and exercise a daily dependence on him in\nthe execution of all his offices; make his word our rule, and delight in\nit after the inward man. How difficult soever the duties are that he\ncommands, we take pleasure in the performance of them, make religion our\ngreat business, and in order thereunto conclude, that every thing we\nreceive from him is to be improved to his glory. And as every duty is to\nbe performed by faith; so what has been before observed concerning the\nlife of faith, is to be considered as an expedient to promote the work\nof sanctification.\n\nII. In the carrying on of this work we are to endeavour, to our utmost,\nto fence against the prevailing power of sin, by all those methods which\nare prescribed in the gospel, that so it may not have dominion over us;\nthis is generally styled the work of mortification. The apostle speaks\nof _our old man being crucified with Christ, and the body of sin\ndestroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin_, Rom. vi. 6. and of\nour crucifying the flesh with the affections and lusts, and of our\n_mortifying the deeds of the body through the Spirit_, Gal. v. 24. that\nis, by his assistance and grace, which is necessary in order thereunto,\nRom. viii. 13.\n\nThis is a very difficult work, especially considering the prevalency of\ncorruption, and the multitude of temptations that we are exposed to; the\nsubtilty and watchfulness of Satan, who walks about like a roaring lion,\nseeking whom he may devour; the treachery of our own hearts, that are so\nprone to depart from God; the fickleness and instability of our\nresolutions; the irregularity of our affections, and the constant\nefforts made by corrupt nature, to gain the ascendant over them, and\nturn them aside from God: this it does sometimes by presenting things in\na false view, calling evil good, and good evil; representing some things\nas harmless and not displeasing to God, that are most pernicious and\noffensive, endeavouring to lead us into mistakes, as to the matter of\nsin or duty, and to persuade us, that those things will issue well which\nare like to prove bitterness in the end; and attempting to impose upon\nus, as though we were in a right and safe way, when, at the same time,\nwe are walking contrary to God, and corrupt nature is gaining strength\nthereby. But this will be farther considered, when we speak concerning\nthe imperfection of sanctification in believers[69]. Now this renders it\nnecessary for us to make use of those methods which God has prescribed\nfor the mortification of sin; and in order thereunto,\n\n1. We must endeavour to maintain a constant sense of the heinous nature\nof sin, as it is contrary to the holiness of God, a stain that cannot be\nwashed away, but by the blood of Jesus, the highest instance of\ningratitude for all the benefits which we have received, a bitter and an\nonly evil, the abominable thing that God hates; it is not only to be\nconsidered as condemning, but defiling, that hereby we may maintain a\nconstant abhorrence of it; and that not only of those sins that expose\nus to scorn and reproach in the eye of the world, but every thing that\nis in itself sinful, as contrary to the law of God.\n\n2. We must be watchful against the breakings forth of corrupt nature,\nobserve the frame and disposition of our spirits, and the deceitfulness\nof sin, which has a tendency to harden us, and avoid all occasions of,\nor incentives to it, _hating even the garment spotted by the flesh_,\nJude, ver. 23. _abstaining from all appearance of evil_, 2 Thess. v. 22.\nAnd to this we may add, that we are frequently to examine ourselves with\nrespect to our behaviour in every state of life; whether sin be gaining\nor losing ground in us; whether we make conscience of performing every\nduty, both personal and relative? what guilt we contract by sins of\nomission, or the want of that fervency of spirit which has a tendency to\nbeget a formal, dead, and stupid frame and temper of mind, and thereby\nhinder the progress of the work of sanctification? but that which is the\nprincipal, if not the only expedient that will prove effectual for the\nmortifying of sin is, our seeking help against it from him who is able\nto give us the victory over it. Therefore,\n\n3. Whatever attempts we use against the prevailing power of sin, in\norder to the mortifying of it, these must be performed by faith; seeking\nand deriving that help from Christ, which is necessary in order\nthereunto. And therefore,\n\n(1.) As the dominion of sin consists in its rendering us guilty in the\nsight of God, whereby the conscience is burdened, by reason of the dread\nthat it has of that punishment which is due to us, and the condemning\nsentence of the law, which we are liable to; and as its mortification,\nin this respect, consists in our deliverance from that which makes us so\nuneasy, no expedient can be used to mortify it, but our looking by faith\nto Christ, as a propitiation for sin, whereby we are enabled to behold\nthe debt which we had contracted, cancelled, the indictment superseded,\nand the condemning sentence repealed; from whence the soul concludes,\nthat iniquity shall not be its ruin. This is the only method we are to\ntake when oppressed with a sense of the guilt of sin, which is daily\ncommitted by us. It was shadowed forth by the Israelites looking to the\nbrazen serpent, a type of Christ crucified, when stung with fiery\nserpents, which occasioned exquisite pain, and would, without this\nexpedient, have brought immediate death: thus the deadly wound of sin is\nhealed by the sovereign balm of Christ\u2019s blood, applied by faith; and\nwe, by his having fulfilled the law, may be said to be dead to it, as\nfreed from the curse thereof, and all the sad consequences that would\nensue thereupon.\n\n(2.) As sin is said to have dominion over us, in that all the powers and\nfaculties of our souls are enslaved by it, whereby, as the apostle\nexpresses it, _we are carnal, sold under sin_, Rom. vii. 14. when we are\nweak and unable to perform what is good, and the corruption of nature is\nso predominant, that we are, as it were, carried down the stream, which\nwe strive against, but in vain: in this respect sin is to be mortified,\nby a fiducial application to Christ, for help against it; and herein we\nare to consider him as having undertaken, not only to deliver from the\ncondemning, but the prevailing power of sin; which is a part of the work\nthat he is now engaged in, wherein he applies the redemption he\npurchased, by the powerful influences of the Holy Spirit, and the soul\nseeks to him for them. As it is natural for us, when we are in imminent\ndanger of present ruin, or are assaulted by an enemy, whose superior\nforce we are not able to withstand, to cry out to some kind friend, for\nhelp; or when we are in danger of death, by some disease which nature is\nready to sink under, to apply ourselves to the physician for relief:\nthus the soul is to apply itself to Christ for strength against the\nprevailing power of indwelling sin, and grace to make him more than a\nconqueror over it; and Christ, by his Spirit, in this respect, enables\nus (to use the apostle\u2019s words,) _to mortify the deeds of body_, Rom.\nviii. 13.\n\nAnd, in order hereunto, we take encouragement, from the promises of God;\nand the connexion that there is between Christ\u2019s having made\nsatisfaction for sin, and his delivering those who are redeemed, from\nthe power of it, as the apostle says, _Sin shall not have dominion over\nyou; for ye are not under the law_, that is, under the condemning\nsentence of it, _but under grace_, chap. vi. 14. as having an interest\nin that grace which has engaged to deliver from sin: in both these\nrespects we consider Christ not only as able, but as having undertaken\nto deliver his people from all their spiritual enemies, to relieve them\nin all their straits and exigences, and to bring them off safe and\nvictorious. This is the method which we are to take to mortify sin; and\nit is a never-failing remedy. What was before observed, under the\nforegoing heads, concerning our endeavouring to see the evil of sin, and\nexercising that watchfulness against the occasions thereof, are\nnecessary duties, without which sin will gain strength: nevertheless the\nvictory over it is principally owing to our deriving righteousness and\nstrength, by faith, from Christ; whereby he has the glory of a conqueror\nover it, and we have the advantage of receiving this privilege as\napplying ourselves to, and relying on him for it.\n\nHaving considered the way in which sin is to be mortified, agreeably to\nthe gospel-rule; we shall, before we close this head, take notice of\nsome other methods which many rest in, thinking thereby to free\nthemselves from the dominion of sin, which will not answer that end.\nSome have no other notion of sin, but as it discovers itself in those\ngross enormities which are matter of public scandal or reproach in the\neye of the world, who do not duly consider the spirituality of the law\nof God; such-like sentiments of moral evil, the apostle Paul had, before\nhis conversion, as he says, _I was alive without the law once_, chap.\nvii. 9. compared with 7. and _I had not known lust, except the law had\nsaid, thou shalt not covet_. _Sin_ did not _appear to be sin_, ver. 13.\nthat is, nothing was thought sin by him, but that which was openly\nscandalous, and deemed so by universal consent; and therefore he says\nelsewhere, that _touching the righteousness which is in the law, he_ was\n_blameless_, Phil. iii. 6. or, as Ephraim is represented, saying, _In\nall my labour they shall find none iniquity in me that were sin_, Hos.\nxii. 8. These persons think they shall come off well, if they can say,\nthat they are not guilty of some enormous crimes; so that none can\ncharge them with those open debaucheries, or other sins, that are not to\nbe mentioned among Christians; or if, through any change in their\ncondition of life, or being delivered from those temptations that gave\noccasion to them; or if there natural temper be less inclined to them\nthan before, and, as the result hereof, they abstain from them, this\nthey call a mortifying of sin; though the most that can be said of it\nis, that sin is only curbed, confined, and their natural inclinations to\nit abated, while it is far from being dead.\n\nOthers, who will allow that sin is of a far larger extent, and includes\nin it that which prevails in the heart, as well as renders itself\nvisible in the life, or contains in it the omission of duties, as well\nas the actual commission of known sins; these often take a preposterous\nmethod to mortify it: if they are sensible of the guilt that is\ncontracted hereby, they use no other method to be discharged from it,\nbut by pretending to make atonement, either by confessing their sins,\nusing endeavours to abstain from them, or by the performance of some\nduties of religion, by which they think to make God amends for the\ninjuries they have offered to him thereby: but this is so far from\nmortifying sin, that it increases the guilt thereof, and causes it to\ntake deeper root, and afterwards to break forth in a greater degree; or\nelse tends to stupify the conscience, after which they go on in a way of\nsin, with carnal security, and without remorse.\n\nOthers think, that to mortify sin, is nothing else but to subdue and\nkeep under their passions, at least, to such a degree that they may not,\nthrough the irregularity and impetuous violence thereof, commit those\nsins which they cannot but reflect upon with shame, when brought into a\nmore calm and considerate temper of mind; and, in order thereunto, they\nsubject themselves to certain rules, which the light of nature will\nsuggest, and the wiser Heathen have laid down to induce persons to lead\na virtuous life; and they argue thus with themselves, that it is below\nthe dignity of the human nature, for men to suffer their passions to\nlead their reason captive, or to do that which betrays a want of wisdom\nas well as temper; and if by this means the exorbitancy of their\npassions is abated, and many sins, which are occasioned thereby,\nprevented, they conclude their lives to be unblemished, and sin subdued;\nwhereas this is nothing else but restraining the fury of their temper,\nor giving a check to some sins, while sin in general remains\nunmortified.\n\nAs to the methods prescribed by some Popish casuists, of emaciating, or\nkeeping under the body by physic, or a sparing diet, and submitting to\nhard penances, not only to atone for past sins, but prevent them for the\nfuture, these have not a tendency to strike at the root of sin, and\ntherefore are unjustly called a mortifying of it. For though an\nabstemious regular way of living be conducive to answer some valuable\nends, and without it men are led to the commission of many sins; yet\nthis is no expedient to take away the guilt thereof; neither is the\nenslaving, captivating, and prevailing power of indwelling sin, that\ndiscovers itself in various shapes, and attends every condition and\ncircumstance of life, sufficiently subdued hereby.\n\nAnd those common methods that many others take, which are of a different\nnature, namely, when they resolve, though in their own strength, to\nbreak off their sins by repentance; or, if their resolutions to lead a\nvirtuous life are weak, and not much regarded by them, endeavour to\nstrengthen them, this will not answer their end, sin will be too strong\nfor all their resolutions, and the engagements with which they bind\nthemselves, will be like the cords with which Sampson was bound, which\nwere broken by him like threads. If we rely on our own strength, how\nmuch soever we may be resolved to abstain from sin at present, God will\nmake us sensible of our weakness, by leaving us to ourselves; and then,\nhow much soever we resolve to abstain from sin, it will appear that it\nis far from being mortified, or subdued by us. Therefore we conclude,\nthat this cannot be performed, but by going forth in the name and\nstrength of Christ, who is able to keep us from falling; or, when\nfallen, to recover us; and this will be found, in the end, to be the\nbest expedient for the promoting this branch of our sanctification;\nwhich leads us to consider,\n\nIII. That, in the farther carrying on of this work of sanctification, we\nare enabled to walk with God, or before him, in holiness and\nrighteousness. We are first made alive in regeneration, and then put\nforth living actions, which some call vivification, as distinguished\nfrom that part of sanctification, which has been already considered,\nnamely, mortification of sin.\n\nThis is what we may call leading an holy life, whereby we are to\nunderstand much more than many do, who suppose, that it consists only in\nthe performance of some moral duties, that contain the external part of\nreligion, without which there would not be the least shadow of holiness;\nand in performing those duties which we owe to men in the various\nrelations which we stand in to them; or, at least, in keeping ourselves\nclear from those _pollutions which are in the world through lust_, 2\nPet. i. 4. The Pharisee, in the gospel, thought himself an extraordinary\nholy person, because he was no extortioner, nor unjust, nor adulterer;\nbut fasted, paid tithes, and performed several works of charity; and\nmany are great pretenders to it, who have no other than a form of\ngodliness, without the power of it, or who are more than ordinarily\ndiligent in their attendance on the ordinances of God\u2019s appointment;\nthough they are far from doing this in a right way, like those whom the\nprophet speaks of, who are said to _seek God daily, and to delight to\nknow his ways, as a nation that did righteousness, and forsook not the\nordinance of their God_; though at the same time, they are said to _fast\nfor strife and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness_, Isa.\nlviii. 2. But, that we may consider several other things, which are\ncontained in a person\u2019s leading an holy life, let it be observed,\n\n1. That our natures must be changed, and therefore sanctification always\nsupposes and flows from regeneration: there must be grace in the heart,\nor else it can never discover itself in the life; the root must be good,\nor else the tree cannot bring forth good fruit; the spring of action\nmust be cleansed, otherwise the actions themselves will be impure. Some\npersons, who are generally strangers to the internal work of grace, are\nvery apt to insist much on the goodness of their hearts, and this is\nsometimes pleaded in excuse for the badness of their lives; whereas they\nnever had a due sense of the plague and perverseness of their own\nhearts. Good actions must proceed from a good principle, otherwise\npersons are in an unsanctified state; and, as they must be conformable\nto the rule laid down in the word of God, and performed in a right\nmanner, and to the glory of God as to the end designed thereby; so they\nmust be performed by faith, whereby we depend on Christ for assistance\nand acceptance, as being sensible of our constant work and business,\nwhereby we are said to walk with God, as well as live to him.\n\n2. In order to our leading an holy life, we must make use of those\nmotives and inducements thereunto, that are contained in the gospel; and\nto encourage us herein,\n\n(1.) We are to have in our view that perfect pattern of holiness which\nChrist has given us; he has _left us an example that we should follow\nhis steps_, 1 Pet. ii. 21. Whatever we find in the life of Christ,\nprescribed for our imitation, should be improved to promote the work of\nsanctification; his humility, meekness, patience, submission to the\ndivine will, his zeal for the glory of God, and the good of mankind, and\nhis unfainting perseverance in pursuing the end for which he came into\nthe world, are all mentioned, in scripture, not barely that we should\nyield an assent to the account we have thereof in the gospel history;\nbut that the _same mind should be in us, which was also in him_, Phil.\nii. 5. or, as the apostle says, _He that saith he abideth in him, ought\nhimself also to walk even as he walked_, 1 John ii. 6. And to this we\nmay add, that we ought to set before us the example of others, and be\nfollowers of them, so far as they followed him: their example, indeed,\nis as much inferior to Christ\u2019s as imperfect holiness is to that which\nis perfect; but yet it is an encouragement to us, that in following the\nfootsteps of the flock, we have many bright examples of those, who\nthrough faith and patience, inherit the promises.\n\n(2.) Another motive to holiness is the love of Christ, expressed in the\ngreat work of our redemption, and in that care and compassion which he\nhas extended towards us in the application thereof, in all the methods\nhe has used in the beginning and carrying on the work of grace, in which\nwe may say, hitherto he hath helped us: this ought to be improved so as\nto constrain us, 2 Cor. v. 14. as he has hereby laid us under the\nhighest obligation to live to him. And as love to Christ is the main\ningredient in sanctification; so when by faith we behold him as the most\nengaging and desirable object, this will afford a constant inducement to\nholiness.\n\n(3.) Another motive hereunto is our relation to God, as his children,\nand our professed subjection to him; as we gave up ourselves to him,\nwhen first we believed, avouched him to be our God, and, since then,\nhave experienced many instances of his condescending goodness and\nfaithfulness; as he has been pleased to grant us some degrees of\ncommunion with him, through Christ; and as he has given us many great\nand precious promises, and in various instances, made them good to us;\nand has reserved an inheritance for all that are sanctified in that\nbetter world, to which they shall be brought at last: this should induce\nus to lead a life of holiness, as the apostle says, _Having these\npromises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and\nspirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God_, chap. vii. 1.\n\nFrom what has been said in explaining the doctrine of sanctification, we\nmay infer,\n\n[1.] The difference that there is between moral virtue, so far as it may\nbe attained by the light of nature, and the improvement of human reason;\nand that holiness of heart and life, which contains in it all Christian\nvirtues, and is inseparably connected with salvation. All who are\nconversant in the writings of some of the Heathen moralists will find a\ngreat many things that tend to regulate the conduct of life; and those\nprecepts laid down, which, if followed, carry in them a great\nresemblance of the grace of sanctification; and herein some, who have\nbeen destitute of the light of the gospel, have very much excelled many\nwho bear the Christian name: when we find a lively representation of the\nuniversal corruption and degeneracy of human nature, the disorder and\nirregularity of the affections, and man\u2019s natural propensity to vice,\nrules laid down for the attaining of virtue, by which means men are\ndirected how to free themselves from that slavery which they are under\nto their lusts, and advice given to press after a resemblance and\nconformity to God; this carried in it a great shew of holiness.\n\nA late writer[70] has collected together several passages out of their\nwritings, with a design to prove, that though they were destitute of\ngospel light, yet they might attain salvation; inasmuch as they use many\nexpressions that very much resemble the grace of sanctification: as for\ninstance, when one of them speaking concerning contentment in the\nstation of life in which providence had fixed him, says, \u201cA servant of\nGod should not be solicitous for the morrow. Can any good man fear that\nhe should want food? Doth God so neglect his servants, and his\nwitnesses, as that they should be destitute of his care and providence?\nAnd he adds, Did I ever, Lord, accuse thee, or complain of thy\ngovernment? Was I not always willing to be sick when it was thy pleasure\nthat I should be so? Did I ever, desire to be what thou wouldest not\nhave me to be? Am I not always ready to do what thou commandest? Wilt\nthou have me to continue here, I will freely do as thou willest? Or,\nwouldest thou have me depart hence, I will freely do it at thy command?\nI have always had my will subject to that of God; deal with me according\nto thy pleasure; I am always of the same mind with thee; I refuse\nnothing which thou art pleased to lay upon me; lead me whither thou\nwilt; clothe me as thou pleasest; I will be a magistrate or private\nperson; continue me in my country, or in exile, I will not only submit\nto, but defend thy proceedings in all things.\u201d We might also produce\nquotations out of other writings whereby it appears that some of the\nheathen excelled many Christians in the consistency of their sentiments\nabout religious matters, with the divine perfections; as when they say,\nWhatever endowment of the mind has a tendency to make a man truly great\nand excellent; this is owing to an internal divine influence.[71]\nOthers, speaking of the natural propensity which there is in man to\nvice, have maintained, that to fence against it, there is a necessity of\ntheir having assistance from God, in order to their leading a virtuous\nlife; and that virtue is not attained by instruction, that is, not only\nby that means, but that it is from God; and that this is to be sought\nfor at his hands, by faith and prayer: much to this purpose may be seen\nin the writings of Plato, Maximus Tyrius, Hierocles, and several\nothers.[72]\n\nThe principal use that I would make hereof is, to observe that this\nshould humble many Christians, who are far from coming up to the Heathen\nin the practice of moral virtue. And, as for the sentiments of those who\ndeny the necessity of our having the divine influence in order to our\nperforming the duties which God requires of us, in a right manner; these\nfall very short of what the light of nature has suggested to those who\nhave duly attended to it, though destitute of divine revelation. When I\nmeet with such expressions, and many other divine things, in the\nwritings of Plato; and what he says of the conversation of his master\nSocrates, both in his life and death: I cannot but apply in this case,\nwhat our Saviour says to the scribe in the gospel, who answered him\ndiscreetly, _Thou art not far from the kingdom of God_, Mark xii. 34.\nThese things, it is true, very much resemble the grace of\nsanctification; yet in many respects, they fall short of it; inasmuch as\nthey had no acts of faith, in a Mediator, whom they were altogether\nstrangers to, as being destitute of divine revelation.\n\nIt is not my design, at present, to enquire, whether they had any hope\nof salvation? this having been considered under a foregoing answer[73].\nAll that I shall here observe is, that some of the best of them were\ncharged with notorious crimes, which a Christian would hardly reckon\nconsistent with the truth of grace; as Plato, with flattering of\ntyrants, and too much indulging pride and luxury[74]; Socrates, with\npleading for fornication and incest, and practising sodomy, if what some\nhave reported concerning them be true[75]. But, without laying any\nstress on the character of particular persons, who, in other respects,\nhave said and done many excellent things; it is evident, that whatever\nappearance of holiness there may be in the writings or conversation of\nthose that are strangers to Christ and his gospel, this falls short of\nthe grace of sanctification.[76]\n\nThere is a vast difference between recommending or practising moral\nvirtues, as agreeable to the nature of man, and the dictates of reason;\nand a person\u2019s being led in that way of holiness, which our Saviour has\nprescribed in the gospel. This takes its rise from a change of nature,\nwrought in regeneration, is excited by gospel-motives, encouraged by the\npromises thereof, and proceeds from the grace of faith, without which,\nall pretensions to holiness are vain and defective. What advances soever\nthese may have made in endeavouring to free themselves from the slavery\nof sin, they have been very deficient, as to the mortification thereof;\nfor being ignorant of that great atonement which is made by Christ, as\nthe only expedient to take away the guilt of sin, they could not, by any\nmethod, arrive to a conscience void of offence, or any degree of hope\nconcerning the forgiveness thereof, and the way of acceptance in the\nsight of God: and their using endeavours to stop the current of vice,\nand to subdue their inordinate affections, could not be effectual to\nanswer that end, inasmuch as they were destitute of the Spirit of God,\nwho affords his divine assistance, in order thereunto, in no other way\nthan what is prescribed in the gospel; so that as _without holiness no\none shall see the Lord_, this grace is to be expected in that way which\nGod has prescribed; and every one that is holy is made so by the Spirit,\nwho glorifies himself in rendering men fruitful in every good work,\nbeing raised by him, from the death of sin, to the life of faith in\nChrist; which is a blessing peculiar to the gospel.\n\n[2.] Since holiness is required of all persons, as what is absolutely\nnecessary to salvation, and is also recommended as that which God works,\nin those in whom the gospel is made effectual thereunto; we may infer,\nthat no gospel-doctrine has the least tendency to lead to\nlicentiousness. The grace of God may indeed be abused; and men, who are\nstrangers to it, take occasion from the abounding thereof, to continue\nin sin, as some did in the apostle\u2019s days, Rom. vi. 1. but this is not\nthe genuine tendency of the gospel, which is to lead men to holiness.\nWhatever duties it engages to, they are all designed to answer this end;\nand whatever privileges are contained therein, they are all of them\ninducements thereunto: are we _delivered out of the hands of our_\nspiritual enemies? it is, _that we should serve him in holiness and\nrighteousness before him, all the days of our lives_, Luke i. 74, 75. As\nfor the promises, they are an inducement to us, as the apostle expresses\nit, to _cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit,\nperfecting holiness in the fear of God_, 2 Cor. vii. 1. and every\nordinance and providence should be improved by us, to promote the work\nof sanctification.\n\n[3.] Let us examine ourselves, whether this work be begun, and the grace\nof God wrought in us, in truth? and if so, whether it be increasing or\ndeclining in our souls?\n\n_1st_, As to the truth of grace, let us take heed that we do not think\nthat we are something when we are nothing, deceiving our own souls, or\nrest in a form of godliness, while denying the power thereof, or a name\nto live, while we are dead; let us think that it is not enough to\nabstain from grosser enormities, or engage in some external duties of\nreligion, with wrong ends. And if, upon enquiry into ourselves, we find\nthat we are destitute of a principle of spiritual life and grace, let us\nnot think, that because we have escaped some of the pollutions that are\nin the world, or do not run with others in all excess of riot, that\ntherefore we lead holy lives; but rather let us enquire, Whether the\nlife we live in the flesh, be by the faith of the Son of God, under the\ninfluence of his Spirit, with great diffidence of our own righteousness\nand strength, and firm dependence upon Christ? and as the result hereof,\nwhether we are found in the practice of universal holiness, and hate and\navoid all appearance of evil, using all those endeavours that are\nprescribed in the gospel, to glorify him in our spirits, souls, and\nbodies, which are his?\n\n_2d_, If we have ground to hope that the work of sanctification is\nbegun, let us enquire, whether it be advancing or declining? Whether we\ngo from strength to strength, or make improvements in proportion to the\nprivileges we enjoy? Many have reason to complain that it is not with\nthem as in months past; that grace is languishing, the frame of their\nspirits in holy duties stupid, and they destitute of that communion with\nGod, which they have once enjoyed; such ought to remember from whence\nthey are fallen, and repent, and do their first works; and beg of God,\nfrom whom alone our fruit is derived, that he would revive the work, and\ncause their souls to flourish in the courts of his house, and to bring\nforth much fruit unto holiness, to the glory of his own name, and their\nspiritual peace and comfort.\n\nAs for those who are frequently complaining of, and bewailing their\ndeclensions in grace, who seem, to others, to be making a very\nconsiderable progress therein; let them not give way to unbelief so far\nas to deny or set aside the experiences which they have had of God\u2019s\npresence with them; for sometimes grace grows, though without our own\nobservation. If they are destitute of the comforts thereof, or the\nfruits of righteousness, which are peace, assurance and joy in the Holy\nGhost, let them consider, that the work of sanctification, in this\npresent state, is, at best, but growing up towards that perfection which\nis not yet arrived to. If it does not spring up and flourish, as to\nthose fruits and effects thereof, which they are pressing after, but\nhave not attained; let them bless God, if grace is taking root downward,\nand is attended with an humble sense of their own weakness and\nimperfection, and an earnest desire of those spiritual blessings which\nthey are labouring after. This ought to afford matter of thankfulness,\nrather than have a tendency to weaken their hands, or induce them to\nconclude that they are in an unsanctified state; because of the many\nhindrances and discouragements which attend their progress in holiness.\n\nFootnote 69:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxviii.\n\nFootnote 70:\n\n _See Whitby\u2019s Disc. &c. page 541, in which he quotes Arrian, as giving\n the sense of Epictetus, Lib. 1. cap. 9. Lib. 3. cap. 5, 24, 26, 36,\n &c._\n\nFootnote 71:\n\n _Vid. Cic. de natura Deorum, Lib. 2._ Nullus unquam vir magnus fuit,\n sine aliquo afflatu divino.\n\nFootnote 72:\n\n _See Gale\u2019s court of the Gentiles. Book 3. chap. 1. and chap. 10. and\n Wits. de Occon. F\u00e6d. 461-463._\n\nFootnote 73:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 489. & seq._\n\nFootnote 74:\n\n _Vid. G. J. Voss. de Hist. Gr\u00e6c. page 22._\n\nFootnote 75:\n\n _See Gale\u2019s court of the Gentiles, Part III. book 1, chap. 1, 2. which\n learned writer having, in some other parts of that work, mentioned\n several things that were praise worthy, in some of the philosophers,\n here takes occasion to speak of some other things, which were great\n blemishes in them; and, in other parts of this elaborate work, proves\n that those who lived in the first ages of the church, and were\n attached to their philosophy, were by this means, as he supposes, led\n aside from many great and important truths of the gospel; of this\n number Origen, Justin Martyr, and several others. And he further\n supposes, that what many of them advanced concerning the liberty of\n man\u2019s will, as to what respects spiritual things, gave occasion to the\n Pelagians to propagate those doctrines that were subversive of the\n grace of God; and that the Arian and Samosatenan heresies took their\n rise from hence. See Part III. Book 2. chap. 1._\n\nFootnote 76:\n\n The natural knowledge of God and his goodness, gives some\n encouragement to guilty creatures to repent of their sins, and to\n return to God by a general hope of acceptance, though they had no\n promise of pardoning grace. And this was the very principle upon which\n some of the better sort of the Gentiles set themselves to practise\n virtue, to worship God, and endeavour to become like him.\n\n I do not say, that natural religion can give sinful men a full and\n satisfying assurance of pardon upon their repentance; for the deepest\n degrees of penitence cannot oblige a prince to forgive the criminal:\n but still the overflowing goodness of God, his patience and\n long-suffering, notwithstanding their sins, may evidently and justly\n excite in their hearts some hope of forgiving grace: and I think the\n words of my text cannot intend less than this, that God has not left\n them without witness, when he gave them rain from heaven, when he\n satisfied their appetites with food, and filled their hearts with\n gladness. What was it that these benefits of their Creator bore\n witness to? Was it not that there was goodness and mercy to be found\n with him, if they would return to their duty, and abandon their own\n ways of idolatry and vice. Surely, it can never be supposed, that the\n apostle here means no more than to say, that the daily instances of\n divine bounty in the common comforts of life, assured them, that God\n had some goodness in him, and blessings to bestow on their bodies; but\n gave them no hope of his acceptance of their souls, if they should\n return and repent never so sincerely. The Ninevites themselves, when\n threatened with destruction, repented in sackcloth and ashes; for,\n said they, Who can tell but God will turn and repent, and turn away\n from his fierce anger, that we perish not? Nor were they mistaken in\n their hope, for God saw their works, that they turned from their evil\n way, and he repented of the evil that he had threatened, Jonah iii.\n 5-10. And there is yet a more express text to this purpose, Rom. ii.\n 4. Despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and\n long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to\n repentance? And if God leads us to repentance, by a sense of his\n goodness, surely he gives hope that our repentance shall not be in\n vain: and though, perhaps, I could not affirm it with boldness, and\n certainty by the mere light of reason, yet I may venture to declare,\n upon the encouragement of these scriptures, that if there should be\n found any sinner in the heathen world, who should be thus far wrought\n upon by a sense of the goodness of God, as to be led sincerely to\n repent of sin, and seek after mercy, God would find a way to make a\n discovery of so much of the gospel, as was necessary for him to know,\n rather than such a penitent sinner should be left under condemnation,\n or that a guilty creature should go on to eternal death in the way of\n repentance. Cornelius the Centurion, who feared God, who prayed to him\n daily, and wrought righteousness, according to the light of his\n conscience, had both an angel and an apostle sent to him, that he\n might receive more complete instruction in the matters of his\n salvation. Acts x. 1-6. and from 30-35.\u201c Dr. Watts.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXVI.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXVI. _What is repentance unto life?_\n\n ANSW. Repentance unto life, is a saving grace, wrought in the heart\n of a sinner, by the Spirit and word of God; whereby, out of the\n sight and sense, not only of the danger, but also of the filth and\n odiousness of his sins, and upon the apprehension of God\u2019s mercy in\n Christ, to such as are penitent, he so grieves for, and hates his\n sins, as that he turns from them all to God, purposing and\n endeavouring, constantly to walk with him in all the ways of new\n obedience.\n\nIn speaking to this answer we shall consider the subject of repentance,\n_viz._ a sinful fallen creature; and that, though this be his condition,\nyet he is naturally averse to the exercise thereof, till God is pleased\nto bring him to it; which will lead us to consider, how the Spirit of\nGod does this; and what are the various acts and effects thereof.[222]\n\n1. Concerning the subjects of repentance. No one can be said to repent\nbut a sinner; and therefore, whatever other graces might be exercised by\nman in a state of innocency, or shall be exercised by him, when brought\nto a state of perfection; yet there cannot, properly speaking, be any\nroom for repentance: some, indeed, have queried whether there shall be\nrepentance in heaven; but it may easily be determined, that though that\nhatred of sin in general, and opposition to it, which is contained in\ntrue repentance, be not inconsistent with a state of perfect\nblessedness, as it is inseparably connected with perfection of holiness;\nyet a sense of sin, which is afflictive, and is attended with grief and\nsorrow of heart, for the guilt and consequences thereof, is altogether\ninconsistent with a state of perfection; and these are some ingredients\nin that repentance which comes under our present consideration.\nTherefore we must conclude, that the subject of repentance is a sinner:\nbut,\n\nII. Though all sinners contract guilt, expose themselves to misery, and\nwill sooner or later be filled with distress and sorrow for what they\nhave done against God; yet many have no sense thereof at present, nor\nrepentance, or remorse for it. These are described as _past feeling_,\nEph. iv. 19. and _hardened through the deceitfulness of sin_, Heb. iii.\n13. as obstinate, and having _their neck as an iron sinew, and their\nbrow as brass_, Isa. xlviii. 4. And there are several methods which they\ntake to ward off the force of convictions. Sometimes they are stupid,\nand hardly give themselves the liberty to consider the difference that\nthere is between moral good and evil, or the natural obligation we are\nunder to pursue the one, and avoid the other. They consider not the\nall-seeing eye of God, that observes all their actions, nor the power of\nhis anger, who will take vengeance on impenitent sinners; regard not the\nvarious aggravations of sin, nor consider that God will, for those\nthings, bring them to judgment. So that impenitency is generally\nattended with presumption; whereby the person concludes, though without\nground, that it shall go well with him in the end; such an one is\nrepresented, as blessing himself in his heart, saying, _I shall have\npeace, though I walk in the imagination_; or, as it is in the margin, in\nthe stubbornness _of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst_, Deut.\nxxix. 19. Or if, on the other hand, he cannot but conclude, that with\nGod is terrible majesty, that he is a consuming fire, and that none ever\nhardened themselves against him, and prospered, and if he does not fall\ndown before him with humble confession of sin, and repentance for it, he\nwill certainly be broken with his rod of iron, and dashed in pieces,\nlike the potter\u2019s vessel, broken with a tempest, and utterly destroyed,\nwhen his wrath is kindled; then he resolves, that some time or other he\nwill repent, but still delays and puts it off for a more convenient\nseason, and though God gives him space to do it, repenteth not, Rev. ii.\n21. Thus he goes on in the greatness of his way, till God prevents him\nwith the blessings of his goodness, and brings him to repentance. And\nthis leads us to consider,\n\nIII. That repentance is God\u2019s work; or, as it is observed in this\nanswer, wrought by the Spirit of God: whether we consider it as a common\nor saving grace, it is the Spirit that convinces or reproves the world\nof sin. If it be of the same kind with that which Pharaoh, Ahab, or\nJudas had; it is a dread of God\u2019s judgments, and his wrath breaking in\nupon conscience, when he reproves for sin, and sets it in order before\ntheir eyes, that excites it. If they are touched with a sense of guilt,\nand hereby, for the present, stopped, or obliged to make a retreat, and\ndesist from pursuing their former methods, it is God, in the course of\nhis providence, that gives a check to them. But this comes short of that\nrepentance which is said to be unto life; or which is styled a saving\ngrace, which is wrought by the Spirit of God, as the beginning of that\nsaving work, which is a branch of sanctification, and shall end in\ncompleat salvation.\n\nThis is expressly styled in scripture, _repentance unto life_, Acts xi.\n18. inasmuch as every one, who is favoured with it, shall obtain eternal\nlife; and it is connected with conversion and remission of sins, which\nwill certainly end in eternal salvation. Thus it is said, _Repent and be\nconverted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of\nrefreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord_, chap. iii. 9. and\nfor this reason it is called a saving grace, or a grace that accompanies\nsalvation, whereby it is distinguished from that repentance which some\nhave, who yet remain in a state of unregeneracy. And it is called,\n_Repentance to salvation, not to be repented of_, 2 Cor. vii. 10. that\nis, it shall issue well; and he shall, in the end, have reason to bless\nGod, and rejoice in his grace, that has made him partaker of it, who\nthus repents.\n\nIV. We shall now consider the instrument or means whereby the Spirit\nworks this grace.[77] Thus it is said to be wrought in the heart of a\nsinner, by the word of God, as all other graces are, except\nregeneration, as has been before observed: we must first suppose the\nprinciple of grace implanted, and the word presenting motives, and\narguments leading to repentance; and then the understanding is\nenlightened and disposed to receive what is therein imparted. The word\n_calls sinners to repentance_, Matt. ix. 13. and therefore, when this\ngrace is wrought, we are not only turned by the power of God, but\n_instructed_, Jer. xxxi. 19. by the Spirit\u2019s setting home what is\ncontained therein whereby we are led into the knowledge of those things\nwhich are necessary to repentance. As,\n\n1. We have in the word a display of the holiness of the divine nature\nand law, and our obligation in conformity thereunto, to the exercise of\nholiness in heart and life, as God says, _Be ye holy, for I am holy_,\nLev. xi. 44. And to this we may add, that it contains a display of the\nholiness of God in his threatenings, which he has denounced against\nevery transgression and disobedience, which shall receive a just\nrecompence of reward; and in all the instances of his punishing sin in\nthose who have exposed themselves thereunto, that hereby he might deter\nmen from it, and lead them to repentance: thus the apostle speaks of\n_the law_ of God as _holy, and the commandment holy, just, and good_,\nRom. vii. 12, 13. and of its leading him into the knowledge of sin, by\nwhich means it appeared to be sin, that is, opposite to an holy God,\nand, as he expresses it, _became exceeding sinful_.\n\n2. Hereby persons are led into themselves; and by comparing their hearts\nand lives with the word of God, are enabled to see their own vileness\nand want of conformity to the rule which he has given them, the\ndeceitfulness and desperate wickedness thereof, and what occasion there\nis to abhor themselves, and repent in dust and ashes; thus the apostle,\nin the place but now mentioned, speaks of himself as _once alive without\nthe law; but when the commandment came, sin revived and he died_, and\nconcludes himself to be _carnal, sold under sin_, Rom. vii. 9, 14. This\nis a necessary means leading to repentance.\n\nAnd we may farther add, that God not only makes use of the word, but of\nhis providences to answer this end; therefore he speaks of a sinning\npeople, _when carried away captive into the land of the enemy_, as\n_bethinking_ themselves, and afterwards _repenting and making\nsupplication to him_ therein, 1 Kings viii. 46, 47. And we read of\nsickness and bodily diseases as ordained by God, to bring persons to\nrepentance; thus Elihu speaks of a person\u2019s being _chastened with pain\nupon his bed, and the multitude of his bones with strong pain; his soul\ndrawing nigh to the grave, and his life to the destroyers_, Job xxxiii.\n19, 27. and then represents the person thus chastened, and afterwards\nrecovered from his sickness, as acknowledging himself to _have sinned,\nand perverted that which is right, and_ that _it profited him not_. And\nthe apostle speaks of _the goodness of God_ in the various dispensations\nof his providence, as _leading to repentance_, Rom. ii. 4. But these\ndispensations are always to be considered in conjunction with the word,\nand as impressed on the conscience of men by the Spirit, in order to\ntheir attaining this desirable end.\n\nBut that we may insist on this matter more particularly, we must take an\nestimate of repentance, either as it is a common or special grace; in\nboth these respects it is from the Spirit, and wrought by the\ninstrumentality of the word, applied to the consciences of men; but\nthere is a vast difference between the one and the other in the\napplication of the word, as well as in the effects and consequences\nthereof.\n\n(1.) In them who are brought under convictions, but not made partakers\nof the saving grace of repentance; the Holy Spirit awakens, and fills\nthem with the terrors of God, and the dread of his vengeance, _by the\nlaw_, by which _is the knowledge of sin_, and _all the world becomes\nguilty before God_, Rom. iii. 20. compared with 19. These are what we\ncall legal convictions; whereby the wound is opened, but no healing\nmedicine applied: the sinner apprehends himself under a sentence of\ncondemnation, but at the same time cannot apply any promise which may\nafford hope and relief to him; groans under his burden, and knows not\nwhere to find ease or comfort, and dreads the consequence thereof, as\nthat which would sink him into hell; God appears to him as a consuming\nfire, his arrows stick fast in his soul, the poison whereof drinketh up\nhis spirits; if he endeavours to shake off his fears, and to relieve\nhimself against his despairing thoughts, he is notwithstanding,\ndescribed, as being like the _troubled sea_, when it _cannot rest_,\nwhich _casts forth mire and dirt_, Isa. lvii. 20. This is a most\nafflictive case; concerning which it is said, that though _the spirit of\na man will sustain his infirmity_; _yet a wounded spirit who can bear_?\nProv. xviii. 14.\n\nThus it is with some when convinced of sin by the law: but there are\nothers who endeavour to quiet their consciences by using indirect\nmethods, thinking to make atonement for it, and by some instances of\nexternal reformation, to make God amends, and thereby procure his\nfavour, but to no purpose; for _sin taking occasion, by the commandment,\nworks in them all manner of concupiscence_, Rom. vii. 8. And if they\ngrow stupid, which is oftentimes the consequence hereof, their sense of\nsin is entirely lost, and their repentance ends in presumption, and a\ngreat degree of boldness in the commission of all manner of wickedness.\n\n(2.) We shall now consider how the Spirit works repentance unto life,\nwhich is principally insisted on in this answer. This is said to be done\nby the word of God; not by the law without the gospel, but by them both,\nin which one is made subservient to the other. The law shews the soul\nits sin, and the gospel directs him where he may find a remedy; one\nwounds and the other heals; _the law enters_, as the apostle expresses\nit, _that the offence might abound_, Rom. v. 20. but the gospel shews\nhim how _grace_ does _much more abound_, and where he may obtain\nforgiveness, by which means he is kept from sinking under that weight of\nguilt that lies on his conscience. And it leads him to hate and abstain\nfrom sin, from those motives that are truly excellent; for which reason\nit is called evangelical repentance.\n\nNow that we may better understand the nature thereof, we shall consider;\nhow it differs from that which we before described, which arises only\nfrom that conviction of sin, which is by the law, which a person may\nhave, who is destitute of this grace of repentance, which we are\nspeaking of. Repentance, of what kind soever it be, contains in it a\nsense of sin: but if it be such a sense of sin, that the unregenerate\nperson may have, this includes little more in it than a sense of the\ndanger and misery which he has exposed himself to by sins committed. The\nprincipal motives leading hereunto, are the threatenings which the law\nof God denounces against those that violate it. Destruction from God is\na terror to him; if this were not the consequence of sin, he would be so\nfar from repenting of it, that it would be the object of his chief\ndelight. And that guilt, which he charges himself with, is principally\nsuch, as arises from the commission of the most notorious crimes, which\nexpose him to the greatest degree of punishment: whereas, repentance\nunto life brings a soul under a sense of the guilt of sin, as it is\ncontrary to the holy nature and law of God, which the least, as well as\nthe greatest sins, are opposed to, and contain a violation of. And\ntherefore he charges himself, not only with open sins, which are\ndetestable in the eyes of men; but secret sins, which others have little\nor no sense of; sins of omission, as well as sins of commission; and he\nis particularly affected with the sin of unbelief, inasmuch as it\ncontains a contempt of Christ, and the grace of the gospel. And he is\nnot only sensible of those sins which break forth in his life; but that\npropensity of nature, whereby he is inclined to rebel against God; so\nthat this sense of guilt, in some respects, differs from that which they\nare brought under, who are destitute of saving repentance.\n\nBut that in which they more especially differ is, in that saving\nrepentance contains in it a sense of the filth, and odious nature of\nsin, and so considers it as defiling, or contrary to the holiness of\nGod, and rendering the soul worthy to be abhorred by him; so that as the\nsense of guilt excites fear, and a dread of the wrath of God, this fills\nhim with shame, confusion of face, and self-abhorrence, which is\ninseparably connected with the grace of repentance; accordingly these\nare joined together, as Job says, _I abhor myself, and repent in dust\nand ashes_, Job xlii. 6. or, as when God promises that he would bestow\nthis grace on his people, he says, _Then shall ye remember your own evil\nways, and your doings, that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves\nin your own sight, for your iniquities, and for your abominations_,\nEzek. xxxvi. 31. As before this they set too high a value upon\nthemselves, and were ready to palliate and excuse their crimes, or\ninsist on their innocence, though their iniquity was written in legible\ncharacters, as with a pen of iron, and the point of a diamond, and to\nsay with Ephraim, _In all my labour they shall find none iniquity in me\nthat were sin_, Hos. xii. 8. or, as the prophet Jeremiah says,\nconcerning a rebellious people, that _though in their skirts were found\nthe blood of the souls of the poor innocents_; yet they had the front to\nsay, _Because I am innocent, surely his anger shall turn from me_, Jer.\nii. 34, 35. Notwithstanding, when God brings them to repentance, and\nheals their backslidings; they express themselves in a very different\nway; _We lie down in our shame, and our confusion covers us; for we have\nsinned against the Lord our God_, chap. iii. 25. Now this is such an\ningredient in true repentance, which is not to be found in that which\nfalls short of it: the sinner is afraid of punishment indeed, or, it may\nbe, he may be filled with shame, because of the reproach which attends\nhis vile and notorious crimes in the eyes of the world; yet he is not\nashamed, or confounded, as considering how vile he has rendered himself\nhereby, in the eye of an holy God.\n\nThere is another thing which is farther observed in this answer, which\nis an ingredient in repentance unto life, in which respect it is\nconnected with faith, inasmuch as he apprehends the mercy of God in\nChrist to such as are penitent; and this effectually secures him from\nthat despair which sometimes attends a legal repentance, as was before\nobserved, as well as affords him relief against the sense of guilt with\nwhich this grace is attended. The difference between legal and\nevangelical repentance, does not so much consist in that one represents\nsin, as more aggravated; nor does it induce him that thus repents, to\nthink himself a greater sinner than the other; for the true penitent is\nready to confess himself the chief of sinners. He is far from\nextenuating his sin, being ready, on all occasions, to charge himself\nwith more guilt than others are generally sensible of: but that which he\ndepends upon as his only comfort and support is the mercy of God in\nChrist, or the consideration that there is forgiveness with him, that he\nmay be feared; this is that which affords the principal motive and\nencouragement to repentance, and has a tendency to excite the various\nacts thereof; which leads us to consider,\n\nV. What are the various acts of this repentance unto life; or what are\nthe fruits and effects produced thereby.\n\n1. The soul is filled with hatred of sin. When he looks back on his past\nlife, he bewails what cannot now be avoided; charges himself with folly\nand madness, and wishes (though this be to no purpose) that he had done\nmany things which he has omitted, and avoided those sins, together with\nthe occasions thereof, which he has committed, the guilt whereof lies\nwith great weight upon him. How glad would he be if lost seasons and\nopportunities of grace might be recalled, and the talents, that were\nonce put into his hand, though misimproved, regained! But all these\nwishes are in vain. However, these are the after-thoughts which will\narise in the minds of those who are brought under a sense of sin. Sin\nwounds the soul; the Spirit of God, when convincing thereof, opens the\nwound, and causes a person to feel the smart of it, and gives him to\nknow, that _it is an evil thing, and bitter, that he has forsaken the\nLord his God_, Jer. ii. 19. This sometimes depresses the spirits, and\ncauses him to walk softly, to _set alone and keep silence_, Lam. iii.\n28. being filled with that uneasiness which is very afflictive to him.\nAt other times it gives vent to itself in tears, as the Psalmist\nexpresses it, _I am weary with my groaning, all the night make I my bed\nto swim; I water my couch with my tears_, Psal. vi. 6. In this case the\nonly thing that gives him relief or comfort is, that the guilt of sin is\nremoved by the blood of Christ, which tends to quiet his spirit, which\nwould otherwise be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that sin is always the object of his\ndetestation, even when there is an abatement of that grief, which, by\nthe divine supports and comforts he is fenced against: he hates sin, not\nbarely because of the sad consequences thereof, but as it is in itself\nthe object of abhorrence; and therefore his heart is set against all\nsin, as the Psalmist says, _I hate every false way_, Psal. cxix. 104.\nThis hatred discovers itself by putting him upon flying from it,\ntogether with all the occasions thereof, or incentives to it. He not\nonly abstains from those sins which they who have little more than the\nremains of moral virtue are ashamed of, and afraid to commit, but hates\nevery thing that has in it the appearance of sin, and this hatred is\nirreconcileable. As forgiveness does not make sin less odious in its own\nnature, so the experience that he has of the grace of God herein, or\nwhatever measures of peace he enjoys, whereby his grief and sorrow is\nassuaged, yet still his hatred of it not only remains, but increases:\nand, as the consequence hereof,\n\n2. He turns from sin unto God; he first hates sin, and then flies from\nit, as seeing it to be the spring of all his grief and fears, that which\nseparates between him and his God. Thus Ephraim, when brought to\nrepentance, is represented as saying, _What have I to do any more with\nidols_, Hos. xiv. 8. reflecting on his past conduct, when addicted to\nthem, with a kind of indignation; so the true penitent, who has hitherto\nbeen walking in those paths that lead to death and destruction, now\nenquires after the way of holiness, and the paths of peace; as he has\nhitherto walked contrary to God, now he desires to walk with him; and\nhaving wearied himself in the greatness of his way, and seeing no fruit\nin those things whereof he is now ashamed; and being brought into the\nutmost straits, he determines to return to his God and Father. And in\ndoing this he purposes and endeavours to walk with him in all the ways\nof new obedience, as the apostle exhorts those who had received good by\nhis ministry, that _with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the\nLord_, Acts xi. 23. This purpose is not like those hasty resolutions\nwhich unconverted sinners make when God is hedging up their way with\nthorns, and they are under the most distressing apprehensions of his\nwrath. Then they say as the people did to Joshua, _We will serve the\nLord_, Josh. xxiv. 22. though they are not sensible how difficult it is\nto fulfil the engagements which they lay themselves under, nor of the\ndeceitfulness of their own hearts, and the need they stand in of grace\nfrom God, to enable them so to do. This purpose to walk with God, does\nnot so much respect what a person will do hereafter; but it contains a\nresolution which is immediately put in execution, and so is opposed to\nhis former obstinacy, when determining to go on in the way of his own\nheart. Thus the prodigal son, in the parable, no sooner resolved that he\nwould _arise and go to his Father_, Luke xv. 18, compared with 20. but\nhe arose and went. True repentance is always attended with endeavours\nafter new obedience, so that a person lays aside that sloth and\nindolence which was inconsistent with his setting a due value on, or\nimproving the means of grace; and, as the result hereof, he now exerts\nhimself, with all his might, in pursuing after those things, whereby he\nmay approve himself God\u2019s faithful servant; and hereby he discovers the\nsincerity of his repentance; which he does, or rather is enabled to do,\nby that grace, which at first began, and then carries on this work in\nthe soul, whereby he _has his fruit unto holiness, and the end_ thereof\n_everlasting life_, Rom. vi. 22.\n\nFrom what has been said concerning repentance, we may infer,\n\n(1.) That since it is a grace that accompanies salvation, and\nconsequently is absolutely necessary thereunto, it is an instance of\nunwarrantable and bold presumption, for impenitent sinners to expect,\nthat they shall be made partakers of the benefits which Christ has\npurchased, while they continue in a state of enmity, opposition, and\nrebellion against him; or that they shall be saved by him in their sins,\nwithout being saved from them; for _he that covereth his sins shall not\nprosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them, shall have mercy_,\nProv. xxviii. 13.\n\n(2.) Since repentance is the work of the Spirit, and his gift, we infer,\nthat whatever endeavours we are obliged to use, or whatever motives or\ninducements are given to lead us hereunto, we must not conclude, that it\nis in our own power to repent when we please; and therefore it should be\nthe matter of our earnest and constant prayer to God, that he would turn\nour hearts, give us a true sight and sense of sin, accompanied with\nfaith in Christ, as Ephraim is represented, saying, _Turn thou me, and I\nshall be turned_, Jer. xxxi. 18.\n\n(3.) Let not those that have a distressing sense of their former sins,\nhow great soever they have been, give way to despairing thoughts; but\nlay hold on the mercy of God in Christ, extended to the chief of\nsinners, and improve it to encourage them to hate sin, and forsake it\nfrom evangelical motives, which will have a tendency to remove their\nfears while they look on God, not as a sin-revenging Judge, but a\nreconciled Father, ready and willing to receive those who return to him\nwith unfeigned repentance.\n\n(4.) Since we daily commit sin, it follows from hence, that we stand in\nneed of daily repentance: and this being a branch of sanctification, as\nsanctification is a progressive work, so is repentance. We are not to\nexpect that sin should be wholly extirpated, while we are in this\nimperfect state; and therefore it is constantly to be bewailed, and, by\nthe grace of God working effectually in us, avoided; that, as the result\nhereof, we may have a comfortable hope that that promise shall be\nfulfilled, _They that sow in tears shall reap in joy_, Psal. cxxvi. 5.\n\nFootnote 222:\n\n It has been, perhaps correctly, asserted that repentance is neither a\n duty discoverable by the law of nature, nor the written law of God;\n because it is unfit, that a law, appointing death for the violation of\n its precept, should also discover to the culprit a way of escape from\n its own penalty incurred.\n\n But there existed purposes of mercy before the law was made; these\n have been revealed by a gracious Sovereign; the condition of men, as\n prisoners of hope possessing competent evidence of the compassion of\n the Lawgiver, points to repentance. Sacrifices in former ages discover\n not only a consciousness of guilt, but a glimmering hope at least, of\n pardon. It is possible that these were the offspring of tradition\n among the Gentiles, rather than the deductions of the light of nature.\n But in either way, sorrow for sin is a duty founded on the will of\n God.\n\n It is therefore a duty, perfectly reasonable, and expressly revealed\n on the sacred page. The strength to perform it is from the King of\n Providence and Grace.\n\n There is necessary in its production a discovery of guilt, liability\n to misery, and entire helplessness. The general belief, or profession\n of these truths, does not prove in event to be a cause adequate to\n produce a total change in a man\u2019s views, pursuits, desires, aversions,\n labours, joys, and sorrows. There is necessary some deep sense, or\n strong conviction of guilt. This, with respect to its proximate cause,\n may originate in various ways; by reflecting on the Divine Sovereignty\n and Majesty; by a solemn contemplation of the excellency and\n loveliness of the moral perfection of Deity; by an affecting sight of\n his goodness and mercy to the individual in particular; by attending\n to the awful subject of Divine Justice, seen in the sufferings of\n Christ, or anticipated in the future judgment, and final sufferings of\n the damned. Such convictions are produced in great mercy to the\n individual, how dearly soever they cost him, whether the prostrated\n idols, on which the sensual affections were fastened, were companions,\n friends, relations, honour or wealth. Disease, approaching death, or\n any thing which shall dissolve the unhallowed attachment to earth, may\n by the Divine blessing produce this change, the glory of which will\n always really belong to Divine grace, which works unseen.\n\n The bitterness of such sorrows is sometimes extreme, when he who\n wounded alone can cure. The effects of it are subsequently salutary,\n both to deter from sin and to strengthen the party\u2019s faith.\n\n The degrees of penitential sorrow are extremely various in different\n converts. He who has been convinced of gospel truths step by step, and\n has been in the same manner brought to the love and fear of God, and\n to a universal conscientiousness, may have grounds of peace and\n comfort equally safe, as he whose convictions have been the most\n sensible; for not their height but their fruits prove them to be\n genuine.\n\nFootnote 77:\n\n Grace here is put for repentance, and not the immediate influence on\n the soul.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXVII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXVII. _Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?_\n\n ANSW. Although sanctification be inseparably joined with\n justification; yet they differ, in that God in justification,\n imputeth the righteousness of Christ, in sanctification his Spirit\n infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof; in the former\n sin is pardoned, in the other it is subdued; the one doth equally\n free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that\n perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation, the\n other is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but\n growing up to perfection.\n\nThis answer being principally a recapitulation of what is contained in\nthose that have been already insisted on, wherein the doctrine of\njustification and sanctification are particularly explained, we shall\nnot much enlarge on it; but since there are some who suppose that one of\nthese graces may be attained without the other; and others confound\nthem, as though to be justified and to be sanctified implied the same\nthing; we shall briefly consider,\n\nI. That which is supposed in this answer, namely, that sanctification\nand justification are inseparably joined together; and accordingly, no\none has a warrant to claim one without the other: This appears in that\nthey are graces that accompany salvation. When the apostle connects\njustification and effectual calling together, in the golden chain of our\nsalvation, Rom. viii. 30. he includes sanctification in this calling.\nAnd elsewhere, when Christ is said to be _made righteousness and\nredemption_ to us for our justification, he is, at the same time, said\nto be made _wisdom and sanctification_, 1 Cor. i. 31. and we are said to\nbe _saved by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy\nGhost_, Tit. iii. 5. which is the beginning of the work of\nsanctification; _that being justified by his grace, we should be made\nheirs according to the hope of eternal life_; and speaking of some who\nwere once great sinners, and afterwards made true believers, he says,\nconcerning them, that they were _washed, sanctified, and justified in\nthe name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God_, 1 Cor. vi.\n11. And when God promises to pardon and _pass by the transgression of\nthe remnant of his heritage_, Micah vii. 18, 19. he also gives them\nground to expect that he would _subdue their iniquities_; the former is\ndone in justification, the latter in sanctification.\n\nFrom the connexion that there is between justification and\nsanctification, we infer: that no one has ground to conclude that his\nsins are pardoned, and that he shall be saved while he is in an\nunsanctified state; for as this tends to turn the grace of God into\nwantonness, so it separates what he has joined together, and it is a\ncertain evidence that they who thus divide them, are neither justified\nnor sanctified. Let us therefore give diligence to evince the truth of\nour justification, by our sanctification, or that we have a right and\ntitle to Christ\u2019s righteousness, by the life of faith, and the exercise\nof all those other graces that accompany or flow from it.\n\nII. We have, in this answer, an account of some things in which\njustification and sanctification differ, as,\n\n1. In justification God imputes the righteousness of Christ to us;\nwhereas, in sanctification the Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to\nthe exercise thereof. What it is for God to impute Christ\u2019s\nrighteousness hath been before considered; the only thing that we shall\nnow observe is, that the righteousness whereby we are justified, is,\nwithout us, wrought out by Christ, for us; so that it is _by his\nobedience_, as the apostle expresses it, that _we are made righteous_,\nRom. v. 19. and that which Christ did as our Surety, is placed to our\naccount, and accepted by the justice of God, as though it had been done\nby us, as has been before observed: Whereas, in sanctification, the\ngraces of the Spirit are wrought and excited in us, we are denominated\nholy, and our right to eternal life is evinced, though not procured.\n\n2. In justification sin is pardoned, in sanctification it is subdued;\nthe former takes away the guilt thereof, the latter its reigning power.\nWhere sin is pardoned, it shall not be our ruin; but yet it gives us\ndaily disturbance and uneasiness, makes work for repentance, and is to\nbe opposed by our dying to it, and living to righteousness. This is\ntherefore sufficiently distinguished from justification, which is also\nto be considered as a motive or inducement leading to it.\n\n3. They differ, in that justification equally frees all believers from\nthe avenging wrath of God, in which respect it is perfect in this life,\nso that a justified person shall never fall into condemnation; whereas,\nthe work of sanctification is not equal in all, nor perfect in this\nlife, but growing up to perfection. For the understanding of which, let\nus consider, that when we speak of justification as perfect in this\nlife, or say, that all are equally justified, we mean, that where God\nforgives one sin, he forgives all; so that _there is no condemnation to\nthem which are in Christ Jesus_, as the apostle says, chap. viii. 1. and\nhe adds, _Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God\u2019s elect? it is\nGod that justifieth; who is he that condemneth? it is Christ that died_,\nver. 33, 34. Were it not so, a person might be said to be justified, and\nnot have a right to eternal life, which implies a contradiction; for\nthough he might be acquitted, as to the guilt charged upon him by one\nindictment, he would be condemned by that which is contained in another.\n\nWe may from hence infer, that all justified persons have an equal right\nto conclude themselves discharged from guilt, and the condemning\nsentence of the law of God; though all cannot see their right to claim\nthis privilege by reason of the weakness of their faith. As for\nsanctification, that, on the other hand, is far from being equal in all;\nsince the best of believers have reason to complain of the weakness of\ntheir faith, and the imperfection of all other graces which are wrought\nin them by the Spirit. If it be enquired from whence this imperfection\nof sanctification arises, that is the subject of the following answer.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXVIII. _Whence ariseth the imperfection of sanctification\n in believers?_\n\n ANSW. The imperfection of sanctification in believers, ariseth from\n the remains of sin abiding in every part of them, and the perpetual\n lustings of the flesh against the spirit, whereby they are often\n foiled with temptations, and fall into many sins, are hindered in\n all their spiritual services, and their best works are imperfect and\n defiled in the sight of God.\n\nIn this answer we may consider,\n\nI. That there is something supposed, namely, that the work of\nsanctification is imperfect in this life, or that there are the remnants\nof sin still abiding in the best of men.\n\nII. In what the imperfection of sanctification more especially discovers\nitself; and in particular, what we are to understand by the lusting of\nthe flesh against the Spirit. And,\n\nIII. The consequences hereof, to wit, their being foiled with\ntemptations, falling into many sins, and being hindered in their\nspiritual services.\n\n1. As to the thing supposed in this answer, that the work of\nsanctification is imperfect in this life: This must be allowed by all\nwho are not strangers to themselves, as it is said, _There is not a just\nman upon the earth that doth good and sinneth not_, Eccl. vii. 20. fine\ngold is not without a mixture of some baser metal, or alloy; even so our\nbest frames of spirit, when we think ourselves nearest heaven, or when\nwe have most communion with God, are not without a tincture of\nindwelling sin, that is easy to be discerned in us. Whatever grace we\nexercise, there are some defects attending it, either with respect to\nthe manner of its exerting itself, or the degree thereof; therefore\nperfection, how desirable soever it be, is a blessing which we cannot,\nat present, attain to: And if it be thus with us, when at the best, we\nshall find, that at other times, corrupt nature not only discovers\nitself, but gives us great interruption and disturbance, so that the\nwork of sanctification seems to be, as it were, at a stand, and we are\nhereby induced to question the truth and sincerity of our graces; and\nif, notwithstanding this, we have sufficient ground to conclude, that\nour hearts are right with God; yet we are obliged to say with the\napostle, that we are _carnal, sold under sin_; and that, _when we would\ndo good, evil is present with us_, Rom. vii. 14. compared with 21. which\nis an undeniable argument of the imperfection of the work of\nsanctification.\n\nThe contrary opinion to this is maintained by many who pretend that\nperfection is attainable in this life; and to give countenance hereunto,\nthey refer to some scriptures, in which persons are characterized as\n_perfect_ men; and others wherein perfection is represented as a duty\nincumbent on us; as our Saviour says, _Be ye perfect, even as your\nFather which is in heaven is perfect_, Matt. v. 48. and the apostle, in\nhis valedictory exhortation to the church, advises them to _be perfect_,\nas well as _of one mind_; as they expected that the God of love and\npeace should be with them, 2 Cor. xiii. 11.\n\nBut to this it may be replied, that these scriptures do not speak of a\nsinless perfection, but of such a perfection as is opposed to hypocrisy;\nas Hezekiah says concerning himself, that he had _walked before the Lord\nin truth, and with a perfect heart_, Isa. xxxviii. 3. Accordingly, the\nperfection of those who are thus described in scripture, is explained as\ndenoting their uprightness. Thus Job is described, as _a perfect and\nupright man, one that feared God and eschewed evil_, Job i. 1. compared\nwith 8. though he elsewhere disclaims any pretensions to a sinless\nperfection; as he expresses himself, _If I say I am perfect, mine own\nmouth shall prove me perverse_, chap. ix. 20. And when Noah is said to\nbe _perfect in his generation_, this is explained as denoting that he\nwas a _just_ or an _holy man_, and one that _walked with God_, Gen. vi.\n9.\n\nAs for other scriptures, which speak of perfection as a duty incumbent\non us, they are to be understood concerning the perfection of grace, as\nto those essential parts thereof, without which it could not be\ndenominated true and genuine, and not as respecting a perfection of\ndegrees. True grace is perfect indeed, as it contains in it those\nnecessary ingredients, whereby an action is denominated good in all its\ncircumstances, in opposition to that which is so, only in some respects;\nand therefore it must proceed from a good principle, an heart renewed by\nregenerating grace; it must be agreeable to the rule which God has\nprescribed in the gospel, and be performed in a right manner, and for\nright ends: Thus a person may be said to be a perfect man, in like\nmanner as a new-born infant is denominated a man, as having all the\nessential perfections of the human nature; though not arrived to that\nperfection, in other respects, which it shall afterwards attain to:\nAccordingly grace, when described, in scripture, as perfect, is\nsometimes explained as alluding to a metaphor, taken from a state of\nperfect manhood, in opposition to that of children: Thus the apostle\nspeaks of some, whom he represents, _as being of full age_; where the\nsame word is used[223], which is elsewhere rendered _perfect_; and these\nare opposed to others whom he had before been speaking of, as weak\nbelievers, or _babes_ in Christ; Heb., v. 13, 14. And elsewhere he\nspeaks of the church, which he styles the _body of Christ_, as arrived\nto a state of manhood, and so calls it a perfect man; having attained\n_the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ_; still alluding to\nthat stature which persons arrive to when they are adult; and these he\nopposes in the following words, to children, who, through the weakness\nof their faith, were liable to be _tossed to and fro, and carried about\nwith every wind of doctrine_, Eph. iv. 13, 14. And in other places,\nwhere Christians are described as perfect, there is a word used, which\nsignifies their having that internal furniture whereby they are prepared\nor disposed to do what is good: Thus the apostle speaks of _the man of\nGod_ being _perfect_[78], that is, _throughly furnished unto all good\nworks_, 2 Tim. iii. 17. And elsewhere he prays, for those to whom he\nwrites, that God would _make them perfect in_, or for _every good work_,\nto the end _that they may do his will_[79], which is such a perfection\nas is necessary to our putting forth any act of grace; and therefore it\ndoes not in the least infer that perfection which they plead for, whom\nwe are now opposing.\n\nAnd, indeed, it is not barely the sense they give of those scriptures\nthat speak of persons being perfect, which they cannot but suppose may\nbe otherwise understood, that gives them occasion to defend this\ndoctrine; but the main thing on which it is founded, is, that God does\nnot require sinless perfection of fallen man, inasmuch as that is\nimpossible; and therefore he calls that perfection, which includes in it\nour using those endeavours to lead a good life, which are in our own\npower. This is agreeable to the Pelagian scheme, and to that which the\nPapists maintain, who make farther advances on the Pelagian hypothesis;\nand assert, not only that men may attain perfection in this life, but\nthat they may arrive to such a degree thereof, as exceeds the demands of\nthe law, and perform works of supererogation; which doctrine is\ncalculated to establish that of justification by works.\n\nBut that which may be alleged in opposition hereunto, is, that it is\ndisagreeable to the divine perfections, and a notorious making void the\nlaw of God, to assert that our obligation to yield perfect obedience,\nceases, because we have lost our power to perform it; as though a\nperson\u2019s being insolvent, were a sufficient excuse for his not paying a\njust debt. We must distinguish between God\u2019s demanding perfect\nobedience, as an out-standing debt, which is consistent with the glory\nof his holiness and sovereignty, as a law-giver; and his determining\nthat we shall not be saved, unless we perform it in our own persons: and\nwe also distinguish between his connecting a right to eternal life with\nour performing perfect obedience, as what he might justly insist on\naccording to the tenor of the first covenant, as our Saviour tells the\nyoung man in the gospel, _If thou wilt enter into life keep the\ncommandments_, Matt. xix. 16. and his resolving that we shall not be\nsaved, unless we are able to perform it. The gospel purposes another\nexpedient, namely, that they who were obliged to yield perfect\nobedience, and ought to be humbled for their inability to perform it,\nshould depend on Christ\u2019s righteousness, which is the foundation of\ntheir right to eternal life, in which respect they are said to be\nperfect, or _compleat in him_, Col. ii. 10. which is the only just\nnotion of perfection, as attainable in this life: and, to conclude this\nhead, it is very unreasonable for a person to suppose that God will\nabate some part of the debt of perfect obedience, and so to call our\nperforming those works, which have many imperfections adhering to them,\na state of perfection, which is to make it an easier matter to be a\nChristian than God has made it. Thus concerning the thing supposed in\nthis answer, _viz._ that the work of sanctification is imperfect in this\nlife.\n\nBut before we dismiss this head, we shall enquire, why God does not\nbring this work to perfection at once, which he could easily have done,\nand, as it is certain, will do, when he brings the soul to heaven. In\nanswer to which, we shall consider in general, that it is not meet for\nus to say unto God, Why dost thou thus? especially considering that\nthis, as well as many of his other works, is designed to display the\nglory of his sovereignty, which very eminently appears in the beginning,\ncarrying on, and perfecting the work of grace: we may as well ask the\nreason, why he did not begin the work of sanctification sooner? or, why\nhe makes use of this or that instrument, or means, to effect it rather\nthan another? which things are to be resolved into his own pleasure: but\nsince it is evident that he does not bring this work to perfection in\nthis world, we may adore his wisdom herein, as well as his sovereignty.\nFor,\n\n1. Hereby he gives his people occasion to exercise repentance and godly\nsorrow for their former sins committed before they were converted.\nPerfect holiness would admit of no occasion to bring past sins to\nremembrance; whereas, when we sin daily, and have daily need of the\nexercise of repentance and godly sorrow, this gives us a more sensible\nview of past sins. When corrupt nature discovers itself in those that\nare converted, they take occasion hereby to consider how they have been\ntransgressors from the womb; as David, when he repented of his sin in\nthe matter of Uriah, at the same time that he aggravated the guilt of\nhis crime, as it justly deserved, he calls to mind his former sins, from\nhis very infancy, and charges that guilt upon himself which he brought\ninto the world; _Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my\nmother conceive me_, Psal. li. 5. And when Job considers God\u2019s\nafflictive providences towards him, as designed to bring sin to\nremembrance, and desires that he would _make him to know his\ntransgression and his sin_; he adds, _Thou writest bitter things against\nme, and makest me to possess the iniquities of my youth_, Job. xiii. 23,\n26. sins committed after conversion were brought to mind, and ordered as\na means to humble him for those that were committed before it. As for\nsins committed before conversion, they could not, at that time, be said\ntruly to be repented of, since that would be to suppose the grace of\nrepentance antecedent to conversion; therefore if the work of\nsanctification were to be immediately brought to perfection, this\nperfect holiness would be as much attended with perfect happiness, as it\nis in heaven, and consequently godly sorrow would be no more exercised\non earth, than it is there; whereas God, in ordering the gradual\nprogress of the work of sanctification, attended with the remainders of\nsin, gives occasion to many humbling reflections, tending to excite\nunfeigned repentance, not only for those sins committed after they had\nexperienced the grace of God; but for those great lengths they ran in\nsin before they had tasted that the Lord was gracious; and therefore he\ndoes not bring the work of sanctification to perfection in this present\nworld.\n\n2. Another reason of this dispensation of providence, is, that\nbelievers, from their own experience of the breakings forth of\ncorruption, together with the guilt they contract thereby, and the\nadvantage they receive in gaining any victory over it, may be furnished\nto administer suitable advice, and give warning to those who are in a\nstate of unregeneracy, that they may be persuaded to see the evil of\nsin, which, at present, they do not.\n\n3. God farther orders this, that he may give occasion to his people to\nexercise a daily conflict with indwelling sin. He suffers it to give\nthem great disturbance and uneasiness, that hereby they may be induced\nto endeavour to mortify it, and be found in the exercise of those graces\nwhich are adapted to an imperfect state, such as cannot be exercised in\nheaven; nor could they be exercised here on earth, were they to be\nbrought into and remain while here in a sinless state; particularly\nthere could not be any acts of faith, in managing that conflict, whereby\nthey endeavour to stand their ground while exposed to those difficulties\nthat arise from the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit;\nwhich leads us to consider,\n\nII. In what the imperfection of sanctification more especially discovers\nitself. This it does, not only in the weakness of every grace, which we\nare at any time enabled to act; and the many failures we are chargeable\nwith in the performance of every duty incumbent upon us; so that if an\nexact scrutiny were made into our best actions, and they weighed in the\nbalance, they would be found very defective; as appears from what has\nbeen said under the foregoing head, concerning perfection, as not\nattainable in this life.\n\nBut this more particularly appears, as it is observed in this answer,\nfrom the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit. Thus the\napostle speaks of, _the flesh lusting against the spirit, and the spirit\nagainst the flesh_, Gal. v. 19. and so of the contrariety of the one to\nthe other; _so that we cannot do the things that we would_, and points\nout himself as an instance hereof, when he says, _I know that in me,\nthat is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present\nwith me, but how to perform that which is good, I find not; the good\nthat I would I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do_, Rom.\nvii. 18-23. and this reluctancy and opposition to what is good, he lays\nto the charge of sin that dwelt in him, which he considers as having, as\nit were, the force of a law; and in particular he styles it _the law of\nhis members warring against the law of his mind_, which is the same\nthing with the lusting of the flesh, against the spirit: so that from\nhence it appears, that when God implants a principle of grace in\nregeneration, and carries on the work of sanctification in believers, he\ndoes not wholly destroy, or root out those habits of sin which were in\nthe soul before this, but enables us to militate against, and overcome\nthem by his implanting and exciting a principle of grace; and from hence\narises this conflict that we are to consider.\n\nIndwelling sin is constantly opposing; but it does not always prevail\nagainst the principle of grace. The event or success of this combat is\nvarious, at different times. When corrupt nature prevails, the principle\nof grace, though not wholly extinguished, remains unactive, or does not\nexert itself, as at other times; all grace becomes languid, and there\nappears but little difference between him and an unbeliever; he falls\ninto very great sins, whereby he wounds his own conscience, grieves the\nholy Spirit, and makes sad work for a bitter repentance, which will\nafterwards ensue: but inasmuch as the principle of spiritual life and\ngrace is not wholly lost, it will some time or other be excited, and\nthen will oppose, and maintain its ground against, the flesh, or the\ncorruption of nature; and, as the consequence hereof, those acts of\ngrace will be again put forth, which were before suspended.\n\nHaving thus given an account of the conflict between indwelling sin and\ngrace, we shall now more particularly shew, how the habits of sin exert\nthemselves in those who are unregenerate, where there is no principle of\ngrace to oppose them. And then, how they exert themselves in believers;\nand what opposition is made thereunto by the principle of grace in them;\nand how it comes to pass that sometimes one prevails, at other times the\nother.\n\n1. We shall consider those violent efforts that are made by corrupt\nnature, in those who are unregenerate, in whom, though there be no\nprinciple of grace to enable them to withstand them; yet they have a\nconflict in their own spirits. There is something in nature, that, for a\ntime, keeps them from complying with temptations to the greatest sins;\nthough the flesh, or that propensity that is in them to sin, will\nprevail at last, and lead them from one degree of impiety to another,\nunless prevented by the grace of God. In this case the conflict is\nbetween corrupt nature and an enlightened conscience; and that more\nespecially in those who have had the advantage of a religious education,\nand the good example of some whom they have conversed with, whereby they\nhave contracted some habits of moral virtue, which are not immediately\nextinguished: it is not an easy matter to persuade them to commit those\ngross, and scandalous sins, which others, whose minds are blinded, and\ntheir hearts hardened to a greater degree by the deceitfulness of sin,\ncommit with greediness and without remorse. The principles of education\nare not immediately broken through; for in this case men meet with a\ngreat struggle in their own breasts, before they entirely lose them; and\nthey proceed, by various steps, from one degree of wickedness unto\nanother[80]. A breach is first made in the fence, and afterwards widened\nby a continuance in the same sins, or committing new ones, especially\nsuch as have in them a greater degree of presumption. And this disposes\nthe soul to comply with temptations to greater sins; whereas, it would\nbe to no purpose to tempt him at first, to be openly profane, blaspheme\nthe name of God, or cast off all external acts of religion, and abandon\nhimself to those immoralities which the most notoriously wicked, and\nprofligate sinners commit, without shame, till he has paved the way to\nthem by the commission of other sins that lead thereunto.\n\nThat which at first prevents or restrains him from the commission of\nthem, is something short of a principle of grace which we call the\ndictates of a natural conscience, which often checks and reproves him:\nhis natural temper or disposition is not so far vitiated, at present as\nto allow of, or incline him to pursue any thing that is openly vile and\nscandalous; he abhors, and, as it were, trembles at the thoughts of it.\nThus when the prophet Elisha told Hazael of all the evil that he would\ndo unto the children of Israel, that he would _set their strong holds on\nfire, slay their young men with a sword, dash their children, and rip up\ntheir women with child_; when he heard this, he entertained the thought\nwith a kind of abhorrence, and said, _But what, is thy servant a dog,\nthat he should do this great thing_, 2 Kings viii. 12, 13. Yet\nafterwards, when king of Syria, we find him of another mind; for he was\na greater scourge to the people of God than any of the neighbouring\nprinces, and _smote them in all the coasts of Israel_, chap. x. 32.\n\nNow that which prevents these greater sins, is generally fear or shame;\ntheir consciences terrify them with the thoughts of the wrath of God,\nwhich they would hereby expose themselves to; or they are apprehensive\nthat such a course of life would blast their reputation amongst men, and\nbe altogether inconsistent with that form of godliness which they have\nhad a liking to from their childhood. But since these restraints do not\nproceed from the internal and powerful influence of regenerating grace,\nbeing excited by lower motives than those which the Spirit of God\nsuggests, in them who are converted; since natural conscience is the\nmain thing that restrains them, corrupt nature first endeavours to\ncounteract the dictates thereof, and, by degrees, gets the mastery over\nthem. When conscience reproves them, they first offer a bribe to it, by\nperforming some moral duties, to silence its accusations for\npresumptuous sins, and pretend that their crimes fall short of those\ncommitted by many others; at other times they complain of its being too\nstrict in its demands of duty, or severe in its reproofs for sin. And if\nall this will not prevail against it, but it will, notwithstanding,\nperform the office of a faithful reprover, then the sinner resolves to\nstop his ears against convictions; and if this will not altogether\nprevent his being made uneasy thereby, he betakes himself to those\ndiversions that may give another turn to his thoughts, and will not\nallow himself time for serious reflection; and associates himself with\nthose whose conversation will effectually tend to extinguish all his\nformer impressions of moral virtue; and by this means, at last he\nstupifies his conscience, and it becomes, as the apostle expresses it,\n_seared with a hot iron_, 1 Tim. iv. 2. and so he gets, as I may express\nit, a fatal victory over himself; and from that time meets with no\nreluctancy or opposition in his own breast, while _being past feeling,\nhe gives himself over unto lasciviousness, to work uncleanness_, and all\nmanner of _iniquity with greediness_, Eph. iv. 19. which leads us to\nconsider,\n\n2. That conflict which is between the flesh and spirit, in those in whom\nthe work of sanctification is begun. Here we shall first observe, the\nlustings of the flesh; and then the opposition that it meets with from\nthat principle of grace which is implanted and excited in them, which is\ncalled the lusting of the spirit against it.\n\n(1.) How corrupt nature exerts itself in believers, to prevent the\nactings of grace. Here it may be observed,\n\n[1.] That that which gives occasion to this, is the Spirit\u2019s withdrawing\nhis powerful influences, which, when the soul is favoured with, have a\ntendency to prevent those pernicious consequences which will otherwise\nensue. And God withdraws these powerful influences sometimes in a way of\nsovereignty, to shew him that it is not in his own power to avoid sin\nwhen he will; or that he cannot, without the aids of his grace,\nwithstand those temptations which are offered to him to commit it. Or\nelse, he does this with a design to let him know what is in his heart;\nand that he might take occasion to humble him for past sins, or present\nmiscarriages, and make him more watchful for the future.\n\n[2.] Besides this, there are some things which present themselves in an\nobjective way, which are as so many snares laid to entangle him. And\ncorrupt nature makes a bad improvement thereof, so that his natural\nconstitution is more and more vitiated by giving way to sin, and defiled\nby the remainders of sin that dwelleth in him. The temptation is\ngenerally adapted to the corrupt inclination of his nature, and Satan\nhas a hand therein. Thus if his natural temper inclines him to be proud\nor ambitious, then immediately the honours and applause of the world are\npresented to him; and he never wants examples of those, who, in an\nunlawful way, have gained a great measure of esteem in the world, and\nmade themselves considerable in the stations in which they have been\nplaced: if he is naturally addicted to pleasures, of what kind soever\nthey be, then something is offered that is agreeable to corrupt nature,\nwhich seems delightful to it; though it be in itself, sinful: if he be\nmore than ordinarily addicted to covetousness, then the profits and\nadvantages of the world are presented as a bait to corrupt nature, and\ngroundless fears raised in him, of being reduced to poverty, which, by\nan immoderate pursuit after the world, he is tempted to fence against.\nMoreover, if his natural constitution inclines him to resent injuries,\nthen Satan has always his instruments ready at hand to stir up his\ncorruption, and provoke him to wrath, by offering either real or\nsupposed injuries; magnifying the former beyond their due bounds, or\ninferring the latter without duly considering the design of those whose\ninnocent behaviour sometimes gives occasion hereunto, and, at the same\ntime, overcharging his thoughts with them, as though no expedient can be\nfound to atone for them. Again, if his natural constitution inclines him\nto sloth and inactivity, then the difficulties of religion are set\nbefore him, to discourage him from the exercise of that diligence which\nis necessary to surmount them. And if, on the other hand, his natural\ntemper leads him to be courageous and resolute, then corrupt nature\nendeavours to make him self-confident, and thereby to weaken his trust\nin God. Or if he be naturally inclined to fear, then something is\noffered to him, that may tend to his discouragement, and to sink him\ninto despair. These are the methods used by the flesh, when lusting\nagainst the spirit; which leads us to consider,\n\n(2.) The opposition of the spirit to the flesh; or how the principle of\ngrace in believers inclines them to make a stand against indwelling sin,\nwhich is called the lusting of the spirit against the flesh. The grace\nof God, when wrought in the heart in regeneration, is not an unactive\nprinciple; for it soon exerts itself, as being excited by the power of\nthe Spirit, who implanted it; and from that time there is, or ought to\nbe, a constant opposition made by it to corrupt nature; and that, not\nonly as the soul, with unfeigned repentance, mourns for it, and\nexercises that self-abhorrence which the too great prevalence thereof\ncalls for; but as it leads him to implore help from God, against it, by\nwhose assistance he endeavours to subdue the corrupt motions of the\nflesh; or, as the apostle expresses it, to _mortify the deeds of the\nbody_, Rom. viii. 13. that by this means they may not be entertained, or\nprove injurious and destructive to him.\n\nAnd inasmuch as there is something objective, as well as subjective, in\nthis work; since the power of God never excites the principle of grace\nwithout presenting objects for it to be conversant about, there are\nseveral things suggested to the soul, which, if duly weighed and\nimproved, are a means conducive to its being preserved from a compliance\nwith the corrupt motions of indwelling sin: these are of a superior\nnature to those made use of by an enlightened conscience, in\nunregenerate persons, to prevent their committing the vilest\nabominations, as was before considered; and indeed, they are such as,\nfrom the nature of the thing, can be used (especially some of them) by\nnone but those in whom the work of grace is begun. Accordingly,\n\n[1.] A believer considers not only the glorious excellencies and\nperfections of Christ, which he is now duly sensible of, as he is said\nto be precious to them that believe; but he is also affected with the\nmanifold engagements, which he has been laid under to love him, and to\nhate and oppose every thing that is contrary to his glory and interest.\nThe love of Christ constraineth him; and therefore he abhors the\nthoughts of being so ungrateful and disingenuous as he would appear to\nbe, should he fulfil the lusts of the flesh: the sense of redeeming love\nand grace is deeply impressed on his soul; he calls to mind how he has\nbeen quickened, effectually called, and brought into the way of peace\nand holiness, and therefore cannot entertain any thoughts of relapsing\nor returning again to folly.\n\nHere he considers the great advantage which he has received, which he\nwould not lose on any terms. The delight and pleasure which he has had\nin the ways of God and godliness, has been so great, that corrupt nature\ncannot produce any thing that may be an equivalent for the loss of it.\nHe is very sensible that the more closely he has walked with God, the\nmore comfortably he has walked. And besides this, he looks forward, and,\nby faith, takes a view of the blessed issue of the life of grace, or\nthose reserves of glory laid up for him in another world, which inclines\nhim to cast the utmost contempt on every thing that has the least\ntendency to induce him to relinquish or abandon his interest therein.\n\n[2.] He considers and improves those bright examples which are set\nbefore him, to encourage him to go on in the way of holiness; takes\nChrist himself for a pattern, endeavouring, so far as he is able, to\nfollow him; walks as they have done, who have not only stood their\nground, but come off victorious in the conflict, and are reaping the\nblessed fruits and effects thereof.\n\n[3.] He also considers, as an inducement to him to oppose the corrupt\nmotions of the flesh; that he has by faith, as his own act and deed, in\nthe most solemn manner, given up himself to Christ entirely, and without\nreserve, and professed his obligation to obey him in all things, and to\navoid whatever has a tendency to displease him. And therefore he reckons\nthat he is not his own, or, at his own disposal, but Christ\u2019s, whose he\nis, by a double right, not only as purchased by, but as devoted and\nconsecrated to him; and therefore he says with the apostle, _How shall\nwe that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?_ Rom. vi. 2. He says\nto this purpose, I have given up my name to Christ; and I have not,\nsince that time, seen the least reason to repent of what I did; I have\nnot found the least iniquity in him, neither has he been an hard master;\nbut, on the other hand, has expressed the greatest tenderness and\ncompassion to me, to whose grace alone it is owing, that I am what I am.\nShall I therefore abandon his interest, or prove a deserter at last, and\nturn aside into the enemies\u2019 camp? Is there any thing that can be\nproposed as a sufficient motive hereunto? Such like thoughts as these,\nthrough the prevailing influence of the principle of grace implanted and\nexcited by the Spirit, are an effectual means to keep him from a sinful\ncompliance with the motions of the flesh, and to excite him to make the\ngreatest resistance against them.\n\nThus we have considered the opposition that there is between the flesh\nand spirit, and how each of these prevail by turns; we might now observe\nthe consequence of the victory obtained on either side. When grace\nprevails, all things tend to promote our spiritual peace and joy; we are\nhereby fortified against temptations, and enabled, not only to stand our\nground, but made more than conquerors, through him that loved us.\nHowever it is not always so with a believer; he sometimes finds, that\ncorrupt nature prevails, and then many sad consequences will ensue\nhereupon, which not only occasion the loss of that peace and joy which\nhe had before; but expose him to many troubles, which render his life\nvery uncomfortable; and this leads us to consider,\n\nIII. What are the consequences of the prevailing power of indwelling\nsin. When the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and God is pleased to\nwithhold his grace, the soul is subjected to many evils, which are\nmentioned in the remaining part of this answer, as,\n\n1. A believer is foiled with temptation. Satan gains ground against him\nby this means, and pursues the victory which the flesh has obtained\nagainst the spirit; hereupon his conflicts are doubled, arising not only\nfrom _flesh and blood; but the rulers of the darkness of this world_,\nEph. vi. 12. as the apostle expresses it: now his difficulties encrease\nupon him, his enemies are more insulting, and he less able to stand his\nground against them, his faith weakened, and his fears encreasing, so\nthat he is perpetually subject to bondage; sometimes inclined to think\nthat he shall one day fall, and whatever he formerly thought he had\ngained, he lost by the assaults of his spiritual enemies; and at other\ntimes, to question whether ever he had the truth of grace or no; in\nwhich case his spirit must needs be filled with the greatest perplexity,\nand almost overwhelmed within him. And he is destitute of that boldness\nor liberty of access to the throne of grace, and that comfortable sense\nwhich once he had of his interest in Christ, and finds it very difficult\nto recover those lively frames which he has lost, or to stand his ground\nagainst the great opposition made by corrupt nature, which still\nincreases as faith grows weaker.\n\n2. Another consequence hereof, is his falling into many sins. By which\nwe are not to suppose that he shall be so far left as to fall into a\nstate of unregeneracy, or lose the principle of grace that was implanted\nin regeneration: nevertheless, when this principle does not exert\nitself, and corrupt nature on the other hand, is prevalent, it is hard\nto say how far he will run into the commission of known and wilful sins.\nAs for sins of infirmity, they cannot be avoided, when we are in the\nbest frame: but in this case we shall find a person committing\npresumptuous sins, so that if we were to judge of his state by his\npresent frames, without considering the former experiences which he has\nhad of the grace of God, we should be ready to question, whether his\nheart were right with God.\n\nAnd as for sins of omission, these generally ensue hereupon; he cannot\ndraw nigh to God, with that frame of spirit, which he once had, and\ntherefore is ready to say, _What profit should I have if I pray unto\nhim?_ Job xxi. 15. and sometimes concludes, that he contracts guilt by\nattempting to engage in holy duties. And to this we may add, that he is\nhindered in all his spiritual services, as it is farther observed in\nthis answer: thus the apostle says, _When I would do good, evil is\npresent with me_, Rom. vii. 21. He finds his heart disposed to wander\nfrom God, and his thoughts taken up with vanity; upon which account it\nmay be truly said, that his best works are not only imperfect, but\ndefiled in the sight of God, who searcheth the heart, and observes the\nvarious steps by which it treacherously departs from him, and can find\nno way to recover itself till he is pleased to revive his work, take\naway the guilt which he has contracted, recover him out of the snare\ninto which he has fallen, and so cause the work of grace again to\nflourish in the soul, as it has once done.\n\nWe shall conclude with some inferences from what has been said\nconcerning the imperfection of sanctification in believers, together\nwith the reasons and consequences thereof.\n\n1. Since sinless perfection is not attainable in this life, we should\nfrom hence take occasion to give a check to our censorious thoughts\nconcerning persons or things, so as not to determine persons to be in an\nunconverted state, because they are chargeable with many sinful\ninfirmities, which are not inconsistent with the truth of grace: some\nabatements are to be made for their being sanctified but in part, and\nhaving the remnants of sin in them; and indeed, the greatest degree of\ngrace which can be attained here, comes far short of that which the\nsaints are arrived to in heaven; accordingly the difference between a\nbeliever and an unregenerate sinner is not in that one is perfect, and\nthe other imperfect; for when we consider the brightest characters given\nof any in scripture, their blemishes as well as their graces are\nrecorded; so that none but our Saviour could challenge the world to\nconvict or reprove them of sin. The apostle speaks of Elias, as a _man\nsubject to like passions as we are_, James v. 17. and he might have\ninstanced in many others. Therefore, when we are sensible of our own\nimperfections, we ought to enquire, whether the spots we find in\nourselves, are like the spots of God\u2019s children? or, whether these\ninfirmities may be reckoned inconsistent with the truth of grace? which,\nif they be, though it affords matter for humiliation, that we are liable\nto any sinful failures, or defects; yet it will be some encouragement to\nus, and matter of thanksgiving to God, that notwithstanding this, our\nhearts are right with him. That we may be, in some measure, satisfied as\nto this matter, let it be considered,\n\n[1.] That we must distinguish between a person\u2019s being tempted to the\ngreatest sins, which are inconsistent with the truth of grace; and his\ncomplying with the temptation. A temptation of this kind may offer\nitself, and at the same time grace may exert itself in an eminent\ndegree, by the opposition that it makes to it, whether it arises from\nindwelling sin, or Satan.\n\n[2.] When we read of some sins that are inconsistent with the truth of\ngrace, such as those which the apostle speaks of, when he says, that\n_neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor\nabusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor\ndrunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of\nGod_, 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. and elsewhere, _the fearful and unbelieving_, as\nwell as those who are guilty of other notorious crimes, are said to\n_have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone_,\nRev. xxi. 8. We must distinguish between those who are guilty of these\nsins in a less degree than what is intended, when they are said to\nexclude from the kingdom of heaven; and others being guilty thereof, in\na notorious degree, with greater aggravations: Thus unbelieving fears in\nthose who are called to suffer for Christ\u2019s sake, if they do not issue\nin a denial of him, are not altogether inconsistent with the truth of\ngrace, though they render a person guilty before God. And the least\ndegree of covetousness, though it is not to be excused, yet it does not\nexclude from the kingdom of heaven; but the prevailing love of the\nworld, or the immoderate pursuit of it in those who use unlawful means\nto attain it, or have a rooted habitual desire after it, more than\nChrist, or put it in his room, this is to be reckoned a mark of\nunregeneracy.\n\n[3.] We must distinguish between sinful infirmities and allowed\ninfirmities, or such who sin through surprize, as being assaulted by an\nunforseen temptation, when not being on their guard; and the same sin\ncommitted with deliberation; the latter gives greater ground to fear\nthat a person is in a state of unregeneracy than the former.\n\nWe must also distinguish between sins committed and repented of, with\nthat degree of godly sorrow which is proportioned to their respective\naggravations; and the same sins committed and continued in with\nimpenitency; the latter gives ground to conclude, that a person is in an\nunconverted state, though not the former. And the difference arises not\nbarely from the nature of the crimes, for we suppose the sins in\nthemselves to be the same; but from other evidences which a person has\nor has not of his being in a state of grace.\n\n2. From what has been said concerning the opposition that there is\nbetween natural conscience and corrupt nature in the unregenerate, we\nmay infer; that it is a great blessing to have a religious education, as\nit has a tendency to prevent many enormities, which others, who are\ndestitute of it, run into: Accordingly they who have had this privilege\nought to bless God for, and make a right improvement of it. But since\nthose principles which take their rise from thence, are liable, without\nthe grace of God prevent it, to be overcome and lost; let us press after\nsomething more than this, and be importunate with God, whose providence\nhas favoured us thus far, that he would give us a better preservative\nagainst sin, or that the prevailing power thereof may be prevented by\nconverting grace.\n\n3. From the opposition that corrupt nature makes in believers to the\nwork of grace, we may infer that the standing of the best of men, or\ntheir not being chargeable with the greatest sins, is not so much owing\nto themselves as to the grace of God, by which we are what we are, and\ntherefore the glory thereof belongs intirely to him; and that we have\nreason, when we are praying against our spiritual enemies, to beg that\nGod would deliver us from the greatest of them, namely, ourselves; and\nthat he, who has a sovereignty over the hearts of all men, and can\ngovern and sanctify their natural tempers and dispositions, would keep\nus from being drawn aside thereby. This should also induce us to walk\nwatchfully, and to be always on our guard, depending on the grace of God\nfor help, that indwelling sin may not so far prevail as to turn aside\nand alienate our affections from him.\n\n4. From what has been said concerning the flesh and spirit prevailing by\nturns, we infer the uncertainty of the frame of our spirits, and what\nchanges we are liable to, with respect to the actings of grace, or the\ncomforts that result from it. This somewhat resembles the state of man\nas subject to various changes, with respect to the dispensations of\nprovidence; sometimes lifted up, at other times cast down, and not\nabiding long in the same condition: Thus we are enabled, at some times,\nto gain advantage over indwelling sin, and enjoy the comforts which\narise from thence; at other times, when the flesh prevails, the acts of\ngrace are interrupted, and its comforts, almost, if not entirely lost.\nWhat reason have we therefore to bless God, that though our graces are\nfar from being brought to perfection, and our frames so various; yet he\nhas given us ground to conclude, that grace shall not wholly be lost,\nand we are assured, that our state, as we are justified, is not liable\nto the same uncertainty, so that that which interrupts the progress of\nsanctification, does not bring us into an unjustified state, or render\nus liable to condemnation?\n\n5. From the inconveniences we sustain by the flesh prevailing against\nthe spirit, as we are foiled by temptation, fall into sins and are\nhindered in spiritual services, we infer the great hurt that sin does to\nthose who are in a justified and sanctified state, as well as to others,\nwho are under the dominion of it. And therefore it is a vile and\nunwarrantable way of speaking which some use, who say, that because\nnothing shall separate them from the love of Christ, or bring them who\nare justified, back again into an unjustified state, that therefore sin\ncan do them no hurt; as though all the consequences of the prevalency of\ncorrupt nature, and the dishonour we bring to God, and the guilt we\ncontract hereby, could hardly be reckoned prejudicial; but this is such\na way of speaking as confutes itself in the opinion of all judicious and\nsober Christians.\n\nAgain, we might also infer, from the consequences of the prevalency of\ncorruption, as we are liable hereby to be discouraged from, or hindered\nin the performance of duty; that we ought, if we find it thus with us,\nto take occasion from hence to enquire, whether some secret sin be not\nindulged and entertained by us, which gives occasion to the prevalency\nof corrupt nature, which we ought to be humbled for. Or if we have lived\nin the omission of those duties which are incumbent on us, or have\nprovoked God to leave us to ourselves, and so have had an hand in our\npresent evils; this affords matter of great humiliation. And we ought to\nbe very importunate with God for restoring grace, not only that our\nfaith may not fail; but that we may be recovered out of the snare in\nwhich we are entangled, and may be brought off victorious over all our\nspiritual enemies.\n\nFootnote 223:\n\n \u03a4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 78:\n\n \u0391\u03c1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 79:\n\n _The word is_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9; _which signifies to give them an internal\n disposition or fitness for the performance of the duties which they\n were to engage in_, _Heb._ xiii. 21.\n\nFootnote 80:\n\n _It is a true observation which some have laid down in this known\n aphorism_, Nemo repente fit turpissimus.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXIX.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXIX. _May not true believers, by reason of their\n imperfections, and the many temptations and sins they are overtaken\n with, fall away from the state of grace?_\n\n ANSW. True believers, by reason of the unchangeable love of God, and\n his decree and covenant to give them perseverance, their inseparable\n union with Christ, his continual intercession for them, and the\n Spirit and seed of God abiding in them, can neither totally nor\n finally fall from the state of grace, but are kept by the power of\n God, through faith unto salvation.\n\nIt is natural for persons, when they enjoy any blessing, to be\nsolicitous about their retaining it; otherwise the pleasure that arises\nfrom it; if it is like to be short and transitory, is rather an\namusement than a solid and substantial happiness. The same may be said\nof those graces and privileges which believers are made partakers of, as\nthe fruits and effects of the death of Christ: These are undoubtedly the\nmost valuable blessings; therefore it highly concerns us to enquire;\nwhether we may assuredly conclude, that we shall not lose them, and so\nfail of that future blessedness which we have had so delightful a\nprospect of?\n\nThe saints\u2019 perseverance has not only been denied by many since the\nreformation, and, in particular, by Papists, Socinians, and\nRemonstrants: But by the Pelagians of old; and all those whose\nsentiments bear some affinity to, or are derived from their scheme. And,\nindeed, when we find persons endeavouring to establish the doctrine of\nconditional election, universal redemption, &c. or when they explain the\nnature of human liberty, as they do, who make the grace of God to be\ndependent on it for its efficacy in the beginning and carrying on the\nwork of conversion and sanctification; and accordingly assert, that the\nwill has an equal power to determine itself to good or evil; or, that\nthe grace of God affords no other assistance to promote the one or fence\nagainst the other, than what is objective, or, at least, by supporting\nour natural faculties; and if there be any divine concourse, that it\nconsists only in what respects the external dispensations of providence,\nas a remote means conducive thereunto, the event hereof depending on our\nown conduct or disposition to improve these means: I say, if persons\nmaintain these and such-like doctrines, it is not to be wondered, when\nwe find them pleading for the possibility of a believer\u2019s falling\ntotally and finally from the grace of God. For they who have brought\nthemselves into a state of grace, may apostatize, or fall from it. If\nthe free-will of man first inclined itself to exercise those graces\nwhich we call special, such as faith, repentance, love to God, &c. then\nit will follow, that he may lose them and relapse to the contrary vices;\nand by this means men may plunge themselves into the same depths of sin\nand misery from whence they had before escaped; and, according to this\nscheme, there may be, in the course of our lives, a great many instances\nof defection from the grace of God, and recovery to it, and finally, a\ndrawing back unto perdition: Or if a person be so happy as to recover\nhimself out of his last apostacy before he leaves the world, then he is\nsaved; otherwise he finally perishes. This is a doctrine which some\ndefend, the contrary whereunto we shall endeavour to maintain, as being\nthe subject insisted on in this answer.\n\nBut before we proceed to the defence thereof, it may not be amiss to\npremise something, which may have, at least, a remote tendency to\ndispose us to receive conviction from the arguments which may be brought\nto prove it. Thus we may consider that the contrary side of the question\nis in itself less desirable, if it could be defended. It is certain,\nthat the doctrine of the possibility of the saints falling from grace,\ntends very much to abate that delight and comfort which the believer has\nin the fore-views of the issue and event of his present state. It is a\nvery melancholy thought to consider, that he who is now advanced to the\nvery borders of heaven, may be cast down into hell; or that, though he\nhas at present an interest in the special and discriminating love of\nGod, he may afterwards become the object of his hatred, so as never to\nbehold his face with joy in a future world; or that, though his feet are\nset upon a rock, yet his goings are not established; though he is\nwalking in a plain and safe path, yet he may be ensnared, entangled, and\nfall, so as never to rise again; that though God be his friend, yet he\nmay suffer him to fall into the hands of his enemies, and be ruined and\nundone thereby, as though his own glory were not concerned in his coming\noff victorious over them, or connected with the salvation of his people:\nSo that as this doctrine renders the state of believers very precarious\nand uncertain, it tends effectually to damp their joys, and blast their\nexpectations, and subject them to perpetual bondage; and it is a great\nhindrance to their offering praise and thanksgiving to God, whose grace\nis not so much magnified towards them, as it would be, had they ground\nto conclude that the work which is now begun, should certainly be\nbrought to perfection.\n\nAnd on the other hand, the doctrine which we are to maintain, is in\nitself so very comfortable, that if we were, at present, in suspense\nconcerning the truth thereof, we cannot but desire that it may appear to\nbe agreeable to the mind of God: It is certainly a very delightful thing\nfor us to be assured, that what is at present well, shall end well; that\nthey who are brought to believe in Christ, shall for ever abide with\nhim; and that the work of grace, which, at present, affords so fair and\npleasing a prospect of its being at last perfected in glory, shall not\nmiscarry. This will have a tendency to enhance our joy in proportion to\nthe ground we have to conclude that the work is true and genuine; and it\nwill excite our thankfulness to God, when we consider, that he who is\nthe author, will also be the finisher of faith: So that it is certain\nthis doctrine deserves confirmation; and accordingly we shall endeavour\nto establish our faith therein in the following method:\n\nI. We shall consider what we are to understand by persevering in grace,\nor falling from it.\n\nII. We shall prove, that the best believers would certainly fall from\ngrace, were they left to themselves: So that their perseverance therein,\nis principally to be ascribed to the power of God, which keeps them,\nthrough faith, unto salvation.\n\nIII. We shall consider, what ground we have to conclude that the saints\nshall persevere in grace; and so explain and illustrate the several\narguments insisted on in this answer; to which we shall add some others\ntaken from several scriptures by which this doctrine may be defended.\n\nIV. We shall endeavour to answer some objections that are generally\nbrought against it.\n\nV. We shall consider what we are to understand by persevering in grace,\nor falling from it.\n\n1. When we speak of a person as persevering in grace, this supposes that\nhe has the truth of grace. We do not hereby intend that a person may not\nfall away from a profession of faith; or that no one can lose that which\nwe generally call common grace, which, in many things, bears a\nresemblance to that which is saving. We have before considered, that\nthere is a temporary faith, whereby persons appear religious, while it\ncomports with their secular interest; but when they are called by reason\nof persecution or tribulation, which may arise for the sake of the\ngospel, to forego their worldly interests, or quit their pretensions to\nreligion, they fall away, or lose that grace which they _seemed to\nhave_, as the Evangelist expresses it, Luke viii. 18. We read of some\nwhose hope of salvation is like the spider\u2019s web, or the giving up of\nthe ghost; but these are described not as true believers, but\nhypocrites. It is beyond dispute that such may apostatize, and not only\nlay aside the external practice of some religious duties, but deny and\noppose the doctrines of the gospel, which they once assented to the\ntruth of.\n\n2. It is certain that true believers may fall into very great sins; but\nyet they shall be recovered and brought again to repentance: therefore\nwe must distinguish between their dishonouring Christ, disobeying his\ncommands, and thereby provoking him to be angry with him; and their\nfalling away totally from him. We have before considered, when we proved\nthat perfection is not attainable in this life, that the best men are\nsometimes chargeable with great failings and defects. And indeed,\nsometimes their sins are very heinously aggravated, their conversation\nin the mean while discovering that they are destitute of the actings of\ngrace, and that to such a degree that they can hardly be distinguished\nfrom those who are in an unregenerate state: accordingly it is one thing\nfor a believer not to be able to put forth those acts of grace which he\nonce did; and another thing for him to lose the principle of grace: it\nwould be a very preposterous thing to say, that when David sinned in the\nmatter of Uriah, the principle of grace exerted itself; yet it was not\nwholly lost. It is not the same in this case, as in the more common\ninstances of the saints\u2019 infirmities, which they are daily chargeable\nwith, in which, the conflict that there is between the flesh and spirit\nappears; for when corrupt nature exerts itself in such a degree that it\nleads persons to the commission of deliberate and presumptuous sins,\nthey hardly appear to be believers at that time: nevertheless if we\ncompare what they were before they fell, with what they shall be when\nbrought to repentance, we may conclude, that they did not, by their\nfall, bring themselves altogether into a state of unregeneracy.\n\n3. It is beyond dispute, that as a believer may be destitute of the acts\nof grace; so he may lose the comforts thereof, and sink into the depths\nof despair. Of this we have several instances recorded in scripture,\nwhich are agreeable to the experiences of many in our day: thus the\nPsalmist, at one time, speaks of himself, as _cast down_, and _his soul\ndisquieted within him_, Psal. xliii. 5. and cxvi. 3. And at another time\nhe says, _The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat\nhold upon me._ And elsewhere he complains, _Will the Lord cast off for\never? will he be favourable no more? is his mercy clean gone for ever?\ndoth his promise fail for evermore? hath God forgotten to be gracious?\nhath he in anger shut up his tender mercies_, Psal. lxxvii. 7-9. And\nagain, a believer is represented as being altogether destitute of a\ncomfortable sense of the divine love, when complaining, _Thou hast laid\nme in the lowest pit, in darkness, in the deeps. Thy wrath lieth hard\nupon me, and thou hast afflicted me with all thy waves. Wilt thou shew\nwonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee? Shall thy\nloving kindness be declared in the grave, or thy faithfulness in\ndestruction? Thy fierce wrath goeth over me, thy terrors have cut me\noff_, Psal. lxxxviii. 6. _&c._ And it is certain, that when at any time\nhe falls into very great sins, which seem inconsistent with a state of\ngrace, he has no present evidence that he is a believer; and is never\nfavoured with a comfortable sense of his interest in Christ, nor is the\njoy of God\u2019s salvation restored to him, till he is brought unfeignedly\nto repent of his sin. Former experiences will not evince the truth of\ngrace, while he remains impenitent. It is a bad sign when any one, who\nformerly appeared to have the truth of grace, but is now fallen into\ngreat sins, concludes himself to be in a state of grace, without the\nexercise of true repentance; for this can be deemed little better than\npresumption: however, God, whose mercy is infinitely above our deserts,\nwill, in the end, recover him; though, at present, he does not look like\none of his children.\n\n4. There are some who suppose that a believer may fall totally, though\nnot finally from grace. And their reason for it is this; because they\nconclude, as they have sufficient warrant to do, from scripture, that\nthey shall not fall finally, inasmuch as the purpose of God concerning\nelection, must stand; if they had not been chosen to salvation they\nwould never have been brought into a state of grace: they are supposed,\nbefore they fell, to have been sanctified; whereas sanctification is\ninseparably connected with salvation; and therefore, though they\nconsider them, at this time, as having lost the grace of sanctification,\nand so to have fallen totally; yet they shall be recovered, and\ntherefore not fall finally. Sanctification is Christ\u2019s purchase; and\nwhere grace is purchased for any one, a price of redemption is paid for\nhis deliverance from condemnation; and consequently he shall be\nrecovered and saved at last, though, at present, he is, according to\ntheir opinion, totally fallen.\n\nThese suppose, not only that the acts of grace may be lost, but the very\nprinciple, and the reason hereof is, because they cannot see, how great\nand notorious sins, such as those committed by David, Peter, Solomon,\nand some others, can consist with a principle of grace: this indeed cuts\nthe knot of some difficulties that seem to attend the doctrine of the\nsaints perseverance, though falling into great sins: nevertheless, I\nthink it may easily be proved, which we shall endeavour to do, that they\nshall be preserved from a total, as well as a final apostacy: or, that\nwhen they fall into great sins, they do not lose the principle of grace,\nthough it be, at present, innactive; which we shall take occasion to\ninsist on, more particularly under a following head, when we consider\nthat argument mentioned in this answer for the proof of this doctrine\ntaken from the Spirit and seed of God abiding in a believer, as that\nwhich preserves him from a total as well as a final apostacy.\n\nII. We shall now consider, that the best believers would certainly fall\nfrom grace, were they left to themselves: so that their perseverance\ntherein is principally to be ascribed to the power of God, that keeps\nthem through faith unto salvation. This is particularly observed in this\nanswer, in which several arguments are laid down to prove the doctrine\nof the saints\u2019 perseverance in grace, and it is supposed to be founded\non his power, and will, to maintain it. God is styled _the preserver of\nmen_, Job vii. 20. inasmuch as he upholds all things by the word of his\npower, so that independency on him is inconsistent with the idea of our\nbeing creatures; and we have no less ground to conclude, that his power\nmaintains the new creature, or that grace, which took its first rise\nfrom him. Should he fail or forsake us, we could not put forth the least\nact of grace, much less persevere therein. When man at first came out of\nthe hands of God, he was endowed with a greater ability to stand than\nany one, excepting our Saviour, has been favoured with, since sin\nentered into the world; yet he apostatized, not from any necessity of\nnature, but by adhering to that temptation which he might have\nwithstood. Then how unable is he to stand in his present state, who is\nbecome weak, and, though brought into a state of grace, renewed and\nsanctified but in part; having still the remainders of corruption, which\nmaintain a constant opposition to the principle of grace? Our\nperseverance in grace cannot therefore be owing to ourselves;\naccordingly the apostle ascribes this to a divine hand, when he says,\nthat _we are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation_, 1\nPet. i. 5.\n\nA late celebrated writer, on the other side of the question,[81]\nattempts to evade the force of this argument to prove the doctrine of\nperseverance, though I think, without much strength of reasoning, when\nhe says; that all who are preserved to salvation, are kept by the power\nof God, but not that all believers are so kept.\n\nTo which it may be replied, that all believers, whose character answers\nthat of the church, to which the apostle writes, shall be saved; namely,\nall who are _begotten again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of\nJesus Christ, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that\nfadeth not away, reserved in heaven for them_; whose _faith_, after it\nhas been tried, shall be _found unto praise, and honour, and glory, at\nthe appearing of Jesus Christ_, 1 Pet. i. 3, 4, 7. I say, these shall\ncertainly be saved: therefore, if all who are thus preserved to\nsalvation, are kept by the power of God, this is all we need contend\nfor. And whereas he adds, that when they are said to be kept through\nfaith, the meaning is, they are kept, if they continue in the faith. To\nthis it may be replied, That their continuance in the faith was put out\nof all dispute, by what is said concerning them in the words going\nbefore and following, as row referred to. And as to his argument, it\namounts to no more than this; that they shall be kept by the power of\nGod, if they keep themselves; or they shall persevere if they persevere,\nto which I need make no reply.\n\nBut since our main design in this head is not to prove that believers\nshall persevere, which we reserve to our next; but to shew that whatever\nwe assert concerning their perseverance, take its rise from God; we\nshall consider this as plainly contained in scripture. Accordingly the\napostle speaks of the Lord\u2019s _delivering him from every evil work, and\npreserving him to his heavenly kingdom_, 2 Tim. iv. 18. Jude, ver. 1.\nand the apostle Jude speaks of believers as _sanctified by God the\nFather, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called_, or as being first\ncalled, and then preserved by God the Father, through the intervention\nof Christ, our great Mediator, till they are brought to glory. And our\nSaviour, in his affectionate prayer for his church, a little before he\nleft the world, says, _Holy Father, keep, through thine own name, those\nwhom thou hast given me_, John xvii. 11. which not only proves that the\nperseverance of the saints is owing to God, but that the glory of his\nown name is concerned herein; therefore it is not from ourselves, but\nhim: and there is another scripture, in which our Saviour, speaks of the\nperseverance of his _sheep_ in grace, and of his giving them eternal\nlife, and adds, that _they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck\nthem out of his hand_, chap. x. 28. therefore it is owing to his care,\nas the great Shepherd of the sheep, and to his power, that is superior\nto that of all those who attempt to destroy them, that they shall\npersevere in grace. And this leads us to consider,\n\nIII. What ground we have to conclude that the saints shall persevere in\ngrace, and so explain and illustrate the arguments insisted on in this\nanswer, together with some others that may be taken from the sense of\nseveral scriptures, by which this doctrine may be defended.\n\n1. The saints\u2019 perseverance in grace may be proved from the unchangeable\nlove of God, and his decree and purpose, relating to their salvation, in\nwhich it is discovered and executed. That God loved them with a love of\ngood-will, before they were inclined to express any love to him, is\nevident; because their love to him is assigned as the effect and\nconsequence of his love to them, as the apostle says, _We love him\nbecause he first loved us_, 1 John iv. 19. Therefore this love of God to\nhis people, must be considered as an immanent act; from whence it\nfollows, that it was from eternity, since all God\u2019s immanent acts are\neternal: and this is particularly expressed by the prophet, when he\nsays, _The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved\nthee with an everlasting love_, Jer. xxxi. 3. If this be meant of a love\nthat shall never have an end, it plainly proves the doctrine we are\ndefending; but inasmuch as the words that immediately follow,\n_Therefore, with loving kindness have I drawn thee_, seem to intimate\nthat this everlasting love is that which was from everlasting; as his\ndrawing them or bringing them into a converted state is the result\nhereof: therefore this everlasting love is the same as his eternal\npurpose, or design to save them. If there be such an eternal purpose\nrelating to their salvation, this necessarily infers their perseverance;\nand that there was such a design in God has been already proved under a\nforegoing answer[82]. And they who are the objects of this eternal\npurpose of grace are frequently described, in scripture, as believers,\ninasmuch as faith and salvation are inseparably connected together;\ntherefore, the execution of God\u2019s purpose in giving faith, necessarily\ninfers the execution thereof, in saving them that believe.\n\nThat this purpose of grace is unchangeable, has been before proved[83];\nand may be farther argued from what the apostle speaks concerning _the\nimmutability of his counsel_, shewn to the _heirs of promise_, as the\nground of that _strong consolation_ which they have _who are flying for\nrefuge to lay hold upon the hope set before them_, Heb. vi. 17, 18.\nTherefore, if God cannot change his purpose, relating to the salvation\nof believers, it necessarily follows, that they shall certainly attain\nthis salvation, and consequently, that they shall persevere in grace.\n\n_Obj._ To this it will be objected, that though God may be said to love\nhis people, while they retain their integrity, yet they may provoke him\nby their sins to cast them off; therefore the present exercise of divine\nlove to them is no certain argument that it shall be extended to the\nend, so as that, by virtue hereof, he will enable them to persevere, and\nthen bring them to glory.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied; that we do not deny that believers,\nby their sins, may provoke God so far, as that, if he should mark their\niniquities, or deal with them according to the demerit thereof, he would\ncast them off for ever; but this he will not do, because it is\ninconsistent with his purpose to recover them from their backslidings,\nand forgive their iniquities. Moreover, it cannot be denied, that,\nnotwithstanding God\u2019s eternal love to them, there are many instances of\nhis hatred and displeasure expressed in the external dispensations of\nhis providence, which are as often changed, as their conduct towards him\nis changed; but this does not infer a change in God\u2019s purpose: he may\ntestify his displeasure against them, or as the Psalmist expresses it,\n_Visit their transgressions with the rod, and their iniquities with\nstripes_, Psal. lxxxix. 32. Nevertheless he cannot change his resolution\nto save them; and therefore, by some methods of grace, he will recover\nthem from their backslidings, and enable them to persevere in grace,\nsince his counsel shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure.\n\n2. Another argument to prove the saints\u2019 perseverance, may be taken from\nthe covenant of grace, and the many promises respecting their salvation,\nwhich are contained therein. That this may appear, let it be considered,\n\n(1.) That Christ was appointed to be the head of this covenant, as was\nobserved in a foregoing answer[84]; and accordingly there was an eternal\ntransaction between the Father and him; in which, all things were\nstipulated in the behalf of his elect, whom he therein represented,\nwhich relate to their everlasting salvation. In this covenant God the\nFather, not only promised that he should _have a seed to serve him_,\nPsal. xxii. 30. but that he _should see his seed_; and that _the\npleasure of the Lord_, with relation to them, _should prosper in his\nhand_; that he should _see of the travel of his soul, and be satisfied_,\nIsa. liii. 10, 11. which implies, that he should see the fruits and\neffects of all that he had done and suffered for them, in order to their\nsalvation; and this is not spoken of some of them, but of all; and it\ncould not have had its accomplishment, were it possible for them not to\npersevere in grace.\n\n(2.) In this covenant, Christ has undertaken to keep them, as the result\nof his becoming a Surety for them, in which he not only engaged to pay\nthe debt of obedience and sufferings that was due from them, which he\nhas already done; but that he would work all that grace in them which he\npurchased by his blood; and he has already begun this work in them which\nis not yet accomplished: can we therefore suppose that he will not bring\nit to perfection, nor enable them to endure to the end, that they may be\nsaved, which would argue the greatest unfaithfulness in him, who is\nstyled Faithful and True?\n\nMoreover, as there are engagements on Christ\u2019s part, relating hereunto,\nand in pursuance thereof, they are said to be in his hand; so the Father\nhas given them an additional security, that they shall be preserved from\napostasy; and therefore they are also said to be _in his hand_; from\nwhence _none can pluck them out_; and from thence it is argued, that\n_they shall never perish_, John x. 28, 29. And we may observe, that the\nlife which Christ is said to give them respects not only the beginning\nthereof, in the first grace which they are made partakers of in\nconversion; but it is called _eternal life_, which certainly denotes the\ncompleting of this work in their everlasting salvation.\n\n(3.) The subject-matter of the promises contained in the covenant of\ngrace, relates not only to their sanctification here, but salvation\nhereafter; in which respect it is called _an everlasting covenant_, and\nthe mercies thereof, _the sure mercies of David_, Isa. lv. 3, 4. that\nis, either those mercies which David, who had an interest in this\ncovenant, was given to expect; or mercies which Christ had engaged to\npurchase and bestow, who is here called David, as elsewhere, Hos. iii.\n5. inasmuch as David was an eminent type of him, as well as because he\nwas his seed according to the flesh; and that this is the more probable\nsense of the two, appears from the following words, in which he is said\nto be _given for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the\npeople_: and if these mercies are in Christ\u2019s hand to apply, it is no\nwonder that they are styled _sure mercies_.\n\nWe might here consider the covenant of grace as containing in it all the\npromises that respect the beginning, carrying on, or completing the\nsalvation of his people; and these relate not only to what God will do\nfor them; but what he will enable them to be, and do, in those things\nthat concern their faithfulness to him, whereby they have the highest\nsecurity that they shall behave themselves as becomes a covenant-people.\nThus he assures them, that he will be to them a God, that is, that he\nwill glorify his divine perfections in bestowing on them the special and\ndistinguishing blessings of the covenant; and that they shall be to him\na people, that is, shall behave themselves so as that they shall not, by\napostacy from him, oblige him to disown his relation to them, or exclude\nthem from his covenant. He has not only encouraged them to expect those\ngreat things that he would do for them, provided they yielded obedience\nto his law; but that he would _put his law into their inward parts, and\nwrite it in their hearts_, whereby they might be disposed to obey him:\nand when he says, that they _shall teach no more every man his\nneighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord_, he gives\nthem to understand that they should not only teach or instruct one other\nin the knowledge of God, which respects their being favoured with the\nexternal means of grace; but that they _should all know him, from the\nleast of them unto the greatest_. This not only denotes that they should\nhave a speculative knowledge of divine truth, but a saving knowledge\nthereof; which is inseparably connected with _life eternal_, John xvii.\n3. as appears from its being accompanied with, or flowing from\nforgiveness of sin, as it immediately follows; _for I will forgive their\niniquity_; and this is expressed with a peculiar emphasis, which is\ncertainly inconsistent with their falling from a justified state, when\nit is said, _I will remember their sin no more_, Jer. xxxi. 33, 34. And\nelsewhere, when God speaks of his _making an everlasting covenant_ with\nhis people, chap. xxxii. 40. he promises that _he will not turn away\nfrom them to do them good_; and, inasmuch as they are prone, by reason\nof the deceitfulness of their hearts, to turn aside from him, he adds,\n_I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from\nme_; it is not only said that he will not turn from them, if they fear\nhim; but he gives them security in this covenant, that they shall fear\nhim: can we therefore conclude that they, in whom this covenant is so\nfar made good, that God has put his fear in their hearts, which is\nsupposed in their being believers, shall not attain the other blessing\npromised, to wit, that of their not departing from him?\n\nMoreover, the stability of this covenant, as a foundation of the saints\u2019\nperseverance, is set forth by a metaphor, taken from the most fixed and\nstable parts of nature; and it is said to exceed them herein; _The\nmountains shall depart and the hills be removed, but my kindness shall\nnot depart from thee; neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed,\nsaith the Lord, that hath mercy on thee_, Isa. liv. 10.\n\n_Object._ The principal objection that is brought to enervate the force\nof this argument taken from those promises of the covenant, which\nrespect the saints\u2019 perseverance, is, that they are to be considered\neither as conditional, and the conditions thereof not fulfilled, in\nwhich case they are not obliging, and therefore God is not bound to give\nsalvation to those to whom he has promised it, upon these conditions; or\nelse they are to be considered as made to a political body, _viz._ the\nJewish nation, in which case it is not to be supposed that they respect\ntheir eternal salvation, but only some temporal deliverance which they\nwere to be made partakers of, that belonged to that church in general;\nfor everlasting salvation is never considered as a blessing that shall\nbe applied to whole nations, how much soever an whole nation may partake\nof the common gifts of divine bounty which are bestowed in this world.\n\n_Answ._ In answer to this objection, in both its branches, I need only\nrefer to what has been said elsewhere. As to the former branch thereof,\nwe have endeavoured to shew how those scriptures are to be understood\nwhich are laid down in a conditional form, without supposing that they\nmilitate against the absoluteness of God\u2019s purpose, or its\nunchangeableness, and independency on the conduct of men.[85] And as to\nthe latter branch thereof; what has been said in answer to an objection\nof the like nature, brought against the doctrine of election by Dr.\nWhitby, and others, who suppose that the blessings, which the elect are\nsaid to be made partakers of in scripture, respect the nation of the\nJews, or the church in general, and not a particular number chosen out\nof them to salvation; and that the promises which are directed to them,\nare only such as they were given to expect, as a church or political\nbody of men, may well be applied to our present purpose, and serve as an\nanswer to this objection;[86] therefore all that I shall add by way of\nreply to it, in this place, is,\n\n[1.] If any thing be annexed to these promises of the covenant, that\ngives occasion for some to conclude, that it is conditional, we must\ntake heed that we do not understand such expressions as denoting the\ndependance of God\u2019s determinations on the arbitrary will of man; as\nthough his purpose relating to the salvation of his people were\nindeterminate, and it were a matter of doubt with him, as well as with\nus, whether he should fulfil it or no; because it is uncertain whether\nthe conditions thereof shall be performed; for this supposition is\ninconsistent with the divine perfections: but, if, on the other hand, we\nsuppose that the grace or duty annexed to the promise, must have some\nidea of a condition contained in it; this may be understood according to\nthe tenor of God\u2019s revealed will, as denoting nothing else but a\ncondition of our expectation, or of our claim to the blessing promised;\nand then nothing can be inferred from hence, but that some who lay claim\nto, or expect salvation, without performing the condition thereof, may\napostatize, and so miss of it; which does not in the least militate\nagainst the doctrine we are defending.\n\nAnd to this we may farther add, that when such a condition is annexed to\na promise (for I will not decline to call it so, in the sense but now\nlaid down) and there is another promise added, in which God engages that\nhe will enable them to perform this condition, that is equivalent to an\nabsolute promise; and of this kind are those conditions that are\nmentioned in the scriptures before referred to, as has been already\nobserved. When God promises that he will be a God to them, that he will\nforgive their iniquities, and never reverse the sentence of forgiveness,\nor remember their sins no more, and that he will never turn away from\nthem to do them good; he, at the same time promises, that he will put\nhis law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and put his\nfear in their hearts, and so enable them to behave themselves as his\npeople, or to be to him a people; and when God sets forth the stability\nof his covenant, and intimates that it should not be removed, he adds,\nthat his kindness shall not depart from them, which kindness does not\nbarely respect some temporal blessings which he would bestow upon them,\nbut his extending that grace to them that should keep them faithful to\nhim; and therefore he says, _that in righteousness they should be\nestablished_; which contains a promise to maintain grace in them,\nwithout which they could hardly be said to be established in\nrighteousness, as well as that he would perform the other things\npromised to them in this covenant.\n\n[2.] As to the other branch of the objection, in which the promises are\nconsidered as given to the church in general, or to the Jews, as a\npolitical body of men; and that this cannot be supposed to respect their\neverlasting salvation, but only some temporal blessings which they\nshould enjoy, it may be replied, That this is to be determined by the\nexpress words contained in the promise: if God tells them that he will\ndo that for them which includes more in it than the blessings which they\nare supposed to enjoy, that are of a temporal nature, we are not to\nconclude that there is nothing of salvation contained in them, when the\nwords seem to imply that there is. And though these promises are said to\nbe given to the Jews, as a political body of men, and there are some\ncircumstances therein, which have an immediate and particular relation\nto them: yet the promises of special grace and salvation were to be\napplied only by those who believed amongst them; and the same promises\nare to be applied by believers in all ages; or else we must understand\nthose scriptures only as an historical relation of things that do not\nbelong to us; which would tend very much to detract from the\nspirituality and usefulness of many parts of scripture.\n\nTo make this appear, we might consider some promises which, when first\nmade, had a particular relation to God\u2019s dealings with his people in\nthose circumstances in which they were at that time; which,\nnotwithstanding, are applied in a more extensive manner, to New\nTestament believers in all ages. Thus when God tells his people, in the\nscripture before referred to, that _all thy children shall be taught of\nthe Lord_, Isa. liv. 13. whatever respect this may have to the church of\nthe Jews, our Saviour applies it in a more extensive way, as belonging\nto believers in all ages, when he says, _Every man therefore that hath\nheard and learned of the Father, cometh unto me_, John vi. 45. And when\nGod promises Joshua that _he would not fail nor forsake him_, and\nencourages him thereby, _not to fear nor be dismayed_, Josh. i. 5, 9.\nwhen he was to pass over Jordan, into the land of Canaan; and after\nthat, to engage in a work which was attended with many difficulties:\nthis promise is applied, by the apostle, as an inducement to believers,\nin his day, to be _content with such things as they have_; accordingly\nhe adds, that what God told Joshua of old, the same was written for\ntheir encouragement, _viz._ that _he would never leave them, nor forsake\nthem_, Heb. xiii. 5. We cannot therefore but conclude from hence, that\nthis objection is of no force in either of its branches, to overthrow\nthe doctrine of the saints\u2019 perseverance, as founded on the stability of\nthe promises of the covenant of grace.\n\n3. The saints\u2019 perseverance in grace may be farther proved from their\ninseparable union with Christ: this union is not only federal, as he is\nthe head of the covenant of grace, and they his members, whose salvation\nhe has engaged to bring about, as was observed under the last head; but\nhe may be considered also as their vital head, from whom they receive\nspiritual life and influence; so that as long as they abide in him,\ntheir spiritual life is maintained as derived from him: if we consider\nthe church, or the whole election of grace as united to him, it is\ncalled, _His body_, Col. i. 24. _the fulness of him that filleth all in\nall_, Eph. i. 23. and every believer being a member of this body, or a\npart, if I may so express it, of this fulness, if it should perish and\nbe separated from him, his body would be defective, and he would sustain\na loss of that which is an ingredient in his fulness.\n\nMoreover, as this union includes in it that relation between Christ and\nhis people, which is, by a metaphorical way of speaking, styled\nconjugal;[87] and accordingly is mutual, as the result of his becoming\ntheirs by an act of grace, and they his by an act of self-dedication;\nthis is the foundation of mutual love, which is abiding, it is certainly\nso on his part; because it is unchangeable, as founded on a\ncovenant-engagement, which he cannot violate; and though their love to\nhim be in itself subject to change, through the prevalency of corrupt\nnature, which too much inclines them to be unstedfast in this\nmarriage-covenant; yet he will recover and bring them back to him, and\nwill not deal with them as persons do with strangers, whom they exclude\nfrom their presence or favour, if they render themselves unworthy of it;\nbut they who stand in a nearer relation to him, and accordingly are the\nobjects of his special love, shall not be cast off for ever, how much\nsoever he may resent their unworthy behaviour to him. Not to be separate\nfrom Christ, is, according to the apostle\u2019s expression, not to _be\nseparated_ from his love; and this, he says, he was _persuaded_ that he\nshould not be, or _that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor\nprincipalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor\nheight, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to do it_, Rom.\nviii. 35, 38, 39. Accordingly it is said, that _having loved his own,\nwhich were in the world, he loved them unto the end_, John xiii. 1.\n\nHere I cannot but take notice of a very jejune and empty sense which\nsome give of this text, to evade the force of the argument taken from\nit, to prove the doctrine we are maintaining. How plausible soever it\nmay seem to be to those who conclude that this must be the true sense,\nbecause it favours their own cause: by _his own_ they mean no other than\nChrist\u2019s disciples, whom he was at that time conversant with; and\nindeed, they apply whatever Christ says, in some following chapters, to\nthem, exclusive of all others; as when he says, _Ye are not of the\nworld, but I have chosen you out of the world_, chap. xv. 19. and\n_because I live, ye shall live also_, chap. xiv. 19. This, they suppose,\nrespects them in particular; and so in the text before us, _having loved\nhis own which were in the world_; that is, his own disciples; as though\nhe had a propriety in none but them; _he loved them to the end_; that\nis, not to the end of their lives; for that would prove the doctrine we\nare maintaining, but to the end of his life, which was now at hand; and\nhis love to them, they suppose to be expressed in this, that he\ncondescended to wash their feet. But if this were the sense of the\nwords, his love to them would not be so extraordinary a privilege as it\nreally is; for it would be only an instance of human and not divine\nlove. And indeed, our happiness consists, not only in Christ\u2019s loving us\nto the end of his life; but in his continuing to express his love in his\ngoing into heaven to prepare a place, and there making continual\nintercession for us; and in the end, in his coming again to receive us\nto himself, that where he is, we may be also; which leads us to\nconsider,\n\n4. That the saints\u2019 perseverance farther appears from Christ\u2019s continual\nintercession for them. This has been particularly explained in a\nforegoing answer;[88] and the apostle speaking of his _ever living to\nmake intercession_ for his people, infers that _he is able to save them\nto the uttermost that come unto God by him_, Heb. vii. 25. This he could\nnot be said to do, should he leave the work which he has begun in them,\nimperfect, and suffer them, who come to him by faith, to apostatize from\nhim. We have before considered Christ\u2019s intercession, as including in it\nhis appearing in the presence of God, in the behalf of those for whom he\noffered himself a sacrifice while here on earth; and also, that what he\nintercedes for shall certainly be granted him, not only because he is\nthe Son of God, in whom he is well pleased, but because he pleads his\nown merits; and to deny to grant what he merited, would be, in effect,\nto deny the sufficiency thereof, as though the purchase had not been\nfully satisfactory; therefore we must conclude, as he himself said on\nearth, that _the Father heareth him always_. It is also evident, that he\nprays for the perseverance of his people, as he says to Peter, _I have\nprayed for thee, that thy faith fail not_, Luke xxii. 32. And there are\nmany things in that affectionate prayer, mentioned in John xvii. which\nhe put up to God, immediately before his last sufferings, which respect\ntheir perseverance in grace; as when he says, _Holy Father, keep through\nthine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as\nwe are_, John xvii. 11. and, _I pray not that thou shouldst take them\nout of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil_, ver.\n15. that is, either the evil that often attends the condition in which\nthey are, in the world, that so the work of grace may not suffer, at\nleast, not miscarry thereby; or else, that he would keep them from the\nevil one, that so they may not be brought again under his dominion; he\nalso prays, _that they may be made perfect in one_, ver. 23. that is,\nnot only that they may be perfectly joined together in the same design,\nbut that this unanimity may continue till they are brought to a state of\nperfection; and _that the world may know that God has loved them, even\nas he has loved Christ_. And he declares his _will_; which shews that\nhis intercession is founded on justice, and accordingly contains in it\nthe nature of a demand, rather than a supplication for what might be\ngiven or denied, namely, _That they whom the Father had given him might\nbe with him where he is, that they may behold his glory_, ver. 24. all\nwhich expressions are very inconsistent with the supposition, that it is\npossible that they, whom he thus intercedes for, may apostatize, or fall\nshort of salvation.\n\n_Object._ It is objected by some, that this prayer respects none but his\ndisciples, who were his immediate friends and followers, and not\nbelievers in all ages and places in the world.\n\n_Answ._ But to this it may be replied, That the contrary hereunto is\nevident, from several things which are mentioned in this prayer, as for\ninstance, he says, That _the Father had given him power over all flesh;\nthat he should give eternal life to as many as he had given him_, ver.\n2. the sense of which words will sink too low, if we suppose that he\nintends thereby, thou hast given me power to dispose of all persons and\nthings in this world, that I may give eternal life to that small number\nwhich thou hast given me, namely, my disciples; whereas he speaks of\nthat universal dominion which he has over all persons and things, which\nwere committed to him with this view, that all those who were put into\nhis hand to redeem and save, should attain eternal life: and again, he\nsays, _I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out\nof the world; thine they were, and thou gavest them me, and they have\nkept thy word_, ver. 6. Did Christ manifest the divine name and glory to\nnone but those who were his disciples; and were there none but them that\nhad kept his word? And when he says, that they whom he prayed for, are\nthe Father\u2019s; and adds, that _all mine are thine, and thine are mine;\nand I am glorified in them_, ver. 9, 10. Is the number of those, whom\nChrist has a right to, and the Father has set apart for himself, in whom\nhe would shew forth his glory, as the objects of his love, and in whom\nChrist, as Mediator, was to be glorified, so small, as that it contained\nonly the eleven disciples? Or does it not rather respect all that have,\nor shall believe, from the beginning to the end of time? and when he\nspeaks of _the world\u2019s hating them, because they are not of the world_,\nJohn xvii. 14, 15. and of their being exposed to the evils that are in\nthe world, or the assaults of Satan, who is their avowed enemy; is this\nonly applicable to the disciples? And when he says, _Neither pray I for\nthese alone_, that is, for those who now believe, _but for them also\nwhich shall believe_, ver. 20. does it not plainly intimate that he had\nothers in view besides his disciples? These, and several other passages\nin this prayer, are a sufficient evidence that there is no weight in the\nobjection, to overthrow the argument we are maintaining.\n\n5. Believers\u2019 perseverance in grace may be proved from the Spirit and\nseed of God abiding in them. When at first they were regenerated, it was\nby the power of the Holy Ghost, as condescending to come and take up his\nabode in them: thus we read of their being acted by, and under the\ninfluence of, the Holy Ghost, who is said to dwell where he is pleased\nto display his divine power and glory; and if these displays hereof be\ninternal, then he dwells in the heart. Our Saviour speaks of him, as\n_another Comforter_ given, _that he may abide_ with his people _for\never_, chap. xiv. 19. And this indwelling of the Spirit is very distinct\nfrom that extraordinary dispensation which the church had, when they\nwere favoured with inspiration; for the apostle speaks of it as a\nprivilege peculiar to believers as such, when he says, _Ye are not in\nthe flesh, but in the Spirit; if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in\nyou: Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his_,\nRom. viii. 9. the meaning of which cannot be, that they have no interest\nin Christ, who have not the extraordinary _afflatus_ of the Spirit, such\nas the prophets had; therefore we must suppose, that this is a privilege\nwhich believers have in all ages. Now if the Spirit is pleased to\ncondescend thus to take up his abode in the soul, and that for ever, he\nwill certainly preserve it from apostacy.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that there are several fruits and effects of the\nSpirit\u2019s dwelling in the soul, which affords an additional proof of this\ndoctrine: thus believers are said to have _the first fruits of the\nSpirit_, ver. 23. that is, they have those graces wrought in them which\nare the beginning of salvation; and as the first fruits are a part of\nthe harvest that will follow, these are the fore-tastes of the heavenly\nblessedness which God would never have bestowed upon them had he not\ndesigned to preserve them from apostasy. Moreover, believers are said to\nbe _sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of\ntheir inheritance_, Eph. i. 13, 14. The earnest, as given by men, is\ngenerally deemed a part of payment, upon which they who are made\npartakers thereof, are satisfied that they shall, at last, receive the\nfull reward; and shall believers miss of the heavenly blessedness, who\nhave such a glorious pledge and earnest of it? Again, if we consider\n_the Spirit as bearing witness with their spirits, that they are the\nchildren of God; and if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint\nheirs with Christ_; and that _they shall be glorified together_ with\nhim, Rom. viii. 16, 17. is this testimony invalid, or not to be depended\non, which it could not be were it possible for them to fall from a state\nof grace?\n\nThis testimony is what we depend very much upon, in order to our\nattaining assurance that we are in a state of grace, and shall persevere\ntherein, as will be observed under the next answer; therefore we shall\nat present, take it for granted, that there is such a thing as\nassurance, or that this blessing is attainable; and the use which I\nwould make of this supposition to maintain our present argument, is,\nthat if the Spirit has an hand in working or encouraging this hope that\nwe have of the truth of grace, and consequently shall persevere therein\nto salvation, this argues that it is warrantable, and not delusive; for\nhe that is the author or giver of it cannot deceive our expectation, or\nput us upon looking for that which is not a reality. From whence it\nfollows, that it is impossible that they should apostatize, to whom _God\nhas given_ this _good hope through grace_, so that they should fail of\nthat _everlasting consolation_, which is connected with it, 2 Thess. ii.\n16. This consequence will hardly be denied by those who are on the other\nside of the question; and we may observe, that they who oppose the\ndoctrine of perseverance, always deny that of assurance, especially as\nproceeding from the testimony of the Spirit: nevertheless, that we may\nnot be misunderstood, we do not say, that every one who has a strong\npersuasion that he shall be saved, shall be saved; which is no other\nthan enthusiasm; but our argument is, in short, this, that if there be a\nwitness of the Spirit to this truth, that cannot be charged therewith,\nthen the doctrine we are maintaining, is undeniably true, which will\nmore evidently appear from what will be said in defence of the doctrine\nof assurance under our next answer.\n\nAnd therefore we proceed to the other branch of the argument\nbefore-mentioned, to prove this doctrine, namely, that believers have\nthe seed of God abiding in them; which is founded on what the apostle\nsays in 1 John iii. 9. _Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin;\nfor his seed abideth in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of\nGod_; for the understanding of which let us consider,\n\n(1.) That by the words, _he cannot commit sin_, the apostle does not\nintend that such an one is not a sinner, or that there is such a thing\nas sinless perfection attainable in this life; for that is contrary, not\nonly to the whole tenor of scripture, and daily experience of mankind;\nbut to what he had expressly said, _If we say we have no sin, we deceive\nourselves, and the truth is not in us_, 1 John i. 8. Therefore, in this\ntext, upon which our present argument is founded, he is, doubtless,\nspeaking of persons committing sins, inconsistent with the truth of\ngrace, as he says in a foregoing verse, _Whosoever sinneth hath not seen\nhim, neither known him_, chap. iii. 6. it is such a sin therefore as\nargues a person to be in a state of unregeneracy; and then, _He that\ncommitteth sin is of the devil_, ver. 8. therefore he certainly speaks\nof such a commission of sin, as argues us to be under the reigning power\nof the devil: and that this may plainly appear to be his sense, we may\nobserve, that he elsewhere distinguishes between _a sin that is unto\ndeath_, and a sin that is _not unto death_, chap. v. 16, 17. by which he\ndoes not mean, as the Papists suppose, that some sins deserve eternal\ndeath, and others not; the former of which they call mortal sins; the\nlatter venial; but he is speaking of a sin that is inconsistent with the\nprinciple of grace, and that which is consistent therewith; the former\nis sometimes called _the pollution that is in the world, through lust_,\n2 Pet. i. 4. the latter _the spot of God\u2019s children_, Deut. xxxii. 5.\nThe least sin deserves death, though they who commit it shall not\nperish, but be brought to repentance; but the _sin unto death_ is wilful\nsin, committed and continued in with impenitency; and with this\nlimitation we are to understand the apostle\u2019s words, _He who is born of\nGod doth not commit sin_.\n\n(2.) We shall now consider the reason assigned, why the person he speaks\nof, cannot, in this sense, commit sin; namely, because he is _born of\nGod_, and _the seed of God abideth, in him_. To be born of God, is what\nis elsewhere styled regeneration, or being born of the Spirit, in which\nthere is a principle of grace implanted, which is here called _the seed\nof God_. And, indeed, this metaphorical way of speaking is very\nexpressive of the thing designed hereby; for as in nature the seed\nproduces fruit, and in things moral, the principle of action produces\naction, as the principle of reason produces acts of reason: so in things\nspiritual, the principle of grace produces acts of grace; and this\nprinciple being from God, which has been largely proved under a\nforegoing answer,[89] it is called here, _the seed of God_.\n\n(3.) This seed of God, or this principle is not barely said to be in the\nbeliever, as that which, for the present, is the ground of spiritual\nactions; but it is said to _remain in him_. As elsewhere Christ speaks\nof the Spirit as _abiding_ with his people _for ever_, John xiv. 16. so\nhere the apostle speaks of that principle of grace wrought by the\nSpirit, as abiding, that is, continuing for ever; and from thence he\ninfers, that a believer _cannot sin_; for if he had been only speaking\nof its being implanted, but not abiding; all that could be inferred from\nthence would be, that he does not sin; but whereas, he argues from it,\nthat he cannot sin, that is, apostatize; it being understood, that this\nprinciple abides in him continually; which plainly contains the sense of\nthe argument we are maintaining, namely, that because the seed of God\nabides in a believer, therefore he cannot apostatize, or fall short of\nsalvation.\n\nThey who are on the other side of the question, seem to find it very\ndifficult to evade the force of this argument: some suppose that the\napostle intends no more but that he that is born of God, should not\ncommit sin; but that is not only remote from the sense of the words\n_cannot sin_;[90] but it does not sufficiently distinguish one that is\nborn of God, from another that is not so; for it is as much a truth,\nthat an unregenerate person ought not to sin, as when we speak of one\nthat is regenerate.\n\nOthers, by not sinning, suppose that the apostle means, they sin with\ndifficulty, or they are hardly brought to commit sin; but as this also\ndoes not answer to the sense of the word _cannot_ sin, so it is\ninconsistent with that beautiful gradation, which we may observe in the\nwords. To say that he does not sin; and then if he commits sin, it is\nwith some difficulty, is not so agreeable to that climax, which the\napostle makes use of, when he says, he does not commit sin, yea, he\ncannot.\n\nOthers suppose that the apostle\u2019s meaning is, that he that is born of\nGod, cannot sin unto death, or apostatize, so as to fall short of\nsalvation, so long as he makes a right use of this principle of grace,\nwhich is implanted in him; but by opposing and afterwards extinguishing\nit, he may become an apostate. But we may observe; in answer to this,\nthat the apostle does not attribute his perseverance in grace, to his\nmaking use of the principle, but his having it, or its abiding in him;\nand he sufficiently fences against the supposition of its being possible\nthat the principle of grace may be wholly lost; for then this seed could\nnot be said to abide in him, nor would the inference deduced from its\nabiding in him, namely, that he cannot sin, be just.\n\nThus, concerning this latter branch of the argument to prove the saints\u2019\nperseverance in grace, taken from the seed of God, abiding in believers:\nBut there is one thing must be observed before I dismiss this head,\n_viz._ That the principle of grace, which is signified by this metaphor,\nthough it be, and abide in a believer; yet it does not always exert\nitself so as to produce those acts of grace which would otherwise\nproceed from it. This cannot be better illustrated than by a similitude\ntaken from the soul, which is the principle of reason in man; though it\nbe as much so in an infant in the womb as it is in any, yet it is\naltogether unactive; for most allow that such have not the exercise of\nthought or acts of reason; and when a person is newly born, it hardly\nappears that this principle is deduced into act; and in those in whom it\nhas been deduced into act, it may be rendered stupid, and almost\nunactive, or at least, so disordered, that the actions which proceed\nfrom it cannot be styled rational, through the influence of some bodily\ndisease, with which it is affected, yet still it remains a principle of\nreason. The same may be said concerning the principle of grace; it is\ncertainly an unactive principle in those who are regenerate from the\nwomb; and it may cease to exert itself, and be with equal reason, styled\nan unactive principle in believers, when they fall into very great sins,\nto which it offers no resistance: This we shall take occasion to apply\nunder a following head, when we shall consider some objections that are\nbrought against this doctrine, by those who suppose that believers, when\nsinning presumptuously, as David, Peter, and others, are said to have\ndone, fail totally, though not finally. There was indeed a total\nsuspension of the activity of this principle, but yet the principle\nitself was not wholly lost; but more of this in its proper place. We are\ntherefore bound to conclude, that because this principle abides in them,\nthey can neither totally nor finally apostatize, and therefore, that\nthey can neither fall from a state of grace, nor fail, at last, of\nsalvation.\n\nThus we have endeavoured to explain and shew the force of those\narguments which are contained in this answer to prove the doctrine of\nthe saints\u2019 perseverance. There are several others that might have been\ninsisted on; and particularly it may be proved, from the end and design\nof Christ\u2019s death, which was not only that he might purchase to himself\na peculiar people, but that he might purchase eternal life for them; and\nwe cannot think that this invaluable price would have been given for the\nprocuring of that which should not be applied, in which respect Christ\nwould be said to die in vain. When a person gives a price for any thing,\nit is with this design, that he or they, for whom he purchased it,\nshould be put into the possession of it; which, if it be not done, the\nprice that was given is reckoned lost, and the person that gave it\ndisappointed hereby.\n\nAnd this argument may be considered as having still more weight in it,\nif we observe, that the salvation of those whom Christ has redeemed, not\nonly redounds to their happiness, but to the glory of God the Father,\nand of Christ, our great Redeemer. God the Father, in giving Christ to\nbe a propitiation for sin, designed to bring more glory to his name than\nby all his other works: Thus our Saviour appeals to him in the close of\nhis life, _I have glorified thee on the earth, I have finished the work\nwhich thou gavest me to do_, John xvii. 14. The work was his, and there\nwas a revenue of glory which he expected thereby; and this glory did not\nonly consist in his receiving a full satisfaction for sin, that so he\nmight take occasion to advance his grace in forgiving it; but he is said\nto be glorified, when his people are enabled to _bear much fruit_, chap.\nxv. 8. Therefore the glory of God the Father is advanced by the\napplication of redemption, and consequently by bringing his redeemed\nones to perfection.\n\nThe Son is also glorified, not barely by his having those honours, which\nhis human nature is advanced to, as the consequence of his finishing the\nwork of redemption, but by the application thereof to his people;\naccordingly he is said to be _glorified in them_, chap. xviii. 10. that\nis, his mediatorial glory is rendered illustrious by all the grace that\nis conferred upon them; and therefore, certainly he will be eminently\nglorified, when they are brought to be with him, where he is, to behold\nhis glory. Now can we suppose, that since the Father and the Son\ndesigned to have so great a glory redound to them by the work of our\nredemption, that they will sustain any loss thereof, for want of the\napplication of it to them, for whom it was purchased. If God designed,\nas the consequence thereof, that the saints should sing that new song,\n_Thou art worthy, for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by\nthy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation_:\nAnd if God the Father, and the Son, are both joined together, and their\nglory celebrated therein, by their ascribing _blessing, glory, and\npower, unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for\never and ever_, Rev. v. 19. compared with 13. Then certainly they will\nnot lose this glory; and therefore, the saints shall be brought into\nthat state where they shall have occasion thus to praise and adore them\nfor it.\n\nIf it be objected to this, that God, the Father and the Son, will be\nglorified, though many of his saints should apostatize, and the death of\nChrist be, to no purpose, with respect to them, because all shall not\napostatize. The answer to this is plain and easy; that though he could\nnot be said to lose the glory he designed, by the salvation of those who\npersevere, yet some branches of his glory would be lost, by reason of\nthe apostacy of others, who fall short of salvation; and it is a\ndishonour to him to suppose that he will lose the least branch thereof,\nor that any of those, for whom Christ died, should be for ever lost.\n\nWe might also add, that for the same reason that we suppose one whom\nChrist has redeemed, should be lost, all might be lost, and so he would\nlose all the glory he designed to have in the work of redemption. This\nappears, in that all are liable to those temptations, which, if complied\nwith, have a tendency to ruin them. All are supposed to be renewed and\nsanctified but in part, and consequently the work of grace meets with\nthose obstructions from corrupt nature; which would certainly prove too\nhard for all our strength, and baffle our utmost endeavours to\npersevere, did not God appear in our behalf, and keep us by his power.\nNow, if all need strength from him to stand, and must say, that without\nhim they can do nothing, then we must either suppose, that that grace is\ngiven to all saints which shall enable them to persevere, or else that\nit is given to none; if it be given to none, but all are left to\nthemselves, then that which overthrows the faith of one, would overthrow\nthe faith of all; and consequently we might conclude, that whatever God\nthe Father, or the Son have done, in order to the redemption and\nsalvation of the elect might be of none effect.\n\nI might produce many other arguments in defence of the saints\u2019\nperseverance, but shall conclude this head with two or three scriptures,\nwhereby the truth hereof will farther appear: Thus our Saviour says to\nthe woman of Samaria, _Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give\nhim, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be\nin him a well of water springing up into everlasting life_, John iv. 14.\nWhere, by the water that Christ gives, is doubtless understood the gifts\nand graces of the Spirit; these are not like the waters of a brook, that\noften deceive the expectation of the traveller; but they are a well of\nwater, intimating that a believer shall have a constant supply of grace\nand peace till he is brought to the rivers of pleasure, which are at\nGod\u2019s right-hand, and is made partaker of eternal life. Again, our\nSaviour says, _He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent\nme, hath everlasting life_, chap. v. 24. _i. e._ it is as surely his as\nthough he was in the actual possession of it; and he farther intimates,\nthat such are not only justified for the present; but they shall not\ncome into condemnation; certainly this implies that their salvation is\nso secure as that it is impossible for them to perish eternally.\n\nAnother scripture that plainly proves this doctrine, is in 2 Tim. ii.\n19. _Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal,\nthe Lord knoweth them that are his; and let every one that nameth the\nname of Christ depart from iniquity_; in which words the apostle\nencourages the church to hope for perseverance in grace, after they had\nhad a sad instance of two persons of note, _viz._ Hymeneus and Philetus,\nwho had not only _erred from the truth_, but _overthrown the faith of\nsome_; and he cautions every one, who makes a profession of religion, as\nthey would be kept from apostatizing, to depart from iniquity, _q. d._\nsince many of you are ready to fear that your faith shall be overthrown,\nas well as that of others, by the sophistry or cunning arts of those\napostates who lie in wait to deceive, you may be assured that their\nstate is safe, who are built upon that foundation which God has laid,\nthat _chief corner stone, elect, precious_, viz. Christ, _on whom he\nthat believeth, shall not be confounded_, 1 Pet. ii. 6. or else, that\nthe instability of human conduct shall not render it a matter of\nuncertainty, whether they, who are ordained to eternal life, shall be\nsaved or no; for that depends on God\u2019s purpose, relating hereunto, which\nis a sure foundation, and has this seal annexed to it, whereby our faith\nherein may be confirmed, that they whom God has set apart for himself,\nand lays a special claim to, as his chosen and redeemed ones, whom he\nhas foreknown and loved with an everlasting love, shall not perish\neternally, because the purpose of God cannot be frustrated. But inasmuch\nas there is no special revelation given to particular persons, that they\nare the objects of this purpose cf grace; therefore every one that names\nor professes the name of Christ ought to use the utmost caution, that\nthey be not ensnared; let them depart from all iniquity, and not\nconverse with those who endeavour to overthrow their faith. And, indeed,\nall that are faithful shall be kept from iniquity by God, as they are\nhere given to understand that it is their duty to endeavour to depart\nfrom it, and consequently they shall be kept from apostacy. This seems\nto be the sense of these words; and it is agreeable to the analogy of\nfaith, as well as a plain proof of the doctrine which we are\nmaintaining.\n\nA late writer[91], by _the foundation of God, which standeth sure_,\nsupposes the doctrine of _the resurrection_ is intended, which Hymeneus\nand Philetus denied, saying, that it _was past already_; this doctrine,\nsays he, which is a fundamental article of faith, _standeth sure, having\nthis seal the Lord knoweth them that are his_; that is, he loveth and\napproveth of them. But though it be true the resurrection is spoken of\nin the foregoing verse, and we do not deny that it is a fundamental\narticle of faith; yet that does not seem to be the meaning of the word\n_foundation_, in this text. For if by the resurrection we understand the\ndoctrine of the general resurrection of the dead, I cannot see where the\nforce of the apostle\u2019s argument lies, _viz._ that there shall be a\ngeneral resurrection, because the Lord knoweth who are his, since the\nwhole world are to be raised from the dead. But if by the resurrection\nwe are to understand a resurrection to eternal life, so that they who\nare known or beloved of God, shall have their part in it, and the\napostle\u2019s method of reasoning be this, that they who believe shall be\nraised to eternal life; that is, so far from militating against the\nargument we are maintaining, that it is agreeable to the sense we have\ngiven of the text, and makes for, rather than against us.\n\nAs to what is farther advanced by the author but now mentioned, _viz._\nthat _the Lord knoweth who are his_, is to be taken for that regard\nwhich God had to his apostles and ministers. This seems too great a\nstrain on the sense of the words, and so much different from the scope\nof the apostle therein, as well as disagreeable to the caution given,\nthat _every one who names the name of Christ_ should _depart from\niniquity_, that no one who reads the scriptures without prejudice, can\neasily give into this sense of the text.\n\nI shall mention but one scripture more for the proof of this doctrine,\nand that is in 1 John ii. 19. _They went out from us, but they were not\nof us; for if they had been of us, they would, no doubt, have continued\nwith us; but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they\nwere not all of us_; for the understanding of which, let it be\nconsidered, that the apostle is speaking of some who were formerly\nmembers of the church, who afterwards turned apostates and open enemies\nto Christ, and his gospel: It is plain that the words _they went out\nfrom us_, and _they were not of us_, must be taken in different\nrespects, otherwise it would imply a contradiction, to say that a person\ndeparted from the faith and communion of the church, when he never\nembraced it, or had communion with it; but if they understand it thus,\nthey left the faith and communion of the church because they were\nChristians only in pretence, and did not heartily embrace the faith on\nwhich the church was built; nor were they really made partakers of that\ngrace, which the apostles, and other faithful members of the church, had\nreceived from God, as being effectually called thereby, the sense is\nvery plain and easy, _viz._ That there were some false professors, who\nmade a great shew of religion, and were admitted into communion with the\nchurch, and, it may be, some of them preached the gospel, and were more\nesteemed than others; but they apostatized; for they had not the truth\nof grace, but were like the seed that sprang up without having root in\nitself, which afterwards withered; whereas, if they had had this grace\nit would have been abiding, and so they would, _without doubt_, says the\napostle, _have continued with us_; but by their apostacy it appears,\nthat they were not, in this sense, of our number, that is believers.\n\nThey who understand this scripture, not of persons who were members of\nthe church, but ministers, that first joined themselves with the\napostles, and afterwards deserted them, and their doctrine, advance\nnothing that tends to overthrow the argument we are maintaining; for we\nmay then understand the words thus, they pretended to be the true\nministers of Jesus Christ, and doubtless, to be, as the apostles were,\nmen of piety and religion, for, in other respects, they were of them\nvisibly, whilst they preached the same doctrines; but afterwards, by\ndeparting from the faith, it appeared, that though they were ministers\nthey were not sincere Christians, for if they had, they would not have\napostatized.\n\nIV. We shall now proceed to consider the objections that are usually\nbrought against the doctrine of the saints\u2019 perseverance in grace.\n\n_Object._ 1. It is objected, that there are several persons mentioned in\nscripture, who appear to have been true believers, and yet apostatized,\nsome totally, as David and Peter; others not only totally, but finally,\nin which number Solomon is included; and others are described as\napostates, such as Hymeneus and Alexander, who are said _concerning\nfaith, to have made shipwreck_, and therefore it is supposed that they\nhad the grace of faith; and Judas is also, by them, reckoned to have\nbeen a true believer, whom all allow afterwards to have proved an\napostate.\n\n_Answ._ 1. As to the case of David and Peter, it is true, their fall was\nvery notorious, and the former seems to have continued some months in a\nstate of impenitency; and when they fell, there appeared no marks of\ngrace in either of them. Peter\u2019s sin, indeed, was committed through\nsurprize and fear; but yet it had such aggravating circumstances\nattending it, that if others, whose character is less established than\nhis was, had committed the same sin, we should be ready to conclude,\nthat they were in a state of unregeneracy; and David\u2019s sin was committed\nwith that deliberation, and was so complicated a crime, that if any\nbeliever ever lost the principle of grace, we should have been inclined\nto suppose this to have been his case. Nevertheless, that which gives us\nground to conclude that this principle was not wholly extinguished,\neither in Peter or him, at the same time that they fell; and therefore,\nthat they were not total apostates, is what we before observed, that the\nprinciple of grace may be altogether unactive, and yet abide in the\nsoul, agreeably to the sense we gave of that scripture, _his seed\nabideth in him_; and if what has been already said concerning the\npossibility of the principle of grace remaining, though it makes no\nresistance against the contrary habits of sin, be of any force,[92] then\nthese and other instances of the like nature, on which one branch of the\nobjection is founded, will not be sufficient to prove the possibility of\nthe total apostacy of any true believer.\n\n2. As to the case of Solomon; that he once was a true believer is\nallowed on both sides; for it is said concerning him, soon after he was\nborn, that _the Lord loved him_, 2 Sam. xii. 24, 25. upon which occasion\nhe gave him that significant name, Jedidiah, the beloved of the Lord;\nand it is certain, that in the beginning of his reign, his piety was no\nless remarkable than his wisdom, as appears from his great zeal,\nexpressed in building the temple of God, and establishing the worship\nthereof; and also from that extraordinary instance of devotion with\nwhich he dedicated or consecrated the house to God, 1 Kings viii. 1. &\n_seq._ and the prayer put up to him on that occasion, and also from\nGod\u2019s appearing to him twice: in his first appearance he condescended to\nask him, what he would give him? and upon Solomon\u2019s choosing, _an\nunderstanding heart_, to judge his people, he was pleased with him, and\ngave him several other things that he asked not for; so that there were\n_not any among the kings like unto him_, chap. iii. 5, 9, 10, 12, 13.\nfrom all this it is taken for granted, that he once was a believer: but,\non the other hand, we must, if we duly weigh the force of the objection,\nset the latter part of his life against the former, in which we find him\nguilty of very great sins; not only in multiplying wives and concubines,\nbeyond what any of his predecessors had done, but in that _his heart was\nturned away after other gods, and_, as it is expressly said, _was not\nperfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David, his father_,\nchap. xi. 4. And it is also said, that _the Lord was angry with Solomon,\nbecause his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had\nappeared to him twice_, ver. 9. and on this occasion he determined to\nrend part of the kingdom from his son, ver. 13. which came to pass\naccordingly; and all this is said to have been done _when he was old_,\nver. 4. And after this we read of several that were _stirred up as\nadversaries_ to him, ver. 14, 23, 26. And in the remaining part of his\nhistory we read of little but trouble and uneasiness that he met with;\nand this seemed to continue till his death, of which we have an account\nin 1 Kings xi. chapter throughout, which contains the history of his\nsin, and troubles; and we read not the least word of his repentance\ntherein; for which reason he is supposed, in the objection, to have\napostatized totally and finally.\n\nThe main strength of this objection lies in the supposition, that\nSolomon did not repent of his idolatry which he committed in his old\nage, or, as it is supposed, in the latter part of his life, and also\nfrom the silence of scripture as to the matter; especially in that part\nof it which gives an account of his fall and death. But this is not\nsufficient to support the weight of the objection, and to oblige us to\nconclude him to be an apostate; for there is nothing that appears from\nthe account we have of him in scripture, but that he might have\nsufficient time for repentance between his fall and death. It is said\nindeed, that in his old age his wives turned him aside, but this they\nmight do, and yet he not die an apostate; for sometimes that part of\nlife which is called old age, comprises in it several years; therefore,\nwhen he began to be in his declining age, he might sin, and after that\nbe brought to repentance. And as for the scripture\u2019s speaking first of\nhis fall, and then of his death; it does not follow from thence that one\nwas immediately after the other; since the history of the blemishes and\ntroubles of his life is but short.\n\nOn the other hand, there are several things which may give us ground to\nconclude, that he repented after his fall; particularly,\n\n(1.) We have an intimation hereof in God\u2019s promise relating thereunto,\nin which it is supposed, that God would suffer him to fall, and a\nprovisionary encouragement is given to expect that he should be\nrecovered: thus he says, _I will chastise him with the rod of men, and\nwith the stripes of the children of men; but my mercy shall not depart\naway from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee_, 1\nSam. vii. 14, 15. and the same thing is repeated, in which his fall is\nsupposed, and his recovery from it particularly mentioned, in Psal.\nlxxxix. 30-34. as though God had designed that this should be a\nsupplement to his history, and remove the doubts which might arise from\nit, with relation to his salvation.\n\n(2.) There are some things in other parts of scripture, which give\nsufficient ground to conclude, that he was a true penitent, which\nplainly refer to that part of his life which was between his fall and\nhis death. Thus, if we duly weigh several passages in Ecclesiastes,\nwhich none can deny that he was the inspired writer of, inasmuch as it\nis said, in the title or preface set before it, that they are _the words\nof the preacher, the son of David, king of Jerusalem_, we shall find\nmany things in which he expresses the great sense of the vanity of his\npast life, when he says, _I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know\nmadness and folly_, Eccl. i. 17. where, by _madness and folly_, he\ndoubtless intends that which was so in a moral sense, when he indulged\nhis sinful passions, which respects the worst part of his life. And this\nhe farther insists on; _Whatsoever mine eyes desired, I kept not from\nthem, I withheld not my heart from any joy, for my heart rejoiced in all\nmy labour_, Eccl. ii. 10. or in all things, which afterwards were matter\nof grief and uneasiness to me; in which he observes how he did, as it\nwere, take pains to bring on himself a long train of miseries that\ntroubled him afterwards; and then he plainly expresses his repentance,\nwhen he says, _All was vanity and vexation of spirit_, and there was _no\nprofit under the sun_, ver. 11. as though he should say, I turned from\nGod to the creature, to see what happiness I could find therein, but met\nwith nothing but disappointment; he had no profit in those things,\nwhereof he was now ashamed. It is probable, God shewed him the vanity\nthereof, by his chastening him, or visiting his transgressions with the\nrod, and his iniquities with stripes, as he had promised to do; and this\nended in vexation of spirit, which is a plain intimation of that godly\nsorrow that proceeded from a sense of sin, which made him, beyond\nmeasure, uneasy; and this vexation or uneasiness was so great, that he\nsays, _I hated life_, that is, I hated my past wicked life, and abhorred\nmyself for it, _because the work that is wrought under the sun, is\ngrievous unto me_; that is, the work that I have wrought, was such as\ngave me grief of heart; _for all is vanity and vexation of spirit_, ver.\n17. that is, this is all the consequence thereof: it cannot be supposed\nthat he was weary of his life for the same reasons that many others are,\nwho are deprived of the blessings of common providence, and reduced to\nthat condition that makes them miserable, as to their outward\ncircumstances in the world; but it was the uneasiness he found in his\nown spirit, the secret wounds of conscience and bitterness of soul,\nwhich arose from a sense of sin, that made him thus complain.\n\nAnd elsewhere, he seems to be sensible of his sin, in heaping up vast\ntreasures, which he calls _loving silver_; and adds, that such an one,\nwhich seems very applicable to his own case, _shall not be satisfied\nwith silver, nor he that loveth abundance, with increase; this is also\nvanity_, chap. v. 10. that is, this had been an instance of his former\nvanity: and he adds, _The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he\neat little or much; but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to\nsleep_, ver. 12. If by this we understand that the increase of riches\nsometimes gives disturbance to, and stirs up the corruptions of those\nthat possess them, and this be applied to himself, it is an\nacknowledgment of his sin. Or, if we understand by it that the abundance\nof a rich man will not give him rest at night, when his mind is made\nuneasy with a sense of the guilt of sin, and this be applied to his own\ncase, when fallen by it; then it intimates that his repentance gave him\nnot only uneasiness by day, but took away his rest by night; and it\nseems not improbable, that what gave him farther occasion to see the\nvanity of his past life, was the sense of mortality impressed on him;\nfor he says, _It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to\nthe house of feasting; for that is the end of all men, and the living\nwill lay it to his heart_, chap. vii. 3. that is, he will, or ought to\nimprove the sense of his own frailty, which we may conclude he had done;\nand therefore adds, _Sorrow is better than laughter; for by the sadness\nof the countenance, the heart is made better_, ver. 3.\n\nBut if it be objected, that all these expressions are not applicable to\nhimself, and many others of the like nature, which might have been\nreferred to, which are expressive of his great repentance; though I\ncannot but think that the contrary to this seems very probable; yet\nthere is something farther added, that he expressly applies to himself,\nwhich refers to his unlawful love of women: _I find more bitter than\ndeath the woman whose heart is snares, and nets, and her hands as bands.\nWhoso pleaseth God shall escape from her, but the sinner shall be taken\nby her: behold, this have I found, saith the preacher_, ver. 26, 27. If\nthese things be not expressive of repentance, it is hard to say what\nare.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that as he expresses a grief of heart for past\nsins; so he warns others that they may not be guilty of that which he\nhimself found more bitter than death; and accordingly, having described\nthe arts used by the wicked woman, to betray the unthinking passenger,\nhe cautions every one to take heed of declining to her ways; inasmuch as\nthe consequence thereof will be, that a _dart_ will _strike through his\nliver_, and he is _as a bird that hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not\nthat it is for his life_, Prov. vii. 23. compared with the foregoing\nverses. He also adds, That _she hath cast down many wounded; yea, many\nstrong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell, going\ndown to the chambers of death_, ver. 26, 27. So that we find in Solomon,\ntwo of the greatest evidences that we can have of sincere repentance;\nnamely, a great degree of sorrow for sin, and an earnest desire that\nothers would avoid it, by giving those cautions that are necessary to\nprevent their falling into the snare in which he had been entangled.\n\n(3.) There is something spoken in Solomon\u2019s commendation, after his\ndeath, which may be gathered from what is said, that during the three\nfirst years of Rehoboam\u2019s reign, which God approved of he _walked in the\nway of David and Solomon_, 2 Chron. xi. 17. where we may observe, that\nSolomon is joined with his father David: so that as there were\nabatements to be made for the blemishes in David\u2019s reign; the reign of\nSolomon had in it great blemishes: but as one repented, so did the\nother, and therefore ought not to be reckoned an apostate.\n\nAnd to all this we may add, that he was a penman of scripture; and it\ndoes not appear that God conferred this honour upon any that apostatized\nfrom him; but on the other hand, they have this general character given\nof them by the apostle Peter, that they were all _holy men of God_, 2\nPet. i. 21. which we must conclude Solomon to have been, till we have\ngreater evidence to the contrary than they can produce who deny it.\n\n3. There are others mentioned in the objection, to wit, Hymeneus and\nAlexander, whose apostacy we have no ground to doubt of; but we cannot\nallow that they fell from, or lost the saving grace of faith. It is one\nthing to fall from the profession of faith, and another thing to lose\nthe grace of faith; therefore, the only thing to be proved in answer to\nthis branch of the objection, is, that these persons, who are described\nas apostates, never had the truth of grace; or that they only fell from\nthat visible profession which they made thereof; whereby they were\nreckoned to be, what in reality they were not, namely, true believers.\nNow that this may appear, let it be considered,\n\nThat the apostle speaks of them as having _departed from the faith_,\nviz. the doctrines of the gospel; and that was attended with blasphemy,\nfor which they were _delivered unto Satan_, which is a phrase used by\nthe apostle here and elsewhere, for persons being cut off from the\ncommunion of the church; upon which occasion he advises Timothy _to hold\nfaith and a good conscience, which some having put away, concerning\nfaith, have made shipwreck_, as these have done.\n\nNow the main force of the objection seems to lie in this, that they who\nhave made shipwreck of faith, were once true believers; therefore, such\nmay apostatize, and so fall short of salvation.\n\nTo which it may be replied, that by _faith_ here, is meant the doctrines\nof the gospel, which are often styled _faith_: thus it is said, that the\napostle _preached the faith which once he destroyed_, Gal. i. 23. and\nelsewhere, _before faith came_; that is, before the gospel-dispensation\nbegan, and those doctrines were preached that were to be published\ntherein to the world, _we were kept under the law_, chap. iii. 23. And\nagain, _Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the\nhearing of faith_, ver. 2. that is, by hearing those doctrines that are\ncontained in the gospel. Therefore, that which he chargeth these\napostates with, is making shipwreck of faith, considered objectively:\nthey once, indeed, held the truth, but it was in unrighteousness; they\nhad right notions of the gospel, which they afterwards lost: now the\napostle advises Timothy not only to _hold faith_, that is, to retain the\ndoctrines of the gospel, as one who had right sentiments of divine\ntruths, but to hold it _with a good conscience_; for I take that\nexpression, _hold faith and a good conscience_, to contain an\n_hendyadis_; and so it is the same as though he should say, Be not\ncontent with an assent to the truths of the gospel, but labour after a\nconscience void of offence towards God, that thou mayst have the\ntestimony thereof, that thy knowledge of divine truth is practical and\nexperimental, and then thou art out of danger of making shipwreck of\nfaith, as these have done, who held it without a good conscience. It is\nnot said they made shipwreck of a good conscience; for that they never\nhave had; but _concerning faith_, which they once professed, _they made\nshipwreck_.\n\nThe same thing may be said concerning Judas; he apostatized from the\nfaith, which he once made a very great profession of, being not only one\nof Christ\u2019s disciples, but sent forth with the rest of them, to preach\nthe gospel, and work miracles; yet it is evident, that he had not the\nsaving grace of faith. For our Saviour, who knew the hearts of all men,\nwas not deceived in him (though others were) inasmuch as it is said, _He\nknew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should\nbetray him_, John vi. 64. However, the principal force of the objection\nlies in this, that Judas must needs have been a believer, because he was\ngiven to Christ; and our Saviour says, that _those who were given him\nwere kept by him, and none of them was lost but the son of perdition_,\nchap. xvii. 12. His being styled _the son of perdition_, argues him an\napostate; and his being _given to Christ_ denotes that he was once a\ntrue believer; therefore he fell totally and finally. In answer to\nwhich,\n\n(1.) Some conclude, that they who are said to _be given to Christ_, are\nsuch as were appointed, by the providence of God, to be his servants in\nthe work of the ministry. Now it is said concerning them, that they were\ngiven to Christ, to be employed by him in this service; and that all of\nthem were kept faithful, except the son of perdition. If this be the\nsense of their being given to him, it does not necessarily infer their\nbeing made partakers of special grace: it is one thing to be given to\nChrist, to be employed in some peculiar acts of service, in which his\nglory is concerned; and another thing to be given to him, as being\nchosen and called by him, to partake of special communion with him: if\nJudas had been given to him in this latter sense, he would not have been\na son of perdition, but would have been kept by him, as the other\ndisciples were; but inasmuch as he was only given to Christ, that he\nmight serve the design of his providence, in the work of the ministry,\nhe might be lost, or appear to be a son of perdition, and yet not fall\nfrom the truth of grace.\n\n(2.) If, by being _given to Christ_, we understand a being given to him,\nas objects of his special love, we must suppose, that all who were thus\ngiven to him, were kept by him; in which sense Judas, who is called _the\nson of perdition_, and was not kept by him, was not given to him:\naccordingly the particle _but_ is not exceptive, but adversative; and it\nis as though he should say, _All that thou gavest me I have kept, and\nnone of them is lost; but the son of perdition is lost_, I have not\npreserved him; for he was not the object of my special care and love; he\nwas not given me to save, therefore he is lost. Now it is certain, that\nthe particle _but_ is used in this sense in many other scriptures,\nparticularly that wherein it is said, _There shall in no wise enter into\nit_, that is, the heavenly Jerusalem, _any thing that defileth, neither\nwhatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie, but they which are\nwritten in the Lamb\u2019s book of life_, Rev. xxi. 27. _q. d._ ungodly men\nshall not enter in; but they that are written in the lamb\u2019s book of life\nshall[93]. Thus much concerning this objection, taken from particular\npersons, who are supposed to have fallen from grace.\n\n_Obj._ 2. The next objection is taken from what the apostle Paul says\nconcerning the church of the Jews, whom he describes as apostatized from\nGod; and it is evident, that they are, to this day, given up to judicial\nblindness, and not in the least disposed to repent of that crime for\nwhich they were cast off by him; concerning these he says, that they\nonce were holy; _If the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy; and\nif the root be holy, so are the branches_, Rom. xi. 16. and afterwards\nhe speaks of _their casting away_, and _some of the branches being\nbroken off, because of unbelief_, ver. 15, 17, 19, 20. Now if the whole\nchurch apostatized, we must conclude at least, that some of them were\ntrue believers, and therefore true believers may fall from the grace of\nGod.\n\n_Answ._ That the church of the Jews apostatized, and were cut off for\ntheir unbelief, is sufficiently evident: but we must distinguish between\nthe apostacy of a professing people, such as the church of the Jews\nwere, who first rejected God, and then were cast off by him, and the\napostacy of those who were truly religious among them; the apostle\nhimself gives us ground for this distinction, when he says, _they are\nnot all Israel which are of Israel; neither because they are the seed of\nAbraham are they all children_, chap. ix. 6, 7. And elsewhere he\ndistinguishes between one who is _a Jew_, as being partaker of the\nexternal privileges of the covenant, which that church was under, and a\nperson\u2019s being _a Jew_, as partaking of the saving blessings thereof; as\nhe says, _He is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that\ncircumcision, which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew which is\none inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and\nnot in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God_, Rom. ii. 28,\n29. A church may lose its external privileges, and cease to have the\nhonourable character given it; the greatest part of them may be blinded,\nwhen, at the same time _the election_, that is, all among them who were\nchosen to eternal life, _obtained it_, as the apostle observes, chap.\nxi. 7. and thereby intimates, that some who were members of that church\nwere faithful; those were preserved from the common apostacy, being\nconverted to the Christian faith. Their privileges, as members of a\nchurch, were lost, but they still retained their spiritual and\ninseparable union with Christ, which they had as believers, and not as\nthe result of their being the natural seed of Abraham, they were made\npartakers of the blessings that accompany salvation; and therefore were\nnot separated from the love of God in Christ, whilst formal professors\nand hypocrites, who were Abraham\u2019s natural seed, but not his spiritual,\nwere cast off by Christ.\n\n_Obj._ 3. It is farther objected, that there are some who have the\ncharacter of righteous persons, concerning whom it is supposed, that\nthey may fall away or perish; particularly those mentioned in Ezek.\nxviii. 24. _When the righteous man turneth away from his righteousness,\nand committeth iniquity, and doth according to all the abominations that\nthe wicked man doth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath\ndone shall not be mentioned, in the trespass that he hath trespassed,\nand in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die_: And in Heb.\nx. 38. it is said, _The just shall live by faith; but if any man_, or,\nas the word should be rendered, if _he draw back, my soul shall have no\npleasure in him_. Therefore, since the righteous man may turn from his\nrighteousness, and draw back to perdition, the doctrine of the saints\u2019\nperseverance cannot be defended.\n\n_Answ._ 1. As to the former of these scriptures, we must consider the\nsense thereof agreeably to the context, and the scope and design of the\nprophet therein; he had often reproved them for those vile abominations\nwhich they were guilty of, and had denounced the threatnings of God,\nwhich should have their accomplishment in their utter ruin;\nparticularly, he fortels the judgments that should sweep away many of\nthem before, and others that should befal them in the captivity: this is\nthe subject principally insisted on by the prophets Jeremiah and\nEzekiel; whereupon sometimes they were represented as disliking the\ndoctrine, desiring that _smooth things_ might be prophesied unto them,\nand _the holy one of Israel might cease from before them_. At other\ntimes they are represented as complaining of the hardship of this\ndispensation, intimating that it was unjust and severe, and, at the same\ntime, justifying themselves, as though they had done nothing that\ndeserved it; but all this was to befal them for the sins of their\nfathers, and accordingly there was a proverbial expression often made\nuse of by them, mentioned verse 2d of this chapter, _The fathers have\neaten sour grapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge_; by which\nthey did not understand that we expect to perish eternally for our\nfathers\u2019 sins, in which sense it must be taken, if this objection has\nany force in it: now God, by the prophet, tells them that they had no\nreason to use this proverb, and so puts them upon looking into their\npast conduct, and enquiring, whether they had not been guilty of the\nsame sins that their fathers were charged with? which, if they could\nexculpate themselves from, they should be delivered, and not die, that\nis, not fall by those judgments which either should go before, or follow\nthe captivity; for that seems to be the sense of _dying_, according to\nthe prophetic way of speaking, as we have observed elsewhere.[94] For\nthe understanding of this scripture we must consider, that the prophet\naddresses himself to _the house of Israel_, who are represented, ver.\n25. as complaining, that _the way of the Lord was not equal_; or, that\nGod\u2019s threatnings or judgments, which were the forerunners of the\ncaptivity, were such as they had not deserved; and therefore he tells\nthem that he would deal with them according to their deserts, ver. 24.\n_When the righteous_, that is, one whose conversation before this seemed\nto be unblemished, and he not guilty of those enormous crimes which were\ncommitted by others (which may be supposed, and yet the person not be in\na state of grace) I say, when such an one _turneth away from his\nrighteousness, and doth according to all the abominations that the\nwicked man doth_, that is, becomes openly vile and profligate; _shall he\nlive?_ can he expect any thing else but that God should follow him with\nexemplary judgments, or that he should be involved in the common\ndestruction? _In his sin that he hath sinned shall he die._ And on the\nother hand, ver. 27. _When the wicked man turneth away from his\nwickedness_; that is, they who have been guilty of these abominations\nshall reform their lives, or turn from their idolatry, murders,\nadulteries, oppressions, and other vile crimes, that the people in\ngeneral were charged with, by the prophet, which are assigned as the\nreason of God\u2019s sending this dreadful judgment of the captivity; I say,\nif there be such an instance of reformation, _he shall save his soul\nalive_; that is, either he shall be delivered from the captivity, or\nshall be preserved from those temporal judgments that either went before\nor followed after it. This reformation, and deliverance from these\njudgments, includes in it something less than saving grace, and a right\nto eternal life, which is inseparably connected with it, so that if\nnothing else be intended by the _righteous_ and _wicked man_; and if the\njudgments threatened, or their deliverance from them, in case of\nreformation, includes no more than this, it is evident, that it does not\nin the least suppose, that any true believer shall apostatize or fall\nfrom a state of grace. As we may distinguish between eternal death and\ntemporal judgments; so we must distinguish between a person\u2019s abstaining\nfrom the vilest abominations, as a means to escape these judgments; and\nhis exercising those graces that accompany salvation. There may be an\nexternal reformation in those who have no special grace, if nothing\nfarther be regarded than a person\u2019s moral character, or inoffensive\nbehaviour in the eye of the world. If we only consider him as abstaining\nfrom those sins which are universally reckoned disreputable among those\nwho make any pretensions to religion, and in this respect he be\ndenominated a righteous man, such an one may turn away from his\nrighteousness and become immoral and profligate, and so be reckoned\namong the number of apostates: nevertheless he cannot be said to\napostatize or fall from the grace of God, since moral virtue or the\nexercise of righteousness in our dealings with men is as much inferior\nto saving grace, as a form of godliness is to the power thereof.\n\n2. As to the other scripture, mentioned in the objection, it is\ngenerally urged against us as an unanswerable argument, taken from the\nexpress words thereof, to prove the possibility of the saints\u2019 apostacy;\nand our translation is charged with a wilful mistake, to serve a turn,\nand make the text speak what it never intended, since all who understand\nthe original must allow that it ought to be rendered, _If he draw back_,\nwhich supposes that the just man may apostatize, or draw back unto\nperdition. To which it may be replied,\n\n(1.) That though the words, according to the form in which they are laid\ndown, contain a supposition, it does not infer the being or reality of\nthe thing supposed[95]; but only this, that if such a thing should\nhappen, it would be attended with what is laid down as a consequence\nthereof. This is very agreeable to our common mode of speaking, as when\nwe say; if a virtuous person should commit a capital crime, he will fall\nunder the lash of the law as much as though he had made no pretensions\nto virtue; nevertheless, it does not follow from hence, that such an one\nshall do it, or expose himself to this punishment; or, on the other\nhand, if a king should say to a criminal, as Solomon did to Adonijah,\n\u2018If he will shew himself a worthy man, there shall not an hair of him\nfall to the earth,\u2019 it cannot be concluded from hence, that he will\nbehave himself so as that his life shall be secured to him. The\nproposition is true, as there is a just connexion between the\nsupposition and the consequence; yet this does not argue that the thing\nsupposed shall come to pass. Now to apply this to the scripture, under\nour present consideration; the proposition is doubtless true, that if\nthe just man should draw back, so as to become a wicked man, if he\nshould lose the principle of grace which was implanted in regeneration,\nand abandon himself to the greatest impieties, he would as certainly\nperish as though he had never experienced the grace of God; but it must\nnot be inferred from hence, that God will suffer such an one, who is the\nobject both of his love and care, thus to fall and perish, so that his\nsoul should have no pleasure in him.\n\n(2.) If we suppose the person here spoken of, whom we consider as a true\nbeliever, to draw back, we may distinguish between backsliding or\nturning aside from God, by the commission of very great sins; and\napostacy. Or between drawing back, by being guilty of great crimes, so\nas to expose himself to sore judgments; and his drawing back to\nperdition. The just man in this text, is said, indeed, to draw back, but\nhe is distinguished from one that draws back to perdition; as it is said\nin the following verse, \u2018We are not of them who draw back to perdition,\nbut of them that believe, to the saving of the soul.\u2019 Such a drawing\nback as this, though it shall not end in perdition, inasmuch as the\nperson shall be recovered and brought to repentance; yet it shall be\nattended with very great marks of God\u2019s displeasure against believers,\nfor those sins which they have committed, as well as others;\naccordingly, _his soul having no pleasure_ in them, denotes that he\nwould, in various instances, reveal his wrath against relapsing\nbelievers, as a display of his holiness, who shall nevertheless be\nrecovered and saved at last. If these things be duly considered, the\nobjection seems to have no weight in it, though it should be allowed,\nthat the words upon which it is principally founded, are not rightly\ntranslated.\n\nHowever, I cannot see sufficient reason to set aside our translation, it\nbeing equally just to render the words, _if any man draw back_[96];\nsince the supplying the words _any man_, or _any one_, is allowed of in\nmany other instances, both in the Old and New Testament. Therefore there\nis not the least incongruity in its being supplied in the text under our\npresent consideration[97]; and, if it be, the sense that we give of it,\nwill appear very agreeable to the context; accordingly the meaning is,\n\u2018The just shall live by faith,\u2019 or they who \u2018know in themselves that\nthey have in heaven a better and an enduring substance,\u2019 as in one of\nthe foregoing verses: These shall live by faith, but as for others who\ndo not live by faith, having only a form or shew of religion, \u2018whose\nmanner is to forsake the assembling of themselves together,\u2019 as in verse\n25. these are inclined to _draw back_; therefore, let them know that _if\nany one_, or _whosoever draws back_, it will be at their peril; for it\nwill be to their own _perdition_; yet saith the apostle, that true\nbelievers may not be discouraged by the apostacy of others, let them\ntake notice of what is said in the following words, \u2018We are not of them\nwho draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe, to the saving of\nthe soul.\u2019 These things being duly considered, it will be sufficiently\nevident that this text does not militate against the doctrine of the\nsaints\u2019 perseverance.\n\n_Obj._ 4. There is another objection brought against the doctrine we\nhave been endeavouring to maintain, taken from what the apostle says in\nHeb. vi. 4, 5, 6. \u2018It is impossible for those who were once enlightened,\nand have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the\nHoly Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the\nworld to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto\nrepentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and\nput him to an open shame.\u2019 The force of this objection lies in two\nthings, _viz._ that they are described as total and final apostates; and\nalso, that according to the account we have of their former\nconversation, they appear then to have been true believers.\n\n_Answ._ This is thought, by some, who defend the doctrine of the saints\u2019\nperseverance, to be one of the most difficult objections that we\ngenerally meet with against it; especially they who cannot see how it is\npossible for a person to make such advances towards true godliness, and\nyet be no other than an hypocrite or formal professor, are obliged to\ntake a method to set aside the force of the objection, which I cannot\ngive into, namely, that when the apostle says, _It is impossible_ that\nsuch should be _renewed again to repentance_; the word _impossible_\ndenotes nothing else, but that the thing is exceeding difficult, not\nthat they shall eventually perish; because they are supposed to be true\nbelievers; but their recovery after such a notorious instance of\nbacksliding, shall be attended with difficulties so great that nothing\ncan surmount, but the extraordinary power of God; and though he will\nrecover them, yet they shall feel the smart thereof as long as they\nlive; they shall be saved, yet so as by fire[98].\n\nBut notwithstanding the word _impossible_ may be sometimes taken for\nthat which is very difficult, I cannot but conclude that the apostle is\nhere speaking of that which is impossible, with respect to the event,\nand therefore, that he is giving the character of apostates who shall\nnever be recovered. This appears, not only from the heinousness of the\ncrime, as they are said _to crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,\nand put him to an open shame_; but from what is mentioned in the\nfollowing verses, in which they are compared to _the earth that bringeth\nforth thorns and briars, which is rejected, and nigh unto cursing, whose\nend is to be burned_; and from their being distinguished from those who\nshall be saved, concerning whom the apostle was _persuaded better\nthings, and things that accompany salvation_; therefore he is speaking\nhere concerning a total and final apostasy.\n\nBut that this may not appear to militate against the doctrine we are\nmaintaining, I shall endeavour to shew, that notwithstanding the\ncharacter the apostle gives of the persons he here speaks of they were\ndestitute of the truth of grace, and therefore nothing is said\nconcerning them, but what a formal professor may attain to: That this\nmay appear let it be considered,\n\n1. That they are described as _once enlightened_; but this a person may\nbe, and yet be destitute of saving faith. If by being _enlightened_ we\nunderstand their having been baptized, as some critics take the word,\nwhich was afterwards, in some following ages, used in that sense, it\nmight easily be alleged, that a person might be baptized and yet not be\na true believer: But since I question whether baptism was expressed by\nillumination in the apostles age[100], I would rather understand by it,\ntheir having been convinced of the truth of the gospel, or yielded an\nassent to the doctrines contained therein. Now this a person may do, and\nyet be destitute of saving faith, which is seated not barely in the\nunderstanding, but in the will, and therefore supposes him not only to\nbe rightly informed, with respect to those things which are the object\nof faith, but to be internally and effectually called, from whence\nsaving faith proceeds, as has been before observed.\n\n2. They are said to have _tasted the good word of God_; which agrees\nwith the character before given of those who had a temporary faith[101],\nwho seemed, for a while, pleased with the word, and their affections\nwere raised in hearing it; as Herod is said to have _heard John the\nBaptist gladly, and to have done many things_; like those whom our\nSaviour compares to the seed sown in stony ground, which soon sprang up,\nbut afterwards withered away. This a person may do, and yet not have\nsaving faith; for it is one thing to approve of, and be affected with\nthe word, and another thing to mix it with that faith which accompanies\nsalvation. A person may entertain those doctrines contained in the word\nwhich relate to a future state of blessedness with pleasure; as all men\ndesire to be happy, and at the same time be far from practising the\nduties of self-denial, taking up the cross, and following Christ,\nmortifying indwelling sin, and exercising an intire dependance upon, and\nresignation to him in all things: This contains much more than what is\nexpressed by _tasting the good word of God_.\n\n3. They are farther described as having _tasted the heavenly gift, and\nbeing made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and of the powers of the world\nto come_; all which expressions, I humbly conceive, carry in them no\nmore than this, that they had been enabled to work miracles, or that\nthey had a faith of miracles, which has been before described[102], and\nproved to fall very short of saving faith[103]. Therefore these\ncharacters given of them do not argue that they were true believers, and\nconsequently the objection, which depends on the supposition that they\nwere, is of no force to prove that saints may totally or finally fall\nfrom grace.\n\n_Obj._ 5. The next objection against the doctrine we have been\nmaintaining, is taken from Heb. x. 29. _Of how much sorer punishment\nsuppose ye shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the\nSon of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was\nsanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the spirit of\ngrace._ The crime here spoken of is of the heinous nature, and the\ngreatest punishment is said to be inflicted for it: Now, inasmuch as\nthese are described as having been _sanctified by the blood of the\ncovenant_, it follows, that they were true believers, and consequently\ntrue believers may apostatize, and fall short of salvation.\n\n_Answ._ The force of the objection lies principally in those words, _the\nblood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified_; which expression is\ntaken, by divines, in two different senses.\n\n1. Some take the word _he_ in the same sense as it is taken in the\nobjection, as referring to the apostate; and then the difficulty which\noccurs, is how such an one could be said to be sanctified by the blood\nof the covenant, and yet not regenerate, effectually called, or a true\nbeliever: To solve this, they suppose, that by _sanctification_ we are\nonly to understand a relative holiness, which such have who are made\npartakers of the common grace of the gospel: Thus it is said, _Israel\nwas holiness unto the Lord_, Jer. ii. 3. or, as the apostle Peter\nexpresses it, _an holy nation_, 1 Pet. ii. 9. as they were God\u2019s people\nby an external covenant relation, and by an explicit consent to be\ngoverned by those laws which he gave them when they first became a\nchurch, Exod. xxiv. 3. and publicly avouched him to be their God, and he\navouched them to be his peculiar people, which was done upon some solemn\noccasions, Deut. xxvi. 17, 18. Nevertheless, many of them were destitute\nof the special grace of sanctification, as it contains in it a thorough\nand universal change of heart and life. Moreover, they suppose that this\nprivilege of being God\u2019s people, by an external covenant-relation,\ntogether with all these common gifts and graces that attend it, was\npurchased by, and founded on the blood of Christ, which is called _the\nblood of the covenant_, inasmuch as he was _given for a covenant of the\npeople_, Isa. xlii. 6. and pursuant hereunto, he shed his blood to\nprocure for them the external as well as the saving blessings of the\ncovenant of grace; the former of these, the persons here described as\napostates, are supposed to have been made partakers of, as the apostle\nsays, _To them pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the\ncovenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the\npromises_, Rom. ix. 4. they worshipped him in all his ordinances, as\nthose whom the prophet speaks of, _who seek him daily, and delight to\nknow his ways, as a nation that did righteousness, and forsook not the\nordinance of their God; they ask of him the ordinances of justice, and\ntake delight in approaching to God_; and yet these things were not done\nby faith, Isa. lviii. 2. In this respect persons may be sanctified, and\nyet afterwards forfeit, neglect, despise and forsake these ordinances,\nand lose the external privileges of the covenant of grace, which they\nonce had, and so become apostates. This is the most common method used\nto solve the difficulty contained in the objection. But I would rather\nacquiesce in another way, which may be taken to account for the sense of\nthose words, _the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified_.\nTherefore, let it be considered,\n\n2. That the word _he_ may be understood, not as referring to the\napostate, but our Saviour, who is spoken of immediately before: thus the\napostate is said to \u2018trample under foot the Son of God, and count the\nblood of the covenant wherewith He, that is, Christ, \u2018was sanctified, an\nunholy thing.\u2019 That this sense may appear just, it may be observed, that\nChrist was sanctified or set apart by the Father, to perform all the\nbranches of his Mediatorial office, in two respects.\n\n(1.) As he was fore-ordained or appointed, by him, to come into the\nworld to shed his blood for the redemption of his people: thus his\nundertaking to redeem them is called his sanctifying, or devoting\nhimself to perform this work, as he says, \u2018For their sakes I sanctify\nmyself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth,\u2019 John\nxvii. 19. this he did in pursuance of the eternal transaction between\nthe Father and him, relating hereunto. But it will be said, that this\nwas antecedent to his dying for them; and therefore, properly speaking,\nhe could not be said, in this respect, to be _sanctified by the blood of\nthe covenant_; therefore, to this we may add,\n\n(2.) That he was also sanctified, or set apart by the Father, to apply\nthe work of redemption after he had purchased it; which sanctification\nwas, in the most proper sense, the result of his shedding his blood,\nwhich was the blood of the covenant; so that as he was \u2018brought again\nfrom the dead,\u2019 as the apostle speaks, \u2018through the blood of the\neverlasting covenant,\u2019 Heb. xiii. 20. all the blessings which he applies\nto his people as the consequence hereof, are the result of his being\nsanctified, or set apart to carry on and perfect the work of our\nsalvation, the foundation whereof was laid in his blood.\n\nMoreover, that they who are here described as apostates, had not before\nthis, the grace of faith, is evident from the context, inasmuch as they\nare distinguished from true believers. The apostle seems to speak of two\nsorts of persons, to wit, some who had cast off the ordinances of God\u2019s\nworship, \u2018forsaking the assembling of themselves together,\u2019 who are\ndistinguished from those whom he dehorts from this sin, who _had_ the\ngrace of _faith_, whereby they were enabled to \u2018draw near to God in full\nassurance thereof, having their hearts sprinkled from an evil\nconscience, and their bodies washed with pure water;\u2019 concerning these\nhe says, \u2018We are not of them who draw back to perdition, but of them who\nbelieve to the saving of the soul,\u2019 chap. x. 39. Therefore we must\nconclude that others are intended in the text under our present\nconsideration, who were not true believers, and consequently it does not\nfrom hence appear that such may totally, or finally, fall from a state\nof grace.\n\nThe apostates spoken of in this and the foregoing objection, were\nprobably some among the Jews, to whom the gospel was preached, who\nembraced the Christian faith, being convinced by those miracles which\nwere wrought for that purpose, but afterwards revolted from it, and were\nmore inveterately set against Christ and the gospel than they had been\nbefore they made this profession; and accordingly as they had formerly\napproved of the crimes of those who crucified Christ, in which respect\nthey are said to have crucified him; now they do, in the same sense,\ncrucify him afresh. And as they had been made partakers of the\nextraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost; afterwards they openly blasphemed\nhim, and this was done with spite and malice. These texts therefore not\nonly contain a sad instance of the apostasy of some, but prove that they\nwere irrecoverably lost; and this comes as near the account we have in\nthe gospels of the unpardonable sin, as any thing mentioned in\nscripture: nevertheless, what has been said to prove that they never\nwere true believers, is a sufficient answer to this and the foregoing\nobjection.\n\n_Objec._ 6. Another objection against the doctrine of the saints\u2019\nperseverance, is taken from 2 Pet. ii. 20-22. _For if after they have\nescaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord\nand Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and\novercome; the latter end is worse with them than the beginning_; and\nthey are said in the following verse, to _turn from the holy commandment\ndelivered unto them_; which is compared to the _dog turning to his own\nvomit again, and the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire_.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though every one must conclude,\nthat the persons, whom the apostle here speaks of, plainly appear to be\napostates; yet there is nothing in their character which argues that\nthey apostatized, or fell from the truth of grace; and it is only such\nwhom we are at present speaking of. It may be observed, that the apostle\nis so far from including these apostates in the number of those to whom\nhe writes this, with the foregoing epistle, whom he describes _as elect,\naccording to the fore-knowledge of God the Father, through\nsanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood\nof Jesus Christ_, and as having been _begotten again unto a lively hope,\nby the resurrection of Jesus Christ, to an inheritance reserved for them\nin heaven_, and as such, who should be _kept by the power of God,\nthrough faith, unto salvation_, 1 Pet. i. 2-5. that he plainly\ndistinguishes them from them. For in verse 1, of this chapter, from\nwhence it is taken, it is said, \u2018There shall be false teachers among\nyou, and many shall follow their pernicious ways;\u2019 he does not say many,\nwho are now of your number, but many who shall be joined to the church,\nwhen these false teachers arise. These persons, indeed, are represented\nas making a great shew of religion, by which they gained reputation\namong some professors, whom they seduced which otherwise they could not\nhave done; and therefore it is said, \u2018They had escaped the pollutions of\nthe world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,\u2019\nand that they had \u2018known the way of righteousness.\u2019 Such might indeed be\njoined to the church afterwards; but they did not now belong to it; and\nwhat is said concerning them, amounts to no more than an external\nvisible reformation, together with their having attained the knowledge\nof Christ and divine things; so that they were enlightened in the\ndoctrines of the gospel; though they made it appear, by the methods they\nused to deceive others, that they had not experienced the grace of the\ngospel themselves, and therefore they fell away from their profession,\nand turned aside from the faith, which once they preached. It is one\nthing for a formal professor, who makes a great show of religion, to\nturn aside from his profession, to all excess of riot; and another thing\nto suppose a true believer can do so, and that to such a degree as to\ncontinue therein; this the grace of God will keep him from.\n\n_Objec._ 7. Another objection against the doctrine of the saints\u2019\nperseverance, is taken from the parable of the debtor and creditor, in\nMatt, xviii. 26, _&c._ in which it is said, \u2018The servant fell down and\nworshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee\nall. Then the Lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed\nhim, and forgave him the debt;\u2019 but afterwards, upon his treating one of\nhis fellow-servants, who owed him a very inconsiderable sum, with great\nseverity, his lord exacted the debt of him, which he had before forgiven\nhim, and so _delivered_ him _to the tormentors_, till he should pay all\nthat was due to him: \u2018So likewise,\u2019 it is said, \u2018shall my heavenly\nFather do unto you, if ye, from your hearts forgive not every one his\nbrother their trespasses;\u2019 from whence it is inferred, that a person may\nfall from a justified state, or that God may forgive sin at one time,\nand yet be provoked to alter his resolution, and inflict the punishment\nthat is due to it, at another; which is altogether inconsistent with the\ndoctrine of the saints\u2019 perseverance in grace.\n\n_Answ._ In answer to this we must observe, that our Saviour\u2019s design in\nhis parables, is not that every word or circumstance contained in them,\nshould be applied to signify what it seems to import, but there is some\ntruth in general intended to be illustrated thereby, which is\nprincipally to be regarded therein. Thus in the parable of the _judge_,\nin Luke xviii. 2, &c. \u2018which feared not God, neither regarded man,\u2019 who\nwas moved, by a widow\u2019s importunity, to \u2018avenge her of her adversary;\u2019\nwhich after a while, he resolved to do, because the widow _troubled\nhim_. This is applied to \u2018God\u2019s avenging his elect, who cry day and\nnight unto him;\u2019 where we must observe, that it is only in this\ncircumstance that the parable is to be applied to them without any\nregard had to the injustice of the judge, or his being uneasy, by reason\nof the importunity which the widow exprest in pleading her cause with\nhim.\n\nAgain, in the parable of the _steward_, in Luke xvi. 1, &c. who being\naccused for having _wasted his lord\u2019s goods_; and apprehending that he\nshould be soon turned out of the stewardship, he takes an unjust method\nto gain the favour of his lord\u2019s debtors, by remitting a part of what\nthey owed him, that by this means they might be induced to shew kindness\nto him when he was turned out of his service. It is said indeed, verse\n8. that \u2018the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had acted\nwisely;\u2019 whereas, our Saviour does not design, in the account he gives\nof his injustice, to give the least countenance to it, as though it were\nto be imitated by us; nor by his lord\u2019s commending him as acting wisely\nfor himself, does he intend that it is lawful or commendable for wicked\nmen to pursue the like measures to promote their future interest. But\nthe only thing in which this parable is applied, is, that we might learn\nfrom hence, that \u2018the children of this world are, in their generation\nwiser than the children of light;\u2019 and that men ought to endeavour,\nwithout the least appearance of injustice, to gain the friendship of\nothers, by using what they have in the world, in such a way, as that\nthey may be induced, out of gratitude for those favours, which they\nconferred upon them, to shew respect to them; but principally, that in\nperforming what was really their duty, they might have ground to hope\nthat they shall be approved of God, and received into everlasting\nhabitations.\n\nNow to apply this rule to the parable from whence the objection is\ntaken, we must consider, that the design hereof is not to signify that\nGod changes his mind, as men do, by forgiving persons at one time, and\nafterwards condemning them, as though he did not know, when he extended\nthis kindness to them, how they would behave towards others, or whether\nthey would improve or forfeit this privilege; since to suppose this\nwould be contrary to the divine perfections. Therefore the only design\nof the parable is to shew, that they who now conclude that God has\nforgiven them, ought to forgive others, or else they will find\nthemselves mistaken at last: and though according to the tenor of the\ndivine dispensations, or the revealed will of God, which is our only\nrule of judging concerning this matter, they think that they are in a\njustified state, it will appear, that the debt which they owed was not\ncancelled, but shall be exacted of them to the utmost, in their own\npersons; so that all that can be proved from hence is, that a man may\nfall from, or lose those seeming grounds, which we had to conclude that\nhis sins were forgiven: but we are not to suppose that our Saviour\nintends hereby that God\u2019s secret purpose, relating to the forgiveness of\nsin, can be changed; or that he, who is really freed from condemnation,\nat one time, may fall under it at another: therefore, what is said in\nthis parable, does not in the least give countenance to this objection,\nor overthrow the doctrine we are maintaining.\n\n_Objec._ 8. There is another objection, taken from what the apostle Paul\nsays concerning himself, in 1 Cor. ix. 27. _I keep under my body, and\nbring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached\nto others, I myself should be a cast-away._ Now it is certain that the\napostle was a true believer; yet he concludes, that if he did not behave\nhimself so as to subdue or keep under his corrupt passions, but should\ncommit those open scandalous crimes, which they would prompt him to, he\nshould, in the end, become a cast-away, that is, apostatize from God,\nand be rejected by him.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though the apostle had as good\nground to conclude that he had experienced the grace of God in truth, as\nany man, and was oftentimes favoured with a full assurance hereof; yet\nhe did not attain this assurance by immediate revelation, so as he\nreceived those doctrines which he was to impart to the church as a rule\nof faith; for then it would have been impossible for him to have been\nmistaken as to this matter: and if this be supposed, then I would\nunderstand what he says concerning his being _a cast-away_, as denoting\nwhat would be the consequence of his _not keeping under his body_; but\nnot implying hereby that corrupt nature should so far prevail, as that\nhe should fall from a sanctified state. Now if he did not attain this\nassurance by immediate revelation, then he had it in the same way as\nothers have, by making use of those marks and characters which are given\nof the truth of grace; and accordingly he argues, that though, at\npresent, he thought himself to be in a sanctified state, from the same\nevidences that others conclude themselves to be so; yet if corrupt\nnature should prevail over him, which it would do, if he did not keep\nhis body in subjection, or if he were guilty of those vile abominations\nwhich unregenerate persons are chargeable with, then it would appear,\nthat this assurance was ill grounded, his hope of salvation delusive,\nand he no other than an hypocrite; and so, notwithstanding his having\npreached to others, he would be found, in the end, among them who were\nfalse professors, and accordingly rejected of God: therefore we may\nobserve, that it is one thing for a person to exercise that caution, and\nuse those means to prevent sin, which, if he should commit, would prove\nhim an hypocrite; and another thing for one that is a true believer, to\nbe suffered to commit those sins whereby he would apostatize from God,\nand so miss of salvation.\n\nAnd this will serve to answer another objection that is usually brought\nagainst the doctrine we are maintaining, as though it were inconsistent\nwith that holy fear which believers ought to have of falling, as an\ninducement to care and watchfulness in the discharge of their duty; as\nit is said in Prov. xxviii. 14. _Happy is the man that feareth always_;\ninasmuch as we must distinguish between that fear of caution, which is a\npreservative against sin, and includes a watchfulness over our actions,\nthat we may not dishonour God thereby; and an unbelieving fear, that\nthough we are in a state of grace, and are enabled to exercise that\ndiligence and circumspection that becomes christians, yet we have no\nfoundation whereon to set our foot, or ground to hope for salvation. Or,\nit is one thing to fear, lest we should, by giving way to sin, dishonour\nGod, grieve his Spirit, and wound our own consciences, and do that which\nis a disgrace to the gospel, through the prevalency of corrupt nature,\nwhereby we shall have ground to conclude that we thought ourselves\nsomething when we were nothing, deceiving our own souls; and another\nthing to fear that we shall perish and fall, though our hearts are right\nwith God, and we have reason to expect that we shall be kept by his\npower, through faith, unto salvation.\n\nWe shall conclude this answer with some few inferences from what has\nbeen said, to prove the doctrine of the saints\u2019 perseverance as\ncontained therein. And,\n\n1. Since we do not pretend to assert that all who make a profession of\nreligion are assured that they shall never apostatize, but only true\nbelievers, let unbelievers take no encouragement from hence to conclude,\nthat it shall be well with them in the end. Many are externally called\nwho are not really sanctified; and presume that they shall be saved,\nthough, without ground, inasmuch as they continue in impenitency and\nunbelief; such have no warrant to take comfort from the doctrine we have\nbeen maintaining.\n\n2. We may, from what has been said, observe the difference between the\nsecurity of a believer\u2019s state, as his hope is fixed on the stability of\nthe covenant, and the promises thereof, relating to his salvation,\ntogether with the Spirit\u2019s witness, with ours, concerning our own\nsincerity; and that which we generally call carnal security, whereby a\nperson thinks himself safe, or that all things shall go well with him,\nthough he make provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof: This\nis an unwarrantable security in a state of unregeneracy, or\nlicentiousness, which this doctrine does not in the least give\ncountenance to.\n\n3. From what has been said concerning the apostasy of some from that\nfaith which they once made a profession of, we may infer; that it is\nonly the grace of God experienced in truth, that will preserve us from\nturning aside from the faith of the gospel. The apostle speaks of some\nwho, by embracing those doctrines that were subversive of the gospel,\nare _fallen from grace_, Gal. v. 4. that is, from the doctrines of\ngrace; concerning whom he says, that _Christ profited them nothing_, or\nwas _become of no effect to them_, chap. v. 2, 4. that is, the gospel,\nwhich contains a display of the glory of Christ, was of no saving\nadvantage to them. All the sad instances we have of many, who are tossed\nto and fro with every wind of doctrine, and are made a prey to those\nthat lie in wait to deceive, proceed from their being destitute of the\ngrace of God, which would have a tendency to preserve them from turning\naside from the faith of the gospel.\n\n4. Let us be exhorted to be as diligent and watchful against the\nbreakings forth of corruption, and endeavour to avoid all occasions of\nsin, as much as though perseverance in grace were to be ascribed to our\nown endeavours, or as though God had given us no ground to conclude that\nhe would enable us to persevere; and yet, at the same time, depend on\nhis assistance, without which this blessing cannot be attained, and hope\nin his mercy and faithfulness, and lay hold on the promises which he has\ngiven us, that it shall go well with us in the end, or that we shall\nhave all joy and peace in believing.\n\n5. Let us not only endeavour to persevere, but grow in grace; which two\nblessings are joined together; as it is said, _The righteous also shall\nhold on his way; and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and\nstronger_, Job xvii. 9.\n\n6. This doctrine has a great tendency to support and fortify believers,\nunder the most adverse dispensations of providence, which, at any time,\nthey are liable to; and to comfort them under all the assaults of their\nspiritual enemies; since though they may be suffered to discourage or\ngive them interruption in the exercise of those graces which they have\nexperienced, yet grace shall not be wholly extinguished. And sometimes,\nby the over-ruling providence of God, those things which in themselves\nhave a tendency to weaken their faith, shall be ordered as a means to\nincrease it; so that when they can do nothing in their own strength,\nthey may be enabled, by depending on Christ, and receiving strength from\nhim, to prevail against all the opposition they meet with, and come off\n_more than conquerors_, at last, _through him that loved them_, Rom.\nviii. 37.\n\nFootnote 81:\n\n _See Whitby\u2019s discourse, &c._ _page 463._\n\nFootnote 82:\n\n _See Vol. I. Page 469._\n\nFootnote 83:\n\n _See Vol. I. page 481, and page 135-138._\n\nFootnote 84:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 170, 171._\n\nFootnote 85:\n\n _See Vol. I. page 477_, & albi passim.\n\nFootnote 86:\n\n _See Vol. I. page 437._\n\nFootnote 87:\n\n _See Page 11, 12, ante._\n\nFootnote 88:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 473-479. Quest._ lv.\n\nFootnote 89:\n\n _See Page 30, ante._\n\nFootnote 90:\n\n _The words are_ \u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 91:\n\n _See Whitby\u2019s Discourse, &c. Page 67, 68, 463._\n\nFootnote 92:\n\n _See page 213, 214, ante._\n\nFootnote 93:\n\n _See several other scriptures, in which_ \u03bc\u03b7 _is taken adversatively_,\n Matt. xxiv. 35. Gal. i. 7. Rev. ix. 4.\n\nFootnote 94:\n\n _See Vol. II page 333-335._\n\nFootnote 95:\n\n _It is a known maxim in logic_, Suppositio nihil ponit in esse.\n\nFootnote 96:\n\n \u0395\u03b1\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 97:\n\n _It is certain, that the particles_ \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8, _and others of the like\n import, are often left out, and the defect thereof is to be supplied\n in our translation: Thus it is in_ Job xxxiii. 27. _where the Hebrew\n word, which might have been rendered_ and he shall say, _is better\n rendered_ and if any say, &c. _and in_ Gen. xlviii. 2. _instead of_ he\n told Jacob, _it is better rendered_ one told Jacob, _or_ somebody\n _told him; and in_ Mark ii. 1. \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, _which is left out in the Greek\n text, is supplied in the translation, in which we do not read it_\n after days, _but_ after some days. _See Nold. Concord. Partic. Page\n 41, 42. in which several texts of scripture are produced to the same\n purpose, and among the rest, this in_ Heb. x. 38. _which we are at\n present considering as what ought to be rendered_ if any one draw\n back. _In this and such like instances we may observe, that the verb\n personal has an impersonal signification, or that which is properly\n active is rendered passively; so_ Eccl. ix. 15. \u05d6\u05de\u05e6\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d4 _is not\n rendered_ and he found in it, &c. _but_ now there was found in it;\n _many other instances of the like nature are to be observed in the\n Hebrew text in the Old Testament; and sometimes this mode of speaking\n is imitated by the Greek text in the New. I might also observe, with\n respect to the scripture under our present consideration, that the\n learned Grotius observes that_ \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 _ought to be supplied, and\n consequently the text ought to be rendered as it is in our\n translation_, if any man draw back, _which he observes as what is\n agreeable to the grammatical construction thereof, without any regard\n to the doctrine we are maintaining, with respect to which, he is\n otherwise minded_.\n\nFootnote 98:\n\n _To give countenance to this sense of the word_ impossible, _they\n refer to some scriptures, in which it does not denote an absolute\n impossibility of the thing, but only that if it comes to pass it will\n be with much difficulty. Thus it is said_, Acts xx. 16. _that the\n Apostle_ Paul hasted, if it were possible for him to be at _Jerusalem_\n the day of Pentecost; _where his making haste argues that the thing\n was not in itself impossible, but difficult. And_ Rom. xii. 18. _we\n are exhorted_, if it be possible, as much as in us lieth, to live\n peaceably with all men; _which shews that it is hard indeed so to do;\n nevertheless, we are to use our utmost endeavours to do it, which does\n not argue that the thing is in itself altogether impossible. And there\n is another scripture they bring to justify this sense of the words in_\n Matt. xix. 23-26. _in which our Saviour\u2019s design is to shew the\n difficulty of a rich man\u2019s entering into the kingdom of heaven, which\n he compares to a_ camel\u2019s going through the eye of a needle; _by which\n very few suppose, that the beast, so called, is intended, but a\n cable-rope, which is sometimes called a_ camel; _thus the Syriack[99]\n and Arabick versions translate the word_:\n\n _And a learned writer observes, that the Jews, in a proverbial way,\n express the difficulty of a thing by that of a cable-rope\u2019s passing\n through the eye of a needle, See Buxt. Lex. Talmud. Pane 1719. and\n Bochart Hiero. Part. 1. Lib. 2. Cap. 3. And by_ needle _is not meant\n that which is used in working, but an iron, through which a small rope\n may be easily drawn; though it was very difficult to force a camel or\n cable-rope through it; therefore they suppose our Saviour is not\n speaking of a thing which is absolutely impossible, but exceeding\n difficult; and this may be inferred from his reply to what the\n disciples objected_, who then can be saved, _when he says_, with men\n this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. _And to\n apply this to the scripture under our present consideration, they\n suppose that the apostle, when he speaks of the renewing of those\n persons to repentance, does not intend that which is absolutely\n impossible, but that it cannot be brought about but by the\n extraordinary power of God, with whom all things are possible._\n\nFootnote 99:\n\n The ancient Syriac is \u0720\u0713\u0721\u0720\u0710 the modern is the same word, which is\n literally \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd _a camel_, not \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd _a cable_. This Eastern\n proverb is now well established. Vide Campbell, Clarke, &c.\n\nFootnote 100:\n\n _We do not find the word used in that sense till the second century_,\n _by Justin Martyr [Vid. ejusd. Dial. 2.] and Clemens Alexandrinus [in\n P\u00e6dag. Lib. 1. cap. 6.] and therefore we are not altogether to take\n our measures in explaining the sense of words, used in scripture, from\n them, who sometimes mistake the sense of the doctrine, contained\n therein. However, if we take the word in this sense, it does not\n militate against our argument, since a person may be baptized, who is\n not in a state of grace and salvation._\n\nFootnote 101:\n\n _See Pag. 124, 125 ante._\n\nFootnote 102:\n\n _See Pag. 122, 123 ante._\n\nFootnote 103:\n\n _There seems to be an hendyadis in the apostle\u2019s mode of speaking. By\n the heavenly gift we are to understand extraordinary gifts, which are\n called the Holy Ghost elsewhere_, Acts xix. 2. _because they were from\n the Holy Ghost as effects of his power, and wrought to confirm the\n gospel dispensation, which is called the world to come_, Heb. ii. 6.\n _and therefore they are styled the powers of the world to come_.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXX.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXX. _Can true believers be infallibly assured that they are\n in the estate of grace, and that they shall persevere therein unto\n salvation?_\n\n ANSW. Such as truly believe in Christ, and endeavour to walk in all\n good conscience before him, may, without extraordinary revelation,\n by faith grounded upon the truth of God\u2019s promises, and by the\n Spirit, enabling them to discern in themselves those graces to which\n the promises of life are made, and bearing witness with their\n spirits, that they are the children of God, be infallibly assured\n that they are in a state of grace, and shall persevere therein unto\n salvation.\n\nHaving before considered a believer as made partaker of those graces of\nthe Holy Spirit that accompany salvation, whereby his state is rendered\nsafe, and also that he shall not draw back unto perdition, but shall\nattain the end of his faith, even the salvation of his soul; it is\nnecessary for the establishing of his comfort and joy, that he should\nknow himself to be interested in this privilege. It is a great blessing\nto be redeemed by Christ, and sanctified by the Spirit; but it is a\nsuperadded privilege to know that we are so, or be assured that we are\nin a state of grace, which is the subject insisted on in this answer: In\nwhich we are led,\n\nI. To speak something concerning the nature of assurance, and how far\npersons may be said to be infallibly assured of their salvation.\n\nII. We shall endeavour to prove that this blessing is attainable in this\nlife.\n\nIII. We shall consider the character of those to whom it belongs. And,\n\nIV. The means whereby it may be attained.\n\nI. Concerning the nature of assurance, and how far persons may be said\nto be infallibly assured of their salvation. Assurance is opposed to\ndoubting; which is inconsistent therewith; so that he who has attained\nthis privilege, is carried above all those doubts and fears respecting\nthe truth of grace, and his interest in the love of God, which others\nare exposed to, whereby their lives are rendered very uncomfortable: It\nmay also be considered as containing in it something more than our being\nenabled to hope that we are in a state of grace; for though that affords\nrelief against despair, yet it falls short of assurance, which is\nsometimes called _a full assurance of hope_, Heb. vi. 11. and it\ncertainly contains a great deal more than a probability, or a\nconjectural persuasion relating to this matter; which is the only thing\nthat some will allow to be attainable by believers, especially they who\ndeny the doctrine of the saints\u2019 perseverance, and lay the greatest\nstress of man\u2019s salvation on his own free-will, rather than the\nefficacious grace of God. All that they will own as to this matter is,\nthat persons may be in a hopeful way to salvation, and that it is\nprobable they may attain it at last. But they cannot be fully assured\nthat they shall, unless they were assured concerning their perseverance,\nwhich, they suppose, no one can be; because the carrying on of the work\nof grace depends on the free-will of man, as well as the first beginning\nof it; and according to their notion of liberty, as has been before\nobserved under another answer[104], _viz._ that he who acts freely may\nact the contrary; and consequently, since every thing that is done in\nthe carrying on of the work of grace, is done freely; no one can be\nassured that this work shall not miscarry; therefore none can attain\nassurance; this is what some assert, but we deny. And it is observed in\nthis answer, that believers may not only attain assurance that they are\nin a state of grace, and shall persevere therein unto salvation, but\nthat they may be infallibly assured hereof, which is the highest degree\nof assurance. How far this is attainable by believers, may be the\nsubject of our farther inquiry.\n\nIt is a matter of dispute among some, whether assurance admits of any\ndegrees, or whether a person can be said to be more or less assured of a\nthing? or whether that which does not amount to the highest degree of\ncertainty, may be called assurance? This is denied, by some, for this\nreason; because assurance is the highest and strongest assent that can\nbe given to the truth of any proposition; accordingly the least defect\nof evidence on which it is supposed to be founded, leaves the mind in a\nproportionable degree of doubt, as to the truth of it; in which case\nthere may be a probability, but not an assurance. If this method of\nexplaining the meaning of the word be true, then it is beyond dispute,\nthat they who have attained assurance of their being in a state of\ngrace, may be said to be infallibly assured thereof: Whether this be the\nsense of that expression in this answer, I will not pretend to\ndetermine; neither shall I enter any farther into this dispute, which\namounts to little more than what concerns the propriety or impropriety\nof the sense of the word _assurance_. All that I shall add concerning\nit, is, that according to our common mode of speaking it is reckoned no\nabsurdity for a person to say he is sure of a thing, though it be\npossible for him to have greater evidence of the truth thereof, and\nconsequently a greater degree of assurance. Thus the assurance that\narises from the possession of a thing cannot but be greater than that\nwhich attends the bare expectation of it: Therefore whatever be the\nsense of that infallible assurance, which is here spoken of; we cannot\nsuppose that there is any degree of assurance attainable in this life,\nconcerning the happiness of the saints in heaven, equal to that which\nthey have who are actually possessed of that blessedness; to suppose\nthis would be to confound earth and heaven together, or expectation with\nactual fruition.\n\nAs to what relates to our assurance thereof, there is another matter of\ndispute among some, which I am not desirous to enter into; namely,\nwhether it is possible for a believer to be as sure that he shall be\nsaved, as he is that he exists, or that he is a sinner, and so stands in\nneed of salvation? or whether it is possible for a person to be as sure\nthat he shall be saved, as he is sure of that truth which is matter of\npure revelation, viz. that he, that believes shall be saved? or whether\nit is possible for a person to be as sure that he has the truth of\ngrace, as he may be that he performs any actions, whether natural or\nreligious; such as speaking, praying, reading, hearing, &c. or whether\nwe may be as sure that we have a principle of grace, as we are that we\nput forth such actions, as seem to proceed from that principle, when\nengaged in the performance of some religious duties? If any are disposed\nto defend the possibility of our attaining assurance in so great a\ndegree as this, as what they think to be the meaning of what some\ndivines have asserted, agreeably to what is contained in this answer,\nthat a believer may be infallibly assured of his salvation, I will not\nenter the list with them; though I very much question whether it will\nnot be a matter of too great difficulty for them to support their\nargument, without the least appearance of exception to it.\n\nNevertheless, (that I may not extenuate or deny the privileges which\nsome saints have been favoured with, who have been, as it were, in the\nsuburbs of heaven, and not only had a prelibation, but a kind of\nsensation, of the enjoyments thereof, and expressed as full an assurance\nas though they had been actually in heaven); it cannot be denied that\nthis, in various instances, has amounted, as near as possible, to an\nassurance of infallibility; and that such a degree of assurance has been\nattained, by some believers, both in former and later ages, will be\nproved under a following head, which, I am apt to think, is what is\nintended in this answer, by the possibility of a believer\u2019s being\ninfallibly assured of salvation. But let it be considered, that these\nare uncommon instances, in which the Spirit of God, by his immediate\ntestimony, has favoured them with, as to this matter, which are not to\nbe reckoned as a standard, whereby we may judge of that assurance which\nGod\u2019s children desire, and sometimes enjoy, which falls short of it:\nTherefore, when God is pleased to give a believer such a degree of\nassurance, as carries him above all his doubts and fears, with respect\nto his being in a state of grace, and fills him with those joys which\narise from hence, that are unspeakable, and full of glory; this is that\nassurance which we are now to consider, which, in this answer is called\nan infallible assurance; whether it be more or less properly so called,\nwe have nothing farther to add; but shall proceed,\n\nII. To prove that this privilege is attainable in this present life; and\nthat it may appear to be so, let it be considered,\n\n1. That if the knowledge of other things which are of less importance,\nbe attainable, then certainly it is possible for us to attain that which\nis of the greatest importance. This argument is founded on the goodness\nof God; if he has given us sufficient means to lead us into the\nknowledge of other things, which respect our comfort and happiness in\nthis world; has he left us altogether destitute of those means whereby\nwe may conclude, that it shall go well with us in a better? God has\nsometimes been pleased to favour his people with some intimations\nconcerning the blessings of common providence, which they might expect\nfor their encouragement, under the trials and difficulties which they\nwere to meet with in the world; and our Saviour encourages his disciples\nto expect, that notwithstanding their present destitute circumstances,\nas to outward things; yet their _Father_, who _knows that they had need\nof them_, would supply their wants; and therefore they had no reason to\nbe over-solicitous in _taking thought what they should eat and drink,\nand wherewithal they should be clothed_, Matt. vi. 31, 32. and if God,\nthat he may encourage the faith of his people, gives them assurance that\n_no temptation shall befal them, but what is common to men_; or, that\nthey shall not be pressed down, so as to sink and despair of help from\nhim, under the burdens and difficulties that, in the course of his\nprovidence, he lays on them; I say, if God is pleased to give such\nintimations to his people, with respect to their condition in this\nworld, that they may be assured that it shall go well with them, as to\nmany things that concern their outward circumstances therein; may we not\nconclude from hence, that the assurance of those things that concern\ntheir everlasting salvation may be attained? or, if the promises that\nrespect the one may be depended on so as to afford relief against all\ndoubts and fears that may arise from our present circumstances in the\nworld; may we not, with as good reason, suppose, that the promises which\nrespect the other, to wit, the carrying on and perfecting the work of\ngrace, afford equal matter of encouragement; and consequently, that the\none is as much to be depended on, as the other; so that as the apostle\nsays, they who have fled for refuge, to lay hold on the hope set before\nthem, may have strong consolation arising from thence, Heb. vi. 18.\n\n_Objec._ It will be objected to this, that the promises that respect\noutward blessings are not always fulfilled, and therefore we cannot be\nassured concerning our future condition, as to outward circumstances in\nthe world; though godliness, as the apostle says, hath the promise of\nthe world that now is, as well as that which is to come. This appears\nfrom the uncommon instances of affliction, that the best men often meet\nwith, which others are exempted from. Therefore the promises which\nrespect the carrying on and completing the work of grace, will not\nafford that assurance of salvation which we suppose a believer may\nattain to, as founded thereon.\n\n_Answ._ In answer to this it may be replied, that the promises of\noutward blessings are always fulfilled, either in kind or value.\nSometimes the destitute state of believers, as to the good things of\nthis life, is abundantly compensated with those spiritual blessings,\nwhich are, at present, bestowed on, or reserved for them hereafter; and\ntherefore, if their condition in the world be attended with little else\nbut affliction, they have no reason to say that they are disappointed;\nfor while they are denied the lesser, they have the greater blessings\ninstead thereof, so that their assurance of the accomplishment of the\npromises of outward blessings, must be understood with this limitation:\nbut as to spiritual blessings, which God has promised to his people,\nthere is no foundation for any distinction of their being made good in\nkind or in value; if the promise of eternal life be not made good\naccording to the letter of it, it cannot be, in any sense, said to be\naccomplished: therefore, since God gives his people these promises as a\nfoundation of hope, we may conclude from thence, that the assurance of\nbelievers, relating to their salvation, is as much to be depended on as\nthe assurance they have, founded on the promises of God, concerning any\nblessings which may tend to support them in their present condition in\nthe world.\n\n2. That assurance of justification, sanctification and salvation, may be\nattained in this life, is farther evident from the obligations which\npersons are under to pray for these privileges, and to bless God for the\nexperience which they have of the one, and the ground which they have to\nexpect the other. That it is our duty to pray for them is no less\ncertain than that we stand in need of them; this therefore being taken\nfor granted, it may be inferred from hence, that there is some way by\nwhich we may know that our prayers are answered, the contrary to which\nwould be a very discouraging consideration; neither could the experience\nhereof be alleged as a motive to the performance of the duty of prayer,\nas the Psalmist says, _O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all\nflesh come_, Psal. lxv. 2. Nor could any believer have the least reason\nto say as he does elsewhere, _Verily God hath heard me, he hath attended\nto the voice of my prayer_, Psal. lxvi. 19. And the apostle says, that\n_if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us_, 1 John v.\n14, 15. and this is said in the following words, to be known by us, we\nknow that we have the petitions that we desired of him; therefore it\nfollows, that we may know from the exercise of faith in prayer, for the\nforgiveness of sin, that our iniquities are forgiven; the same may be\nsaid concerning the subject-matter of our prayer for all other blessings\nthat accompany salvation; and consequently it is possible for us to know\nwhether God has granted us these blessings or no.\n\nBut if it be replied to this, that it is not absolutely necessary that\nan humble suppliant should have any intimations given him, that his\npetition shall be granted; or that it would be a very unbecoming thing\nfor such an one to say, that he will not ask for a favour, if he be not\nsure before-hand that it will he bestowed.\n\nTo this it may be answered, That we are not only to pray for saving\nblessings, but to praise God for our experience thereof; as it is said,\n_Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me_, Psal. l. 23. and _praise is\ncomely for the upright_, Psal. xxxiii. 1. Now this supposes that we know\nthat God has bestowed the blessings we prayed for upon us. If the\nPsalmist calls upon his soul to _bless the Lord for forgiving_ him _all\nhis iniquities_, Psal. ciii. 2, 3. we must suppose that there was some\nmethod by which he attained the assurance of the blessing which he\npraises God for; which leads us to consider,\n\n3. That some have attained this privilege, therefore it is not\nimpossible for others to attain it. That some have been assured of their\nsalvation, is evident from the account we have thereof in several\nscriptures, Thus the apostle tells the church he writes to, _God hath\nnot appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation_, 1 Thes. v. 7. and\nhe says concerning himself, _I know whom I have believed, and I am\npersuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him,\nagainst that day_, 2 Tim. i. 12.\n\n_Objec._ To this it is objected, that though it is true, some persons of\nold, have experienced this privilege, yet it does not follow from hence\nthat we have any ground to expect it; since they attained it by\nextraordinary revelation, in that age in which they were favoured with\nthe spirit of inspiration, whereby they arrived to the knowledge of\nthings future, even such as it was impossible for them otherwise to have\nknown, at least, they could not without these extraordinary intimations,\nhave arrived to any more than a probable conjecture concerning this\nmatter; and this is not denied by those who oppose the doctrine of\nassurance: whereas, to pretend to more than this, is to suppose that we\nhave it by extraordinary inspiration, which, at present, can be reckoned\nno other than enthusiasm.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though God does not give the\nchurch, at present, the least ground to expect extraordinary intimations\nconcerning their interest in spiritual and saving blessings, as he\nformerly did; yet we must not conclude that there is no method whereby\nthey may attain the assurance hereof in a common and ordinary way, by\nthe internal testimony of the Spirit; which, as will farther appear\nunder a following head, differs very much from enthusiasm; since it is\nattended with, and founded on those evidences which God has given hereof\nin scripture, which they, in a way of self-examination, are enabled to\napprehend in themselves. That this may appear, let it be considered,\n\n(1.) That there never was any privilege conferred upon the church by\nextraordinary revelation, while that dispensation was continued therein,\nbut the same, or some other which is equivalent thereunto, is still\nconferred in an ordinary way, provided it be absolutely necessary for\nthe advancing the glory of God, and their edification and consolation in\nChrist. If this were not true, the church could hardly subsist, much\nless would the present dispensation of the covenant of grace excel the\nother which the church was under in former ages, as to those spiritual\nprivileges which they have ground to expect. It is, I think, allowed by\nall, that the gospel-dispensation, not only in the beginning thereof,\nwhen extraordinary gifts were conferred, but in its continuance, now\nthey are ceased, excels that which went before it, with respect to the\nspiritual privileges which are conferred therein. Now if God was pleased\nformerly to converse with men in an extraordinary way, and thereby give\nthem an intimation of things relating to their salvation, but, at\npresent, withholds not only the way and manner of revealing this to\nthem, but the blessings conveyed thereby; then it will follow, that the\nchurch is in a worse state than it was before; or else it must be\nsupposed that these privileges are not absolutely necessary to enable\nthem to glorify God, which they do by offering praise to him, and to\ntheir attaining that peace and joy which they are given to expect in a\nway of believing; but if the church were destitute of this privilege, it\nwould be in a very unhappy state, and retain nothing that could\ncompensate the loss of those extraordinary gifts that are now ceased.\n\nThey who insist on this objection, and charge the doctrine of assurance\nas what savours of enthusiasm, are obliged, by their own method of\nreasoning, to apply the same objection to the doctrine of internal,\nspecial, efficacious grace, which we have, under a foregoing\nanswer,[105] proved to be the work of the Spirit; and if these internal\nworks are confined to the extraordinary dispensation of the Spirit, then\nthe church is at present as much destitute of sanctification as it is of\nassurance. Therefore we must conclude, that one no more savours of\nenthusiasm than the other; or that we have ground to hope for assurance\nof salvation, though not in an extraordinary way, as much as the saints\ndid in former ages.\n\n(2.) Our Saviour has promised his people the Spirit to perform what is\nnecessary for the carrying on the work of grace in all ages, even when\nextraordinary gifts should cease: accordingly he says, _The Comforter,\nwhich is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall\nteach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,\nwhatsoever I have said unto you_, John xiv. 26. And elsewhere it is\nsaid, _Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things_, 1\nJohn ii. 20. And to this privilege of assurance, it is said, _We have\nreceived not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God,\nthat we might know the things that are freely given to us of God_, 1\nCor. ii. 12. And there are many other promises of the Spirit, which\nthough they had their accomplishment, as to what respects the conferring\nextraordinary gifts, in the first age of the church; yet they have a\nfarther accomplishment in what the Spirit was to bestow on the church in\nthe following ages thereof, though in an ordinary way. This seems very\nevident from scripture; inasmuch as the fruits of the Spirit are said to\nappear in the exercise of those graces which believers have in all ages,\nwho never had extraordinary gifts: thus it is said, _The fruit of the\nSpirit, is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness,\nfaith, meekness, temperance_, Gal. v. 22, 23. Now if these graces be\nproduced by the Spirit, as they are called his fruits, and the exercise\nthereof be not confined to any particular age of the church, then we\nmust suppose that the Spirit\u2019s energy extends itself to all ages.\n\nAgain, believers are said, to be _led by the Spirit_, Rom. viii. 14. and\nthis is assigned as an evidence of their being _the sons of God_; and,\non the other hand, it is said, _If any man have not the spirit of\nChrist, he is none of his_, ver. 9. from whence we may conclude, that\nthere was, in the apostles\u2019 days, an effusion of the Spirit, common to\nall believers, besides that which was conferred in an extraordinary way,\non those who were favoured with the gift of inspiration; otherwise, the\nhaving the Spirit would not have been considered as a privilege\nbelonging only to believers, and being destitute of it, an argument of a\nperson\u2019s not belonging to Christ. As for the extraordinary dispensation\nof the Holy Ghost, it was not inseparably connected with salvation; for\nmany had it who were Christians only in name, and had nothing more than\na form of godliness; and on the other hand, many true believers brought\nforth those fruits which proceeded from the Spirit, in an ordinary way,\nwho had not these extraordinary gifts conferred on them. Moreover the\napostle speaks of believers _through the Spirit mortifying the deeds of\nthe body_, Rom. viii. 13. Now if the work of mortification be incumbent\non believers in all ages, then the influences of the Spirit, enabling\nhereunto, may be expected in all ages. Now to apply this to our present\nargument; the Spirit\u2019s bearing witness with our spirit, that we are the\nchildren of God, which is the foundation of that assurance which we are\npleading for, is, together with the other fruits and effects of the\nSpirit but now mentioned, a privilege which believers, as such, are\ngiven to desire and hope for, and stand in as much need of as those who\nhad this or other privileges conferred on them in an extraordinary way,\nin the first age of the gospel-church.\n\nAnd to all this we might add, that the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit\nat that time, were conferred on particular persons, and not on whole\nchurches; but assurance is considered, by the apostle, as a privilege\nconferred on the church to which he writes, that is, the greatest part\nof them, from whence the denomination is taken; upon which account, the\napostle speaking to the believing Corinthians, says, _We know that if\nour earthy house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building\nof God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens_, 2 Cor. v.\n1. by which he does not only intend himself and other ministers, but the\ngenerality of believers, at that time, who are described as walking by\nfaith: and there are many other things said concerning them in the\nforegoing and following verses; which makes it sufficiently evident,\nthat the apostle intends more than himself and other ministers, when he\nspeaks of their having assurance, since many had it who were not made\npartakers of extraordinary gifts. Therefore we must not conclude that\nthe church has, at present, no ground to expect this privilege, so that\nthey are liable to the charge of enthusiasm if they do. But that this\nobjection may farther appear not to be sufficient to overthrow the\nargument we are maintaining, we may appeal to the experience of many\nbelievers in this present age, who pretend not to extraordinary\nrevelation; and therefore let it be considered,\n\n(3.) That many, in later ages, since extraordinary revelation has\nceased, have attained this privilege, and consequently it is now\nattainable. To deny this would be to offend against the generation of\nGod\u2019s people, of whom many have given their testimony to this truth, who\nhave declared what a comfortable sense they have had of their interest\nin Christ, and the sensible impressions they have enjoyed of his love\nshed abroad in their hearts, whereby they have had, as it were, a\nprelibation of the heavenly blessedness; and this has been attended with\nthe most powerful influence of the Spirit of God enabling them to\nexercise those graces which have been agreeable to these comfortable\nexperiences, whereby they have been carried through, and enabled to\nsurmount the greatest difficulties which have attended them in this\nlife. And many have been supported and comforted therewith, at the\napproach of death, in which respect the sting thereof has been taken\naway, and they have expressed themselves with a kind of triumph over it,\nin the apostle\u2019s words, _O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is\nthy victory?_ 1 Cor. xv. 55.\n\nThat some have been favoured with this invaluable privilege is\nundeniable; the account we have in the history of the lives and deaths\nof many, who have been burning and shining lights in their generation,\nputs it out of all doubt. And if this were not sufficient, we might\nappeal to the experience of many now living, since there is scarce any\nage or place in which the gospel comes with power, but we have some\ninstances of the Spirit\u2019s testimony to his own work, whereby it comes,\nwith much assurance, a comfortable sense of God\u2019s love, peace of\nconscience, and joy in the Holy Ghost, which is the first-fruits and\nearnest of eternal life. But since this will be particularly insisted on\nunder a following answer[106], and farther proofs given hereof; we may,\nat present, take it for granted, that many have been assured of their\nbeing in a state of grace, who have not made the least pretension, to\ninspiration; and to charge them with enthusiasm, or a vain ungrounded\ndelusion, is to cast a reflection on the best of men, as well as on one\nof the highest privileges which we can enjoy in this world.\n\nI am sensible that it will be objected to this, that though some have\nindeed expressed such a degree of assurance, yet this will only afford\nconviction to those that have it, who are best judges of their own\nexperience, and the evidence whereon it is founded; but this is not a\nsufficient proof to us, with respect to whom it is only matter of\nreport: And it may be said, on the other hand, that it is possible they\nmight be mistaken who have been so sure of their own salvation.\n\nBut to this it may be replied, that it is very unreasonable to suppose\nthat all have been mistaken or deluded, who have declared that they have\nbeen favoured with this blessing; charity will hardly admit of such a\nsupposition; and if there be no possibility of attaining this assurance,\nthey must all have been deceived, who have concluded that they had it.\nMoreover, this privilege has been attained, not only by a few persons,\nand these the more credulous part of mankind, or by such who have not\nbeen able to assign any marks or evidences tending to support it; but\nmany believers have experienced it, who, at the same time, have been far\nfrom discovering any weakness of judgment, or disposition to\nunwarrantable credulity; yea, they have enjoyed it at such a time when\nthey have been most sensible of the deceitfulness of their own hearts,\nand could not but own that there was a peculiar hand of God herein; and\nthe same persons, when destitute of the Spirit\u2019s testimony, have\nacknowledged themselves to have used their utmost endeavours to attain\nit, but in vain.\n\nAs to the conviction which this will afford to us who are destitute\nhereof; that though we suppose it true to a demonstration, to those who\nhave it, as being matter of sensation to them, it is only matter of\nreport to us; which we are no farther bound to believe than we can\ndepend on the credibility of their evidence, who have declared that they\nhave experienced it. To this it may be replied, that if there be such a\nthing as certainty founded on report, which to deny, would be the\ngreatest degree of scepticism; and if this has been transmitted to us,\nby a great number of those who cannot be charged with any thing that\nlooks like a disposition to deceive either themselves or others; then we\nare bound to believe, from their own testimony, that there is such an\nassurance to be attained by those who pretend not to receive it by\nextraordinary inspiration from the Spirit of God. This leads us,\n\nIII. To consider the character of the persons to whom this privilege\nbelongs. Accordingly they are described in this answer, as such who\ntruly believe in Christ, and endeavour to walk in all good conscience\nbefore him: these only have ground to expect this privilege. It is an\nassurance of our having the truth of grace that we are considering;\nwhich supposes a person truly to believe in Christ; and accordingly it\nis distinguished from that unwarrantable presumption whereby many\npersuade themselves that they shall be saved, though they be not\nsanctified. It is not _the hope of the hypocrite_ we are speaking of,\nwhich, as it is said, shall _perish_, and be _cut off; whose trust shall\nbe as the spider\u2019s web_, which shall be swept away with the besom of\ndestruction, and be like the _giving up of the ghost_, which shall end\nin everlasting despair, Job viii. 13, 14. and chap. xi. 20. but it is a\nwell-grounded hope, such as is accompanied with, and supported by the\nlife of faith; so that we are first enabled to act grace, and then to\ndiscern the truth thereof in our own souls, and accordingly reap the\ncomfortable fruits and effects that attend this assurance; as the\napostle prays in the behalf of the believing Romans, that _the God of\nhope would fill them with all joy and peace in believing_, Rom. xv. 13.\nSo that an unbeliever has no right to this privilege, and, indeed, from\nthe nature of the thing, it is preposterous for a person to be assured\nof that, which in itself has no reality, as the apostle says, _If a man\nthink himself to be something when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself_,\nGal. vi. 3. And if faith be necessary to assurance, then it follows, as\nit is farther observed in this answer, that they who have attained this\nprivilege, walk in all good conscience before God; whereby the sincerity\nof their faith is evinced: Thus the apostle says, _Our rejoicing is\nthis, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly\nsincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had\nour conversation in the world_, 2 Cor. i. 12.\n\nIV. We are now to consider the means by which assurance is to be\nattained, _viz._ not by extraordinary revelation, but by faith, founded\non the promises of God. As to the former of these, we have already\nconsidered, that assurance may be attained without extraordinary\nrevelation, as has been experienced by some in this present dispensation\nof the gospel, in which extraordinary revelation is ceased. And, indeed,\nit may be observed, in the account the scripture gives of this\nprivilege, that it does not appear, that when extraordinary revelation\nwas granted to many, in the first age of the gospel, that the design\nthereof was to lead men into the knowledge of their own state, so as\nthat they should attain assurance of their interest in Christ, and right\nto eternal life that way. The main design of inspiration was to qualify\nministers in an extraordinary way to preach the gospel, as the necessity\nof affairs seemed then to require it; it was also necessary for the\nimparting some doctrines; which could not otherwise be known: And,\ninasmuch as it was an extraordinary dispensation of divine providence,\nit was an expedient to give conviction to the world, concerning the\ntruth of the christian religion, since God hereby was pleased to\nconverse in an immediate way with men, and testified by this, the great\nregard he had to his church, and answered the great ends of inspiration,\nin propagating that religion which was then to be set up in the world.\nBut we do not find that the work of grace was ordinarily wrought, or\ncarried on this way; nor was it God\u2019s instituted means, without which\nthey could not attain assurance, which the saints\u2019 arrived to, in that\nage of extraordinary inspiration, the same way as we are to expect to\nattain it. It is true, God has occasionally intimated, by immediate\nrevelation, that he would save some particular persons, and that their\n_names were written in the book of life_, Phil. iv. 3. but this was a\nspecial and extraordinary instance of divine condescension, that some\nshould be described by name, in scripture, who had obtained this\nprivilege; though it is not designed hereby that others should expect to\nattain it this way; and therefore it will be hard to prove that the\napostle Paul, and others whom he speaks of, who were assured of their\nsalvation, though they received the knowledge of other things by\ninspiration, were led into the knowledge of their own state in such a\nway, much less may we expect to attain assurance by extraordinary\nrevelation. And this leads us to consider the ordinary means whereby we\nmay attain it, which is, in this answer, said to be, by faith, grounded\non the truth of God\u2019s promises, and the Spirit\u2019s testimony, whereby we\nare enabled to discern in ourselves those graces which accompany\nsalvation; accordingly we must consider,\n\n1. That in order to our arriving to a comfortable persuasion that we\nshall be saved, there must be promises of life and salvation revealed,\nwhich are contained in the gospel; these are remotely necessary\nthereunto; for without a promise of salvation we can have no hope of it;\nbut notwithstanding these promises are contained therein, yet many are\ndestitute of it.\n\n2. It is also necessary, in order to our attaining assurance, that there\nshould be some marks and evidences revealed in the word of God, as a\nrule for persons to try themselves by, in order to their knowing that\nthey are in a state of grace. Now we may say concerning this, as well as\nthe former, to wit, the promises of salvation recorded, that though it\nbe necessary to assurance; yet it is only an objective means for our\nattaining it, inasmuch as we are hereby led to see what graces\nexperienced, or duties performed by us, have the promise of salvation\nannexed to them; and therefore let me add,\n\n3. That it is necessary that we should discern in ourselves those marks\nand evidences of grace to which the promise of salvation is annexed;\notherwise we have no right to lay claim to it; accordingly it is our\nduty to look into ourselves, and observe what marks of grace we have,\nfrom whence we may, by the Spirit\u2019s testimony with ours, discern\nourselves to be in a state of grace; which leads us to consider,\n\n(1.) That in order to our attaining assurance, we must exercise the duty\nof self-examination.\n\n(2.) What we may truly call a mark or evidence of grace, whereby we may\ndiscern that we are in a state of salvation.\n\n(3.) Notwithstanding this we are to depend on, hope, and pray for, the\ntestimony of the Spirit with our spirits, that we are the children of\nGod, and that these evidences are found in us.\n\n(1.) In order to our attaining assurance, it is necessary that we\nexercise the duty of self-examination, which is God\u2019s ordinance for this\nend. And in order hereunto, let it be considered,\n\n[1.] That it is certainly a duty and privilege for us to know ourselves,\nnot only what we do, but what we are; for without this, whatever\nknowledge we may have of other things, we are chargeable with great\nignorance in a matter of the highest importance; neither can we be\nsufficiently humble for those sins we commit, or thankful for the\nmercies we receive. If we reckon it an advantage to know what is done in\nthe world, and are very inquisitive into the affairs of others, it is\nmuch more necessary and reasonable for us to endeavour to know what more\nimmediately relates to ourselves; or if we are very desirous to know\nthose things that concern our natural or civil affairs in the world;\nwhether we are in prosperous or adverse circumstances therein, ought we\nnot much more to enquire, how matters stand with us, as to what concerns\na better world?\n\n[2.] We cannot know the state of our souls, without impartial\nself-examination. This is evident from the nature of the thing. As\nenquiry is the means for our attaining knowledge; so looking into\nourselves is a means of attaining self-acquaintance.\n\n[3.] Self-examination is a duty founded on a divine command, and an\nordinance appointed for our attaining the knowledge of our state. Thus\nthe apostle says, _Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove\nyour ownselves_, 2 Cor. xiii. 5. and whatever duty God has commanded us\nto engage in, as expecting any spiritual privilege to attend it, that is\nproperly an ordinance for the attaining that privilege; and if so, then\nit is an argument to enforce the performance of that duty. Having\ntherefore proved self-examination to be a christian\u2019s duty, we shall now\nconsider how it ought to be performed. And here let it be observed, that\nas it is God\u2019s ordinance, we are to have a due regard to his presence,\nand consider him as an heart searching God, and depend on his\nassistance, without which it cannot be performed to any great advantage;\nbut more particularly,\n\n_1st_, We are to engage in this duty deliberately. It cannot well be\nperformed while we are in an hurry of business. As every thing is\nbeautiful in its seasons, so time ought to be redeemed, and we to retire\nfrom the world, to apply ourselves to this as well as other secret\nduties, and the rather, because a rash and hasty judgment concerning any\nthing, is generally faulty, and must be reckoned an argument of weakness\nin him that passes it, and it will be much more so when the thing to be\ndetermined is of such vast importance.\n\n_2dly_, It ought to be done frequently; not like those things which are\nto be performed but once in our lives, or only upon some extraordinary\noccasions, but often, at least, so often, that no presumptuous sin may\nbe committed, nor any extraordinary judgment inflicted on us, or mercy\nvouchsafed to us, without a due observation thereof, in order to our\nimproving them aright to the glory of God, and our own edification:\nNevertheless, we cannot exactly determine what relates to the frequency\nof this duty, any more than we can prescribe to those who are in a way\nof trade and business in the world, how often they are to cast up their\naccounts, and set their books in order, that they may judge whether they\ngo forward or backward in the world: Notwithstanding, as the neglect\nhereof has been detrimental to many, as to their worldly affairs; so the\nneglect of self-examination has been often found an hindrance to our\ncomfortable procedure in our christian course: However, so far as we may\nadvise concerning the frequency of this duty, it would redound much to\nthe glory of God and our own advantage, if, at the close of every day,\nwe would call to mind the experiences we have had, and observe the frame\nof spirit with which we have engaged in all the business thereof. This\nthe Psalmist advises when he says, _Commune with your own heart upon\nyour bed, and be still_, Psal. iv. 4.\n\nMoreover, it is adviseable for us to perform this duty whenever we\nengage in other solemn stated religious duties, whether public or\nprivate, that we may know what matter we have for prayer, or praise,\nwhat help we want from God, against the prevalency of corruption or\ntemptation, or what answers of prayer we have received from him, or what\nsuccess we have had under any ordinance, in which we have engaged, as\nwell as what the present frame of our spirit is, when drawing nigh to\nGod in any holy duty.\n\n_3dly_, It ought to be performed with great diligence, inasmuch as it is\nno easy matter to arrive to such a knowledge of ourselves, and the\nsecret working of our hearts and affections, in what respects things\ndivine and heavenly, or to discern the truth of grace, so as not to\nmistake that for a saving work, which has only the external shew of\ngodliness, without the power of it; this requires great diligence and\nindustry to know: Accordingly the Psalmist, in speaking concerning the\nperformance of this duty, says, _I commune with mine own heart, and my\nspirit made diligent search_, Psal. lxxvii. 6. The thing to be enquired\ninto is not barely, whether we are sinners in general, or exposed to\nmany miseries in this life, as the consequence thereof? for this is\nsufficiently evident by daily experience. But we are to endeavour after\na more particular knowledge of ourselves, and accordingly are to\nenquire; whether sin hath dominion over us to such a degree, so that all\nthe powers and faculties of our souls are enslaved thereby, and we\ncommit sin in such a way, as denominates us, as our Saviour expresses\nit, _servants of sin_? John viii. 34. or, whether sin be loathed and\nabhorred, avoided and repented of? and as to our state, we are to\nenquire; whether we have ground to conclude that we are justified, and\nthereby delivered from the guilt of sin, and the condemning sentence of\nthe law? or, whether we remain in a state of condemnation, and the wrath\nof God abideth on us? We must enquire, whether the work of grace be\nreally begun, so that we are effectually called, and enabled to put\nforth spiritual actions from a renewed nature? and whether this work is\ngoing forward or declining? what is the strength or weakness of our\nfaith? Also we are to enquire, what is the general tenor of our actions?\nwhether the ends we design in all religious duties are right and\nwarrantable? whether our improvement in grace bears any proportion to\nthe means we are favoured with?\n\nMoreover, we are to examine ourselves; whether we perform all those\nrelative duties that are incumbent on us, so as to glorify God in our\nconversation with men, whereby we endeavour to do good to, and receive\ngood from them, and accordingly improve our talents to the glory of God,\nfrom whom we received them? These and such like things are to be\nenquired into, which will be more immediately subservient to the\nattaining this privilege of assurance.\n\n_4thly_, Self-examination ought to be performed with the greatest\nimpartiality. Conscience, which is to act the part of a judge and a\nwitness, must be faithful in its dictates and determinations, it being a\nmatter of the greatest importance; and therefore, in passing a judgment\non our state, we must proceed according to the rules of strict justice,\nnot denying, on the one hand, what we have received from God, or\nresolutely concluding against ourselves, that there is no hope, when\nthere are many things that afford matter of peace and comfort to us;\nnor, on the other hand, are we to think ourselves something when we are\nnothing.\n\nTherefore some are obliged to conclude, as the result of this enquiry,\ninto their state, that they are unregenerate and destitute of the saving\ngrace of God. This sentence persons are obliged to pass on themselves,\nwho are grossly ignorant, not sensible of the plague of their own\nhearts, and altogether unacquainted with the way of salvation by Jesus\nChrist, or the method prescribed in the gospel, for the sinner\u2019s\njustification or freedom from the guilt of sin, in a fiducial\napplication of Christ\u2019s righteousness, which is the only means conducive\nthereunto; and who know not what is included in evangelical repentance;\nhow sin is to be mortified, and what it is to depend on Christ in the\nexecution of his offices of prophet, priest, and king, at least, if they\nhave not such a degree of the knowledge of these things, though they\ncannot fully and clearly describe them, as may influence their practice,\nand excite those graces, which all true converts are enabled to\nexercise, they have ground to conclude that they are in a state of\nunregeneracy. And to this we may add, that a person must conclude\nagainst himself, that he is destitute of the grace of God, if he allows\nhimself in the omission of known duties, or the commission of known\nsins, and is content with a form of godliness, without the power\nthereof, or values and esteems the praise of men more than of God; such\nmust conclude that their hearts are not right with him.\n\n_5thly_, We must examine ourselves concerning our state, with a\nresolution, by the grace of God, to make a right improvement of that\njudgment which we are bound to pass on ourselves. And therefore, if we\napprehend that we are in a state of unregeneracy, we are not to sink\ninto despair; but to wait on God in all his appointed means and\nordinances, in order to our obtaining the first grace, that, by the\npowerful influences of the Spirit, there may be such a true change\nwrought in us, that we may have ground to hope better things concerning\nourselves, even things which accompany salvation. And if we find that we\nhave experienced the grace of God in truth, we may be disposed to give\nhim all the glory; to exercise a continued dependence on him, for what\nis still lacking to complete the work, and as we have received Christ\nJesus the Lord to walk in him.\n\n_6thly_, This duty must be performed with judgment; and accordingly we\nare to compare our hearts and actions with the rule which is prescribed\nin the word of God, whereby we may know whether we have those marks and\nevidences of grace, from whence we may conclude, that we have a good\nfoundation to build on, and that our hope is such, as shall never make\nashamed; which leads us to consider,\n\n(2.) What we may truly call a mark or evidence of grace, whereby we may\ndiscern that we are in a state of salvation. In order to our\nunderstanding this, we must consider,\n\n1. That every thing, which is a mark or evidence of a thing, must be\nmore known than that which is designed to be evinced thereby. The sign\nmust always be more known than the thing signified by it; inasmuch as it\nis a means of our knowing that which we are at present in doubt about.\nAs when the finger is placed in a cross-road, to direct the traveller\nwhich way he is to take.\n\n2. A mark or evidence of a thing must contain some essential property of\nthat which it is designed to evince: thus the inferring consequences\nfrom premises is an essential property belonging to every intelligent\ncreature, and to none else; therefore it is a mark or evidence thereof;\nso to design the best end, and use those means that are conducive\nthereunto, is an essential property of a wise man, and consequently a\nmark or evidence of wisdom. And, on the other hand, there are some\nthings, which are not essential properties, but accidental, as an\nhealthful constitution is to man, or a particular action, that has some\nappearance of wisdom and goodness, but not all the necessary ingredients\nthereof, to a wise or good man.\n\nNow to apply these rules to our present purpose, in determining what we\nmay call marks or evidences of grace. With respect to the former of\nthem, _viz._ that a mark must be more known than the thing that is\nevinced thereby; we may conclude, that eternal election, or the Spirit\u2019s\nimplanting a principle of grace in regeneration, cannot be said to be\nmarks or evidences of sanctification, since these are less known than\nthe thing designed to be evinced thereby.\n\nAnd as to the other rule, _viz._ that a mark must contain an essential\nproperty of that which it evinces: it follows from hence, that our\nengaging in holy duties, without the exercise of grace therein; or our\nextending charity to the poor, when it does not proceed from faith or\nlove to God, &c. is no certain evidence of the truth of grace, since a\nperson may perform these duties and yet be destitute hereof; whereas,\nthat which is essential to a thing, is inseparable from it. Thus\nconcerning marks of grace in general; which I could not but think\nnecessary to premise, inasmuch as some have entertained prejudices\nagainst all marks of grace, and seem to assert, that a believer is not\nto judge of his state thereby; than which, nothing seems more absurd. If\nthey who are thus prejudiced against them, have nothing to say in\ndefence thereof, but that some assign those things to be marks of grace\nwhich are not so, and thereby lead themselves and others, into mistakes\nabout them; what has been premised concerning the nature of a mark, or\nevidence, may, in some measure, fence against this prejudice, as well as\nprepare our way for what may be said concerning them. Therefore we\nshall, _First_, consider those things which can hardly be reckoned marks\nof grace; and, _Secondly_, what marks we may judge of ourselves by.\n\n_First_, As to the former of these, what are not to be reckoned marks of\ngrace.\n\n1. We are not to conclude that a person is in a state of grace, barely\nbecause he has a strong impression on his own spirit that he is so;\nsince that is accidental, and not essential to grace, and many are\nmistaken with respect to this matter. It is not to be doubted, but they\nwhom our Saviour represents as saying, _Lord, Lord, have we not\nprophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy\nname done many wonderful works_, Matt. vii. 2. had a strong persuasion\nfounded on this evidence, that they were in a state of grace, till they\nfound themselves mistaken, when he commanded them to _depart from him_?\nNothing is more obvious than that many presume they are something when\nthey are nothing; and, indeed, a persuasion that a person is in a state\nof grace, barely because he cannot think otherwise of himself, the thing\nbeing impressed on his spirit, without any other evidence, lays such an\none too open to the charge of enthusiasm.\n\n2. An external profession of religion, discovered in the performance of\nseveral holy duties, is no certain sign of the truth of grace; for this\nmany make who are not effectually called. Of such as these Christ\nspeaks, when he says, _Many are called, but few are chosen_, Matt. xx.\n16. And to this we may add, that persons may have some degree of raised\naffections, when attending on the ordinances, some sudden flashes of\njoy, when they hear of the privileges of believers, both in this and a\nbetter world; though their conversation be not agreeable to their\nconfident and presumptuous expectation thereof. And, on the other hand,\nsome have their fears very much awakened under the ordinances, as the\nsubject of their meditations has a tendency thereunto; others have such\na degree of sorrow, that it gives vent to itself in a flood of tears; as\nEsau is said to have _sought the blessing with tears_, Heb. xii. 17. but\nyet there is something else wanting to evince the truth of grace. I do\nnot deny but that it is a great blessing to have raised affections in\nholy duties; but when this is only in particular instances, and they are\nprincipally excited by some external motives or circumstances attending\nthe ordinance they are engaged in; and when the impressions made on\nthem, wear off as soon as the ordinance is over, in this case we can\nhardly determine a person to be in a state of grace hereby. The\naffections, indeed, are warmed in holy duties; but this is like an iron\nheated in the fire, which, when taken out, soon grows cold again; and\nnot like that natural heat that remains in the body of man, which is an\nabiding sign of life.\n\nBut since this subject is to be treated on with the utmost caution,\ninasmuch as many are apt to conclude, that they have no grace, because\nthey have no raised affections, in holy duties, as well as others\npresume they have grace merely because they are affected therein, let it\nbe farther considered; that when we speak of raised affections, not\nbeing a certain mark of grace, we consider them as being destitute of\nthose other evidences, which contain some essential properties of grace:\nthe affections are often raised by insignificant sounds, or by the tone\nof the voice, when there is nothing in the matter delivered, that is\nadapted to excite any grace, the judgment is not informed thereby, nor\nthe will persuaded to embrace Christ, as offered in the gospel. There\nmay be transports of joy in hearing the word, when, at the same time,\ncorrupt nature retains its opposition to the spirituality thereof. A\nperson may conceive the greatest pleasure in an ungrounded hope of\nheaven, as a state of freedom from the miseries of this life, when he\nhas no savour or relish of that holiness which is its glory, in which\nrespect his conversation is not in heaven; and he may be very much\nterrified with the wrath of God, and the punishment of sin in hell;\nwhen, at the same time, there is not a due sense of the vile and odious\nnature of sin, or an abhorrence of it: such instances of raised\naffections we intend when we speak of them as no marks or evidences of\nthe truth of grace. But, on the other hand, when, together with raised\naffections, there is the exercise of suitable graces, and the impression\nthereof remains, when their fervency is abated or lost, this is a good\nsign of grace; whereas, when they are not accompanied with the exercise\nof any grace, they afford no mark or evidence of the truth thereof.\n\nNow that we may not be mistaken as to this matter, let us enquire, not\nonly what it is that has a tendency to raise the affections; but whether\nour understandings are rightly informed in the doctrines of the gospel,\nand our wills choose and embrace what is revealed therein. And if we\nfind it a difficult matter for our affections to be raised in holy\nduties, let us farther enquire, whether this may not proceed from our\nnatural constitution? and if the passions are not easily moved with any\nother things in the common affairs of life; we have then no reason to\nconclude that our being destitute hereof in the exercise of holy duties,\nis a sign that we have not the truth of grace, especially if Christ and\ndivine things are the objects of our settled choice, and our hearts are\nfixed trusting in him.\n\n3. The performance of those moral duties, which are materially good, is\nno certain sign of the truth of grace; I do not say that this is not\nnecessary; for when we speak of a mark of grace, as containing in it\nwhat is essential thereunto, we distinguish between that which is a\nnecessary pre-requisite, without which, none can have grace; and that\nwhich is an essential ingredient in it. Where there is no morality,\nthere is certainly no grace; but if there be nothing more than this,\nthere is an essential ingredient wanting, by which this matter must be\ndetermined. A person may abstain from gross enormities, such as murder,\nadultery, theft, reviling, extortion, covetousness, &c. and, in many\nrespects, perform the contrary duties, and yet be destitute of faith in\nChrist. The Pharisee, whom our Saviour mentions in the gospel, had as\nmuch to say on this subject as any one; yet his heart was not right with\nGod; nor was his boasting hereof approved of by Christ. There are\nmultitudes who perform many religious duties, when it comports with\ntheir secular interests; they adhere to Christ in a time of prosperity;\nbut in a time of adversity they fall from him; and then, that which\nseemed to be most excellent in them is lost, and then they appear to be,\nwhat they always were, destitute of the truth of grace. We now proceed\nto consider,\n\n_Secondly_, What are those marks by which persons may safely conclude\nthemselves to be in a state of grace. In order to our determining this\nmatter, we must consider what are the true and genuine effects of faith,\nwhich we find mentioned in scripture, namely, those other graces that\naccompany or flow from it; as when it is said to _work by love_, Gal. v.\n6. or as we are hereby enabled to _overcome the world_, 1 John v. 4. or\nto despise the honours, riches, and pleasures thereof; especially when\nstanding in competition with Christ; or our hearts are thereby drawn\naside from him: this effect it produced in Moses, when he _refused to be\ncalled the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, choosing rather to suffer\naffliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin\nfor a season, esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the\ntreasures in Egypt_, Heb. xi. 24-26. and in others, who _confessed that\nthey were strangers and pilgrims on the earth_, ver. 13, 16. who\n_desired a better country_, that is, _an heavenly_; whose _conversation\nwas in heaven_, Phil. iii. 10. Moreover, we are to enquire whether it\nhas a tendency to _purify the heart_, Acts xv. 9. and so puts us upon\nabhorring, flying from, watching, and striving against every thing that\ntends to corrupt and defile the soul! and whether it tends to excite us\nto universal obedience, which is called _the obedience of faith_, Rom.\nxvi. 26. and a carefulness to _maintain good works_, Tit. iii. 6. which\nproceed from, and are evidences of the truth of it? as the apostle says,\n_Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by\nmy works_, James ii. 18. or, as our Saviour says, _The tree is known by\nhis fruit_. But that we may more particularly judge of the truth of\ngrace by the marks and evidences thereof, we must consider its beginning\nand progress, or with what frame of spirit we first embraced and closed\nwith Christ; and what our conversation has been since that time.\n\n1. As to the former of these, to wit, our judging of the truth of grace\nby the first beginning thereof. Here we are to enquire, what were the\nmotives and inducements that inclined us to accept of Christ? Did we\nfirst see ourselves lost and undone, as sinful, fallen creatures; and\nwere we determined hereupon to have recourse to him for salvation, as\nthe only refuge we could betake ourselves to? Did we first consider\nourselves as guilty; and did this guilt set very uneasy upon us; and in\norder to the removal of it, did we betake ourselves to Christ for\nforgiveness? and did we consider ourselves as weak and unable to do what\nis good, and so apply ourselves to him for strength against indwelling\nsin, and victory over the temptations which prevailed against us?\n\nMoreover, let us enquire, whether it was only a slavish fear and dread\nof the wrath of God, and the punishment of sin in hell, that gave the\nfirst turn to our thoughts and affections, so as to put us on altering\nour course of life? or, whether, besides this, we saw the evil of sin\narising from its intrinsic nature, and its opposition to the holiness of\nGod; and was this attended with shame and self-abhorrence? and, at the\nsame time, did we see the excellency and loveliness of Christ? was he\n_precious_ to us _as he is to them that believe_? 1 Pet. ii. 7.\n\nAgain, let us farther enquire, what were the workings of our spirits\nwhen we first closed with Christ? did we do this with judgment, duly\nweighing what he demands of us in a way of duty, as well as what we are\nencouraged to expect from him? were we made willing to accept of him in\nall his offices, and to have respect to all his commandments? were we\nearnestly desirous to have communion with him here, as well as to be\nglorified with him hereafter? were we content to submit to the cross of\nChrist, to bear his reproach, and to count this preferable to all the\nglories of the world? were we willing to be conformed to an humbled\nsuffering Jesus, and to take our lot with his servants, though they may\nbe reckoned the refuse and off-scouring of all things? And let us\nfarther enquire; whether we did this with reliance on his assistance, as\nbeing sensible of the treachery and deceitfulness of our own hearts, and\nour utter inability to do what is good, without the aids of his grace?\ndid we accordingly give up ourselves to him in hope of obtaining help\nfrom him, in order to the right discharge of every duty? did we reckon\nourselves nothing, and Christ to be all in all, that all our springs are\nin him? This was a good beginning of the work of grace, which will\nprepare the way for this grace of assurance, which we are now\nconsidering.\n\n_Obj._ Some will object against what has been said concerning our\nenquiring into, or being able to discern the first acts of faith, or\nthat frame of spirit wherewith we then closed with Christ, that they\nknow not the time of their conversion, if ever they were converted; they\ncannot remember or determine what was the particular ordinance or\nprovidence, that gave them the first conviction of sin, and of their\nneed of Christ, and induced them to close with him; much less can they\ntell what were the workings of their hearts at such a time: It is\nimpossible for them to trace the footsteps of providence, so as to point\nout the way and manner in which this work was at first begun in their\nsouls. This therefore is not to be laid down as a mark or evidence of\ngrace, which so few can make use of.\n\n_Answ._ I am not insensible that this is the case of the greatest number\nof believers. There are very few, who, like the apostle Paul, can tell\nthe time and place of their conversion, and every circumstance leading\nto it; or like those converts, who, when the gospel was first preached\nby Peter, _were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter, and to the\nrest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?_ Acts ii. 37.\nor like the jailor, who broke forth into an affectionate enquiry, not\nmuch unlike to it; _Sirs, what must I do to be saved?_ chap. xvi. 30.\nthough the ordinance leading to it was of a different nature. Sometimes,\nthe way of the Spirit of God in the soul at first, is so discernable,\nthat it cannot but be observed by them who are brought into a state of\ngrace; but others know nothing of this, especially they who have not run\ninto all excess of riot, and been stopped in their course on a sudden,\nby the grace of God; in whom the change made in conversion, was real,\nthough it could not, from the nature of the thing be so plainly\ndiscerned in all its circumstances. Some have been regenerate from the\nwomb; others have had a great degree of restraining grace, and been\ntrained up in the knowledge of the doctrines of the gospel from their\nvery childhood, and retain the impressions of a religious education;\nthese cannot so easily discern the first beginnings of the work of grace\nin their souls; yet they may, and ought to enquire, whether ever they\nfound, in the course of their lives, such a frame of spirit as has been\nbefore described, which believers have when the work of grace is first\nbegun, and it is not very material for them to be able to discern\nwhether these were the first actings of grace or no? The main thing to\nbe determined is; whether they have ground to conclude, that ever they\nexperienced the grace of God in truth? In this case, the most that some\ncan say concerning themselves, is as the blind man says in the gospel,\nwhen the Pharisees were inquisitive about the restoring his sight, and\nthe way and manner in which this was done; this is all that I know\nconcerning myself, that _whereas I was blind, now I see_, John ix. 25.\nso the true convert says; whereas I was once dead in trespasses and\nsins, I am now alive, and enabled to put forth living and spiritual\nactions, to the glory of God. This evidence will give as much ground to\nconclude that they are in a state of grace, as though they were able to\ndetermine when they were first brought into it.\n\n2. We may judge of the truth of grace by the method in which it has been\ncarried on, whether we are able to determine the way and manner in which\nit was first begun, or no, as a farther evidence of the truth thereof.\nSanctification is a progressive work; therefore it is not enough for us\nto set our faces heaven-ward; but we must make advances towards it, and\nbe found in the daily exercise of grace, in order to our concluding that\nwe are in a state of grace. A believer must not only set out in the\nright way, but he must hold on therein; he must live by faith if he\nwould conclude that the work of faith is begun in truth. It is not\nsufficient to call upon God, or implore help from him, when under some\ndistressing providences, and afterwards to grow remiss in, or lay aside\nthis duty; but it must be our constant work. A true christian is\ndistinguished from an hypocrite, in that it is said, concerning the\nlatter, _Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will he always call\nupon God?_ Job xxvii. 20. denoting that a true believer will do so. He\nis either habitually or actually inclined to it; and that in such a way\nas is attended with the daily exercise of those graces, which are the\nfruits and effects of faith, whereby he may conclude that he is in a\nstate of grace. Thus far we have considered those marks or evidences of\ngrace, which, in order to our attaining assurance, we must be able to\ndiscern in ourselves. But inasmuch as a believer may understand what are\nthe marks of grace contained in scripture, and, at the same time,\nenquire into the state of his soul, to know whether he can apprehend in\nhimself any evidences of the truth of grace; and not be able to arrive\nto a satisfaction as to this matter, so as to have his doubts and fears\nremoved; let it be considered,\n\n3. That he must depend on, hope, and pray for the testimony of the\nSpirit, with his spirit, that he is a child of God. It will be a\ndifficult matter for us to conclude that we have the truth of grace,\ntill the Spirit is pleased to shine on his own work; which, when he\ndoes, all things will appear clear and bright to us, though before this\nwe might walk in darkness, and have no light. In speaking concerning the\ninward testimony of the Spirit (which is necessary to enable a believer\nto discern in himself the marks of grace, on which his assurance of\nsalvation is founded) let it be premised; that as it is a branch of the\nSpirit\u2019s divine glory, by his internal influence, to deal with the\nhearts of his people; so he does this various ways, according to the\nvarious faculties of the soul, which are the subjects thereof;\nparticularly, when by his power, he renews the will, and causes it to\nact those graces which are the effects of his divine power; then he is\nsaid to sanctify a believer. But when he deals with the understanding\nand conscience, enabling us to discern the truth of the work of grace,\nthat we may take the comfort of it, then he is described, in scripture,\nas a witness hereunto, or as witnessing with our spirits, that we are in\na state of grace, the consequence of which is, that _the eyes of_ our\n_understanding being enlightened_, we _may know what is the hope of his\ncalling_, Eph. i. 18. accordingly he gives us to discern that he has\ncalled us by his grace; and, as the result thereof, granted us a hope of\neternal life.\n\nThis is a privilege plainly mentioned in scripture; and we must not\nsuppose that none had it but those who had extraordinary revelation,\nsince it is so necessary to a believer\u2019s attaining that peace and joy\nwhich the church, in this present dispensation, is certainly not less\npossessed of, than it was in former ages. And that the Spirit gives his\ntestimony to the work of grace in the souls of believers, though\nextraordinary revelation be ceased, is evident from what is matter of\ndaily experience; since there are many instances of those who have used\ntheir utmost endeavours in examining themselves, to know whether they\nhad any marks of grace, who have not been able to discern any, though\nthey have been thought to be sincere believers by others, till, on a\nsudden, light has broke forth out of darkness, and their evidences for\neternal life cleared up, so that all their doubts have been removed; and\nthis they could not but attribute to a divine hand, inasmuch as before\nthis they could meditate nothing but terror to themselves; and, in this\ncase, what the apostle prays for, with respect to the church, _That the\nGod of hope would fill them with all joy and peace in believing, that\nthey might abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost_, Rom.\nxv. 13. is experienced by them: And on this account they are said, to be\n_sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise_, Eph. i. 13. whereby their\nhope is established, and that is now confirmed to them by this means,\nwhich they were before in perplexity about; so that we have as much\nground to conclude that the Spirit is the author of assurance in\nbelievers, as we have that he is the author of sanctification.\n\nBut that this doctrine may not appear liable to the charge of\nenthusiasm, let it be farther considered, that the Spirit never gives\nhis testimony to the truth of grace in any, in whom he has not first\nwrought it; for that would be, as it were, a setting his seal to a\nblank. And to this we may add, that he, at the same time, excites the\nlively exercise of grace, whereby they are enabled to discern that it is\ntrue and genuine; so that their assurance, though it be not without some\ninternal, impressive influences, which they are favoured with; yet it is\nnot wholly dependent on them: Therefore, if you demand a reason of the\nhope that is in them, though they ascribe the glory hereof to the Holy\nSpirit, as enabling them to discern the truth of grace; yet they are\nable to prove their ownselves, after having examined themselves, whether\nthey are in the faith, by discovering their evidences of the faith of\nGod\u2019s elect; which argues that their assurance is no delusion.\n\nFootnote 104:\n\n _See Quest._ lxvii: _Pag. 15 ante._\n\nFootnote 105:\n\n _See page 54, 55, ante._\n\nFootnote 106:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxxiii.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXI.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXI. _Are all true believers, at all times, assured of\n their present being in the estate of grace; and that they shall be\n saved?_\n\n ANSW. Assurance of grace and salvation not being of the essence of\n faith, true believers may wait long before they obtain it; and after\n the enjoyment thereof, may have it weakened and intermitted through\n manifold distempers, sins, temptations, and desertions; yet are they\n never left without such a presence and support of the Spirit of God,\n as keeps them from sinking into utter despair.\n\nHaving considered some believers as favoured with assurance of their\nbeing in a state of grace, we are, in this answer, led to speak of\nothers who are destitute of it. And the general method in which it may\nbe considered, is,\n\nI. That there is something supposed, namely, that assurance of grace and\nsalvation is not of the essence of saving faith.\n\nII. Some things are inferred from this supposition, namely,\n\n1. That true believers may wait long before they obtain assurance. And,\n\n2. That after the enjoyment thereof it may be weakened and intermitted;\nthe reasons whereof are assigned, _viz._ bodily distempers, sins,\ntemptations, and divine desertions; yet it is farther added, that they\nare never left without the support of the Spirit of God; whereby they\nare kept from sinking into utter despair.\n\nI. As to the thing supposed in this answer, _viz._ that assurance of\ngrace and salvation is not of the essence of faith. There are many who,\nin other respects, explain the nature of faith, in such a way as is\nunexceptionable, who, notwithstanding, assert that assurance is of the\nessence thereof; in which we cannot but think they express themselves\nvery unwarily, at least, they ought to have more clearly discovered what\nthey mean by faith, and what by assurance, being of the essence of\nfaith; if they mean that no one has saving faith but he who has an\nassurance of his own salvation; they not only assert what is contrary to\nthe experience of many believers, but lay a stumbling-block in the way\nof weak Christians, who will be induced from hence to conclude, that\nbecause they cannot tell whether they are true believers or no,\ntherefore they are destitute of saving faith; upon which account it is\nnecessary for us to enquire how far this supposition is to be allowed\nof, and in what respect denied.\n\nIt is certain, that there are many excellent divines, in our own and\nforeign nations, who have defined faith by assurance; which they have\nsupposed so essential to it, that without it no one can be reckoned a\nbeliever. It may be they might be inclined thus to express themselves by\nthe sense in which they understood several texts of scripture, in which\nassurance seems to be considered as a necessary ingredient in faith; as\nit is said, _Let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of\nfaith_, Heb. x. 22. and when the apostle speaks of assurance, as a\nprivilege that belonged to the church to which he wrote, _We know that\nif our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a\nbuilding of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens_,\n2 Cor. v. 1. and elsewhere, he so far blames their not knowing\nthemselves, or being destitute of this assurance, that he will hardly\nallow them to have any faith, who were without it; _Know ye not your\nownselves, how that Jesus, Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates_,\nchap. xiii. 5. From such like expressions as these, they who plead for\nassurance being of the essence of faith, are ready to conclude, that\nthey who are destitute of it, can hardly be called believers.\n\nBut, that this matter may be set in a true light, we must distinguish\nbetween assurance of the object, _viz._ the great and important\ndoctrines of the gospel, being of the essence of faith; and assurance of\nour interest in Christ being so. The former of these we will not deny;\nfor no one can come to Christ, who is not assured that he will receive\nhim, nor trust in him till he is fully assured that he is able to save\nhim: but the latter we must take leave to deny; for if no one is a\nbeliever but he that knows himself to be so, then he that doubts of his\nsalvation, must be concluded to be no believer; which is certainly a\nvery discouraging doctrine to weak Christians. And also, when we lose\nthe comfortable persuasion we once had, of our interest in Christ, we\nare bound to question all our former experiences, and to determine\nourselves to be in a state of unregeneracy, which is, in effect to deny\nto give God the glory of that powerful work which was formerly wrought\nin us, which we then thought to be a work of grace.\n\nIf they, indeed, mean by assurance, being of the essence of faith, that\nan assurance of our interest in Christ is essential to the highest or\nmost comfortable acts of faith, designing thereby to put us upon\npressing after it, if we have not attained to it; and that hereby God is\nvery much glorified, and a foundation laid for our offering praise to\nhim, for the experience we have had of his grace, which a doubting\nChristian cannot be said to do; we have nothing to say against it. Or,\nif they should assert, that doubting is no ingredient in faith, nor a\ncommendable excellency in a Christian; this we do not deny. All that we\nare contending for is, that there may be a direct act of faith, or a\nfaith of reliance, in those who are destitute of assurance that they are\nin a state of grace; which is the thing supposed in this answer, when it\nis said, that assurance is not of the essence of faith. That this may be\nbetter understood, and we be led into the sense of those scriptures that\ndescribe believers as having assurance, such as those but now mentioned,\nand others to the like purpose, let it be considered, that there are\nmany scriptures, in which believers are said to have such an assurance,\nas only respects the objects of faith, _viz._ the person, offices, and\nglory of Christ, the truth of the gospel, and the promises thereof;\nwhich we do not deny to be of the essence of faith. Thus, when the\napostle prays for the church, _That their hearts might be comforted,\nbeing knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance\nof understanding, to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God, and of\nthe Father, and of Christ_, Col. ii. 2. and when elsewhere he says, _Our\ngospel came to you in much assurance_, 1 Thess, i. 5. and when he\nexhorts persons to _draw near_ to God, _with a true heart, in full\nassurance of faith_, Heb. x. 22. it is probable, that he means in these,\nand several other scriptures of the like import, no more than an\nassurance of the object of faith. And as for that scripture but now\nmentioned, in 2 Cor. xiii. 5. where he seems to assert, that all who are\ndestitute of this privilege are reprobates; some understand the word,\nwhich we translate _reprobates_, as only signifying injudicious\nChristians; and if so, this is not inconsistent with the character of\nbelievers: but others, with an equal degree of probability, render it\n_disapproved_;[107] and so the meaning is, that if you know not your\nownselves, to wit, that Christ is in you, you are greatly to be blamed,\nor disapproved; especially because this proceeds from your neglect of\nthe duty of self-examination; by which means you have no proof of\nChrist\u2019s being in you, who are so ready to demand a proof of his\nspeaking in his ministers, as in verse 3. Therefore it does not appear\nfrom this text, that every one who endeavours to know that he is in a\nstate of grace, by diligent self-examination, but cannot conclude that\nhe is so, must be determined to be destitute of faith; which would\nnecessarily follow from our asserting that assurance of our interest in\nChrist, is of the essence of saving faith.\n\nThere are other scriptures which speak of assurance as a distinguishing\ncharacter of Christians in general; which are usually brought to prove,\nthat assurance is of the essence of faith, _viz._ 2 Cor. v. 1. _We know\nthat if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a\nbuilding of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens_;\nand, 1 John v. 19. _we know that we are of God_: and in several places\nin the New Testament, in which the apostle addresses his discourse to\nwhole churches, as having assurance, as well as the grace of faith: thus\nthe apostle Peter, 1 Pet. i. 8, 9. speaks of them as _loving Christ,\nbelieving in him, rejoicing with joy unspeakable and full of glory, and\nreceiving the end of their faith, even the salvation of their soul_;\nwhich could hardly be said of them, if they were destitute of assurance\nof their own salvation. All that I would infer from these and such-like\nscriptures is, that it seems probable that assurance was a privilege\nmore commonly experienced in that age of the church than it is in our\nday; and there may be two reasons assigned for this,\n\n(1.) Because the change that passed upon them, when they were converted,\nwas so apparent, that it was hardly possible for it not to be discerned.\nThey turned from dead idols, and the practice of the vilest\nabominations, to serve the living God; which two extremes are so\nopposite, that their being brought from one to the other could not but\nbe remarked by, and consequently more visible to themselves, than if it\nhad been otherwise; but,\n\n(2.) That which may be assigned as the principal reason of this is,\nbecause the church was called, at this time, to bear a public testimony\nto the gospel, by enduring persecutions of various kinds; and some of\nthem were to resist unto blood. Therefore, that God might prepare them\nfor these sufferings, and that he might encourage others to embrace the\nfaith of the gospel, which was then in its infant state, he was pleased\nto favour them with this great privilege. And it may be hereafter, if\nGod should call the church to endure like trials, he may in mercy grant\nthem a greater degree of assurance than is ordinarily experienced.\n\nNevertheless, it may be questioned; whether those scriptures which speak\nof assurance, as though it were a privilege common to the whole church,\nare not to be understood as applicable to the greater part of them,\nrather than to every individual believer among them. For though the\napostle, in one of the scriptures before-mentioned, considers the church\nat Corinth, as enjoying this privilege, and concluding that it should go\nwell with them in another world, when this earthly tabernacle was\ndissolved; yet he speaks of some of them, in the same epistle, as not\nknowing their ownselves, how that Jesus Christ was in them. And the\napostle John, notwithstanding what he says to the church, _We knew that\nwe are of God_, in 1 John v. 19. which argues that many of them had\nassurance, plainly intimates that all had it not, from what he says,\nver. 13. _These things have I written unto you, that believe on the name\nof the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life_: and\nthough in another scripture, but now mentioned, the apostle Peter speaks\nto the church to which he writes, as having _joy unspeakable and full of\nglory_ consequent upon their faith, which argues that they had\nassurance; yet he exhorts others of them _to give diligence to make\ntheir calling and election sure_, 2 Pet. i. 10. these therefore are\nsupposed, at that time, not to have it: from all which it may be\nconcluded, that assurance of grace and salvation, is not of the essence\nof saving faith; which is the thing supposed in this answer.[108]\n\nII. We proceed to consider those things that are inferred from this\nsupposition, viz.\n\n1. That a believer may wait long before he attains it: this appears from\nwhat is matter of daily experience and observation. The sovereignty of\nGod discovers itself herein, as much as it does when he makes the\nordinances effectual to salvation, in giving converting grace unto those\nwho attend upon them. Some are called early to be made partakers of that\nsalvation that is in Christ, others late. The same may be said with\nrespect to God\u2019s giving assurance. Some are favoured with this privilege\nsoon after, or when first they believe; others are like those whom the\napostle speaks of, _who, through fear of death, are all their life-time\nsubject to bondage_, Heb. ii. 15. Many have often enquired into the\nstate of their souls, that cannot discern any marks or evidences of\ngrace in themselves; whose conversation is such, that others cannot but\nconclude them to be true believers; their spirits are deprest, doubts\nand fears prevail, and tend to make their lives very uncomfortable; they\nwait and pray for the evidence and sense of God\u2019s love to them, but\ncannot immediately find it: this the Psalmist speaks of, either in his\nown person, or thereby represents the case of many who had the truth of\ngrace, but not the assurance thereof, when he says, _O Lord God of my\nsalvation, I have cried day and night before thee; I am afflicted and\nready to die from my youth up; while I suffer thy terrors I am\ndistracted_, Psal. lxxxviii. compared with the xv. God suffers it to be\nthus with them for wise ends. Hereby he lets them know, that assurance\nof his love is a special gift and work of the Spirit; without which they\nremain destitute of it, and cannot take comfort, either from their\nformer or present experiences.\n\n2. They who once enjoyed assurance, may have it weakened and\nintermitted; whether it may be entirely lost will be considered under a\nfollowing head, when we speak concerning the supports that believers\nhave, and how far they are kept hereby from sinking into utter despair:\nit is one thing to fall from the truth of grace, another thing to lose\nthe comfortable sense thereof. The joy of faith may be suspended, when\nthe acts and habits of faith remain firm and unshaken. The brightest\nmorning may afterwards be followed with clouds and tempests; even so our\nclearest discoveries of our interest in the love of God may be followed\nwith the withdrawment of the light of his countenance, and we be left\nunder many discouraging circumstances concerning our state, having lost\nthe assurance we once had.\n\nIf it be inquired, what reason may be assigned for this? I answer, that\nit must, in a great measure, be resolved into the sovereignty of God,\nwho will bring his people which way he pleases, to heaven; and may take\nthose comforts which had their first rise from himself; and, at the same\ntime, none must say, why dost thou thus? However, we may observe some\nparticular reasons, which the providence of God points out to us, to\nwhich we may in other respects, ascribe our want of assurance; and these\nmay be reduced to four heads, particularly mentioned in this answer.\n\n(1.) It is sometimes occasioned by manifold distempers, or bodily\ndiseases: the soul and body are so closely joined to, and dependant on\neach other, that the one can hardly suffer without the other. Hence it\nis that bodily distempers affect the mind, excite and give disturbance\nto the passions; which is a great addition to the uneasiness that ensues\nhereupon. When the spirits are deprest, and we are under the prevalency\nof a melancholy disposition, we are oftentimes inclined to think that we\nare not in a state of grace; and though we were before this disposed to\ncomfort others in like cases, we are at this time unable to take the\nleast encouragement ourselves. All things look black and dismal; our\nformer hope is reckoned no other than delusive, and we brought to the\nvery brink of despair. And it may be observed, that these sad and\nmelancholy apprehensions concerning our state, increase or abate, as the\ndistemper that gives occasion thereunto more or less prevails.\n\nNow that we may be able to determine whether our want of assurance\nproceeds from some natural cause or bodily distemper, we must enquire;\nwhether, before this, we have endeavoured to walk in all good conscience\nin the sight of God? to hate every false way, and make religion the\ngreat business of life, so that we cannot assign any reigning sin as the\ncause of our present desponding frame? And also, whether we have been\ndiligent in performing the duty of self-examination, and have been\nsensible that we stood in need of the Spirit\u2019s witness with ours, in\norder to our arriving to a comfortable persuasion that we are in a state\nof grace? And if, as the result of these enquiries, we cannot see any\ncause leading to this dejection of spirit, but the unavoidable\ninfirmities, which we are daily liable to, then we may probably\nconclude, that it arises from a distemper of body. And, in order to our\ndetermining this matter, we must farther inquire; whether some\nafflictive providence has not had an influence upon us, to bring us into\na melancholy temper? and whether this does not appear in what relates to\nour secular, as well as our spiritual concerns? and if this be the case,\nthough it be very afflictive, it is not attended with that guilt as it\nwould be, had it been occasioned by some presumptuous sin; and there are\nother medicines to be used when it arises from this cause, besides those\nwhich are of a spiritual nature, that are contained in the gospel; but\nwhat they are, it is not our business, in this place, to determine.\n\n(2.) There are many sins which are the occasion of a person\u2019s being\ndestitute of assurance. As all the troubles of life are brought upon us\nby sin; so are all our doubts and fears, arising from the want of a\ncomfortable sense of, or interest in, the love of God. It pleases God,\nin the method of his providence, thus to deal with his people, that he\nmay humble them for presumptuous sins; more especially those that are\ncommitted against light and conviction of conscience, that he may bring\nto remembrance their sins of omission, or neglect to exercise those\ngraces in which the life of faith consists, that hereby they may feel\nthe effect of their stupidity, indifferency, and carnal security, or\ntheir engaging in religious duties, in their own strength, without\ndependence on the Spirit and grace of God, or a due sense of their\ninability to perform any duty in a right way. Or, sometimes, as has been\nbefore observed, they want assurance, because they do not examine\nthemselves, which is God\u2019s ordinance for the attaining this privilege;\nor, if they do, they neglect to give that glory to the Holy Spirit which\nis due to him, by depending on his enlightening influence, whereby they\nmay arrive to a comfortable persuasion of their interest in Christ.\n\n(3.) Assurance is oftentimes weakened and intermitted through manifold\ntemptations. Satan is very active in this matter, and shews his enmity\nagainst the interest of Christ in the souls of his people, as much as\nlies in his power, with this intent, that though it is impossible for\nhim to ruin the soul, by rooting out that grace that is implanted in it;\nyet he may disturb its peace, and weaken its assurance, and, if not\nprevented, hurry it into despair. In this case the general design of his\ntemptations is to represent God as a sin-revenging Judge, a consuming\nfire, and to present to our view, the threatenings whereby his wrath is\nrevealed against sinners; and to endeavour to set aside the promises of\nthe gospel, from which alone relief may be had.\n\nMoreover, he puts us upon considering sin, not only as heinously\naggravated, (which may, for the most part be done with justice) but also\nas altogether unpardonable; and, at the same time pretends to insinuate\nto us that we are not elected, or that Christ did not die for us; and\ntherefore, what he has done and suffered will not redound to our\nadvantage. Now there is apparently the hand of Satan in this matter;\ninasmuch as he attempts, by false methods of reasoning, to persuade us\nthat we are not in a state of grace, or that God is an enemy to us; and\ntherefore our condition is desperate; in which he uses the arts of the\nold serpent, that he may deceive us by drawing conclusions against\nourselves from false premises, _e. g._ because we daily experience the\ninternal workings of corrupt nature, which inclines us to many sins,\nboth of omission and commission; therefore there is no room for us to\nexpect mercy and forgiveness from God. And from our barrenness and\nunprofitableness under the means of grace, our improvements not being\nproportioned to the obligations we have been laid under. Or because we\nhave had great reason to charge ourselves with many declensions and\nbackslidings, which afford matter for deep humiliation, and should put\nus upon sincere repentance, he endeavours to persuade us that we are\naltogether destitute of special grace. And whenever we are unprepared or\nindisposed for the right performance of holy duties, and our affections\nare not suitably raised, but grow stupid, remiss, and careless therein;\nhe puts us upon concluding that it is a vain thing for us to draw nigh\nto God, and that he has utterly rejected, both our persons and services.\nOr, if we are not favoured with immediate returns of prayer, and\nsensible communion with God therein; he tempts us to infer, that we\nshall never obtain the blessing we are pressing after; and therefore we\nmay as well lay aside this duty, and say, why should I wait on the Lord\nany longer? And if by this method he cannot discourage us from engaging\nin holy duties, he sometimes injects blasphemous thoughts or unbecoming\nconceptions of the divine Majesty, which fills the soul with the\ngreatest grief and uneasiness, that hereby he might give us occasion to\nconclude that we sin in persisting therein; and by all these temptations\nhe endeavours to plunge us into the depths of despair.\n\nAs to what concerns the purpose of God relating to the event of things:\nwhen we are led to determine that we are not elected, this is alleged\nwithout sufficient ground, and therein he deceives us, by pursuing the\nsame false methods of reasoning, and puts us upon presuming to enter\ninto those secret things which do not belong to us, because we deserve\nto be cast off by him for our sins, instead of giving diligence to make\nour calling and election sure. It is one thing not to be able to\nconclude that we are elected; and another thing to say that we are not\nso: the former of these is the consequence of our present doubts and\ndesponding apprehensions concerning our state; the latter is plainly a\ntemptation of Satan: this we are often subject to, when we have lost\nthat assurance of our interest in Christ that we once enjoyed,\n\n(4.) A believer\u2019s want of assurance is, for the most part, attended\nwith, and arises from divine desertion; not that we are to suppose that\nGod will cast off his people, whom he has foreknown, effectually called\nand preserved hitherto, so as to forsake them utterly; for that is\ninconsistent with his everlasting love, and the promises of the covenant\nof grace, which respect their salvation. But that which we understand by\ndivine desertions, is God\u2019s withdrawing his comforting presence, and\nwithholding the witness of his Spirit to the work of grace in the soul,\nfrom whence arises those doubts and fears which attend the want thereof;\nas God says to his people, _For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but\nwith great mercies will I gather thee_, Isa. liv. 7. In this respect\nthey are destitute of God\u2019s comforting presence; though at the same time\nthey may be favoured with his supporting presence, and those powerful\ninfluences which are necessary to maintain the work of grace; which, at\npresent, appears to be very weak and languishing.\n\nAnd this leads us to consider the last thing mentioned in this answer,\n_viz._ That though they are thus described, they are not left without\nsuch a presence and support of the Spirit of God, as keeps them from\nsinking into utter despair. This observation ought to be explained and\nconsidered, with certain limitations, lest while on the one hand, we\nassert that which affords matter of encouragement to believers, when\nthey have some degree of hope, we should, on the other hand, throw\ndiscouragements in the way of others, who will be apt to imagine, when\nthey are ready to sink into despair, that this is wholly inconsistent\nwith any direct act of faith. I dare not say that no believer was ever\nso far deserted as to be left to despair of his interest in Christ:\ninasmuch as scripture and daily experience give us instances of some,\nwhose conversation in many respects discovers them to have had the truth\nof grace; whom God has been pleased for wise ends, to leave to the\nterror of their own thoughts, and they have remained for some time, in\nthe depths of despair; and others have gone out of the world under a\ncloud, concerning whom there has been ground to hope their state was\nsafe. Therefore it is somewhat difficult to determine what is meant in\nthis answer, by a believer\u2019s being kept from sinking into utter despair:\nif the meaning is, that they have the supports of the Spirit of God, so\nas to be kept from relapsing into a state of unregeneracy, in their\ndespairing condition, that may be easily accounted for; or, if we are to\nunderstand by it, that believers are not generally given up to the\ngreatest degree of despair; especially such as is inconsistent with the\nexercise of any grace, that is not to be denied. But I would rather say,\nthat though a believer may have despairing apprehensions concerning his\nstate, and the guilt of sin lie upon him like a great weight, so as to\ndepress his spirits, yet he shall not sink into endless misery; for\nthough darkness may continue for a night, light and joy shall come in\nthe morning; and accordingly we may consider,\n\n[1.] That though there are many who are far from having assurance, yet\nthey are at some times, favoured with a small glimmering of hope, which\nkeeps them from utter despair.\n\n[2.] If they are in deep despair, yet they are not so far left as not to\ndesire grace, though they conclude themselves to be destitute of it, or\nnot to lament the loss of those comforts, and their being unable to\nexercise those graces which once they thought themselves possessed of.\n\n[3.] A believer, when in a despairing way, is notwithstanding enabled,\nby a direct act of faith, to give up himself to Christ, though he cannot\nsee his interest in him, and so, long for those experiences and comforts\nwhich he once enjoyed; and when he is at the worst, he can say with Job,\n_Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him_, Job xiii. 15.\n\n[4.] In this case a person has generally such a degree of the presence\nof God, as that he is enabled to justify him in all his dealings with\nhim, and lay the blame of all the troubles that he is under, on himself;\nand this is attended with shame and confusion of face, self-abhorrence,\nand godly sorrow.\n\n[5.] Despairing believers have, notwithstanding, such a presence of God\nwith them, as keeps them from abandoning his interest, or running, with\nsinners, into all excess of riot, which would give occasion to others to\nconclude that they never had the truth of grace.\n\nFrom what has been said concerning true believers being destitute of\nassurance, and yet having some degree of the presence of God with them\nat the same time, we may infer,\n\n_1st_, That this is not inconsistent with what has been said concerning\na believer\u2019s perseverance in grace; yet it must be considered with this\nlimitation, that though the truth of grace shall not be lost, yet the\ncomforts and evidences thereof may, and often are.\n\n_2dly_, This should put us upon circumspect walking and watchfulness\nagainst presumptuous sins, which, as has been before observed, are often\nthe occasion of the loss of assurance; and also on the exercise of a\nfaith of reliance on Christ, for the maintaining the acts of grace, as\nwell as restoring the comforts thereof.\n\n_3dly_, This should instruct believers what to do when destitute of this\nprivilege of assurance. We have observed that this is attended with\ndivine desertion, which is generally occasioned by sins committed.\nTherefore let us say with Job, _Shew me wherefore thou contendest with\nme_, chap. x. 2. let me know what are those secret sins by which I have\nprovoked thee to leave me destitute of thy comforting presence; enable\nme to be affected with, humbled for, and unfeignedly repent of them; and\nexercise that faith in Christ which may be a means of my recovering that\nhope or assurance which I am, at present, destitute of.\n\n_4thly_, What has been said concerning a believer\u2019s being destitute of\nassurance, should put us upon sympathizing with those who are in a\ndespairing way, and using endeavours to administer comfort to them,\nrather than censure them, or conclude them to be in an unregenerate\nstate; as Job\u2019s friends did him, because the hand of God had touched\nhim, and he was destitute of his comforting presence.\n\n_5thly_, From what has been said concerning that degree of the presence\nof God which believers enjoy, which has a tendency to keep them from\nutter despair, at least, from sinking into perdition, how disconsolate\nsoever their case may be at present; we may be induced to admire the\ngoodness and faithfulness of God in his dealings with his people, who\nwill not lay more on them than he will enable them to bear; though they\nare comfortless and hopeless, yet they shall not be destroyed; and, in\nthe end, they shall be satisfied with God\u2019s loving kindness; and when\nthe clouds are all dispersed, they shall have a bright and glorious day\nin his immediate presence, where _there is fulness of joy_, and at his\n_right hand_ where _there are pleasures for evermore_, Psal. xvi. 11.\n\nFootnote 107:\n\n _The word_ \u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, _though it be sometimes used to signify such as\n are rejected as objects of God\u2019s hatred, as in Heb._ vi. 8. _and\n consequently is inconsistent with the character of believers; yet, in\n other places it may be taken according to the grammatical construction\n thereof, as opposed to_ \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9; _which signifies persons approved_, 2\n Tim. ii. 15. _and so it signifies a person whose conduct is\n blame-worthy, or whose actions are not to be approved of; and this may\n be applied to some who are not altogether destitute of faith_, _though\n they are not able to vindicate themselves in all respects as\n blameless. That the apostle uses the word in this sense here, seems\n probable from the application he makes of it to himself; it is said,\n ver. 3._ Ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5;\n _and verse 6. he says_, I trust that ye shall know that we are not\n reprobates; _so we render the words_ \u03b5\u03bb\u03c0\u03b9\u03b6\u03c9 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03bf\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5 o\u03c4\u03b9 h\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n \u03bf\u03c5\u03ba \u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9; _but it would be more agreeable to what is said in\n verse 4. if we should render them, I trust that ye shall know that we\n are not disapproved, or that ye shall find a proof of Christ speaking\n in us: and in verse 7. he farther says_, I pray to God, not that we\n should appear approved. \u03bf\u03c5\u03c7 i\u03bd\u03b1 h\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, _that is, I am\n not so much concerned about your finding a proof of Christ speaking in\n us_; but that ye should do that which is honest, _q. d._ _I am more\n concerned for you than myself, though we be as reprobates_, h\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\n w\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd _that is, whether you think we have a proof of\n Christ\u2019s speaking in us or no, or his approving us in the course of\n our ministry, my great concern is, that you may be approved; so that\n it is plain the apostle uses the word_ \u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, _as signifying\n disapproved; and therefore as it is applied to those he speaks of in\n verse 5. the meaning is this; you seek to know whether we are approved\n of God as ministers; therefore I would advise you to examine\n yourselves, whether you be in the faith, and to prove your ownselves:\n and if you know not yourselves, you are in this respect blame-worthy,\n or to be disapproved; especially because you seem to have been\n negligent as to the duty of self-examination. Whether he who is\n diligent in the exercise of this duty, and yet cannot apprehend that\n he is in a state of grace, be, in this respect to be disapproved or\n no, it is certain, that he who is a stranger to himself, because of\n the neglect hereof, is disapproved._\n\nFootnote 108:\n\n Vide Bellamy\u2019s Works, 3 Vol. p. 81-83.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXII. _What is the communion in glory, which the members of\n the invisible church have with Christ?_\n\n ANSW. The communion in glory, which the members of the invisible\n church have with Christ, is, in this life, immediately after death;\n and at last perfected at the resurrection and day of judgment.\n\nAfter having considered believers, or the members of the invisible\nchurch, as enjoying this privilege of union with Christ, and, as the\nimmediate consequence hereof, communion with him. It has been farther\nobserved, that this communion with him, is either in grace, or glory.\nTheir communion with him in grace consists in their partaking of the\nvirtue of his mediation, in their justification, adoption, and\nsanctification; which have been particularly considered, together with\nother graces and comforts that accompany or flow from them. We are now\nled to speak concerning the communion which they have with him in glory;\nwhich contains the highest privilege they are capable of receiving;\nconsisting in his giving them some right discoveries of the glory which\nthey behold and enjoy by faith, in this life, and also of that which\nshall be immediate, and, in some respects, complete, after death; and,\nat the resurrection and day of judgment, be brought, in all respects, to\nthe utmost degree of perfection; when their joy, as well as their\nhappiness, shall be full, and continued throughout all the ages of\neternity. These are the subjects insisted on in several following\nanswers, which remain to be considered in this first part of the\nCatechism.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXIII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXIII. _What is the communion in glory, with Christ, which\n the members of the invisible church enjoy in this life?_\n\n ANSW. The members of the invisible church have communicated to them\n in this life, the first-fruits of glory with Christ, as they are\n members of him their head, and so, in him, are interested in that\n glory which he is fully possessed of; and as an earnest thereof,\n enjoy the sense of God\u2019s love, peace of conscience, joy in the Holy\n Ghost, and hope of glory; as, on the contrary, the sense of God\u2019s\n revenging wrath, horror of conscience, and a fearful expectation of\n judgment, are, to the wicked, the beginning of their torments which\n they shall endure after death.\n\nThere are two sorts of persons mentioned in this answer, namely, the\nrighteous and the wicked, and the different condition of each of them\nconsidered,\n\nI. With respect to the righteous, who are here styled the members of the\ninvisible church. There are several invaluable privileges which they are\nmade partakers of in this life, in which they are said to have a degree\nof communion in glory with Christ; particularly as they enjoy the\nfirst-fruits or earnest of that glory which they shall have with him\nhereafter: And that,\n\n1. As they are members of him, their head; and accordingly may be said,\nin some respects, to be interested in that glory which he is fully\npossessed of.\n\n2. As they have a comfortable sense of his love to them, attended with\npeace of conscience, joy in the Holy Ghost, and an hope of glory.\n\nII. We have an account, on the other hand, of the dreadful condition of\nimpenitent sinners, when God sets their iniquities in order before them;\nwhich is represented in a very moving way. Thus they are said to be\nfilled with a sense of God\u2019s revenging wrath, horror of conscience, and\na fearful expectation of judgment; which is considered as the beginning\nof those torments which they shall endure after death.\n\nI. There are several invaluable privileges which the righteous enjoy in\nthis life, that are styled the first-fruits or earnest of glory. Though\nChrist has reserved the fulness of glory for his people hereafter, when\nhe brings them to heaven; yet there are some small degrees thereof,\nwhich they enjoy in their way to it. The _crown of righteousness_, as\nthe apostle speaks, is _laid up for them, which the righteous Judge\nshall give them at that day_, 2 Tim. iv. 8. to wit, when we shall come\nto judgment; then their joy shall be full; they shall be satisfied in\nhis likeness, and made compleatly blessed: Nevertheless there are some\nprelibations, or foretastes, which they have hereof, for their support\nand encouragement, while they are in this imperfect state. For the\nunderstanding of this it may be premised,\n\n1. That we are not to suppose that the present enjoyments which\nbelievers experience in the highest degree, do fully come up to those\nthat are reserved for them. There is a great difference as to the degree\nthereof. As a child that is newly born has something in common with what\nhe shall have when arrived at a state of manhood; but there are several\ndegrees, and other circumstances, in which he falls short of it: or, as\na few drops are of the same nature with the whole collection of water in\nthe ocean; yet there is a very small proportion between one and the\nother: so the brightest discovery of the glory of God, which we are\ncapable of enjoying in this world; or the comfortable foretastes that\nbelievers have of heaven, fall very much short of that which they shall\nbe possessed of, when they are received into it. And there are very\ngreat allays, and many things that tend to interrupt and abate their\nhappiness, agreeably to the imperfection of this present state. Whatever\ngrace they are enabled to act, though in an uncommon degree, is attended\nwith a mixture of corruption; and as their graces are imperfect, so are\nthe comforts that arise from thence, which are interwoven with many\nthings very afflictive; so that they are not what they shall be, but are\ntravelling through this wilderness to a better country, and exposed to\nmany evils in their way thither.\n\n2. All believers do not enjoy these delights and pleasures that some are\nfavoured with in their way to heaven; the comforts, as well as the\ngraces, of the Holy Spirit, are bestowed in a way of sovereignty, to\nsome more, and to others less: Some have reason to say with the apostle,\n_Thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ_, 2\nCor. ii. 14. others are filled with doubts concerning their interest in\nhim, and go mourning after him all the day; and if they have, at some\ntimes a small glimpse of his glory, by which they conclude themselves to\nbe, as it were, in the suburbs of heaven, they soon lose it, and find\nthemselves to be in the valley of the shadow of death, as the disciples,\nwhen they were with Christ at his transfiguration, which was an emblem\nof the heavenly blessedness, when his _face did shine as the sun, and\nhis raiment was white as the light_; which occasioned them to say, _it\nis good for us to be here_; before they had done speaking, or had time\nto reflect on their present enjoyment they were deprived of it when _the\ncloud overshadowed them_, Matt. xvii. 2,-5. so the believer is not to\nexpect uninterrupted communion with God, or perfect fruition with him\nhere. However, that which we are at present to consider, is that degree\nthereof which some enjoy; which is here called the first-fruits and\nearnest of glory. The scripture sets it forth under both these\nexpressions.\n\n(1.) They are said to receive the first-fruits thereof; or as the\napostle styles it, _The first-fruits of the Spirit_, Rom. viii. 23. that\nis, the graces and comforts of the Holy Ghost, which are the\nfirst-fruits of that blessedness, that they are said to wait for; which\nis called _the adoption_, viz. those privileges which God\u2019s children\nshall be made partakers of; or, _the glorious liberty_ which they shall\nhereafter enjoy. This is styled, the _first-fruits_, as alluding to the\ncluster of grapes, which they who were sent to spy out the land of\nCanaan, were ordered to bring to the Israelites in the wilderness, that\nhereby they might be encouraged in their expectation of the great plenty\nthat was to be enjoyed when they were brought to it. Or, it has\nreference to the feast of ingathering, before the harvest, when they\nwere to bring the sheaf which was first to be cut down, and _wave it\nbefore the Lord_, Lev. xxiii. 10, 11. compared with Deut. xxvi. 10, 11.\nwith thankfulness and joy, in expectation of the full harvest, which\nwould be the reward of the industry and labour of the husbandman. Thus\nbelievers are given not only to expect, but to rejoice in hope of the\nglory of God.\n\n(2.) This is also called an earnest of glory. Thus believers are said to\nbe _sealed with that holy Spirit of promise which is the earnest of\ntheir inheritance_, Eph. i. 13, 14. and elsewhere it is said, _God hath\ngiven us the earnest of his Spirit_, 2 Cor. i. 5. An earnest is a small\nsum, given in part of payment; whereby they who receive it, are\nencouraged hereafter to expect the whole: So a believer may conclude,\nthat as sure as he now enjoys those spiritual privileges that accompany\nsalvation, he shall not fail of that glory which they are an earnest of.\nIn this respect God is pleased to give his people a wonderful instance\nof his condescending love, that they may hereby be led to know what the\nhappiness of the heavenly state is, in a greater degree than can be\nlearned from all the descriptions that are given of it, by those who are\ndestitute of this privilege. Heaven is the port to which every believer\nis bound, the reward of all those labours and difficulties which he\nsustains in his way to it; and to quicken him to the greater diligence\nin pursuing after it, it is necessary that he should have his thoughts,\nmeditation, and conversation there. The reason why God is pleased to\ngive his people some foretastes thereof, is, that they may love and long\nfor Christ\u2019s appearing, when they shall reap the full harvest of glory.\nNow this earnest, prelibation, or first-fruits of the heavenly\nblessedness which believers enjoy in this life, is considered in this\nanswer.\n\n[1.] As it is included in that glory which Christ is possessed of as\ntheir head and Mediator.\n\n[2.] As they have those graces wrought in them, and comforts flowing\nfrom thence, which bear some small resemblance to what they shall\nhereafter be made partakers of.\n\n[1.] Christ\u2019s being possessed of the heavenly blessedness, as the head\nof his people, is an earnest of their salvation. For the understanding\nof which, let it be considered, that our Lord Jesus sustained this\ncharacter, not only in what he suffered for them, that he might redeem\nthem from the curse of the law; but in the glory which he was afterwards\nadvanced to: _Thus it is said, that he is risen from the dead, and\nbecome the first-fruits of them that slept_, 1 Cor. xv. 20. and\naccordingly they are said to be _risen with him_, Col. iii. 1. as\nrespecting that communion which they have with him herein; and when,\nafter this, he ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of\nthe Majesty on high, his people are said _to sit together in heavenly\nplaces in him_, Eph. ii. 6. not that we are to suppose that they are\nmade partakers of any branch of his mediatorial glory, or joined with\nhim in the work which he there performs, as their exalted head: But his\nbeing considered as their representative, appearing in the presence of\nGod for them, is a foundation of their hope that they shall be brought\nhither at last; and therefore, when he is about to depart out of this\nworld, he gave an intimation to his people, whom he left behind him in\nit, that he went _to prepare a place for them_, John xiv. 3. and assures\nthem, that _because he lives they shall live also_, ver. 19.\n\n[2.] The graces and comforts of the Holy Spirit, which believers are\nmade partakers of, may also be said to be a pledge and earnest of\neternal life. Heaven is a state in which grace is brought to perfection,\nwhich, at present, is only begun in the soul: nevertheless, the\nbeginning thereof affords ground of hope that it shall be compleated. As\na curious artist, when he draws the first lines of a picture, does not\ndesign to leave it unfinished; or he that lays the foundation of a\nbuilding, determines to carry it on gradually, till he has laid the\ntop-stone of it; so the work of grace, when begun by the Spirit, is a\nground of hope that it shall not be left unfinished. As God would never\nhave brought his people out of Egypt with an high hand and an\noutstretched arm, and divided the red sea before them, if he had not\ndesigned to bring them into the promised land; so we may conclude, that\nwhen God has magnified his grace in delivering his people from the\ndominion of darkness, and translating them into the kingdom of his dear\nSon; when he has helped them hitherto, and given them a fair and\nbeautiful prospect of the good land to which they are going, he will not\nleave his work imperfect, nor suffer them to fall and perish in the way\nto it. Christ, in believers, is said to be _the hope of glory_, Col. i.\n27. and the joy which they have in believing, is said not only to be\n_unspeakable_, but _full of glory_, 1 Pet. i. 8. that is, it bears a\nsmall resemblance to that joy which they shall be filled with, when\nbrought to glory, and therefore may well be styled the earnest or\nfirst-fruits of it.\n\nNow, that this may farther appear, let it be considered, that the\nhappiness of heaven consists in the immediate vision and fruition of\nGod, where the saints behold his face in light and glory[109], and enjoy\nall those comfortable fruits and effects that arise from thence, which\ntend to make them compleatly happy. Thus it is said, _They shall see him\nas he is_, 1 John iii. 2. and they are said to _enter into the joy of\ntheir Lord_, Matt. xxv. 21. Believers, it is true, are not in all\nrespects, said to be partakers of this blessedness here; and their\nhighest enjoyments bear but a very small proportion to it: Yet, when we\nspeak of some as having the foretastes of it, we must consider, that\nthere is something in the lively exercise of faith, and the joy that\narises from it, when believers have attained the full assurance of the\nlove of God, and have those sensible manifestations of his comfortable\npresence with them, that bears some small resemblance to a life of\nglory.\n\nThat which in some respects resembles the beatific vision, is a sight of\nGod\u2019s reconciled face, and of their interest in all the blessings of the\ncovenant of grace, by faith. It is true, the views which they have of\nthe glory of God here, are not immediate, but at a distance; and\ntherefore they are said to _behold_, _as in a glass, the glory of the\nLord_, 2 Cor. iii. 18. Thus we see things at a distance, as through a\nperspective glass, which enlarges the object[110], and brings it, as it\nwere, near to the eye, though in reality, it be at a great distance from\nit; and so gives us a clear discerning of that which could otherwise\nhardly be discovered: So faith gives us clearer views of this glory than\nwe could have any other way. Hereby we are said _to see him that is\ninvisible_, Heb. xi. 27. Thus, when God bade Moses go up to the top of\nPisgah, and strengthened his sight, he took a view of the whole land of\nCanaan, though without this he could only have beheld a small part\nthereof: So when God not only gives an eye of faith, but strengthens it\nin proportion to the views he designs it shall take of the heavenly\nstate, that lies at so great a distance, the soul is enabled to see it,\nand herein has a faint emblem of the beatific vision.\n\nMoreover, as heaven is a state, in which the saints have the perfect\nfruition of those blessings which tend to make them compleatly happy;\nthe view which a believer is enabled, by faith, to take of his interest\nin Christ, and the glory he shall be made partaker of with him, is\nsometimes attended with such an extasy of joy and triumph, as is a kind\nof anticipation of that glory which he is not yet fully possessed of.\nSuch an one is like an heir who wants but a few days of being of age;\nwho does not look upon his estate with that distant view which he before\ndid, but with the satisfaction and pleasure that arises from his being\nready to enter into the possession of it; or like one who after a long\nand tedious voyage, is within sight of his harbour, which he cannot but\nbehold with a pleasure, which very much resembles that which he shall\nhave when he enters into it; this is more than a bare hope of heaven; it\nis a full assurance, attended with a kind of sensation of those joys\nwhich are inexpressible, which render the believer a wonder to himself,\nand afford the most convincing proof to others, that there is something\nreal and substantial in the heavenly glory, whereof God is pleased to\nfavour some of his people with the prelibations. That some have enjoyed\nsuch-like manifestations of the divine love to them, and been filled\nwith those raptures of joy, accompanying that assurance which they have\nhad of their salvation, is evident from the experience which they have\nhad of it in some extraordinary and memorable occurrences in life; and\nothers at the approach of death.\n\nOf this there are multitudes of instances transmitted to us in history:\nI shall content myself with a brief extract of some passages which we\nmeet with in the life and death of some who appear to have had as\ncomfortable a foretaste of the joys of heaven, as it is possible for any\none to have in this world. And the first that I shall mention is that\neminently learned and pious Dr. Rivet; who, in his last sickness seemed\nto be in the very suburbs of heaven, signifying to all about him, what\nintimate communion he had with God, and fore-views of the heavenly\nstate; his assurance of being admitted into it; and how earnestly he\nlonged to be there: and, in the very close of life, one who stood by him\ncould not forbear expressing himself to this purpose; I cannot but think\nthat he is now enjoying the vision of God, which gave him occasion to\nsignify that it was so, as well as he was able to express himself, which\naccount, and much more to the same purpose, is not only mentioned by the\nauthor of his last hours, but is taken notice of in a public funeral\noration, occasioned by his death.[111]\n\nAnd what a very worthy writer observes,[112] concerning that excellent\nservant of Christ, Mr. Rutherford, who recites some of his last words to\nthis purpose, is very remarkable, who says, \u201cI shall shine, I shall see\nhim as he is, and all the fair company with him, and shall have my large\nshare. It is no easy thing to be a Christian; but as for me, I have got\nthe victory; and Christ is holding forth his arms to embrace me. I have\nhad my fears and faintings, as another sinful man, to be carried through\ncreditably; but as sure as ever he spake to me in his word, his Spirit\nwitnessed to my heart, saying, Fear not; he had accepted my suffering,\nand the outgate should not be matter of prayer, but of praise.\u201d And a\nlittle before his death, after some fainting, he said, \u201cNow I feel, I\nbelieve, I enjoy, I rejoice, I feed on manna, I have angels\u2019 food, my\neyes shall see my Redeemer; I know that he shall stand, at the latter\nday, on the earth, and I shall be caught up in the clouds to meet him in\nthe air. I sleep in Christ; and when I awake I shall be satisfied with\nhis likeness; O for arms to embrace him!\u201d And to one speaking concerning\nhis painfulness in the ministry, he cried out, \u201cI disdain all; the port\nI would be in at, is redemption and forgiveness of sins through his\nblood.\u201d And thus, full of the Spirit; yea, as it were overcome with\nsensible enjoyment, he breathes out his soul, his last words being\nthese; \u201cGlory, glory dwelleth in Emmanuel\u2019s land.\u201d\n\nTo this I may add the account given of that great man Dr. Goodwin, in\nsome memoirs of his life, composed out of his own papers published by\nhis son,[113] who intimates that he rejoiced in the thoughts that he was\ndying, and going to have a full and uninterrupted communion with God; \u201cI\nam going, said he, to the three Persons with whom I have had communion;\nthey have taken me, I did not take them; I shall be changed in the\ntwinkling of an eye; all my lusts and corruptions I shall be rid of,\nwhich I could not be here; those croaking toads will fall off in a\nmoment.\u201d And mentioning those great examples of faith, Heb. xi. said he,\n\u201cAll these died in faith. I could not have imagined I should ever had\nsuch a measure of faith in this hour; no, I could never have imagined\nit. My bow abides in strength. Is Christ divided? No, I have the whole\nof his righteousness; I am found in him, not in my own righteousness,\nwhich is of the law; but in the righteousness which is of God, which is\nby faith of Jesus Christ, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Christ\ncannot love me better than he doth; I think I cannot love Christ better\nthan I do; I am swallowed up in God:\u201d and then he says, \u201cNow shall I\never be with the Lord.\u201d With this assurance of faith, and fulness of joy\nhis soul left this world, and went to see and enjoy the reality of that\nblessed state of glory.\n\nThere is also an account, in the life and death of Mr. John Janeway, of\nthe great assurance and joy which he had in his last sickness, in which\nhe expresses himself to this purpose; \u201cI am, through mercy, quite above\nthe fears of death, and am going unto him whom I love above life. O that\nI could let you know what I now feel! O that I could shew you what I\nsee! O that I could express the thousandth part of that sweetness which\nnow I find in Christ! you would all then think it worth the while to\nmake it your business to be religious. O my dear friends, you little\nthink what a Christ is worth upon a death-bed! I would not, for a world,\nnay, for millions of worlds, be now without Christ and a pardon. O the\nglory! the unspeakable glory that I behold! My heart is full, my heart\nis full; Christ smiles and I cannot choose but smile. Can you find in\nyour heart to stop me, who am now going to the complete and eternal\nenjoyment of Christ? Would you keep me from my crown? The arms of my\nblessed Saviour are open to embrace me; the angels stand ready to carry\nmy soul into his bosom. O did you but see what I see, you would all cry\nout with me, How long dear Lord, come Lord Jesus, come quickly? Or why\nare his chariot-wheels so long a coming?\u201d Much more to the same purpose\nmay be found in the life of that excellent man, which is exceedingly\naffecting.\n\nAnd there is another who does not come short of him in his death-bed\ntriumphs;[114] who says concerning himself, \u201cDeath is not terrible, it\nis unstinged; the curse of the fiery law is done away: I bless his name\nI found him; I am taken up in blessing him; I am dying rejoicing in the\nLord; I long to be in the promised land; I wait for thy salvation; how\nlong! Come sweet Lord Jesus, take me by the hand; I wait for thy\nsalvation, as the watchman watcheth for the morning; I am weary with\ndelays; I faint for thy salvation: Why are his chariot-wheels so long a\ncoming? What means he to stay so long? I am like to faint with delays.\u201d\nAfter that he said, \u201cO Sirs, I could not believe that I could have born,\nand born cheerfully this rod so long: This is a miracle, pain without\npain. And this is not a fancy of a man disordered in his brain, but of\none lying in full composure: O blessed be God that ever I was born; O if\nI were where he is! And yet, for all this, God\u2019s withdrawing from me\nwould make me as weak as water: all this I enjoy, though it be a miracle\nupon miracle, would not make me stand without new supply from God; the\nthing I rejoice in is, that God is altogether full; and that in the\nMediator Christ Jesus, there is all the fulness of the Godhead, and it\nwill never run out. I am wonderfully helped beyond the power of nature,\nthough my body be sufficiently teazed, yet my spirit is untouched.\u201d Much\nmore to this purpose we have in the latter part of his life, which I\nshall close with one thing that is very remarkable. When he was\napprehensive that he was very near his death, he said, \u201cWhen I fall so\nlow that I am not able to speak, I\u2019ll shew you a sign of triumph, when I\nam near glory, if I be able;\u201d which accordingly he did, by lifting up\nhis hands, and clapping them together, when he was speechless, and in\nthe agonies of death.\n\nMany more instances might have been given to illustrate this argument,\nwhereby it will evidently appear, that God is pleased, sometimes, to\ndeal familiarly with men, by giving them extraordinary manifestations of\nhis presence, before he brings them into the immediate enjoyment of\nhimself in heaven; which may be well called an earnest or prelibation\nthereof.[115] And it may serve as a farther illustration of an argument\nbefore insisted on,[116] to prove that assurance of God\u2019s love is\nattainable in this life, from the various instances of those who have\nbeen favoured with it. This assurance, as it may be observed, is\naccompanied with the lively acts of faith, by which it appears to be\nwell grounded; so that, as the apostle says, _The God of hope_ is\npleased to _fill them with all joy and peace in believing_; whereby they\n_abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost_, Rom. xv. 13. in\nwhich respect it may be said, to use the prophet\u2019s words, that _they joy\nbefore thee, according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when\nthey divide the spoil_, Isa. ix. 3. This is like the appearing of the\nmorning-star, which ushers in a bright and glorious day, and gives a\nfull discovery to themselves and others, that there is much of heaven\nenjoyed in the way to it, by those whom God delights to honour. Thus\nconcerning the communion in glory, which the members of the invisible\nchurch sometimes enjoy in this life; which leads us to consider,\n\nII. The miserable condition of the wicked in this life, when God is\nprovoked, as a sin-revenging Judge, to fill them with a sense of his\nwrath; from whence arises horror of conscience, and a fearful\nexpectation of judgment; which is the beginning of those torments which\nthey shall endure after death, as it is observed in the latter part of\nthis answer. We have many instances in scripture, of the punishment of\nsin in this world, in whom God is said _to reprove and set_ their\niniquities _in order before their eyes_, Psal. l. 21. which fills them\nwith horror of conscience,[117] and leaves them in utter despair. They\nwho once thought themselves in a prosperous condition, concerning whom\nit is said, _Their eyes stand out with fatness, they have more than\nheart could wish_, Psal. lxxiii. 7. yet their end was terrible, when it\nappears that they were _set in slippery places_, being _cast down into\ndestruction, brought into desolation as in a moment, and utterly\nconsumed with terrors_, ver. 18, 19.\n\nWe have a sad instance of this in Cain, after he had slain his brother,\nand fell under the curse of God, whereby he was sentenced to be a\nfugitive and vagabond in the earth. He separated himself indeed from the\npresence of the Lord, and the place in which he was worshipped; but\ncould not fly from the terrors of his own thoughts, or get any relief\nunder the uneasiness of a guilty conscience; which made him fear that he\nshould be slain by the hand of every one that met him; and complain, _My\npunishment is greater than I can bear_, Gen. iv. 13.\n\nAnd some understand that expression of Lamech in the same sense, when he\nsays, _I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If\nCain shall be avenged seven-fold, truly Lamech seventy and seven-fold_,\nGen. iv. 23, 24. The wrath of God was also denounced against Pashur; as\nit is said, the _Lord hath not called thy name Pashur, but\nMagor-missabib; for thus saith the Lord, I will make thee a terror to\nthyself, and to all thy friends_, Jer. xx. 3, 4.\n\nAnd Judas, after he had betrayed our Saviour, was filled with the\nterrors of an accusing conscience, which forced him to confess, not as a\nbelieving penitent, but a despairing criminal; _I have sinned in that I\nhave betrayed the innocent blood_; after which it is said, _He departed,\nand went and hanged himself_, Matt, xxvii. 4, 5. Nothing is more\nterrible than this remorse of conscience, which renders sinners\ninexpressibly miserable. This is a punishment inflicted on those who sin\nwilfully, presumptuously, and obstinately against the checks of\nconscience and rebukes of providence, and various warnings to the\ncontrary, who treasure up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath;\nwho are _contentious, and do not obey the truth_; that is, they are so\nfar from obeying it, that they persecute and oppose it; and, on the\nother hand, _obey unrighteousness_: to these belong, as the apostle\nsays, _indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish_, Rom. ii. 5, 8,\n9. This not only waits for them, as _laid up in store, and sealed up\namong God\u2019s treasures, to whom vengeance belongeth_, Deut. xxxii. 34,\n35. but they are made to taste the bitterness of that cup, which shall\nafterwards be poured forth without mixture. In this world _their eyes\nshall see their destruction, and_ afterwards _they shall drink of the\nwrath of the Almighty_, Job xxi. 20. This is a most affecting subject;\nhow awful a thing is it to see a person surrounded with miseries, and,\nat the same time, shut up in darkness, and left destitute of hope! With\nwhat horror and anguish was the soul of Saul filled, when he uttered\nthat doleful complaint; _I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make\nwar against me, and God is departed from me_, 1 Sam. xxviii. 15. much\nmore for a person to apprehend himself fallen into the hands of the\nliving God, who is a consuming fire; and having nothing left but the\nfearful expectation of future judgment, and an abyss of woes that will\nensue hereupon. These are the evils that some endure in this life; which\nis no less terrible to them than the comfortable foretastes of the love\nof God are joyful to the saints.\n\nFrom the different view of the end of the wicked, and the righteous,\nmany useful instructions may be learned.\n\n1. When we consider the wicked as distressed with the afflicting sense\nof what they feel, and with the dread of that wrath which they would\nfain flee from, but cannot, we may infer,\n\n(1.) That a state of unregeneracy, whatever advantages may attend it, as\nto the outward blessings of common providence, is a very sad and\ndeplorable condition, far from being the object of choice to those who\nduly consider the consequences hereof. The present amusements that arise\nfrom the enjoyment of sensual pleasures, from whence the sinner\nconcludes himself to be happy, is the most miserable instance of\nself-deceit, and will appear to be so, if we consider the end thereof,\nor that _the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the\nhypocrite but for a moment_, Job xx. 5. and after that, nothing shall\nremain but what wounds his spirit, and makes his misery intolerable.\n\n(2.) When we meet with instances of persons sunk in the depths of\ndespair, and tormenting themselves with the fore views of hell and\ndestruction, let this be a warning to others to flee from the wrath to\ncome. I would not be peremptory in passing a judgment on the state of\nthose who apprehend themselves to be irretrievably lost, and feel those\nterrors in their consciences which no tongue can express. A person can\nhardly read the account of the despair of poor Spira, soon after the\nreformation; and how much his sentiments concerning himself, resembled\nthe punishment of sin in hell, without trembling: he was, indeed, a sad\ninstance, of the wrath of God breaking in upon conscience; and is set up\nas a monument to warn others, to take heed of apostacy; and in this, and\nsuchlike instances, we have a convincing proof of the reality of a\nfuture state of misery; or, that the punishment of sin in hell is not an\nungrounded fancy: nevertheless, it is not for us to enter into those\nsecrets which belong not to us, or to reckon him among the damned in\nanother world, because he reckoned himself among them in this. And as\nfor any others that we may see in the like circumstances, we are not so\nmuch to pass a judgment concerning their future state, as to infer the\ndesperate estate of sinners, when left of God, and to bless him that it\nis not our case. And on the other hand, let not unregenerate sinners\nthink that they are safe, merely because their consciences are quiet, or\nrather stupid, since that false peace, which they have, is no better\nthan _the hope of the hypocrite_, which _shall perish_, and be _cut\noff_; and his _trust shall be as a spider\u2019s web_, if he continue in his\npresent condition.\n\nFrom what has been said concerning the happiness of the righteous, in\nthe enjoyment they have of the first fruits of the heavenly glory, we\nmay learn,\n\n(1.) That this may afford farther conviction to us, that there is a\nstate of complete blessedness reserved for the saints in another world;\nsince, besides the arguments we have to prove this taken from scripture,\nwe have others founded in experience, so far as it is possible for any\nto attain to the joys of heaven before they come there. Though the\ninstances we have here given thereof are uncommon, yet this inference\nfrom them is just, and may afford matter of conviction to those who are\nwholly taken up with earthly things, and have no taste of, nor delight\nin things spiritual, that religion has its own rewards attending it, and\nconsequently that a believer is the only happy man in the world.\n\n(2.) This may serve as an encouraging motive to induce Christians to\nhold on their way. Whatever difficulties or distressing providences they\nmay meet with in this life, if they have the earnest and foretastes of\nheaven at any time, this will make their afflictions seem light;\ninasmuch as they work for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight\nof glory. And if they are rather waiting and hoping for them, than\nactually enjoying them, let them adore and depend on the sovereignty of\nGod, who dispenses these comforts when he pleases: and if they are\ndestitute of the joy of faith, let them endeavour to be found in the\nlively exercise of the direct acts thereof, trusting in Christ, though\nthey have not such sensible communion with him as others have; and let\nthem bless God, (though they have not those foretastes of the heavenly\nglory, which accompany a full assurance thereof,) if they have a quiet,\ncomposed frame of spirit, and are not given up to desponding thoughts,\nor unbelieving fears, and have ground to conclude, that though their\nstate be not so comfortable as that of others; yet it is no less safe,\nand shall, at last, issue into the fruition of that felicity of which\nothers have the first-fruits here on earth.\n\n(3.) Let them who are at any time favoured with this privilege of\nassurance, and the joy that arises from it, walk very humbly with God,\nas being sensible that this frame of spirit is not owing to themselves,\nbut to the quickening and sealing influences of the Holy Ghost; and if,\nby neglecting to depend on him for the continuance thereof, we provoke\nhim to leave us to ourselves, we shall soon lose this desirable frame,\nand be left in darkness: since as without him we can do nothing, so\nwithout his continued presence we can enjoy none of those privileges\nwhich tend to make our lives comfortable, and give us an anticipation of\nfuture glory.\n\nFootnote 109:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxxvi. xc.\n\nFootnote 110:\n\n Reflecting as mirrors, or beholding as by mirrors.\n\nFootnote 111:\n\n _Vid. Dauberi orat. Funeb. ad front. & Hor. Noviss. ad calc. Tom. 3.\n Riveti operum: in which he is represented as saying, Nolite mei causa\n dolere, ultima h\u00e6c momenta nihil habent funesti; corpus languet\n quidem, at anima robore & consolatione plena est, nec impedit paries\n iste intergerinus, nebula ista exigua, quo minus lucem Dei videam.\n Atq; exinde magis magisque optavit dissolvi & cum Christo esse.\n Sufficit mi Deus exclamabat subinde, sufficit, suscipe animam meam:\n Non tamen moram impatienter fero. Expecto, credo, persevero, dimoveri\n nequeo, Dei Spiritus meo spiritui testatur, me ex filiis suis esse. O\n amorem ineffabilem! id quod sentio, omnem expressionem alte\n transcendit. Veni Domine Jesu, veni, etenim deficio, nan quidem\n impatiens Domine, sed anima mea respicit te ut terra sicca. Preces &\n votum, ut Deus Paradisum aperiret, & huic fideli servo suo faciem suam\n ostenderet; his verbis supplevit; cum animabus justorem sanctificatis;\n Amen, Amen. Exinde lingua pr\u00e6pedita verbo affirmare; mox ad vocem\n adstantium, ipsum jam visione Dei frui, annuere; paulo post sub mediam\n decimam matutinam placide in Domino obdormiit._\n\nFootnote 112:\n\n _See Fleming\u2019s Fulfilling of the Scripture, in fol. Part 1. page 287._\n\nFootnote 113:\n\n _See Dr. Goodwin\u2019s Works, Vol. 5. in his life, page 19._\n\nFootnote 114:\n\n _See the Memoirs of the Life of Mr. Halyburton, Cap. 6._\n\nFootnote 115:\n\n _See this argument improved by Mr. Fleming_, _in his Fulfilling of the\n Scripture_, _Edit. in Fol. page 394_, & seq. _in which he takes\n several remarkable passages out of Melchoir Adam\u2019s Lives, and gives\n several instances of that extraordinary communion which some have had\n with God, both in life and death; whose conversation was well known in\n Scotland; so that he mentions it as what is a matter undeniably true:\n and he relates other things concerning the assurance and joy which\n some have had; which has afforded them the sweetest comforts in\n prisons and dungeons, and given them a foretaste of heaven, when they\n have been called to suffer death for Christ\u2019s sake._\n\nFootnote 116:\n\n _See Page 252, ante._\n\nFootnote 117:\n\n _See Vol. II. page 151._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXIV., LXXXV.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXIV. _Shall all men die?_\n\n ANSW. Death being threatened as the wages of sin, it is appointed\n unto all men once to die; for that all have sinned.\n\n QUEST. LXXXV. _Death being the wages of sin, why are not the\n righteous delivered from death, seeing all their sins are forgiven\n in Christ?_\n\n ANSW. The righteous shall be delivered from death itself at the last\n day, and even in death are delivered from the sting and curse of it;\n so that, although they die, yet it is out of God\u2019s love, to free\n them perfectly from sin and misery; and to make them capable of\n farther communion with Christ in glory, which they then enter upon.\n\nIn these answers we have an account,\n\nI. Of the unalterable purpose of God, or his appointment that all men\nonce must die; which is also considered as the wages of sin.\n\nII. It is supposed, that death has a sting and curse attending it with\nrespect to force.\n\nIII. It is the peculiar privilege of the righteous, that though they\nshall not be delivered from death, yet this shall redound to their\nadvantage: For,\n\n1. The sting and curse of it is taken from them.\n\n2. Their dying is the result of God\u2019s love to them; and that in three\nrespects,\n\n(1.) As they are thereby freed from sin and misery.\n\n(2.) As they are made capable of farther communion with Christ in glory,\nbeyond what they can have in this world.\n\n(3.) As they shall immediately enter upon that glorious and blessed\nstate when they die.\n\nI. God has determined, by an unalterable purpose and decree, that all\nmen must die. Whatever different sentiments persons may have about other\nthings, this remains an incontestable truth. We have as much reason to\nconclude that we shall leave the world, as, at present, we have that we\nlive in it. _I know_, says Job, _that thou wilt bring me to death, and\nto the house appointed for all living_, Job xxx. 23. and upon this\naccount the Psalmist says, _I am a stranger with thee, and a sojourner,\nas all my fathers were_, Psal. xxxix. 12. And if scripture had been\nwholly silent about the frailty of man, daily experience would have\nafforded a sufficient proof of it. We have much said concerning man\u2019s\nmortality in the writings of the heathen; but they are at a loss to\ndetermine the origin or first cause of it; and therefore they consider\nit as the unavoidable consequence of the frame of nature, arising from\nthe contexture thereof, as that which is formed out of the dust must be\nresolved into its first principle; or that which is composed of flesh\nand blood, cannot but be liable to corruption. But we have this matter\nset in a true light in scripture, which considers death as the\nconsequence of man\u2019s first apostacy from God. Before this he was\nimmortal, and would have always remained so, had he not violated the\ncovenant, in which the continuance of his immortality was secured to\nhim; the care of providence would have prevented a dissolution, either\nfrom the decays of nature, or any external means leading to it. And\ntherefore some of the Socinian writers have been very bold in\ncontradicting the express account we have hereof in Scripture, when they\nassert that death was, at first, the consequence of nature;[118] for\nwhich reason man would have been liable to it, though he had not sinned;\nwhereas the apostle says, _By one man sin entered into the world, and\ndeath by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have\nsinned_, Rom. v. 12.\n\nWe have a particular account of this in the sentence God passed on our\nfirst parents immediately after their fall; when having denounced a\ncurse upon the ground for their sake, he says, _Dust thou art, and unto\ndust shalt thou return_, Gen. iii. 19. And it may be observed, that as\nthis is unavoidable, pursuant to the decree of God, so the constitution\nof our nature, as well as the external dispensations of providence, lead\nto it. This sentence no sooner took place, but the temperament of human\nbodies was altered,[119] the jarring principles of nature, on the due\ntemperament whereof life and health depends, could not but have a\ntendency by degrees to destroy the frame thereof; if there be too great\na confluence of humours, or a defect thereof; if heat or cold\nimmoderately prevails; if the circulation of the blood and juices be too\nswift or slow: or if the food on which we live, or the air which we\nbreathe be not agreeable to the constitution of our nature, or any\nexternal violence be offered to it; all these things have a necessary\ntendency to weaken the frame of nature, and bring on a dissolution.\nDavid includes the various means by which men die, in three general\nheads, speaking concerning Saul, _The Lord shall smite him, or his day\nshall come to die, or he shall descend into battle, and perish: the Lord\nshall smite him_, 1 Sam. xxvi. 10. denotes a person\u2019s dying by a sudden\nstroke of providence, in which there is the more immediate hand of God;\nand his _falling into battle_, a violent death by the hands of men; in\nboth which respects men die before that time which they might have lived\nto, according to the course of nature; and what is said concerning his\n_day\u2019s coming to die_; that is, a person\u2019s dying what we call a natural\ndeath, or when nature is so spent and wasted that it can no longer\nsubsist by all the skill of the physicians, or virtue of medicine; and\nthen the soul leaves its habitation, when it is not longer able to\nperform the functions of life.\n\nWe might here consider those diseases that are the fore-runners of\ndeath, which sometimes are more acute; and by this means, as one\nelegantly expresses it, nature feels the cruel victory before it yields\nto the enemy. As a ship that is tossed by a mighty tempest, and by the\nconcussion of the winds and waves, loses its rudder and masts, takes\nwater in every part, and gradually sinks into the ocean: so in the\nshipwreck of nature, the body is so shaken and weakened by the violence\nof a disease, that the senses, the animal and vital operations decline,\nand, at last, are extinguished in death.[120] This seemed, so formidable\nto good Hezekiah, that he utters that mournful complaint, _Mine age is\ndeparted and removed from me as a shepherd\u2019s tent: I have cut off like a\nweaver, my life; he will cut me off with pining sickness: from day even\nto night, wilt thou make an end of me. I reckoned till the morning, that\nas a lion, so will he break all my bones: from day even to night wilt\nthou make an end of me_, Isa. xxxvii. 12, 13.\n\nWe might here consider the empire of death as universal; as the wise man\nsays, _One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh_,\nEccl. i. 4. and then they pass away also, like the ebbing and flowing of\nthe sea. Death spares none; the strongest constitution can no more\nwithstand its stroke, than the weakest; no age of man is exempted from\nit. This is beautifully described by Job; _One dieth in his full\nstrength, being wholly at ease and quiet: his breasts are full of milk,\nand his bones are moistened with marrow: and another dieth in the\nbitterness of his soul; and never eateth with pleasure: they shall lie\ndown alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them_, Job xxi. 23-26.\n\nWe might also consider the body after death, as a prey for worms, the\nseat of corruption; and lodged in the grave, the house appointed for all\nliving; and then an end is put to all the actions, as well as enjoyments\nof this life; and, as the Psalmist speaks, _In that very day_ all _their\nthoughts perish_, Psal. cxlvi. 4. Whatever they have been projecting,\nwhatever schemes they have laid, either for themselves or others, are\nall broken: as the historian observes concerning the Roman emperor, that\nwhen he had formed great designs for the advantage of the empire,[121]\ndeath broke all his measures, and prevented the execution thereof.\n\nWe might also consider it as putting an end to our present enjoyments,\nremoving us from the society of our dearest friends, to a dismal and\nfrightful solitude. This was one of the consequences thereof, that was\nvery afflictive to Hezekiah, when he says, _I shall behold man no more\nwith the inhabitants of the world_, Isa. xxxviii. 11. It also strips us\nof all our possessions, and the honours we have been advanced to in this\nworld, as the Psalmist speaks, _When he dieth he shall carry nothing\naway, his glory shall not descend after him_, Psal. xlix. 27.\n\nWe might also consider the time of life and death as being in God\u2019s\nhand. As we were brought into the world by the sovereignty of his\nprovidence, so we are called out of it at his pleasure; concerning whom\nit is said, _Our times are in his hand_, Psal. xxxi. 15. So that as\nnothing is more certain than death, nothing is more uncertain to us than\nthe time when. This God has concealed from us for wise ends. Did we know\nthat we should soon die, it would discourage us from attempting any\nthing great in life; and did we know that the lease of life was long,\nand we should certainly arrive to old age; this might occasion the\ndelaying all concerns about our soul\u2019s welfare, as presuming that it was\ntime enough to think of the affairs of religion and another world, when\nwe apprehend ourselves to be near the confines thereof; and therefore,\nGod has by this, made it our wisdom, as well as our duty, to be waiting\nall the days of our appointed time, till our change come.\n\nFrom what has been said under this head, we may learn,\n\n1. The vanity of man as mortal. Indeed, if we look on believers as\nenjoying that happiness which lies beyond the grave, there is a very\ndifferent view of things; but as to what respects the world we have\nreason to say as the Psalmist does, _Verily, every man at his best\nestate is altogether vanity_, Psal. xxxix. 5. We may see the vanity of\nall those honours and carnal pleasures which many pursue with so much\neagerness, as though they had nothing else to mind, nothing to make\nprovision for but the flesh, which they do at the expence of that which\nis in itself most excellent and desirable: We may also infer,\n\n2. That this affords an undeniable and universal motive to humility;\nsince death knows no distinction of persons, regards the rich no more\nthan the poor; puts no mark of distinction between the remains of a\nprince and a peasant; and not only takes away every thing that men value\nthemselves upon, but levels the highest part of mankind with common\ndust: They who boast of their extract, descent, and kindred, are\nobliged, with Job, to say, _to corruption, Thou art my father; to the\nworm, Thou art my mother and my sister_, Job xvii. 14. Shall we be proud\nof our habitations, _who dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in\nthe dust?_ chap. iv. 19. Are any proud of their youth and beauty? this\nis, at best, but like a flower that does not abide long in its bloom,\nand when cut down, it withers. The finest features are not only spoiled\nby death, but rendered unpleasant and ghastly to behold; and accordingly\nare removed out of sight, and laid in the grave.\n\n3. From the consideration of man\u2019s liableness to death, and those\ndiseases that lead to it, as the wages of sin, we may infer; that sin is\na bitter and formidable evil. The cause is to be judged of by its\neffects. As death, accompanied with all those diseases which are the\nforerunners of it, is the greatest natural evil that we are liable to;\nsin, from whence it took its rise, must be the greatest moral evil; we\nshould never reflect on the one without lying low before God in a sense\nof the other. The Psalmist, when meditating on his own mortality, traces\nit to the spring thereof; and ascribes it to those rebukes with which\n_God corrects men for their iniquities_, that they die, and their\n_beauty consumes away like a moth_, Psal. xxxix. 11. And elsewhere, when\nhe compares the life of man to the _grass_, which _in the morning\nfourisheth, and groweth up; and in the evening is cut down and\nwithereth, he immediately adds; thou hast set our iniquities before\nthee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance_, Psal. xc. 6, 8.\nAnd when Hezekiah had an intimation of his recovery, after he had the\nsentence of death within himself, he speaks of his deliverance from the\n_pit of corruption_, Isa. xxxviii. 17. as that which was accompanied\nwith God\u2019s _casting all his sins behind his back_. And since we cannot\nbe delivered from these sad effects of sin, till the frame of nature is\ndissolved, and afterwards rebuilt; it should put us upon using those\nproper methods whereby we may be freed from the guilt and dominion\nthereof; and accordingly it should have a tendency to promote a life of\nholiness in us.\n\n4. From the uncertainty of life, let us be induced to improve our\npresent time, and endeavour so to live, as that, when God calls us\nhence, we may be ready. And therefore, we ought to pray with the\nPsalmist, _So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts\nunto wisdom_, Psal. xc. 12. that by this means, that which deprives us\nof all earthly enjoyments, may give us an admission into a better world,\nand be the gate to eternal life. This leads us to consider,\n\nII. That death has a sting and curse annexed to it, with respect to\nsome. Thus the apostle expressly says, _The sting of death is sin_, 1\nCor. xv. 56. As sin at first brought death into the world; so it is the\nguilt thereof, lying on the consciences of men, which is the principal\nthing that makes them afraid to leave the world; not but that death is,\nin itself, an evil that nature cannot think of without some reluctancy.\nAnd therefore the apostle Paul, although he expresses that assurance\nwhich he had of happiness in another world, which he _groaned_ after,\nand _earnestly_ longed to be possessed of; yet had it been put to his\nchoice, he would have wished that he could have been _clothed upon with\nthe house which is from heaven_, 2 Cor. v. 2. that is, had it been the\nwill of God, that he might have been brought to heaven without going the\nway of all the earth, this would have been more agreeable to nature. But\nwhen the two evils of death meet together, namely, that which is\nabhorrent to nature, and the sting which makes it much more formidable,\nthis is, beyond measure, distressing. In this answer, the sting and\ncurse of death are both put together, as implying the same thing.\nAccordingly, it is that whereby a person apprehends himself liable to\nthe condemning sentence of the law, separated from God, and excluded\nfrom his favour, so that death appears to him to be the beginning of\nsorrows; this is that which tends to embitter it, and fills him with\ndread and horror at the thoughts of it. Which leads us,\n\nIII. To shew that it is the peculiar privilege of the righteous, that\nthough they shall not be delivered from death, yet this shall redound to\ntheir advantage. That they shall not be exempted from death is evident;\nbecause the decree of God relating hereunto, extends to all men. We\nread, indeed, of two that escaped the grave, viz. Enoch, who was\ntranslated that he should not see death, and Elijah, who was carried to\nheaven in a fiery chariot; but these are extraordinary instances, not\ndesigned as precedents, by which we may judge of the common lot of\nbelievers. And the saints that shall be found alive at Christ\u2019s second\ncoming, shall undergo a change[122], as the apostle speaks; which though\nit be equivalent to death, it cannot properly be styled a dying;\ninasmuch as he opposes it thereunto, when he says, _We shall not all\nsleep, but we shall all be changed_, 1 Cor. xv. 51. and he speaks of it\nas a future dispensation of providence, which does not immediately\nconcern us in this present age. Therefore we must not conclude that\nbelievers are delivered from the stroke of death; nevertheless, this is\nordered for their good, as the apostle says, with a particular\napplication to himself, _For me to die is gain_, Phil. i. 21. And when\nhe speaks of the many blessings that believers have in possession or in\nreversion, he says, _Death is yours_; as though he should say, it shall\nredound to your advantage; and this it does if we consider,\n\n1. That the sting of death is taken away from them. This is the result\nof their being in a justified state; for since a person\u2019s being liable\nto the condemning sentence of the law is the principal thing that has a\ntendency to make him uneasy, and may be truly called the sting that\nwounds the conscience; so a sense of his interest in forgiveness through\nthe blood of Christ, tends to give peace to it; such an one can say, who\nshall lay any thing to my charge? It is God that justifieth; or though I\nhave contracted guilt, which renders me unworthy of his favour; yet I am\npersuaded that this guilt is removed; and therefore iniquity shall not\nbe my ruin; and even death itself shall bring me to the possession of\nthose blessings that were purchased for me by the blood of Christ, which\nI have been enabled to apply to myself by faith; and with this\nconfidence he can say with the apostle, _O death, where is thy sting? O\ngrave, where is thy victory?_ 1 Cor. xv. 55.\n\n2. Their dying is an instance of God\u2019s love to them. As those whom\nChrist is said to have _loved in the world, he loved unto the end_ of\nhis life; so he loves them to the end of theirs, John xiii. 1. And as\nnothing has hitherto separated them from this love, nothing shall be\nable to do it. There are _three_ instances wherein the love of God to\ndying believers discovers itself.\n\n(1.) In that they are hereby freed from sin and misery; this they never\nwere, nor can be till then. As for sin, there are the remainders thereof\nin the best of men, which give them great disturbance, and occasion for\nthat daily conflict which there is between flesh and spirit, as has been\nbefore observed. But at death the conflict will be at an end, and the\nvictory which they shall obtain over it, compleat. There shall be no law\nin the members warring against the law of the mind; no propensity or\ninclination to what is evil; nor any guilt or defilement contracted;\nwhich would be inconsistent with a state of perfect holiness. And as it\nis a state of perfect happiness, there is an entire freedom from all\nthose miseries which sin brought into this lower world. These are either\ninternal or external, personal or relative; none of which shall occur to\nallay, or give any disturbance to the saints\u2019 blessedness after death.\nBut more of this will be considered under a following answer; in which\nwe shall be led to speak of the happiness of the righteous at the day of\njudgment, both in soul and body[123]; and therefore we proceed to\nconsider,\n\n(2.) That the death of a believer appears to be an instance of divine\nlove, in that hereby he is made capable of farther communion with Christ\nin glory. Persons must be made meet for heaven before they are admitted\nto it. Though our present season and day of grace is a time in which God\nis training his people up for glory; and there is an habitual\npreparation for it, when the work of grace is begun; which is what the\napostle intends when he speaks of some who are _made meet to be made\npartakers of the inheritance of the saints in light_, Col. ii. 12. when\nthey were first translated into Christ\u2019s kingdom: nevertheless this\nfalls very short of that actual meetness which the saints must have when\nthey are brought to the possession of the heavenly blessedness. Then\nthey shall be made perfect in holiness, as will be observed in the next\nanswer; otherwise there can be no perfect happiness.\n\nAnd besides this, the soul must be more enlarged, that hereby it may be\nenabled to receive the immediate discoveries of the divine glory, or to\nconverse with the heavenly inhabitants, than it can be here. The frame\nof nature must be changed; which is what the apostle intends, when he\nsays, _Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth\ncorruption inherit incorruption_, 1 Cor. xv. 50. accordingly he adds,\nver. 53. _This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal\nmust put on immortality_; whereby he intimates, that frail, mortal, and\ncorruptible man, is not able to bear that glory which is reserved for a\nstate of immortality. Therefore the soul must be so changed as to be\nrendered receptive thereof; and in order thereto, all its powers and\nfaculties must be greatly enlarged; otherwise it can no more receive the\nimmediate rays of the divine glory, than the weak and distempered eye\ncan look steady on the sun shining in its meridian brightness. In this\nworld our ideas of divine things are very imperfect, by reason of the\nnarrowness of our capacities, and God condescends to reveal himself to\nus in proportion thereto; but when the saints shall see him as he is, or\nhave a perfect and immediate vision and fruition of his glory, they\nshall be made receptive of it; this is done at death; whereby they are\nrendered capable of farther communion with Christ in glory.[124]\n\n(3.) At death believers immediately enter upon, and are admitted into\nthe possession of this glory. At the same time that the soul is enlarged\nand fitted for the work and enjoyment of heaven, it is received into it;\nwhere it shall have an uninterrupted communion with Christ in glory;\nwhich is the subject insisted on in the following answer.\n\nFootnote 118:\n\n _Sequela natur\u00e6._\n\nFootnote 119:\n\n _Before this there was what some call_ temperamentum ad pondus, _which\n was lost by sin; and a broken constitution, leading to mortality\n ensued thereupon_.\n\nFootnote 120:\n\n _See Dr. Bates on Death, chap._ ii.\n\nFootnote 121:\n\n _Vid. Sueton. in Vit. Jul. C\u00e6s. Talia agentem atq; meditantem mors\n pr\u00e6venit._\n\nFootnote 122:\n\n _See more of this in Quest._ lxxxvii.\n\nFootnote 123:\n\n _See Quest._ xc.\n\nFootnote 124:\n\n The belief of a separate state is very ancient. Cicero and Seneca have\n asserted, that all nations believed the immortality of the soul. Yet\n we know there were not only individuals, but sects who were\n exceptions. Saul the first king of Israel believed that the soul\n survived the death of the body, or he would neither have made laws\n against necromancers, nor have applied to one in his distresses. If\n Samuel was raised, it is a fact, directly in point, but the words\n though express, are probably an accommodation to the sentiments of\n men. The son of Sirach who lived two hundred years before Christ, says\n that Samuel prophesied after he was dead. (Ecclus. c. 46. v. 20.) And\n Josephus in his account of the life of Saul, shows his belief to be\n that Samuel actually arose. The same feats of apparitions which the\n disciples had, still exist with the common people, and are proofs that\n they entertain the same sentiment.\n\n Some of the Pharisees, who are represented as believing a separate\n state, thought souls might return to other bodies. This was the\n opinion of Josephus with respect to the virtuous; and also of those\n Jews, who supposed that Jesus was Elijah or Jeremiah; but the question\n of the disciples, whether a man had been born blind for his own sins,\n implies a possibility of a return also of the wicked into other\n bodies. Nevertheless the prevailing opinion of the Pharisees was of a\n separate state; otherwise Paul\u2019s professing their sentiments, which\n must have been known to him, was disingenuous; nor, if they had known\n the difference, would they have protected him. The approbation of the\n multitude when he proved the doctrine from the words of Jehovah to\n Moses at the bush, (Matt. xxii. 32.) and the parable of Lazarus and\n the rich man, evince that the common opinion was such.\n\n This subject, has been enlightened, not first brought to light,\n through the Gospel, but plainly asserted: _this day shalt thou be with\n me in paradise. At home in the body, and absent from the Lord, absent\n from the body, and present with the Lord_, is descriptive but of two\n states. The desire _to depart to be with Christ_, shows an immediate\n expectation. And otherwise it cannot be said that the spirits of just\n men are _made perfect_.\n\n The Jews, Greeks, and Romans assigned the Heaven to the gods, earth to\n men, and under the earth (\u05e9\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc, \u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, inferi) to the dead. The\n passages \u201cthe spirit shall return to God,\u201d and \u201cthe spirit of a man\n goeth upwards\u201d are not exceptions, for then they would prove that the\n evil, as well as the good, went to heaven. That the spirit is disposed\n of by God, and that the spirit of a man survives the death of the\n body, seem to be all that is respectively implied. Samuel was believed\n to come out of, and return to his place under the earth; and Saul was\n to be with him, below the earth; but, possibly, in a different\n apartment. Thus Abraham and Lazarus were in sight of, and only divided\n from the man in torments by a gulph.\n\n Under the gospel the place of separate saints is represented to be in\n Heaven. Heaven had been always assigned to God among the Jews, and\n even the heathens thought it the most honourable place: Virgil\n assigned it to C\u00e6sar. Jesus declared he came from thence, and would\n return thither; and for the comfort of his disciples, told them, he\n would prepare a place for them, and take them to himself. They saw him\n actually ascend. He is to come from thence, and to bring them with him\n to judgment.\n\n This change of representation implies no contradiction, for pure\n spirits are not confined to place. Our souls are connected with our\n bodies, and therefore go and come with, or rather in them. But when\n the connexion is broken, the soul cannot be said to be in one place\n more than another, except as it is occupied with material objects. It\n can attend to one thing only at once, and therefore when in, it cannot\n be out of the body, and must be wherever occupied, but not in any\n _place_, except concerned with material objects. The infinite Spirit\n had no connexion with space in all the eternity which preceded\n creation; since time began as every thing is known and supported by\n him, he is said to be in all places. But the idea of place is not\n necessary to our conceptions of Spirit.\n\n To speak of the planets as the residence of spirits, and to talk of\n souls flying through the _visible_ Heavens in quest of paradise is\n idle. If all souls must ascend to Heaven, from India they go in a\n direction opposite to our course thither.\n\n There is no sun nor moon enjoyed by saints in glory; the Lord is their\n light. And spiritual bodies are not flesh and blood, nor belly, nor\n meats; nor corruptible nor mortal; but fit for the society of spirits.\n The soul at death is discharged from the prison of these bodies, and\n not confined to place. It receives new faculties, which entertain it\n with more than substitutes for the sensations it had in the body; it\n obtains a perception of light more vivid than in dreams, and\n permanent. It enjoys the discernment, society, and communion of other\n Spirits; the presence of God and the Redeemer; and progresses in the\n knowledge and love of God, and so in holiness and happiness forever.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXVI.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXVI. _What is the communion in glory with Christ, which\n the members of the invisible church enjoy immediately after death?_\n\n ANSW. The communion in glory with Christ, which the members of the\n invisible church enjoy immediately after death, is, in that their\n souls are then made perfect in holiness, and received into the\n highest heavens, where they behold the face of God in light and\n glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies, which, even\n in death, continue united to Christ, and rest in their graves as in\n their beds, till at the last day they be again united to their\n souls: Whereas the souls of the wicked are at death cast into hell,\n where they remain in torments and utter darkness, and their bodies\n kept in their graves, as in their prisons, till the resurrection and\n judgment of the great day.\n\nHaving considered the soul as separated from the body by death; the next\nthing that will be enquired into, is what becomes of it, and how it is\ndisposed of in its separate state? and here we find that there is a vast\ndifference between the righteous and the wicked in this respect: the\nformer have communion with Christ in glory, the latter are in a state of\nbanishment and separation from him; being cast into hell, and there\nremaining in torments and utter darkness. Both these are particularly\ninsisted on in this answer. In speaking to which, we must consider,\n\nI. That there is something supposed; namely, that the soul of man is\nimmortal; otherwise it could not be capable of happiness or misery.\n\nII. We shall consider the happiness which the members of the invisible\nchurch enjoy; which is called communion with Christ in glory.\n\nIII. The misery which the souls of the wicked endure at death; which is\ncontained in the latter part of the answer.\n\nI. To speak concerning the thing supposed in this answer; namely, that\nthe soul of man is immortal. This is a subject of that importance, that\nwe must be first convinced of the truth of it before we can conclude\nthat there is a state of happiness or misery in another world. But\nbefore we proceed to the proof of it, it is necessary for us to explain\nwhat we are to understand thereby; accordingly let it be premised,\n\n1. That we read, in scripture, of the death of the soul, in a spiritual\nsense, as separated by sin, from God, the fountain of life and\nblessedness, and as being destitute of a principle of grace; whereby it\nis utterly indisposed to perform any actions that are spiritually good,\nas much as a dead man is unable to perform the functions of life. In\nthis sense we are to understand the apostle\u2019s words, _She that liveth in\npleasure is dead while she liveth_, 1 Tim. v. 6. And in this respect\nunregenerate persons are said to be _dead in trespasses and sins_, Eph.\nii. 1. and a condemned state, which is the consequence hereof, is a\nstate of death. Now that which is opposed hereunto, is called, in\nscripture, a spiritual life, or immortality; but this is not the sense\nin which we are to consider it in our present argument.\n\n2. Immortality may be considered as an attribute peculiar to God, as the\napostle says, _he only hath immortality_, 1 Tim. vi. 16. the meaning of\nwhich is, that his life, which includes his Being, and all his\nperfections, is necessary and independent; but in this respect no\ncreature is immortal; but their life is maintained by the will and\nprovidence of God, which gave being to it at first.\n\n3. When we speak of creatures being immortal, we must consider them\neither as not having any thing in the constitution of their nature, that\ntends to a dissolution, which cannot be effected by any second cause; or\ntheir eternal existence, pursuant to the will of God, who could, had he\npleased, have annihilated them. It is in both these senses that we are\nto consider the immortality of the soul.\n\nThat it is in its own nature immortal, has been allowed by many of the\nHeathens, who have had just conceptions of the spirituality of its\nnature, possessed due regards to the providence of God, and those marks\nof distinction that he puts between good and bad men, as the consequence\nof their behaviour in this life. That the soul survives the body, has\nbeen reckoned, by some of the Heathens, as an opinion that has almost\nuniversally obtained in the world[125]. Thus Plato introduces\nSocrates[126] as discoursing largely on this subject, immediately before\nhis death: and, in some, other of his writings, not only asserts, but\ngives as good proofs of this doctrine as any one, destitute of\nscripture-light, could do. One of his followers, in the account he gives\nof his doctrine, recommends and insists on an argument which he brings\nto prove it, which is not without its weight, namely, that the soul acts\nfrom a principle seated in its own nature, and not by the influence of\nsome external cause, as things material do[127]. And Strabo speaks of\nthe ancient Brachmans, among the Indians, as entertaining some notions\nof the immortality of the soul, and the judgment passed upon it in its\nseparate state; agreeable to what Plato advances on that subject[128].\n\nSome, indeed, have thought that this notion took its rise from Thales,\nthe Milesian, who lived between two and three hundred years before\nPlato, and about six hundred years before the Christian \u00c6ra, from an\noccasional passage mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, in his life, which is\nhardly sufficient to justify this supposition; which he brings in only\nas matter of report[129]: And Cicero[130] supposes it was first\npropagated by Pherecydes, who was cotemporary with him; though Diogenes\nLaertius makes no mention of it. But it may be inferred from many things\nin Homer, the oldest writer in the Greek tongue, who lived above three\nhundred years before Thales, that the world had entertained some\nconfused ideas of it in his time: As we often find him bringing in the\nsouls of the deceased heroes appearing in a form, and speaking with a\nvoice like that which they had when living, to their surviving friends.\nAnd he not only supposes, but plainly intimates that their souls existed\nin a separate state[131]. And in other places he represents some\nsuffering punishment for their crimes committed here on earth[132];\nwhich plainly argues, whatever fabulous account we have of the nature of\npunishment, or the person suffering it, that it was an opinion,\ngenerally received at that time, that the soul existed in a separate\nstate.\n\nAnd, indeed, this maybe inferred from the doctrine of D\u00e6mons, or the\nsuperstitious worship of the heathens, which they paid to the souls of\nthose heroes who formerly lived on earth, and had done some things which\nthey thought rendered them the peculiar favourites of God, and the\nobjects of worship by men; and that their souls existed with God in\ngreat honour and favour in a separate state[133]. But passing this by,\nit may be farther observed, that whatever notions some of the heathens\nhad of the immortality of the soul in general; they were very much at a\nloss, many of them, in determining the place, or many things relating to\nthe state in which they were; and therefore many of them, with\nPythagoras, asserted the doctrine of transmigration of souls, or their\npassing from one body to another; and being condemned to reside in vile\nand dishonourable bodies; which, though it perverts, yet doth not\noverthrow the doctrine of the soul\u2019s immortality; and others seemed to\ndoubt whether, after four or five courses of transmigration of souls\nfrom one body to another, they might not at last shrivel into nothing.\n\nIt must also be acknowledged, that there was a considerable party among\nthe heathen that adhered to the sentiments of Epicurus, who denied the\nimmortality of the soul, as supposing it to be material. And the\nSadducees are represented, in scripture, as imbibing that notion; who\nare said to deny both angels and spirits, Acts xxiii. 8. In this respect\nthey gave into his philosophy, as to what concerns his denying the\nimmortality of the soul, or its existence in a future state[134]: But\npassing this by, we may observe, that notwithstanding all that has been\nsaid concerning this doctrine, by the better and wiser part of the\nheathen in their writings; yet their notions seem very defective, if we\ntrace them farther than what concerns the bare separate existence of the\nsoul; or, if they attempt to speak any thing concerning its happiness in\na future state, they then discover that they know but little of this\nmatter; and many of them, though they cannot deny the soul\u2019s\nimmortality, yet they seem to hesitate about it; and therefore we may\nsay with the apostle, that _life and immortality is brought to light\nthrough the gospel_, 2 Tim. i. 10. that is, if we would be sure of the\nimmortality of the soul, and know its state and enjoyments in another\nworld, we must look farther than the light of nature for it: and in\nseeking for arguments in scripture, we shall find great satisfaction\nconcerning this matter, which we cannot do from the writers before\nmentioned.\n\nThat some of the heathen were in doubt about this important truth, is\nvery evident from their writings; for Plato himself[135],\nnotwithstanding the many things which he represents Socrates as saying,\nconcerning a state of immortality after death, endeavouring to convince\nhis friend Cebes about that matter, and apprehending that he had so far\nprevailed in the argument, as that his antagonist allowed that the soul\nsurvived the body, but yet held the transmigration of souls into other\nbodies; this he seems to allow him, and adds, that it is uncertain\nwhether the soul, having worn out many bodies, may not at last perish\nwith one that it is united to[136]. And he farther says to him, that I\nmust now die, and you shall live; but which of us is in the better state\nGod only knows[137].\n\nAs for Aristotle, though, in many places of his writings, he seems to\nmaintain the immortality of the soul; yet in others it appears that he\nis in doubt about it; and seems to assert, that neither good nor evil\nhappens to any man after his death[138]. And the Stoicks, who did not\naltogether deny this doctrine; yet they supposed that in process of\ntime, it would be dissolved[139]. And even Cicero himself,\nnotwithstanding all that he says, by which he seems to give into this\ndoctrine; yet sometimes speaks with great hesitation about it[140]. And\nnotwithstanding what Seneca says concerning the immortality of the soul,\nas has been often before observed; yet he speaks doubtfully of it[141];\nso that we must have recourse to scripture, and those consequences that\nare deduced from it, as well as those things that may be inferred from\nthe nature of the soul to prove that it is immortal. And,\n\n(1.) For the proof of this doctrine, let it be considered, that the soul\nis immaterial; which appears from its being capable of thought, whereby\nit is conversant about, and takes in ideas of things divine and\nspiritual, which no creature below man can do. It has a power of\ninferring consequences from premises, and accordingly is the subject of\nmoral government, capable of conversing with God here, and expecting\nrewards or punishments from him hereafter; all this cannot be produced\nby matter or motion: As for matter, that is in itself altogether\nunactive; and when motion is impressed upon it, the only change that is\nmade therein, is in the situation and contexture of its parts, which\ncannot give it life, sensation or perception, much less a power of\njudging and willing, or being conversant about things spiritual and\nimmaterial.\n\n(2.) This power of thinking or reasoning was not derived from the body\nto which it was united; for that which has not in itself those superior\nendowments, cannot communicate them to another: Its union with the soul\ncannot impart them to it; for whatever sensation the body has, (which is\nbelow the power of reasoning,) is derived from the soul, as appears from\nits being wholly destitute thereof, when the union between the soul and\nbody is broken: And therefore, since those superior powers, or\nexcellencies of the soul, are produced by another cause, we must\nconclude, that they are immediately from God: This evidently appears\nfrom scripture; the body of Adam was first formed, and then it is said,\n_God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life_, Gen. ii. 7. that\nis, he put into it that soul which was the spring and fountain of all\nliving actions; and then it follows, man became a living soul: And it is\nconsidered as a peculiar display of the glory of God, that he _formeth\nthe spirit of man within him_, Zech. xii. 2.\n\n(3.) It follows from hence, that the dissolution of the body makes no\nalteration in the powers and faculties of the soul; which is not hereby\nrendered subject to death. For, as it did not derive those powers from\nthe body, as was before observed, it could not be said to lose them in\nthe ruin of the body: Thus our Saviour speaks of the soul as not being\naffected with those injuries that tend to the bodies destruction, when\nhe says, _Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill\nthe soul_, Mat. x. 28.\n\n(4.) We have a particular account in scripture, of the soul when\nseparated from the body, as disposed of in a different way from it; it\ndoes not go down to the earth as the body does, from whence it was, but\n_returns to God who gave it_, Eccl. xii. 7. Its return to God supposes\nthat it was accountable to him for its actions performed in the body, or\nthe way and manner in which the faculties were exerted; and accordingly,\nwhen separate from it, it is represented as returning to God to give an\naccount of its behaviour in the body, and to reap the fruits and effects\nthereof. And as it is said to return to God; so believers breathe forth\ntheir souls, and resign them by faith into the hand of God, as our\nSaviour expresses it, _Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit_, Luke\nxxiii. 46. or, as Stephen says, _Lord Jesus receive my spirit_, Acts\nvii. 59.\n\n(5.) The soul\u2019s immortality may be proved from the extent of the\ncapacities thereof, and the small improvement men make of them in this\nworld, especially the greatest part of mankind. What a multitude are\nthere who never had the faculties of the soul deduced into act, in whom\nthe powers of reasoning were altogether useless, while in this world; I\nmean in those whose souls are separated from their bodies as soon as\nthey are born; others die in their childhood, before reason comes to\nmaturity; and how great a part of the world live to old age, whose souls\nhave not been employed in any thing great or excellent, in proportion to\ntheir capacities? Were these made in vain? or did God design, when he\nbrought them into, or continued them either a longer or a shorter time\nin the world, that they should never be employed in any thing that is\nworthy of these noble faculties? Therefore we must conclude that there\nis another state, in which the soul shall act more agreeably to those\ncapacities which it is endowed with.\n\n(6.) This may be farther proved, not only from the natural desires,\nwhich there are in all men, of immortality; but more especially those\ndesires, which the saints have, of enjoying some things in God, which\ncannot be attained in this life. The natural desire of immortality is\nwhat belongs to all: With what reluctancy does the soul and body part;\nwhich arises from a natural aversion to a dissolution, unless there be a\nwell-grounded hope of a life of blessedness that shall ensue? Moreover\nthere is not only a desire but an expectation of the soul\u2019s living for\never, when separated from the body, in a state of happiness; which\nbelievers are made partakers of, as a peculiar blessing from God:\nTherefore we must conclude, that he that gave them will satisfy them; so\nthat as they have a thirst after happiness, which is the effect of a\nsupernatural power, they shall not be disappointed or destitute of it;\nwhich they must be if the soul does not survive the body.\n\n(7.) The immortality of the soul may be proved from the justice of God\nas the Governor of the world. This divine perfection renders it\nnecessary that rewards and punishments should be distributed according\nto men\u2019s behaviour in this life. We observe, under a foregoing head,\nthat man is supposed to be accountable to God, from the consideration of\nthe spirit\u2019s returning to him: And it also follows, from what was said\nunder another head, concerning the soul\u2019s being the subject of moral\ngovernment: But this argument will be farther improved under a following\nanswer, when we consider our Saviour\u2019s coming to judge the world[142].\nAll the use therefore that we shall at present make thereof, is, that\nthe soul being thus accountable to God, has reason to expect some\npeculiar marks of favour beyond what it receives in this world; or to\nfear some punishment as the consequence of crimes committed, from the\nhand of the supreme Judge of all: Thus it is said, _God will render to\nevery man according to his deeds_, Rom. ii. 6. And elsewhere, _Every one\nshall receive according to what he hath done in the body, whether it be\ngood or bad_, 2 Cor. v. 10. Now that which makes for our present\nargument, is, that the best men in the world do not receive those\npeculiar marks of divine favour, as to what respects their outward\ncondition therein, as some of the vilest men often do: This the prophet\nJeremiah takes notice of, when he says, _Righteous art thou, O Lord,\nwhen I plead with thee; yet let me talk with thee of thy judgments:\nWherefore doth the way of the wicked prosper? Wherefore are all they\nhappy that deal very treacherously?_ Jer. xii. 1. And the Psalmist, when\nobserving the prosperity of the wicked, says, _They are not in trouble\nlike other men; neither are they plagued like other men_, Psal. lxxiii.\n5. that is, not exposed to those rebukes of providence, as to what\nconcerns outward things, as good men are.\n\nThat which is alledged by some to solve this difficulty, is, that virtue\nhas its own reward; and therefore, the good man cannot but be happy,\nwhatever troubles he meets with in this life, since he has something\nwithin himself that makes him so. But to this it may be replied, that\nthis cannot give the least satisfaction, that the divine distributions\nare just and equal, to those who are destitute of this inward comfort;\nand the principal ingredient in that internal happiness which arises\nfrom the exercise of religion and virtue, consists in the divine\napprobation, and the interest which such have in that love, which shall\ndiscover itself more fully, when the soul, being separate from the body,\nshall enjoy the happiness resulting from it in another world: Therefore,\nthis is so far from militating against the doctrine we are maintaining,\nthat it affords a considerable argument to support it.\n\nIf it be objected also, on the other hand, that sin brings its own\npunishment along with it, in that uneasiness which the wicked find in\ntheir own breasts; concerning whom it is said, _They are like the\ntroubled sea when it cannot rest; whose waters cast up mire and dirt_,\nIsa. lvii. 20. This also proves the immortality of the soul; inasmuch as\nthis fear arises from a sense of guilt, whereby persons are liable to\npunishment in another world, who are not in the least concerned about\nthe punishment of sin in this, and are ready to conclude themselves out\nof the reach of human judicature; therefore, that which they are afraid\nof, is God\u2019s righteous judgments in another world, which they cannot, by\nany means, free themselves from the dread of. We must therefore conclude\nthat this is as natural to man, considered as sinful, as the hope of\nfuture blessedness is to one that is righteous; and both these are the\nresult of a divine impression enstamped on the souls of men, which\naffords an evident proof of their immortality.\n\nThe objections against this doctrine, are generally such as carry in\nthem the lowest and most abject thoughts of human nature in those who\nmay truly be said to despise their own souls. When they pretend, as was\nbefore observed, that they are material, this is to set the soul on a\nlevel with the body; for matter, how much soever it be refined, when it\nis resolved into the particles of which it consists, has no excellency\nabove other material beings.\n\nAs to the objections that are brought against this doctrine from\nscripture, by which the frailty of this present life is set forth: These\ndo not in the least tend to overthrow the immortality of the soul. Thus,\nwhen it is said in Eccles. iii. 19, 20. _That which befalleth the sons\nof men, befalleth beasts, even one thing befalleth them: As the one\ndieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man\nhath no pre-eminence above a beast; all go unto one place; all are of\nthe dust, and all turn to dust again._ It is plain, that Solomon here\nspeaks of the inferior part of man, in which he has no pre-eminence\nabove the beasts, as the body is resolved into dust, as well as the\nbodies of the brute creatures; but then the following words sufficiently\nconfute the objection, in which it is said, _the spirit of man goeth\nupward_; whereby he asserts, not only the superior excellency, but the\nimmortality of the soul.\n\nAgain, when it is said in chap. ix. 5. _The living know that they must\ndie, but the dead know not any thing; neither have they any more a\nreward; for the memory of them is forgotten._ This is sufficiently\nanswered by only reading the following words; by which it appears, that\ntheir memory is forgotten; and they are said to have no farther reward\nin this world; or, as it is expressed, _They have no more any portion\nfor ever, in any thing that is done under the sun_; but this does not in\nthe least intimate that they have no portion in what respects the things\nof another world; and, indeed, their labour being unrewarded here,\naffords us an incontestible argument, that they shall have it hereafter,\nwhen the soul leaves this world.\n\nAnd as for other scriptures, that seem to intimate as though death put\nan end to all those actions of religion which were performed by good men\nin this life, as in Psal. xxx. 9. \u2018When I go down to the pit, shall the\ndust praise thee, shall it declare thy truth?\u2019 and, \u2018The dead praise not\nthe Lord; neither any that go down into silence,\u2019 Psal. cxv. 17. and\nwhat Hezekiah says to the same purpose, \u2018The grave cannot praise thee;\ndeath cannot celebrate thee; they that go down to the pit cannot hope\nfor thy truth,\u2019 Isa. xxxviii. 18. These and such-like expressions intend\nnothing else but this; that the praises of God cannot be celebrated by\nthose who are in the state of the dead, in such a way as they were by\nthem while they lived in this world, _viz._ in the assemblies of his\nsaints, from which they are separated, being no longer considered as\nmembers of the militant church; neither are they apprized of, or\naffected with the things done in this lower world, in which respect they\nare said to know nothing: But this does not in the least, militate\nagainst their praising God with the church triumphant, and having those\nprivileges conferred upon them, which are adapted to a state of\nimmortality and eternal life.\n\nAs to what is farther objected by others, that the immortality of the\nsoul respects only the righteous; because the apostle says in 1 John ii.\n17. \u2018The world passes away, and the lust thereof, but he that doth the\nwill of God abideth for ever.\u2019 This sense given of the words contradicts\nall those scriptures that speak of the punishment of sin in another\nworld; for if none are said to _abide for ever_, but the righteous, or\nthey who do the will of God; the wicked must necessarily go unpunished.\nTherefore we must understand the word _abiding_ in the same sense as the\nPsalmist does, when he says, \u2018The ungodly shall not stand in the\njudgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous,\u2019 Psal. i. 5.\nwhich does not signify their not existing in a future state, but not\nbeing admitted into the congregation of the righteous, or made happy\nwith them therein.[143]\n\nII. We shall consider the happiness that the members of the invisible\nchurch enjoy; which is called communion with Christ in glory, as it\nincludes in it perfect holiness; accordingly we read of _the spirits of\njust men made perfect_, Heb. xii. 23. This perfection consists in the\nrooting out all those remainders of corruption, and those habitual\ninclinations to sin, that they were never wholly freed from in this\nworld. The most that can be said concerning a believer at present, is,\nthat he has a principle of spiritual life and grace, which inclines him\nto oppose, and stand his ground against, the assaults of sin that\ndwelleth in him, whereby it is mortified, but not wholly destroyed. The\nwork of sanctification is daily growing to perfection, though it does\nnot fully attain to it: But when the soul leaves the world, it arrives\nto perfection in a moment; so that the power which man had at first, to\nyield sinless obedience, which was lost by the fall of our first\nparents, is regained with great advantage. For this perfection of\nholiness not only denotes a sinless state, but the soul\u2019s being\nconfirmed therein; and accordingly it is said to be received into the\nhighest heaven, the place into which no unclean thing can enter; where\nthere is spotless purity, as well as everlasting happiness; and here\nthey are described as beholding the face of God in light and glory.\nThese things need not be particularly insisted on in this place, since\nthe same privileges are said, in a following answer, to belong to\nbelievers after the day of judgment, both in their souls and bodies,\nwhen they shall be received into heaven, and be made perfectly holy and\nhappy, and be blest with the immediate vision of God[144]; Therefore all\nthat we shall consider at present, with relation hereunto, is,\n\n1. That the soul is immediately made partaker of this blessedness on its\nseparation from the body.\n\n2. It is farther described as waiting for the full redemption of the\nbody, which is still supposed to continue under the dominion of death,\nthough united to Christ, and consequently under his special protection:\nUpon which account believers are said, when they die, to rest in their\ngraves as in their beds, till their bodies are again united to their\nsouls at the last day.\n\n1. We shall consider that the soul is made partaker of this blessedness\nimmediately after its separation from the body, as it is observed in\nthis answer; which seems to militate against three opinions that have\nbeen advanced relating to the state of separate souls.\n\n[1.] That of the Papists, who maintain that the soul is not made perfect\nin holiness at death, but enters into a middle-state, which they call\npurgatory, in which it is to endure exquisite torments, designed partly\nas a punishment inflicted for those sins committed in this life, which\nhave not been expiated by satisfaction made by them, and partly to free\nthem from the sin which they brought with them into that state.\n\n[2.] Another opinion which seems to be opposed in this answer, is what\nwas maintained by some of the ancient Fathers; namely, that the souls of\nbelievers do not immediately enter into the highest heaven before they\nare reunited to their bodies, but into paradise; not to suffer, as the\nPapists pretend that they do who are in purgatory; but to enjoy those\npleasures which are reserved for them in a place not much inferior to\nheaven.\n\n[3.] There is another opinion which is subversive of the doctrine\ncontained in this answer; namely, that the soul, at its separation from\nthe body, sleeps till the resurrection; and consequently, in that\nintermediate space of time in which it is separate, it is no more\ncapable of happiness or misery than the body that lies in the grave. The\nabsurdity of these opinions we shall take occasion farther to consider.\nAnd,\n\n[1.] That of the Papists concerning a middle-state, into which they\nsuppose, souls enter at death, in order to their being cleansed from the\nremainders of sin, whereby they are made meet for heaven. This doctrine,\nhow ludicrous and ungrounded soever it may appear to be, they are so\nfond of, that it will be as hard a matter to convince them of the\nabsurdity thereof, as it was of old to convince the worshippers of Diana\nat Ephesus, of their stupid idolatry; because it tends to promote their\nsecular interest. They first endeavour to persuade the poor deluded\npeople, that they must suffer very great torments after death, unless\nthey be relieved by the prayers of their surviving friends; and then, to\ninduce them to shew this favour to them, as well as that they may merit\nsome abatement of these torments or a speedy release from them, they\ntell them, that it is their duty and interest to leave their estates, by\ntheir last will and testament to pious uses; such as building of\nchurches, endowing of monasteries, &c. by which means they have got a\ngreat part of the estates of the people into their own hands. And to\ncarry on this cheat, they give particular instances, in some of their\nwritings, of souls being released from this dreadful place by their\nprayers.\n\nThe account they give of this middle-state, between heaven and hell, is\nnot only that they are not admitted into the immediate presence of God;\nbut are exposed to grievous torments by fire, little short of those that\nare endured in hell; and if they are not helped by the prayers of the\nchurch, they are in danger of being sent from thence directly to hell,\nfrom whence there is no release. They also add, that the punishment, in\nthis state, is either longer or shorter, in proportion to the crimes\ncommitted in this world; for which satisfaction has not been made by\npenances endured, or money given to compensate for them. Some, indeed,\nare allowed, by them, to pass immediately into heaven, without being\ndetained here; namely, those who have performed works of supererogation;\nor if by their entering into a vow of poverty, they have parted with\ntheir estates, while living in the world, for the use of the church, in\nwhich case no end could be answered, by telling them of this fable of\npurgatory. Others are told that they may escape it, by entering into a\nvow of chastity and canonical obedience; which belongs more especially\nto the priests, when entering into holy orders; whereby they take care\nto make provision for themselves, that so the deluded people may have a\ngreater regard to their prayers, since they will find none in purgatory\nto perform that service for them. This is so vile and absurd an opinion,\nthat it cannot but expose the church of Rome to the scorn and contempt\nof all who are not given up to strong delusions.\n\nBut though it sufficiently appears, that secular interest is the main\nfoundation of this doctrine; yet there are some arguments, which they\ntake from scripture, to support it; which is the only thing that\nrequires our notice.\n\nOne scripture brought to this purpose, is in Isa. iv. 4. where the\nprophet speaks concerning the _Lord\u2019s purging the blood of Jerusalem\nfrom the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of\nburning_; supposing that this should have its accomplishment when the\nsoul left the body, and was detained in this place of torment. But this\nis very remote from the design of the Holy Ghost herein; for it only\ncontains a metaphorical description of some judgments which God would\ninflict on people in this life, and as a means to reclaim them from\nthem: therefore we often read, in the prophets, of God\u2019s refining his\npeople _in the furnace of affliction_, Isa. xlviii. 10. and accordingly\nit is said, that _the Lord\u2019s fire is in Zion, and his furnace in\nJerusalem_, chap. xxxi. 9. denoting the sore judgments they should\nundergo in this world, as a punishment for their idolatry.\n\nAnother scripture, which is miserably perverted, to support this\ndoctrine, is that in Zech. ix. 11. _By the blood of thy covenant have I\nsent forth thy prisoners, out of the pit wherein is no water_; which\nthey suppose, is to be understood of some state after this life; because\nit is called _the pit_; and it is also described as a place of misery,\ninasmuch as there is no water, that is, no refreshing comforts; and they\nadd, that the prophet does not speak of hell because some persons are\ndescribed as _sent forth_, or released from it; therefore it must needs\nbe understood of this middle-state, between heaven and hell. But this is\nfar from being the sense of the text, since it contains a prediction of\ntheir being delivered from the Babylonish captivity, which, in a\nmetaphorical way of speaking, is called _the pit, wherein is no water_,\nto denote the great distress that the people were to be brought under\ntherein; thus the prophet Isaiah, speaking of their deliverance from the\ncaptivity, says, _The captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and\nthat he should not die in the pit_, Isa. li. 14. Or else it denotes some\nfuture deliverance, which the church was to expect after great\ncalamities undergone by them; and this is said to be _by the blood of\nthe covenant_, denoting that all the happiness the church shall enjoy in\nthis world, as well as the other is founded in the blood of Christ,\npursuant to the covenant of grace: and if the text must necessarily be\nunderstood of a deliverance from evil after death, it may be considered\nas a prediction of our being delivered from eternal destruction, by the\nblood of Jesus.\n\nAgain, another scripture which they bring to support this fabulous\ndoctrine, is in 1 Cor. iii. 13, 14, 15. _Every man\u2019s work shall be made\nmanifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by\nfire; and the fire shall try every man\u2019s work, of what sort it is, If\nany man\u2019s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a\nreward. If any man\u2019s work shall be burnt, he shall suffer loss; but he\nhimself shall be saved; yet so as by fire_. The reason why this\nscripture is forced into that cause which they maintain, is, because we\nread of persons being _saved so as by fire_; and this they suppose to\nrespect that which should follow after the particular judgment of every\none at death in which, a scrutiny shall be made concerning their works,\nor their behaviour in this world; and if they are found faulty, they\nmay, notwithstanding, be saved after they have endured those sufferings\nwhich are there allotted for them.\n\nBut there is nothing in the text that gives the least countenance to\nthis notion, since the apostle seems to be speaking concerning those\nministers who preach false doctrines, that is, propagate errors not\ndirectly subversive of the fundamental articles of faith, but such as\ntend to embarrass the consciences of men, and, in many respects, lead\nthem out of the way; or of others, who have been perverted by them, and\nhave embraced pernicious errors, which, in their consequences, are\nsubversive of the faith, but yet do not hold those consequences: these\nmay be saved, but their salvation shall be attended with some\ndifficulty, arising from the mistaken notions which they have imbibed.\nSome compare this to a person whose house is in flames, and he saves his\nlife with difficulty, being scorched thereby. God will, in his own time,\ntake some method to discover what notions we have received in religion;\nand he is said to do it by fire. Whether this, as a learned writer\nobserves, is to be understood of the clear gospel-dispensation,[145] or\nelse respects some trying dispensation of providence, accompanied with a\ngreater measure of the effusion of the Spirit, that shall lead men into\nthe knowledge of their mistakes, and set them in the right way, I will\nnot determine. But whether the one or the other of these senses of the\ntexts seems most agreeable to the mind of the apostle, it is\nsufficiently evident that no countenance is given, either in this or any\nother scripture, to this absurd doctrine of the Papists.\n\nAnother scripture which they bring for the proof of this doctrine, is in\n1 Pet. iii. 19. in which it is said, that our Saviour _went and preached\nunto the spirits in prison_. The sense they give of that text, compared\nwith the foregoing verse, is, that as our Saviour, after his death,\nvisited those repositories, where the Old Testament-saints were lodged,\nand preached the gospel to them, which they embraced; and pursuant\nhereupon, were admitted into heaven: so he went down into this\nsubterraneous prison, and preached to them also; but whether this was\nattended with the same success, or no, they pretend not to determine;\nbut only allege this as a proof that there is such a place: and to give\ncountenance to this sense they say, that by the prison here spoken of,\nthe prison of hell cannot be intended; inasmuch as there is no hope of\nsalvation there, and consequently no preaching of the gospel. And it\ncannot be meant of his preaching to any in this world; for they suppose,\nthat he went after he left the world, and _preached to spirits_, that\nis, to persons, whose souls were separate from their bodies; therefore\nhe went, as they argue, and preached to those that are in purgatory: but\nin giving this sense of the text, they are obliged to take no notice of\nwhat follows, which, if duly considered, would plainly overthrow it.\n\nThe meaning of this scripture therefore is this, that our Saviour\npreached by his Spirit, to the old world, in the ministry of Noah, while\nhe was preparing the ark; but they being disobedient, were not only\ndestroyed by the flood, but shut up in the prison of hell; in which\nrespect it is said he preached to those that are now in prison: so that\nthis scripture makes nothing for that doctrine which we are opposing;\nnor any other that is or can be brought; so that all the arguments\npretended to be taken from it, are a manifest perversion thereof.\n\nHowever, there is one method of reasoning which they make use of, that I\ncannot pass over; inasmuch as they apprehend that it contains a\n_dilemma_ that is unanswerable; namely, that there is some place in\nwhich persons are perfectly freed from sin, which must be either this\nworld, or heaven, or some middle state between them both. It is allowed\nby all, that there is no perfect freedom from sin in this world; and to\nsuppose that persons are perfectly freed from sin after they come to\nheaven, is to conclude that that is a state of probation, in which the\ngospel must be preached, and persons that attend upon it, inclined to\nembrace it, which is not agreeable to a state of perfection: and this is\ncontrary to scripture, which speaks of no unclean thing entering\ntherein. Therefore it follows, that the state in which they are fitted\nfor it, must be this which they plead for, to wit, a middle-state, in\nwhich they are first purged, and then received into heaven.\n\nBut to this it may be replied, that it is true, believers are not\nperfectly freed from sin in this world, nor do they enter into heaven,\neither with the guilt or pollution of their sins upon them; but they are\nmade perfect in an instant, in passing out of this world into heaven:\nthe same stroke which separates the soul from the body takes away the\nremainders of corruption, and fits it for the heavenly state; it passes\nout of this world perfect, though it was imperfect while in it; in like\nmanner as the body being raised out of the grave is rendered\nincorruptible thereby, so that we have no occasion to invent a middle\nstate, into which the saints are brought. Therefore it follows, as it is\nexpressed in this answer, that the souls of believers, immediately after\ndeath, are made perfect in holiness.\n\n[2.] There is another opinion embraced by some of the Jews, and several\nof the Fathers, in which they are followed by some modern writers;\nnamely, that the souls of believers, at death, enter into paradise,\nwhere they continue till they are reunited to their bodies, and, after\nthe day of judgment, are received into the highest heaven: thus they\nunderstand our Saviour\u2019s words to the penitent thief on the cross, _To\nday thou shalt be with me in paradise_, in a literal sense, as\ncontra-distinguished from heaven. And these assert, that the soul of our\nSaviour, when separate from his body, went immediately into paradise,\nand not into heaven, till after his resurrection. This is supposed to\nimport the same thing as _Abraham\u2019s bosom_ does in the parable; and\nindeed, the Greek word,[146] in the metaphorical sense thereof, which we\ntranslate _bosom_, signifies a port or haven; which is, as it were, a\nbosom for shipping.\n\nThis is described as very distinct from the Popish doctrine of\npurgatory; for it is not a place of suffering, but of delight and\npleasure. Tertullian, who gave into this notion,[147] describes it as a\nplace of divine pleasure, designed for the reception of the spirits of\nholy men, being separate either from the world, or other places near it,\nby an inclosure of fire, designed to keep the wicked out.\n\nThis is what they suppose the apostle Paul speaks of when he says, that\nhe was _caught up into paradise_, 2 Cor. xii. 5. and they conclude that\nthis vision or rapture which he mentions, includes in it what he\nexperienced at two several times; and that this is agreeable to what he\nmentions in verse 1. where he speaks not of one single vision, but of\n_visions_ and _revelations_. Accordingly they suppose that he had first\nof all a vision of the glory of heaven, and then he had another of\nparadise: thus a late writer understands the text.[148] However, I\ncannot think that this can be sufficiently inferred from the apostle\u2019s\nwords, which are, as it were, a preface to introduce the account which\nhe gives of himself, when he says, _I will come to visions and\nrevelations_; that is, I will now tell you how God sometimes favours his\npeople with extraordinary visions and revelations: then he proceeds to\ngive an instance hereof in himself, as being _caught up into the third\nheaven_, or into paradise; for I cannot suppose that he speaks of two\nvisions, or distinguishes paradise from heaven; and therefore I am\nobliged not to pay that deference to the sentiments of the Fathers he\nmentions, as he does, but must conclude the notion to be altogether\nungrounded, though it is supported by the credit of Iren\u00e6us, Tertullian,\nEpiphanius, Methodius, as well as of several Jewish writers; such as\nPhilo, and some others,[149]\n\n[3.] We shall now consider another doctrine, maintained by some, which\nis inconsistent with what is said in this answer, concerning the souls\nof believers being made perfect in holiness, and entering immediately\ninto heaven, when separate from their bodies, _viz._ that at death the\nsoul sleeps as well as the body, till the resurrection, when one shall\nbe raised, and the other awakened out of its sleep. These do not suppose\nthat the soul ceases to exist; but that it enters into, and continues\nin, a state of inactivity, without any power to exercise the faculty of\nthinking, and, as a consequence thereof, whilst remaining in this state,\nit must be incapable either of happiness or misery. These do not assert\nthat there shall be no rewards and punishments in a future state; but\nthat there will be a deferring thereof until the last day.\n\nThis doctrine was generally maintained by the Socinians, as may be seen\nin several of their writings referred to by a learned author, who\nopposes them;[150] and the arguments by which it is usually supported,\nare taken partly from the possibility of the soul\u2019s being destitute of\nthought, and partly from those scriptures that compare death to a sleep;\nby which they understand not only a cessation of action in the body, but\nlikewise in the soul. In defence of the former of these, _viz._ that it\nis possible for the soul to be without the exercise of thought, they\nargue, that the soul of a new-born infant, (or, at least, before it is\nborn,) has no ideas: though there be a power of reasoning, which is\nessential, to the soul; yet this is not deduced into act, so as to\nproduce thought, or actual reasoning, from whence moral good or evil\nwould proceed, and a sense of happiness or misery, arise from it. And\nthis notion is carried somewhat farther by a late celebrated\nwriter;[151] who, though he takes no notice of the tendency of his\nassertion to support this opinion concerning the soul\u2019s sleeping at\ndeath; yet others make a handle of it, to defend it with a greater shew\nof reason than what was formerly discovered in maintaining this\nargument.\n\nHe asserts, that the souls of those that are adult do not always think;\nand particularly when a person is in a sound sleep, that he has no\nthought; how much soever there may be the exercise of thought, though\nconfused and irregular, in those who, between sleeping and waking, not\nonly dream a thousand things which they never thought of before, but\nalso remember those dreams when they awake. That a person, in a sound\nsleep, has no dreams, and consequently is destitute of thought, he\nattempts to prove; inasmuch as when any one is suddenly waked out of a\nsound sleep, he can give no account of what he had been thinking of; and\nhe supposes it impossible for a person who was thinking, to forget the\nnext moment what his thoughts were conversant about. This is the\nprincipal argument whereby he supports this notion; and he has so far\nthe advantage thereof, as that it is impossible for us to prove the\ncontrary from any thing that we know or experience concerning ourselves:\nNevertheless, it will not appear very convincing, when we consider that\nthere are innumerable thoughts which we have when awake, that we can\nhardly give an account of the next minute: And if the thoughts are very\nactive in those that dream, (who are as much asleep as others that do\nnot dream; though the sleep may not be so refreshing as if it were\notherwise,) I cannot see how this consequence can be inferred, that\nsleep is inconsistent with thought. Moreover, a person who is delirious,\nor distracted, undoubtedly thinks, though his thoughts are disordered;\nbut when the _delirium_ or distraction is over, he can no more remember\nwhat he thought of, than a person that is waked out of the soundest\nsleep: This argument therefore tends rather to amuse, or embarrass the\ncause they maintain, than to give sufficient conviction.\n\nNow from this method of reasoning it is inferred, that when the soul is\nseparated from the body, it is altogether destitute of the exercise of\nthought, which is what they mean by the soul\u2019s sleeping: And to give\nfarther countenance to this matter, they produce several scriptures, in\nwhich death is compared to a sleep; as when God speaks of the death of\nMoses, he says, _Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers_, Deut. xxxi.\n26. and Job speaks of _sleeping in the dust_, Job vii. 21. And\nconcerning the resurrection after death, he says, _That man lieth down\nand riseth not, till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake nor be\nraised out of their sleep_, chap. xiv. 12. and David prays, _Lighten\nmine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death_, Psal. xiii. 3. and our\nSaviour, speaking concerning Lazarus, when dead, says, _Our friend\nLazarus sleepeth; but I go that I may awake him out of sleep_, John xi.\n11. which he afterwards explains, ver. 14. when he says, _Lazarus is\ndead_. There are several other scriptures to the like purpose, they\nbring to prove that the soul sleeps in death, taking the word in the\nliteral sense thereof.\n\nBut to this it may be replied, that as to what respects the possibility\nof the soul\u2019s being rendered incapable of thinking, when separate from\nthe body; it is no just way of reasoning to infer from the possibility\nof a thing, the actual being of it: Therefore if it could be proved to a\ndemonstration, (as the author above-mentioned supposes he has done,\nthough, I think, without sufficient ground,) that sleep deprives a\nperson of thought; yet it will not follow from hence, that the soul,\nwhen separate from the body, ceases to think. When the powers and\nfaculties of the soul are deduced into act, experience tells us, that\nthey are greatly improved and strengthened; and therefore the exercise\nthereof cannot be so easily impeded as is pretended; especially when we\nconsider that it does not derive this from the body, which contributes\nvery little to those ideas it has of things immaterial, which are not\nthe objects of sense; and how much soever bodily diseases may weaken or\ninterrupt the soul in its actings, we do not find that they so far\ndestroy those powers, but that, when the distemper ceases, the former\nactings return, like the spring of a watch, which may be stopped by\nsomething that hinders the motion of the wheels, which, when it is\nremoved, continues to give motion to them as it had done before: The\nbody, at most, can be considered but as a clog and impediment to the\nactivity of the soul; and consequently it may be argued from thence,\nthat in a state of separation the soul is so far from being impeded in\nits actings, that it becomes more active than before.\n\nBut that which I would principally insist on, as what will sufficiently\noverthrow this doctrine, is, the account which we have in many\nscriptures; and several just consequences which may be deduced from\nthem, by which it will appear, that nothing that has been said\nconcerning the possibility of the soul\u2019s being unactive, when separate\nfrom the body, can enervate the force of the argument taken from thence\nto support the contrary doctrine. It is true, the scripture oftentimes\nrepresents death as a _sleep_, as in the places before-mentioned; and it\nis sometimes described as a state of rest, which is of the same import\nwith sleep; but this is explained as a state of peace, holiness, and\nhappiness, and not a cessation from action. Thus it is said, _He shall\nenter into peace, they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his\nuprightness_, Isa. lvii. 2. which is plainly meant of the death of the\nrighteous, as appears from the preceding verse, where it is said, _The\nrighteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart_. Now these are said\nto _enter into peace_; which supposes that they are capable of the\nenjoyment of those blessings which the soul shall then be possessed of,\nand they are said to _walk in their uprightness_; which signifies their\nbeing active in what respects the glory of God, which is very\ninconsistent with the soul\u2019s sleeping, when separate from the body. Rest\nand sleep are metaphorical expressions, when applied to this doctrine;\nand nothing is more common than for such figurative ways of speaking to\nbe used in the sacred writings; and therefore it is very absurd for us\nto understand the words otherwise in this instance before us.\n\nWe will now proceed to consider those proofs we have from scripture, of\nthe soul\u2019s being in a state of activity when separate from the body.\n\nThe first scripture that may be brought to prove this, is what the\napostle says in 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3, 4. when speaking concerning himself as\n_caught up into the third heaven_; and not knowing whether he was at the\nsame time, _in, or out of the body_. If he was in the body, his senses\nwere locked up, and he must be supposed to have been in a trance; which\nmilitates against the supposition that the soul\u2019s power of acting may be\nimpeded either by sleep or some bodily disease, in which there is not\nthe exercise of the senses. Or if, on the other hand, he was _out of the\nbody_, his _hearing unspeakable words_ plainly proves our argument,\n_viz._ that the soul is capable of action, and consequently of enjoying\nthe heavenly glory, when separate from the body.\n\nMoreover, this is evident from our Saviour\u2019s words to the penitent thief\non the cross, _Verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with me in\nparadise_, Luke xxiii. 43. To _be in paradise_ is certainly to be in\nheaven in a state of compleat blessedness, where the soul delights\nitself in the enjoyment of God, which is altogether inconsistent with a\nstate of insensibility. Were it otherwise, it ought rather to have been\nsaid, thou shalt be with me in paradise after the resurrection of the\nbody, than to day. The method which some take to evade the force of the\nargument, who say, that _to day_, refers not to the time of his being\nadmitted into heaven, but to the time when Christ spake these words, is\nso low and trifling, that it doth not deserve an answer.\n\nThere is another scripture which fully proves this doctrine, namely,\nwhat the apostle says, _I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to\ndepart and to be with Christ, which is far better_, Phil. i. 23. In\nwhich he takes it for granted, that as soon as he departed out of this\nworld, he should be with Christ; which denotes that he should be in his\nimmediate presence, beholding his glory; which is inconsistent with the\nsupposition that the soul sleeps at death. And this is farther evident\nfrom what he says, that this is _far better_, which could not be said to\nbe, if the notion we are opposing were true; for it is so much better\nfor a saint to be serving Christ\u2019s interest in this world, and made so\neminently useful in promoting his glory, as the apostle was, than to be\nin a state of inactivity, wherein the soul is not capable of doing any\nthing for him, nor enjoying any thing from him, that there is no\ncomparison between them; and whereas he was _in a strait_ which of these\ntwo he should chuse, had it been referred to him, the matter might\neasily have been determined in favour of his continuing in this world;\nfor there he was useful; whereas, in the other, he would not only be\nuseless, but incapable of enjoying those privileges which he was made\npartaker of here.\n\nMy next argument shall be taken from what is said in 2 Cor. v. 8. _We\nare confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and\nto be present with the Lord_; where one infers the other, without any\nintimation of his waiting till the soul is united again to the body,\nbefore he is admitted into Christ\u2019s presence.\n\nAgain, this farther appears from the words of Solomon, in Eccl. iv. 2.\n_I praised the dead which are already dead, more than the living which\nare yet alive._ By which we are to understand, that the state of\nbelievers, when they die, is much more happy than it can be in this\nlife; which supposes that they are capable of happiness, and\nconsequently that the soul, when separated from the body, is not in a\nstate of insensibility; which is altogether inconsistent with happiness.\n\nAnd to all this we may add what our Saviour says in the parable of the\nrich man and Lazarus; the _beggar died, and was carried by angels into\nAbraham\u2019s bosom: The rich man also died and was buried, and in hell he\nlifted up his eyes, being in torments_, Luke xvi. 22, 23. In which\nparable we have an account of the different state of the souls of the\nrighteous and wicked at death, and not barely what shall follow upon the\nresurrection of the body; for when the rich man is represented as being\nin torments, he says, in a following part of the parable, _I have five\nbrethren_; and he would have _had Lazarus sent to testify to them, lest\nthey should also come into that place of torment_; to which it is\nreplied, _They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them_, ver.\n28, 29. which plainly intimates, that the parable refers to the state of\nseparate souls, before the resurrection, whilst others enjoyed the means\nof grace; and consequently it proves that the soul, when separate from\nthe body, is capable of happiness or misery; and which is more, is fixed\nin one or the other of them.\n\nAs to those scriptures that speak of the happiness or misery of men, as\ndeferred to the end of the world. It is intimated in the parable of the\ntares, that _the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from the\njust_, Mat. xiii. 9. and the former are said to be _cast into a furnace\nof fire_, ver. 49, 50. and the latter, _viz._ the righteous, to _shine\nforth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father_, ver. 43. which\nrespects the dealings of God with man, in the end of time. Moreover our\nSaviour speaks of his people as _blessed and recompensed at the\nresurrection of the just_, Luke xiv. 14. And the apostle Paul expresses\nhis hope of a _crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous\nJudge, should give him at that day_, 2 Tim. iv. 8. that is, the day of\nhis coming to judgment; and several other scriptures that speak of what\nis consequent to the resurrection. To this it may be replied, that these\nscriptures respect not the beginning, but consummation of the happiness\nof the saints, or their compleat blessedness in soul and body, which is\nnot inconsistent with the happiness that separate souls enjoy before the\nresurrection. Nor is the misery that is consequent upon the\nresurrection, inconsistent with that which sinners endure before it,\nwhen their souls are separate from their bodies. Thus concerning the\nhappiness of the souls of believers at death; which leads us to\nconsider,\n\n2. What is farther observed in this answer, concerning the soul\u2019s\nwaiting for the full redemption of the body; which though it continues\nunder the dominion of death, is notwithstanding united to Christ; and\naccordingly believers are said to rest in their graves as in their beds,\ntill the resurrection.\n\nThe souls of believers are described as waiting for the full redemption\nof their bodies; which is the same expression that the apostle uses,\nRom. viii. 23. where redemption denotes a full discharge from that\nprison, or state of confinement in the grave; in which the body was\nrendered incapable of answering the end for which it was redeemed by\nChrist, and, at the same time, the soul was destitute of that happiness\nwhich its re-union therewith shall convey to it. Its enjoyments were all\nspiritual, and, in their kind perfect; but yet it was naked, or, as the\napostle expresses it unclothed; inasmuch as it wanted that which was\ndesigned to be a constituent part, necessary to compleat the human\nnature; without which it was indisposed for those actions and enjoyments\nwhich arise from its union with the body. This it is said to wait for,\nas a desire of re-union therewith is natural to it. Nevertheless it\nwaits without impatience, or any diminution of its intellectual\nhappiness.\n\n(2.) As to what respects the bodies of believers, they are said to\ncontinue united to Christ, which is the result of their being redeemed\nby him, and of his condescending to dwell in them by his Spirit.\nAccordingly his love extends itself to their lower part, as well as to\ntheir souls; and, as the apostle says, _Nothing shall separate_ a\nbeliever _from his love_, no, _not death itself_, ver. 38, 39. upon\nwhich account they are said to _sleep in Jesus_, 1 Thes. iv. 14. or to\n_die in the Lord_, Rev. xiv. 14. They are indeed buried in the grave,\nand seem to lie neglected like common dust: nevertheless it is said,\n_Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints_, Psal.\ncxvi. 15. Christ reckons every particle of their dust among _his\njewels_, Mal. iii. 17. and is no more ashamed to own them as his\npeculiar care, than he was when they were in their most flourishing\nstate in this world; and for this reason they are also said to rest in\ntheir graves as in their beds. This is a scripture-expression, as the\nPsalmist says, _My flesh shall rest in hope_, Psal. xvi. 9. and the\nprophet Isaiah, _He shall enter into peace, they shall rest in their\nbeds_, Isa. lvii. 2. The body, indeed, remains, at the same time, under\nthe external part of the curse due to man for sin; yet it is freed from\nthat which is the most bitter ingredient therein; which will be\nabundantly demonstrated when death shall be compleatly swallowed up in\nvictory. In this the bodies of believers have the advantage of all\nothers. The frame of nature indeed is dissolved; there is no visible\nmark of distinction from the wicked put upon them in the grave; yet\nthere is a vast difference in God\u2019s account, which one elegantly\ncompares to the removing of the tabernacle in the wilderness: when the\nIsraelites changed their stations, all the parts thereof were carefully\ntaken down and delivered to the Levites\u2019 charge, in order to its being\nraised again with honour; whereas, the house incurably infected with the\nleprosy, was plucked down with violence, and thrown into an unclean\nplace with execration. The bodies of the saints are committed to the\nbosom of the earth, as the repository Christ has appointed for them;\nfrom whence he will call them forth at last, when their souls shall be\nagain united to them in the glorious morning of the resurrection. This\nleads us to consider,\n\nIII. The misery which the souls of the wicked endure at death, which is\ncontained in the latter part of this answer.\n\nWe have here a different scene opened, the final estate of the wicked\ndescribed in words adapted to strike dread and terror into those who\nhave, at present, no sense of their future misery: their souls are\nconsidered as cast into, or shut up in hell; their bodies imprisoned in\nthe grave, and both, the objects of divine wrath. We shall have\noccasion, under a following answer,[152] farther to speak concerning the\npunishment that shall be inflicted on sinners, whose torments shall be\ninexpressible, both in body and soul, after the day of judgment: and\ntherefore we shall, at present, consider the misery which the souls of\nthe wicked shall undergo before they are united to their bodies. The\nsoul, which carries out of the world with it the power of reflecting on\nitself as happy or miserable, immediately sees itself separate from the\ncomfortable presence of God, the fountain of blessedness. And that which\ntends to enhance its misery beyond what it is capable of in this life,\nwill be the enlargement of its faculties; as the apprehension shall be\nmore clear and its sensation of the wrath of God more pungent; when it\nis not oppressed with that drowsiness and stupidity as it was before;\nnor will it be possible for it to delude itself, with those vain hopes,\nwhich it once conceived, of escaping that misery, which it is now\nplunged into; when all the waves and billows of the Almighty shall\noverwhelm and swallow it up. The soul is, in a peculiar manner, the\nsubject of misery, as it is made uneasy by its own thoughts; which are\ncompared to the worm that dieth not. While it looks backwards, and calls\nto mind the actions of his past life, and all his sins are charged upon\nhim, this fills it with such a sense of guilt and confusion as is\ninexpressibly tormenting; and when he looks forward, there is nothing\nbut what administers despair, which increases his misery to the highest\ndegree. These torments the soul endures before it is reunited to the\nbody, and thereby rendered receptive of others, which we generally call\nthe punishment of sense, that are conveyed by it.\n\nThe place of punishment is the same that is allotted for soul and body,\n_viz._ hell; and this is called utter darkness; which is an expression\nused to signify the greatest degree of misery. As for their bodies, they\ndread the thoughts of being united to them again; inasmuch as that will\nbring with it new accessions of torment. These are considered as liable\nto a double dishonour; not only that which arises from their being in a\nstate of corruption in common with all mankind; but in their being\ndetained in the grave, as prisoners to the justice of God, from whence\nthey shall not be released as persons acquitted or discharged, but\nremanded from that prison to another, from whence there is no\ndeliverance. But more of this under a following answer.\n\nFootnote 125:\n\n _Vid. Senec. Epist. 117. Cum de animarum immortalitate loquimur, non\n leve momentum apud nos habet consensus hominum, aut timentium inferos,\n aut colentium. Utor hac persuasione publica. Et. Cic. Tusc. Quest.\n Lib. 1. permanere animos arbitramur consensu nationum omnium; qua in\n sede maneant, qualesque sint ratione discendum est._\n\nFootnote 126:\n\n _In Ph\u00e6d._\n\nFootnote 127:\n\n _Vid. Alcin. de doct. Plat. Cap._ xxv. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7\n \u03bf\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c5 \u03b6\u03c9\u03b7\u03c5, \u03b1\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 128:\n\n _Vid. Strab. Geog. Lib._ xv. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03c9\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03b3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c9\u03b3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u03b1\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\n \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3 \u03c4\u03c9\u03b3 \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 129:\n\n _Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Thal._\n\nFootnote 130:\n\n _Vid. Cic. Tusc. Qu\u00e6st. Lib. 1._\n\nFootnote 131:\n\n _Vid, Hom. Iliad. 23._ _lin. 65. & seq._\n\n \u0389\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7 \u03a0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf,\n \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03c9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1fbd \u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c5\u03b9\u03b1,\n \u039a\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd. \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf.\n \u03a3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u1f11\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n _In which, after he had killed Hector, he addresses himself to his\n friend Patroclus, signifying that he had done this to revenge his\n death; upon which, the poet brings in Patroclus as appearing to him._\n\nFootnote 132:\n\n _Vid. Odys. Lib._ xi. _lin. 575._ & seq. _in which he speaks of the\n punishment of Tityus and Tantalus. In this, as well as many other\n things, he is imitated by Virgil. See \u00c6neid. Lib._ vi. _lin. 595_, &\n seq.\n\nFootnote 133:\n\n _See this argument managed with a great deal of learning and judgment\n by Mede, in his apostasy of the latter times, who proves that the gods\n whom the heathens worshipped, were the souls of men deifyed or\n cannonized after death, from many of their own writers, chap._ iv.\n _and Voss. de orig. &c. idol. Lib. 1. cap._ xi, xii, xiii. _who refers\n to Lanct. Lib. 1. de fals. Relig. cap._ v. _his words are these; Quos\n imperiti, & insipientes, tanquam Deos & nuncupant, & adorant, nemo est\n tam inconsideratus, qui non intelligat fuisse mortales. Quomodo ergo,\n inquiet aliquis, Dii crediti sunt? Nimirum quia reges maximi, ac\n potentissimi fuerunt, ob merita virtutum suarum, aut munerum, aut\n artium repertarum, cum chari fuissent iis, quibus imperitaverunt, in\n memoriam sunt consecrati. Quod si quis dubitet, res eorum gestas, &\n facta, consideret: qu\u00e6 universa tum poet\u00e6, tum historici veteres,\n prodiderunt. Et August. de Civ. Dei, Lib._ viii. _cap._ v. _Ipsi etium\n majorum gentium Dii, quos Cicero in Tusculanis, tacitis nominibus\n videtur attingere, Jupiter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vesta, & alii\n plurimi, quos Varro conatur ad mundi partes, sive elementa transferre\n homines fuisse produntur. Et Cic. Lib. 1. de nat. Deor. Quid, qui aut\n fortes, aut potentes viros tradunt post mortem ad Deos pervenisse;\n eosq; ipsos quos, nos colere, precari, venerariq; soleamus?_\n\nFootnote 134:\n\n _Some have wondered how the Sadducees could deny angels, and yet\n receive the five books of Moses, in which there is so frequent mention\n of the appearance of angels; and it might as well be wondered how they\n could make any pretensions to religion, who denyed the immortality of\n the soul; but as to both these, it may be said concerning them, that\n they were the most irreligious part of the Jewish nation. To make them\n consistent with themselves, is past the skill of any who treat on this\n subject. Some suppose that they understand all those scriptures that\n speak concerning the appearance of angels, as importing nothing else\n but a bodily shape, appearing for a time, and conversing with those to\n whom it was sent, moved and actuated by the divine power, and then\n disappearing and vanishing into nothing._\n\nFootnote 135:\n\n _In Ph\u00e6d._\n\nFootnote 136:\n\n _His words are these_; \u039a\u03b5\u03b2\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03a8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03bd \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\u1fbd \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9, \u03bc\u03b7\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7, \u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03bd\u03c5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2\n \u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b3 \u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 137:\n\n \u1f49\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03b7\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1, \u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u03b7 \u03c4\u03c9\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9.\n\nFootnote 138:\n\n _Vid. ejusd. moral. Lib._ iii. _cap._ ix.\n\nFootnote 139:\n\n _Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Zen._ \u03a4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n \u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9; _upon which occasion Cicero says, That though they\n assert that they shall continue a great while in being, yet they deny\n that they shall exist for ever. Vid. ejusd. in Tusc. Qu\u00e6st. Lib. 1.\n Stoici usuram nobis largiuntur, tanquam cornicibus; diu mansuros\n animos ajunt; semper negant._\n\nFootnote 140:\n\n _Et ibid. Ea qu\u00e6 vis, ut potero, explicabo, nec tamen quasi Pythius\n Apollo certa ut sint, & fixa qu\u00e6 dixero, sed ut homunculus unus e\n multis, probabilia conjectura sequens; ultra enim quo progrediar quam\n ut verisimilia videam, non habeo; which Lactantius observes, speaking\n of him as in doubt about it. Vid. Lactant. de Vit. Beat. Lib._ vii. _\u00a7\n 8. And elsewhere he says, in Lib. de Amicitia. Sin autem illa vetiora,\n ut idem interitus sit animorum, & corporum, nec ullus sensus maneat:\n Ut nihil boni est in morte, sic certe nihil est mali; & in Lib. de\n Senect. Quod si in hoc erro, quod animos hominum immortales esse\n credam, libenter erro: Nec mihi hunc errorem, quo delector, dum vivo,\n extorqueri volo. Sin mortuus, ut quidam minuti philosophi censent,\n nihil sentiam; non vereor, ne hunc errorem meum philosophi minuti\n irrideant: Quod si non sumus immortales futuri, tamen extingui hominem\n suo tempore, optabile est._\n\nFootnote 141:\n\n _Epist. 102. Credebam opinionibus magnorum virorum rem gratissimam\n promittentium, magis quam probantium._\n\nFootnote 142:\n\n _See Quest._ lxxxviii, lxxxix.\n\nFootnote 143:\n\n The doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and of the resurrection\n of the body equally rest upon the will and word of God. But when\n viewed with the eye of natural reason, they have been deemed to\n possess very unequal grounds of probability. The properties of matter\n and of mind are so very different, they have been distinguished by\n almost all. If the mind be not matter, no argument for its\n extermination can be drawn from the dissolution of the body; and as\n its materiality has never been shown, no premises have been found from\n which its death can be inferred. Some wise men who had not the\n scriptures, have indeed withholden their belief; but the reason is\n discernible, they have demanded proofs which the God of nature has not\n vouchsafed; and their rejection of the preponderating evidence of\n probability, argues weakness and fastidiousness.\n\n The resurrection of the body has been held to be impossible. If so,\n the impossibility should either consist in the absolute incapacity in\n the dead body to be raised; but this it does not, for death can only\n reduce the body to its first element, and the dust which has been a\n body is not any more unfit to be reanimated, than it was to receive\n life in the first instance; or it must be owing to some detect of\n wisdom or power, or of both in him, who should raise the body; but God\n is unchangeable, and in all respects as able to raise him from the\n dead, as to create man at the first; and there is no contradiction\n implied in the thing, which should prevent the exertion of his power;\n a resurrection is therefore possible.\n\n The usual arguments for its probability drawn from analogy to the\n return of day, of spring, of vegetation, &c. are not conclusive. But\n those drawn from the resurrection of Christ, from the identity of man\n considered as a compound from the removal of moral evil, from which\n natural evils arise, from the earnest expectation of animal nature for\n a better condition, and from the perfection of the future state, seem\n to raise a presumption which is probable; yet these are not\n appreciated by the natural man; hence the world has so generally\n denied a resurrection of the body.\n\n The testimony of the Holy Spirit on both points has been always the\n same, but not with equal lustre.\n\n Jesus Christ explicitly affirmed both, and brought his proofs from the\n old testament, pressed them as motives of comfort or terror to saints\n and sinners, and so connected their truth with that of his own\n character, that every thing which proves the latter, is a proof of the\n former. Not only did his actually raising the dead, and arising\n himself, prove that the dead shall rise, but every prophecy\n accomplished in him, and every miracle wrought by him and his\n apostles, the continuance of his church, the purity of his system of\n doctrines, the doctrines of election, redemption, justification,\n regeneration and perseverance, as well as the express declarations on\n this subject, both in the old and new testament, all form a solid mass\n of evidence upon which the hopes of the Christian may firmly rest.\n\nFootnote 144:\n\n _See Quest._ xc.\n\nFootnote 145:\n\n _See Dr. Edward\u2019s exercit. Part II. on 1 Cor._ iii. _15. who, to give\n countenance to this opinion, produces two scriptures, viz. Mark_ xiv.\n _54. and Luke_ xxii. _56. where the word_ \u03c6\u03c9\u03c2, _is put for fire; from\n whence he supposes, that_ \u03c6\u03c9\u03c2 _and_ \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1, _are used promiscuously_.\n\nFootnote 146:\n\n \u039a\u03bf\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2. Sinus, _a bosom, coast, or haven_.\n\nFootnote 147:\n\n _Vid. Tertull. Apologet. Cap._ xlvii. _Et si paradisum nominemus,\n locum divin\u00e6 am\u00e6nitatis recipiendis sanctorum spiritibus destinatum,\n materia quadem igne\u00e6 illius Zon\u00e6 segregatum._\n\nFootnote 148:\n\n _See Whitby in loc._\n\nFootnote 149:\n\n _See also his notes on Luke_ xxiii. 43.\n\nFootnote 150:\n\n _Vid. Hoornbeck Socin. Confut. Tom. III. Lib._ v. _Cap. 1. who quotes\n some passages out of several Socinian writers, among whom I shall only\n mention what is said by two of them, with whom several others of their\n brethren agree herein. Vid. Socin. in Epist._ v. _ad Volkel. Tantum id\n mihi videtur statui posse, post hanc vitam, animam, sive animum\n hominis non ita per se subsistere ut pr\u00e6mia ulla p\u00e6nasve sentiat; vel\n etiam ista sentiendi sit capax, qu\u00e6 mea firma opinio facile potest\n colligi ex multis qu\u00e6 a me dicuntur_, &c. _Et Smalc. in Exam. Error.\n Pag. 33. Animam vel spiritum hominis post mortum aliquid sentire, vel\n aliqua re perfrui, nec ratio permittit nec scriptura testatur: ut enim\n corpus sine anima, sic etiam anima sine corpore, nullus operationes\n exercere potest; & perinde sic ac si anima illorum nulla esset, etiam\u00e6\n suo modo sit, quia scilicet nullius rei sensum habeat, aut per se\n voluptate aliqua fr\u00e6 possit. And elsewhere the same author is so hardy\n as to term the contrary doctrine no other than a fable, in Lib. de Dei\n filio, Cap._ vi. _Pag. 43. Quod vern de vita animarum disserit, hoc\n instar fabul\u00e6 est_, &c. _Spiritum hominis ad Deum redire testatur\n sacra scriptura, at eum vivera vita, ut ait Smiglecius, spirituum, &\n vel aliquid intelligere, vel voluptate frui hoc extra, & contra\n scripturam dicitur._\n\nFootnote 151:\n\n _See Locke\u2019s Essay concerning human understanding, Lib._ ii. _Chap.\n 1._ \u00a7 ix. _to the_ xix.\n\nFootnote 152:\n\n _Quest._ lxxxix.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXVII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXVII. _What are we to believe concerning the\n resurrection?_\n\n ANSW. We are to believe, that at the last day there shall be a\n general resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust; when\n they that are then found alive, shall, in a moment, be changed; and\n the self-same bodies of the dead which were laid in the grave, being\n then again united to their souls for ever, shall be raised up by the\n power of Christ; the bodies of the just, by the Spirit of Christ,\n and by virtue of his resurrection, as their head, shall be raised in\n power, spiritual, incorruptible, and made like to his glorious body;\n and the bodies of the wicked shall be raised up in dishonour, by\n him, as an offended Judge.\n\nIn the foregoing answers, we have considered the soul and body as\nseparated by death, the body turned to corruption, and the soul\nimmediately entering into a state of happiness or misery; and are now\nled to insist on the doctrine of the resurrection, when these two\nconstituent parts of man shall be reunited. And accordingly we shall\nendeavour,\n\nI. To explain what we are to understand by the resurrection of the dead.\n\nII. We shall prove that there is nothing in this doctrine contrary to\nreason, at least, if we consider it as a supernatural and divine work.\n\nIII. We shall farther observe, that this doctrine could not be known by\nthe light of nature; and therefore we believe it as founded in divine\nrevelation.\n\nIV. What arguments are contained in scripture for the proof thereof;\nsome of which might be taken from the Old Testament, and others from the\nNew, in which it is more clearly revealed.\n\nV. We shall answer some of the most material objections brought against\nit.\n\nVI. We shall consider it as universal, as it is here styled a general\nresurrection of the dead, from the beginning of time to Christ\u2019s second\ncoming; yet with this exception, that they who are found alive shall be\nchanged. And,\n\nVII. The condition in which the body shall be raised; and those\ncircumstances of honour and glory, which respect, more especially, the\nresurrection of the just. And, on the other hand, we shall consider the\nresurrection of the wicked, as being in dishonour, by Christ, as an\noffended Judge.\n\nI. What are we to understand by the resurrection of the dead. We\nsometimes find the word taken, in scripture, in a metaphorical sense,\nfor God\u2019s doing those things for his church, which could not be brought\nabout any otherwise than by his extraordinary and supernatural power.\nSometimes the work of regeneration is set forth by this figurative way\nof speaking; whereby they who are dead in trespasses and sins, are said\nto be quickened; and our Saviour speaks of this when he says, _The hour\nis coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of\nGod; and they that hear shall live_, John v. 25. But we are to\nunderstand it in a proper sense, as denoting that change which shall\npass upon the body, when it shall be delivered from the state of\ncorruption, into which it was brought at death, and reunited to the\nsoul; which is distinguished in a following verse, from this\nmetaphorical sense of it, when he says, _All that are in the graves\nshall hear his voice, and shall come forth, they that have done good\nunto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the\nresurrection of damnation_, ver. 28. This includes in it not barely the\nrepairing, but the rebuilding the frame of nature; which was not only\ndecayed, but dissolved in death; or the gathering together those\nparticles of matter, of which the body was before constituted; which was\nnot only turned into corruption, but common dust; whereby a new body, as\nto the form and qualities thereof, is erected out of its old materials;\notherwise it could not be called a resurrection. It is said, indeed,\nthat the body shall not, in all respects, be the same that it was when\nseparated from the soul; as the apostle compares to a _grain of wheat_\nsown in the ground, which, when it springs up, is not altogether the\nsame as it was before; for _God giveth it a body,[153] as it hath\npleased him, and to every seed his own body_, 1 Cor. xv. 37, 38. It is\nthe same for substance, as it consists of the same materials, but very\ndifferent as to its qualities; as will be farther considered, when we\nspeak concerning the condition of the body when raised from the dead;\nand as it is raised with a design that it should be re-united to the\nsoul, which will immediately follow upon it; and this union shall be\nindissoluble and eternal.\n\nII. We shall now consider that there is nothing contrary to reason, or\nimpossible, from the nature of the thing, which might have a tendency to\noverthrow this doctrine; especially if we consider it as a supernatural\nand divine work, brought about by the almighty power of God.\n\nIf we look no farther than the power of natural causes, we may conclude\nit to be impossible for a creature to effect, as much as it was at first\nto produce the body of man out of the dust of the ground; but this is\nnot impossible with God: He that gave life and being to all things; and,\nby his sovereign will, puts a period to that life, which had been, for\nsome time continued by his power and providence, can give a new life to\nit; especially if there be nothing in this work that renders it unmeet\nfor it to be performed by him.\n\nThat there is nothing in the nature of the thing that renders a\nresurrection impossible, appears, in that death, though it be a\ndissolution of the frame of nature, does not annihilate the body. If the\nbody, indeed, were annihilated at death, then it would be impossible, or\ncontrary to the nature of things, that there should be a resurrection\nthereof; since the bringing it again into a state of existence would be\na new creation; which, though it would not be too great a work for\nomnipotency, yet it could not be styled a resurrection, or restoring the\nsame body to life that was separated from the soul, to which it was once\nunited. But when we suppose that the matter of which the body consisted\nis still in being, and nothing is necessary to the raising it from the\ndead but the recollecting the various particles thereof, and forming it\nagain into a body, fitted to receive the soul: this is not in its own\nnature impossible; nor does it infer a contradiction, so as that we\nshould argue from thence, that it cannot be brought about by divine\npower.\n\nThat this may more fully appear, let it be considered, that nothing\nwhich God has brought into being, can be annihilated, but by an act of\nhis will; since nothing can defeat or disannul his providence, which\nupholdeth all things that were brought into being by the word of his\npower. It is also certain, that God has given us no ground to conclude\nthat any part of his material creation has been, or shall be turned into\nnothing; from whence it follows, that the particles of all the bodies of\nmen, that once lived in this world, though turned to corruption or dust,\nare as much in being as ever they were, though not in the same form.\n\nAgain, it is certain that God, who made and upholdeth all things, has a\nperfect knowledge of that which is the object of his power, since his\nunderstanding is infinite: therefore he knows where the scattered dust,\nor the smallest particles of matter that once constituted the bodies of\nmen, are reserved: and when we speak of a resurrection from the dead, we\nunderstand hereby the gathering them together, and disposing them in\nsuch a way as that new bodies shall be framed out of them: therefore,\nthough this could not be done by any but God, it is not impossible, from\nthe nature of the thing, for him to do it; and that he will do it will\nbe considered, when we come more directly to the proof of this doctrine.\nWe shall therefore proceed,\n\nIII. To consider it as a matter of pure revelation, such as we could not\nhave known by the light of nature, without the assistance of\nscripture-light. Something, indeed, might be known by reason concerning\nthe immortality of the soul, and its being not only capable of happiness\nor misery in a future state, but dealt with therein according to its\nbehaviour in this world: nevertheless, when we enquire into that part,\nwhich the body shall bear therein; whether it shall be raised and\nreunited to the soul, to be for ever a partner with it in what respects\nits state in another world, or shall remain for ever in a state of\ncorruption; this cannot be known by the light of nature.\n\nThere are, indeed, many things which we find in the writings of the\nHeathen, that discover them to have had some notion of what bears a\nresemblance to a resurrection: as when they speak concerning the\ntransmigration of souls, or their living in other bodies, when separated\nfrom those which they formerly were united to. And others of them speak\nconcerning the general conflagration, and the restoration of all things,\nimmediately after, to their former state, as well as give some hints\nwhich are contained in their writings, concerning particular persons\nthat have been raised from the dead, at least, pretended to have been\nso. What we find of this nature therein, very much resembles the\nfabulous account we have in the Popish legends of miracles, said to have\nbeen wrought, though without proof: thus we are told of one Aristeas,\nthe Proconnesian, who had a power of expiring and returning to life at\npleasure, and relating what he had seen in a separate state.[154] The\nsame is reported of one Hermotimus of Clazomena.[155] But the most\nfamous story of this kind, is what is related by Plato,[156] and\ntranscribed from him by Eusebius,[157] concerning one Er, the son of\nArmenius; who, after he was slain in battle, and had continued ten days\namong other dead bodies, was brought home to his house; and two days\nafter, being laid on his funeral pile, came to life again: this Plato,\nwhile he is relating it, calls little better than a fable.[158] And it\nwas treated by others with ridicule, how much soever believed by some\nwho regarded reports more than solid evidence of the truth thereof.\n\nI might also mention others, who are said, by Heathen writers to have\nbeen translated into heaven in their bodies and souls[159]: Which might\ntake its first rise from what they had received by tradition, concerning\nthe translation of Enoch and Elijah; as the stories of those that were\nraised from the dead might be first invented by them with this view,\nthat their religion might have as great reputation as that of the Jews.\n\nBut notwithstanding these particular instances related by them, of some\ntranslated, or others raised from the dead; there were very few of them\nthat believed the doctrine of the resurrection; and some treated it with\nas much contempt as we do the before-mentioned account which they give\nof particular persons raised from the dead[160]. This agrees very well\nwith what we read in scripture, concerning the treatment the apostle\nPaul met with, when he encountered the Epicureans and Stoicks at Athens,\n_preaching to them Jesus and the resurrection_, Acts xvii. 18. upon\nwhich occasion they call him _babbler_; and insinuated that he seemed to\nbe _a setter forth of strange gods_. Oecumenius and Chrysostom think,\nthat they supposed he reckoned the _resurrection_ among the gods[161],\nas well as _Jesus_, whose divinity he doubtless maintained; but whether\nthey were so stupid as thus to wrest his words, is not material. It is\nno wonder to find the Epicureans treating this doctrine with ridicule;\nfor they, denying the immortality of the soul, could not entertain the\nleast idea of the resurrection of the body in any sense: Whereas the\nStoicks, though they did not own the doctrine of the resurrection, yet\nthey could not think it so strange a doctrine as some others might do;\nsince they held that the soul, after death, continued at least, as long\nas the body; and they knew very well, that many of the philosophers\nstrenuously maintained the transmigration of souls; and, indeed, this\nwas held by many of them, as well as the Platonists and Pythagoreans;\nand therefore the resurrection, though it differed from it, could not\nseem so strange and unheard of a notion, as that they should reckon it\namong the gods: However, it plainly appears from hence that this\ndoctrine could not be learned by the light of nature; whatever confused\nideas the Heathen might have entertained by tradition, concerning it.\n\nTherefore it follows from hence, that we must look for a satisfactory\naccount hereof from scripture: Thus when the Sadducees put a stupid\nquestion to our Saviour concerning the _woman_ that had _seven\nhusbands_, which successively _died_; and they would know whose _wife\nshe should be in the resurrection_; by which they designed to express\ntheir opposition to this doctrine, rather than a desire of information\nas to the question proposed: Our Saviour in his reply to them refers\nthem to the _scriptures_, Matt. xxii 29. as the fountain from whence a\nclear and satisfactory knowledge of this doctrine is to be derived as\nwell as from the _power of God_. This divine perfection argues the\npossibility thereof, the justice and goodness of God, its expediency;\nbut the scriptures, which contain a revelation of his will, represent it\nas certain; and this leads us to consider some arguments that are\ncontained in, or deduced from scripture for the proof thereof; and here\nwe shall consider,\n\n1. Those proofs which we have for it, taken from the Old Testament.\nThese I chuse first to insist on, because I am sensible there are many\nwho think, that the church knew nothing of it, till it was revealed, by\nour Saviour, in the New Testament: This very much detracts from the\nimportance of the doctrine, as well as renders the state of those who\nlived before Christ\u2019s incarnation, very uncomfortable, since the saints,\naccording to this opinion, must have had no hope of a glorious\nresurrection to eternal life. This notion is defended by many who extend\nthe darkness of the dispensation farther than what is convenient; and\namong others, it is generally maintained by the Socinians, probably with\nthis design, that since according to them, our Saviour had little else\nin view, in coming into the world, but to lead men into the knowledge of\nsome things which they were ignorant of before; this might be reckoned\none of those doctrines that he came to communicate. Thus Volkelius\ndenies that there were any promises of eternal life made to the church\nunder the Old Testament; and concludes that there was no one who had the\nleast surmise that any such doctrine was contained in those scriptures\nwhich we commonly bring from thence to prove it[162]. And to give\ncountenance to this opinion, several quotations are often taken from\nJewish writers, since our Saviour\u2019s time, who either speak doubtfully of\nthis matter, or give occasion to think that they did not understand\nthose scriptures which establish the doctrine of the resurrection in the\nOld Testament, as having any reference to it.\n\nTherefore it may not be amiss for us to enquire; what were the\nsentiments of some of the Jews about this matter? Every one knows that\nthere was one _sect_ amongst them, namely, the Sadducees, who\ndistinguished themselves from others by denying it: And Josephus gives\nthe largest account of any one, concerning another _sect_, to wit, the\nEssens, who affected to lead a recluse life, in their respective\ncolleges, and were governed by laws peculiar to themselves: Among other\nthings which he relates concerning their conduct and sentiments, he\nsays, that it was an opinion established among them, that the bodies of\nmen were corruptible, and the matter of which they were compounded, not\nperpetual; though the soul remained for ever: And then he represents\nthem as speaking, according to the Pythagorean and Platonick way,\nconcerning the body\u2019s being the prison of the soul, and its remaining\nwhen released from it, and of the soul\u2019s dwelling in a pleasant place,\nand enjoying many things that tend to make it happy, &c.[163].\nNevertheless, his account of them is so short, and the expression on\nwhich the whole stress of this supposition is founded, a little\nambiguous, namely, that the bodies of men are corruptible, and their\nmatter not perpetual, which may be understood as agreeing with the\ncommon faith concerning man\u2019s mortality, and the body\u2019s turning to\ncorruption, and not remaining in the same state in which it was; that it\nseems to leave the matter doubtful, whether they asserted or denied the\nresurrection. It is also supposed, that Philo denied this doctrine from\nseveral passages observed in his writings, which a late learned writer\ntakes notice of[164]; but this is only the opinion of a single person,\nwho, according to his general character, seems to be halting between two\nopinions, to wit, the doctrine of Moses, and the philosophy of Plato;\nand therefore I take his sentiments, about this, to be nothing else but\nan affection of thinking or speaking agreeably to the Platonic\nphilosophy, which had probably given such a tincture to his notions,\nthat he might deny the resurrection. And if the Essens,\nbefore-mentioned, should be allowed to have denied it, they received it\nfrom their attachment to the same, or, at least, the Pythagorean\nphilosophy: But we cannot from hence conclude that the doctrine of the\nresurrection was denied by the main body of the Jews, or the greatest\npart of them; or by any, excepting those who were led out of the way, by\nthe writings of the philosophers: Which gave occasion to the apostle\nPaul to warn the church to _beware of philosophy and vain deceit, after\nthe tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after\nChrist_, Col. ii. 8. as foreseeing that some of them, in after-ages,\nwould, in many respects, corrupt the doctrines of the gospel, by\naccommodating them to, or explaining them by what they found in the\nwritings of the Heathen philosophers, as Origen, Justin Martyr, and some\nothers did; and he seems to take the hint from what had been before\nobserved relating to the corruption of the Jewish _faith_, by those who\nwere attached to them. Thus concerning the opinion of those Jews, who\nare supposed to deny the doctrine of the resurrection.\n\nOn the other hand, there are several Rabbinical writers, who\nsufficiently intimate their belief of this doctrine; though it is true,\nsome of them infer it from such premises, as discover great weakness in\ntheir method of reasoning. Thus the learned bishop Pearson observes,\nthat they produce several places out of Moses\u2019s writings, which when the\nresurrection is believed, may, in some kind, serve to illustrate it, but\ncan, in no degree, be thought to reveal so great a mystery[165]. And Dr.\nLightfoot produces other proofs, which they bring for this doctrine, as\nlittle to the purpose[166], of which all the use that can be made is,\nthat we may from hence observe, that they believed the doctrine we are\nmaintaining, to be contained in scripture. Whether they were able to\ndefend it by shewing the force of those arguments on which it is founded\ntherein or no, is not much to our present purpose, my design in\nreferring to their writings being to prove that this doctrine was\nembraced by the Jews, in the ages before, as well as since our Saviour\u2019s\ntime. It is true, the Talmud, and other writings, which are generally\nquoted for the proof of it, are of later date, and the most ancient of\nthe Chaldee paraphrases now extant, is supposed to have been written\nabout that time, or, at least, but little before it: And there are no\nuninspired writings, relating to the Jewish affairs, more ancient,\nexcept those which we generally call Apocryphal; which most suppose to\nhave been written about 150 years before the Christian \u00c6ra. And it is\nvery evident, that about that time the doctrine of the resurrection was\nbelieved by the Jewish church; as the author of the book of Maccabees,\nin the history of the martyrdom of the seven brethren in the reign of\nAntiochus[167], represents some of them in the agonies of death, as\nexpressing the firm belief they had of a resurrection to eternal life;\ntheir mother, in the mean while, encouraging them from the same\nconsideration. These, as it is more than probable, the apostle includes\nin the number of those noble Old Testament worthies who were _tortured,\nnot accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better\nresurrection_, Heb. xi. 35. which is an undeniable evidence that the\nchurch at that time believed the doctrine of the resurrection.\n\nAll that I shall add under this head is, that how weak soever the\nreasoning of some Jewish writers, concerning this subject, has been,\nthere are others who give substantial proofs from the Old Testament;\nwhich not only argues that they believed it, but that their belief\nproceeded from a just conviction of the truth thereof. And they give the\nsame sense of some of those scriptures which are generally produced for\nthe proof hereof, as we do[168].\n\nThe first scripture that we shall take notice of, is what contains the\n_vision_ mentioned in Ezek. xxxvii. 1, _& seq._ concerning the _valley\nwhich was full of bones_, which were _very dry_: Upon which occasion God\nsays, _Son of man, Can these bones live?_ to which he replies, _O Lord\nGod, thou knowest._ And afterwards we read of God\u2019s _laying sinews, and\nbringing up flesh upon them, covering them with skin, and putting breath\ninto them_; and their being hereupon restored to life. I am sensible\nthat they who are on the other side of the question, pretend that this\nis no proof of a resurrection; because the design thereof was to\nillustrate and make way for the prediction mentioned in the following\nverses, concerning the deliverance of God\u2019s people from the Babylonish\ncaptivity: But that which seems to have its weight with me is, that God\nwould never have made use of a similitude to lead them into this\ndoctrine, taken from a thing which they had no manner of idea of: But if\nwe suppose that they believed that there shall be a resurrection of the\ndead, agreeable to the literal sense of the words here made use of to\nillustrate it, then the argument taken from thence is plain and easy,\n_q. d._ as certainly as you have ground to believe that the dead shall\nbe raised at the last day (which though it could not be brought about by\nany natural means, yet it shall be effected by the power of God;) so\nyour deliverance, how unlikely soever it may appear to those who look no\nfarther than second causes, shall come to pass by God\u2019s extraordinary\npower and providence, which will be as life from the dead.\n\nAnd whereas it is farther objected, that when God asked the prophet,\nwhether _these dry bones could live_? He seems to be in doubt about it;\nwhich argues that he had no idea of the resurrection of the dead. To\nthis it may be replied, that his doubt respected an event that should\nimmediately ensue; he knew that God could put life into these bones; but\nwhether he would do it now or no, he could not tell: Therefore it does\nnot contain any disbelief of the doctrine of the resurrection at the\nlast day; and, indeed, this scripture, how little soever it may seem to\nsome to make for the doctrine we are maintaining, is alleged by others,\nas an undeniable proof of it. Tertullian expressly says, that this would\nhave been a very insignificant vision, if this doctrine were not\ntrue[169]. And Jerome speaks to the same purpose, supposing that God\nwould never illustrate any truth which they were in doubt of, by a\nsimilitude taken from an incredible fiction[170]. And Menasseh Ben\nIsrael, a learned Jew, supposes this text to be an express and\ninfallible proof of the resurrection; which plainly argues that he\nthought the Jews, in former ages, were convinced of this doctrine\nthereby[171].\n\nBut supposing this scripture be not reckoned sufficient to evince the\ntruth of this doctrine, there is another which has more weight in it,\n_viz._ that in Job xix. 25-27. _I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that\nhe shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though, after my\nskin, worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: Whom I\nshall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another,\nthough my reins be consumed within me._ Job, as is generally supposed,\nlived in Moses\u2019 time; therefore, if it can be made appear that he\nprofesses his faith in the doctrine of the resurrection, we may conclude\nthat the church was acquainted with it in the early ages thereof; and\nnothing seems more evident, from the plain sense of the words, than that\nhe here professes his faith in, and encourages himself from the hope of\nfuture blessedness, both in soul and body, at Christ\u2019s second coming in\nthe last day.\n\nIt is with a great deal of difficulty that they who deny this doctrine,\nare obliged to account for the sense of this text, so as to evade the\nforce of the argument taken from thence to prove it. These suppose that\nJob intends nothing hereby but a firm persuasion which he had, that he\nshould be recovered from that state of misery in which he then was,\nwhich not only affected his mind, but his body, as it was _smitten with\nsore boils, from the sole of his foot unto his crown_, Job ii. 7. _his\nflesh_ being _clothed with worms_, and his _skin broken and become\nloathsome_, chap. vii. 5. and accordingly he says, I shall be redeemed\nfrom this affliction, and brought into a happy state before I die; and\nso they suppose that the words are to be taken in a metaphorical sense;\nand therefore do not prove the doctrine of the resurrection. But this\nwill appear to be a very great perversion of the sense of this text, if\nwe consider,\n\n1. In how solemn a manner he brings it in, in the verses immediately\nforegoing. _Oh that my words were now written! Oh that they were printed\nin a book! that they were graven with an iron pen and lead, in the rock\nfor ever!_ Which seems to import that he had something to communicate,\nthat was of far greater moment than the account of his deliverance from\nthe afflictions he was under in this world. Therefore it seems more\nagreeable to understand the sense of the words, as denoting that great\nand important truth, in which all believers are concerned, relating to\nChrist\u2019s second coming, and the happiness that his saints shall then\nenjoy in soul and body; this deserves to be writ with a pen of iron,\nthat it may be transmitted to all generations. But,\n\n2. It is evident that he is here speaking of something that should be\ndone, not whilst he lived, but in the end of time; for he considers his\nRedeemer, as _standing in the latter day upon the earth_. The person\nwhom he here speaks of as his Redeemer, is, doubtless, our Saviour, who\nis frequently described, both in the Old and New-Testament, under that\ncharacter: And, if at any time God the Father is called the Redeemer of\nhis people, it may farther be observed that he is never said in\nredeeming them to make himself visible to their bodily eyes, or to stand\nupon the earth, much less to do this in the latter or last day, in which\nChrist is said to come again in a visible manner, to raise the dead and\njudge the world: And this Job intends when he says, _In my flesh shall I\nsee God, whom I shall see for myself and mine eyes shall behold, and not\nanother_.\n\n3. It is evident also that he intends hereby something that should befal\nhim after his death, and not barely a deliverance from his present\nmisery in this world; for he speaks of his _skin_ or body as devoured by\n_worms_, and _his reins consumed within him_; which can intend no other\nthan a state of corruption in death.\n\n4. It does not appear that Job had any intimation concerning the change\nof his condition in this world, before God turned his captivity, having\nfirst made him sensible of his error, in _uttering that which he\nunderstood not_, when he testified his reconciliation to his friends,\nnotwithstanding the injuries he had received from them, by _praying for\nthem_, chap. xlii. 3, 10. And, indeed, he was so far from expecting\nhappiness in this life, that he says, _Mine eye shall no more see good_,\nviz. in this world, chap. vii. 7. and hereupon he takes occasion to\nmeditate on his own mortality in the following words; _The eye of him\nthat hath seen me shall see me no more; thine eyes are upon me, and I am\nnot_: And after this he prays, _O that thou wouldst hide me in the\ngrave_, chap. xiv. 13. &c. And immediately before he speaks of his\nRedeemer as living, and the deliverance which he should obtain in the\nlatter day, in the text under our present consideration, he earnestly\ndesires the compassion of his friends: _Have pity upon me, have pity\nupon me, O ye my friends; for the hand of God hath touched me_; which\ndoes not well agree with the least expectation of a state of happiness\nin this world; in which case he would not need their pity; he might only\nhave convinced them of the truth thereof, and it would have given a turn\nto their behaviour towards him; for we find, that, when God blessed his\nlatter end more than his beginning, every one was as ready to comfort\nhim concerning the evil that the Lord had brought upon him, and shew\ntheir very great respect to him, by offering him presents, as any were\nbefore to reproach him. Therefore upon the whole, it is very evident\nthat Job is not speaking concerning his deliverance from his present\nevils in this world, but of a perfect deliverance from all evil in the\ngreat day of the resurrection: Accordingly we must conclude, that the\ndoctrine of the resurrection is plainly asserted in this scripture; and\nindeed, Jerome says, that no one who wrote after Christ has more plainly\nmaintained the doctrine of the resurrection than Job does in this\nscripture, who lived before him[172].\n\nThere is another scripture, by which, if I do not mistake the sense\nthereof, Job appears to have had a steady faith in the doctrine of the\nresurrection, and was firmly persuaded concerning his happiness, when\nraised from the dead, namely, in chap. xiv. 13, 14, 15. in which he\nsays, _O! that thou wouldst hide me in the grave, that thou wouldst keep\nme secret until thy wrath be past_; that is, till a full end is put to\nall the afflictive providences which men are liable to in this present\nworld, namely, till the day of Christ\u2019s second coming; or, _that thou\nwouldst appoint me a set time, and remember me_; namely, that thou\nwouldst deliver me from the evils which I now endure. As to the former\nof these expedients, to wit, his deliverance by death, that he counts a\nblessing, because he takes it for granted that _if a man die he shall\nlive again_, ver. 14.[173] and therefore says, _all the days of my\nappointed time_, that is, not of the appointed time of life, but the\ntime appointed that he should lie in the grave, in which he desired that\nGod would hide him; there, says he, I shall wait, or remain, _till my\nchange come_, that is, till I am changed from a state of mortality to\nthat of life. And he goes on in the following words, _Thou shalt call_,\nthat is, by thy power thou shalt raise me, _and I will answer thee_, or\ncome forth out of my grave; and hereby thou wilt make it known that thou\n_hast a desire to the work of thine hands_.\n\nIf it be objected to this sense of the words, that Job says, ver. 12.\nthat _man lieth down, and riseth not till the heavens be no more; they\nshall not awake nor be raised out of their sleep_; therefore he is so\nfar from expecting relief from his misery in the resurrection, that he\nseems plainly to deny it. To this I answer, that he doth not deny the\ndoctrine of the resurrection in those words wherein he says that they\n_shall not be raised from the dead, till the heavens be no more_; which\nseems to intimate that he concluded that the dead should rise when the\nframe of nature was changed, as it will be, at the last day, in which\nthe heavens shall be no more. I confess this sense is not commonly given\nof these verses, nor any argument drawn from, them to prove a\nresurrection from the dead; therefore I would not be too tenacious of\nmine own sense thereof; but I cannot but think it more probable than the\ncommon sense that is given of the words, and if so, it may be considered\nas a proof of the doctrine that we are maintaining.\n\nThere is another scripture which plainly proves the doctrine of the\nresurrection, namely, Dan. xii. 2. _Many of them that sleep in the dust\nshall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting\ncontempt._ This scripture is brought by several Rabbinical writers, as a\nproof of this doctrine; and the words are so express, that it will be\nvery difficult to evade the force of them; though, it is true, some\nmodern writers, who are ready to conclude that the Old Testament is\nsilent as to the doctrine of the resurrection, take the words in a\nmetaphorical sense, for the deliverance of the church from those\ngrievous persecutions which they were under in the reign of Antiochus;\nand so _sleeping in the dust_ is taken, by them, for lying in the holes\nand caves of the earth, the Jews being forced to seek protection there\nfrom the fury of the tyrant: But this cannot be properly called\n_sleeping in the dust of the earth_; and their deliverance from this\npersecution is not consistent with the contempt that should be cast on\nsome that were raised out of the dust; nor could the happiness that\nothers enjoyed in this deliverance, be called _everlasting life_, it\nbeing only a temporal salvation, that according to them, is here spoken\nof; and it must be a straining the metaphor to a great degree, to apply\nthe following words to their wise men and teachers, after this\ndeliverance, that they should _shine as the brightness of the\nfirmament_; therefore this sense has such difficulties attending it,\nthat every person who is not prepossessed with prejudice must give into\nthe literal sense of the text; and confess that it is an argument to\nprove the doctrine of the resurrection.\n\nThe only difficulty that is pretended to be involved in this sense of\nthe text is its being said, _Many of them that sleep in the dust shall\nawake_; whereas the doctrine that we are defending, is that of an\nuniversal resurrection. But since we shall have occasion to speak to\nthat under a following head, we shall rather choose to refer it to its\nproper place, in which, according to our designed method, we are to\nconsider that all who have lived from the beginning to the end of time,\nshall be raised.\n\nThere are other scriptures in the Old Testament that might be brought to\nprove this doctrine, such as that in Deut. xxxii. 39. in which God says,\n_I kill, and I make alive_; and that parallel text, in which the same\nthing is confessed, and farther explained, by Hannah, in her song, in 1\nSam. ii. 6. _The Lord killeth and maketh alive, he bringeth down to the\ngrave, and bringeth up._ I know that death and life are sometimes taken\nfor good and evil; but why should deliverance from the miseries of this\npresent life be represented by the metaphor of a resurrection, and this\nattributed to the almighty power of God, if the doctrine of the\nresurrection was reckoned by the church at that time, no other than a\nfiction or chimera, as it must be supposed to be if they had no idea of\nit, as not having received it by divine revelation?\n\nWe might, as a farther proof of this doctrine, consider those three\ninstances that we have in the Old Testament of persons raised from the\ndead, namely, the Shunamite\u2019s child, by the prophet Elisha, 2 Kings iv.\n35. and the man who was cast into his sepulchre, that _revived and stood\non his feet_, when he touched his _bones_, chap. xiii. 21. and the widow\nof Zarephath\u2019s son, by the prophet Elijah, on which occasion it is said,\n_He cried to the Lord, and said, O Lord my God, I pray thee let this\nchild\u2019s soul come into him again_; and accordingly the soul of the child\ncame into him again, and he revived, 1 Kings xvii. 21, 22. From hence we\nmust conclude, that this doctrine was not unknown to the prophet; for if\nit had, he could not have directed his prayer to God in faith. And these\ninstances of a resurrection of particular persons could not but give\noccasion to the church at that time, to believe the possibility of a\nresurrection at the last day; so that it might as reasonably be expected\nthat God will exert his power by raising the dead then, as that he would\ndo it at this time, unless there was something in this possible event\ncontrary to his moral perfections; but the resurrection appeared to them\nas it doth to all who consider him as the governor of the world, and as\ndistributing rewards and punishments to every one according to their\nworks, as not only agreeable to these perfections, but, in some\nrespects, necessary for the illustration thereof. Therefore we must\nconclude, that as they had particular instances of a resurrection, which\nargued the general resurrection possible, they might easily believe that\nit should be future; which is the doctrine that we are maintaining.\n\nTo this we may add, that the patriarch Abraham believed the doctrine of\nthe resurrection; therefore he had it some way or other revealed to him,\nbefore the word of God was committed to writing. This appears from what\nthe apostle says when speaking concerning his offering Isaac, that _he\naccounted that God was able to raise him up even from the dead_, Heb.\nxi. 19. From hence it is evident that he was verily persuaded when he\nbound him to the altar, and lifted up his hand to slay him, that God\nwould suffer him to do it, otherwise it had been no trial of his faith,\nso that his being prevented from laying his hand on him was an\nunexpected providence. Now how could he solve the difficulty that would\nnecessarily ensue hereupon; had he expected that God would give him\nanother seed instead of Isaac, that would not have been an\naccomplishment of the promise which was given to him, namely, that in\nIsaac his seed should be called; therefore the only thing that he\ndepended on, was, that when he had offered him, God would raise him from\nthe dead, and by this means fulfil the promise that was made to him\nconcerning the numerous seed that should descend from him; therefore it\ncannot be supposed that Abraham was a stranger to the doctrine of the\nresurrection.\n\nThere are other scriptures by which it appears that the doctrine of the\nresurrection was revealed to the church under the Old Testament\ndispensation, either from the sense of the words themselves, or the\nexplication thereof in the New, which refers to them: thus it is said in\nPsal. xvi. 10. _Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou\nsuffer thine holy one to see corruption_; which the apostle Peter quotes\nto prove the resurrection of Christ, in Acts ii. 24-27. If David\ntherefore knew that the Messiah should be raised from the dead (which,\nas will be considered under a following head, is a glorious proof of the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the saints) we cannot suppose that he\nwas a stranger to this doctrine himself.\n\nAgain, it is said in Isa. xxv. 8. _He will swallow up death in victory_;\nand this is mentioned immediately after a prediction of the glorious\nprovision, which God would make for his people under the\ngospel-dispensation, which is called, by a metaphorical way of speaking,\nver. 6. _A feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat\nthings full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined_; and of the\ngospel\u2019s being preached to the Gentiles, ver. 7. which is expressed by\nhis _destroying the face of covering, and the veil that was spread over\nall nations_: therefore it may well be supposed to contain a prediction\nof something consequent thereupon, namely, the general resurrection: and\nthere is another scripture to the same purpose, viz. Hos. xiii. 14. _I\nwill ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from\ndeath: O death, I will be thy plague; O grave, I will be thy\ndestruction_; and both these scriptures are referred to by the apostle,\nas what shall be fulfilled in the resurrection of the dead; when he\nsays, _Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death\nis swallowed up in victory: O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where\nis thy victory?_ 1 Cor. xv. 54, 55. Therefore we cannot but think that\nthe prophets, and the church in their day, understood the words in the\nsame sense.\n\nThere is another scripture in the Old Testament, in which the premises\nare laid down, from whence the conclusion is drawn in the New for the\nproof of this doctrine, namely, when God revealed himself to Moses,\nExod. iii. 6. which our Saviour refers to, and proves the doctrine of\nthe resurrection from, against the Sadducees. _Now that the dead are\nraised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord, the God\nof Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: for he is not\nthe God of the dead, but of the living_, Luke xx. 37, 38. which argument\nwas so convincing, that _certain of the Scribes_, said, in the following\nwords, _Master, thou hast well said; and after that, they_, that is, the\nSadducees, _durst not ask him any question at all_; so that it silenced,\nif it did not convince them. There are some, indeed, who, though they\nconclude that it is a very strong proof of the immortality of the soul,\nwhich the Sadducees denied, since that which does not exist cannot be\nthe subject of a promise; yet, they cannot see how the resurrection can\nbe proved from it; whereas it is brought, by our Saviour, for that\npurpose: therefore, that the force of this argument may appear, we must\nconsider what is the import of the promise contained in this covenant,\nthat God would be the _God of Abraham_; which is explained elsewhere,\nwhen he told him, _I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward_, Gen.\nxv. 1. He was therefore given hereby to expect, at the hand of God, all\nthe spiritual and saving blessings of the covenant of grace; but these\nblessings respect not only the soul, but the body; and as they are\nextended to both worlds, it is an evident proof of the happiness of the\nsaints in their bodies in a future state, and consequently that they\nshall be raised from the dead. This leads us,\n\n2. To consider those arguments to prove the doctrine of the resurrection\nwhich are contained in the New Testament, in which it is more fully and\nexpressly revealed than in any part of scripture. Here we may first take\nnotice of those particular instances in which our Saviour raised persons\nfrom the dead in a miraculous way, as the prophets Elijah and Elisha did\nunder the Old Testament dispensation, as was before observed. Thus he\nraised Jairus\u2019s _daughter_, whom he found dead in the house, Matt. ix.\n25. and another, to wit, the _widow\u2019s son at Nain_, when they were\ncarrying him to the grave; which was done in the presence of a great\nmultitude, Luke vii. 11, 14, 15. and there was another instance hereof\nin his raising Lazarus from the dead, John xi. 43, 44. which he did in a\nvery solemn and public manner, after he had been dead four days, his\nbody being then corrupted and laid in the grave, from whence Christ\ncalls him, and he immediately revived and came forth. These instances of\nthe resurrection of particular persons tended to put the doctrine of the\ngeneral resurrection out of all manner of doubt; and, indeed, it was, at\nthis time, hardly questioned by any, excepting the Sadducees: therefore\nbefore Christ raised Lazarus, when he only told his sister Martha that\nhe _should rise again_, she, not then understanding that he designed\nimmediately to raise him from the dead, expresses her faith in the\ndoctrine of the general resurrection; _I know that he shall rise again\nin the resurrection at the last day_, John xi. 24. upon which occasion\nour Saviour replies, _I am the resurrection and the life_, ver. 25.\ndenoting that this work was to be performed by him.\n\nMoreover, this doctrine was asserted and maintained by the apostles,\nafter Christ had given the greatest proof hereof in his own resurrection\nfrom the dead: thus it is said, that _they preached through Jesus, the\nresurrection from the dead_, Acts iv. 2. And the apostle Paul standing\nbefore Felix, and confessing his belief of all things which are written\nin the law and the prophets, immediately adds, that he had _hope towards\nGod, which they themselves also allow_; that is, the main body of the\nJewish nation; _that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of\nthe just and of the unjust_.\n\nAnd he not only asserts but proves it with very great strength of\nreasoning, in 1 Cor. xv. and the argument he therein insists on, is\ntaken from Christ\u2019s resurrection, ver. 13. _If there be no resurrection,\nthen is Christ not risen_; which is a doctrine that could not be denied\nby any that embraced the Christian religion, as being the very\nfoundation thereof; but if any one should entertain the least doubt\nabout it, he adds, ver. 17. _If Christ be not raised from the dead, your\nfaith is vain, ye are yet in your sins_; that is, your hope of\njustification hereby is ungrounded, _and they also which are fallen\nasleep in Christ, are perished_; but this none of you will affirm;\ntherefore you must conclude that he is risen from the dead: and if it be\nenquired, how does this argument prove the general resurrection, that he\nfarther insists on from ver. 20. _Now is Christ risen from the dead, and\nbecome the first-fruits of them that slept?_ Christ\u2019s resurrection\nremoves all the difficulties that might afford the least matter of doubt\nconcerning the possibility of the resurrection of the dead; and his\nbeing raised as the _first-fruits of them that slept_, or, as the head\nof all the elect, who are said to have communion with him in his\nresurrection, or to be _risen with him_, Col. iii. 1. renders the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of all his saints, undeniably certain. As\nthe first-fruits are a part and pledge of the harvest, so Christ\u2019s\nresurrection is a pledge and earnest of the resurrection of his people.\nThus the apostle says elsewhere, _If the Spirit of him that raised up\nJesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead\nshall also quicken your mortal bodies_, Rom. viii. 11. And our Saviour,\nwhen he was discoursing with his disciples concerning his death, and\nresurrection that would ensue thereupon, tells them, that though after\nthis he should be separated for a time from them, and _the world_ should\n_see him no more_, yet that _they should see him_ again; and assigns\nthis as a reason, _because I live ye shall live also_, John xiv. 19. _q.\nd._ because I shall be raised from the dead, and live for ever in\nheaven; you, who are my favourites, friends, and followers, shall be\nalso raised and live with me there; so that the resurrection of\nbelievers is plainly evinced from Christ\u2019s resurrection.\n\nI might produce many other scriptures out of the New Testament, in which\nthis doctrine is maintained; but we shall proceed to consider what\nproofs may be deduced from scripture-consequences. And it may here be\nobserved, that our Lord Jesus Christ, has by his death and resurrection,\nas the consequence thereof, purchased an universal dominion over, or a\nright to dispose of his subjects in such a way as will be most conducive\nto his own glory and their advantage. Thus the apostle speaks of him as\n_dying, rising, and reviving, that he might be Lord both of the dead and\nliving_; and infers from thence, that _whether we live or die, we are\nthe Lord\u2019s_, Rom. xiv. 8, 9. And his being Lord over the dead is\nexpressed in other terms, by his _having the keys of hell and death_;\nand this is assigned as the consequence of his _being alive_ after his\ndeath, or of his resurrection from the dead, Rev. i. 18. Therefore he\nhas a power, as Mediator, to raise the dead. And to this we may also\nadd, that this is what he has engaged to do, as much as he did to redeem\nthe souls of his people. When believers are said to be given to him, or\npurchased by him, it is the whole man that is included therein; and\naccordingly he purchased the bodies as well as the souls of his people,\nas may be argued from our obligation hereupon, to _glorify him in our\nbodies_ as well as _in our spirits which are God\u2019s_, 1 Cor. vi. 20. And\nthey are both under his care; he has undertaken that their bodies shall\nnot be lost in the grave; which is very emphatically expressed, when he\nis represented as saying, this is _the will of the Father which hath\nsent me_, John vi. 39, 40. or, contained in the commission that I\nreceived from him, when he invested me with the office of Mediator;\n_that of all which he had given me, I should lose nothing, but should\nraise it up again at the last day_. What should be the reason that he\nhere speaks of things rather than persons, if he had not a peculiar\nregard to the bodies of believers? which, as they are the subjects of\nhis power when raised from the dead; so they are the objects of his\ncare, and therefore he will raise them up at the last day.\n\nWe might farther consider Christ\u2019s dominion as extended to the wicked as\nwell as the righteous. He is not, indeed, their federal head; but he is\nappointed to be their Judge; and therefore has a right to demand them to\ncome forth out of their graves, to appear before his tribunal; though\nthey are neither the objects of his special love, nor redeemed by his\nblood, nor the dutiful and obedient subjects of his kingdom; inasmuch as\nit is said, _God has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in\nrighteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given\nassurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead_, Acts\nxvii. 31. And elsewhere it is said, that he was ordained _of God to be\nthe Judge of quick and dead_, chap. x. 42. Therefore we read, that he\nshall _sit upon the throne of his glory, and before him shall be\ngathered all nations_, Matt. xxv. 31, 32. and of his determining the\nfinal estate, both of the righteous and the wicked, as it is expressed\nin the following verses; and this is described more particularly as\nbeing immediately after the universal resurrection; as it is said, \u2018I\nsaw the dead, small and great, stand before God, and the books were\nopened,\u2019 Rev. xx. 12, 13. which, as will be observed under our next\nanswer, respects his judging the world; and in order hereto it is\nfarther said, that \u2018the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death\nand hell delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were judged\nevery man according to their works.\u2019 And since Christ is represented as\na judge, it is necessary that he should execute his vindictive justice\nagainst his enemies, and punish them as their sins deserve; but this\nrespects not only the soul but the body; and therefore Christ that he\nmay secure the glory of his justice, shall raise the bodies of sinners,\nthat he may punish them according to their works; and therefore he is\nsaid to be the object of fear, in that he is _able to destroy both soul\nand body in hell_, Matt. x. 28.\n\nThus we have endeavoured to prove the doctrine of the resurrection by\narguments taken from the Old and New Testament, and those\nscripture-consequences from which it may be plainly deduced: so that how\nmuch soever it may be thought a strange and incredible doctrine, by\nthose who have no other light to guide them but that of nature; it will\nbe generally believed by all whose faith is founded upon divine\nrevelation, and who adore the infinite power and impartial justice of\nGod, the Governor of the world: and, indeed, it is not attended with\nsuch difficulties arising from the nature of the thing, as many pretend,\nsince we have several emblems in nature which seem to illustrate it;\nwhich are very elegantly represented by some of the Fathers, and\nespecially by Tertullian;[174] whom the learned and excellent bishop\nPearson refers to and imitates in his style and mode of expression;[175]\nhis words are these; \u201cAs the day dies into night, so doth the summer\ninto winter: the sap is said to descend into the root, and there it lies\nburied in the ground. The earth is covered with snow, or crusted with\nfrost, and becomes a general sepulchre. When the spring appeareth all\nbegin to rise; the plants and flowers peep out of their graves, revive,\nand grow, and flourish; this is the annual resurrection. The corn by\nwhich we live, and for want of which we perish with famine, is\nnotwithstanding cast upon the earth, and buried in the ground, with a\ndesign that it may corrupt, and being corrupted, may revive and\nmultiply; our bodies are fed with this constant experiment, and we\ncontinue this present life by succession of resurrections. Thus all\nthings are repaired by corrupting, are preserved by perishing, and\nrevive by dying; and can we think that man, the lord of all those\nthings, which thus die and revive for him, should be detained in death,\nas never to live again? Is it imaginable that God should thus restore\nall things to man, and not restore man to himself? If there were no\nother consideration but of the principles of human nature, of the\nliberty, and remunerability of human actions, and of the natural\nrevolutions and resurrections of other creatures, it were abundantly\nsufficient to render the resurrection of our bodies highly probable.\u201d We\nshall now consider,\n\nV. Some objections that are generally brought against the doctrine of\nthe resurrection. Some things, indeed, are objected against it, that are\nso vain and trifling, that they do not deserve an answer: as when the\nfollowers of Aristotle assert that it is impossible for a thing which is\ntotally destroyed, to be restored to that condition in which it was\nbefore[176]: And some have been so foolish as to think that those\nnations, who burnt their dead bodies, put an eternal bar in the way of\ntheir resurrection; since the particles being so changed and separated\nby fire as they are, can never return again to their former bodies; or\nthey who have been swallowed up by the ocean, and the particles of which\nthey consisted, dissolved by water; and every one of them separated from\nthe other, can never be again restored to their former situation.\nSuch-like objections as these, I say, do not deserve an answer; because\nthey consider the resurrection as though it were to be brought about in\nsuch a way, as effects are produced by second causes, according to the\ncommon course of nature; without any regard to the almighty power of\nGod, that can easily surmount all the difficulties which, they pretend,\nlie in the way of the resurrection.\n\nAnd there are other objections, taken from a perverse sense, which they\ngive of some texts of scripture, without considering the drift and\ndesign thereof, or what is added in some following words, which\nsufficiently overthrows the objection. Thus some produce that scripture\nin Eccles. iii. 19, 20, 21. where it is said, _That which befalleth the\nsons of men, befalleth beasts. So that a man hath no pre-eminence above\na beast, all go unto one place, and all are of the dust, and all turn to\nthe dust again_; which we before mentioned as brought against the\nimmortality of the soul; and it is also alleged against the resurrection\nof the body, by those who conclude that it shall be no more raised from\nthe dead than the bodies of brute creatures. But this is rather a cavil\nor a sophism, than a just way of reasoning; inasmuch as the following\nwords plainly intimate, that men and beasts are compared together only\nas to their mortality, not as to what respects their condition after\ndeath; and therefore it is no sufficient argument to overthrow the\ndoctrine of the resurrection. These and such-like objections are so\ntrifling, that we shall not insist on them: However, there are three or\nfour that we shall lay down, and consider what answers may be given to\nthem.\n\n_Obj._ 1. It is objected against the doctrine of the resurrection, that\nthough the power of God can do all things possible to be done; yet the\nraising the dead, at least, in some particular instances thereof, is\nimpossible from the nature of the thing; and therefore we may say,\nwithout any reflection cast on the divine Omnipotency, that God cannot\nraise them, at least, not so as that every one shall have his own body\nrestored to him; since there are some instances of Cannibals, or\nmen-eaters, who devour one another, by which means the flesh of one man\nis turned into the flesh of the other. And in those instances which are\nmore common, the bodies of men being turned into dust, produce food,\nlike other parts of the earth, for brute creatures; and accordingly some\nof those particles of which they consisted, are changed into the flesh\nof these creatures; and these again are eaten by men; so that the\nparticles of one human body, after having undergone several changes,\nbecome a part of another; therefore there cannot be a distinct\nresurrection of every one of those bodies that have lived in all the\nages of the world.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that it cannot be proved, that in\nthose instances mentioned in the objection, that when one man preys upon\nanother, or when brute creatures live upon that grass which was produced\nby the ground, which was made fertile by the bodies of men turned to\ncorruption, and it may be, may have some of the particles thereof\ncontained in them: It cannot, I say, be proved, that these particles of\nthe bodies of men are turned into nourishment, and so become a part of\nhuman flesh; since providence did not design this to be for food. If so,\nthen it is not true in fact, that the particles of one human body become\na part of another. But, suppose it were otherwise (to give the objection\nas much weight as possible) we may farther observe, that it is but a\nvery small part of what is eaten, that is turned into flesh; and\ntherefore those particles of one human body, that by this means are\nsupposed to pass into another, make up but a very inconsiderable part\nthereof. Therefore, if some few particles of one human body in the\nresurrection are restored again to that body to which they at first\nbelonged, this will not overthrow the doctrine of the resurrection of\nthe same body. If the body of man loses a few ounces of its weight, no\none will suppose that it is not the same body. So when the bodies of men\nare raised from the dead, if the far greater part of the particles\nthereof are recollected and united together, they may truly be said to\nconstitute the same body; this therefore does not overthrow the\nresurrection of the same body from the nature of the thing.\n\n_Object._ 2. It is farther objected, especially against the possibility\nof the resurrection of the same body that was once alive in this world;\nthat the bodies of men, while they live, are subject to such\nalterations, that it can hardly be said that we are the same when we are\nmen as when we are children. The expence of those particles which were\ninsensibly lost by perspiration, and others being daily gained by\nnutrition, make such an alteration in the contexture of the body, that,\nas some suppose, in the space of about seven years, almost all the\nparticles of the body are changed, some lost and others regained. Now if\nit be supposed that the same body we once had shall be raised, it is\nhard to determine; whether those particles of which it consisted when we\nwere young, shall be gathered together in the resurrection, or the\nparticles of the emaciated or enfeebled body, which was laid down in the\ngrave.\n\n_Answ._ We are obliged to take notice of such-like objections as these,\nbecause they are often alleged in a cavilling way, against the doctrine\nof the resurrection. The answer therefore that I would give to this, is,\nthat the more solid and substantial parts of the body, such as the skin,\nbones, cartilages, veins, arteries, nerves, fibres, that compose the\nmuscles, with the ligaments and tendons, are not subject to this change\nthat is mentioned in the objection, by evaporation or perspiration;\nwhich more especially respects the fluids, and not the solids of the\nbody. These remain the same in men as they were in children, excepting\nwhat respects their strength and size: And if the body, as consisting of\nthese and some other of the particles that it has lost, which the wisdom\nof God thinks fit to recollect, be gathered together in the\nresurrection; we may truly say, that the same body that once lived,\nnotwithstanding the change made in the fluids thereof, is raised from\nthe dead.\n\n_Obj._ 3. There is another objection which is sometimes brought against\nthe doctrine of the resurrection of the just, especially against their\nbeing raised with the same body they once had, taken from the\ninconsistency hereof, with their living in the other world, called\nheaven; which is generally distinguished from the earth, as being a more\npure subtil and etherial region, therefore not fit to be an habitation\nfor bodies compounded of such gross matter as ours are, which are\nadapted to the state and world in which they now live: Whereas, to\nsuppose them placed in heaven, is inconsistent with the nature of\ngravity; so that we may as well conclude a body, which naturally tends\nto the earth its centre, to be capable of living in the air, at a\ndistance from the surface of the earth, as we can, that it is possible\nfor such a body to live in heaven: Therefore they argue that the bodies\nof men, at the resurrection must be changed, so as to become etherial,\nwhich does, in effect, overthrow the doctrine of the resurrection, as\nrespecting, at least, the restoring the bodies of men to the same form\nwhich once they had.\n\nMoreover, this objection is farther improved by another supposition:\nwhich gave the Socinians occasion to assert, that the same body shall\nnot be raised; namely, that if the bodies of men should be the same as\nthey are now, they would be rendered incapable of that state of\nimmortality which is in heaven. For by the same method of reasoning, by\nwhich, as has been before observed, they argue that man would have been\nliable to mortality, though he had not sinned, _viz._ that death was\nthen the consequence of nature, inasmuch as the body was to be supported\nby food, breathe in proper air, and be fenced against those things that\nmight tend to destroy the temperament thereof, or a dissolution would\nensue, they conclude that we must not have such bodies as we now have,\nbut etherial. And to give countenance to this, they refer to the\napostle\u2019s words in 1 Cor. xv. 50. _Flesh and blood cannot inherit the\nkingdom of God_: And ver. 40. where he speaks of _celestial bodies_ as\ndistinguished from _terrestrial_, and of the body\u2019s being raised a\n_spiritual body_, ver. 44. And there is another scripture generally\nreferred to, wherein our Saviour speaks of believers, in the\nresurrection, being _as the angels of God_, Matt. xxii. 30. which is to\nbe understood, at least, as signifying that their motion will be no more\nhindered by the weight of the body, than the motion of an angel is;\ntherefore their bodies must be of another kind than what we suppose they\nshall be in the resurrection.\n\n_Answ._ 1. As to what respects the inconsistency of bodies like ours,\nliving in the upper world, as being contrary to the nature of\ngravitation: It may be answered, that according to the generally\nreceived opinion of modern philosophers, gravity arises from an external\npressure made upon bodies which are said to be heavy or light, according\nto the force thereof; and therefore those bodies that are in the upper\nregions, above the atmosphere, are equally adapted to ascend or descend;\nwhich sufficiently answers that part of the objection. This a learned\nwriter takes notice of[177]: And if this be not acquiesced in, he\nadvances another hypothesis; which, because it has something of wit and\nspirit in it, I shall take leave to mention, though I must suspend my\njudgment concerning it, whether it be true or false. He says, perhaps,\nour heaven will be nothing else but an heaven upon earth; and that it\nseems more natural to suppose that, since we have solid and material\nbodies, we shall be placed as we are in this life, in some solid and\nmaterial orb; and this he supposes agreeable to the apostle Peter\u2019s\nwords, when he speaks of a _new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness_,\n2 Pet. iii. 13. From whence he concludes, that either this world shall\nbe fitted to be the seat of the blessed, or some other that has a solid\nbasis like unto it. And to give countenance to this opinion, he refers\nto some ancient writers; and particularly tells us, that Maximus speaks\nof it as the opinion of many in his time; and Epiphanius brings in\nMethodius in the third century, as asserting the same thing.\n\n2. As to what concerns that part of the objection, that bodies, like\nthose we have now, are unmeet for the heavenly state, inasmuch as they\ncannot be supported without food and other conveniences of nature, which\ntend to the preservation of life in this world. To this it may be\nanswered, that it is not necessary to suppose that the body shall be\nraised with such qualities as that it will stand in need of food, rest,\nor other conveniences of nature; which, at present, tend to the support\nof life: The apostle seems to assert the contrary, when he says, _Meats\nfor the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it\nand them_, 1 Cor. vi. 13. There is certainly a medium between asserting,\nwith some, that we shall be raised with an etherial body, in all\nrespects unlike to that which we have at present; and maintaining, that\nwe shall have such as are liable to the imperfections of this present\nstate, and supported in the same way in which they now are.\n\nAs to what the apostle says concerning _flesh and blood not inheriting\nthe kingdom of heaven_, he does not mean thereby that our bodies shall\nbe so changed, that they shall in no respect consist of flesh and blood:\nAnd when he speaks of _celestial_ and _spiritual_ bodies, it is not\nnecessary for us to suppose, that hereby he intends \u00e6rial or etherial\nbodies. But this will be more particularly considered under a following\nhead, when we speak of the circumstances in which the bodies of\nbelievers shall be raised from the dead. As for that other scripture, in\nwhich they are said to be _as the angels of God in heaven_, that\nrespects their being immortal and incorruptible; or as the context seems\nto intimate, that they need not marriage, to perpetuate their\ngenerations, in that world: Therefore we have no occasion to strain the\nsense of the words, so as to suppose that our Saviour intends in his\nsaying _they shall be as the angels_, that they shall cease to be like\nwhat they were when men on earth.\n\n_Objec._ 4. The last objection which we shall mention, is taken from its\nnot being agreeable to the goodness of God, extended to those who are\nmade partakers of the resurrection to eternal life; inasmuch as it is a\nbringing them into a worse condition than the soul was in, when separate\nfrom the body. This objection is generally brought by those who give\ninto that mode of speaking often used by Plato[178] and his followers,\nthat the body in this world, is the prison of the soul, which at death,\nis set at liberty: therefore they suppose, that its being united to the\nbody again, is no other than its being condemned to a second\nimprisonment, which is so far from being a favour conferred, that it\nrather seems to be a punishment inflicted. Others, with Celsus, reckon\nit a dishonour for the soul to be reunited to a body that is\ncorrupted.[179] And others speak of the body as being a great hindrance\nto the soul in its actings; and frequently inclining it to the exercise\nof some of those passions that tend to make men uneasy, and thereby\nunhappy; and that this may, some way or other, take place in a future\nstate.\n\n_Answ._ It is no great difficulty to answer this objection, in which\nthere is not a due difference put between the present and future state\nof believers. The only thing which might give occasion to men to\nconclude that their souls are imprisoned in this world is, because they\nare abridged of that happiness which they shall be possessed of in\nanother; which the apostle calls _The glorious liberty of the children\nof God_, Rom. viii. 21. And as for the reproaches which some of the\ngreatest enemies to Christianity have cast on this doctrine, these are\nnot sufficient to beget the least dislike of it in the minds of serious\nand unprejudiced Christians. What though the body be turned to\ncorruption? It shall be raised incorruptible, and in glory; and\ntherefore shall be a palace fit to entertain its noble inhabitant: what\nthough it has, in this world, offered many temptations to the soul to\nsin, by which it has been sometimes overcome and exposed to those\npassions that have defiled, and made it very uneasy; is this to be\nobjected against its being raised from the dead in such a state of\nperfection, that it shall never more contract any guilt, or render the\nsoul unhappy, by any inconvenience arising from it? But this will\nfarther appear, when we speak of the condition in which the body shall\nbe raised under a following head. We shall therefore proceed,\n\nVI. To consider the resurrection of the dead as universal, including in\nit all who have lived, or shall live, from the beginning of time, till\nChrist\u2019s second coming, excepting those who shall be found alive; on\nwhom a change shall pass which is equivalent to a resurrection.\n\n1. That all the dead shall be raised: this is expressly mentioned in\nthat vision, _I saw the dead both small and great, standing before God;\nand the books were opened; and the dead were judged out of those things\nwhich were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea\ngave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the\ndead which were in them; and they were judged every man according to\ntheir works_, Rev. xx. 12, _& seq._ where the Judge is represented as\ndemanding the bodies of men of all ranks, conditions, and ages, out of\nthose places where they have been lodged, with a design to reward or\npunish them according to their works: therefore, if the justice of God\nis to be displayed in this solemn and awful transaction, and the bodies\nas well as the souls of men, are the subjects on which this judgment\nmust pass; then it follows, that it will be universal: thus our Saviour\nsays, _All that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come\nforth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they\nthat have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation_, John v. 28, 29.\nThis is so evident a truth, founded on the divine perfections, as well\nas express words of scripture, that it is strange to find that any, who\nallow that the dead shall be raised, should deny the universality\nthereof.\n\nHowever, we meet with several expressions in Rabbinical writers, which\nseem to speak of it as a peculiar privilege belonging to some, but not\nto all; and therefore they have a proverbial expression, that though the\nrain descends on the just and on the unjust, yet the resurrection of the\ndead belongs only to the just:[180] and this they infer from the words\nof the prophet Daniel, in chap. xii. 2. _Many of them that sleep in the\ndust of the earth shall awake_; which words contain a difficulty which\nmost have found it an hard matter to account for, agreeably to the sense\nof the prophet, who speaks, in the words immediately following, of the\nconsequence hereof, as, _some_ shall awake _to everlasting life, and\nsome to everlasting shame and contempt_; whereby he divides the world\ninto two parts, and considers one as happy, the other as miserable;\ntherefore he must, doubtless, speak of an universal resurrection. But\nthe great difficulty lies in these words; _Many of them that sleep in\nthe dust shall arise_; from whence, some conclude that this expression\ncontains an exception of others who shall not arise: thus some Jewish\nwriters seem to have understood it; but I rather think, that the word\n_many_, there, imports nothing else but the _multitude_, _q. d._ the\nwhole number of those that sleep shall awake.[181]\n\nIt is somewhat hard to determine what the Rabbinical writers intend when\nthey seem to confine the resurrection to the Israelites; and some of\nthem to exclude, not only the wicked from it, but those that had not\naddicted themselves to the study of the law, whom they call the Gnam\nHaaretz: thus they are represented in scripture as giving them but a\nvery indifferent character, _The people that knoweth not the law are\naccursed_, John vii. 49. by this means they bring the number of those\nthat shall be raised from the dead into a very narrow compass:\nnevertheless they speak of future rewards and punishments in another\nworld; therefore some have thought, when they exclude all but the\nIsraelites, and, of them, all but those who were in the greatest\nreputation amongst them, that they understand nothing else by the\nresurrection, but that which they fancied would happen in the days of\nthe Messiah; in which, they suppose, that some of the Jews shall be\nraised from the dead before the general resurrection at the last day;\nand in this sense we may easily understand their exclusive account, when\nthey speak of many that shall not be partakers of this privilege; and if\nit be extended to the resurrection at the last day, then I am apt to\nthink, that they intend hereby a resurrection to eternal life, and so\nsome understand that common proverb but now mentioned, concerning the\nrain\u2019s descending upon all; but the resurrection\u2019s belonging only to the\njust, in this sense; that though the rain descends upon the wilderness,\nand barren ground; yet it is only some places which are made fruitful\nthereby: accordingly, though the resurrection be universal, both of the\nrighteous and wicked; yet the resurrection to eternal life belongs only\nto the just.[182]\n\nAll that I shall observe at present is, that this is not altogether\ndisagreeable to the scripture-mode of speaking; which, though in some\nplaces it asserts the resurrection of the whole world, in others, by the\nresurrection, we are to understand nothing else, but a resurrection to\neternal life: thus the apostle Paul, when he speaks of his _attaining\nunto the resurrection of the dead_, Phil. iii. 11. intends hereby his\nobtaining a glorious resurrection. And our Saviour, when speaking\nconcerning the happiness of the saints in another world, expresses it on\nthis wise; that they shall be _counted worthy_, or meet, _to obtain that\nworld, and the resurrection from the dead_, Luke xx. 35. so that\nwhatever is said by Jewish writers, tending to limit the resurrection of\nthe dead to eternal life, to some particular persons, it does not appear\nbut that even they held, in other respects, a general resurrection, both\nof the just and unjust; which is as demonstrable as is the resurrection\nin general.\n\n2. They who are found alive at Christ\u2019s second coming, shall undergo a\nchange; which, though it cannot be called a resurrection, will be\nequivalent to it. The apostle Paul gives an account of this, as what was\nbefore unknown to the church; _Behold I shew you a mystery; we shall not\nall sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of\nan eye, at the last trump_, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52. And elsewhere he speaks\nof them when thus changed, as _caught up in the clouds together with_\nother saints, that are raised from the dead, _to meet the Lord in the\nair_, 1 Thess. iv. 17. This is no less an effect of almighty power than\na resurrection; for hereby their bodies, though never separated from\ntheir souls, are brought into the same state as the bodies of others\nshall be, when re-united to them, and thereby be rendered incorruptible\nand immortal, as the bodies of all other saints shall be, and made\npartakers of the same glory with which they are said to be raised. We\nhave an emblem of this in Christ\u2019s transfiguration, when there was such\na change made, for the present, on his body, that his face shined as the\nsun, and his raiment was white as the light. And there was not only a\nresemblance, but a kind of specimen hereof, in the translation of Enoch\nand Elijah, whose bodies were before this, liable to corruption, and all\nother infirmities that attend this present life, but were made, in a\nmoment, celestial and glorious. And the body of our Saviour, though it\nwas raised from the dead incorruptible and immortal, yet, during the\nspace of forty days, while he continued on earth, it was not made so\nglorious as it was immediately after the cloud received him into heaven,\nwhen it underwent such a change as was agreeable to the place and state\ninto which he then entered; even so the bodies of the saints, at last,\nshall, by this change, be made meet for heaven, and received, with other\nsaints into it.\n\nVII. We shall now consider the condition in which the body shall be\nraised. And,\n\n1. Those circumstances of honour and glory which respect more especially\nthe resurrection of the just: this the apostle mentions, and describes\nthem as _raised in glory_, 1, Cor. xv. 43. It is the same body indeed,\nthat is raised, which he illustrates by _a grain of wheat_ springing up,\nand changed into a full-grown ear; which, though it be greatly improved,\nand very much altered from what it was, when cast into the ground, yet\n_every seed_, as he observes, has _its own body_, ver. 38. From whence\nwe may infer, that the same body shall be raised from the dead, though\nwith very different qualities. There are several things mentioned by the\napostle, in the account he gives of the bodies of the saints after the\nresurrection; which some have attempted to explain in such a way, as is\nhardly consistent with a resurrection of the same body. The Socinians\ngenerally maintain that the body shall be altogether new, as to its\nsubstance, as well as its qualities: and others speak of it as an aerial\nbody; as supposing that the gross and heavy matter, of which it formerly\nconsisted, is not adapted to an heavenly state, and would render it not\naltogether free from a liableness to corruption. This opinion a late\nwriter mentions, as what was espoused by some of the Fathers, which he\nspeaks very favourably of; and inasmuch as the apostle calls it _a\nspiritual body_, 1 Cor. xv. 45. and seems to distinguish it from _flesh\nand blood_, which _cannot inherit the kingdom of God_, ver. 50. he\nthinks that though the same flesh and blood may rise from the grave, it\nwill then or afterwards, receive such a change, as will render it\nspiritual and incorruptible; and so, perhaps, when it comes to heaven,\nwill not be flesh and blood; or, that it will clothed with such an\nheavenly body as will keep it from a possibility of corruption; and\naccordingly he supposes that the apostle is to be understood in this\nsense, that flesh and blood unchanged and unclothed with its heavenly\nbody, cannot inherit the kingdom of God; and that this body with which\nit shall be invested, will be thin, aerial, spiritual, bright, and\nshining; and, in that respect, may be called celestial.[183] The reason\nhe assigns why _flesh and blood_, namely, such as is subject to\ncorruption here, _cannot inherit the kingdom of God_, is, because the\nflesh may be cut and divided, and the blood let out, which would subject\nit to corruption; therefore it must be changed, and _put on\nincorruption_.\n\nThis account of the bodies of the just after the resurrection, seems,\nindeed, to be a medium between the two extremes, either of those who\nsuppose that the body shall differ but little from what it was whilst\nhere on earth, or of others, who conclude it to be nothing else but an\naerial body; yet it contains several things taken for granted, without\nsufficient proof, which I cannot readily give into: nevertheless what he\nfarther adds on this subject is undeniably true, _viz._ that the body,\nwhich before was subject to filth and deformity, is raised in glory and\nsplendor, _shining like the sun_, Matt. xxiii. 43. That which was once\n_vile_, is _fashioned like Christ\u2019s glorious body_, Phil. iii. 21. and\nis freed from all defect or deformity in its members, and from any\ndishonourable parts. Not subject to weakness by labour, decays of age,\nto impotency and wasting by diseases; but nimble, strong, active, and\nthat without reluctancy or molestation, grief, pain, or lassitude; it is\nraised a spiritual body, possessed and acted by the Holy Spirit; and\nadvanced so far to the perfection of spirits, as to be free from\ngrossness, ponderosity, from needing rest, sleep, or sustenance, and is\nfitted for a spiritual and celestial state in which our bodies shall\nwholly serve our spirits, and depend upon them, and therefore may be\nstyled spiritual. If we stop here, without giving too much scope to our\nwit and fancy, in advancing things too high for us, and confess that we\nknow not, or, at least, but a little of the affairs of an unseen world;\nor, as the apostle says, _what we shall be_, Phil. iii. 21. we say\nenough to give us an occasion to conclude that it is a glorious and\ndesirable state, and the change wrought therein, such as fully answers\nour most raised expectations, and is agreeable to a state of perfect\nblessedness. Thus concerning the condition and circumstances in which\nthe saints shall be raised.\n\nThere is one thing which must not wholly be past over, which is farther\nobserved in this answer, namely, that the bodies of the just shall be\nraised by the Spirit of Christ: This is what the apostle expressly says,\n_If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you,\nhe that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal\nbodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you_, Rom. viii. 11. The bodies of\nbelievers, which were, in this world, the temple of the Holy Ghost, and\nwere under his divine influence whilst living, shall not cease to be the\nobjects of his care when dead; and as an instance of his regard to them,\nas well as denoting the subserviency hereof, to their attaining that\ncomplete redemption which Christ has purchased for them, the Spirit, in\na peculiar manner, demonstrates his personal glory in raising them from\nthe dead: Whereas, others are said to be raised only by the power of\nChrist.\n\n2. We shall now consider the circumstances in which the wicked shall be\nraised, namely, in dishonour; or, as the prophet Daniel expresses it,\n_to shame and everlasting contempt_. Some marks of dishonour shall,\ndoubtless, be impressed on their bodies, in that they shall be raised\nwith all those natural blemishes and deformities, which rendered them\nthe object of contempt. That part which the body bore in tempting the\nsoul to sin, shall tend to its everlasting reproach; and when reunited\nto it, those habits of sin which were contracted, shall incurably\nremain, as well as the tormenting sense of guilt consequent hereupon,\nwhich exposes them to the wrath of God for ever; so that their\nresurrection, which renders them immortal, brings upon them endless\nmisery. And it is said to be brought about by Christ, as an offended\nJudge, as the consequence whereof, they are summoned to his tribunal,\nwho will render to every one according to his works. Which leads us to\nconsider Christ as coming to judge the world; which is that solemn\ntransaction that will immediately follow after the resurrection.\n\nFootnote 153:\n\n \u201cBy affirming, that the grain produced from the seed sown, is not the\n very body which is sown, the apostle I think insinuates, that the body\n to be raised is not numerically the same with the body deposited at\n death, but something of the same kind formed by the energy of God.\n Having such an example of the divine power before our eyes, we cannot\n think the reproduction of the body impossible, though its parts be\n utterly dissipated. Farther, although the very numerical body is not\n raised, yet the body is truly raised, because what is raised, being\n united to the soul, there will arise in the man thus completed, a\n consciousness of his identity, by which he will be sensible of the\n justice of the retribution which is made to him for his deeds.\n Besides, this new body, will more than supply the place of the old, by\n serving every purpose necessary to the perfection and happiness of the\n man in his new state. According to this view of the subject, the\n objection taken from the scattering of the particles of the body that\n dies, has no place; because it does not seem necessary, that the body\n to be raised, should be composed of them. For the scripture no where\n affirms, that the same numerical body is to be raised. What it teaches\n is; that the dead shall be raised.\u201d\n\n DR. MACKNIGHT.\n\nFootnote 154:\n\n _This is reported in a very fabulous manner, and is reckoned no more\n than an idle tale by Pliny, who mentions it among other stories of the\n like nature. Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Lib._ vii. _Cap._ lii. _Animam\n Arist\u00e6i etiam visam evolentem ex ore, in Proconneso, corvi effigie,\n magna qu\u00e6 sequitur fabulositate. This is also mentioned as a fable by\n Origen._ _Vid. Origin. Lib._ iii. _Contr. Cels._\n\nFootnote 155:\n\n _Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Cap._ lii. _Reperimus inter exempla Hermotimi\n Clazomenii animam relicto corpore, errare solitam, vagamq; e loginquo\n multa annunciare, qu\u00e6 nisi a pr\u00e6senti nosci non possent; but by the\n following words he speaks of him as not dead, but in a kind of\n deliquium; corpore interim semianimi; but yet it was given out by\n many, that he died and rose again very often. This Lucian himself\n laughs at as a foolish tale. Vid. Lucian. Enc. Musc._\n\nFootnote 156:\n\n _Vid. Plat. de Repub. Lib._ x.\n\nFootnote 157:\n\n _Vid. Euseb. Pr\u00e6parat. Evang. Lib._ xi. _Cap._ xxxv. _It is mentioned\n by Plutarch, Symp. Lib._ ix. _Cap._ v.\n\nFootnote 158:\n\n _Macrobius speaking concerning it, in Somn. Scip. Lib. 1. Cap. 1.\n represents Cicero as being under a great concern, that this story of\n Er was ridiculed, by many who did not stick to say, Visum fuisse Erem,\n vitam effundere, animamq; recipere, quam revera non amiserat. See more\n to this purpose in Hust. Demonst. Evang. Prop._ ix. _Cap._ cxlii.\n\nFootnote 159:\n\n _See a late learned writer, Hody on the resurrection of the same body;\n who refers to several places in Heathen writers, of whom some believed\n it; others exposed it as fabulous, Pag. 13-16._\n\nFootnote 160:\n\n _Thus Pliny, who a little before related several stories of persons\n raised from the dead, notwithstanding calls the doctrine of the\n resurrection_, puerile deliramentum. _Vid. Ejusd. Nat. Hist. Lib._\n vii. _Cap._ lv. _and elsewhere he speaks of it as a thing in its own\n nature impossible; and therefore concludes it to be one of those\n things which God cannot do. Lib._ ii. _Cap._ vii. _Ne Deum quidem\n posse omnia, nec mortales \u00e6ternitate donare, aut revocare defunctos.\n And Minutius Felix. Vid. Ejusd. Octav. Cap._ xi. _brings in an\n Heathen, who was his friend, railing at it, without any decency, as\n though it was no better than an old wives fable; and the principal\n argument he produces, is, because he supposes it impossible for a body\n that was burnt to ashes, to spring up into life again. And Celsus,\n speaking concerning the impossibility of God\u2019s doing any thing\n contrary to nature, reckons this among those things. Vid. Orig. Contr.\n Cels. Lib._ v. _Page 240. and says, the hope hereof is more worthy of\n worms than men and styles it an abominable, as well as an impossible\n thing, which God neither can nor will do._\n\nFootnote 161:\n\n \u0391\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 162:\n\n _Vid. Volkel. de vera relig. Lib._ iii. _Cap._ xi. _Apparet\n promissionem vit\u00e6 sempitern\u00e6 in prisco illo foedere factam minime\n fuisse. And in a following part of this chapter, wherein he\n professedly treats on this subject, he adds; Qu\u00e6 apertis\n luculentissimisq; verbis ut in nova scriptura fieri videamus, hoc Dei\n beneficium nobis polliceantur. Ex quorum munere, hoc de quo agimus,\n nequaquam esse hinc patet, quod antequam Christus illud explicaret,\n nemo unquam extitit, qui vel suspicari auderet, tale quid illo\n comprehendi._\n\nFootnote 163:\n\n _Vid. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. Lib._ ii. _Cap._ vii. \u039a\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u03b5\u03c1\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\n \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b7\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03be\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c5\u03bb\u1f74\u03b3 \u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\n \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, &c.\n\nFootnote 164:\n\n _See Dr. Hody on the resurrection, &c. Page 56-59._\n\nFootnote 165:\n\n _See Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Artic. 11. who observes, from their\n writings, that because, in the formation of man, mentioned in_ Gen.\n ii. 7. _Moses uses the word_ \u05d5\u05d9\u05d9\u05e6\u05e8, _and in the formation of beasts,\n verse 19. the word_ \u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05e8, _the former having two_ jods, _the latter\n but one: Therefore the beasts are made but once, but man twice; to\n wit, once in his generation, and the second time in his resurrection.\n And they strangely apprehend a proof of the resurrection to be\n contained in the malediction_, Gen. iii. 19. Dust thou art, and unto\n dust thou shalt return, _q. d. thou art now dust while thou livest;\n and, after death, thou shalt return unto this dust, that is, thou\n shalt live again, as thou, dost now: And those words in_ Exod. xv. 1.\n then sang Moses and the children of Israel; _they render_ he shall\n sing, _viz. after the resurrection in the life to come, and from\n thence infer this doctrine, which could afford but very small\n satisfaction to the Sadducees, while they omitted to insist on other\n pregnant proofs thereof_.\n\nFootnote 166:\n\n _See Vol. II. Heb. and Talmud. Exercit. on_ John iv. 25. _wherein he\n says, that they pretend to prove it from_ Deut. xxxi. 16. _where God\n says to Moses_, Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, and rise again;\n _which is an addition to, as well as a perversion of the text; which\n says_, the people shall rise up and go a whoring, _&c. and Page 541,\n and 787. he represents them as proving it from_ Josh. viii 30. _where\n it is said, that Joshua_ built an altar unto the Lord; _which they\n translate_, he shall build an altar; _supposing this to be after the\n resurrection: And from_ Psal. lxxxiv. 4. Blessed are they that dwell\n in thy house, they will be still praising thee, _they suppose is meant\n of their praising God after the resurrection. See many other absurd\n methods of reasoning to the same purpose, referred to by him in the\n same place._\n\nFootnote 167:\n\n _Macab._ vii. 9, 11, 14, 23, 29.\n\nFootnote 168:\n\n _Thus Josephus Jacchiades, referred to by Witsius in Symb. Exercit._\n xxvi. \u00a7 41. _in explaining that famous text in Daniel_ xii. 2. _says,\n Et tunc fiet miraculum resurrectionis mortuorum: Nam multi dormientium\n in terra pulverulenta expergiscentur, hi ad vitam \u00e6ternam, qui sunt\n sancti; illi vero ad opprobria & detestationem \u00e6ternam; qui sunt\n impii. Quorum resurrectionis causa est, ut impii fateantur palam, suam\n fidem esse falsam, & eos qui ipsis fidem habuerint, prosecutos fuisse\n vanitatem atque evanuisse, ipsique agnoscant suos majores falsitatem\n possedisse. And Menasseh Ben Israel, de Resurr. mort. Lib._ ii. _Cap._\n viii. _proves it from the same scripture. More to the same purpose may\n be seen in Dr. Hody on the resurrection, Page 72. &_ seq. _who quotes\n several of the Talmudical writers, as signifying their belief of this\n doctrine; and especially Pocock in Maimon. Port. Mos. Cap._ vi. _who\n produces a multitude of quotations to the same purpose; in which some\n assert this doctrine without proof, others establish it by solid\n arguments, and some mix a great many absurd notions with it, which we\n shall, at present, pass over_.\n\nFootnote 169:\n\n _Vid. Tertull. de Resurrect. Carn. Cap._ xxx. _Non posset de ossibus\n figura componi, si non id ipsum, & ossibus eventurum esset._\n\nFootnote 170:\n\n _Vid. Hieron. in Ezek._ xxxvii. _Nunquam poneretur similitudo\n resurrectionis, ad restitutionem Israelitici populi significandam,\n nisi staret ipsa resurrectitio, & futura crederetur; quia nemo de\n rebus non extantibus incerta confirmat._\n\nFootnote 171:\n\n _Vid. Menasseh Ben Isr. Lib. 1. de Resurrect. Cap._ ii. \u00a7 4. _Hic\n textus expressus est. & infallibilis quo sine omni dubio resurrectio\n probatur._\n\nFootnote 172:\n\n _Vid. Hieron. Epist. 61. ad Pammach. de error. Joh. Hieros. Quid hac\n prophetia manifestius? Nullus tam aperte post Christum, quam iste ante\n Christum de resurrectione loquitur._\n\nFootnote 173:\n\n _The words are put in the form of an interrogation, which sometimes\n argues a strong negation, but not always, since here it seems to imply\n a concession that he should live again._\n\nFootnote 174:\n\n _Vid Minut. Fel. in Octav. \u00a7 33. Vide adeo quam in solatium nostri\n resurrectionem futuram omnis natura meditatur Sol demergit, &\n nascitur; astra labuntur, & redeunt; fiores occidunt, & reviviscunt;\n post senium arbusta frondescunt semina non nisi corrupta revirescunt;\n ita corpus in sepulchro ut arbores in hyberno occultant virorem,\n ariditate mentita. Expectandum nobis etiam corporis ver est_, &c.\n\nFootnote 175:\n\n _See his Exposition on the Creed, Artic._ xi. _and Tertull. de resur.\n Carn. cap._ xii. _Aspice nunc ad ipsa qunq; exempla divin\u00e6 potestatis:\n dies moritur in noctem, & tenebris usquequaq spelitur. Funestatum\n mundi honor, omnis substantia deusgratur. Sordent, silent, stupent\n cuncta; ubiq; justitium est, quies rerum. Ita lux amissa lugetur; &\n tamen rursus cum suo cultu, cum dote, cum sole, eadem & integra & tota\n universo orbi reviviscit, interficiens mortem suam noctem, rescindens\n sepulturam suam tenebras, h\u00e6res sibimet existens, donec & nox\n reviviscat, cum suo & illa suggestu. Redaccenduntur enim & stellarum\n radii, quos matutina successio extinxerat. Reducuntur & siderum\n absenti\u00e6, quas temporalis distinctio exemerat. Redornantur & specula\n lun\u00e6 qu\u00e6 menstruus numerus adtriverat. Revolvuntur hyemes & \u00e6states, &\n verna, & autumna, cum suis viribus, moribus, fructibus. Quippe etiam\n terr\u00e6 de c\u0153lo disciplina est, arbores vestire post spolia, flores\n denuo colorare, herbas rursus imponere, exhibere eadem qu\u00e6 absumpta\n sunt semina; nec prius exhibere quam absumpta: mira ratio: de\n fraudatrice servatrix: ut reddat, intercipit: ut custodiat, perdit: ut\n integret, vitiat e ut etiam ampliet, prius decoquit. Siquidem uberiora\n & cultiora restituit quam exterminavit. Revera foenore interitu, &\n injuria usura, & lucro damno: semel dixerim universa conditio recidiva\n est. Quodcunq; conveneris, fuit: quodcunq; amiseris, nihil non iterum\n est. Omnia in statum redeunt, quum abscesserint. Omnia incipiunt, quum\n desierint. Ideo finiuntur, ut fiant. Nihil deperit, nisi in salutum.\n Totus igitur hic ordo revolubilis rerum, testatio est resurrectionis\n mortuorum. Operibus eam pr\u00e6scripsit Deus ante, quam literis: viribus\n predicavit ante, quam vocibus. Pr\u00e6missit tibi naturam magistram,\n submissurus & prophetiam, quo facilius credas propheti\u00e6, discipulus\n natura: quo statim admittas, quum audieris, quod ubiq; jam videris;\n nec dubites Deum carnis etiam resuscitatorem, quem omnium noris\n restituorem. Et utiq; si omnia homini resurgunt, cui procurata sunt\n porro non homini, nisi & carni, quale est ut ipsa depereat ut totum,\n propter quam & cui nihil deperit? Et Vid. ejud. apologet cap._ xlviii.\n _in which he proves the resurrection of the body from the possibility\n of that being restored to a former being, with the same ease that it\n was made out of nothing; and shews how God has impressed upon this\n world many testimonies of the resurrection; and then he adds, Lux\n quotidie intersecta resplendet, & tenebr\u00e6, pari vice decedendo\n succedunt, sidera defuncta vivescunt, tempora, ubi finiuntur,\n incipiunt, fructus consummantur, et redeunt. Certe semina non nisi\n corrupta et dissoluta foecundius surgunt, omnia percundo servantur,\n omnia de interitu reformantur. Tu homo tantum nomen, si intelligas te,\n vel de titulo Pythix discens, dominus omnium momentum et resurgentium,\n ad hoc morieris, ut pereas?_\n\nFootnote 176:\n\n _This is what they generally intend by that aphorism, a privatione ad\n habitum non datur regressus._\n\nFootnote 177:\n\n _See Hody on the resurrection_, &c. _Pag. 205-208._\n\nFootnote 178:\n\n _Vid. Plat. in Cratyl, who brings in Socrates as gravely punning on\n the word_ \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1, _q. d._ \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, sepulchrum; _and supposing that this\n name, was given to denote that the soul suffers punishment for its\n faults, by being detained or shut up in prison. And Seneca speaks to\n the same purpose: corpus hoc, animi pondus, & poena est, permanente\n illo urgetur, in vinculis est. Vid. Sen. Epist. 65._\n\nFootnote 179:\n\n _Vid. Orig. in Loc. supra citat._\n\nFootnote 180:\n\n _Beneficium pluvi\u00e6 ad omnes spectare, resurrectionem mortuorum ad\n justos tantum._\n\nFootnote 181:\n\n _The words are_, \u05e8\u05d1\u2019\u05dd \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e0\u05d9, _multi ex dormientibus. Now it is certain\n that_ \u05e8\u05d1\u05d9\u05dd, _is often translated_ a multitude, _or_ multitudes, _and\n signifies the same with_ \u05e8\u05d5\u05d1, _or the Greek word_ \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, _as in\n Gen._ xvii. 5. _Psal._ cix. 30. _and in several other places. But the\n principal difficulty lies in the sense of the particle_ Mem, _which is\n prefixed to the following word; and is generally supposed to be taken\n distributively; and accordingly the sense must be_, Many, _that is, a\n great number, or part, taken out of them_ that sleep, shall awake;\n _though, I am apt to think, that the prefix_ Mem _here, is not taken\n distributively; but denotes the following word to be in the Genitive\n case, as Lamed and Beth often do; and if so, the words may be\n rendered_, The multitude of them that sleep, shall awake; _that is,\n the whole number of them that sleep shall awake; and so it is the same\n with what is mentioned by our Saviour in the text but now referred\n to_; all that are in their graves shall come forth, _and be disposed\n of in a different way, as he particularly expresses it; which contains\n the sense of the prophet\u2019s prediction in this place. There is a\n scripture, in which the word_ many _plainly signifies_ \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2,\n _the_ multitude, _or all mankind: thus the apostle speaks, Rom._ v.\n 15. _of_ many, _as_ being dead by the offence of one, _and_ by one\n man\u2019s disobedience, many _being_ made sinners; _which none, who allow\n all the world to have fallen in Adam, will suppose to be taken in any\n other sense. See other instances of the like nature in Glas. Phil.\n Sacr. Lib._ v. _Tract. 1. Cap._ xv.\n\nFootnote 182:\n\n _Vid. Poc. Not. Misc. in Maimon. Port. Mos. Cap._ vi. _who treats\n largely on this subject, and gives an account of the opinions of\n several Rabbinical writers concerning this matter; which renders it\n needless for me to refer to particular places_.\n\nFootnote 183:\n\n _Vid. Whitby in 1 Cor._ xv. 44, 50. _If by the bright and shining\n body, which this author speaks of, he intends that it shall be\n invested with some rays of glory in the heavenly state, as many others\n suppose: this, I think, none will deny since it agrees well with what\n the apostle says concerning the body\u2019s being made like to Christ\u2019s\n glorious body, and also what the prophet Daniel says, chap._ xii. 2.\n _concerning their_ shining as the brightness of the firmament, and as\n the stars; _or, as our Saviour says_, Matt. xiii. 43. They shall shine\n as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXVIII. _What shall immediately follow after the\n resurrection?_\n\n ANSW. Immediately after the resurrection shall follow the general\n and final judgment of angels and men; the day and hour whereof no\n man knoweth, that all may watch and pray, and be ever ready for the\n coming of the Lord.\n\nOur Lord Jesus Christ having finished the work which he undertook to\nperform, in gathering in his elect, and bringing that grace which he\nwrought in them to perfection; the only thing then remaining to be done,\nwill be his receiving them into his immediate presence, to behold his\nglory; and banishing others, for ever, from him, with marks of infamy\nand detestation. And, in order hereunto, he will raise the dead, and\ngive a summons to the whole world of angels and men, to appear before\nhis tribunal in that day in which he is appointed, by the Father, to\njudge the world in righteousness; which is the subject insisted on in\nthis answer. In speaking to which, we shall\n\nI. Prove that there shall be a day of judgment.\n\nII. Consider the person, the character, and the solemnity of the\nappearing of the great Judge, to whom this work is committed.\n\nIII. The persons to be judged, angels and men.\n\nIV. The manner in which he shall proceed in judging them. And,\n\nV. Some circumstances concerning the place where, and the time when this\ngreat and awful work shall be performed.\n\nI. We are to prove that there shall be a day of judgment. This is as\nevident a truth as that there is a providence, or that God is the\nGovernor of the world. Every intelligent creature, who is the subject of\nmoral government, affords an argument for the proof of this doctrine.\nAnd accordingly we must consider them as under a law which he has given,\nas that by which they are to be governed. From hence arises our\nobligation to duty, and being rendered accountable to the great\nLawgiver, as to what concerns our obedience to, or violation of his law.\nAnd God is obliged, in honour, to make a scrutiny into, or take an\naccount of our behaviour, that it may be known whether we have obeyed or\nrebelled against him. This is evident from the concern which the glory\nof his own perfections has herein; and the promises and threatnings\nannexed to his law, which he is obliged to fulfil or execute. From\nwhence it follows, that God will display his glory as the Judge of the\nworld.\n\nThis is plainly revealed in scripture; it was foretold in the early ages\nof the world, as contained in the epistle of Jude, in ver. 14, 15.\n_Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, to execute\njudgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them, of\nall their ungodly deeds, which they have ungodly committed, and of all\ntheir hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him_:\nwhich words, though they might have a peculiar relation to the judgment\nwhich God would execute in the destruction of the old world; yet it is\nplain by the application hereof made by the apostle, that it looks as\nfar as the final judgment, which shall be in the end of time. And this\nlikewise appears from what is said in Eccles. xii. 14. that _God shall\nbring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be\ngood, or whether it be evil_. There are, indeed, many displays of God\u2019s\njudicial hand in the present dispensations of his providence, as he is\nsaid to be _known by the judgment which he executeth_, Psal. ix. 16. The\nvisible token of his regard to his saints in this world, as well as the\npublic and dreadful display of his vengeance poured forth upon his\nenemies, proclaim his glory, as God, the Judge of all. But inasmuch as\nsin deserves greater punishments than what are inflicted here; and the\npromises which God has made for the encouragement of his people, give\nthem occasion to look beyond the present scene of affairs; and\nespecially since the divine dealings with men, as to what respects\noutward things, cannot so clearly be accounted for, while we behold the\nrighteous oppressed, and many of the wicked having, as it were, more\nthan heart could wish; this plainly argues, that there is a time coming\nwhen matters will be adjusted; and, as the Psalmist says, \u2018A man shall\nsay,\u2019 or every one shall have occasion to say, \u2018Verily there is a reward\nfor the righteous; verily he is a God that judgeth in the earth,\u2019 Psal.\nlviii. 11.\n\nMoreover, this doctrine is not only revealed in scripture, but it is\nimpressed on the consciences of men; which, though they never took so\nmuch pains to extinguish their apprehension or dread thereof, it is\nimpossible for them to do it. That secret remorse or terror which\nsinners feel within their own breasts, which makes them restless and\nuneasy, especially when they perceive themselves to stand on the\nconfines of another world, is an undeniable argument that there is a\nfuture judgment. What was it that made Belshazzar\u2019s _countenance to\nchange_? Why did his _thoughts trouble him, so that the joints of his\nloins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another_, when he saw\nthe _hand-writing on the wall_, in the midst of all his mirth and\njollity? Dan. v. 6. Was he afraid of the united forces of the Persians\nand Medes, who at that time invested the capital city in which he was?\nDid he know that he should be slain before the morning? That was most\nremote from his thoughts, as apprehending himself safe from any danger\nthat might arise from that quarter. Was he afraid of punishment from\nmen? His condition in the world set him above the dread of any such\nevent. It was only the sense he had of a future judgment from God, that\nproduced these effects in him. It was this that made the Heathen\ngovernor _tremble_, when the apostle _reasoned of righteousness,\ntemperance, and judgment to come_, Acts xxiv. 25. And when he was\ndisputing with the Athenians, though they mocked and treated what he\nsaid about the resurrection with ridicule; yet none of them had any\nthing to object against this doctrine that _God would judge the world in\nrighteousness_, chap. xvii. 31.\n\nIt may be observed that the doctrine of future rewards and punishments,\nas the result of a sentence passed on men after death, is so often\nmentioned by heathen-writers, that it is evident they either received by\ntradition, or understood it by the light of nature; though, when they\nenter into particular explications thereof, we meet with little but what\nis fabulous and trifling. Some of them suppose the rewards and\npunishments to be in other bodies, agreeably to the doctrine of the\ntransmigration of souls, as before-mentioned. Others speak of fictitious\nlakes and rivers in the other world, where men are doomed to abide, at\nleast, for some time; though they know nothing of the day of judgment,\nor the appearance of the whole world before Christ\u2019s tribunal; which is\na matter of pure revelation[184].\n\nII. We are now to consider the person, character, and solemnity of the\nappearing of the great Judge, to whom this work is more especially\ncommitted. This is a doctrine that can be known no other way than by\ndivine revelation. The light of nature, indeed, discovers to us that God\nshall judge the world; but there is something more than this may be\nlearned from scripture, as well as those circumstances of glory with\nwhich this work shall be performed. Accordingly we read,\n\n1. That the person who is to perform this great work, is the Lord Jesus\nChrist; of whom it is said, he shall _judge the quick and the dead at\nhis appearing, and his kingdom_, 2 Tim. iv. 1. And elsewhere, _We must\nall appear before the judgment-seat of Christ_; 2 Cor. v. 10. If we\nconsider his glory as a divine person, he is fit to engage in it. For as\nhe knoweth all things, he can judge the secrets of men, which no mere\ncreature can do; and as he has all the other perfections of the divine\nnature, he can display and glorify them, in such a way as is necessary,\nin determining the final estate of men, and rewarding every one\naccording to his work.\n\nWe may also observe, that this is a branch of his Mediatorial dignity,\nand contains in it a part of the execution of his Kingly office; it was\ncontained in that commission which he received of the Father. Thus it is\nsaid, that _the Father judgeth no man_, John v. 22. that is, not in a\nvisible manner, or by any delegated power, which he is invested with,\n\u2018but hath committed all judgment to the Son,\u2019 and, it is said, he has\n\u2018given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of\nman,\u2019 ver. 27. And to this we may add, that it is a part of the work\nwhich was incumbent on him in the application of redemption, which\ncannot be said to be brought to the utmost perfection, till the day of\njudgment: Thus when he speaks concerning his \u2018coming in a cloud with\npower and great glory\u2019; then he bids his people \u2018lift up their heads,\ninasmuch as their redemption draweth nigh,\u2019 Luke xxi. 27, 28. We might\nalso add to this, that it was very expedient that he should judge the\nworld, since he was unjustly judged and condemned by the world;\ntherefore the cause must have a second hearing, that his enemies, at\nwhose bar he once stood, may be fully convinced, to their eternal\nconfusion, that he was not the person they took him to be, that he did\nnot deserve the treatment and rude insults which he met with from them,\nwhen he stood at their tribunal. They asked him this question, \u2018Art thou\nthe Christ, the Son of the blessed?\u2019 to which he replied, \u2018I am: And ye\nshall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming\nin the clouds of heaven,\u2019 Mark xiv. 61-64. wherein he applied to himself\nwhat the prophet Daniel said concerning him, Dan. vii. 13. and thereby\nintimated, that this would be the most visible and incontestible proof\nof his Mediatorial glory, with which he was invested, as the Son of man;\nupon which the high-priest rent his clothes, apprehending that he spake\nblasphemy; after which they all condemned him to be guilty of death.\nTherefore it is expedient that this visible proof of his Sonship and\nMediatorial glory should be given, and that he should perform this great\nwork, which was incumbent on him, as he gave them to expect. It is his\n\u2018coming with clouds, that every eye shall see;\u2019 that shall oblige \u2018them\nwhich pierced him, and all the kindreds of the earth,\u2019 who set\nthemselves against him, \u2018to wail because of him,\u2019 Rev. i. 7.\n\nIt was also necessary that he should judge the world, that he might\npublicly vindicate his people, who have been judged and condemned by the\nworld for his sake; and that his cause and interest, which has been\ntrampled on by them, might be defended in the most public and glorious\nmanner, which will afford an everlasting conviction, that he whom men\ndespised, whose glory was set light by, whose gospel was rejected and\npersecuted, is a person worthy of universal honour and esteem. Thus\nconcerning the person who is appointed to judge the world, and the\ncharacter in which he shall do it: which leads us,\n\n2. To consider the solemnity of his appearing, when engaging in it. The\nwork being the most glorious that ever was performed since the world was\ncreated, and the honour redounding to Christ as the result thereof,\nbeing the last and highest degree of his state of exaltation; it cannot\nbut be supposed that he will appear with those ensigns of majesty and\nregal dignity that become his character as the Judge of quick and dead:\naccordingly we have an account of his \u2018appearing in his own glory, and\nin his Father\u2019s, and of the holy angels,\u2019 Luke ix. 26. _His own glory_\nrespects the rays of his divinity shining forth; whereby it will appear,\nthat he has a natural right to summon the whole world before him. This\ncannot but strike a terror into his enemies, and enhance the joy and\ntriumph of his friends, and excite the adoration that is due to so\nglorious a person. His appearing in _his Father\u2019s glory_, denotes that\nthis is the highest display of his Mediatorial dignity; the reward of\nhis having perfectly fulfilled the commission given him by the Father,\nand fully answered the end for which he became incarnate. And his\nappearing in the _glory of his holy angels_, implies the reverence and\nhomage which they will pay to him, into whose hands they are given, as\nministering spirits, to fulfil his pleasure, and who always rejoice in\nthe advancement of his kingdom.\n\nThe angels shall not indeed be employed in raising the dead, for that is\na work too great for finite power; but we read of their ministry as\nsubservient to the glory of the solemnity, as consisting in their\nappearing with Christ as his retinue; so it is said, that he shall \u2018come\nin his glory, and all the holy angels with him,\u2019 Matt. xxv. 31. These,\nindeed make up his train; but do not convey to him the least branch of\nthat glory or character he is invested with: but it is their honour to\nattend him, whose servants they are; their work is to praise and adore\nhim, and to shew their readiness to fulfil his pleasure, without\ndesiring to usurp the least branch of his glory.\n\nThe first thing they are represented as doing, is, their attending his\ncoming with a shout, or the word of command first given forth by Christ,\nand transmitted by them to the whole world, whereby they shall be\nsummoned to appear before him. This shall doubtless be attended with\nuniversal joy and triumph expressed by them. And whereas Christ is said\nto _come with the sound of a trumpet_, 1 Thess. iv. 16. this is either\nto be considered in allusion to the custom of calling the hosts\ntogether, which was by the sound of a trumpet, Num. x. 2. _&c._[185] or\nelse we may understand it in a literal sense, for some sound like that\nof a trumpet, which shall be heard throughout the world, which shall\nhave a tendency to excite the joy and triumph of the saints, and to\nstrike terror into the wicked. And as this trumpet gives an alarm to all\nto appear before Christ\u2019s tribunal; the angels are represented as\nassisting in bringing them thither. It is by them that the saints _which\nremain alive, shall be caught up_ with others _in the clouds to meet the\nLord in the air_, 1 Thess. iv. 17. and they are said to _gather together\nthe elect from the four winds, from one end of the heaven to the\nother_.[186] And elsewhere, our Saviour, speaking of the _end of the\nworld_, which he calls the _harvest_, represents the angels as\n_reapers_, Matt. xiii. 39. which he explains as denoting that _at the\nend of the world the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from\namong the just_, ver. 49. which plainly intimates that they are to\ngather the elect together. And inasmuch as there must be a separation\nbetween them and the wicked, so that one shall be set at Christ\u2019s right\nhand, the other at his left; this, as it is more than probable, shall be\ndone by the ministry of angels, chap. xxv. 32. And then the Judge is\nrepresented as _sitting on his throne_, ver. 31. this is called\nelsewhere a judgment-seat, agreeable to his character as a judge; and it\nis here styled his throne, as expressive of the majesty and royal\ndignity with which he shall perform this great work. Which leads us,\n\nIII. To consider the persons who are to be judged, things being thus\nprepared for it; and these are said to be angels and men, _i. e._ all\nwho are summoned to appear before Christ\u2019s tribunal. Whether the holy\nangels are included in the number of those whom Christ will judge, it is\nnot safe for us to pretend to determine, since scripture is silent as to\nthis matter. That they are the subjects of moral government is evident,\nbecause they are intelligent creatures; and it follows from hence, that\nthey are accountable to God for their behaviour as such. It is also\ncertain, that they are employed by our Saviour, in _fulfilling his\npleasure_; and pursuant thereto, they are _sent forth by him to minister\nto the heirs of salvation_, Heb. i. 14. and upon this account it may not\nbe reckoned foreign to the work of the day, for Christ to give a public\ntestimony to their faithfulness in the discharge of every work which has\nbeen committed to them; especially since the saints, who, in some\nrespects, may be said to have been their charge and care, have received\nno small advantage from the good offices which they have performed for\nthem by Christ\u2019s appointment: but more than this, I think, cannot be\ndetermined, with respect to their being judged by Christ. Therefore,\nmany conclude, that, properly speaking, they are not included in the\nnumber of those that shall be judged by him; and that either because\nthey are represented as attending him, when he comes to judgment; and\nare never spoken of as standing before his tribunal, as persons whose\ncause is to be tried by him; or because they are considered, as long\nbefore this confirmed in holiness and happiness, and as beholding the\nface of God in heaven; and consequently not to be dealt with as those\nwho are to undergo a farther scrutiny, in order to their having, a new\nsentence passed upon them.\n\nAs to what respects the fallen angels, they are to be brought as\ncriminals before Christ\u2019s tribunal, in order to his passing a righteous\nsentence upon them. Whether the charge of their apostacy from God, shall\nbe again renewed, and hereby sin traced to the very first spring and\nfountain of it, we know not: but all the guilt that they have contracted\nsince they were, by a former sentence, cast out of heaven, shall be laid\nto their charge: all that they have done against the interest of God in\nthe world, begun in the seduction of our first parents, and continued\never since, with all those methods of revenge and subtilty whereby they\nhave opposed the kingdom of Christ in the world, and endeavoured to ruin\nhis people, will be alleged against them, as well as the bold attempt\nthey made on him in his own Person, whilst he was in a state of\nhumiliation. Thus the fallen angels, though represented as cast down to\nhell, are yet said to _be delivered into chains of darkness, and\nreserved unto judgment_, 2 Pet. ii. 4. Jude, ver. 6. This they are, at\npresent, apprehensive of, and are accordingly said _to tremble_, Jam.\nii. 19. at the fore-thoughts of it: it may also be inferred from what\nthey said to our Saviour, _Art thou come to torment us before the time_,\nMatt. viii. 29. and, as the result hereof, it is said, that _the devil\nwas cast into the lake of fire and brimstone_, Rev. xx. 10. _i. e._\nadjudged to endure a greater degree of torment in proportion to the\nincrease of his guilt.\n\nBut that which is more particularly insisted on in scripture, in which\nwe are immediately concerned, is what relates to men, as those who are\nto be judged by Christ. This is set forth in universal terms; the\napostle says, _We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ,\nthat every one may receive the things done in his body, according to\nthat he hath done, whether it be good or bad_, 2 Cor. v. 10. men of all\nranks and conditions, _small and great_, Rev. xx. 12. _quick and dead_,\n2 Tim. iv. 1. _i. e._ those who died before, or shall be found alive at\nhis coming, _the righteous and the wicked_, Eccl. iii. 17. and among\nthese, not only them that have lived under the gospel-dispensation; but\nothers, who have had no other light but that of nature; _As many as have\nsinned without law, shall also perish without law_, Rom. ii. 12. We have\nno account, indeed, in scripture, of their being adjudged to eternal\nlife, for their doing, by nature, some things that are contained in the\nlaw; to suppose this, is to be wise above what is written; and, indeed,\nit seems contradictory to those scriptures which assert the necessity of\nfaith in Christ to salvation; but these are generally described as\nsuffering punishment proportioned to their works. Thus we read of the\n_men of Nineveh_, Matt. xii. 41. _the queen of the South_, ver. 42. _the\ninhabitants of Tyre and Sidon_, chap. xi. 22. and those of Sodom and\nGomorrah, ver. 24. as _appearing in judgment_, and exposed to a less\ndegree of punishment than those that sinned against greater light; but\nthere is not the least intimation given of their being discharged from\ncondemnation. Our Saviour, indeed, speaks of the \u2018servant which knew his\nmaster\u2019s will, and prepared not himself to do according to it, who\nshould be beaten with many stripes,\u2019 _i. e._ exposed to a greater\ncondemnation; nevertheless, he, at the same time, intimates that _the\nservant who did not know_, _i. e._ who sinned under greater\ndisadvantages for want of gospel-revelation, even he _should be beaten\nwith few stripes_; or adjudged to suffer a less degree of punishment.\n\nThe Pelagians, indeed, have endeavoured not only to exempt the Heathen\nfrom the consequences of this judgment; but some have insinuated as\nthough they were not concerned in it at all: thus one[187] supposes,\nthat the persons who are represented as appearing at Christ\u2019s tribunal,\nMatt. xxv. and sentenced, by him, according to their works, are only\nthose who made a profession of the Christian religion. And the principal\nargument that he brings to support this opinion is, because they, on\nwhom a sentence of condemnation is passed, are accused of not\nministering to Christ\u2019s members, which is interpreted as not giving him\nmeat, when he was hungry, or drink when he was thirsty, _&c._ which\ncharge could not have been brought against those that never heard of\nChrist; or if it had, they might have excused themselves by alleging\nthat it was impossible for them to shew this respect to him whom they\nnever knew. But to this it may be replied, that though our Saviour\u2019s\ndesign here, is to aggravate the condemnation of those who sinned under\nthe gospel, and to charge some with crimes of the highest nature; yet\nthere is nothing mentioned, exclusive of others, so as to give occasion\nto suppose that the judgment of the great day will respect only those\nwho have set under the sound of the gospel. Therefore we have ground to\nconclude, that as the resurrection of the dead will be universal; so all\nthat have lived, or shall live, from the beginning to the end of time,\nshall be the subjects of the judicial proceedings in that solemn and\nawful day; which leads us to consider,\n\nIV. The manner in which Christ shall proceed in judging the world. It is\nevident, that the design of this glorious transaction is to determine\nthe final state of all men, which will be done in a public and visible\nmanner, that it may appear that the Judge of all does right: this\ndiffers very much from that particular judgment that is passed on every\none at death; in which, though their state be unalterably determined,\nyet it is not done in an open and visible manner; but with a design that\nthe cause should be tried again in that day which is appointed for it.\nThe account we have in scripture, of the manner in which this shall be\ndone, bears some resemblance to the proceedings in human courts of\njudicature; accordingly the day is set in which causes are to be tried;\nthe Judge appears with the ensigns of his authority; and being seated on\nthe tribunal, the persons to be tried appear before him; the cause is\nheard; and since all are to be judged according to law, the law is\nsupposed to be known, or the particular statute, which is the rule of\njudgment, must be produced; and whatever charge is to be brought against\nany one, it is drawn up in the form of an indictment, and supported by\nsufficient evidence, and the persons hereupon acquitted or condemned. In\nallusion hereunto we read of Christ\u2019s appearing in a visible manner,\nseated on a throne of judgment; or, as it is expressed, of _the Son of\nman_, as _appearing with all the holy angels with him_; and his _sitting\nupon the throne of his glory, and all nations being gathered before\nhim_, Matt. xxv. 31, 32. _the judgment seat, and the books opened_, Dan.\nvii. 26. Rev. xx. 12.\n\nThe righteous, who are a part of those that shall stand before Christ\u2019s\ntribunal, shall be separated from the wicked; the former placed at his\nright hand, the latter at his left. With respect to the wicked, an\nindictment shall be brought in, in which they shall be charged with the\nviolation of the holy law of God, with all the aggravating circumstances\nthereof, the subject-matter of which is contained in the books that are\nsaid to be opened. And this charge shall be supported by evidence; in\nwhich case men shall be witnesses against one another, so far as they\nhave been apprised of each other\u2019s behaviour, or immediately concerned\ntherein: and it is not improbable, that since the holy angels are\nconversant in this lower world, as they are sometimes represented as\nbeing present in worshipping assemblies, 1 Cor. xi. 10. and observing\nthe actions of men, 1 Tim. v. 21. that they shall appear as evidences\nagainst the wicked. And it may be farther observed, that the Judge\nhimself will be a witness against the criminals, which is not usual in\nhuman courts of judicature; though it does not savour of the least\ninjustice: thus it is said, \u2018I will come near to you to judgment; and I\nwill be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the\nadulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress\nthe hireling in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, and that turn\naside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of\nhosts,\u2019 Mal. iii. 5. The divine Omniscience will put the charge out of\nall manner of doubt; from whence there can be no appeal; since it is\nimpossible for God, either to be deceived himself, or to deceive others.\n\nBut besides this, there shall also be the testimony of conscience,\nwhereby persons shall stand self-convicted; their \u2018own hearts shall\ncondemn them,\u2019 as well as \u2018God, who is greater than their hearts,\u2019 1\nJohn iii. 20. Thus it is said, that \u2018the consciences of men bear\nwitness, and their thoughts, in the mean while, accuse or else excuse\none another, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus\nChrist;\u2019 and accordingly \u2018every mouth shall be stopped, and all the\nworld\u2019 of the ungodly \u2018become guilty,\u2019 Rom. ii. 15, 16. or appear, by\ntheir own confession, to be so, _before God_, chap. iii. 19. And in\norder hereunto, there shall be a particular dispensation of providence,\nwhereby those sins which have been long since forgotten, shall be\nbrought to remembrance: this seems intimated in our Saviour\u2019s words in\nthe parable; \u2018Son, remember that thou in thy life-time receivedst thy\ngood things,\u2019 _&c._ Luke xvi. 25. and also in God\u2019s _setting the\niniquities_ of sinners _in order before their eyes_, Psal. l. 21. and\nthis will have a greater tendency to support the charge, than ten\nthousand witnesses.\n\nAs to the things that shall be brought into judgment, or be charged, and\nproved upon them; these are mentioned in a very particular manner, as it\nis said, \u2018God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret\nthing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil,\u2019 Eccl. xii. 14. And\nelsewhere, he is represented as \u2018executing judgment upon all, and\nconvincing all that are ungodly of all their ungodly deeds, which they\nhave ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly\nsinners have spoken against him,\u2019 Jude, ver. 15. And our Saviour\nparticularly intimates, Matt. xxv. 42, 43. that their behaviour, under\nthe means of grace, shall be enquired into, and what they have done\nagainst him, and his interest in the world, alleged against them.\n\nBut now we are speaking concerning those matters which shall be produced\nin judgment against the wicked, it may be enquired; whether the smallest\nsins committed by them, shall be brought into judgment against them?\nThis seems to be intimated by our Saviour, when he says, that \u2018every\nidle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the\nday of judgment,\u2019 chap. xii. 36. on which some take occasion to complain\nof the severity of the divine dispensations, as though it was intended\nhereby, that persons shall be condemned to suffer eternal punishments\nfor a vain thought: but to this it may be replied, that no one will\nbring this as an objection against the methods of the divine proceedings\nin the great day, who duly considers the infinite evil of sin; or, that\nthe least sin deserves a sentence of banishment from God, as it is an\naffront to his sovereignty, and opposite to his holiness. However let it\nbe considered that no person in the world shall have reason to complain\nthat he is separated from God, or rendered eternally miserable, only for\na vain thought, or a sin of infirmity, as though he had been guilty of\nnothing else: therefore, when our Saviour says, that \u2018every idle word\nshall come into judgment,\u2019 the meaning is, that this shall tend to fill\nup the measure of their iniquity; so that the punishments which they\nshall be exposed to, shall be for this, in conjunction with all other\nsins. Every sin brings guilt with it; and all sins taken together,\nsmaller, as well as greater, enhance the guilt: therefore, our Saviour\u2019s\nmeaning is this, that every sin exposes men to a degree of condemnation,\nin proportion to the aggravation thereof; though they which are of a\nmore heinous nature, bring with them a greater degree of condemnation.\nThus concerning the charge brought against the wicked.\n\nThe next thing to be considered is, the trial of the righteous, who are\nsaid to stand before Christ\u2019s judgment-seat. Here it may be observed,\nthat no indictment shall be brought against them, at least, with the\njudge\u2019s approbation; for they have been before this acquitted and\ndischarged, when brought into a justified state; and therefore, as the\nconsequence hereof, _none_, as the apostle says, _shall lay any thing to\ntheir charge_, since _it is God that justifieth_, Rom. viii. 33. If any\nthing be alleged against them by the enemies of God, who loaded them\nwith reproach, and laid many things to their charge in this world, of\nwhich some have been just, and others unjust and malicious: I say, if\nthese things should be suffered to be alleged against them, the great\nand merciful Judge will appear as an advocate for, and vindicate them\nfrom those charges which are ungrounded; and will farther allege, as a\nfoundation of their discharge from the guilt of all others, that he has\nmade a full atonement for them; upon which account, when they are sought\nfor, they shall not be found in judgment, or charged upon them to their\nshame, confusion, or condemnation; but they shall be pronounced\nrighteous, as interested in Christ\u2019s righteousness; and this shall be\nevinced by his producing those graces which are inseparably connected\nwith, though not the foundation of their justification, that so the\nmethod of the divine proceedings, in this respect, may be vindicated,\nand it may appear, that as it is said, without holiness no one shall see\nthe Lord; so these are holy, and therefore they have this internal\nquality, which denotes them such whom God designed to save: this I take\nto be the meaning of that expression of our Saviour to the righteous,\nwhen he pronounces them blessed, and invites them to _come and inherit\nthe kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world: for I\nwas an hungred and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty and ye gave me drink_,\n&c. Matt. xxv. 34, 35. where the word _for_ is taken demonstratively,\nand, not casually; and denotes that they were such who might expect to\nbe admitted to this honour and blessedness, as having those marks and\ncharacters of his children upon them, to which the promise of salvation\nwas annexed; not as though any thing done by them was the cause of it.\nFrom hence it appears, that the graces of God\u2019s people shall be\npublished before angels and men, to the praise of the glory of him who\nwas the author of them.\n\nBut there is a difficult question which is proposed by some, namely,\nwhether the sins of God\u2019s people shall be published in the great day;\nthough it is certain they shall not be alleged against them to their\ncondemnation? This is one of the secret things which belong to God,\nwhich he has not so fully or clearly revealed to us in his word; and\ntherefore we can say little more than what is matter of conjecture about\nit. Some have thought that the sins of the godly, though forgiven, shall\nbe made manifest, that so the glory of that grace which has pardoned\nthem, may appear more illustrious, and their obligation to God for this,\nfarther enhanced. They also think that the justice of the proceedings of\nthat day, requires it; since it is presumed and known by the whole\nworld, that they were prone to sin, as well as others; and, before\nconversion, as great sinners as any; and after it their sins had a\npeculiar aggravation: therefore, why should not they be made public, as\na glory due to the justice and holiness of God, and being infinitely\nopposite to all sin? And this they farther suppose to be necessary, that\nso the impartiality of divine justice may appear. Moreover, since God by\nrecording the sins of his saints in scripture, has perpetuated the\nknowledge thereof; and if it is to their honour that the sins there\nmentioned were repented of, as well as forgiven, why may it not be\nsupposed that the sins of believers shall be made known in the great\nday? And besides, this seems agreeable to those expressions of every\nword, and every action, as being to be brought into judgment; whether it\nbe good, or whether it be bad, as in the scripture before-mentioned.\n\nBut it is supposed by others, that though the making known of sin that\nis subdued and forgiven, tends to the advancement of divine grace; yet\nit is sufficient to answer this end, as far as God designs it shall be\nanswered, that the sins which have been subdued and forgiven, should be\nknown to themselves, and this forgiveness afford matter of praise to\nGod. Again, the expressions of scripture, whereby forgiveness of sin is\nset forth, are such as seem to argue, that those sins which were\nforgiven, shall not be made manifest; thus they are said to be _blotted\nout_, Isa. xliii. 25. _covered_, Psal. xxxii. 1. _subdued_, and _cast\ninto the depths of the sea_, Micah vii. 19. and _remembered no more_,\n&c. Jer. xxxi. 34. Besides, Christ\u2019s being a Judge, doth not divest him\nof the character of an advocate, whose part is rather to conceal the\ncrimes of those whose cause he pleads, than to divulge them. And to this\nwe may add, that the law which requires duty, and forbids the contrary\nsins, is not the rule by which they who are in Christ, are to be\nproceeded against; for then they could not stand in judgment; but they\nare dealt with according to the tenor of the gospel, which forgives and\ncovers all sin. And furthermore it is argued, that the public declaring\nof all their sins before the whole world, notwithstanding their interest\nin forgiving grace, would fill them with such shame, as is hardly\nconsistent with a state of perfect blessedness. And lastly, the\nprincipal argument insisted on, is, that our Saviour in Matt. xxv. in\nwhich he gives a particular account of the proceedings of that day,\nmakes no mention of the sins, but only commends the graces of his\nsaints. Such-like arguments as these are alleged to prove that it is\nprobable the sins of the saints shall not be exposed to public view, in\nthe great day. But after all that has been said, it is safest for us not\nto be too peremptory in determining this matter, lest, by pretending to\nbe wise beyond what is clearly revealed in scripture, we betray our own\nfolly, and too bold presumption, or assert that which is not right of\nthis glorious Judge. Thus concerning the method in which Christ shall\nproceed in judging the world. We are now led to consider,\n\nV. Some circumstances relating to the place where, and the time when,\nthis great and awful work shall be performed, at least, so far as it is\nconvenient for us to enquire into this matter, without giving too much\nscope to a vain curiosity, or desire to be wise above what is written.\nAnd,\n\n1. As to the place; it does not seem probable that it shall be upon the\nsurface of the earth; because we read, that _they which are_ found\n_alive_ at Christ\u2019s coming, _shall be caught up together with them_,\nthat is, the others who are raised from the dead, _in the clouds, to\nmeet the Lord in the air_; which immediately follows after the account\nwhich the apostle gives of the Lord\u2019s _descending from heaven with a\nshout, with the voice of the arch-angel, and with the trump of God_, 1\nThes. iv. 16, 17. which is the signal to be given of the immediate\nappearance of the Judge: therefore, their being _caught up in the\nclouds_, denotes that Christ shall judge the world, in some place above\nthis earth; otherwise they must be supposed to be caught up thither, and\nafterwards obliged to descend from thence, to the place from whence they\nwere taken, to be judged; which does not seem probable. This is all that\nwe dare assert, concerning the place where this great and solemn\ntransaction shall be performed.\n\nAnd I the rather observe this, because some are of opinion, that the\nvalley of Jehoshaphat is designed to be the place, from the application\nof that prediction mentioned in the prophet Joel, in chap. iii. 2. _I\nwill gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of\nJehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people_:[188] but\nthat seems to be a prophesy of some signal victory which the church\nshould gain over its enemies; which shall have its accomplishment before\nChrist come to judgment, and be no less remarkable than that which God\ngave Jehoshaphat over the Moabites, Ammonites, and the inhabitants of\nmount Seir, mentioned in 2 Chron. xx. upon which occasion the place\nwhere it was obtained, was called _the valley of Berachah_, which\nsignifies blessing: and the prophet does not seem by _the valley of\nJehoshaphat_, to point out any particular place known by that name; but\nrather to allude to the signification of the word, as importing the\njudgment of the Lord: so that nothing else is intended by it but that\nGod shall, in the latter day, probably when those scriptures shall have\nhad their accomplishment, which relate to the conversion of the Jews,\nexecute some remarkable judgment against the heathen, amongst whom they\nwere scattered. Therefore it cannot, with the least shadow of justice,\nbe argued from hence, that this is the place where all nations of the\nearth shall be gathered to judgment. Besides, some have observed, that\nhow great soever this valley may be, it is not large enough to hold the\nvast multitudes that shall be convened on this occasion.\n\nAs to what concerns the time when Christ shall judge the world; this is\ncalled, in scripture, _a day_, Acts xvii. 31. not to signify that the\nwhole work shall be performed in that space of time, which we generally\ncall _a day_; for that can hardly be sufficient for the performing the\nmany things that are to be done in it. Some have thought that the whole\nprocess shall take up no less than a thousand years; and suppose, that\nthe apostle Peter intimates as much, when speaking concerning the day of\njudgment, he says, _One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a\nthousand years as one day_, 2 Pet. iii. 8. Thus the excellent Mr. Mede\nunderstands that scripture:[189] but since this is not more clearly\nexplained by other scriptures, speaking to the same purpose, I dare not\nbe too peremptory in giving into this opinion; but would rather\nconclude, that the time of the continuance thereof, is called _a day_,\nas denoting a season appointed for the dispatch of a work, whether it be\nlonger or shorter. Thus Christ calls that season, in which the gospel\nwas preached to the Jews, _their day_, Luke xix. 42. And therefore it is\nthe safest way for us to acknowledge this to be a secret which belongs\nnot to us to enquire into.\n\nAs to the time when Christ shall come to judgment, or when this glorious\nday shall begin, that is also considered, not only as a matter kept\nsecret from us, but from all creatures: thus our Saviour, speaking\nconcerning it, says, \u2018Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the\nangels of heaven, but my Father only,\u2019 Matt. xxiv. 36. This is\nparticularly intimated in the answer we are explaining; and the reason\nassigned why it is kept secret from us, _viz._ that all may watch and\npray, and be ready for the coming of the Lord; which is certainly a\nmatter of the highest importance; and it is evident, that if God had\neither revealed the time of Christ\u2019s coming to judgment, or let men know\nhow long they should continue in this world, before that judgment, which\nis past on all at death, it might have given occasion to the corruption\nof our nature, to have put off all thoughts about it, till it was at\nhand: therefore our Saviour, in wisdom, as well as kindness to his\npeople, has represented his coming under the similitude of _a thief in\nthe night_, 2 Thes. v. 2. and accordingly says, _Therefore be ye also\nready; for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh_, Matt.\nxxiv. 44. Thus concerning the day of judgment. As to what respects the\nconsequence hereof, and the sentence which shall be pronounced on the\nrighteous and the wicked, that is the subject-matter of the two\nfollowing answers.\n\nAll that I shall add at present is, some practical inferences from this\ndoctrine of Christ\u2019s coming to judgment.\n\n(1.) What has been observed concerning Christ\u2019s coming to judge the\nworld in his own glory, and that of his Father, and of his holy angels,\nshould fill us with high and honourable thoughts of him; and since the\nangels reckon it an honour to attend him as ministering spirits in that\ngreat day, this should excite in us an holy ambition to approve\nourselves his servants in all things, and to account it our honour that\nhe will esteem us such.\n\n(2.) Since Christ at his coming to judgment, will bring all things to\nlight, and impartially state and try the cause of every one, who shall\nbe rewarded according to their works; this should silence, and fence\nagainst, all unbelieving thoughts, which may arise in the minds of men,\nconcerning the seemingly unequal distributions of providence, in God\u2019s\ndealing with the righteous and the wicked, as to what respects the\noutward affairs of life, and make us easy, though we know not his design\nin the various afflictive providences wherewith we are exercised; since\nwe are not to expect those blessings here, which he has reserved for his\npeople, at Christ\u2019s appearing to judgment; which, if he is pleased to\nbestow upon us hereafter, we shall then have the highest reason to\nadmire his wisdom, goodness, and faithfulness, in the whole method of\nhis providential dealings with us.\n\n(3.) This doctrine tends to reprove the atheism and profaneness of\nthose, who make a jest of, or scoff, at the day of judgment; like those\nthe apostle Peter mentions, whom he calls _scoffers, walking after their\nown lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the\nfathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning\nof the creation_, 2 Pet. iii. 3, 4. It also reproves those who abuse the\nday of God\u2019s patience; and because his coming to judgment is delayed,\ntake occasion to commit the vilest crimes. Thus our Saviour speaks of\nsome as doing, and intimates that he will _come in a day when they look\nnot for him, and shall cut them asunder, and appoint them their portion\nwith hypocrites_, Matt. xxiv. 48-51.\n\n(4.) This doctrine should stir us up to universal holiness, and the\ngreatest circumspection and diligence in the service of God; as the\napostle says, when speaking concerning Christ\u2019s coming to judgment, with\nthose displays of terrible majesty that shall attend it, _what manner of\npersons ought we to be, in all holy conversation and godliness, looking\nfor, and hasting unto the coming of the day of God_, 2 Pet. iii. 11, 12.\n\n(5.) Since we expect that Christ will judge the world at the last day,\nit behoves us to be often judging and trying ourselves, examining how\nmatters stand between God and us; and whether we behave ourselves in\nsuch a way as that we may be meet for Christ\u2019s coming, and have boldness\nin the day of judgment; as the apostle says, _If we would judge\nourselves, we should not be judged_, 1 Cor. xi. 31. that is, with the\njudgment of condemnation.\n\n(6.) It is an inexpressible advantage when we can conclude, upon good\ngrounds, that this great Judge is our Friend, our Saviour, our Advocate,\nand that, living and dying, we shall be found in him; for then, though\nhe come in such a way as will strike the utmost terror and confusion\ninto his enemies, we shall be found of him in peace: and the consequence\nof this day\u2019s solemnity shall be our admission into his immediate\npresence, and being for ever blessed therein.\n\nFootnote 184:\n\n _We often read in Heathen-writers, of \u00c6acus, Minus and Rhadamanthus,\n as appointed to pass a judgment on every one at death, fix them in\n their respective places of residence, and determine their rewards and\n punishments. These are generally supposed to have lived about Moses\u2019s\n time, and are commended for the exercise of justice, and making laws,\n some of which they are supposed to have received from heaven; and as\n the reward hereof, have the honour, of being judges of men at death,\n conferred upon them. Some have been ready to conclude that the account\n which the Heathen give of these three famous law-givers and judges, is\n nothing else but a corruption of a tradition which they had received\n concerning Moses, the great law-giver to the Israelites, set forth by\n different names, with several things fabulous added thereunto. They\n who have a mind to see a very learned and critical disquisition on\n this subject, may consult Huet Demonst. Evang. Prop._ iv. \u00a7 9-13. _And\n as for the variety of punishments which these judges inflicted, the\n lakes and rivers of fire to which they are condemned, see Plato\u2019s\n account thereof, translated by Eusebius, in Pr\u00e6p. Evang. Lib._ xi.\n _Cap._ xxxvii. _who thinks that some things mentioned by him, bear a\n resemblance to the punishment of sin, which we read of in scripture,\n which he supposes he received by tradition, from some that were\n acquainted with divine revelation, as he did many other things which\n he speaks of in his writings_.\n\nFootnote 185:\n\n _See Vol. II. Quest. LVI._\n\nFootnote 186:\n\n _Matt._ xxiv. 31. _This is the most common sense of those words; and\n how far soever they are supposed, by some, to be taken in a figurative\n sense, for the preaching of the gospel throughout the whole world,\n after the destruction of the Jewish state, which some have supposed,\n is principally intended by what is mentioned in the foregoing verses;\n yet most conclude that several things in this account of Christ\u2019s\n glorious appearance, are not without some allusion, at least to what\n shall be more eminently accomplished, when he shall come to judgment._\n\nFootnote 187:\n\n _Curcell\u00e6us in Dissert. de necessit. cognit. Christ._ \u00a7 vi.\n\nFootnote 188:\n\n _Of this opinion were some among the Papists, and particularly\n Cornelius a Lapide, Vid. ejusd. comment in Loc. who describes it as a\n place situate at the foot of the mount of Olives, in or near the place\n where our Saviour was in his agony betrayed and delivered by Judas,\n into the hands of his enemies. Therefore this will be, according to\n him, the fittest place for him to execute judgment upon them, and to\n appear in this triumphant and glorious manner, in order thereunto. And\n this is mentioned by many Jewish writers, who maintained it. Thus the\n author of the Chaldee Paraphrase on Canticles_ viii. 5. _speaks to\n this purpose, that the dead shall be raised, and the mountain of\n Olives shall be cleft, and all the dead of Israel shall come out from\n thence; and that the just, who died in the captivity, and consequently\n were not buried in or near that place, shall come through the caverns\n of the earth, that they may here arise to judgment. And several\n Rabbinical writers give into this chimera, which is also mentioned in\n both the Talmuds. And many of the modern Jews, as is observed by some\n late travellers into the holy land, are so fond of burying their dead\n in or near this place, that they might not have far to come under the\n earth, when they rise from the dead, and must appear here at the day\n of judgment, that they pay a certain sum of money for the privilege of\n burying their dead therein. See Hody on the resurrection, Page 70,\n 71._\n\nFootnote 189:\n\n _See his works, Lib._ iii. _Comment. apocal. page 662. and his\n remains, chap._ xi. _page 748. in which he is followed by some others,\n and the learned Gale, in his court of the Gentiles, Part_ I. _Book_\n iii. _chap._ vii. _Page 78. speaks of some Jewish writers as\n maintaining, that the world shall continue 6000 years; and from thence\n to the 7000th shall be the day of judgment. And he also mentions this\n as an opinion which Plato had received by conversing with some of\n them; and concludes, that this is the great Platonick year, which is\n mentioned by him, and his followers._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. LXXXIX.\n\n\n QUEST. LXXXIX. _What shall be done to the wicked at the day of\n judgment?_\n\n ANSW. At the day of judgment the wicked shall be set on Christ\u2019s\n left hand; and upon clear evidence, and full conviction of their own\n consciences, shall have the fearful, but just sentence of\n condemnation pronounced against them; and thereupon shall be cast\n out from the favourable presence of God, and the glorious fellowship\n with Christ, his saints, and all his holy angels, into hell, to be\n punished with unspeakable torments both of body and soul, with the\n devil and his angels for ever.\n\nHaving, under the last answer, taken a view of Christ, as coming to\njudgment; and the whole world as seated at his tribunal, the wicked on\nhis left hand, and the righteous on his right; the books opened, the\ncause tried, and the evidence produced; we are now to consider the\nsentence that will be past on each of them, together with the\nconsequences thereof: and particularly we have an account in this\nanswer, of a sentence of condemnation, pronounced against the wicked,\nand the punishment inflicted on them, pursuant thereunto; which our\nSaviour expresses in words full of dread and horror; _Then shall he say\nunto them on the left hand, Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting\nfire, prepared for the devil and his angels; and these shall go away\ninto everlasting punishment_, Matt. xxv. 41, 45. This includes in it an\neternal banishment and separation from him, in whose favour there is\nlife. As sin is the object of his detestation, it being contrary to the\nholiness of his nature, they who are found in open rebellion against\nhim, shall not _stand in his sight_, Psal. v. 5. As they did not desire\nhis special and gracious presence, which his saints always reckoned\ntheir chief joy, in this world; they shall be deprived of it in the\nnext. And when they are commanded to depart from him, they are described\nas _cursed_, that is, bound over to suffer all those punishments which\nthe vindictive justice of God will inflict, that are contained in those\nthreatenings which are denounced by his law that they have violated, and\nsent down into hell, to be punished with unspeakable torments, both in\nbody and soul, with the devil and his angels, for ever. Accordingly\nthere are three things to be considered, relating to the punishment of\nsinners in another world, namely, the kind thereof, its degree, and\neternal duration.\n\nI. As to the kind of punishment; that is generally considered in two\nrespects, namely, the punishment of loss and sense.\n\n1. Concerning the punishment of loss. This contains in it a separation\nfrom God, the fountain of blessedness; a being destitute of every thing\nthat might administer comfort to them; and, as the consequence hereof,\nthey are deprived not only of fellowship with Christ, but with his\nsaints. Not that they were ever the objects of their love or delight,\nbut, on the other hand, their conversation was distasteful and\nburdensome; especially when it was in itself most savoury and spiritual:\nnevertheless, it is reckoned to be one ingredient in their misery, as\nour Saviour expresses it, when he speaks of the _workers of iniquity_,\nas first commanded to _depart from him_, Luke xiii. 27, 28. and then\ntells them, _Ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the\nprophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out_: where\nthe happiness of others is considered as what will raise their envy, and\nprove a torment to them.\n\n2. There is the punishment of sense: this is set forth by those\nunspeakable torments to be endured both in soul and body; and because no\npain is so exquisite as that which is occasioned by fire, it is\ntherefore called _unquenchable and everlasting fire_, Matt. iii. 12.\nchap. xxv. 41. As for that enquiry which some make, whether the fire be\nelementary or material, like that which is in this world, it savours\nmore of curiosity than what tends to real advantage: and since it is\ncalled a fire, prepared for the devil and his angels, some have a little\nhesitated about this matter, as concluding it impossible for material\nfire to affect spirits; but I am not desirous to enter too far into this\ndisquisition. It is, indeed, a hard matter for us to determine whether,\nor how far a spirit is capable of the punishment of sense, any otherwise\nthan, as, by reason of its union with the body, it has an afflictive\nsensation of the evils which that immediately endures; and therefore,\nsome have thought, that when we read of the fire of hell, it is to be\ntaken in a metaphorical sense, to denote those punishments which are\nmost exquisite, and have a tendency to torment both soul and body in\ndifferent respects. The soul is to be tormented as the wrath of God has\nan immediate access to it, to make it miserable: and though this cannot\nbe styled the punishment of sense in the same respect as that is of\nwhich the body is the more immediate subject; yet if we take the word\n_sense_, as importing an intellectual perception of those miseries that\nit undergoes, whereby it is made uneasy, and in a moral sense, subject\nto pain, as we sometimes speak of the pain of the mind, as well as that\nof the body, then it may be said to endure the punishment of sense,\nthough it be in a spiritual substance.\n\nThere are various ways by which the wrath of God may have access to the\nsoul, to make it miserable; and this punishment is sometimes compared to\nfire, as it is beyond expression dreadful; and accordingly God, when\ninflicting it, is styled, _A consuming fire_, Heb. xii. 29. and _his\njealousy_ is said elsewhere to _burn like fire_, Psal. lxxix. 5.\nTherefore, some have described the punishment of sin in hell, as\nincluding in it the insupportable weight of the wrath of God lying on\nthe consciences of men, and sinking them into perdition; whereby it\nappears to be _a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living\nGod_, Heb. x. 31. A judicious divine considers this as the effect of\nGod\u2019s immediate presence, as a sin-revenging Judge; and therefore\nunderstands that text, in which it is said, _They shall be punished with\neverlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord_, 2 Thes. i. 9.\nnot as denoting an exclusion from his comforting presence, which is an\nundoubted truth, and the more generally received sense thereof; but he\nspeaks of the presence of God, as well as his power, as the immediate\ncause of their destruction; in like manner as when the Psalmist joins\nboth these ideas together, when he says, _Who knoweth the power of thine\nanger_, Psal. xc. 11. and it seems most agreeable to the grammatical\nconstruction of the words.[190] This is that punishment which is more\nimmediately adapted to the soul.\n\nAs for the punishment of sense, which the body shall endure, whether it\nbe compared unto fire, as containing in it some effects, not unlike to\nthose produced by fire; or, whether it only signifies that the\npunishment shall be most exquisite, as no pain is so terrible as that\nwhich is the effect of fire, I will not pretend to determine. There are,\nindeed, other expressions by which it is set forth in scripture, as well\nas fire, _viz._ _cutting asunder_, Matt. xxiv. 51. _tearing in pieces_,\nPsal. l. 22. _drowning men in destruction and perdition_, 1 Tim. vi. 9.\n_a being bound hand and foot_, and _cast into outer darkness_, Matt.\nxxii. 13. or, into _a furnace of fire_, chap. xiii. 42. or, _a lake of\nfire burning with brimstone_, Rev. xix. 20. some of which are,\ndoubtless, metaphorical expressions, by which the punishment of sin is\nset forth; but whether they are all so we must not be too positive in\ndetermining: however, some suppose they are, because the glory of heaven\nis described by the metaphors of _streets of gold, gates of pearl_, Rev.\nxxi. 21. _rivers of pleasure_, &c. Psal. xxxvi. 8. and the wrath of God\nis metaphorically described, when he is called _a consuming fire_, Heb.\nxii. 29. Therefore, as the glory of heaven is represented by metaphors,\ndenoting that it is inconceivably great; so, if we suppose that the\npunishment of sin in hell, is set forth by metaphorical ways of\nspeaking, we cannot from hence, in all respects, take an estimate of the\nquality thereof; nevertheless we must conclude in general from such-like\nexpressions, by which it is represented, that it is inexpressibly\nterrible, such as respects both soul and body, which is called, as has\nbeen observed in different respects, the punishment of sense. Which\nleads us,\n\nII. To consider this punishment, as to the degree thereof, which is\ngenerally described as being various, in proportion to the aggravations\nof sin committed; accordingly they who have sinned under the\ngospel-dispensation, are considered as exposed to a greater degree of\npunishment than others who have not had those advantages. Thus the\napostle says, _Of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy,\nwho hath trodden under foot the Son of God_, chap. x. 29. And our\nSaviour speaking concerning the Scribes and Pharisees, who were\nnotorious hypocrites, whose religion was no more than a pretence, and\nmade subservient to the vilest practices, tells them, that _they should\nreceive the greater damnation_, Matt. xxiii. 14. that is, a greater\ndegree of punishment, as they had contracted greater guilt than others:\nand the apostle speaks of some who had had great advantages through the\n_riches of God\u2019s goodness and forbearance_ towards them, but yet were\n_impenitent_, and hardened in sin; these, says he, _treasure up unto\nthemselves wrath against the day of wrath_, Rom. ii. 5. that is, add\ngreater degrees to the punishment which they shall endure in another\nworld.\n\nIII. We are to consider the punishment, which sinners are liable to in\nthe world to come, as to its duration, in which respect, it shall be\nwithout intermission, and eternal. That there shall be no relaxation of\npunishment, may be proved from what our Saviour says in the parable; in\nwhich the _rich man_, who was tormented in flames, could not obtain _one\ndrop of water to cool his tongue_, Luke xvi. 26. Thus we read of those\nwho are said to _drink of the wine of the wrath of God_, which is\n_poured out without mixture, into the cup of his indignation_; and that\n_the smoke of their torment ascendeth for ever and ever_; and that _they\nhave no rest day nor night_, Rev. xiv. 10, 11. And our Saviour speaks of\nthe two main ingredients in the punishment of sin; namely, the\ntormenting sense which conscience shall have of the wrath of God due to\nit; and the punishment of sense, which is compared to that that proceeds\nfrom fire, and both are described as eternal; where _their worm dieth\nnot, and the fire is not quenched_, Mark ix. 44, 46, 48.\n\nThat the punishment of sin in another world will be eternal, may be\nargued from the impossibility of their obtaining a discharge from the\nsentence of condemnation, under which they are, unless satisfaction be\ngiven to the justice of God for sins committed; but this cannot be given\nby the person that suffers; inasmuch as his sufferings are due to him,\npursuant to the sentence of the judge, and agreeable to the demerit of\nsin; which being, as it is usually expressed objectively infinite,\nbecause committed against an infinite God, and containing a contempt of\nhis sovereignty and other perfections which are infinite; therefore it\ndeserves a punishment proportionable thereto. And since the sufferings\nof finite creatures are no other than finite, and consequently bear no\nproportion to the demands of infinite justice, they must be infinite in\nduration, that is, eternal. It may also be observed, that at the same\ntime that persons are suffering for past sins, they are committing\nothers. This is not like God\u2019s furnace, which is in Zion; whereby he\ndesigns not to consume, but to refine and purge away the dross and the\ntin; for it cannot, in any instance be said, that this is overruled for\ngood. Therefore the habits of sin are increased rather than weakened\nthereby; and consequently sinners are set at a farther distance from\nGod, from holiness and happiness; which, because it is still increasing,\ntheir punishment must be eternal.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that there is no Mediator appointed between God\nand them; none who has undertaken to pay this debt for them, and procure\ntheir discharge, as the apostle says concerning those who have _sinned\nwilfully after they had received the knowledge of the truth; there\nremaineth no more sacrifice for sin_, Heb. x. 26. no advocate to plead\ntheir cause; no ordinances in which the glad tidings of salvation are\npublished, nor any golden sceptre of mercy held forth to invite them to\ncome in, or give them hope of finding acceptance in the sight of God; no\ncovenant of grace that contains any promise that will afford relief; and\nno inclination, in their own souls, to return to God with an humble\nsense of sin, and desire to forsake it, and from hence arises\neverlasting despair, beyond expression tormenting, which the apostle\ncalls _blackness of darkness for ever_, Jude ver. 13.\n\nThis is a very awful and awakening subject; and many are as little\ndesirous to hear of these things, as the people were to hear of the\naccount which the prophet Isaiah gave them of approaching judgments; and\ntherefore they say, _Cause the holy One of Israel to cease from before\nus_, Isa. xxx. 11. But since there is such a passion in men as fear; and\nthis is oftentimes made subservient to their spiritual advantage, it\npleases God, in wisdom and mercy, sometimes to reveal those things in\nhis word, which have a tendency to awaken our fears, and to set before\nus death as well as life, the threatenings as well as the promises, that\nhereby we may see it to be our duty and interest to flee from the wrath\nto come; and to use those precautions prescribed in the gospel, which\nmay have a tendency, through divine grace, to prevent our sinking into\neverlasting perdition. They who cast off fear, and think themselves\nsafe, because the rod of God is not upon them, generally cast off a\nsense of duty, and say unto God, _Depart from us; for we desire not the\nknowledge of thy ways_, Job xxi. 9, 14. Therefore these subjects are to\nbe insisted on as warnings to induce men to avoid the rock on which\nmultitudes have split and perished; not to lead them to despair.\nHowever, there is great need of prudence in applying every truth in such\na way as that it may be of advantage; which renders the work of those\nthat are employed in preaching the gospel, exceeding difficult: every\none must have those doctrines inculcated and applied to him, that are\nadapted to his respective condition, as well as founded on the word of\nGod; and therefore we may observe,\n\n1. That such subjects as these, though they are not to be concealed, as\nbeing a part of the counsel of God, and a means ordained by him, to\nanswer some valuable end; yet they are not only, or principally to be\ninsisted on, as though there were no passion to be wrought upon but\nfear. It is the stupid person that is to be awakened out of his\nlethargy, by violent methods: the man that says, I shall have peace,\nthough I walk according to the corrupt inclinations of my own heart; the\ndanger is over; or that no ill consequences will attend that wilful\nimpenitency and unbelief, which is like to prove destructive to him; or,\nif a person is willing to deceive himself, and endeavours to extenuate\nhis sin, apprehending the consequences thereof not to be so pernicious\nas they really are; or, that the mercy of God will save him, though\nremaining in open rebellion against him, as though there were no arrows\nin his quiver, or vials of wrath to be poured forth on his enemies. Such\nought to be dealt with, by representing God as a consuming fire, with\nwhom is terrible majesty; and they must be told of the punishment of sin\nin this and another world, that they may see their danger before it be\ntoo late to escape. If it be said, that the terrors of God have a\ntendency to drive persons to despair. To this it may be replied, that\nthe persons we are speaking of, are so far from despairing of the mercy\nof God, that they are inclined to abuse it; and that which is like to be\ntheir ruin, is the contrary extreme, _viz._ presumption; which leads\nthem to turn the grace of God into wantonness.\n\n2. As for others, who are humbled under a sense of sin, whose flesh\ntrembles for fear of God\u2019s judgments, there is not so much occasion to\ninsist on these awakening subjects, when we have to do with them; for\nthis would be like adding fuel to the fire. If the heart be broken and\ncontrite, and is apt to meditate little else but terror; then such\nsubjects are to be insisted on as are encouraging. Thus when the prophet\nJeremiah had been reproving the people for their abominations, and\nthreatening many sore judgments which God would execute upon them, he\napplies healing medicines; _Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no\nphysician there? why then is not the health of the daughter of my people\nrecovered?_ Jer. viii. 22. And elsewhere when he had been reprehending\nthem for their idolatry, and putting them in mind of those judgments\nthey had exposed themselves to; he encourages them to _cry unto God, my\nFather, thou art the guide of my youth: Will he reserve his anger for\never? Will he keep it to the end?_ Jer. iii. 4, 5. It is God\u2019s usual\nmethod in dealing with sinners, first to excite their fear by charging\nsin on the conscience, and putting them in mind of the dreadful\nconsequences thereof; in which respect, as the apostle expresses, _The\nlaw enters that the offence might abound_; and then he shews him, that\nthe soul may take encouragement, when humbled under a sense of its own\nguilt; that _where sin has abounded, grace did much more abound_, Rom.\nv. 20. The gospel is designed to administer comfort to those, who are\ndistressed under a dread of the wrath of God. Therefore, there are\npromises as well as threatenings; and each of these are to be applied as\nthe occasion requires it; so that the happiness of heaven is to be set\nin opposition to the punishment of sin in hell; and accordingly as the\nanswer we have been explaining, contains a very awful and awakening\nsubject; so, in the next, we are led to consider a doctrine which is\nfull of comfort to those who have an interest in Jesus Christ.\n\nFootnote 190:\n\n _See this largely insisted on by Dr. Goodwin, in his works, Vol._ III.\n _Book_ xiii. _His critical remarks in chap._ ii. _seem very just_,\n viz. _that_ \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf _is causal here, as well as in many other scriptures\n which he refers to: and his strongest argument to prove that it is to\n be taken so in this verse, is, because, as he observes_, \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf _must be\n applied to_ the glory of his power, _as well as to_ his presence; _so\n that if it denotes a separation from the one, it must also denote a\n separation from the other; whereas no one supposes that this\n punishment consists in a separation from the power of God, but that it\n is to be considered as the effect thereof_.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. XC.\n\n\n QUEST. XC. _What shall be done to the righteous at the day of\n judgment?_\n\n ANSW. At the day of judgment, the righteous being caught up to\n Christ in the clouds, shall be set on his right hand, and there\n openly acknowledged, and acquitted; shall join with him in the\n judging of reprobate angels and men, and shall be received into\n heaven; where they shall be fully and for ever freed from all sin\n and misery, filled with unconceivable joys, made perfectly holy and\n happy, both in body and soul, in the company of innumerable saints,\n and holy angels, but especially in the immediate vision and fruition\n of God the Father, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,\n to all eternity: and this is the perfect and full communion which\n the members of the invisible church shall enjoy with Christ in glory\n at the resurrection and day of judgment.\n\nWe have, in this answer, an account of the great honours and privileges\nthat the saints shall be advanced to, and partake of, as the consequence\nof that sentence that Christ will pass on them, _Come ye blessed of my\nFather, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the\nworld_, Matt. xxv. 34. which are words that contain a gracious\ninvitation given them to take possession of that glory which will tend\nto make them completely and for ever happy. We have already considered\nthe righteous as caught up to Christ in the clouds, which is either done\nby the ministry of angels, or else their bodies will be so changed, that\nthey shall be able to mount upward, with as much ease as they are, now\nto walk upon the surface of the earth. We have also considered them as\nset at Christ\u2019s right-hand. Whether this has any regard to the place of\ntheir situation, we cannot determine; but, according to the scripture\nmode of speaking, it certainly denotes the highest honours conferred\nupon them; which will be not only spiritual but external and visible;\nwhereby it shall appear to all, that they are Christ\u2019s peculiar friends\nand favourites; and this will tend to raise in them the highest\nastonishment, that they should thus be dealt with by so glorious a\nperson, who were in themselves unworthy of his notice; and it shall\nafford matter of eternal praise. What is farther observed concerning\nthem in this answer, is contained in the following heads.\n\nI. They shall be openly acknowledged and acquitted.\n\nII. They shall join with Christ in the judging of reprobate angels and\nmen.\n\nIII. They shall be received into heaven, in which their happiness is\nfarther described; as therein they shall be freed from sin and misery,\nfilled with unspeakable joy, made perfectly holy and happy, both in body\nand soul, and admitted into the company of saints and holy angels, and\nhave the immediate vision and fruition of God to all eternity.\n\nI. They shall be openly acknowledged and acquitted. Our Lord Jesus was\nnot ashamed to own his people, when he condescended to take their nature\nupon him, and dwell among them; or, as the apostle expresses it, _He is\nnot ashamed to call them brethren_, Heb. ii. 11. And he gives them many\ntokens of his approbation, by those spiritual privileges which he\nbestows on them here: but at last he shall own them publicly, in the\npresence of the whole world, as a people whom he has chosen, redeemed,\nsanctified, and brought the work of grace in them to perfection. He\noverlooks all their former failures and defects, and looks upon them as\nadorned with perfect beauty, appearing without spot before him, and\nhaving now nothing that may be offensive to his holy eye, or denote them\nunmeet for the relation which they stand in to him, and the blessings\nwhich they shall enjoy with him.\n\nMoreover, it is said that he shall openly acquit them, _i. e._ declare\npublicly, that he has given satisfaction for all their offences; and\ntherefore they are for ever pronounced clear from the guilt thereof.\nAnd, as it was before observed, it is not improbable, that their former\nsins shall not be so much as mentioned, being all covered; and if sought\nfor, shall not be found: but it is certain, that if they shall be\nmentioned, it shall not be to their confusion or condemnation; for it\nshall be declared, that the justice of God has nothing to lay to their\ncharge; and, as the consequence thereof, they shall be delivered from\nthat fear, shame, and distress, which they had before been subject to,\nthrough the afflicting sense of the guilt and prevalency of sin:\nhowever, when they are represented as thus acquitted, this does not\nsuppose that their sins were not fully pardoned before, or that\njustification in this life, is imperfect, as to what concerns their\nright to forgiveness, or eternal life. The debt was fully cancelled, and\na discharge given into Christ\u2019s hands, in the behalf of all his elect,\non his making satisfaction to the justice of God; but this was not their\nvisible discharge; and not being a declared act, it could not be claimed\nby, nor was it applied to them till they believed; and then they might\nsay, Who shall lay any thing to our charge? it is God that\njustifieth[191]: nevertheless, their justification, as it is declared\nto, and apprehended by faith, could not be said to be in all respects,\nso apparent, nor attended with those comfortable fruits and effects,\nwhich are the consequence hereof, as it is when they are pronounced\njustified by Christ at death; and even then the discharge is not so open\nand visible to the whole world, as it shall be in the day of judgment.\n\nII. It is farther said, that they shall join with Christ in judging of\nreprobate angels and men: this is very often asserted by those who treat\non this subject; and it seems to be taken from the sense which is\ncommonly given of the apostle\u2019s words in 1 Cor. vi. 2, 3. _Know ye not\nthat saints shall judge the world_; and, _know ye not that the saints\nshall judge angels?_ However, we must take heed, if we apply that\nscripture to the case before us, that we do not advance any thing that\ntends, in the least, to derogate from the glory of Christ, who only is\nfit for, and appointed to perform this great work: therefore, if we\nsuppose that the apostle is here speaking concerning the judgment of the\ngreat day, the saints are said to judge the world in a less proper\nsense; but whatever be the sense in which we explain it, we must not\nthink that they shall be assessors with Christ in his throne of\njudgment: it is one thing for them to be near his throne in the capacity\nand station of favourites; and another thing for them to be in it: if\nthey are in any sense said to judge the world, it must not be\nunderstood, as though the trying of the cause, or passing the sentence,\nwere committed to them; but rather of their approving what Christ shall\ndo: this they are represented as doing, when Christ is set forth as\n_judging the great whore_, Rev. xix. 2. namely, the anti-christian\npowers; they so far join with him herein, as that they ascribe glory and\nhonour to him, and say, _Righteous are his judgments_.\n\nAnd there is another sense in which some understand this scripture,\nconcerning _the saints judging the world_, as denoting that the public\nmention which shall be made of the graces of the saints, their faith,\nrepentance, love to God, and universal holiness, will have a tendency to\ncondemn those whose conversation in this world has been the reverse\nthereof. Their having forsaken all, and followed Christ, and accounted\nall things but loss, that they might win him. The choice which they have\nmade of suffering rather than sinning, which appears to be an instance\nof the highest wisdom, shall condemn the wickedness and folly of those,\nwho have exposed themselves to inevitable ruin and misery, by being\notherwise-minded. Thus Noah is said to have _condemned the world by_ his\n_faith_, Heb. xi. 7. when, in obedience to the divine command, he\n_prepared an ark to the saving of his house_, which the world then\nthought to be the most preposterous action that ever was performed,\nthough they were afterwards, to their cost, convinced of the contrary.\nAnd _the men of Nineveh, and the queen of the South_, are said to _rise\nup in the judgment with that generation, and condemn it_, Matt. xii. 41,\n42. (to wit, objectively, rather than formally,) as their respective\nbehaviour tended to expose the impenitency and unbelief of the Jews,\nwhom Christ there reproves. If the saints judging the world, be taken in\neither of these senses, it is an undoubted truth: but more than this we\ndare not assert.\n\nNevertheless, we may take occasion to enquire, whether that text, on\nwhich this doctrine is founded, may not be explained in another sense,\nas denoting some privilege which the saints were to enjoy in this world,\nwhen the empire should become Christian; and accordingly, magistrates\nand judges should be chosen out of the church, in which respect they\nshould _judge the world_. This seems, to me, the most probable sense of\nthe apostle\u2019s words, as an excellent and learned writer understands\nthem[192]; and it is very agreeable to the context, in which they are\ndissuaded, in ver. 1. from _going to law before the unjust, and not\nbefore the saints_, as signifying the inexpediency of exposing those\ncontroversies, that ought to be compromised in the church, before\nHeathen-magistrates, as though they thought themselves unfit to judge\nthe smallest matters, of which he here speaks, not of capital offences,\nwhich were to be tried only by the civil magistrate; and to enforce this\nadvice, he says, _Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world_.\n\n_Obj._ 1. It is objected to this sense of the text; that, at the same\ntime when _the saints_ are said to _judge the world_, he speaks of them\nas _judging angels_; which comes not within the province of civil\nmagistrates; though we suppose them to be Christians.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that when the apostle speaks of the\n_saints judging angels_; this is brought in occasionally, the former\nsense of _judging_ being more agreeable to the context. But since he is\ninsisting on an honour that should be conferred on the church, he\nfarther enlarges on that subject, and so speaks of their _judging\nangels_, as denoting that the consequence and success of the gospel\nwould be an evident conviction to the world, that the Devil\u2019s empire was\nweakened, that he had no right to reign over the children of\ndisobedience, as he before had done. Thus our Saviour speaks of Satan\u2019s\nkingdom being destroyed by the preaching and success of the gospel, when\nhe says, \u2018Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the prince of\nthis world be cast out,\u2019 John xii. 31. And elsewhere it is said, \u2018Now is\ncome salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power\nof his Christ; for the accuser of our brethren is cast down,\u2019 Rev. xii.\n10. Moreover, the apostle may have a particular reference to their power\nof casting out devils, not only in that, but in some following ages, as\nour Saviour, promised they should have, before he left the world, Mark\nxvi. 17. which is known to have continued in the church till the third\ncentury[193].\n\n_Obj._ 2. There is another scripture which seems to favour this opinion,\nnamely, that the saints shall judge the world in the last day, _viz._\nour Saviour\u2019s words, in Matt. xix. 28. \u2018Ye which have followed me in the\nregeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory,\nye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of\nIsrael;\u2019 and that which makes this sense more probable, is what he\nspeaks of in the following verse, as a reward which they, who had\n\u2018forsaken all for his name\u2019s sake,\u2019 should enjoy, namely, \u2018ye shall\nreceive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life.\u2019\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that our Saviour, in one of these\nverses, may, without any strain on the sense of the words, be understood\nas giving them to expect some honours, that should be conferred on them\nhere, and in the other, those which they should receive in another\nworld: As to the honours which were to be conferred on them here,\nnamely, their _sitting on thrones_, &c. This is said to be \u2018in the\nregeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory,\u2019\nthat is, not when the Son of man shall come to judgment; but when he\nshall enter into his state of exaltation, and sit at God\u2019s right-hand.\nAnd inasmuch as this was to be done for them _in the regeneration_, it\nseems most applicable to the gospel-state; in which, as the apostle\nsays, \u2018Old things are past away; behold, all things are become new,\u2019 2\nCor. v. 17. agreeable to what is foretold by the prophet, \u2018Behold I\ncreate new heavens and a new earth,\u2019 Isa. lxv. 17. which may well be\ncalled _the regeneration_. And, as for the apostles _sitting on\nthrones_, that may signify the spiritual honours that should be\nconferred upon them; so that however they might be despised by the\nworld, they should be reckoned, by all that entertain just notions of\nthings, the chief and most honourable men of the earth. And, as to what\nrespects their _judging the twelve tribes of Israel_, that may be\nunderstood of their convicting the Jews, and condemning them for their\nunbelief in crucifying Christ, and rejecting and persecuting the gospel.\nThis they might be said to do, partly in the exercise of their ministry,\nand partly in the success thereof, and, indeed, the gospel may be said\nto judge men when it convicts and reproves them. If this be the sense of\nthe text, then it does not respect any honours which the apostles should\nbe advanced to in the day of judgment; and consequently it does not\nappear from hence, that they, any more than other saints, shall bear a\npart in judging the world, either of angels or men.\n\nIII. The saints shall be received into heaven. This includes in it their\nbeing brought into a glorious place, and state. Thus the apostle calls\nit, _An house not made with hands_, 2 Cor. v. 1. which, doubtless, far\nexceeds all the other parts of the creation: For, as the earthly\nparadise far exceeded all other places in this world, being planted\nimmediately by God, and furnished with every thing which might be\ndelightful and entertaining for man, for whom it was designed: so this\nmust be supposed to be the most glorious part of the frame of nature, as\nbeing designed to be the place of the eternal abode of the best of\ncreatures; and indeed, whatever is called heaven in scripture, comes\nshort of it, this being styled, _the heaven of heavens_, Psal. cxlviii.\n4. it is also particularly described as _God\u2019s throne_, Isa. lxvi. 1.\nthe place of his immediate residence, where he displays his glory in an\nextraordinary manner. As for that particular part of the universe, in\nwhich it is situate, it is neither possible, nor of any advantage for us\nto determine, any otherwise than as it is described, as being above this\nlower world. But the principal thing to be considered, is, the glory of\nthe state, into which the saints shall there be brought; which is set\nforth in this answer, by variety of expressions.\n\n1. Herein they shall be fully, and for ever, freed from all sin and\nmisery; which being inseparably connected, they are delivered from both\nat once. As to what respects the guilt of sin, this includes in it not\nonly their being for ever discharged from the guilt of past sins, which\nis contained in their being openly acquitted, as was before observed,\nbut their not contracting guilt for the future; accordingly they are put\ninto such a state as that they shall be disposed, and enabled to yield\nsinless obedience; and as they are presented without spot and blemish\nbefore God, they shall never contract the least defilement, or do any\nthing which shall render them unmeet for that glory, to which they are\nadvanced, afford matter of reproach to them, or provoke God to cast them\nout of that place which cannot entertain any but sinless creatures.\nTherefore it differs not only from that sinless state in which man was\ncreated at first, but that in which the angels were created, who were\nnot all confirmed in their state of holiness, so as to render it\nimpossible for any of them to fall; but this is the happiness of\nglorified saints.\n\nAnd we may also infer from hence, that there shall be no temptations to\nsin; none arising from themselves, since there are no lusts, or\nremainders of corruption, to draw them aside from God; and no\ntemptations from others, since they are all made perfectly holy. The\nsoul meets with no temptations from the body, as it often did, while it\nwas subject to the infirmities of nature, in this imperfect state. It\nshall never be liable to any weakness, weariness, stupidity, nor any of\nthose diseases with which it is now oppressed; so that the soul shall\nnever meet with any temptations arising from thence, inasmuch as the\nhappiness of the body consists in its subserviency to it, in all those\nthings that may tend to promote its compleat blessedness. Moreover, they\nare also considered as delivered from all misery, whether personal, or\nrelative. The afflictions of believers are confined to this present\nstate; therefore in heaven \u2018God shall wipe away all tears from their\neyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying,\nneither shall there be any more pain; for the former things are passed\naway,\u2019 Rev. xxi. 4. and nothing remains that may tend to abate their\nhappiness, or render the state in which they are, imperfect.\n\n2. They shall be filled with inconceivable joys. Thus our Saviour says\nto the man in the parable, who had improved the talents he had been\nentrusted with; _Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord_, Matt. xxv. 21,\n23. and they are said not only to be _presented faultless before the\npresence of the glory of Christ_; but _with exceeding joy_, Jude, ver.\n24. This is the necessary result of a state of perfect blessedness;\nwhich cannot but administer the highest satisfaction and comfort to\nthose who are possessed thereof; inasmuch as it not only answers, but\neven exceeds their most raised expectations. These joys are not indeed\ncarnal, but spiritual; for as the greatest delight which the saints have\nhere, consists in the favour and love of God, and in the bright rays of\nhis glory shining into the soul, so they shall be perfectly blessed with\nthis hereafter, in which respect their joy shall be full.\n\n3. They shall be made perfectly holy and happy, both in body and soul.\nThe soul shall be unspeakably more enlarged than it was before, as to\nall the powers and faculties thereof. The understanding rendered more\ncapable of contemplating the divine perfections, and it shall be\nentertained with those discoveries of the glory thereof, which, at\npresent, we have but a very imperfect knowledge of: It shall be fitted\nto behold the wisdom of God in the works of creation and redemption, and\nbe led into the deep mysteries of his providence, and the reason of the\nvarious dispensations thereof, which, though they know not now, they\nshall know hereafter. The will shall be perfectly free, having no\ncorrupt nature to bias, or turn it aside, from that which is its chief\ngood and happiness; neither shall it choose any thing, but what is\nconducive thereunto: There are no remains of rebellion and obstinacy to\nbe found therein, but a perfect and entire conformity to the will of\nGod. The affections shall be perfectly regulated, and unalterably run in\na right channel, fixed upon the best objects, and not in the least\ninclined to deviate from them. And, as for the body, that shall be\nfitted for a state of perfection, as well as the soul; for it shall be\nraised a spiritual, celestial, and glorious body, and therefore\nperfectly adapted to be a partaker with the soul, of that glory which\nthe whole man shall be possessed of; and sanctified to be a temple of\nthe Holy Ghost for ever.\n\n4. They shall be joined with the innumerable company of the saints and\nholy angels. The apostle speaks of an _innumerable company of angels,\nand the general assembly and church of the first-born_, Heb. xii. 22,\n23. to which we are said, in this world, to _come_ by faith; but\nhereafter these two assemblies shall be joined together, and make one\nbody, that so they may, as they are represented doing, with one consent,\n_adore_ and proclaim the _worthiness, riches, wisdom, and strength of\nthe lamb that was slain, who lives for ever and ever_, Rev. v. 11, _&\nseq._ Now since the saints and angels are described as making up the\nsame body, and engaged in the same worship, some have taken occasion to\nenquire concerning the means by which they shall converse together in\nanother world; or, in what manner this united body shall be made visible\nto each other; but these things we must be content to be ignorant of in\nthis present state. However, as to the saints, they shall converse with\none another by the organ of sense and speech; for this is one of the\nends for which the body shall be raised and re-united to the soul; and\nit may also be proved, from what we read of Moses and Elias conversing\nwith Christ at his transfiguration in such a manner, Matt. xvii. 3.\n\nAs for that question which some propose, relating to this matter, _viz._\nwhether there shall be a diversity of languages in heaven, as there is\non earth? This we cannot pretend to determine. Some think that there\nshall; and that as persons of all nations and tongues, shall make up\nthat blessed society, so they shall praise God in the same language\nwhich they before used when on earth; and that this worship may be\nperformed with the greatest harmony, and to mutual edification, all the\nsaints shall, by the immediate power and providence of God, be able to\nunderstand and make use of every one of those different languages, as\nwell as their own. This they found on the apostle\u2019s words, in which he\nsays, _That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and that every\ntongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord_; which, they suppose,\nhas a respect to the heavenly state, because it is said to be done both\nby _those that are in heaven, and those that are on earth_, Phil. ii.\n10, 11. But though the apostle speaks, by a metonymy, of different\ntongues, that is, persons who speak different languages, being subject\nto Christ, he probably means thereby persons of different nations,\nwhether they shall praise him in their own language in heaven, or no.\n\nTherefore some conjecture, that the diversity of languages shall then\ncease; inasmuch as it took its first rise from God\u2019s judicial hand, when\nhe confounded the speech of those who presumptuously attempted to build\nthe city and tower of Babel; and this has been, ever since, attended\nwith many inconveniencies. And, indeed, the apostle seems expressly to\nintimate as much, when he says, speaking concerning the heavenly state,\nthat _tongues shall cease_, 1 Cor. xiii. 8. that is, the present variety\nof languages. Moreover, since the gift of tongues was bestowed on the\napostles, for the gathering and building up the church in the first age\nthereof, which end, when it was answered, this extraordinary\ndispensation ceased; in like manner, it is probable that hereafter the\ndiversity of languages shall cease[194].\n\nI am sensible there are some who object to this, that the saints,\nunderstanding all languages, will be an addition to their honour, glory,\nand happiness: but to this it may be answered, that though it is,\nindeed, an accomplishment in this world, for a person to understand\nseveral languages; that arises from the subserviency thereof, to those\nvaluable ends that are answered thereby; but this would be entirely\nremoved, if the diversity of languages be taken away in heaven, as some\nsuppose it will.\n\nThere are some, who, it may be, give too much scope to a vain curiosity,\nwhen they pretend to enquire what this language shall be, or determine,\nas the Jews do, and with them, some of the Fathers, that it shall be the\nHebrew; since their arguments for it are not sufficiently conclusive;\nwhich are principally these, _viz._ That this was the language with\nwhich God inspired man at first in paradise, and that which the saints\nand patriarchs spake, and the church generally made use of in all ages,\ntill our Saviour\u2019s time; and that it was this language which he himself\nspake, while here on earth: and since his ascension into heaven, he\nspake unto Paul _in the Hebrew tongue_, Acts xxvi. 14. And when the\ninhabitants of heaven are described in the Revelations as praising God,\nthere is one word used, by which their praise is expressed, namely,\nHallelujah, which is Hebrew; the meaning whereof is, _praise ye the\nLord_: but all these arguments are not sufficiently convincing; and\ntherefore we must reckon it no more than a conjecture.\n\nAs for the opinion of those who suppose that it will not be any\nparticular language that is, or has been spoken in this world, but one\nthat is more perfect and significative, and that this is what the\napostle means when he speaks of _the tongues of angels_, in 1 Cor. xiii.\n1. To this it may be replied, that it is more than probable, that there\nshall be some language which shall be more perfect and significative\nthan any that is now known in the world; which glorified saints shall\nreceive by immediate inspiration; yet this does not fully appear to be\nthe apostle\u2019s meaning in that scripture; since it is not certain that\nangels express their ideas by the sound of words; inasmuch as they have\nno bodies, nor organs of speech; neither can we certainly determine that\nthey frame voices some other way. Therefore, _the tongue of angels_,\nwhich the apostle speaks of, is an hyperbolical expression, signifying\nthe most excellent language, or such an one as angels would speak, did\nthey use a voice; as _the face of angels_, chap. vi. 15. is expressed to\nsignify the most bright, glorious, and majestic countenance; and as\n_manna_ is called _angels food_, Psal. lxviii. 25. that is, the most\npleasant and delightful: therefore _the tongue of angels_ signifies the\nmost excellent language. But these things, though often enquired into by\nthose who treat on this subject, are very uncertain; neither is it of\nany advantage for us to be able to determine them.\n\nBut there is another thing arising from the consideration of the saints\nbeing joined in one society, which is much more useful, and, so far as\nwe have light to determine it, will afford a very comfortable and\ndelightful thought to us, namely, what concerns their knowing one\nanother in heaven. The scripture, indeed, does not so fully determine\nthis matter as it does some others, relating to the heavenly state; yet\nmany of God\u2019s children have died with a firm persuasion that they shall\nsee and know their friends, in another world; and have been ready to\nconclude this to be a part of that happiness which they shall enjoy\ntherein; and we cannot think this altogether an ungrounded opinion;\nthough it is not to be contended for as it were a necessary and\nimportant article of faith.\n\nThe arguments which are generally brought in defence of it, are taken\nfrom those instances recorded in scripture, in which persons who have\nnever seen one another before, have immediately known each other in this\nworld, by a special immediate divine revelation, given to them; in like\nmanner as Adam knew that Eve was taken out of him, and therefore says,\n_This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be\ncalled woman, because she was taken out of man_, Gen. ii. 23. He was\n_cast into a deep sleep, when God took one of his ribs, and so formed\nthe woman_, as we read of in the foregoing words; yet the knowledge\nhereof was communicated to him by God. Moreover we read, that Peter,\nJames, and John, knew Moses and Elias, Matt. xvii. as appears from\nPeter\u2019s making a particular mention of them; _Let us make three\ntabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias_, ver.\n4. though he had never seen them before. Again, our Saviour, in the\nparable, represents the _rich man_ as seeing _Abraham afar off, and\nLazarus in his bosom_, Luke xvi. 23. and speaks of him as addressing his\ndiscourse to him. From such-like arguments some conclude, that it may be\ninferred, that the saints shall know one another in heaven, when joined\ntogether in the same assembly.\n\nMoreover, some think that this may be proved from the apostle\u2019s words,\nin 1 Thess, ii. 19, 20. _What is our hope or joy, or crown of rejoicing?\nare not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming?\nfor ye are our glory and joy_; which seems to argue that he apprehended\ntheir happiness in heaven should contribute, or be an addition to his,\nas he was made an instrument to bring them thither; even so, by a parity\nof reason, every one who has been instrumental in the conversion, and\nbuilding up others in their holy faith, as the apostle Paul was with\nrespect to them; these shall tend to enhance their praise, and give them\noccasion to glorify God on their behalf: therefore it follows, that they\nshall know one another; and consequently they who have walked together\nin the ways of God, and have been useful to one another, as relations\nand intimate friends, in what respects more especially their spiritual\nconcerns, these shall bless God for the mutual advantages which they\nhave received, and consequently shall know one another. Again, some\nprove this from that expression of our Saviour in Luke xvi. 9. _Make to\nyourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail,\nthey may receive you into everlasting habitations;_ especially if by\nthese _everlasting habitations_ be meant heaven, as many suppose it is;\nand then the meaning is, that they whom you have relieved and shewn\nkindness to in this world, shall express a particular joy upon your\nbeing admitted into heaven; and consequently they shall know you and\nbless God for your having been so useful and beneficial to them.\n\n_Objec._ To this it is objected, that if the saints shall know one\nanother in heaven, they shall know that several of those who were their\nintimate friends here on earth, whom they loved with a very great\naffection, are not there; and this will have a tendency to give them\nsome uneasiness, and be a diminution of their joy and happiness.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that if it be allowed that the saints\nshall know that some whom they loved on earth, are not in heaven, this\nwill give them no uneasiness, since that affection, which took its rise\nprincipally from the relation which we stood in to persons on earth, or\nthe intimacy that we have contracted with them, will cease in another\nworld, or rather run in another channel, and be excited by superior\nmotives, namely, their relation to Christ, and that perfect holiness\nwhich they are adorned with, and their being joined in the same blessed\nsociety, and engaged in the same employment, together with their former\nusefulness one to another, in promoting their spiritual welfare, as made\nsubservient to the happiness they enjoy there. And as for others who are\nexcluded from their society, they will think themselves obliged, out of\na due regard to the justice and holiness of God, to acquiesce in his\nrighteous judgments: thus the inhabitants of heaven are represented as\nadoring the divine perfections, when the vials of God\u2019s wrath were\npoured out upon his enemies; and saying, _Thou art righteous, O Lord,\nbecause thou hast judged thus: true and righteous are thy judgments_,\nRev. xvi. 5, 7.\n\n5. Another ingredient in the glory of heaven, which is, indeed, the\ngreatest of all, is the saints enjoying the immediate vision and\nfruition of God: this vision includes in it something more than their\nbeholding the human nature of Christ, as Job speaks when he says, _In my\nflesh shall I see God_, Job xix. 26. This, indeed, will be a delightful\nobject, not only by reason of the glory thereof, but from the love that\nthey bear to his person, who, in that nature, procured for them the\nhappiness which they are advanced to. But the principal thing contained\nin this vision of God, is, that it is contemplative and intellectual;\nfor, in other respects, he is invisible: nevertheless there are two ways\nby which persons are said to see him; the one is by faith, adapted to\nour present state; thus Moses is said to have _seen him who is\ninvisible_, Heb. xi. 27. that is, to contemplate, adore, and improve the\nglory of the divine perfections so far as he is pleased to manifest it\nto us in this world; but the other way of beholding him is more perfect,\nas his glory is displayed with the greatest clearness, and in the\nhighest degree in heaven: this the apostle opposes to that vision which\nwe have of God by faith, when he says, that in heaven _we shall see face\nto face, and know even as we are also known_, 1 Cor. xiii. 12. that is,\nwe shall have more bright and immediate discoveries of the glory of God;\nwhich, when represented by the metaphor of _seeing face to face_, has\nsome allusion to our knowing persons, when we are in their immediate\npresence, which far exceeds that knowledge which we had of them by\nreport, when at a distance from them: this the apostle expresses by such\na mode of speaking, as cannot well be understood in this imperfect\nstate, when he says,[195] _We shall see him as he is_, 1 John iii. 2.\nwhich differs from those views which the saints have sometimes had of\nthe glory of God, when manifested in an emblematical way, in this world;\nthey also behold it as shining forth in its greatest effulgency.\n\nMoreover, since the apostle speaks of this as a privilege which should\nbe enjoyed by the saints at Christ\u2019s appearing, who seems to be the\nobject more especially here intended, it may denote their beholding his\nmediatorial glory in its highest advancement; and this view which they\nhave of it, is said to be assimilating, as well as delightful; and\ntherefore he farther adds, _We shall be like him_. And this shall also\nbe satisfying: thus the Psalmist says, _I will_, or shall, _behold thy\nface in righteousness; when I awake I shall be satisfied with thy\nlikeness_, Psal. xvii. 15. How vastly does this differ from the\nbrightest views which the saints have of the glory of God here! It is\ntrue they know something of him as he manifests himself in the works of\ncreation and grace; but this is very imperfect; the object is not\npresented in its brightest lustre; nor is the soul, which is the\nrecipient thereof, enlarged, as it shall then be to take in the rays of\ndivine glory: however, though this vision of God be unspeakable, and\nmuch more shall be known of his perfections than we can attain to in\nthis life; yet the saints shall not have a comprehensive view thereof;\nfor that is not consistent with the idea of them as finite creatures.\nThus concerning the immediate vision of God.\n\nIt is farther observed, that this vision is attended with fruition; and\ntherefore it is not barely speculative or contemplative, but such as is\nfelicitating; and accordingly the saints know their interest in God, and\nsee themselves to be the happy objects of the former and present\ndisplays of the glory of his perfections, and how they have all been\nexerted in bringing them to, and fixing them in this blessed state; and\nfrom hence arises that joy which accompanies this vision of God. And\nbesides this, there are some impressions of his glory on their souls,\nwhich not only occasion, but excite this joy.\n\nAnd it is farther observed, that this fruition is of God the Father,\nSon, and Holy Ghost. The Father is beheld and enjoyed, as his glory\nshines forth in the face of Christ, as bestowing on his saints all the\nblessings which he has promised in that everlasting covenant, which was\nestablished with, and in, Christ, as their Head and Saviour; his\npurposes of grace, and all his promises, having had their full\naccomplishment in him. And the glory of Christ is beheld as the person\nto whom the whole work of redemption, together with the application\nthereof, was committed, and is now brought to perfection. And the Holy\nGhost is beheld as the person who has, by his power, rendered every\nthing which was designed by the Father, and purchased by the Son,\neffectual to answer the end which is now attained, by shedding abroad\nthe love of the Father and Son in their hearts, dwelling in them as his\ntemple, and in beginning, carrying on, and perfecting that work, which\nis so glorious in the effects and consequences thereof. In these\nrespects they have perfect and distinct communion with the Father, Son,\nand Holy Ghost; which far exceeds all they can have here, and is\ninfinitely preferable to all the delight which arises from that\nenjoyment which they have of the blessed society of perfect creatures to\nwhom they are joined.\n\n6. The last ingredient in the happiness that believers shall enjoy in\nheaven, is, that it shall be to all eternity. As the soul is immortal,\nand the body, to which it shall be united, shall be raised\nincorruptible; so the inheritance, which is reserved in heaven for the\nsaints is such as _fadeth not away_, 1 Pet. i. 4. chap. v. 4. This will\ntend to make their happiness complete, which nothing could do, were\nthere not a full assurance of the everlasting duration thereof. It would\nbe a continual allay to it, and a very uncomfortable thought to\nconclude, that though their enjoyments are very great, yet they shall\nhave an end. The glory of heaven is not like the glories of this present\nworld, which are but for a moment, and, as it were, perish in the using;\nnor like the state of holiness and happiness in which God created man at\nfirst; which, through the mutability of his nature, it was possible for\nhim to lose: but it is established by the decree of God, founded on the\nvirtue of the blood of Christ, who purchased for his people eternal\nredemption, and in the covenant of grace settled this inheritance upon\nthem, as an everlasting possession. This is a doctrine so universally\nacknowledged, that it is needless to insist on the proof of it; and it\nis so frequently mentioned in scripture, that we scarce ever read of the\nglory of heaven, but it is described as _eternal_, See Jude ver. 6, and\n21. Matt. xxv. 46. Tit. i. 2. Rom. vi. 22. Gal. vi. 8. 1 Tim. i. 16.\nPsal. xvi. 11.\n\nThere is one thing more, which, though it be not particularly mentioned\nin this answer, I would not entirely pass over, that is, what may be\nsaid to a question proposed by some, _viz._ Whether there are degrees of\nglory in heaven? The Papists not only maintain that there are, but\npretend that greater degrees thereof shall be conferred on persons, in\nproportion to the merit of their good works here on earth; and therefore\nhave assigned to them the highest places there, who have performed works\nof supererogation, by doing more than was strictly enjoined them by the\nlaw of God. But all Protestant divines, who allow that there are degrees\nof glory in heaven, strenuously maintain that these are rewards of grace\nas every ingredient in the heavenly blessedness is supposed to be. And\nwhen this doctrine is made the subject of controversy among them;\nneither side ought to contend for their particular opinion, as though it\nwas one of the most important articles of faith, or charge them who\ndefend the other side of the question, as though they were maintaining\nsomething that was directly contrary to scripture, or of a pernicious\nconsequence.\n\nThey, on the other hand, who suppose that there are no degrees of glory\nin heaven, are afraid, that if they should assert the contrary, it\nwould, in some measure, eclipse the glory of the grace of God, and give\ntoo much umbrage to the Popish doctrine of the merit of good works. But\nthis all Protestant divines, as was but now observed, sufficiently fence\nagainst. And, inasmuch as it is farther argued against degrees of glory,\nthat those external and relative privileges, which they enjoy, such as\nelection, justification, and adoption, belong equally and alike to all\nsaints; and the same price of redemption was paid for all, therefore\ntheir glory shall be equal: this method of reasoning will not appear\nvery conclusive, if we consider that sanctification is as much the\nresult of their being elected, justified, redeemed, and adopted, as\ntheir being glorified; but that appears not to be equal in all,\ntherefore it does not follow from hence, that their glory, in a future\nstate, shall be so. And though their objective blessedness, which\nconsists in that infinite fulness of grace that there is in God, is\ninconsistent with any idea of degrees; yet it does not follow, that the\ncommunications resulting from hence, which are finite, shall be in a\nlike degree; nor can it be inferred from hence, that if there are\ndegrees of glory, the state of those who have the least degree, shall be\nimperfect in its kind, or have any thing in it which shall afford the\nleast abatement of their happiness, or be the occasion of envy or\nuneasiness, as the superior excellencies of some, in this imperfect\nstate, often appear to be, since that is inconsistent with perfect\nholiness: nor is it to be supposed that there are any degrees, with\nrespect to the deliverance of the saints from the sins, guilt, and\nmiseries of this present life, which is equal in all; nor do they, who\nthink that there are degrees of glory in heaven, in the least insinuate\nthat every one shall not be perfectly filled and satisfied, in\nproportion to his receptive disposition; as a small vessel, put into the\nocean, is equally full, in proportion to its capacity, with the largest;\nand therefore none of the saints will desire, nor, indeed, can contain\nmore than God designs to communicate to them.\n\nAs for that scripture which is sometimes brought in defence of this\nopinion, _viz._ the parable of the persons that were hired to work in\nthe _vineyard_, in Matt. xx. 9. in which it is said, that _they that\nwere hired about the eleventh hour, received every man a penny_, which\nis as much as others received who were hired early in the morning, and\nhad _born the heat and burden of the day_; that does not sufficiently\nprove it, since some of these labourers are represented as _murmuring_,\nand insinuating that they had wrong done them, to whom Christ replies,\n_Is thine eye evil, because I am good?_ and they are described as\n_called_, but _not chosen_, ver. 15, 16. Therefore it is not designed to\nset forth the glory of heaven, but the temper and disposition of the\nJewish church, who were partakers of the external blessings of the\ncovenant of grace, and the gospel-church, as having equal privileges; so\nthat the arguments generally insisted on to prove that there are no\ndegrees of glory in heaven, can hardly be reckoned sufficient to\noverthrow the contrary doctrine; especially if those other scriptures,\nthat are often brought to prove that there are, be understood in the\nmost obvious sense thereof; and they are such as these, _viz._ Daniel\nxii. 3. _They that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the\nfirmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for\never and ever_; where the prophet speaks of those who excel in grace and\nusefulness in this world; and then considers them not only as _wise_,\nbut as _turning many to righteousness_; whose glory, after the\nresurrection, of which he speaks in the foregoing verse, has something\nillustrious and distinguishing in it, which is compared to the\n_brightness of the firmament and stars_.\n\nTo this it is objected, that our Saviour, in Matt. xiii. 43. illustrates\nthe happiness of all the glorified saints, whom he calls _the\nrighteous_, by their _shining as the sun_; therefore the prophet Daniel\nmeans no other glory but what is common to all saints; and consequently\nthere are no degrees of glory. But to this it may be replied, that our\nSaviour does not compare the glory of one of the saints in heaven, with\nthat of another; but intimates, that the happiness of every one of them\nshall be inconceivably great, and very fitly illustrates it by the\n_brightness of the sun_; whereas the prophet is speaking of some that\nwere honoured above others in their usefulness here; and then considers\nthem as having peculiar degrees of glory conferred upon them hereafter,\nwhich is something more than what he had said in the foregoing verse,\nwhich is common to all the saints, when he speaks of them as _awaking\nout of the dust to everlasting life_.\n\nAnother scripture which is also brought to prove this doctrine, is in 1\nCor. xv. 41, 42. _There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of\nthe moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differeth from\nanother star in glory; so also is the resurrection of the dead_; where\nthe apostle is speaking concerning the happiness of the saints after the\nresurrection, whom he compares not with what they were when they left\nthe world; for then had no glory, being _sown in corruption and\ndishonour_; but he seems to compare the glory of one saint, after the\nresurrection, with that of another; and accordingly he illustrates it by\nthe brightness of the heavenly luminaries; every one of which has a\nglory superior to terrestrial bodies: nevertheless he seems to intimate,\nthat if we compare them together, the glory of the one exceeds that of\nthe other. Thus the glory of the least saint in heaven, is inconceivably\ngreater than that of the greatest here on earth: it is, indeed, full and\ncomplete in its kind; yet when compared with the glory of others, it may\nin some circumstances fall short of it.\n\nThere is another argument brought by some, to prove this doctrine, taken\nfrom the parable of the _talents_, in Matt. xxv. 14, _& seq._ in which\nthe reward is proportioned to the respective improvement thereof; which\nseems to respect some blessings which they were to receive in another\nworld; inasmuch as our Saviour compares himself to one that is\n_travelling into a far country_, and after a long time, returning and\nreckoning with his servants: by the former of which is meant, his\nascension into heaven; and by the latter, his return to judgment; and\nconsequently those regards which differ in degree, must respect some\npeculiar glory, which he will confer on his people in another world;\nand, indeed, the whole chapter seems to refer to the same thing. The\nformer parable of the _wise_ and _foolish virgins_ denotes the behaviour\nof persons here, and the consequence thereof hereafter: and the latter\npart of the chapter expressly speaks of Christ\u2019s coming to judgment, and\ndealing with every one according to his works. If therefore the\nimprovement of these talents respects some advantages that one is to\nexpect above the other, it seems to intimate that there are degrees of\nglory.\n\nMoreover, this is farther argued from those various degrees of grace\nthat some have in this world above others, which is a peculiar honour\nbestowed on them, and is sometimes considered as the fruit and\nconsequence of their right improvement of those graces which they had\nbefore received. And this may be considered as laying a foundation for\ngreater praise; which argues that the soul shall be enlarged in\nproportion thereunto; so that it may give unto God the glory due to his\nname, as the result thereof. Therefore if we take an estimate of God\u2019s\nfuture, from his present dispensations, it not only removes some\nobjections that are sometimes brought against this doctrine; but adds\nfarther strength to those arguments taken from the scriptures\nbefore-mentioned, to prove it. But notwithstanding all that has been\nsaid, on this subject, it is the safest way for us to confess, that we\nknow but little of the affairs of another world, and much less of the\ncircumstances of glorified saints, considered as compared with one\nanother. Nor are we to conclude, if there are degrees of glory, that the\nhighest degree thereof is founded on the merit of what any have done or\nsuffered for Christ; or, on the other hand, that the lowest is\ninconsistent with complete blessedness; which shall be proportioned to\ntheir most enlarged desires, and as much as they are capable of\ncontaining. Thus concerning the question proposed by some, _viz._\nWhether there are degrees of glory?\n\nThere is another which has some affinity with it, that I would not\nwholly pass over; namely, whether the saints in heaven shall not have\nsome additional improvements, or make progressive advances in some\nthings, which may be reckoned a farther ingredient in their future\nhappiness? This is to be insisted on with the utmost caution, lest any\nthing should be advanced which is inconsistent with the complete\nblessedness, which they are immediately possessed of: however, I do not\nthink that it will detract from it, if we should venture to assert, that\nthe understanding of glorified saints shall receive very considerable\nimprovements, from those objects which shall be presented to them, and\nthe perpetual discoveries that will be made of the glorious mysteries of\ndivine grace, whereby the whole scene of providence, and its\nsubserviency to their eternal happiness, shall be opened, to raise their\nwonder, and enhance their praise. Since it is not inconsistent with the\nperfect blessedness of the angels, to desire to know more of this\nmystery, which they are said to _look into_, 1 Pet. i. 12. and inasmuch\nas their joy is increased by those new occasions, which daily present\nthemselves; why may not the same be said with respect to the saints in\nheaven; especially if we consider that this will redound so much to the\nglory of God, as well as give us more raised ideas of that happiness\nwhich they shall be possessed of.\n\nWe shall conclude with some practical inferences from what has been said\nin this answer, concerning the happiness of the saints in heaven.\n\n(1.) We may learn from hence the great difference which there is between\nthe militant and triumphant state of the church. Here they meet with\nperpetual conflicts, but hereafter they shall be crowned with complete\nvictory: now they walk by faith, but then faith shall be swallowed up in\nvision, and hope in enjoyment. The saints of God are, at present, in\ntheir minority, having a right to, but not the possession of their\ninheritance. Their desires are enlarged, and their expectations raised;\nbut nothing can give them full satisfaction till they arrive to that\nstate of perfection, which God will, at last, bring them to.\n\n(2.) The account which we have of the happiness of heaven, as being of a\nspiritual nature, and accompanied with perfect blessedness, and the\nenjoyments thereof being agreeable thereto; this may tend to reprove the\ncarnal conceptions which many entertain concerning it, as though it were\nno other than what Mahomet promised his followers; who fancy that they\nshall have therein, those delights, which are agreeable to the sensual\nappetites of such as have no other ideas of happiness, but those which\nconsist in the pleasures of sin: neither is it enough for us to conceive\nof it, as barely a freedom from the miseries of this life (though this\nbe an ingredient therein) as if it had no reference to the bringing\nthose graces which are begun here, to perfection; or it did not consist\nin that blessed work of admiring and adoring the divine perfections, and\nimproving the displays thereof in a Mediator, which the saints shall for\never be engaged in.\n\n(3.) Let us not content ourselves barely with the description which we\nhave in the word of God, concerning the glory of heaven, but enquire,\nwhether we have a well-grounded hope, that we have a right to it, and\nare found in the exercise of those graces which will be an evidence\nthereof? It is a very low and insignificant thing for us to be convinced\nthat the glory of heaven contains in it all those things which shall\nrender them who are possessed of it, completely happy, if we have no\nground to claim an interest in it; and if we have this ground of hope,\nit will have a tendency to excite practical godliness, which it is\ninseparably connected with, and affords an evidence of our right to\neternal life: whereas, without this, our hope will be delusive, and we\nchargeable with an unwarrantable presumption, in expecting salvation\nwithout sanctification.\n\n(4.) If we have any hope concerning this future blessedness; this ought\nto be improved by us, to support and comfort us under the present\nmiseries of life; as the apostle exhorts the church to which he writes,\nto _comfort one another with these words_, 1 Thess. iv. 18. or from\nthese considerations; which should also be an inducement to us to bear\n_affliction_ with patience, since they _work for us an exceeding and\neternal weight of glory_, 2 Cor. iv. 17. And,\n\n(5.) Let the hope we have of the privileges to be enjoyed hereafter, put\nus upon the greatest diligence in the performance of those duties, which\nare incumbent on us, as expectants of this inheritance; and let us\nendeavour to have our conversation in heaven, and be frequently\nmeditating on the blessed employment thereof; and be earnest with God,\nthat we may be made more meet for, and in the end received to it.\n\n(6.) If we are enabled, by faith, to conclude that we have a right to\nthe heavenly inheritance, let us be frequently engaged in the work and\nemployment thereof, so far as is consistent with this present imperfect\nstate; let us be much in praising and blessing God, who has prepared\nthese glorious mansions for his people; and let us set a due value on\nthe blood of Christ, by which they were purchased; and give glory to the\nHoly Ghost, who has given us the earnest thereof; and having begun the\nwork of grace, will, we trust, carry it on to perfection.\n\nFootnote 191:\n\n _Or, shall God, who justifieth?_\n\nFootnote 192:\n\n _Vid Wits. in Symb. Exercit._ 22. \u00a7 18-20.\n\nFootnote 193:\n\n _See Vol. I. Page 286_\n\nFootnote 194:\n\n _What speech can be without atmosphere, and without flesh?_\n\nFootnote 195:\n\n God is an _infinite_ being. This also is a principle established by\n both natural and revealed religion. The soul of man is finite, and, to\n whatever perfection it may be advanced, it will always continue to be\n so. This is another indisputable principle. It would imply a\n contradiction to affirm, that an infinite Spirit can be seen, or\n _fully_ known, in a strict literal sense, as it is, by a finite\n spirit. The human soul, therefore, being a finite spirit, can never\n perfectly see, that is, fully comprehend, _as he is_, God, who is an\n infinite spirit. The proposition in our text, then, necessarily\n requires some restriction. This inference arises immediate from the\n two principles now laid down, and this second consequence furnishes\n another ground of our reflections.\n\n But, although it would be absurd to suppose, that God, an infinite\n spirit, can be fully known by a finite human spirit, yet there is no\n absurdity in affirming, God can _communicate_ himself to a man in a\n very close and intimate manner proper to transform him. This may be\n done four ways. There are, we conceive, four sorts of communications;\n a communication of ideas; a communication of love; a communication of\n virtue, and a communication of felicity. In these four ways, _we shall\n see God_, and by thus seeing him _as he is, we shall be like him_ in\n these four respects. We will endeavour by discussing each of these\n articles to explain them clearly; and here all your attention will be\n necessary, for without this our whole discourse will be nothing to you\n but a sound, destitute of reason and sense.\n\n The first communication will be a communication of _ideas_. We shall\n _see God as he is_, because we shall participate his ideas; and by\n seeing God as he is, we shall become _like him_, because the knowledge\n of his ideas will rectify ours, and will render them like his. To know\n the ideas of an imperfect being is not to participate his\n imperfections. An accurate mind may know the ideas of an inaccurate\n mind without admitting them. But to know the ideas of a perfect spirit\n is to participate his perfections; because to know his ideas is to\n know them as they are, and to know them as they are is to perceive the\n evidence of them. When, therefore, God shall communicate his ideas to\n us, _we shall be like him_, by the conformity of our ideas to his.\n\n What are the ideas of God? They are clear in their nature; they are\n clear in their images; they are perfect in their degree; they are\n complex in their relations; and they are complete in their number. In\n all these respects the ideas of God are infinitely superior to the\n ideas of men.\n\n 1. Men are full of _false_ notions. Their ideas are often the very\n reverse of the objects, of which they should be clear representations.\n We have false ideas in physic, false ideas in policy, false ideas in\n religion. We have false ideas of honour and of disgrace, of felicity\n and of misery. Hence we often mistake fancy for reason, and shadow for\n substance. But God hath only _true_ ideas. His idea of order is an\n exact representation of order. His idea of irregularity exactly\n answers to irregularity; and so of all other objects. He will make us\n know his ideas, and by making us know them he will rectify ours.\n\n 2. Men have often _obscure_ ideas. They only see glimmerings. They\n perceive appearances rather than demonstrations. They are placed in a\n world of probabilities, and, in consideration of this state, in which\n it has pleased the Creator to place them, they have more need of a\n course of reasoning on a new plan, to teach them how a rational\n creature ought to conduct himself, when he is surrounded by\n probabilities, than of a course of reasoning and determining, which\n supposes him surrounded with demonstration. But God hath only _clear_\n ideas. No veil covers objects; no darkness obscure his ideas of them.\n When he shall _appear_, he will communicate his ideas to us, and they\n will rectify ours, he will cause the scales, that hide objects from\n us, to fall from our eyes; and he will dissipate the clouds, which\n prevent our clear conception of them.\n\n 3. Men have very few ideas perfect in _degree_. They see only the\n surface of objects. Who, in all the world, hath a perfect idea of\n matter? Who ever had perfect ideas of spirit? Who could ever exactly\n define either? Who was ever able to inform us how the idea of motion\n results from that of body; how the idea of sensation results from that\n of spirit? Who ever knew to which class space belongs? It would be\n very easy, my brethren, to increase this list, would time permit; and\n were I not prevented by knowing, that they, who are incapable of\n understanding these articles, have already in their own minds\n pronounced them destitute of all sense and reason. But God hath\n _perfect_ ideas. His ideas comprehend the whole of all objects. He\n will communicate to us this disposition of mind, and will give us such\n a penetration as shall enable us to attain the knowledge of the\n essence of beings, and to contemplate them in their whole.\n\n 4. Men have very few ideas _complex_ in their relations. I mean, their\n minds are so limited, that, although they may be capable of combining\n a certain number of ideas, yet they are confounded by combining a\n greater number. We have distinct ideas of units, and we are capable of\n combining a few: but as soon as we add hundred to hundred, million to\n million, the little capacity of our souls is overwhelmed with the\n multitude of these objects, and our weakness obliges us to sink under\n the weight. We have a few ideas of motion. We know what space of body,\n to which a certain degree of velocity is communicated, must pass\n through in a given time: but as soon as we suppose a greater degree of\n motion, as soon as we imagine an augmentation of velocity to this\n greater degree; as soon as we try to apply our knowledge of moving\n powers to those enormous bodies, which the mighty hand of God guides\n in the immensity of space, we are involved in perplexity and\n confusion. But God conceives _infinite combinations_. He will make us\n participate, as far as our minds can, his ideas; so that we shall be\n able to give a large expanse to our meditation without any fear of\n confusing ourselves.\n\n 5. In fine, the ideas of mankind are incomplete in their _number_.\n Most men think, there are only two sorts of beings, body and spirit;\n and they have also determined, that there can be only two. A rash\n decision in itself: but more rash still in a creature so confined in\n his genius as man. But the ideas of God are _complete_. He knows all\n possible beings. He will make us participate this disposition of mind,\n and from it may arise ideas of myriads of beings, on which now we\n cannot reason, because now we have no ideas of them. A communication\n of ideas is the first way, in which God will make himself known to us.\n This will be the first trait of our resemblance of him. _We shall be\n like him, for we shall see him as he is._\n\n The second communication of God to a beatified soul is a communication\n of love. We cannot possibly partake of the ideas of God without\n participating his love. To participate the ideas of God is to possess\n just notions. To possess just notions is to place each object in the\n rank, that is due to it; consequently, we shall regard the chief being\n as the only object of supreme love.\n\n What is necessary to answer the idea, that an upright soul forms of\n the lovely? The lovely object must answer three ideas: the idea of the\n great and marvellous; the idea of the just; and the idea of the good:\n and, if I may venture to speak so, of the beatifying. Now, it is\n impossible to know God without entertaining these three ideas of him\n alone; consequently it is impossible to know God without loving him.\n And this is the reason of our profound admiration of the morality of\n the gospel. The morality of the gospel is the very quintessence of\n order. It informs us, no creature deserves supreme love. It makes this\n principle the substance of its laws. _Thou shalt love the Lord thy God\n with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind_,\n Matt. xxii. 37.\n\n How worthy of supreme love will this God appear, how fully will he\n answer the idea of the _great_ and the _marvellous_, when _we shall\n see him as he is_! He will answer it by his independence. Creatures\n exist: but they have only a borrowed being. God derives his existence\n from none. He is a self-existent being. He will answer our idea of the\n magnificent by the immutability of his nature. Creatures exist: but\n they have no fixed and permanent being. They arise from nothing to\n existence. Their existence is rather variation and inconstancy than\n real being. But God, but _I the Lord_, says he of himself, _I change\n not_, Mal. iii. 6. _the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever_, Heb.\n xiii. 8. He is, as it were, the fixed point, on which all creatures\n revolve, while he is neither moved by their motion, shaken by their\n action, nor in the least imaginable degree altered by all their\n countless vicissitudes. He will answer the idea of the great and\n marvellous by the efficiency of his will. Creatures have some\n efficient acts of violation: but none of themselves.\u2014But go back to\n that period, in which there was nothing. Figure to yourselves those\n immense voids, which preceded the formation of the universe, and\n represent to yourself God alone. He forms the plan of the world. He\n regulates the whole design. He assigns an epoch of duration to it in a\n point of eternity. This act of his will produces this whole universe.\n Hence a sun, a moon, and stars. Hence earth and sea, rivers and\n fields. Hence kings, princes, and philosophers. _He spake, and it was\n done; he commanded, and it stood fast. The heavens were made by the\n word of the Lord, and all the host of them by the breath of his\n mouth_, Psal. xxxiii. 9. God, then, perfectly answers our idea of the\n grand and the marvellous. He answers also the idea of the just.\n\n It was he, who gave us an idea of _justice_ or order. It was he, who\n made the greatest sacrifices to it. It was he, who moved heaven and\n earth to re-establish it, and who testified how dear it was to him by\n sacrificing the most worthy victim, that could possibly suffer, I mean\n his only Son.\n\n Finally, God will perfectly answer our idea of the _good_ and the\n _beatifying_. Who can come up to it except a God, who opens to his\n creatures an access of his treasures? A God, who reveals himself to\n them in order to take them away from their _broken cisterns_, and to\n conduct them to a _fountain of living waters_, Jer. ii. 13. A God,\n whose eternal wisdom cries to mankind, _Ho, every one that thirsteth,\n come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money, come ye, buy and\n eat, yea come, buy wine and milk without money, and without price.\n Wherefore do ye spend money for that, which is not bread? and your\n labour for that, which satisfieth not? Hearken diligently unto me, and\n eat ye that, which is good, and let your soul delight itself in\n fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me; hear, and your soul shall\n live._ Isa. lv. 1-3.\n\n We cannot, then, know God without loving him. And thus a communication\n of ideas leads to a communication of love. But this communication of\n love will render us _like_ the God, whom we admire. For the property\n of love, in a soul inflamed with it, is to transform it in some sort\n into the object of its admiration. This is particularly proper to\n divine love. We love God, because we know his attributes; when we know\n his attributes, we know, we can no better contribute to the perfection\n of our being than by imitating them, and the desire we have to perfect\n our being will necessitate us to apply wholly to imitate them, and to\n become _like him_.\n\n Let us pass to our third consideration. The third communication of God\n to a beatified soul is a communication of his _virtues_. To love and\n to obey, in Scripture-style, is the same thing. _If ye love me, keep\n my commandments_, is a well-known expression of Jesus Christ, John\n xiv. 15. _He, who saith I know him, and keepeth not his commandments,\n is a liar, and the truth is not in him_, is an expression of our\n apostle, 1 John ii. 4. This is not peculiar to the love of God. To\n love and to obey, even in civil society, are usually two things, which\n have a very close connexion. But, as no creature hath ever excited all\n the love, of which a soul is capable, so there is no creature, to whom\n we have rendered a perfect obedience. It is only in regard to God,\n that there is an inseparable connexion between obedience and love. For\n when we love God, because we know him, we are soon convinced, that he\n cannot ordain any thing to his creature but what is useful to him;\n when we are convinced, he can ordain nothing to be performed by his\n creature but what is useful to him, it becomes as impossible not to\n obey him as it is not to love ourselves. To love and to obey is one\n thing, then, when the object in question is a being supremely lovely.\n These are demonstrations; but to obey God, and to keep his\n commandments, is to be _like God_.\n\n The commandments of God are formed on the idea of the divine\n perfections. God hath an idea of order; he loves it; he follows it;\n and this is all he ever hath required, and all he ever will require of\n his intelligent creatures. He requires us to know order, to love it,\n to follow it. An intelligent creature, therefore, who shall be brought\n to obey the commandments of God, will be _like God_. _Be ye perfect,\n as your Father, which is in heaven, is perfect_, Matt. v. 48. _Be ye\n holy, for I am holy_, 1 Pet. i. 16. _Every man, that hath this hope in\n him, purifieth himself even as he is pure_, 1 John iii. 3. These\n precepts are given us here on earth, and we obey them imperfectly now;\n but we shall yield a perfect obedience to them in heaven, when we\n shall _see him as he is_. Here, our apostle affirms, _Whosoever\n sinneth, hath not seen him, neither known him_, ver. 6. that is to\n say, he who suffers sin to reign over him, doth not know God; for if\n he knew God, he would have just ideas of God, he would love him; and,\n if he loved him, he would imitate him. But in heaven we shall see, and\n know him, we shall not sin, we shall imitate him, _we shall be like\n him, for we shall see him as he is_.\n\n Lastly, the fourth communication of the Deity with beatified souls is\n a communication of _felicity_. In an economy of order, to be holy and\n to be happy are two things very closely connected. Now we are in an\n economy of disorder. Accordingly, virtue and felicity do not always\n keep company together, and it sometimes happens, that for _having hope\n in Christ we are_, for a while, _of all men most miserable_, 1 Cor.\n xv. 19. But this economy of disorder must be abolished. Order must be\n established. St. Peter, speaking of Jesus Christ, says, _The heavens\n must receive him until the times of the restitution of all things_,\n Acts iii. 21. When all things shall be restored, virtue and happiness\n will be closely united, and, consequently, by participating the\n holiness of God we shall participate his happiness.\n\n SAYRIN.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. XCI., XCII.\n\n\n QUEST. XCI. _What is the duty that God requireth of man?_\n\n ANSW. The duty which God requireth of man, is, obedience to his\n revealed will.\n\n QUEST. XCII. _What did God at first reveal unto man as the rule of\n his obedience?_\n\n ANSW. The rule of obedience revealed to Adam in the estate of\n innocency, and to all mankind in him, beside a special command, not\n to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,\n was, the moral law.\n\nHaving, in the former part of the Catechism, been led to consider what\nwe are to believe concerning God, and those works of nature and grace,\nwherein he has displayed his glory to man, whether considered as created\nafter his image, or having lost it by sin, and afterwards redeemed, and\nmade partaker of those blessings that are consequent thereupon; we are\nnow to consider him as under an indispensable obligation to yield\nobedience to God. They who have received most grace from him, are laid\nunder the strongest ties and engagements hereunto; accordingly we may\nobserve,\n\nI. That, obedience is due from man to God. This results from the\nrelation we stand in to him as creatures;[196] who ought to say with the\nPsalmist, _O come let us worship and bow down, let us kneel before the\nLord our Maker_, Psal. xcv. 6. and particularly when considered as\nintelligent creatures, having excellencies superior to all others in\nthis lower world, whereby we are rendered capable, not only of\nsubserving the ends of his providence, but performing obedience, as\nsubjects of moral government: But if we are redeemed, justified, and\nsanctified, and made partakers of all the blessings that accompany\nsalvation; this obligation to duty, is greater than that of all others,\nas the apostle says, _Ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God\nin your body, and in your spirit, which are God\u2019s_, 1 Cor. vi. 2. And\nthis may be considered, not only as our duty, but our highest wisdom; as\nit is said, _The fear of the Lord, that is wisdom, and to depart from\nevil, is understanding_, Job xxviii. 28. hereby, in some measure, we\nanswer the end for which we came into the world. And it is our interest,\ninasmuch as it is conducive to, and inseparably connected with our\npresent and future blessedness: Nevertheless we are to be very sensible\nthat this is out of our own power, as our Saviour says, _Without me ye\ncan do nothing_, John xv. 5. Therefore we should exercise a constant\ndependence on him, who works in his people both to will and to do, of\nhis own good pleasure. We might here consider the nature and properties\nof that duty and obedience which we owe to God.\n\n1. If it be such as we hope God will accept or approve of, it must\nproceed from a renewed nature, and as a consequence thereof, from a\nprinciple of love to God, as a reconciled Father; not from a slavish\nfear and dread of his wrath, as a sin-revenging Judge. Thus the Psalmist\nsays, _There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared_,\nPsal. cxxx. 4.\n\n2. It ought to be without the least reserve, as containing a ready\ncompliance with whatever he commands; and hereby we ought to approve\nourselves to him, as our sovereign Lord and Law-giver, and consider that\nwe are under his all-seeing eye; and accordingly his glory is to be\nassigned as the highest end of all we do.\n\n3. It ought to be performed with constancy; and therefore it doth not\nconsist barely in a sudden fit of devotion, arising from the dictates of\nan awakened conscience, or the dread we have of his wrath, when under\nsome distressing providence; but it ought to be the constant work and\nbusiness of life. And,\n\n4. When we have done or suffered most for God, we are not only to\nconsider ourselves as _unprofitable servants_, Luke xvii. 10. as our\nSaviour expresses it; but we must lament our imperfections, and be\ndeeply humbled for the iniquities that attend our holy things; inasmuch\nas _there is not a just man upon earth that doth good, and sinneth not_,\nEccles. vii. 20.\n\nII. In order to our yielding obedience, it is necessary that God should\nsignify to us, in what instances he will be obeyed, and the manner how\nit is to be performed; otherwise it would rather be a fulfilling our own\nwill than his. None but those who are authorized hereto, and receive\nwhat they impart to us by divine inspiration, can, without the boldest\npresumption, assume this prerogative to themselves, so as to prescribe\nto us a rule of duty to God; and therefore it follows, that this\nobedience must be to his revealed will. The secret purposes of God are\nthe rule and measure of his own actings; but his revealed will is the\nrule of our obedience. _Secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but\nthose things which are revealed, belong unto us and to our children_,\nDeut. xxix. 29.\n\nIII. The will of God, as thus made known to us, is called a Law: Which,\nthat we may farther understand, let us consider, that a law is the\ndecree or revealed will of a sovereign, designed to direct and govern\nthe actions of his subjects, and thereby to secure his own honour and\ntheir welfare. And if this be applied to the law of God, we must\nconsider him as our Lord and Sovereign, whose will is the rule of our\nactions; and he being infinitely wise and good, is able and inclined to\ndirect us in those things that are conducive to his own honour and our\nsafety and happiness; and this he has been pleased to do, and\naccordingly has given us a law as the rule of life.\n\nThe laws of God are either such as take their rise from his holy nature,\nand accordingly our obligation to yield obedience thereto, proceeds not\nonly or principally from the command of God, but from their being\nagreeable to his divine perfections, which must be assigned as the\nreason of his prescribing them as matter of duty. These are all\nreducible to what we call, in general, the law of nature; which, because\nit is agreeable to the dictates of reason, it is called, by way of\neminency, _The moral law_. Thus when we consider ourselves as creatures,\nwe are led to confess that we are subject to God, and therefore bound to\nobey him; and when we think of him as a God of infinite perfection, this\nobedience must be agreeable thereunto; and because he is a Spirit, it\nmust be performed in a spiritual manner; and as he is a holy God, he is\nto be worshipped with reverence and holy fear. Thus far we are induced\nto yield obedience by the law of nature.\n\nBut, on the other hand, there are many laws relating to the\ncircumstances or manner in which God will be worshipped, which are\nfounded in his sovereign will; and these we call positive laws. Of this\nkind was that law given to our first parents, not to eat of the tree of\nknowledge of good and evil; and, doubtless, there were many other laws\ngiven to them relating to their conduct of life, and mode of worship,\nthough they are not particularly mentioned in that short history we have\nof the state of man before the fall. As for the moral law, it is said,\nin one of the answers we are explaining, to have been revealed to Adam\nin his state of innocency, and to all mankind in him. Its being revealed\nto man, must be supposed to be a less proper way of speaking; inasmuch\nas that method of discovery is more especially applicable to positive\nlaws; and therefore I would rather chuse to express it as it is in a\nforegoing answer[197], by God\u2019s writing his laws in the hearts of our\nfirst parents, or impressing the commands of the moral law on their\nnature; so that by the power of reasoning, with which they were endowed,\nthey might attain to the knowledge thereof. So that man, by the light of\nnature, knew all things contained in the moral law.\n\nAs to what is farther said in this answer, that the moral law was given\nto man in innocency; that has been considered elsewhere. And as all\nmankind were represented by him, so we are to understand those words,\nthat it was given to all mankind in him. But these things have been\ninsisted on in another place, as also what relates to his being\nprohibited from eating the tree of knowledge of good and evil, I shall\npass it over, and proceed to speak more particularly concerning the\nmoral law, together with the use thereof to all sorts of men.\n\nFootnote 196:\n\n \u201cIt may be asked, Is there no _reason_ or _nature_ of things? Yes; as\n certainly as there are things. But the nature and reason of things,\n considered _independently_ of the divine Will, or _without_ it, have\n no more _obligation_ in them, than a _divine worship_ considered\n independently of, and without any regard to the _existence_ of God.\n For the _Will_ of God is as absolutely necessary to found all _moral\n obligation_ upon, as the existence of God is necessary to be the\n foundation of religious worship. And the fitness of _moral\n obligations_, without the _Will_ of God, is only like the fitness of a\n _religious_ worship without the _existence_ of God.\n\n And it is as just to say, that he destroys the _reason_ of religion\n and piety, who founds it upon the nature and existence of God, as to\n say, he saps the foundation of moral obligations, who founds them upon\n the Will of God. And as religion cannot be justly or solidly defended,\n but by shewing its connexion with, and dependance upon, God\u2019s\n existence; so neither can moral obligations be asserted with strength\n and reason, but by shewing them to be the Will of God.\n\n It may again be asked, Can God make that fit in _its self_, which is\n in _its self absolutely_ unfit to be done?\n\n This question consists of improper terms. For God\u2019s Will no more makes\n actions to be fit _in themselves_, than it makes _things_ to exist\n _in, or of themselves_. No things, nor any actions, have any\n _absolute_ fitness, and in _themselves_.\n\n A _gift_, a _blow_, the making a _wound_, or _shedding_ of _blood_,\n considered in themselves, have no _absolute_ fitness, but are fit or\n unfit according to any variety of incidental circumstances.\n\n When therefore God, by his Will, makes any thing fit to be done, he\n does not make the thing fit in _its self_, which is just in the _same\n state_ considered in _its self_, as it was before; but, it becomes fit\n for the person to do it, because he can be happy, or do that which is\n fit for him to do, by doing the Will of God.\n\n For instance, the _bare eating_ a fruit, considered in _its self_, is\n neither fit nor unfit. If a fruit be appointed by God for our food and\n nourishment, then it is as fit to eat it, as to preserve our lives. If\n a fruit be poisonous, then it is as unfit to eat it, as to commit\n self-murder. If eating of a fruit be prohibited by an express order of\n God, then it is as unfit to eat it, as to eat our own damnation.\n\n But in none of these instances is the eating or not eating, considered\n in _its self_, _fit_ or _unfit_; but has all its fitness, or\n unfitness, from such circumstances, as are entirely owing to the Will\n of God.\n\n Supposing, therefore, God to require a person to do something, which,\n according to his present circumstances, _without_ that command, he\n ought not to do, God does not make that which is _absolutely_ unfit in\n _itself_, fit to be done; but only adds _new circumstances_ to an\n action, that is neither fit nor unfit, moral nor immoral in _itself_,\n but _because_ of its circumstances.\n\n To instance, in the case of _Abraham_ required to sacrifice his son.\n The killing of a man is neither good nor bad, considered _absolutely_\n in _its self_. It was unlawful for _Abraham_ to kill his son, because\n of the _circumstances_ he was in with regard to his son. But when the\n divine Command was given, _Abraham_ was in a _new state_; the action\n had _new circumstances_; and then it was as lawful for _Abraham_ to\n kill his son, as it was lawful for God to require any man\u2019s life,\n either by _sickness_, or any _other means_ he should please to\n appoint.\n\n And it had been as unlawful for _Abraham_ to have disobeyed God in\n this extraordinary command, as to have cursed God at any _ordinary\n calamity_ of providence.\u2014\n\n Again, it is objected, _If there be nothing right or wrong, good or\n bad, antecedently and independently of the Will of God, there can be\n no reason, why God should will, or command one thing, rather than\n another_.\n\n It is answered, _first_, That all goodness, and all possible\n perfection, is as _eternal_ as God, and as _essential_ to him as his\n existence. And to say, that they are either _antecedent_ or\n _consequent_, _dependent_ or _independent_ of his Will, would be\n equally absurd. To ask, therefore, whether there be not something\n right and wrong, antecedent to the Will of God, to render his Will\n _capable_ of being right, is as absurd, as to ask for some antecedent\n cause of his existence, that he may be proved to exist necessarily.\n And to ask, how God can be good, if there be not something good\n independently of him, is asking how he can be infinite, if there be\n not something infinite independently of him. And, to seek for any\n other _source_ or _reason_ of the divine Goodness, besides the divine\n Nature, is like seeking for some external cause, and help of the\n divine omnipotence.\n\n The goodness and wisdom, therefore, by which God is wise and good, and\n to which all his works of wisdom and goodness are owing, are neither\n _antecedent_, nor _consequent_ to his Will.\u2014\u201d\n\n HUMAN REASON.\n\nFootnote 197:\n\n _See Quest._ xvii.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. XCIII., XCIV., XCV., XCVI., XCVII.\n\n\n QUEST. XCIII. _What is the moral law?_\n\n ANSW. The moral law is the declaration of the will of God to\n mankind, directing and binding every one to personal, perfect, and\n perpetual conformity and obedience thereunto, in the frame and\n disposition of the whole man, soul and body, and in performance of\n all those duties of holiness and righteousness which he oweth to God\n and man; promising life upon the fulfilling, and threatening death\n upon the breach of it.\n\n QUEST. XCIV. _Is there any use of the moral law to man, since the\n fall?_\n\n ANSW. Although no man, since the fall, can attain to righteousness\n and life by the moral law; yet there is great use thereof, as well\n common to all men, as peculiar, either to the unregenerate, or the\n regenerate.\n\n QUEST. XCV. _Of what use is the moral law to all men?_\n\n ANSW. The moral law is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy\n nature and will of God, and of their duty, binding them to walk\n accordingly; to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of\n the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives; to humble\n them in a sense of their sin and misery, and thereby help them to a\n clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and of the perfection\n of his obedience.\n\n QUEST. XCVI. _What particular use is there of the moral law to\n unregenerate men?_\n\n ANSW. The moral law is of use to unregenerate men, to awaken their\n consciences to fly from wrath to come, and to drive them to Christ;\n or, upon their continuance in the estate and way of sin, to leave\n them inexcusable, and under the curse thereof.\n\n QUEST. XCVII. _What special use is there of the moral law to the\n regenerate?_\n\n ANSW. Although they that are regenerate, and believe in Christ, be\n delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works, so as thereby\n they are neither justified, nor condemned; yet beside the general\n uses thereof common to them with all men, it is of special use to\n shew them how much they are bound to Christ for his fulfilling it,\n and enduring the curse thereof in their stead, and for their good;\n and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness, and to express the\n same in their greater care, to conform themselves thereunto, as the\n rule of their obedience.\n\nIn these answers we have,\n\nI. A description of the moral law, in which we may observe,\n\n1. That it is a declaration of the will of God to mankind, that so we\nmay not be destitute of a rule to guide and regulate our behaviour, both\ntowards God and man. This is the first idea contained in a law; and\nthere is another, which respects the obligation which we are laid under\nhereby, arising from our being creatures, and consequently subject to\nGod, who, as the supreme governor, has an undoubted right to demand\nobedience from us to every thing that he prescribes and reveals to us,\nas a rule for our direction therein. Moreover, that which God requires\nof us in this law, is, personal, perfect, and perpetual conformity and\nobedience thereunto.\n\n(1.) It must be personal, as denoting that it is not to be performed by\nproxy; so that whatever services we may expect from men, we must not\nconclude that they can perform obedience for us to God, and thereby\nfulfil the obligation we are personally laid under. Yea, we may proceed\nfarther, and assert, that what Christ has performed for us, does not\nexempt us from an obligation to yield perfect obedience; though it is\nnot to be performed by us with the same view with which he performed it,\nas will be farther considered under a following head, where we shall\nshew, that though it is not to be obeyed by us as a covenant of works;\nnevertheless we are obliged to obey it as a rule of life.\n\n(2.) Our obedience to the law of God must be perfect. The same\nobligation that man was under at first, to yield perfect obedience,\nremains still in force, though we are not able to perform it. The\ninsolvency of man by the fall, did not cancel or disannul this\ndebt[198]. And how much soever God may own and approve of the sincerity\nof his people, which is all the perfection which fallen man can arrive\nto in this world; yet we must not suppose, that hereby we fulfil the\nobligation which God, as a law-giver, has laid us under. This I the\nrather take notice of, that there may not be the least ground to suppose\nthat we make void the law, but rather establish it, and thereby assert\nthe right which God has to that perfection of obedience, which is due\nfrom us, though unable to perform it.\n\n(3.) It must be perpetual, without backsliding from God, or the least\nremissness in our duty to him; and therefore there is no abatement or\ndispensation allowed of, that may give countenance to the least defect\nof this obedience. Thus the Psalmist says, _I will never forget thy\nprecepts_, Psal. cxix. 93. and, _Every day will I bless thee, and I will\npraise thy name for ever and ever_, Psal. cxlv. 2. Moreover, we may\nobserve, that this obedience is to be performed with the whole man, and\nin particular, by the soul, with the utmost intenseness, in all the\npowers and faculties thereof. Accordingly our understandings are to be\nrightly instructed, as to what respects the matter and manner of\nperforming it; our wills to be entirely subjected to the will of God,\nand our affections engaged therein, as being sanctified and excited by\nthe Spirit, to the end, that duty may be performed with delight, arising\nfrom the love which we bear to him, whose servants we are.\n\nIt is also to be performed with our bodies. The former, includes in it\nthat obedience more especially which is internal; this, that which is\nexternal. This is what is styled a lower sort of obedience; and if we\nrest here, it is so far from being acceptable, as the apostle says, that\n_Bodily exercise profiteth little_, 1 Tim. iv. 8. Nevertheless, as the\nbody is an instrument of the soul in acting, that service which is\nperformed therein, is absolutely necessary; and therefore all religious\nworship is to be engaged in with a becoming reverence that is external,\nas well as that which is internal; without which the soul cannot be said\nto engage in any religious duties, in a becoming manner.\n\nIt is farther observed, that this obedience includes in it holiness and\nrighteousness. The former of these respects more especially our duty to\nGod, which, being a branch of religious worship, ought to be performed\nwith a reverential fear of his divine Majesty, and that due regard to\nhis infinite purity, and entire dedication and consecration of ourselves\nto him, as becomes those who are sanctified by his Spirit, and enabled\nto exercise all those graces whereby we may approve ourselves his\nfaithful servants and subjects. The latter more especially respects\nthose duties which we owe to men, in the various relations we stand in\nto them, which is incumbent on us as what is enjoined by God.\n\n2. The moral law is farther considered as having a promise of life\nannexed to it, and a threatning of death upon the breach thereof. This\nis what is generally called the sanction annexed to the law. A law\nwithout a sanction would not be much regarded, especially by those who\nhave not a due sense of their obligation to obedience. Persons are very\nmuch disposed to enquire, when a command is given, what the consequences\nof their obeying or disregarding it will be? and this being made known\nbefore hand, is a strong motive to obedience. If God is pleased, out of\nhis abundant grace, to encourage his people, by giving them to expect\nsome blessings that he will bestow on those that obey him, it is, in\nsome respect, necessary that this should be known. But especially since\npunishment, in proportion to the nature of the crime, will be the\nconsequence of disobedience, it is becoming the divine perfections to\nlet it be known, that the wages of sin is death. And this was not only\nannexed to the moral law, but equally impressed on the nature of man,\nwho could not but know, that rebellion against God would be punished\nwith a separation from him, and that all those miseries would attend it,\nin proportion to the respective aggravation thereof, that it deserves.\n\nII. We have an account of the use of the moral law since the fall; and\nthat either with respect to mankind in general, or the unregenerate and\nregenerate. And here it is observed, that no man since the fall, can\nattain righteousness and life by it; therefore it is not to be used with\nthat view. From whence we may infer, that this might have been attained\nby man before the fall, according to the tenor of the covenant which he\nwas under, the sum and substance whereof was that _the man that doth\nthese things shall live by them_, Rom. x. 5. as the apostle says.\nEternal life was promised to man in innocency; and he was then able to\nyield sinless obedience, which was the condition thereof. But it is\nimpossible for fallen man thus to obey; for how perfect soever his\nobedience may be for the future, it is supposed, from the nature of the\nthing, that it cannot be sinless, after sin has been committed; and it\nwould be a reflection on the justice and holiness of God, for us to\nconclude that he will accept of imperfect obedience, instead of perfect.\nTherefore it follows, that a right to life is not to be expected from\nour imperfect obedience to the law, as the apostle says, _By the deeds\nof the law there shall no flesh be justified_, chap. iii. 20. in God\u2019s\nsight; in this respect our own righteousness is represented not only as\nfaulty and defective, but as altogether insufficient to procure an\ninterest in the divine favour, or to exempt us from the punishment which\nis due to us for sin. It is one thing to say, that eternal life is\nconnected with obedience, so that no one can have the least ground to\nexpect it without it; and another thing to say, that it is founded upon\nit, or, that it gives us a right and title to it. Nevertheless, we are\nnot to conclude that the law is of no use; for,\n\n1. It is of use to all men, in several respects:\n\n(1.) It informs us of the holy nature and will of God, and of our duty\nto him. This is the first idea we have of a law[199], which signifies\nmore especially a doctrine; and, as the subject-matter thereof, respects\nour being taught what we are obliged to, as commanded by a law-giver, it\nsignifies a law. The divine perfections are eminently instamped on it in\nvery legible characters; his sovereignty, as having a right to demand\nobedience; his holiness in the matter thereof, and in the obligation we\nare herein laid under to be _holy in all conversation; because it is\nwritten, be ye holy, for I am holy_, 1 Pet. i. 15, 16. and therefore\nthis perfection is set forth in those threatnings that are annexed to\nit, whereby _the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and\nunrighteousness of men_, Rom. i. 18. As it is designed to discover our\nsecret faults, that we may be humbled for them, and hereby a multitude\nof sins may be prevented, so it not only sets forth the holiness, but\nthe goodness of God; and indeed there is nothing enjoined therein as our\nduty, but what includes in it some advantage. Thus the Psalmist\ndescribes it as _more to be desired than gold, yea, than much fine gold;\nsweeter also than honey and the honey comb; and adds, that in keeping\nthereof, there is great reward_, Psal. xix. 10, 11.\n\n(2.) The moral law is of use to all men, as it binds them to perform\nthat which is therein enjoined as matter of duty, which is another idea\ncontained in a law, _viz._ as it is that which binds the consciences of\nmen, that so we may not vainly and presumptuously conclude, to our own\ndestruction, that we may live as we list, or say, who is Lord over us?\nIt is a great instance of the care and goodness of God, that he has\ntaken this method to prevent that ruin which would arise from our\nwithdrawing the allegiance which we owe to him, and lay us under the\nstrictest engagement to seek after that blessedness which is connected\nwith obedience to him.\n\n(3.) We are hereby convinced of our inability to keep the law, and of\nthe sinful pollution of our nature, hearts, and lives, as an expedient\nto humble us under the sense of sin and misery. The law being spiritual,\nwe are thereby convinced that _we are carnal_, and _sold under sin_, as\nthe apostle expresses it, Rom. vii. 14. And he also says, _I had not\nknown sin, but by the law_, ver. 7. When we consider ourselves as being\nobliged to yield perfect obedience, and compare our hearts and lives\ntherewith, we shall see nothing but holiness and purity on the one hand,\nand a wretched mass of corruption and impurity on the other. God demands\nperfect obedience; and we are unable, of ourselves, to perform any\nobedience. And our best duties being attended with many imperfections,\nwe are hereby led to be humbled under a sense of sin, whatever thoughts\nwe, before this, had of ourselves. When _the law enters, sin_ will\n_abound_, chap. v. 20. and if we were apprehensive that we were alive,\nas the apostle expresseth it, _without the law; when the commandment\ncomes, sin_ will _revive and we die_, chap. vii. 9. and see ourselves\nexposed to the miseries threatened to those that violate it.\n\n(4.) From hence arises a clear sight of the need that persons have of\nChrist, and of the perfection of his obedience. When we find ourselves\ncondemned by the law, and that righteousness is not to be attained by\nour own obedience to it, then we are led to see our need of seeking it\nelsewhere; and when the gospel gives us a discovery of Christ, as\nordained by God, to procure for us righteousness, or a right to eternal\nlife by his obedience, this will shew us the need we have of faith in\nhim, whereby we derive from him that which could not be attained by our\nown conformity to the law.\n\n2. The moral law is of use in particular to the unregenerate. We have\nconsidered, under the former head, that it is of use to all men (among\nwhom the unregenerate are included) as it gives them a discovery of the\npollution and guilt of sin; and now we are led to enquire into the\nconsequence hereof. Sin may be charged on the conscience, and the guilt\nthereof make it very uneasy, so that a person may apprehend himself\nunder the condemning sentence of the law, and yet receive no saving\nadvantage hereby; he may have a sight of sin, and not be truly humbled\nfor it or turned from it. In some, corruption is hereby excited, and the\nsoul grows worse than it was before; thus the apostle says, _sin taking\noccasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence_,\nver. 8. Others, when filled with a dread of the wrath of God, are\ninclined to stretch out their hand against him, and strengthen\nthemselves against the Almighty; resolving, some way or other, to\ndisentangle themselves, though they render their condition much worse\nthereby. These are compared to _a wild bull in a net, full of the fury\nof the Lord_, Isa. li. 20. or, as our Saviour says concerning Paul,\nbefore his conversion, _they kick against the pricks_, Acts ix. 5. Every\nstep they take to free themselves from the horrible pit and miry clay,\ninto which they are cast, sinks them deeper into it. Others are\nconvinced of sin by the law, and, at the same time, despair of obtaining\nmercy; they complain with Cain, _My punishment is greater than I can\nbear_, Gen. iv. 13. or, as it is in the margin, _Mine iniquity is\ngreater than that it may be forgiven._ These see themselves lost, or\ncondemned by the law, but have no sight of Christ as coming into the\nworld to save sinners, or, at least, the chief of them. The wound is\nopened, but there are no healing medicines applied. But there are others\nwhose condition is no less dangerous, in whom the _wound is healed\nslightly_, who _say, Peace, peace, when there is no peace_, Jer. vi. 14.\nThey are indeed, convinced of sin, and this is attended sometimes with\nan external humiliation, arising from the dread of God\u2019s judgments. This\neffect it had in Pharaoh, Exod. x. 16, 17. and Ahab, 1 Kings xxi. 27-29.\nand they are willing to part with some particular sins, while they\nindulge others, that by this partial reformation they may free\nthemselves from the condemning sentence of the law; but all this is to\nno purpose, sin gains strength hereby, and the guilt thereof is still\nincreased. This is a wrong method taken to flee from the wrath to come;\nand therefore, when these convictions of sin have a good issue, in\nflying from it, they have recourse to Christ. This is called a being\ndriven to Christ; by which we are to understand that they see themselves\nunder an unavoidable necessity of going to him, as not being able to\nfind peace or solid rest elsewhere. But since this effect is, in a\npeculiar manner, ascribed to the gospel, the law being only the remote\nmeans hereof, I would rather express it by their being drawn to him, or\nencouraged by the grace contained therein, to close with him by faith;\nand then the work is rendered effectual, and convictions end in a saving\nconversion. But if it be otherwise, or they apply themselves to indirect\nmeans, to ease themselves of the burden that lies on them, they are\nfarther described as left inexcusable, and still remaining under the\ncurse and condemning sentence of the law.\n\n3. The moral law is of use to the regenerate. In considering which it\nmay be observed; that there is something supposed in the answer, which\ntreats on this subject, namely, that they who believe in Christ are\ndelivered from it as a covenant of works; which is the only sense in\nwhich we are to understand those scriptures, which speak of believers as\n_not_ being _under the law_, Rom. vi. 14. and being _dead to the law_,\nchap. vii. 4. as _being redeemed from the curse thereof_, Gal. iii. 13.\nThe moral law is to be considered in two respects, as a rule of life,\nand so no one is delivered from it; or else, as a covenant of works, in\nthe same sense in which it was given to man in innocency, the condition\nof which was his performing perfect obedience, in default whereof he was\nliable to a sentence of death. In this latter respect a believer is\ndelivered from it.\n\nThis is the great privilege that such are made partakers of in the\ngospel; which sets forth Christ as our Surety, performing perfect\nobedience for us, and enduring the curse we were liable to; so that\nthough it was a covenant of works to him, it ceases to be so to them who\nare interested in him; and accordingly it is farther added, that they\nare hereby neither justified nor condemned. Not justified; thus the\napostle says, _By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified_,\nRom. iii. 20. This is therefore only to be expected from him who is _the\nLord our righteousness_, Jer. xxiii. 6. _in whom all the seed of Israel\nshall be justified, and glory_, Isa. xlv. 25. Nor are they condemned by\nthe law; for that is inconsistent with a justified state; as the apostle\nsays, _There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus_, Rom.\nviii. 1. However, we must distinguish between a believer\u2019s actions being\ncondemned by the law, or his being reproved thereby, and laid under\nconviction, for sins daily committed; and his being in a condemned\nstate, according to the sentence thereof. We are far from denying that a\nbeliever is under an obligation to condemn or abhor himself, that is, to\nconfess that he deserves to be condemned, by God, for the sins that he\ncommits, which, if he should mark, or punish him according to the\ndemerit of, he could not stand. Thus the Psalmist says, though speaking\nof himself as a believer, and consequently in a justified state, _Enter\nnot into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living\nbe justified_, Psal. cxliii. 2. This a believer may say, and yet not\nconclude himself to be in a state of condemnation; inasmuch as he sees\nhimself, by faith, to have ground to determine that he is delivered\nfrom, and so not condemned by the law, as a covenant of works.\n\nMoreover, it is observed, on the other hand, in the answer under our\npresent consideration, that the moral law is of use to a believer, in\nthose respects in which it is of use to all men; and therefore he is\nlaid under the strictest obligation to perform all the duties which we\nowe to God and man, and to be humbled for those defects which he has\nreason to charge himself with, which call for the daily exercise of\nrepentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.\n\nBut as to the special use of the moral law to those who are regenerate,\nas distinguished from all others, it is said to shew them how much they\nare bound to Christ for his fulfilling it, and enduring the curse\nthereof in their stead, and for their good. Thus _Christ is_ said to be\n_the end of the law for righteousness_, Rom. x. 4. that is, he has\nanswered the end and demand of the law, by performing that obedience\nwhich it requires, and thereby procuring a justifying righteousness,\nwhich is applied to every one that believes. This lays them under a\nsuperadded obligation to obedience, peculiar to them as believers; so\nthat they are not only engaged to the practice of universal holiness,\nfrom the consideration of the sovereignty of God commanding in common\nwith all others, but from _the love of Christ_, which does as it were\n_constrain them_ hereunto, 2 Cor. v. 14. And hereby they are said to be\nprovoked to more thankfulness, as they have greater inducements hereunto\nthan any others; and this gratitude cannot be better expressed than by\nthe utmost care to approve themselves to him in all things. Therefore\nthe grace of God is so far from leading to licentiousness, that all who\nhave experienced it, are hereby put upon the exercise of that obedience\nwhich they owe to God as their rightful Lord and Sovereign, and to\nChrist as their gracious Redeemer, whom they love entirely; and\ntherefore keep his commandments.\n\nI cannot but here take occasion to observe, not only with dislike, but a\njust indignation, how some, under a pretence of religion, sap the very\nfoundation of it, while they frequently make mention of the gospel, and\nthe liberty wherewith Christ has made his people free, and at the same\ntime abuse it, not only by practising, but pleading for licentiousness.\nThe Epicureans were libertines among the Heathen, and the Sadducees\namong the Jews; but these were vile and profligate out of principle;\neither denying the being of a God, or disowning his perfections as well\nas future rewards and punishments; and therefore it is no wonder they\nhad no regard to the divine law. But I want words to express the\nwickedness of those who pervert the gospel of Christ, as though that\nexempted them from the obligation which all are under to universal\nobedience.\n\nThe apostle had to do with some such in his day; and therefore he\nrepresents them as saying, _Is the law sin?_ that is, since we are\ndelivered from the condemning sentence thereof, may we not take\nencouragement from thence to sin? or, as he elsewhere brings them in as\nsaying, _Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?_ chap. vi. 1.\nTo both which he replies, with the greatest detestation, _God forbid_.\nAfter this, in an early age of the church, the Nicolaitans, Rev. ii. 6.\nand Gnostics, and among them, the Valentinians held these pernicious\nopinions, and encouraged themselves in the practice of the greatest\nimmoralities[200]. And Augustin speaks of the Aetians and Eunomians, who\nlived in his time, who pretended that any one who persisted in the\nvilest crimes, would receive no detriment thereby, provided they adhered\nto the sentiments which they advanced[201]. And there are many, in later\nages, whose sentiments have been, in this respect, subversive of all\nreligion; and from their denying the obligation we are under, to yield\nobedience to the law of God, are justly called Antinomians.\n\nHowever, that we may not appear to be unjust to the characters of men,\nlet it be considered, that we are not here speaking of the charge of\nAntinomianism, which some, who defend or oppose the doctrines of grace,\nbring against each other; as supposing that their respective sentiments\nlead to licentiousness. The Papists and Pelagians pretend, though\nunjustly, that the doctrine of predestination, efficacious grace, and\nthe final perseverance of the saints, is liable to this charge; while\nthey on the other hand, lay themselves open to the like charge, by\nadvancing doctrines which have the most pernicious tendency, as\nsubversive of practical godliness, in various instances; particularly\ntheir asserting, that God in the gospel-covenant, dispenses with\nimperfect obedience instead of perfect; and this is no other than what\nwe are able to perform without the aids of divine grace. But this we\npass over, leaving each party to defend their scheme from this\nimputation.\n\nAs to others, who are more especially known by the character of\nAntinomians, these are of two sorts, namely, such who openly maintain\nthat the moral law is not a rule of life in any sense; and that good\nworks are not to be insisted on as having any reference to salvation;\nand therefore, if persons presume, as they, according to them, ought to\ndo, that Christ died for them, and they were justified before they had a\nbeing, they may live in the practice of the greatest immoralities, or\ngive countenance to them that do so, without entertaining the least\ndoubt of their salvation; and that it is a preposterous thing for those\nwho thus presumptuously conclude themselves to be justified, to confess\nthemselves guilty of sin; since that would be to deny that they are in a\njustified state, or in any sense, to pray for the pardon thereof; since\nthat would argue that it is not forgiven. Neither can they, with any\ntolerable degree of patience, entertain the least exhortations to\npractical godliness; because they pretend, that they are exempted from\nthe obligation to perform any branch thereof, by their not being under\nthe law. Nay, some of them have been so impudent, and daringly wicked,\nas to assert, that if they should commit murder, adultery, or any other\ncrimes of the like nature, even this would be no bar in the way of their\nsalvation; nor the most vile sins that can be committed, do them any\nhurt, or in the least affect their eternal state. I have, indeed,\nsometimes thought that this representation of Antinomianism was no other\nthan a consequence, deduced from some absurd doctrines that have been\nmaintained; or that so much of hell could never put on the mask or shew\nof religion in any degree; and that this character belonged to none but\nthose who are open and professed Atheists. But though my lot has not\nbeen cast among persons of so vile a character, yet I have been\ninformed, by those whose souls have been grieved with such conversation,\nthat there are some in the world who thus set themselves against the law\nof God.\n\nThere are others, indeed, who are styled Antinomians, whose conversation\nis blameless, and are not therefore to be ranked with these men, or\njudged Antinomians in practice; who, nevertheless, do great disservice\nto the truth; and, it may be, give occasion to some to be licentious, by\nadvancing unguarded expressions, which will admit of a double\nconstruction, without condescending to explain some bold positions,\nwhich they occasionally lay down.\n\nThus when they maintain eternal justification, without considering it as\nan immanent act in God, or as his secret determination, not to impute\nsin to those who are given to Christ; but ascribe that to it, which is\nonly to be applied to justification, as it is the result of God\u2019s\nrevealed will, in which respect it is said to be by faith: and when they\nencourage persons from hence, to conclude that their state is safe; and\nto maintain that it is the duty of every one to believe that he is thus\njustified; this has certainly a tendency to lead some out of the way of\ntruth and holiness, whether they design it or no. And when others speak\ndiminutively of good works as though they were in no sense necessary to\nsalvation, because they are not the matter of our justification. This\nmay give occasion to some to think that they may be saved without them.\n\nAnd when others deny the law to be a rule of life, or assert that\nbelievers have nothing to do with it; though, it may be, they understand\nnothing else by it, but that it is not that rule, according to which God\nproceeds in justifying, or giving his people a right to eternal life;\nor, that a believer is not under the law, as a covenant of works; yet\nmany would be ready to think the words had a different meaning, and so\nbe led out of the way thereby, how far soever this might be from their\nintention. And if a person seems studiously to avoid confessing of sin,\nor praying for forgiveness, some would be ready to judge of his\nsentiments by his practice; and certainly our denying this to be a duty\nin any sense, is not only contrary to scripture, but inconsistent with\nthat humility and faith which are essential to practical godliness. Or\nwhen persons deny that self-examination is a duty; and speak of all\nmarks and evidences of grace, though never so just and agreeable to the\nscripture-account thereof, as legal, or a low way, in order to a\nperson\u2019s coming to the knowledge of himself; or suppose that they are\nunnecessary, as being inconsistent with the Spirit\u2019s testimony: This has\na tendency to lead to presumption, which is a degree of licentiousness.\n\nMoreover, when they assert that God is not angry with his people for\ntheir sins, nor, in any sense, punishes them for them, without\ndistinguishing between fatherly chastisements, and the stroke of\nvindictive justice, or the external and sensible effects of that hatred\nwhich God cannot but exercise against sin, and his casting them out of a\njustified state: Such doctrines as these lead some persons to\nlicentiousness, whatever be the secret meaning of those that advance\nthem.\n\nWe have an instance of this, as the historian observes[202], in\nAgricola, who was Luther\u2019s towns-man, and great admirer; who, as it is\nprobable, did not thoroughly understand what he maintained concerning\nthe subserviency of the law to the gospel, and its having no place in\nthe justification of a sinner; or else, from some unguarded expressions,\nwhich he was sometimes apt to make use of; this friend of his took\noccasion to advance some Antinomian tenets, _viz._ that repentance ought\nnot to be urged from the consideration of the breach of the law; and\nthat the gospel ought to be preached to sinners before they are brought\nunder conviction by the law; and that how scandalous and debauched\nsoever persons be in their lives, yet, if they do but believe the\npromises of the gospel, they shall be justified. In this, Agricola was\nfollowed by a party of men; and accordingly Antinomianism is said to\nhave taken its rise, in this part of the world, from that time. Luther,\non the other hand, was forced to take a great deal of pains to rectify\nhis mistakes; which, though it tended to his conviction, yet it did not\nput a stop to the spread of his errors, which he had before propagated.\n\nAs for those who were charged with Antinomianism in England, in the last\ncentury, such as Dr. Crisp, Eaton, Saltmarsh, Town, and others, whatever\ntheir design might be, and how much soever they were remote from the\ncharge of Antinomianism in practice; though it be alleged in their\nvindication, by some, that the principal thing they had in view, was to\nbear their testimony against the prevailing doctrine of Arminianism,\nthat was studiously propagated by some persons of great character and\ninfluence in the nation: Nevertheless, we cannot but conclude, that they\nhad done more service to the cause of truth, had they been more cautious\nin explaining their sentiments, and saved those, who had favourable\nthoughts of them in other respects, the trouble of producing some\nexpressions out of their writings, to convince the world that they did\nnot hold those dangerous notions which were charged upon them: and it is\ntoo evident to be denied, that many have taken them in the worst sense;\nwho have from hence been ready to charge the most important doctrines of\nthe gospel, as leading to licentiousness, and this has made some more\nsparing in defending those truths which ought to have been insisted on,\nand explained, though in other words more intelligible and\nunexceptionable.\n\nFootnote 198:\n\n _It is a known maxim in the civil law, Cessante capacitate subditi non\n cessat obligatia._\n\nFootnote 199:\n\n _Thus the word_ \u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4, _is derived from_ \u05d5\u05e8\u05d4, didicit, _or_ viam\n monstravit.\n\nFootnote 200:\n\n _Vid. Cov. Hist. lit. Tom. I. Page 30._\n\nFootnote 201:\n\n _Vid. Aug. de H\u00e6res. Cap. liv. where speaking of Eunomius, he says,\n Fertur etiam usque adeo fuisse bonis moribus inimicus, ut asseveraret,\n quod nihil cuique obesset, quorumlibet perpetratio ac perseverantia\n peccatorum, si hujus qu\u00e6 ab illo docebatur, fidei particeps esset._\n\nFootnote 202:\n\n _See Slled. Comment. de Stat. Relig. & Repub. Lib._ xii.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. XCVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. XCVIII. _Where is the moral law summarily comprehended?_\n\n ANSW. The moral law is summarily comprehended in the Ten\n commandments, which were delivered by the voice of God upon mount\n Sinai, and written by him in two tables of stone, and are recorded\n in the twentieth chapter of Exodus; the four first Commandments\n containing our duty to God, and the other six our duty to man.\n\nHaving considered the moral law, as written on the heart of man at\nfirst, and the knowledge thereof, in some degree attainable by all who\nexercise their reasoning powers: We are in this, and some following\nanswers, led to consider that epitome, or abstract thereof, that was\ngiven to the Israelites by the voice of God upon mount Sinai, which is\ncontained in the Ten Commandments.\n\nBut since we are considering this instance of divine condescension to\nthem, it may not be reckoned altogether foreign to our present design,\nfor us to give some brief account of those other laws which God gave,\ntogether with the moral law; most of which were communicated from mount\nSinai: And therefore we may observe, that together with the moral law,\nthere were several forensic or judicial laws given by God for the\ngovernment of the people of Israel, which more especially respected\ntheir civil rights. And there were other laws which had a more immediate\nsubserviency to their attaining the knowledge of those things which\nrelated to the way of salvation by the promised Messiah, which are more\nfully revealed in the gospel: And this is what we call the ceremonial\nlaw. Both these are to be considered before we come to speak concerning\nthe moral law, as summarily comprehended in the Ten Commandments.\n\nI. Concerning the judicial law. It cannot be supposed that so great a\npeople, so much interested in the care of God, to whom he condescended\nto be their king, should be without a body of laws for their government:\nAccordingly there were some given them by him, which were founded in,\nand agreeable to the law of nature and nations; which all well-governed\nstates observe unto this day, viz. that murder should be punished with\ndeath; theft with restitution, or some other punishment that may best\ntend to deter from it. Moreover, besides these, there were other\njudicial laws given to Israel, which had a more immediate tendency to\npromote their civil welfare, as a nation distinguished from all others\nin the world; which laws expired when their civil policy was extinct.\nAnd these were,\n\n1. Such as tended to prevent the alienation of inheritances from the\nrespective families to which they were at first given. Accordingly God\ncommanded, that if a man died without children, his brother should marry\nhis widow to raise up seed to him, to inherit his estate and name, Deut.\nxxv. 5, 6. Matt, xxii. 24.\n\n2. If an Israelite was waxen poor, and obliged to sell his land, for the\npayment of his debts; the purchaser was to admit any of his family to\nredeem it; or, if they could not, he was, nevertheless, to restore the\nland at the _year of Jubilee_, which was every _fiftieth_ year, Levit.\nxxv. 11, 12, 13, 25, 26, 27.\n\n3. If an Hebrew servant was sold for the payment of debts, which he\ncould not otherwise discharge; his master was obliged to release him\nafter six years service, Exod. xxi. 2. But if the servant chose to stay\nwith his master longer than that time, out of the love he bore to him;\nthen he was to have his ear bored, as a token that he should serve him,\nwithout being subject to the aforesaid laws, which made provision for\nhis discharge after a certain number of years, ver. 5, 6.\n\n4. The land was to lie untilled, and the vine-yards and olive-yards were\nto be free for every one to come and eat of the fruit thereof every\n_seventh_ year; designed more especially for the relief of the poor,\namongst them, who had no distinct inheritance of their own, chap. xxiii.\n10.\n\n5. They were prohibited from taking usury of an Israelite, though they\nmight of a stranger. The reason of which law might be, either that they\nmight exercise brotherly kindness and charity to one another, in which\nsense the law is in force to this day; especially when the poor borrow\nmoney to supply themselves with necessary food, in which case it is now\nunlawful to take usury. Or else it is to be considered, that the\nIsraelites lived upon their farms or cattle, by which they seldom got\nmore than what was a necessary provision for their families. And\ntherefore the paying usury whenever they were necessitated to borrow\nmoney, would have procured their ruin in the end. Therefore they were\nnot to take usury of an Israelite, but of a stranger they might; because\nthey enriched themselves by merchandise, and were gainers in a way of\ntrade, by what they borrowed.\n\n6. All the males were to come up to Jerusalem, to appear before God, and\nperform public worship in the temple three times a year, viz. at the\nsolemn festivals; the passover, pentecost, and the feast of tabernacles,\nDeut. xvi. 16, 17.\n\n7. Six cities of refuge were appointed for those to fly to, for\nprotection, who killed any one by accident. Though a near kinsman, as an\navenger of blood might kill the man-slayer before he came to one of\nthese cities. The design of which law was to induce them to take care\nthat none might lose their lives through inadvertency. And there was\nprovision made in these cities for the man-slayer to dwell safely;\nwhereby a just difference was put between such an one, and a wilful\nmurderer, Numb. xxxv. 15, 26, 27. Thus concerning the judicial laws.\n\nII. We now proceed to consider the ceremonial laws that were given them,\nthe end whereof was to lead them into the knowledge of Christ, and the\nway of salvation by him, then to come, Heb. x. 1. Gal. iii. 24, 25.\nThese may be considered under six heads, which we shall speak briefly\nto;\n\n[1.] It was ordained, that all their males should be circumcised. This\nwas designed to be a visible mark put on the church, whom God had set\napart for himself, that hereby they might be distinguished from the\nworld: But the principal design hereof was, that it might be a sign or\nseal of the blessings of the covenant of grace, in which God promised\nthat he would be _a God to them_; and they were hereby to own themselves\nas his people, Gen. xvii. 7, 10.\n\n[2.] There were various ways whereby persons were reckoned unclean, and\nordinances appointed for their cleansing. They were rendered unclean, by\neating those birds, beasts, fishes, and creeping things, which God had\npronounced unclean, and not designed for food, Lev. xi. Moreover, they\nwere polluted by touching the dead bodies of such unclean birds, beasts,\nfishes, or creeping things, ver. 31. Again, some diseases, incident to\nthe bodies of men, which were more than ordinarily noisome, rendered\nthem unclean, as the issue, leprosy, _&c._ Lev. xv. 2, _& seq._ and ch.\nxiii. and the clothes they wore, the houses they lived in, the beds on\nwhich they lay, their ovens and the vessels used in eating or drinking,\nwere, on several accounts, deemed unclean, and accordingly were either\nto be cleansed or destroyed; otherwise the owners thereof would be\npolluted hereby[203].\n\nThis law was designed to signify how odious and abominable sin, which is\na moral pollution, is, in God\u2019s account, who is _of purer eyes than to\nbehold iniquity_, Hab. i. 13. We might also observe; that there are\nvarious ordinances appointed for their cleansing, in order to which,\nseveral sacrifices were to be offered, and divers washings with water,\nLev. xiii\u201415. The former of these signified the way of our being\ndelivered from sin by the blood of Christ, as the procuring cause of\nforgiveness, Heb. ix. 13, 14. Eph. i. 7. the latter, our being cleansed\nfrom sin by the internal, powerful influences of the Holy Spirit, in\nregeneration and sanctification, Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27. Heb. x. 22. Tit.\niii. 5, 6.\n\n[3.] There were holy places, such as the tabernacle and temple, with the\nvessels and ornaments thereof. The tabernacle was erected according to\nthe pattern which God shewed to Moses in the mount, Exod. xxv. 40. and\nwas so framed, that it might be taken to pieces, and removed from place\nto place, as often as the host of Israel changed their station in the\nwilderness: And accordingly there were Levites appointed to take it down\nand set it up; and also waggons with oxen, to carry it, excepting those\nparts of it which belonged to the holiest of all, which were to be\ncarried on their shoulders, Numb. vii. 6.\n\nThe temple was that fixed place appointed for public worship at\nJerusalem; first built by Solomon, and afterwards rebuilt by Zerubbabel.\nAnd both this and the tabernacle signified, that God would dwell in the\nmidst of his people, and accept of that solemn and instituted worship\nthat was to be performed by his church, in all ages. This was designed\nto be a type of the incarnation of the Son of God, who is styled\n_Emmanuel, God with us_; and in allusion hereunto, he calls his body _a\ntemple_, John ii. 19.\n\nMoreover, the courts of this tabernacle and temple, and the ministry\nperformed therein, had each their respective signification annexed to\nthem. That, in which the priests came daily to minister, wherein gifts\nand sacrifices were offered, prefigured Christ\u2019s offering himself a\nsacrifice upon earth, for the sins of his people. And the inner court,\nwhich was the holiest of all, into which none but the high-priest was to\nenter, and that with blood and incense, signified Christ\u2019s _entering\ninto heaven, to appear in the presence of God for us_, Heb. ix. 24.\n\nAs for the vessels of the tabernacle and temple, these were either such\nas were in the first court, which is also called _the sanctuary; in\nwhich was the candlestick, the table, and the shew-bread_, Lev. xxiv.\n2-7. Heb. ix. 2. the laver and the altar, Exod. xxx. 18. all which were\ndesigned for types. The candlestick signified the church, and the\npreaching the gospel therein; whereby light is held forth to the world,\nRev. i. 20. Matt. v. 14. The shew-bread set up, signified the communion\nwhich the members of the church have with Christ, and with one another,\n1 Cor. x. 17. as he styles himself, the _bread of life_, or, _the bread\nof God, which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world_,\nJohn vi. 33. The laver signified, that when we draw nigh to God, our\npersons and services ought to be pure and holy; to which the apostle\nalludes, when he says, _Let us draw near with a true heart, in full\nassurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience,\nand our bodies washed with pure water_, Heb. x. 22. The altar, which was\nholy, and sanctified the gift that the high-priest offered thereon,\nMatt, xxiii. 19. so that _every thing that touched it was holy_, Exod.\nxxix. 37. this signified, that the divine nature of Christ added an\ninfinite worth to what he did in the human; in which he offered himself\na sacrifice to God. These were the vessels in the outer court.\n\nThe vessels in the inward court, or holiest of all _in which were the\ngolden censer, the ark of the covenant, and the Cherubims of glory\nshadowing the mercy seat_, Heb. ix. 3-5. were a symbol and type of God\u2019s\nspecial presence with his people, which is their glory; or of the Son of\nGod\u2019s dwelling with us, in our nature. The mercy-seat, which was placed\nover it, signified that the mercy of God was displayed to sinners,\nthrough Christ. The cherubims of glory with their wings spread,\novershadowing and looking down upon the mercy-seat, signified that the\nangels behold and admire the stupendous work of redemption, 1 Pet. i.\n12. The altar of incense, and the golden censer, were types of the\nintercession of Christ for his people; and its fragrancy typified the\nacceptableness thereof in the sight of God.\n\nThere were, besides these, three more things in the holiest of all,\nwhich are particularly mentioned, viz. the _pot of manna_, which was\nmiraculously preserved from corruption throughout their generations, as\na memorial of the bread which God had fed them with in the wilderness,\nand a type of Christ, the bread of life, who was to come down from\nheaven, John vi. 48-50. There was also Aaron\u2019s rod, which was preserved\nin memory of the wonders that were wrought by it in Egypt, at the Red\nSea, and in the wilderness: And it is said to have _blossomed and\nyielded almonds_, Numb. xvii. 8. which seemed to typify the flourishing\nstate of the gospel; which is called, _The rod of God\u2019s strength_, Psal.\ncx. 2. Moreover, the two tables of the law were put into the ark,\nwhereby the exceeding holiness of it was signified; and also that the\nlaw should be fulfilled and magnified by Christ, when he came to dwell\namong us. Thus we have given a brief account of the holy vessels of the\ntemple and tabernacle.\n\nWe might also have added, that there were various ornaments thereof;\nthey were adorned with silver, gold, and precious stones, carved, and\ncurious needle-work; which rendered them exceeding rich and beautiful.\nThe temple in particular, was the wonder of the world, far surpassing\nall other buildings, either before or since, Exod. xxv. 3-7. 1 Chron.\nxxix. 2-5. And this may be supposed to shadow forth the spiritual beauty\nand glory of the gospel-church, and of the heavenly state, in which it\nshall be brought to its utmost perfection, Rev. xxi. 11-23. Thus\nconcerning those holy places, which were immediately designed for\nworship.\n\nThere were other holy places, such as the land of Canaan, which was\nstyled the _Holy land_, and the inhabitants thereof a holy nation, or\n_the people of his holiness_, Isa. lxiii. 18. And as this was a place\nwhere God gave them rest, and a settlement, after forty years travel in\nthe wilderness, it was a type of that rest which the church was to\nexpect from Christ under the gospel, Isa. xi. 10. Heb. iv. 9. Moreover,\nJerusalem was an holy city, Nehem. xi. 1. Matt. iv. 5. because thither\nthe tribes went up to worship, Psal. cxxii. 4. and God was present with\nthem there, Ezek. xxxvii. 27, 28.\n\n[4.] There were other laws that respected those whom God had appointed\nto be ministers in holy things. These were the Priests and Levites, who\nwere to assist them in some parts of their office; but especially the\nhigh-priest, who was the chief or head of them all, who is considered as\nan eminent type of Christ\u2019s Priestly office in several respects, Heb. v.\n1-5. And there were various ceremonies instituted, which were observed\nin their consecration of them; particularly they were to be washed with\nwater, Exod. xxix. 4. which was a rite used in the consecration of\npersons and things; and signified, that they who ministred in holy\nthings, should be holy in their conversation. Moreover, there were\nseveral garments to be made and put on them, which are styled _holy_,\nand designed _for glory and for beauty_, chap. xxviii. 2, _& seq._ These\nsignified the dignity and holiness of Christ\u2019s priesthood. And\nparticularly the breast-plate, which was only worn by the high-priest,\nadorned with precious stones, on which the names of the children of\nIsrael were engraven, with which he was to go into the holy of holies.\nThis signified the concern of Christ\u2019s people in the execution of his\nPriestly office, and his representing them when appearing in the\npresence of God for them. Again, they were anointed with the precious\nointment, compounded for that purpose, chap. xxx. 25, 30. whereby they\nwere set apart, or consecrated to minister in the priest\u2019s office, and\nwere types of Christ; upon which account he is said to be _anointed with\nthe oil of gladness above his fellows_, Psal. xlv. 7.\n\n[5.] There were other laws respecting the temple-service, or the gifts\nand sacrifices that were to be offered there. There were many gifts\npresented or devoted to God; some of which were not designed for\nsacrifice, but to testify their acknowledgment of God\u2019s right to all we\nare and have; and among these, the first ripe fruits were offered, or\npresented, as gifts to him, Exod. xxix. 29. As for those things that\nwere designed for sacrifice, these were offered, and their blood poured\nforth on the altar; which signified the expiation of sin by the blood of\nJesus, Heb. ix. 22, 23, 26. And that part of the high-priest\u2019s office,\nwhich respected his carrying the blood with the incense, into the\nholiest of all, was a type of Christ\u2019s _entering into heaven, there to\nappear in the presence of God_ for his people, chap. ix. 24.\n\n[6.] There were other laws that respected the holy times or festivals,\nappointed for solemn worship. Some of these were monthly, as the new\nmoons; others annual, as the passover; which was not only a sign\nmemorizing their having been formerly delivered from the sword of the\ndestroying angel, when he slew the first-born of Egypt; but it typified\nour deliverance from the stroke of vindictive justice, on which account\nChrist is called _our passover_, 1 Cor. v. 7. There was also the feast\nof harvest, in which the first-fruits were presented to God as an\nacknowledgment that he has a right to the best of our time and service.\nThere was also the feast of tabernacles; which not only called to\nremembrance their dwelling in tents in the wilderness, but was an\nacknowledgment that we are strangers and sojourners upon earth; and was\nalso a type of Christ, who was expected to come and pitch his tabernacle\namong us in his incarnation. There are many other laws, both judicial\nand ceremonial, that I might have mentioned; but since these things are\nonly spoken of occasionally, as being imparted by God to Israel, by the\nhand of Moses, from mount Sinai, at the same time, or soon after, the\nTen Commandments were given, Deut. iv. 12, 13. we shall add no more\nconcerning them, but proceed,\n\nTo consider what is particularly mentioned in this answer, concerning\nGod\u2019s giving this abstract of the moral law contained in them, which\nwere first delivered by a voice; in which respect God is said to have\n_talked with them face to face_, chap. v. 4. but at the same time there\nwere many ensigns of terrible majesty attending the delivery of this\nlaw; the _mountain burned with fire_, Exod. xix. 18. There were\n_lightnings, thunderings, and earthquakes, and the sound of a trumpet,\nthat waxed louder and louder; which made the people, and Moses himself,\nexceedingly tremble_, Exod. xx. 18. Heb. xii. 18, 19. and there was the\nministry of angels who performed that part of the work which they were\nemployed in on this solemn occasion. This is described in a majestic\nstyle, becoming the subject insisted on, when it is said, _The Lord came\nfrom Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount\nParan, and he came with ten thousands of saints; from his right hand\nwent a fiery law_, Deut. xxxiii. 2. Their ministry might probably\nconsist in their forming the thunder, lightnings, and tempest.\nNevertheless, the law was not originally from them, but given\nimmediately by God. And the design of its being given in such an awful\nand majestic way was, that God might hereby set forth his greatness, and\nfill them with a reverential fear of him; and to intimate, that if they\ndid not yield obedience to him, they were to expect nothing else but to\nbe consumed by the fire of his jealousy. However, it was not an\nintimation that he designed to destroy, but to prove them; as it is\nsaid, that _his fear might be before their faces, that they should not\nsin_, Exod. xx. 20. That which we may farther observe is, that after God\nhad delivered the Ten Commandments by words; he wrote them with his own\nfinger, on two tables of stone; in which the moral law is summarily\ncomprehended; which is particularly explained in several following\nanswers.\n\nFootnote 203:\n\n _See a particular account hereof in Lev. xi 15. Chapters._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. XCIC.\n\n\n QUEST. XCIX. _What rules are to be observed for the right\n understanding of the Ten Commandments?_\n\n ANSW. For the right understanding of the Ten Commandments, these\n rules are to be observed,\n\n I. That the law is perfect, and bindeth every one to full conformity\n in the whole man unto the righteousness thereof, and unto entire\n obedience, for ever, so as to require the utmost perfection of every\n duty, and to forbid the least decree of every sin.\n\nThis implies, that how unable soever we are to yield perfect obedience,\nyet it does not cease to be a duty. And though some sins are smaller\nthan others, yet the least is contrary to the law of God; and therefore\nnot to be committed by us.\n\n II. That it is spiritual, and so reacheth the understanding, will,\n affections, and all other powers of the soul, as well as words,\n works, and gestures.\n\nThis denotes that obedience ought to be performed in a spiritual manner.\nGod is to be worshipped with our spirits; without which, all external\nmodes of worship will avail nothing. Nevertheless, external worship is\nto be performed and expressed by words, works, and gestures; which\nsupposes that our understandings are rightly informed, or that we do not\nworship an unknown God, and that our wills express a readiness to obey\nhim out of choice, and without the least reluctancy; and our affections\nmust centre in him, as performing the duties incumbent on us, with the\nutmost delight and pleasure.\n\n III. That, one and the same thing, in divers respects, is required\n or forbidden, in several commandments.\n\nThus covetousness is forbidden in the Tenth Commandment. Nevertheless,\nas hereby the world is loved more than God, it is a breach of the first\nCommandment, and as such is styled _idolatry_, Col. iii. 5.\n\n IV. That, as, where a duty is commanded, the contrary sin is\n forbidden, and where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is\n commanded. So, where a promise is annexed, the contrary threatening\n is included; and where a threatening is annexed, the contrary\n promise is included.\n\nThus the fifth Commandment requires us to honour our superiors;\ntherefore it forbids our reproaching or doing any thing dishonourable or\ninjurious to them, Matt. xv. 4. The eight Commandment forbids stealing;\nand it also requires the contrary duty, namely, that we should labour\nfor a competent maintenance, that we may not be exposed to any\ntemptation thereunto. Thus it is said, _Let him that stole, steal no\nmore, but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which\nis good, that he may have to give to him that needeth_, Eph. iv. 28.\nMoreover, as there is a promise of long life annexed to the fifth\nCommandment, this includes the contrary threatening to those that break\nit. Thus it is said, _The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth\nto obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the\nyoung eagles shall eat it_, Prov. xxx. 17. And on the other hand,\nwhatever threatening is annexed to any commandment, the contrary promise\nis included, and belongs to those that repent of, or abhor, and turn\nfrom the sin therein forbidden. Thus it is said, _At what instant I\nspeak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to\npull down, and to destroy it. If that nation against whom I have\npronounced turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I\nthought to do unto them_, Jer. xviii. 7, 8.\n\n V. That what God forbids, is at no time to be done; what he\n commands, is always our duty, and yet every particular duty, is not\n to be done at all times.\n\nThus sin is, under no pretence to be committed. Accordingly Moses, when\nhe was in a prosperous condition in Pharaoh\u2019s court, though he might\nhave pretended, that his greatness, and the advantages which Israel\nmight have expected from it, might have been an excuse for his\ncontinuing to enjoy the pleasures of sin there. Nevertheless, he was\nsensible that this would not exempt him from guilt; therefore _he\nforsook Egypt, and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of\nGod, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin_, Heb. xi. 25. Again, what God\ncommands is always a duty; so that there is no season of life in which\nit ceases to be so: as for instance, praying, reading, hearing the word,\n&c. Nevertheless these duties are not actually to be engaged in every\nmoment of our lives. It is always our duty to visit the sick, comfort\nthe afflicted, defend the oppressed; but such objects do not always\npresent themselves to us, so as to render it our duty at all times.\n\n VI. That, under one sin or duty, all of the same kind are forbidden\n or commanded, together with all the causes, means, occasions, and\n appearances thereof, and provocations thereunto.\n\nThus, according to the fourth Commandment, it is our duty to sanctify\nthe Sabbath, and consequently to avoid every thing that may be a means\nor occasion of our breach of it. In the sixth Commandment murder is\nforbidden; so is likewise all sinful passion or anger with our brethren\nwithout a cause, Matt. v. 22. And in the seventh, adultery is forbidden;\nso is also _looking on a woman to lust after her_, Matt. v. 28. And as\nwe are obliged to _abstain_ from every sin forbidden, so _from all\nappearance of evil_, 1 Thes. v. 22. or what may be an occasion of it.\nThus _fathers_ are _not to provoke their children to wrath_, Eph. vi. 4.\nand according to the moral reason of the command, we are not to provoke\nany one to wrath, or do that which may excite their corruptions.\n\n VII. That, what is forbidden or commanded to ourselves, we are\n bound, according to our places, to endeavour that it may be avoided\n or performed by others, according to the duty of their places.\n\nNot to endeavour to prevent sin in others, is, in effect, to commit it\nourselves. Thus Eli contracted the guilt of his sons crimes, by not\nendeavouring to prevent them. And persons are said to _hate their\nbrethren in their hearts_ who _do not rebuke them, but suffer sin upon\nthem_, Lev. xix. 17. And Abraham is commended in that he _should command\nhis household after him, that they should keep the way of the Lord_,\nGen. xviii. 19. From hence it follows, that it is a duty for parents to\ninstruct their children in the ways of God, Deut. vi. 6, 7.\n\n VIII. That, in what is commanded to others, we are bound according\n to our places and callings, to be helpful to them, and to take heed\n of partaking with others in what is forbidden them.\n\nThat we are to be helpful to others, in that which is their duty,\nappears, from our obligation to endeavour that God may be glorified.\nTherefore we are, to our utmost, to promote their faith and joy in\nChrist. Thus the apostle says, _We are helpers of your joy_, 2 Cor. i.\n24. And, on the other hand, we ought to take care that we do not partake\nwith others in their sin. Thus the Psalmist says, _When thou sawest a\nthief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with\nadulterers_, Psal. l. 18.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. C., CI., CII.\n\n\n QUEST. C. _What special things are we to consider in the Ten\n Commandments?_\n\n ANSW. We are to consider in the Ten Commandments, the preface, the\n substance of the Commandments themselves, and several reasons\n annexed to some of them, the more to inforce them.\n\n QUEST. CI. _What is the preface to the Ten Commandments._\n\n ANSW. The preface to the Commandments is contained in these words\n [_I am the Lord thy God, who have brought thee out of the land of\n Egypt, out of the house of bondage_] wherein God manifesteth his\n sovereignty, as being Jehovah, the eternal, immutable, and almighty\n God, having his being in and of himself, and giving being to all his\n words, and works; and that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel\n of old, so with all his people; who, as he brought them out of their\n bondage in Egypt, so he delivereth us from our spiritual thraldom;\n and that therefore we are bound to take him for our God alone, and\n to keep all his Commandments.\n\n QUEST. CII. _What is the sum of the four Commandments, which contain\n our duty to God?_\n\n ANSW. The sum of the four Commandments containing our duty to God,\n is, to love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our\n soul, and with all our strength, and with all our mind.\n\nThese answers contain some things necessary to be observed; as,\n\nI. That the substance of each commandment is to be considered by us, or\nwhat it is, that God enjoins or forbids therein; in which we find that\nevery Commandment contains a distinct head of duty, and is to be\nexplained according to the rules laid down in the foregoing answer. And\nalso that some of them have reasons annexed to them; which is an\ninstance of God\u2019s condescending goodness, that besides the consideration\nof our obligation to obey whatever he commands, because it is his will,\nwe may have other motives to enforce this obedience. What these reasons\nor motives are, will be considered in their proper place.\n\nII. That here is a general preface, which God has set before the\ncommandments, which contains several motives to obedience; some of which\nwere indeed peculiarly adapted to the Israelites, whereby they were put\nin mind of their late deliverance out of the land of Egypt.\nNevertheless, if we consider the moral reason thereof, as this, together\nwith the subject-matter of the commandments, to which it is prefixed,\nmay be applied to God\u2019s people under all ages, we shall find that it\nextends farther than the obligation which Israel was under, as delivered\nfrom the Egyptian bondage. Therefore it may be observed,\n\n1. That God reveals himself as the Lord, whose name alone is Jehovah, a\nGod of infinite sovereignty and almighty power, as well as faithful to\nhis promises; so that whatever he obliges us to do, or gives us\nencouragement to expect from him, we have the highest motive and\ninducement thereunto.\n\n2. He styles himself his people\u2019s God; and so puts them in mind of that\nrelation which they stand in to him, as the result of the covenant of\ngrace, in which he gives them a warrant to lay claim to those spiritual\nblessings which he bestows on a people nigh unto him; and this is\nconsidered as a farther obligation to obedience. The covenant of grace\nrespects either the external dispensation thereof, which belongs to the\nchurch in general, viz. to all who are made partakers of the glad\ntidings of salvation, which are contained in the gospel; or else that\nparticular claim which believers have to saving blessings which are made\nover to them therein, which respects all those graces which God is\npleased to give his people here, and that glory which he has reserved\nfor them hereafter; and this must certainly be reckoned the highest\nmotive to duty.\n\n3. As to what respects God\u2019s having brought Israel out of the land of\nEgypt, out of the house of bondage; this is to be extended farther than\nthat particular providence, which was then fresh in their memories; and\ntherefore it denotes all the deliverances which God is pleased to\nvouchsafe to his people, whether temporal or spiritual; and in\nparticular, that which was procured for us by Christ, from the bondage\nand thraldom of sin and Satan, the condemning sentence of the law,\ntogether with that salvation which is inseparably connected with it;\nwhich is to be improved by us as an inducement to yield universal\nobedience to all God\u2019s commandments.\n\nThere are some, indeed, who think that this is a part of the first\nCommandment, and so the meaning is, Thou art to know, and practically\nconsider, that I am the Lord thy God, as containing the affirmative part\nthereof; and then follows the negative, Thou shalt have no other gods;\nor else they suppose it to be a reason annexed to this Commandment in\nparticular. But it seems most probable, that it is a preface to all the\nCommandments, and accordingly to be applied as a motive to enforce\nobedience to every one of them.\n\nIII. We have farther an account of the sum of the four Commandments,\nwhich contain our duty to God. Here it maybe observed,\n\n1. That the sum of all the commandments is love. This is what the\napostle intends, when he says, that _the end of the commandment is\ncharity_, or rather _love_, as it ought to be rendered, 1 Tim. i. 5. and\naccordingly he says, _He that loveth another hath fulfilled the law_,\nRom. xiii. 8. This love hath either God or man for its object, and\ncomprizes in it the duties which we owe to God and man: and they are all\nreduced to this general head; that hereby we may understand; that\nobedience, whether it be to God or man, is to be performed with delight;\notherwise it will be a burden to us and unacceptable to him, who has\nobliged us to love him and keep his commandments; because he first loved\nus.\n\n2. These commandments, as they respect our duty to God and man, are\ncomprized in two tables, which are to be divided according to their\nrespective objects. Some ancient writers, indeed, have very\ninjudiciously supposed that the five first Commandments belong to the\nfirst table, and the others to the second; and so make an equal division\nthereof; and the Papists have assigned but three to the first table,\nmaking the second Commandment an appendix to the first; and that the\nnumber ten may be compleat, they divide the tenth Commandment into two.\nThe reason urged by them for this matter, will be considered in its\nproper place; but we are bound to conclude that the four first\nCommandments contain the duties of the first table, which respect those\nwhich we immediately owe to God; and these are to be performed, as our\nSaviour says, _with all our soul, with all our strength, and with all\nour mind_, Luke x. 27. which is an idea superior to that which is\ncontained in the duty we owe to man. And the six last Commandments\ncontain the duties of the second table, of which our neighbour is the\nmore immediate object.\n\nThat this division of the Commandments is just, appears from what the\napostle says, when speaking concerning the duty contained in the fifth\nCommandment, _Honour thy father and mother_, who calls it _the first\nCommandment with promise_, Eph. vi. 2. Whereas it is not the first\nCommandment that has a promise annexed to it, since the second\nCommandment contains a promise of mercy to thousands of them that love\nGod and keep his commandments; nor is it the first of the ten\nCommandments. Therefore the apostle can intend nothing hereby but that\nit is the first Commandment of the second table.\n\nAnd now we are considering the Commandments as thus contained in two\ntables, and distinguished with respect to the more immediate objects\nthereof, we may farther observe; that though both of them are enjoined\nby the authority of God, and consequently are equally binding, so that\nthe obedience which is acceptable in his sight, must be so extensive, as\nthat we must _have respect to all his commandments_, Psal. cxix. 6. Yet\nit may be observed,\n\n(1.) That the duties of the first table, in which we have to do with God\nas the more immediate object thereof, are to be considered as acts of\nreligious worship, whereby we not only confess our obligation to obey\nhim; but in performing it, adore and magnify his divine perfections as\nthe highest end and reason thereof; which is not included in the idea of\nthe duties which we owe to our neighbour, as contained in the\ncommandments of the second table. These, indeed are to be religiously\nobserved, not from any circumstance respecting our neighbour, but as\nduties which we perform in obedience to God[204].\n\n(2.) Though the principal and most excellent branch of religion consists\nin our obeying the commandments of the first table; yet our obedience is\nnot only defective, but unacceptable to God, if we neglect to perform\nthose of the second. And, on the other hand, the performance of the\nduties of the second table is not sufficient to denominate a person a\nreligious man, who lives in the neglect of those which are contained in\nthe first.\n\n(3.) The duties which we owe to our neighbour, as contained in the\nsecond table, are, for the most part, to give way to those which we owe\nto God, pursuant to those which are enjoined in the first, especially\nwhen they are considered as standing in competition with them. Thus we\nare obliged, in the fifth Commandment, to obey our parents or superiors.\nNevertheless, if they command us to break the Sabbath, profane the name\nof God, or attend on such worship which he has not required, we are to\ndisobey them, or to _obey God rather than men_, Acts iv. 19. And\nelsewhere it is said, _If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy\nson, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is\nas thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go, and serve\nother gods: thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him_,\nDeut. xiii. 6, 8. This our Saviour calls _hating father and mother,\nwife, children, and brethren_, Luke xiv, 26. without which we cannot be\nhis disciples. By which he intends, that if the love which we otherwise\nowe to them, be inconsistent with that obedience which he requires of\nhis followers; or, if we cannot oblige them, and at the same time\nperform the duties which we owe to him, the inferior obligation must\ngive way to the superior.\n\nFootnote 204:\n\n _The former of these are generally styled the Elicit acts of religion,\n the latter the Imperate._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CIII., CIV.\n\n\n QUEST. CIII. _Which is the first commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The first commandment is, _Thou shalt have no other gods\n before me_.\n\n QUEST. CIV. _What are the duties required in the first commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The duties required in the first commandment, are, the knowing\n and acknowledging of God to be the only true God, and our God; and\n to worship and glorify him accordingly, by thinking, meditating,\n remembering, highly esteeming, honouring, adoring, choosing, loving,\n desiring, fearing of him, believing him, trusting, hoping,\n delighting, rejoicing in him, being zealous for him, calling upon\n him, giving all praise and thanks, and yielding all obedience and\n submission to him, with the whole man, being careful in all things\n to please him, and sorrowful when in any thing he is offended, and\n walking humbly with him.\n\nThe duties required in this Commandment, are contained in three general\nheads.\n\nI. We are obliged to know God. This supposes that our understanding is\nrightly informed as to what relates to the divine perfections, which are\ndisplayed in the works of creation and providence, by which we are led\ninto the knowledge of his eternal power and Godhead; and this is called\nthe natural knowledge of God: but that knowledge which we are to\nendeavour to attain, who have a brighter manifestation of his\nperfections in the gospel, is of a far more excellent and superior\nnature; inasmuch as herein we see the glory of God the Father, Son, and\nHoly Ghost; or behold the perfections of the divine nature, as displayed\nin and through a Mediator; which is that knowledge which is absolutely\nnecessary to salvation, as our Saviour says, _This is life eternal; that\nthey might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast\nsent_, John xvii. 3. By this means we not only know what God is, but our\ninterest in him, and the foundation which we have of our being accepted\nin his sight.\n\nII. We are farther commanded to acknowledge or make a visible profession\nof our subjection to God, and in particular, to Christ, as our great\nMediator: His name, interest, and glory, should be most dear to us; and\nwe are, on all occasions, to testify, that we count it our glory to be\nhis servants, and to make it appear that he is the supreme object of our\ndesire and delight, as the Psalmist says, _I cried unto thee, O Lord, I\nsaid, Thou art my refuge and my portion in the land of the living_, Psal\ncxlii. 5. And elsewhere, _Whom have I in heaven but thee, and there is\nnone upon earth that I desire besides thee_, Psal. lxxiii. 25.\n\nIII. We are farther obliged by this Commandment, to worship and glorify\nGod, pursuant to what we know, and the profession we make of him as the\ntrue God and our God. To worship and glorify God, is to ascribe all\npossible glory and perfection to him, and to have our hearts suitably\naffected therewith, as sensible of that infinite distance which we stand\nat from him. This is considered under several heads, which contain the\nsubstance of what is required in this Commandment; as,\n\n1. We must make God the subject of our daily meditation; calling to mind\nwhat he is in himself, and what he is to us, or does for us; which is to\nbe considered as a means to preserve us from sin, and a spur, to duty, a\nmotive to holy fear and reverence.\n\n2. We are to honour, adore, and fear him for his greatness. Thus the\nPsalmist says, _Who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord; who\namong the sons of the mighty can be likened to the Lord? God is greatly\nto be feared in the assemblies of the saints, and to be had in reverence\nof all them that are about him_, Psal. lxxxix. 6, 7.\n\n3. As God is the best good, and has promised that he will be a God to\nus; so he is to be desired, loved, delighted, and rejoiced in, and\nchosen by us; as the prophet says, \u2018With my soul have I desired thee in\nthe night,\u2019 Isa. xxvi. 9. and the church, \u2018I sat down under his shadow\nwith great delight,\u2019 Cant. ii. 3. and the apostle, \u2018Lord, thou knowest\nthat I love thee,\u2019 John xxi. 15.\n\n4. As he is a God of truth, we are to believe all that he has spoken;\nand in particular, what he has revealed in his promises or threatnings,\nrelating to mercies which he will bestow, or judgments which he will\ninflict. Thus our Saviour says, \u2018If I say the truth, why do ye not\nbelieve me,\u2019 John viii. 46. And it is said, when Israel \u2018saw that great\nwork which the Lord did upon the Egyptians, the people feared the Lord,\nand believed the Lord, and his servant Moses,\u2019 Exod. xiv. 31.\n\n5. As he is able to save to the utmost, and faithful in fulfilling all\nhis promises, we are to trust him with all we have from him, and for all\nthose blessings which we hope to receive at his hands. Thus the prophet\nsays, \u2018Trust ye in the Lord for ever; for in the Lord Jehovah is\neverlasting strength,\u2019 Isa. xxvi. 4. And the apostle speaks of his\n_having committed_ all to him, 2 Tim. i. 11. as the consequence of what\nhe knew him to be.\n\n6. When the name, interest, and glory of God is opposed in the world, we\nare to express an holy zeal for it. Thus the prophet Elijah says, \u2018I\nhave been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts; for the children of\nIsrael have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain\nthy prophets with the sword,\u2019 1 Kings xix. 10. And as to what concerns\nour conversation in general, we are to be \u2018not slothful in business, but\nfervent in spirit, serving the Lord,\u2019 Rom. xii. 11.\n\n7. Since he is a God hearing prayer, we are daily to call upon him, \u2018O\nthou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come,\u2019 Psal. lxv. 2.\n\n8. As he is the God of all our mercies, we are to thank and praise him\nfor them. Thus the Psalmist says, \u2018O give thanks unto the Lord, for he\nis good; for his mercy endureth for ever,\u2019 Psal. cxxxvi. 1.\n\n9. His sovereignty and dominion over us, calls for subjection and\nobedience, and a constant care to please him, and approve ourselves to\nhim in all things. Thus the apostle says, \u2018Submit yourselves to God,\u2019\nJames iv. 7. And the Psalmist speaks of a person\u2019s \u2018cleansing his way,\nby taking heed thereto according to his word,\u2019 Psal. cxix. 9.\n\n10. As he is an holy, jealous, and sin-hating God, we are to be filled\nwith grief and sorrow of heart when he is offended, either by ourselves\nor others, as Ephraim says, \u2018I was ashamed, yea, even confounded;\nbecause I did bear the reproach of my youth,\u2019 Jer. xxxi. 19. And the\nPsalmist, \u2018Rivers of waters run down mine eyes, because they,\u2019 that is,\nthe world in general, \u2018keep not thy law,\u2019 Psal. cxxix. 136.\n\n11. A sense of our unworthiness and daily infirmities should excite us\nto _walk humbly with God_. This is enjoined as a necessary duty, Mic.\nvi. 8. and is called a _being clothed with humility_, 1 Pet. v. 5. Thus\nconcerning the duties required in this Commandment.\n\nThat which may be farther observed is, that it is fitly placed before\nall the other Commandments, because it is, from the nature of the thing,\nnecessary to our performing the duties which are required in them. The\nobject of worship must first be known before we can apply ourselves, in\na right manner, to perform any duty prescribed, whether respecting God\nor man.\n\nIt may be also farther considered, that it is not an easy matter to keep\nthe Commandment, because of the spirituality and vast extent thereof,\nand the many graces that are to be exercised by those that would perform\nit aright; and therefore we ought earnestly to beg of God that our\nhearts may be set aright with him, and inclined and excited hereunto by\nhim; which is a peculiar blessing to be desired and expected from the\nHoly Spirit. Thus the Psalmist says, _Incline mine heart unto thy\ntestimonies_, Psal. cxix. 36.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CV., CVI.\n\n\n QUEST. CV. _What are the sins forbidden in the first Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sins forbidden in the first Commandment, are, Atheism, in\n denying, or not having a God; idolatry, in having, or worshipping\n more gods than one, or any with, or instead of the true God; the not\n having and avouching him for God, and our God; the omission or\n neglect of any thing due to him required in this Commandment,\n ignorance, forgetfulness, misapprehensions, false opinions, unworthy\n and wicked thoughts of him, bold and curious searching into his\n secrets, all profaneness, hatred of God, self-love, self-seeking,\n and all other inordinate and immoderate setting of our mind, will,\n or affections upon other things, and taking them off from him, in\n whole or in part; vain credulity, unbelief, heresy, misbelief,\n distrust, despair, incorrigibleness, insensibleness under judgments,\n hardness of heart, pride, presumption, carnal security, tempting of\n God, using unlawful means, and trusting in lawful means, carnal\n delights and joys; corrupt, blind, and indiscreet zeal,\n lukewarmness, and deadness in the things of God, estranging\n ourselves, and apostatizing from God, praying, or giving any\n religious worship to saints, angels, or any other creatures, all\n compacts, and consulting with the devil, and hearkening to his\n suggestions, making men the lords of our faith and conscience,\n slighting and despising God and his commandments, resisting and\n grieving of his Spirit, discontent, and impatience at his\n dispensations, charging him foolishly for the evils he inflicts on\n us, and ascribing the praise of any good we either are, have, or can\n do, to fortune, idols, ourselves, or any other creature.\n\n QUEST. CVI. _What are we especially taught by these words_ (before\n me) _in the first Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. These words _before me_, or before my face, in the first\n Commandment, teach us, that God who seeth all things, takes special\n notice of, and is much displeased with the sin of having any other\n god; that so it may be an argument to dissuade from it, and to\n aggravate it, as a most impudent provocation, as also to persuade us\n to do, as in his sight, whatever we do in his service.\n\nThe sins forbidden in this Commandment may be reduced to two general\nheads, Atheism and Idolatry.\n\n_First_, Atheism; whereby men are so far from taking God for their God,\nthat they deny that there is a God; or, at least, that he is what he has\nrevealed himself to be. Thus the wicked man, who is styled a _fool_, is\nrepresented as _saying in his heart, There is no God_. Psal. xiv. 1.\nThis Atheism is either speculative or practical. The former of these is\nthat which is seated in the minds and consciences of men; who are so far\nblinded, perverted, and deluded, as to think that there is no God.\nThough, indeed, there are very few among these who are so bold and\nprofane as to deny this truth when they attend to the dictates of\nnature, or duly exercise those reasoning faculties with which God has\nendowed them; which, if they neglect to do, they must be reckoned but\none remove from brutes. Some, indeed, are ready to wish that there were\nno God, or inclined to deny those divine perfections that are essential\nto him, cast contempt on his government, or, it may be, deny a\nprovidence; which is, in effect, to deny that there is a God. Though it\nmust be observed, that none proceed to this degree of wickedness, till,\nby a long continuance in sin, they are given up to judicial hardness of\nheart, and blindness of mind, Rom. i. 28. Eph. iv. 17-20. And even these\nhave been forced, at some times, to confess that there is a God, with\nwhom is terrible majesty; when he has broken in on their consciences,\nand filled them with the dreadful apprehensions of his wrath, as a\nsin-revenging Judge. But where there is one speculative Atheist, there\nare a thousand practical ones, who live without God in the world; and\nthese are described in this answer, as being guilty of those sins which\nnone who duly consider his divine perfections would venture to commit.\n\nTo enlarge on every one of those instances, particularly mentioned in\nthis answer, in which this sin is supposed to consist, would require a\ndistinct treatise, and be inconsistent with our designed brevity in\nexplaining the Ten Commandments. All that we shall therefore attempt at\npresent, shall be to consider some instances, in which practical Atheism\ndiscovers itself, together with the aggravations of this sin; and then\nwe shall enquire what judgment we are to pass concerning those who\ncomplain of atheistical and blasphemous thoughts; and consider whether\nthis be a degree of that Atheism which we are speaking of; together with\nthe causes of this sin, and the remedies against it.\n\nI. The instances in which practical Atheism discovers itself. And,\n\n1. They are chargeable with it who are grossly ignorant, and know\nnothing of God but the name, being utter strangers to those perfections\nwhereby he makes himself known to the world, or who entertain carnal\nconceptions of him, as though he were altogether such an one as\nourselves, Psal. l. 21.\n\n2. When persons, though they know, in some measure, what God is, yet\nnever seriously exercise their thoughts about him; which forgetfulness\nis a degree of Atheism, and will be severely punished by him, Psal. ix.\n17. and l. 22.\n\n3. When persons maintain corrupt doctrines, and dangerous heresies,\nsubversive of the fundamental articles of faith, and contrary to the\ndivine perfections. Of this kind are those that militate against his\nsovereignty and dominion over the wills, consciences and affections of\nman; when persons conclude that his counsels and determinations may be\ndisannulled or defeated; or when we suppose that he changes, as we do;\nor when, under a pretence of advancing one perfection, we set aside the\nglory of another, when in order to magnify his mercy, we disregard his\nholiness or justice, and so presume of being happy without being holy;\nor when we give way to despairing thoughts, from the consideration of\nhis vindictive justice, without improving the displays of his mercy, as\nset forth in the gospel.\n\n4. When we repine and quarrel at his providence, and pretend to find\nfault with the dispensations thereof, or charge God foolishly, and go\nabout to prescribe laws to him, who is the Governor of the world, and\nmay do what he will with the work of his hands.\n\n5. When we refuse to engage in those acts of religious worship which he\nhas appointed, or to attend on his ordinances, in which we may hope for\nhis presence and blessing.\n\n6. When we behave ourselves, in the conduct of our lives, as though we\nwere not accountable to him, and had no reason to be afraid of his\njudgments. Accordingly, when we set our affections on other things, and\ntake them off from him, when we are guilty of wilful impenitency and\nunbelief, and are incorrigible under divine rebukes; when our hearts and\nlives are estranged from him, as though we desired not the knowledge of\nhis ways; when we resist and grieve his Spirit, are discontented and\nimpatient under his hand, or ascribe that to second causes, or think\nthat those things come by chance which are under the direction of his\nprovidence. In these, and many other instances, persons are notoriously\nguilty of practical Atheism, which is forbidden in this Commandment.\n\nII. We are now to consider the aggravations and dreadful consequences of\nthis sin.\n\n1. It is contrary to the light of nature, and the dictates of\nconscience, a disregarding those impressions which God has made of his\nglory on the souls of men. And in those who have been favoured with the\nrevelation of the grace of God in the gospel, in which his perfections\nhave been set forth to the utmost, it is a shutting our eyes against the\nlight and casting contempt on that which should raise our admiration,\nand excite in us the highest esteem of him whom we practically disown\nand deny.\n\n2. It is directly opposite to, and entirely inconsistent with all\nreligion, and opens a door to the greatest degree of licentiousness. To\nlive without God in the world, is to give the reins to our own\ncorruptions; it is not barely a sin of infirmity or inadvertency, but a\nrunning in all excess of riot; and therefore the consequence hereof must\nbe dreadful; for that which strikes at the very being of God, cannot but\nexpose the sinner to the sorest condemnation. But since there are some\nsins mentioned in this answer, which contain a degree of practical\natheism; which believers themselves are prone to fall into, and complain\nof, as forgetfulness of God, unbelief, distrust of his providence,\ninsensibleness under judgments, too great a degree of hardness of heart,\npride, carnal security, discontent and impatience under his\ndispensations; this may tend very much to discourage them, and make them\nconclude that they are not in a state of grace; especially when they\nfind, as sometimes they do, atheistical and blasphemous thoughts\nsuggested to their minds. Therefore we must inquire,\n\nIII. What judgment we are to pass concerning those who are ready to\ncharge themselves with practical atheism, especially as to what respects\nthose unbecoming thoughts and conceptions which they sometimes have of\nthe divine Majesty? whether this be altogether inconsistent with the\ntruth of grace, together with the causes thereof, and the remedies\nagainst it? It is certain, that the best of God\u2019s people are sanctified\nbut in part, and therefore are prone to commit those sins which seem to\ncontain in them a denial, at least, a neglect of that regard which we\nought to have for the divine perfections, and especially when we are not\nonly followed with vain, but blasphemous thoughts; which gives great\ndisturbance to us, when engaged in holy duties. This ought to be\nreckoned a very great affliction, and occasion many searchings of heart;\nsince sometimes it brings much guilt with it. Nevertheless, we are not\nalways from hence to conclude that we are in a state of unregeneracy. It\nis the prevalency of corruption, or the dominion of sin, which is\ninconsistent with the truth of grace, not the remainders thereof. A\nperson may have faith, who yet complains of unbelief; he may have a due\nregard to God, as to what respects the course and tenor of his actions;\nbut yet, in many instances, be chargeable with forgetfulness of him. He\nmay have a love to him, and yet sometimes be guilty of indiscreet zeal,\non the one hand, or lukewarmness and deadness of heart, on the other;\nhis mind and affections may be sanctified, and yet he be sometimes\nfollowed with atheistical and blasphemous thoughts.\n\nWe have instances in scripture of good men, who have spoken, not only\nunadvisedly, but, as we may term it wickedly with their lips. Thus Job\nis justly reproved by Elihu for charging God with _finding occasions\nagainst him; putting his feet in the stocks, and marking all his paths_,\nJob xxxiii. 10, 11. as though his dealings with him had been unjust and\nsevere; especially when he says at the same time, _I am clean, and\nwithout transgression; I am innocent, neither is there iniquity in me_,\nver. 9. And Jonah, when he was reproved by God for his passionate\nbehaviour towards him, vindicates himself, and says, _I do well to be\nangry, even unto death_, Jonah iv. 9. These are expressions that favour\nof a degree of Atheism; and so do those unbecoming conceptions of God,\nwhereby our thoughts are sometimes defiled and depraved. But it is one\nthing to be guilty of this through surprise and the prevalency of\ntemptation; and another thing to have those thoughts indulged by, and\nlodged in us unrepented of.\n\nAnd there are some instances in which believers are afflicted with\natheistical and blasphemous thoughts, when it is hard to say that they\ncontract guilt thereby, or, at least, it must only be reckoned an\ninfirmity arising from this imperfect state; and that more especially\nwhen they are injected by Satan, and are without the consent of our\nwills; but treated with the utmost abhorrence, constantly bewailed and\nresisted with all our might; more particularly when we take occasion\nhereby to exercise those graces which discover that we have other\napprehensions of God than what are suggested at those times, when we are\nhurried by these temptations, and can scarce say, that we have the\ngovernment of our own thoughts; especially if we are able to say, at\nsuch a time as our Saviour did, when unadvisedly tempted by Peter, who,\nwas at that time the Devil\u2019s instrument, to persuade him to relinquish\nthe work which he came into the world about. _Get thee behind me Satan,\nthou art an offence to me_, Matt. xvi. 23.\n\nAnd this leads us to consider the causes of such atheistical and\nblasphemous thoughts. Sometimes they proceed from a neglect of waiting\non God in his ordinances, or indulging a carnal and stupid frame of\nspirit therein, and not maintaining that holy reverence, or becoming\nsense of his all-seeing eye, which we ought always to have. Moreover,\nthere is nothing that has a greater tendency hereunto, than our\nconversing with those who make religion the subject of their profane wit\nand drollery; especially if we do this out of choice, and do not at the\nsame time testify a just abhorrence of it.\n\nAs for those remedies which are to be made use of to fence against, and\ncure the sinfulness of our thoughts in such-like instances; it behoves\nus to repent of those sins, which may have been the occasion of, or\ngiven rise to them. And inasmuch as it is not in our own power to govern\nour hearts or affections, or restrain the breaking forth of corruption;\nit is necessary for us to commit our souls into Christ\u2019s hands, with\nearnest supplications to him that he would sanctify, regulate, and\ncleanse our thoughts, and bring us into, and keep us in a good frame. We\nought also to desire, seek after, and improve all opportunities of\nconversing with those whose discourse is holy and profitable, Mal. iii.\n16. by which means our affections may be raised, and our thoughts\ntinctured with divine things, which will leave an abiding impression\nbehind them, Luke xxiv. 32. Which leads us,\n\n_Secondly_, To consider this Commandment as forbidding idolatry. Thus,\nwhen it is said, _Thou shalt have no other gods_; the meaning is, thou\nshalt not worship idols, or set a creature in the place of God, or pay\nthat regard to it that is due to him alone.\n\nHere it may not be inconvenient to consider the difference between\nidolatry as it is a breach of the first and second commandment. As it is\na breach of the first Commandment, it contains in it a giving divine\nhonour to that which is not God; but as it is against the second\nCommandment, it is a worshipping God by the creature, to whom an\ninferior kind of worship is given. Thus when the Papists worship God by\nimages, supposing them to be a help to their devotion, or a means of\nperforming that worship which they pretend to be given ultimately to\nGod. Or when they ascribe any branch of divine glory to saints or\nangels; notwithstanding what they say to exculpate themselves from the\nbreach of the first Commandment, they are justly chargeable with the\nbreach of the second.\n\nWe are here to consider, the idolatry more especially that is forbidden\nin the first Commandment. Which is either what is more gross, such as\nthat which is found among the heathen; or that which is more secret, and\nmay be found in the hearts of all, and is discovered by the practice of\nmultitudes of Christians, who profess the utmost detestation of idolatry\nin the other sense.\n\n1. As to idolatry, in the former sense, together with the rise and\nprogress thereof. In considering the first rise of it we may observe,\n\n(1.) That it proceeded from the ignorance and pride of man, who, though\nhe could not but know, by the light of nature, that there is a God; yet\nbeing ignorant of his perfections, or of what he has revealed himself to\nbe in his word, was disposed to frame those ideas of God, which took\ntheir rise from his own invention. Accordingly the apostle says, _When\nye knew not God, ye did service unto them, which, by nature, are no\ngods_, Gal. iv. 8.\n\n(2.) When iniquity abounded in the world, and men withdrew from, and\ncast contempt on the ordinances of God, they invented and worshipped new\ngods. This some suppose Cain and his posterity did, when he _went out\nfrom the presence of the Lord_, Gen. iv. 16. and the _sons_ of God, that\nis, the church, when they contracted marriages with the _daughters of\nmen_, chap. vi. 2. and joined with them in idolatry; so that it is no\nwonder if persons leave the true worship of God, that they should chuse\nto themselves other gods.\n\n(3.) Hereupon God gave them up to judicial blindness; so that they\n_worshipped the host of heaven_, Acts vii. 42. as the apostle says the\nHeathen did.\n\n(4.) As to what concerns the idolatry which was practised among the\nIsraelites, that took its rise from the fond ambition which they had to\nbe like other nations, who were abhorred of God; counting this a\nfashionable religion, and finding the true worshippers of God to be\nfewer in number than the rest of the world, so that, as the prophet\nspeaks, they were _like a speckled bird_, despised and hated by the\nHeathen _round about them_, Jer. xii. 9. they approved of, and learned\ntheir ways. It was this that occasioned Solomon to _cleave to them in\nlove_, 1 Kings xi. 2. which was not much unlike to the argument used by\nDemetrius and his followers, why Diana should be worshipped; namely,\n_because all Asia and the world worshipped her_, Acts xix. 27.\n\n(5.) The Devil was permitted, for the trial of the faith of God\u2019s\npeople, and as an instance of his righteous judgment on his enemies, to\nabuse the unthinking part of the world by various signs and lying\nwonders. Thus we read of _prophets_, and _dreamers of dreams_, who gave\nforth signs and wonders, which God sometimes judicially suffered to come\nto pass; whereby many took occasion to go _after other gods_, Deut.\nxiii. 1-3. and Antichrist is said _to come after the working of Satan,\nwith all power, and signs, and lying wonders_, 2 Thess. ii. 9. This was\nmanaged by the craft and covetousness of the priests, who made a gain of\nit, and amused the common people thereby. And the Heathen oracles, so\nmuch spoken of by ancient writers, which gave countenance to their\nidolatry, are reckoned, by some, to have been no other than a\ncontrivance of those who had little else but secular interest in view.\nAnd when they predicted things future, or revealed secrets, this was\ngenerally done in doubtful expressions: so that whether the thing really\ncame to pass or no, the end designed might be answered thereby; and\ndoubtless there was a hand of Satan herein, to harden the world in that\nidolatry which was then practised by them. The gods they worshipped were\nas numerous as the countries and kingdoms where idolatry prevailed;\naccordingly every nation, yea, every city had its particular god and\ndistinct modes of worship.\n\n[1.] Some worshipped the sun, moon, and stars, supposing that their\nregular motion and influence on earthly bodies, was not to be attributed\nto the all-wise providence of God, but to some intelligent being, which\nresided in, and gave that motion and influence to them: upon the account\nwhereof they worshipped them as gods. This some did in that early age in\nwhich Job lived, Job xxxi. 26. and the Israelites were warned against\nit, Deut. iv. 19. And afterwards we read of _idolatrous priests_, who\n_burnt incense to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to\nall the host of heaven_, and dedicated _horses and chariots to the sun_,\n2 Kings xxiii. 5, 11.\n\n[2.] Others worshipped the earth, and many creatures therein, especially\nthose that they received a more than ordinary advantage from. Thus the\nEgyptians worshipped the river Nile; by the overflowing of which, their\ncountry was rendered fertile. And some who lived in maritime towns,\nworshipped the sea, thinking thereby to prevent an inundation from it.\nAnd the Philistines worshipped Dagon; inasmuch, as living near the sea,\nit afforded them plenty of fish.\n\n[3.] Others worshipped those parts of the earth which they most\ndelighted in; such as gardens, woods, groves, springs, _&c._ which they\nsupposed to be inhabited by some gods, who produced the advantages which\nthey received hereby, without regarding the providence of God, to which\nevery thing is to be ascribed, that the earth brings forth for the\nsupport and delight of men.\n\n[4.] Others supposed that there were particular gods, who had the\noversight of men, succeeded their undertakings in the various affairs of\nlife, conducted them when travelling by sea or land, gave good or ill\nsuccess to their secular employments, and preserved them in sickness and\nhealth; and accordingly they paid divine adoration to them.\n\n[5.] Others expressed the regard they had to virtue by worshipping some\nmen after their death, who had signalized themselves by inventing some\nthings which were of common advantage to mankind while they lived. And\nthe Romans were so much addicted to this practice of idolatry, that some\nof their emperors, though tyrants and monsters in wickedness, while they\nlived, obliged their subjects to perpetuate their memories by\nworshipping them as gods when they were dead.\n\n[6.] Some were so stupid, as that they worshipped stocks and stones,\nascribing divinity to them; in which they acted below the reason of\nintelligent creatures. Thus the prophet speaks of their idols as first\n_growing in the wood_, then _framed by the smith_, or carpenter, _into\ngods_, and afterwards _worshipped by them_, Isa. xliv. 9-17. And the\nPsalmist, on this occasion, justly observes, _They that make them are\nlike them; so is every one that trusteth in them_, Psal. cxv. 4-7,\ncompared with 8.\n\nWe might, under this head, consider some things mentioned in scripture;\nin which idolaters not only acted contrary to the dictates of reason,\nbut discovered themselves to be cruel and inhuman in their modes of\nworship. Thus Baal\u2019s worshippers in Ahab\u2019s time, cut themselves with\nknives and lancets, till the blood gushed out of them, 1 Kings xviii.\n28. and others made their children pass through the fire, in the worship\nthey paid to Molech, or the sun, which the Psalmist refers to, when he\nsays, _They sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, and\nshed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their\ndaughters_, Psal. cvi. 37, 38. This, indeed, some think, intends nothing\nelse but their passing between two fires; so that they were scorched by\nthem. Yet others, with greater reason, suppose that they were inclosed\nin that brazen idol, and so burnt to death in the most barbarous\nmanner[205].\n\nThe use which we ought to make of this doctrine, should be to excite us\nto bless God for the clear light of the gospel, whereby we are led to\nturn from dead idols to serve the living and true God: nevertheless we\nare to take heed lest we be chargeable with heart-idolatry; whereby we\nmay be said to break this Commandment, though it be in a different way\nfrom that in which the Heathen did. This leads us to consider,\n\n2. That idolatry which is sometimes found among Christians; who, though\nthey abhor the thoughts of giving divine worship to a creature, yet, if\nthey look into their own hearts, will have reason to charge themselves\nwith those things which are in scripture called idolatry; namely, when\nthey put any thing in the room of God, or love it more than him; and\nthis may be considered in the following instances.\n\n(1.) Self may be reckoned among those idols which many, who make\nprofession of the true religion, pay a greater regard to than to God.\nThus the apostle, speaking concerning the great degeneracy of the world,\namong other things, says, that _men should be lovers of their\nownselves_, 2 Tim. iii. 2. so that self-love turns away the heart from\nGod, and excludes all practical religion. This we may be said to be\nguilty of; in which respect we are chargeable with heart-idolatry.\n\n[1.] When we reject, or refuse to give credit to any of the great\ndoctrines contained in divine revelation, unless we are able to\ncomprehend them within the shallow limits of our own understandings;\nupon which account some are inclined to treat the most sacred mysteries\nof our religion with contempt; and for the same reason they might as\nwell deny and disbelieve what is said concerning the infinite\nperfections of the divine nature, because they cannot be comprehended by\nus. This is no other than a setting up our own understanding, which is\nweak and liable to err, in opposition to the wisdom of God, and, in some\nrespects, a giving superior glory to it.\n\n[2.] When we are resolute and incorrigible under the various rebukes of\nprovidence, and persist in our rebellion against God, notwithstanding\nthe threatenings which he has denounced, or the judgments which he\nexecutes. When the will of man is obstinately set on those things which\nare directly contrary to the will of God; and, though we are warned of\nthe danger thereof, resolve notwithstanding, to add rebellion to our\niniquities, like the wild ass used to the wilderness, or the swift\ndromedary traversing her ways, that cannot be easily turned out of her\ncourse. In this respect the will of man is set in opposition to God; and\ntherefore he is, for this reason, justly chargeable with idolatry.\n\n(3.) This also discovers itself in our affections, when they are either\nset on unlawful objects, or immoderately pursue those that would\notherwise be lawful; when we love these things which God hates, or covet\nwhat he has expressly forbidden, as Achan did the wedge of gold, and the\nBabylonish garment; upon which account _covetousness_ is, by the\napostle, called _idolatry_, Col. iii. 5. And to this we may add, that we\nare chargeable with this sin, when we _make provision for the flesh, to\nfulfil the lusts thereof_, Rom. xiii, 14. Thus the apostle speaks of\nsome _whose god is their belly_, Phil. iii. 19.\n\nAnd as for those things which are otherwise lawful, we may be guilty of\nidolatry in the immoderate pursuit of them, when they take up too much\nof our thoughts, time, and concern; when our affections are so much set\nupon them, as though we had nothing better to mind; when we are not\nwilling to part with them when God calls for them at our hands, and are\nmore cast down at the loss of them, than we are when deprived of those\nspiritual blessings which are of the highest importance. In these\ninstances we may be said to set up self as our idol in opposition to\nGod.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that there is a more subtle kind of idolatry,\nwhereby self enters into, and takes its place in those religious duties,\nwhich believers are engaged in. Thus when they attempt to perform them\nin their own strength, as though they had a sufficiency in themselves,\nand had no occasion to depend on the almighty power of God to work in\nthem that which is pleasant in his sight. And we are farther guilty of\nthis sin, when, through the pride of our hearts, we are apt to applaud\nourselves when we have performed some religious duties, and expect to be\njustified thereby; which is a setting up self as an idol, in the room of\nChrist. And lastly, when self is the end designed in what we do in\nmatters of religion, and so robs God of that glory which is due to his\nname.\n\n(2.) There is another idol, which is put in the room of God; and that is\nthe world. When the profits, pleasures, or honours thereof are thought\nof with the greatest delight, as though they were our chief good, and\npursued with more earnestness than Christ\u2019s interest and glory. When it\nhas not only the highest place in our affections, but, as it were,\nengrosses them; this is that love of the world which, as the apostle\nsays, is inconsistent with the love of the Father, 1 John ii. 15. and\ndenotes us guilty of that idolatry which we are now speaking of; more\nparticularly,\n\n[1.] When our thoughts are so much engaged in the pursuit of it, that we\ngrow not only cold and remiss as to spiritual things; but allow\nourselves no time for serious meditations on them, or converse with God\nin secret.\n\n[2.] When the world has our first and last thoughts every day; when we\nare so far from following the Psalmist\u2019s example, when he says, _When I\nawake, I am still with thee_, Psal. cxxxix. 18. as considering ourselves\nunder the care of providence, and beholden to God for the mercies which\nwe enjoy, that we are taken up with nothing else but the projects and\nschemes which we lay for the gaining or increasing our wealth, or\nworldly estate therein. And this having been the great business of the\nday, takes up and engages our wakeful thoughts by night, as though it\nwere the main work and business of life.\n\n[3.] When we pursue the world, without depending on God for his blessing\nto attend our lawful undertakings, and do not consider the good things\nthereof as his special gift, nor the disappointments that attend us\ntherein, as ordered by his overruling providence, to engage us to walk\nmore closely with him, and take up our rest in him as our only\nhappiness.\n\n[4.] When our hearts are hereby hardened, and grow cold and indifferent\nin religion, or when it follows and disturbs us in holy duties, and\nrenders us formal in the discharge thereof.\n\n[5.] When the riches, honours, and pleasures of the world have a\ntendency to quiet our spirits, and give us full satisfaction, though\nunder spiritual declensions, and destitute of the special presence of\nGod, which is our greatest happiness.\n\n[6.] When we fret, or repine at the providence of God, under the\ndisappointments we meet with in our secular affairs in the world. And,\n\n[7.] When we despise the members of Christ, because they are poor in the\nworld, are ashamed of his cross, and refuse to bear reproach for his\nsake.\n\n(1.) There is another instance of heart-idolatry, _viz._ when we adhere\nto the dictates of Satan, and regard his suggestions more than the\nconvictions of our own consciences, or the Holy Spirit. Satan\u2019s design\nin his temptations, is to turn us away from God; and when we are drawn\naside thereby, we may be said to obey him rather than God. This is what\nall are more or less guilty of; but some are said, in an uncommon\ndegree, to be his servants. Thus the apostle Paul styles the _sorcerer,\nwho sought to turn aside the deputy from the faith, a child of the\ndevil_, Acts xiii. 10. and our Saviour tells the Jews, _Ye are of your\nfather the devil; and the lusts of your father ye will do_, &c. John\nviii. 44. He is also called _The god of this world_, 2 Cor. iv. 4. and\n_the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the\nchildren of disobedience_, Eph. ii. 2. and accordingly he attempts to\nusurp the throne of God; by which means he has led a great part of the\nworld after him. And, as he tempted our Saviour to fall down and worship\nhim, Matt. iv. 9. though without success, he prevails upon others to do\nit to their own ruin. Here it may be observed,\n\n[1.] That he has propagated several doctrines, in opposition to the\ngospel; and, indeed, all those doctrines which are subversive thereof,\ntake their rise from him. Thus the apostle, speaks of some who, _in the\nlatter times, should depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing\nspirits, and doctrines of devils_, 1 Tim. iv. 1. This they do when they\ndepart from the way of truth.\n\n[2.] He has sometimes invented those modes of worship, which have been\nobserved by some, in imitation of the sacrifices which God had ordained;\nand whatever pretence there might be of religion herein, he had\ndoubtless a design, by this means, to set up himself, in opposition to\nGod.\n\n[3.] He has amused and hardened the hearts of his subjects, by pretended\nmiracles, designed to oppose, and lessen the credit of those real\nmiracles which have been wrought, to confirm the truth, by the finger of\nGod, Exod. viii. 7.\n\n[4.] He has endeavoured to extirpate the true religion, by raising\npersecutions against the faithful worshippers of God; which has been his\nconstant practice, so far as he has been permitted, in all ages.\n\n[5.] He has excited, in some of his subjects, the greatest degree of\nhatred, opposition to, and rebellion against God. Thus he _entered into\nthe heart of Judas_, Luke xxii. 3. and _filled the heart of Ananias,\nthat he lied to the Holy Ghost_, Acts v. 3. and has hardened the hearts\nof others, that they bade defiance to the Almighty, as Pharaoh, who\nsaid, _Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice?_ Exod. v. 2.\n\n[6.] He has persuaded many of his subjects to enter into a kind of\nconfederacy with him, and with one another, to promote his wicked\ndesigns. Thus those wretched Jews did, who _bound themselves under a\ncurse, that they would neither eat or drink till they had killed Paul_,\nActs xxiii. 14. And we read of others who had _made a covenant with\ndeath and with hell_, Isa. xxviii. 15. The vilest instances of sins of\nthis nature, were found among some who used sorcery, divination,\nwitch-craft, and other diabolical practices; which is so horrid a crime,\nand so contrary to the dictates of human nature, that had we not an\naccount of some in scripture, who used those abominable arts, we should\nbe ready to think that none were ever guilty of them.\n\nI will not deny but that many things, which are commonly related\nconcerning witch-craft and sorcery, as practised in latter ages, are\nfabulous and incredible; and some things, said to be done by the power\nof the Devil, may be accounted for by natural causes; and others are\nascribed to it, which are performed by the concealed arts of some who\nget a livelihood by cheating the unthinking part of mankind:\nnevertheless, I am far from thinking that the account we have hereof in\nscripture, is without any manner of foundation, as some modern writers\nsuggest. That famous story of the witch of Endor, mentioned in 1 Sam.\nxxviii. 7-20. is an argument that there were such persons, at that time,\nin the world.\n\nI am sensible that it will be objected to this, that she was a cunning\nwoman, who lived by her wits, and deceived Saul, by pretending that she\nused some infernal art, as expedient to bring him to the speech of\nSamuel; which it may not be amiss for us to inquire into. Therefore let\nit be observed,\n\n_1st_, That it is by no means to be supposed that she raised Samuel from\nthe dead; for it is out of the Devil\u2019s power to call the soul of a saint\nout of heaven, with a design to subserve his interest thereby, and to\nset up his kingdom in opposition to Christ\u2019s; and it is not reasonable\nto suppose that Samuel should do the Devil so much service after his\ndeath, who was so great an enemy to him in his life. Besides, he was\nburied at Ramah, 1 Sam. xxv. 1. and can we think that he should be now\nraised at Endor?\n\n_2dly_, On the other hand, we are not to imagine, that it was a mere\ntrick or juggle of the woman, whereby she imposed on Saul; for though it\nis true, he did not see a shape, yet he heard a voice, and made a reply\nthereunto. Moreover we read, that he had an intimation given him, that\nIsrael should be delivered into the hands of the Philistines; and that\nhe and his sons should be with him to-morrow; that, is in the state of\nthe dead; which the woman was not cunning enough to foretel;[206] or if\nshe had guessed that it would be so, she would hardly have ventured to\ntell Saul such ungrateful tidings; which, if he had lived to see himself\ncheated, and her prediction confuted, it would have endangered her life.\nHad it been nothing but a cheat or juggle, she would rather have told\nhim, that he would be safe and victorious; for which, if it had come to\npass, she might have expected a reward; and if not, she had nothing to\nfear from him as a just punishment of her impiety.\n\n_3dly_, We must therefore suppose, that she was a professed servant of\nthe Devil, and _had_, as the text says, _a familiar spirit_; by which we\nare to understand that she conversed with Satan; who, that he might\nharden her the more in her sin, and lead others, like Saul, into a\ncredulous, diabolical presumption, might reveal some secrets to her,\nand, at the same time, either assume the shape, or, at least,\ncounterfeit the voice of Samuel.\n\nThus concerning those, who, by the practice of these arts, have\nprofessed themselves to be in a kind of confederacy with Satan. It is\ncertain no good man ever practised them; and therefore some have found\nit very difficult to understand the sense of that scripture in Gen.\nxliv. 5. concerning the cup that was in Benjamin\u2019s sack; _Is not this\nthe cup wherein my Lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth?_ And\nJoseph himself says, in ver. 15. _Wot ye not that such a man as I can\ncertainly divine?_ Though Joseph was a prophet, it is certain he was no\ndiviner in that sense in which the word is commonly used in scripture;\nnor was this cup an instrument by which he practised any such art.\nTherefore, for the understanding of this scripture, we may consider,\n\n_1st_, That the word which we render _to divine_, denotes, as it is\nobserved in the margin, to make trial of, or search after, or to\ndiscover, or find out a matter; and instead of _whereby_, or _by which_,\nit ought rather to have been rendered _concerning which_; and then the\nmeaning of the scripture is only this; _Is not this the cup wherein my\nlord drinketh?_ And therefore, if it were lost or stolen, he would soon\nmiss it; and make inquiry to find out the thief, as he has now done. And\nwhen Joseph says, ver. 15. _Wot ye not that such a man as I can divine?_\nThe meaning is, Do you think that one who is so diligent and industrious\nin the management of all those affairs that are incumbent on me, would\nlose the cup in which I drink, and make no inquiry after it? Did you\nexpect to go undiscovered, when you had such an one as I to deal with,\nwho not only have an inclination, but all the advantages that can be\ndesired, to make search after those who have dealt unjustly by me, as\nyou have done?\n\n_2d_, To _divine_ may signify to _prophesy_; and so it may be taken in a\ngood sense as well as in a bad one. Accordingly, when Joseph\u2019s servants\nspeak of him as divining concerning the cup, they consider him as one\nwho had an extraordinary gift from God of revealing secrets. Therefore,\nthey might easily conclude that he would, by this means, find out the\nperson who had stolen his cup. This is agreeable to the Egyptian mode of\nspeaking; for those whom the Hebrews called _prophets_, they called\n_diviners_. And Joseph used the same expression when he says, _Wot you\nnot that such a man as I could divine?_ that is, Did you not know that I\nwas a prophet, and by this means was advanced to my present honour in\nPharaoh\u2019s court? So that, whether we take the words in this or the other\nsense, it does not follow, that he used any arts that were diabolical or\nunlawful.\n\nAnd now we are speaking concerning those arts, by which Satan deludes\nthem, who, either directly, or by consequence, pay that regard to him\nwhich is due only to God. It may farther be inquired; what we are to\nconclude concerning the practice of judicial astrology, by those, who,\nin scripture, are called _star-gazers_, as a term of contempt, whose\nprofession is universally condemned therein.\n\nThese are, especially in our age, a generation of men, who impose on the\nweakness of many superstitious and ignorant people, who, by encouraging\nthem, are partakers with them in their sin. The art they pretend to, is\nnot only uncertain, but presumptuous, and contains in it a contempt of\nthe providence of God, in regarding the signs and intimations, which\nthey suppose they receive from the stars, concerning the future\ncontingent events, or those actions which take their rise from the\nfree-will of man.\n\nThat which I would observe in general, concerning this practice, is,\nthat we no where find in scripture, that the stars were designed to\nsignify the prosperous or adverse circumstances in which men shall be in\nthe world; or to foretel the riches or poverty, sickness or health,\nwhich we should experience in our passage through it, or how long we\nshall continue in it; our times and circumstances in the world being\nonly in God\u2019s hand; and it is in mercy to us that he has concealed these\nfuture events from us. To this we may add, that this art, and those that\nuse it, is very often spoken against in scripture, and the church warned\nagainst it; when God says, _Learn not the way of the Heathen, and be not\ndismayed at the signs of heaven_, Jer. x. 2. And elsewhere, _Thou art\nwearied in the multitude of thy counsels, let now the astrologers, the\nstar-gazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up and save thee_, Isa.\nxlvii. 13. And elsewhere, they are ranked with _diviners_, and called\n_liars_, chap. xliv. 25.\n\nIf it be inquired, Whether any good men have ever practised this art,\nthough without pretending to have had any intimation from Satan, but\nonly proceeding according to the rules prescribed therein? It is not my\nbusiness to censure men, but things. Therefore the best that can be said\nthereof is; that if any good men have studied or practised it, they have\ngenerally blamed themselves for it afterwards, or, at least, confessed\nthe uncertainty and presumption thereof. And we read of some that, in\nthe time of their ignorance, had addicted themselves thereunto; who,\nwhen it pleased God to convert them, have laid it aside, and burned the\nbooks from whence they learned it, Acts xix. 19.\n\nIt is objected against what has been said concerning the unlawfulness of\njudicial astrology, that Moses addicted himself to the study thereof, of\nwhom it is said, That _he was learned in all the wisdom of the\nEgyptians_, chap. vii. 22. To which it may be replied, that if, by _the\nwisdom of the Egyptians_, we understand, as most expositors do, judicial\nastrology, Moses might know, but not approve of, or practise this art,\nwhich was so much in use among the Egyptians. But it may be, nothing\nmore is intended by it, but his knowing the regular motion of the stars,\nand the wisdom of God seen therein, without judging of future events\nthereby; which is not only lawful, but commendable: though, I am apt to\nthink, that by the _wisdom of the Egyptians_, we are to understand those\nmaxims of state, and the secrets of Pharaoh\u2019s court, which he had an\nopportunity to know, as being a great favourite with him, as Josephus\nobserves, who thinks that he designed that he should succeed him in the\nthrone[207]. Thus having considered this Commandment as being broken by\nAtheism and idolatry, and the various kinds and degrees thereof; which\nis called our having other gods;\n\nWe proceed now to inquire what is meant by these words [before me] in\nthe first Commandment, which are an intimation of the aggravation of the\nsins forbidden therein; whereby God puts us in mind of his all-seeing\neye, which ought to deter us from the breach of it; especially when we\nconsider, that inasmuch as he beholds all our actions, he cannot but be\nexceedingly displeased when we entertain any conceptions of him that\ntend to question his authority, dethrone his sovereignty, or alienate\nour affections from him, and set up any thing in competition with him.\nAnd this should teach us how we ought to set the Lord always before us,\nconsidering him as the heart-searching God, who is jealous for his own\nhonour, and will not suffer this sin to go unpunished.\n\nFootnote 205:\n\n _To this the poet\u2019s observation might well be applied_, Tantum religio\n potuit saudere malorum! _Lucet. de Nat. Rer. Lib._ 1. _And that human\n sacrifices were offered, appears from what we read of the_ king of\n Moab, _who_ took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his\n stead, and offered him for a burnt-offering, 2 Kings iii. 27.\n\nFootnote 206:\n\n Satan knew the state of the armies, and wished to drive Saul to\n despair.\n\nFootnote 207:\n\n _Vid. Jos. Antq. Lib. II. Cap. 5._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CVII., CVIII., CIX., CX.\n\n\n QUEST. CVII. _Which is the second Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The second Commandment is _Thou shalt not make unto thee any\n graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above,\n or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the\n earth; thou shalt not bow down to them, nor serve them; for I the\n Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers\n upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that\n hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands, of them that love me and\n keep my commandments._\n\n QUEST. CVIII. _What are the duties required in the second\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The duties required in the second commandment are the\n receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such\n religious worship and ordinances as God hath instituted in his word,\n particularly prayer and thanksgiving in the name of Christ, the\n reading, preaching, and hearing of the word, the administration and\n receiving of the sacraments, church-government, and discipline, the\n ministry and maintenance thereof, religious fasting, swearing by the\n name of God, and vowing unto him. As also the disapproving,\n detesting, opposing all false worship; and according to each ones\u2019\n place and calling, removing it, and all monuments of idolatry.\n\n QUEST. CIX. _What are the sins forbidden in the second Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sins forbidden in the second Commandment, are, all\n devising, counselling, commanding, using, and any ways approving any\n religious worship not instituted by God himself, tolerating a false\n religion, the making any representation of God, of all, or of any of\n the three Persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly, in any\n kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever, all\n worshipping of it, or God, in it, or by it; the making of any\n representation of feigned deities, and all worship of them, or\n service belonging to them, all superstitious devices, corrupting the\n worship of God, adding to it, taking from it, whether invented and\n taken up of ourselves, or received by tradition from others; though\n under the title of antiquity, custom, devotion, good intent, or any\n other pretence whatsoever, simony, sacrilege, all neglect, contempt,\n hindering and opposing the worship and ordinances which God hath\n appointed.\n\n QUEST. CX. _What are the reasons annexed to the second Commandment\n the more to enforce it?_\n\n ANSW. The reasons annexed to the second Commandment, the more to\n enforce it, contained in these words, [_For I the Lord thy God am a\n jealous God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the\n children, unto the third and fourth generation, of them that hate\n me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep\n my commandments_] are, besides God\u2019s sovereignty over us, and\n property in us, his fervent zeal for his own worship, and his\n revengeful indignation against all false worship, as being a\n spiritual whoredom, accounting the breakers of this commandment such\n as hate him, and threatening to punish them unto divers generations,\n and esteeming the observers of it, such as love him, and keep his\n commandments, and promising mercy to them unto many generations.\n\nBefore we proceed to consider the subject-matter of this Commandment, we\nshall premise something, in general, concerning the difference between\nit, and the first Commandment. The first Commandment respects the object\nof worship; the second, the manner in which it is to be performed.\nAccordingly the former forbids, our not owning God to be such an one, as\nhe has revealed himself to be, in his word; as also the substituting any\ncreature in his room, or acknowledging it, either directly, or by\nconsequence, to be our chief good and happiness; the latter obliges us\nto worship this God, in such a way as he has prescribed, in opposition\nto that, which takes its rise from our own invention. These two\nCommandments therefore being so distinct, we cannot but think the\nPapists to be chargeable with a very great absurdity, in making the\nsecond to be only an appendix to the first, or an explication of it; the\ndesign whereof seems to be, that they might exculpate themselves from\nthe charge of idolatry, in setting up image-worship, which they think to\nbe no crime; because they are not so stupid as to style the image a god,\nor make it the supreme object of worship; whereas this Commandment,\nforbidding false worship, is directly contrary to their practice of\nworshipping God thereby.\n\nThe method, in which this Commandment is laid down, is the same with\nthat of several others, _viz._ as we have therein, an account of the\nduties required, the sins forbidden, and the reasons annexed to enforce\nit. We shall therefore\n\nI. Consider the duties commanded. These are contained in two heads.\n\n1. The obligation we are under to observe, or attend upon, such\nreligious worship and ordinances as God hath appointed. Religious\nworship is that whereby we address ourselves to God, as a God of\ninfinite perfection; profess an entire subjection and devotedness to him\nas our God; put our trust in him for a supply of all our wants, and\nascribe that praise and glory, that is due to him, as our chief good,\nmost bountiful benefactor, and only portion and happiness.\n\nAs for the ordinances, our attendance on them depends on a divine\ncommand, to which God has annexed a promise of his gracious presence,\nwhereby our expectations are raised, that we shall obtain some blessings\nfrom him, when we engage therein in a right manner, in which respect\nthey are instituted means of grace, and pledges of that special favour\nwhich he designs to bestow on his people. This is that which more\nespecially renders a duty enjoined, an ordinance. Accordingly our\nSaviour says, _Where two or three are gathered together in my name,\nthere am I in the midst of them_, Matt. xviii. 20.\n\nNow these ordinances are either solitary or social; such as we are\nobliged to perform in our closets, chap. vi. 6. in our families; or in\nthose public assemblies where God is worshipped. These are particularly\nmentioned in this answer; and they are prayer, thanksgiving, reading,\npreaching, and hearing the word, the administration and receiving the\nsacraments; to which we may add, praising God by singing; all which will\nbe insisted on in a following answer, and therefore we pass by them at\npresent, and shall only observe; that as these are duties which are\ndaily incumbent on us, so there are other duties or ordinances, which\nare only to be performed as the necessity of affairs require it; such as\nreligious fasting, whereby we express public tokens of mourning and\nhumiliation, and perform other duties agreeable thereunto, when God is\nprovoked by crying sins; or when his judgments are upon us, and our\nfamilies, or the church of God in general. Thus the prophet Joel, when\nspeaking concerning several desolating judgments, which Israel was\nexposed to, commands them _to sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly;\nand to weep between the porch and the altar; and say, spare thy people,\nO Lord, and give not thine heritage to reproach_, Joel ii. 15, 17. This\nis not to be done at all times, but when the providence of God calls for\nit. Therefore we have no warrant for the observation of annual fasts;\nwhen that which was the first occasion thereof, is removed; much less\nfor those weeks of fasting which the Papists observe, which they call\nLent; for which, no sufficient reason can be assigned why it should be\nobserved at that rather than any other time of the year. And their\nfasting on certain days of the week cannot be vindicated; much less\ntheir doing this without joining other religious duties to it, or their\nabstaining from some kinds of food, while they indulge themselves in\neating others that are equally grateful to the appetite; which is a\nludicrous and superstitious way of fasting.\n\nAgain, another occasional duty or ordinance is, our setting apart time\nfor thanksgiving to God for deliverances from public or national\ncalamities, or those which more immediately respect ourselves and\nfamilies; in which those religious duties are to be performed, that tend\nto express our spiritual joy and thankfulness to God, who is the Author\nthereof, and at the same time, we are to pray, that he would enable us\nto walk as such who are hereby laid under renewed engagements to be his;\nthus the Jews observed some days of thanksgiving for their deliverance\nfrom Haman\u2019s conspiracy, Esth. ix. 20, _& seq._ And this is to be\nreligiously observed, wherein it differs from that carnal joy, which is\ngenerally expressed by those who receive mercies, but do not give glory\nto God, the sole Author thereof.\n\nMoreover, besides these occasional ordinances, there is another\nmentioned in this answer, namely, vowing to God. Thus the Psalmist says,\n_Vow, and pay unto the Lord_, Psal. lxxvi. 11. which either, more\nespecially, respects their entering into a solemn obligation, or promise\nto give something that was to be applied to the support of the public\nand costly-worship which was performed under the ceremonial law; upon\nwhich account it is said, in the following words, _Bring presents unto\nhim_; or it may be considered as to what concerns the moral reason of\nthe thing, as including in it our resolution to set apart, or apply some\nportion of our worldly substance, as God has prospered us in our secular\naffairs, to the maintaining and promoting his cause and interest in the\nworld. And we ought, at the same time, to devote ourselves to him,\nwhereby we acknowledge his right to us, and all that we have. Thus the\napostle says, concerning the churches of Macedonia, not only that they\ndevoted their substance to God, but that they _gave themselves_, also\n_unto the Lord_, 1 Cor. viii. 5.\n\nThis does not include in it our resolution to do those things that are\nout of our own power; or, that we will exercise those graces that are\nthe special gift of the Spirit of God, but rather a dedication of\nourselves to him, in hope of obtaining that grace from him which will\nenable us to perform those duties, which are indispensably necessary to,\nand inseparably connected with salvation. This is such a vowing to God,\nas will not have a tendency to ensnare our own consciences, or detract\nfrom his glory, who is alone the Author of all grace; nor does it\ncontain in it the least instance of presumption, but it is a duty which\nwe ought to perform by faith, to his glory and our own edification.\n\nAnd to this we might add another ordinance, mentioned in this answer;\nnamely, swearing by the name of God; which, as we have elsewhere\nexpressed it, contains a swearing fealty to him, and our consecrating\nand devoting ourselves to him[208]. And as to what respects swearing, as\nit is a religious duty to be performed in subserviency to civil duties,\nwe shall have occasion to speak of that under the third Commandment; and\ntherefore we pass it over at present, and proceed to consider,\n\n2. That these, and all other religious duties or ordinances which God\nhas enjoined, are to be kept pure and entire. As we are not to cast off\nthe ordinances of God in general, so we must take heed that we do not,\nwhile we perform some, live in the neglect of others; for that is not to\nkeep them entire. Thus private duties are not to shut out those which\nare social in our families or the public assemblies; nor entrench on\nthat time which ought to be allotted for them; and, on the other hand,\nit is not sufficient for us to worship God in public, and, at the same\ntime, cast off all secret duties. This reproves the practice of some\nmodern enthusiasts, who pray not, unless moved by the Spirit, as they\npretend; and deny their obligation to observe the ordinances of baptism\nand the Lord\u2019s supper.\n\nMoreover, as we are to keep the ordinances of God entire, we are also to\nkeep them pure; that is, to allow of, or practise nothing but what is\nwarranted by the rules which God has given us in his word, in opposition\nto those who corrupt his worship, by intruding those ordinances into it\nwhich are of their own invention; and pretending, that though God has\nnot commanded them, yet the service which we perform (which can be no\nother than will-worship) will be acceptable to him. This leads us,\n\nII. To consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment. The general\nscope and design hereof, as to what concerns the negative part of it, is\nGod\u2019s prohibiting all false worship, either in our hearts, outward\nactions or gestures, whereby we adhere to our own imaginations rather\nthan his revealed will; which is the only rule of instituted worship.\nThe things forbidden in this commandment may be reduced to three heads;\n\n1. A not attending on the ordinances of God with that holy, humble, and\nbecoming frame of spirit, that the solemnity of the duties themselves,\nor the authority of God enjoining, or the advantages which we may expect\nto receive by them, call for. When we do not seriously think what we are\ngoing about before we engage in holy duties, or watch over our own\nhearts and affections, or else worship God in a careless and indifferent\nmanner, in which case we may be said to draw nigh to him with our lips,\nwhile our hearts are far from him.\n\n2. We farther break this commandment, when we invent ordinances which\nGod has no where in his word commanded; or think to recommend ourselves\nto him by such gestures, or modes of worship, which we have no precedent\nor example for in the New Testament; this is what is generally called\nsuperstition and will-worship. Thus we read in the degenerate age of the\nchurch, that _the statutes of Omri were kept, and the works of the house\nof Ahab_, Micah vi. 16. as intimating that false worship which was\npractised by them. And here we cannot but observe, that there are many\nthings in which the Papists are chargeable with superstition and\nwill-worship, if not with idolatry. As for instance,\n\n(1.) Their worshipping the bread in the sacrament, as supposing it to be\nthe real body and blood of Christ, and not barely the sign thereof;\nunderstanding the words of our Saviour, in which, in instituting this\nordinance, he says, _This is my body_, Matt. xxvi. 26. in a literal\nsense; whereas it ought to be taken in a figurative. Again,\n\n(2.) Their lifting up the bread in the sacrament, pretending that this\nis a real offering of Christ, and, at the same time, the people being\nobliged to shew all possible marks of sorrow; such as beating their\nbreasts, shaking their heads, &c. as though they really saw Christ on\nthe cross; whereas it is a profaning the Lord\u2019s supper, to say that\nChrist is really and visibly offered therein by the hands of the priest;\nwhich is contrary to what the apostle says of his being but _once\noffered to bear the sins of many_, Heb. ix. 28.\n\n(3.) They use several superstitious ceremonies in baptism, which have,\nindeed, a shew of religion, but want a divine sanction, and are no other\nthan an addition to Christ\u2019s institution. Thus they use spittle, salt,\nand cream, besides the water with which the child is to be baptised, and\nanoint it with oil, and use exorcism, commanding the unclean spirit to\ndepart out of it, and signing it with the sign of the cross; at which\nthey suppose the Devil to be so terrified, that he is hereby obliged to\nleave it, being by this means, as it were, frighted away. But the\nprincipal reason they give for their adding this ceremony to Christ\u2019s\ninstitution, is to signify that the child is hereby obliged to fight\nmanfully under Christ\u2019s banner; which obligation is neither increased\nnor diminished thereby; and it is a sign which he makes no mention of.\n\n(4.) Their frequent crossing of themselves, as a preservative against\nsin, and a means to keep them from the power of the Devil, and to render\ntheir prayers acceptable in the sight of God.\n\n(5.) The splendor and magnificence of their churches, and especially the\nshape and figure of them, as accommodated to that of Solomon\u2019s temple,\nand their situation east and west; and also their bowing to the altar,\nwhich is placed in the east; for which there is not the least shadow of\nargument in scripture, nor example in the purest ages of the church.\n\n(6.) The ludicrous and unwarrantable ceremonies used in the consecration\nof churches, and the reverence that every one must shew to places thus\nconsecrated, though it be not in the divine worship. And to this we may\nadd, that there are many superstitious ceremonies in consecrating all\nthe vessels and utensils that are used in their churches; yea, the very\nbells are baptised, or, as they express it, consecrated that so the\nDevil may be afraid of the sound thereof, and keep his distance from\nthose places of worship in which they are fixed; which charms can be\nreckoned no other than the sport of the powers of darkness, or looked on\nby them with contempt.\n\n(7.) They ascribe a divine, yea, a meritorious virtue, to the frequent\nrepeating the Lord\u2019s prayer in Latin, commonly called _Pater noster_,\nand the angel\u2019s salutation of the virgin Mary, mentioned in Luke i. 28.\ncalled _Ave Maria_; which words they put a corrupt sense upon, contrary\nto the proper meaning thereof; which, if only recited, whether\nunderstood or no, it is reckoned acceptable service.\n\n(8.) The distinction of garments, and the relative holiness of persons\nthat wear them as signified thereby. To which we may add, the canonical\nhours which are appointed for the performing divine service; especially\nif we consider the reason which they allege for it, namely, because\nthere was something remarkable done or suffered by Christ, at those\nhours in the day. These things argue them guilty of superstition.\n\n(9.) We might also take notice of the many things which they make\nmerchandise of, as consecrated bread, wax candles, &c. to which they\nascribe a spiritual virtue, or some advantages to be received hereby, by\nthose that purchase them; which tends to advance the price thereof.\nThere are also the relicts which they call the church\u2019s treasure, or\nthose rarities which they purchase at a great rate; though some of the\nwiser Papists have made but a jest of them. We pass by many other\nsuperstitious ceremonies used by them, for brevity sake, and shall only\nobserve,\n\n(10.) Their bowing at the name of Jesus; which can hardly be vindicated\nfrom the charge of superstition, especially because no extraordinary\ninstance of reverence is expressed at the mention of those\nincommunicable attributes of God, which are ascribed to him; nor,\nindeed, do they bow the knee at the mentioning of the word Saviour,\nChrist, or Emmanuel, or when any other divine characters are given him.\n\nThe only scripture they make use of to vindicate this practice, is in\nPhil. ii. 10. _That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow_; whereas\nit is plain, that this _bowing the knee_ does not signify a bodily\ngesture, but only a subjection of soul to Christ, as _angels,\nauthorities and powers are_ said to be _made subject to him_, 1 Pet.\niii. 22. These, indeed, are a very considerable part of the inhabitants\nof heaven, but they have no knees to bow; and as for _things under the\nearth_, to wit, the powers of darkness; they do not bow to him in a way\nof worship, but are subjected to him as conquered enemies. Which leads\nus to consider,\n\n3. That they are guilty of the breach of this Commandment, who frame an\nimage of any of the persons of the Godhead, or of any creature in heaven\nor earth, as a means or help made use of in order to their worshipping\nGod. Here it must be enquired,\n\n(1.) Whether the making images, absolutely, or in all respects, be\nunlawful. To which it is generally answered, that if pictures\nrepresenting creatures, either in heaven or earth, be made with no other\ndesign, but in an historical way, to propagate the memory of persons,\nand their actions to posterity, it seems not to be a breach of this\nCommandment. But the sin forbidden therein, expressed in those words,\n_Making to ourselves the image or likeness of creatures in heaven or\nearth_, is when we design to worship God by them; and accordingly the\nusing bodily gestures to them, such as those which are used in the\nworship of God; as bowing, uncovering the head, &c. wherein a person\ndesigns an act of worship, is idolatry. And if nothing else is intended\nbut the worshipping of God by them, it can hardly be excused from the\nappearance of idolatry at least; so that, according to one of the rules\nbefore laid down for the understanding the Ten Commandments, it is to be\nreckoned a breach of the second Commandment; which is what we are now\nconsidering[209].\n\n(2.) It must farther be enquired, whether it be unlawful to represent\nany of the persons in the Godhead, by pictures or carved images? to this\nwe answer, that God being infinite and incomprehensible, it is\nimpossible to frame any image like him, Isa. xl. 18. chap. xlvi. 5. Acts\nxvii. 29. Moreover, he assigns this as a reason why Israel should make\nno image of him, _because they saw no manner of similitude when he spake\nto them in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire_; and adds, _lest ye\ncorrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image_, Deut. iv. 15, 16. And\nthe apostle styles this an offering the highest affront to God, when he\nspeaks of some who _changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an\nimage made like to corruptible man_. Rom. i. 23.\n\nThere are others, who, though they do not much care to defend the\npractice of making pictures of God, yet plead for describing an emblem\nof the Trinity, such as a triangle, with the name Jehovah in the midst\nof it. But that which I would observe concerning this practice is, that\nif the design hereof be to worship God by it, it is idolatry; but if\nnot, it is unwarrantable, and, indeed, unnecessary; since a Trinity of\npersons in the unity of the divine essence, is to be understood as\nrevealed in scripture, and not brought to our remembrance by an emblem,\nwhich is an ordinance of our own invention.\n\nIt is farther enquired, whether we may not describe our Saviour, as he\nsometimes is by the Papists, in those things that respect his human\nnature? whether we may not pourtray him as an infant in his mother\u2019s\narms; or, as conversing here on earth, or hanging on the cross; as they\nnot only describe him, but adore this image or representation of Christ\ncrucified, which they call a crucifix? To this we answer; that whatever\nof Christ comes within the reach of the art of man to delineate or\ndescribe, is only his human nature, which is not the object of divine\nadoration; and therefore this rather tends to debase than give us raised\nand becoming conceptions of him as such.\n\nAs to what is argued by some, to prove that it is not unlawful to make\nan image of God, inasmuch as he is sometimes represented as having a\nbody, or bodily parts; and the prophet Daniel describes God the Father,\nas _the ancient of days_, Dan. vii. 9. therefore, they suppose, that it\nis not unlawful for them to make such representations of him by images.\nTo this it may be answered, that God\u2019s being described by the parts of\nhuman bodies, is in condescension to the weakness of our capacities, or\nagreeable to human modes of speaking; in which _the eye_ signifies\nwisdom, _the arm_ power, _the heart_ love, &c. We are, notwithstanding\nthose modes of expression, to abstract in our thoughts, every thing that\nis carnal, or applicable to the creature when conceiving of him, and\ntherefore not to give occasion to any to think that he is like\nourselves, by describing him in such a way. The Papists not only plead\nfor making such like images, but set them up in churches, calling them\nthe laymen\u2019s books, with a design to instruct them in those things which\nthe image represents. To which it may be replied, that such a method of\ninstruction is without any warrant from scripture, as well as contrary\nto the practice of the purest ages of the church, who always thought\nthat the word of God was sufficient to lead them into the knowledge of\nhimself, without making use of a picture to that end.\n\nBut notwithstanding this colour is put on their practice, of setting up\nsuch-like images in churches; yet there are some who plead for the\nworship of images, only with this distinction, that it is a subordinate\nor a relative worship that they give to them, while, at the same time,\nthe highest worship is given to God only; in which respect they cannot\nexculpate themselves from the charge of idolatry. And, indeed, in some\nof their books of devotion, we find the same expressions used, when they\naddress themselves to the creature, as though they were paying divine\nadoration to God; particularly in the book, that is well known among\nthem, called the _Virgin Mary\u2019s Psalter_; in which her name is often\ninserted instead of the name of God, which is the highest strain of\nblasphemy. Thus when it is said, _O come let us kneel before the Lord\nour Maker_, Psal. xcv. 6. instead of _the Lord_, they put the _Virgin\nMary_. And when it is said, _Have mercy upon me, O God_, &c. Psal. li.\n1. they pray, _Have mercy upon me, O Lady_, &c. which expressions cannot\nbe read without detestation. And there are many more to the like\npurpose, in that book.\n\nWhen this has been objected against them as a specimen of their\nidolatry, all the reply they make to it is; that the book was written by\na private person, as an help to devotion, but not established by the\nauthority of the church, which is not to be charged with every absurdity\nwhich some of their communion may advance. To which it may be replied,\nthat the church of Rome has been very ready to condemn better books,\nwritten by those who were not in their communion; whereas they never\npublicly condemned this book, but rather commended it, as written with a\ngood design.\n\nBesides we may farther observe, that there are many blasphemous\nexpressions given to the virgin Mary, in their Breviaries and Missals,\nwhich are used by public authority. Thus she is often addressed to in\nsuch characters as these, viz. the mother of mercy, the gate of heaven,\nthe queen of heaven, the empress of the world; and sometimes she is\ndesired not only to pray her son to help them, but, by the authority of\na mother, to command him to do it. At other times they desire her to\nhelp and save them herself; and accordingly they give her the title of\nRedeemer, and Saviour, as well as our Lord Jesus Christ. And sometimes\nthey profess themselves to put their trust and confidence in her. If\nthis be not idolatry, where is there any to be found in the world?\n\nTo this we may also add, that idolatry which is practised by them in\ntheir devotion, to the images of other saints. Every saint in their\nKalendar is called upon, in his turn; among whom some indeed were good\nmen, as the martyrs, who refused to be worshipped while on earth; how\nmuch soever these worship them now they are in heaven. But there are\nothers whom the Popes have canonized for saints, who were little better\nthan devils incarnate, while they were here upon earth; and others have\nbeen rebels and traitors to their king and country, and suffered the\njust reward of their wickedness; such as these are found among those\nwhom they pay this worship to. There are also others whom they\nworshipped as saints; concerning whom it may be much questioned whether\nthere ever were such persons in the world; these may be called fabulous\nsaints. Nevertheless, images are made to their honour, and prayers\ndirected to them. And there are other things worshipped by them, which\nnever had life, as the picture of the cross, and many pretended relics\nof the saints. So that upon the whole, we cannot but think that we have,\nin this mode of worship, a notorious instance of the breach of this\nCommandment. And we cannot but conclude, that herein they have\napostatized, or turned aside from the purity of the gospel.\n\nIt may be observed, that the church, for the first three hundred years\nafter Christ, had comparatively, but little superstition, and no\nidolatry; but in the fourth Century, superstition began to insinuate\nitself into it; then it was that the pictures of the martyrs, who had\nsuffered in Christ\u2019s cause, were first set up in churches, though\nwithout any design of worshipping them; and this was not universally\napproved of. As for image-worship, it was not brought into the church\ntill above seven hundred years after Christ; and then there was a\nconsiderable opposition made to it by some; and this kind of worship was\nset up in one reign, and prohibited in another; but afterwards it\nuniversally prevailed in the Romish church, when arrived to that height\nof impiety and idolatry, without opposition, as it is at this day. We\nnow proceed to observe,\n\nIII. The reasons annexed to this Commandment, which are taken from the\nconsideration of what God is in himself; _I am the Lord_, or _Jehovah_;\nwhich being a name never given to any creature, is expressive of all his\ndivine perfections, which render him the object of worship, and oblige\nus to perform that worship which he requires, in such a way as is\nagreeable thereunto; he also styles himself a God to his people, _I am\nthy God_; therefore to set up strange gods, or to worship him in a way\nnot prescribed by him, is a violation of his covenant, as well as not\nperforming the duty we owe to him, and would render us unfit to be owned\nby him as his people. And it is farther observed, that they who thus\ncorrupt themselves, and pervert his worship, are styled haters of him,\nand therefore can expect nothing but to be dealt with as enemies. This\nhe gives them to understand, inasmuch as he styles himself _a jealous_,\nor sin-revenging _God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the\nchildren_. For the understanding of which, let it be considered,\n\n1. That though God does not punish children with eternal destruction,\nfor the sins of their immediate parents, yet these oftentimes bring\ntemporal judgments on families. Thus, all the children of Israel that\nmurmured and despised the good land, so far bare their fathers iniquity,\nthat they wandered in the wilderness near forty years.\n\n2. These judgments fall heavier on those children that make their\nparents sins their own; which was the case of the Jews. Upon which\noccasion our Saviour tells them, that _all the blood that was shed upon\nthe earth, should come upon them, from the blood of righteous Abel, unto\nthe blood of Zacharias, whom they slew between the temple and the\naltar_, Matt, xxiii. 35. They approved of, and committed the same sins\nwhich their fathers were guilty of, and consequently are said to fill up\nthe measure of their sins; therefore the judgments of God, which they\nexposed themselves to, were most terrible.\n\n3. Whatever temporal judgments may be inflicted on children for their\nparents sins, shall be sanctified, and redound to their spiritual\nadvantage, as well as end in their everlasting happiness, if they do not\nfollow their bad example; and therefore it is farther observed, that God\n_shews mercy unto thousands of them that love him, and keep his\nCommandments_. These are very great motives and inducements to enforce\nthe observation of all God\u2019s Commandments, and this in particular.\n\nFootnote 208:\n\n _See more of this in Vol. I. Page 226._\n\nFootnote 209:\n\n _See Page 498._\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXI., CXII., CXIII., CXIV.\n\n\n QUEST. CXI. _Which is the third Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The third Commandment is, _Thou shalt not take the name of the\n Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless, that\n taketh his name in vain_.\n\n QUEST. CXII. _What is required in the third Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The third Commandment requires, that the name of God, his\n titles, attributes, ordinances, the word, sacraments, prayer, oaths,\n vows, lots, his works, and whatsoever else there is whereby he makes\n himself known, be holily and reverently used in thought, meditation,\n word, writing, by an holy profession, and answerable conversation,\n to the glory of God, and the good of ourselves and others.\n\n QUEST. CXIII. _What are the sins forbidden in the third\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sins forbidden in the third Commandment are, the not using\n of God\u2019s name as is required, and the abuse of it, in an ignorant,\n vain, irreverent, profane, superstitious, or wicked mentioning or\n otherwise using his titles, attributes, ordinances, or works; by\n blasphemy, perjury; all sinful cursings, oaths, vows, and lots;\n violating of our oaths, and vows, if lawful, and fulfilling them, if\n of things unlawful, murmuring and quarrelling at, curious prying\n into, and misapplying of God\u2019s decrees, and providences,\n misinterpreting, misapplying, or any way perverting the word, or any\n part of it, to profane jests, curious or unprofitable questions,\n vain janglings, or the maintaining of false doctrines, abusing it,\n the creatures, or any thing contained under the name of God, to\n charms, or sinful lusts and practices, the maligning, scorning,\n reviling, or any ways opposing of God\u2019s truth, grace, and ways,\n making profession of religion in hypocrisy, or for sinister ends;\n being ashamed of it, or a shame to it, by uncomfortable, unwise,\n unfruitful, and offensive walkings, or backslidings from it.\n\n QUEST. CXIV. _What are the reasons annexed to the third\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The reasons annexed to the third Commandment in these words\n [_the Lord thy God_] and [_for the Lord will not hold him guiltless\n that taketh his name in vain_] are, because, he is the Lord and our\n God, and therefore his name is not to be profaned, or any way abused\n by us, especially, because he is so far from acquitting and sparing\n the transgressors of this Commandment, as that he will not suffer\n them to escape his righteous judgment, albeit, many such escape the\n censures and punishments of men.\n\nAs the second Commandment respects the manner in which God is to be\nworshipped, agreeably to his revealed will; in this we are commanded to\nworship him with that frame of spirit which is suitable to the greatness\nof the work, and the Majesty of him with whom we have to do. By the name\nof God we are to understand all those things whereby he is pleased to\nmake himself known; and these are his names, titles, attributes, words\nand works. The attributes of God have been largely insisted on in that\nquestion, _What is God[210]?_ His names and titles have also been\nconsidered, as belonging to all the persons of the Godhead, in proving\nthat the Son and Holy Ghost are God equal with the Father[211]. His word\nis that in which the glory that is contained in his names, titles and\nattributes, is set forth in the most glorious manner. Thus the Psalmist\nsays; _Thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name_, Psal. cxxxviii.\n2. or, thou hast given a brighter discovery of thyself in thy word, than\nthou hast done in any thing else, by which thou hast made thyself known\nto thy creatures. And as for the works of God, whether of nature or of\ngrace, these are designed to lead us into the knowledge of his power,\nwisdom, goodness, holiness and faithfulness, which are eminently\nglorified in all that he does. Now this Commandment respects our having\na due regard to all those ways whereby he makes himself known, and\ncontains a prohibition of every thing that may tend to cast the least\ndishonour upon them.\n\nThe method in which we are led to speak to it, is to consider,\n\nI. What is required in it. This supposes, that it is an indispensible\nduty for us to make mention of the name of God. Since he has given us\nsome discoveries of himself, by what means soever he has done it, it\nwould be an instance of the highest contempt of the greatest privilege,\nfor us to express no regard to them; which they may be said practically\nto do, who make no profession of religion, and desire not to be\ninstructed in those things which relate to the name and glory of God;\nwhich argues a person to be abandoned to the greatest wickedness, and to\nlive without God in the world.\n\nNow there are several duties mentioned in this answer, in which we are\nsaid to make use of God\u2019s name; particularly, when we attend on his\nordinances, viz. the word, sacraments and prayer; and take religious\noaths, and make solemn vows; which, doubtless, are to be performed with\nthe utmost reverence. We have many instances, in scripture, of holy men\nwho, when they have drawn nigh to him in prayer, have adored his divine\nperfections, with a becoming humility. Thus Solomon, at the dedication\nof the temple, addresses himself to God; _There is no god like thee, in\nheaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with\nthy servants, that walk before thee with all their heart_, 1 Kings viii.\n23. And Jacob, when wrestling with God in prayer, says, _O God of my\nfather Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, the Lord which saidst unto\nme, Return to thine own country, and to thy kindred, and I will deal\nwell with thee. I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of\nall the truth, which thou hast shewed unto thy servant_, Gen. xxxii. 9,\n10. And Hezekiah expresses himself thus in prayer, _O Lord God of\nIsrael, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even\nthou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth, thou hast made heaven and\nearth_, 2 Kings xix. 25. And Daniel in prayer, styles him, _The great\nand dreadful God, keeping the covenant, and mercy to them that love him,\nand to them that keep his commandments_, Dan. ix. 4. And Abraham, when\nstanding before the Lord, and pleading in behalf of Sodom, says,\n_Behold, now I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but\ndust and ashes_, Gen. xviii. 27. And the inhabitants of heaven, who are\nnearest the throne of God, are represented as worshipping him with the\ngreatest reverence, _casting their crowns before the throne_, in token\nof their being unworthy of the honour that they are advanced to, and\nsaying, _Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour and\npower_, Rev. iv. 10, 11. which is to be understood of him, exclusive of\nall others. And as this reverence is to be expressed when we ask any\nthing at the hand of God, by a parity of reason, it ought to expressed\nin any other religious duty, on which he has made, some impressions of\nhis glory.\n\nIf it be enquired, whether this reverence is consistent with that\nboldness which believers are said to have in prayer, when they are\nexhorted to _come boldly unto the throne of grace_, Heb. iv. 16. and to\n_have boldness to enter into the holiest of all, by the blood of Jesus_,\nchap. x. To this it may be answered, that the word there used[212],\nwhich is called boldness, may be rendered a liberty of speech. So that\nthough he be infinitely above us, and a God of infinite holiness and\npurity, and therefore has the utmost abhorrence of sin, which we have\nreason to charge ourselves with, yet we are encouraged to come to him,\nas sitting on a throne of grace: from whence he displays his glory, as a\nsin-pardoning God, who otherwise appears in his jealousy, as a\nsin-revenging Judge. Therefore this _boldness_ is nothing else but our\nmaking use of that liberty which God gives us to come into his presence\nwith hope of being accepted in his sight, in and through a Mediator.\n\nWe might farther observe, that as we are to express an holy reverence,\nin drawing nigh to God, in all religious duties; so we ought not to\nthink of any of his works, but with a due regard to, and the highest\nveneration of, his glory shining forth therein. Thus it is said,\n_Remember that thou magnify his work, which men behold_, Job xxxvi. 24.\nand this reverence is to be expressed in our meditations, words and\nwritings; so that we should never think or treat of divine subjects, but\nin an holy manner; we should never speak of any thing, by which God\nmanifests his glory, but with a design to beget in ourselves and others,\na reverential fear of, and the highest esteem for him.\n\nII. We are now to consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment; and\naccordingly, we violate it by not using the name of God in such a way as\nit is required. This includes in it,\n\n1. The not making any profession of religion, as being afraid or ashamed\nto own, that in which the name of God is so much concerned. Persons,\nindeed, do not usually arrive to this height of wickedness at once; but\nthe mind is alienated from God, and his worship, by degrees. There is\nfirst a great deal of lukewarmness, formality, and hypocrisy, reigning\nin the heart of man; so that if they attend on the ordinances of God\u2019s\nworship, it is with great indifferency, many prejudices entertained\nagainst them, and with such a frame of spirit as savours more\nprofaneness than true religion. After this they are ashamed of Christ\nand his cause, being influenced by the reproach that is cast on it in\nthe world. Thus the Jews pretended, concerning Christianity, that it was\n_a sect every where spoken against_, Acts xxviii. 22. And Demas forsook\nthe apostle, _having loved this present world_, 2 Tim. iv. 10. being\nmore concerned for his reputation in it, than for Christ\u2019s interest.\nAfter this, such cast off all public worship; and this is generally\nattended with a seared conscience, and running into all excess of riot.\n\n2. Persons take the name of God in vain, when though they make a\nprofession of religion, yet it is not in such a way as God has required;\nand this is done by using his titles, attributes, or any ordinances or\nworks, in which he makes himself known in an unbecoming manner; with\nignorance, when we speak of the divine perfections, and, at the same\ntime, have no just ideas of what is intended thereby; or when we use the\nname of God with a vanity or levity of spirit, and mention sacred things\nin a common way, whereby we may be said to profane them; or when we\nsuperstitiously pay a kind of veneration to the sound of words, relating\nto divine matters, but regard not the thing signified thereby. This is\nusing the name of God in such a way as he has not required, and\nconsequently taking it in vain.\n\n3. The name of God is taken in vain by blasphemy; which is a thinking or\nspeaking reproachfully of him, as though he had no right to the glory\nthat belongs to his name; which is, in effect, a cursing him in our\nhearts, and offering the greatest injury that can be done, to a God of\ninfinite perfection; which, though it be no real lessening his essential\nglory, yet it argues the greatest malignity, and highest degree of\nimpiety in those that are guilty of it. This was so great a crime, that,\nby God\u2019s command, it was punished with death, Lev. xxiv. 16.\n\n4. This Commandment is broken by not using religious oaths in a right\nmanner, or by violating them; and, on the other hand, by all sinful and\nprofane oaths and cursing.\n\n(1.) By not using religious oaths in a right manner. It is certain, that\nwe are, upon extraordinary occasions, to make mention of the name of\nGod, by solemn oaths, in which we appeal to him as a God of truth, the\nsearcher of hearts, and the avenger of falsehood. That this is a duty,\nappears,\n\n[1.] In that we have various instances, in scripture, of God\u2019s\ncondescending to confirm what he has spoken, by an oath; wherein he\nappeals to his own perfections for the confirmation of our faith. Thus\nhe is represented as _swearing by himself_, and by _his holiness_, Gen.\nxxii. 16, 17. Psal. lxxxix. 35.\n\n[2.] There are several examples and commands, in scripture, which make\nit our duty to appeal to God, on some occasions, by solemn oaths. Thus\nit is said, _Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt\nswear by his name_, Deut. vi. 13. And elsewhere, _To me every knee shall\nbow, and every tongue shall swear_, Isa. xlv. 23. But we must observe\nthat there is a vast difference between God\u2019s swearing by himself, or by\nany of his perfections, and man\u2019s swearing by him. When God swears by\nhimself, it is a display of the glory of his perfections, as a God that\ncannot lye; but when man swears by him, it is an act of religious\nworship, containing an acknowledgment of his perfections, and an appeal\nto him, as a God of truth, and the avenger of a lye. Therefore an oath\nis not to be taken, but in matters of great importance, which cannot be\ndecided without it; and being an act of religious worship, it ought to\nbe performed in the most solemn manner; otherwise we profane the name of\nGod, and so violate this commandment. This respects not so much the form\nused in swearing, as the levity of spirit with which it is done, or our\npretending to confirm that which is false hereby.\n\nThe form used in solemn oaths has been various.\n\n_1st_, We read of some ceremonies used in swearing, that were only\noccasional. Thus when Jacob and Laban took a solemn oath to each other,\nat their parting, a _pillar was erected_, and a _heap of stones_\ngathered together, and they both eat upon the heaps and _sware by the\nGod of Abraham and Nahor, and the fear of Isaac, that they would do no\ninjury to each other_, Gen. xxxi. 45,-53. Also we read, that when\nAbraham made his servant swear, that he would take a wife for Isaac,\nfrom among his kindred, and not out of the land where he dwelt, he\nordered him to _put his hand under his thigh_, chap. xxiv. 2, 3, 4. This\nform of swearing seemed to be an appeal to God, as having promised that\nhis seed should be increased and multiplied, and that in his seed, all\nthe families of the earth should be blessed; which was a circumstance\nwell adapted to the matter and occasion of the oath, viz. that he should\nprovide such a wife for Isaac as God approved of.\n\n_2dly_, The common form of swearing used of old, seems to have been by\n_lifting up the hand_ to heaven, thereby signifying their appeal to God,\nwhose throne is there; accordingly the _lifting up the hand to heaven_\nimports the same thing as to swear, according to the scripture-mode of\nspeaking, Deut. xxxii. 40. In this manner Abraham sware, Gen. xiv. 22,\n23. and the angel which appeared to John, Rev. x. 5. and this is\nundoubtedly, a very good and justifiable form of swearing; and it is\nused, in some Protestant countries, even at this day.\n\nAs to the form used by us in public solemn oaths, viz. laying the hand\non the Bible, or on the gospels, and kissing the book, it is no where\nwarranted by scripture, and therefore is not so eligible as that lifting\nup the hand; yet because it is the common legal form used among us, it\nis rather to be complied with, than that the duty should be neglected;\nbecause, as has been but now observed, some forms of swearing are said\nto have been used in scripture, and not reproved, which were of men\u2019s\ninvention. And the thing principally to be looked at in an oath, is, the\nsolemn appeal made therein to God. Therefore it is the frame of spirit\nwith which this is done, that is chiefly to be regarded. And what we\nhave promised to do, is religiously to be observed, that so our oaths\nmay not be violated.\n\n_Obj._ The objections against the use of religious oaths, are\nprincipally taken from two or three scriptures, not rightly understood,\nin which they seem to be forbidden; as when our Saviour says, _I say\nunto you, Swear not at all_, Matt. v. 34. and in James v. 12. the\napostle speaks to the same purpose; and it is farther objected, that the\nprophet speaks of this as a national sin; when he says, _Because of\nswearing the land mourneth_, Jer. xxiii. 10.\n\n_Answ._ In these scriptures profane swearing is forbidden; whereby\npersons make use of the name of God to confirm what they say, in a light\nand trifling manner; or swearing by creatures, as the heaven, the earth,\nor any creature therein. But they do not forbid swearing, as containing\nin it a religious appeal unto God in a solemn manner, for the confirming\nof what we assert. And when the prophet speaks of the _land\u2019s mourning\nbecause of swearing_, it may be rendered, as in the margin of our\nBibles; _because of cursing the land mourneth_, intimating, that it was\na custom among them, to imprecate the wrath of God against one another;\nwhich was a sin highly provoked to the Majesty of heaven. And, besides,\nit appears that the prophet is speaking of profane cursing or swearing,\nby what is said in the words immediately following; _for both prophet\nand priest are profane_. So that people of all ranks and degrees, were\nprofane; the prophets and priests by abusing the sacred mysteries; and\nthe people, in their common discourse, using oaths and curses; for which\nthings the land mourned. This is the plain sense of that scripture; and\ntherefore no arguments can be drawn from thence to prove that solemn and\nreligious oaths are unlawful.\n\nIt is, indeed, unlawful to swear by creatures, as is observed in the\nscriptures but now mentioned; for they are not omniscient, and therefore\nnot to be appealed to for the decided matters, which are known to none\nbut ourselves, and the Searcher of hearts; neither are they to be\nreckoned avengers of the cause of injured truth; for they have not a\nsovereignty over man, or a right to judge and punish them in such a way\nas God has; for that belongs only to him, and therefore to swear by\ntheir name, is to give them a branch of his glory, and consequently to\ntake his name in vain.\n\n(2.) This Commandment is broken by violating religious oaths, both those\nthat are assertory or promissory. Therefore, when men assert that, for\ntruth, which is uncertain; or, especially if they know it to be false,\nand so design to deceive, they break this Commandment. As for promissory\noaths, they contain an appeal to God concerning what respects some\nthings to be done by us, conducive to the good of others. Now we are\nguilty of the breach of this Commandment.\n\n[1.] When we assert a thing, without implying this condition that ought\nto be contained in it, if God will, or he be pleased to enable us to do\nit. This the apostle particularly mentions, when he blames those who\nsay, _To day or to morrow we will go to such a city, and continue there\na year, and buy, and sell, and get gain. Whereas they know not what\nshall be on the morrow._ And therefore, they _ought to say, If the Lord\nwill, we shall live, and do this, or that_, James iv. 13, 15.\n\n[2.] When we promise a thing, that is out of our power to perform; and,\nmuch more, when we do not design to perform it.\n\n[3.] When we promise a thing, which is in itself unlawful; as the Jews\ndid, who _bound themselves under a curse, that they would not eat nor\ndrink till they had killed Paul_, Acts xxiii, 12. If we have obliged\nourselves by an oath, to perform that which is unlawful, as we sin in\nmaking, we should do so in fulfilling it. There are, however, some cases\nin which persons may not perform what they have sworn to do, and yet not\nbe guilty of perjury, or violation of their oaths; as,\n\n_1st_, When they have used their utmost endeavours to fulfil what they\nhave promised to do, but yet cannot accomplish it. Though here it must\nbe observed, that if the thing promised was absolutely out of their\npower when the promise was made, the oath (as we but now observed) was\nunlawful. But supposing the thing was in their power when they promised\nit; but an unforeseen providence has put it out of their power at\npresent, though they have used their utmost endeavours to perform it,\nthey are not chargeable with the guilt of perjury.\n\n_2dly_, If we have promised to do a thing that is for the advantage of\nanother; but now see reason to alter our mind, apprehending some\ndetriment will accrue thereby to ourselves; we must, notwithstanding,\nfulfil our promise. Thus the Psalmist says, _he sweareth to his own\nhurt, and changeth not_, Psal. xxv. 4. However, if the person to whom we\nhave made the promise, who is to receive the advantage by our fulfilling\nit, is willing to discharge us from our obligation, we may omit to do\nit, and not be guilty of perjury.\n\nHere it might be enquired; whether we are always obliged to fulfil a\npromise extorted from us by violence? In answer to which, it is\ngenerally supposed, by divines, that we are not. Nevertheless, the\nperson can hardly be excused from sin in snaking such a promise, when he\ndesigns not to perform it, though some small degree of force or\nthreatening were used; especially since the will cannot be obliged to\nconsent, or the tongue to utter the promise. And to all this we may add,\nthat they are guilty of the breach of this Commandment (how much soever\nthey may think themselves guiltless) who use equivocations, or mental\nreservations, in taking solemn and religious oaths. Thus the Papists\nmake no scruple of swearing to support the government under which they\nlive, and yet take the first opportunity that offers to subvert it,\npretending they swore to support it as it stood before the reformation;\nor when they swear allegiance to their sovereign, and yet do what they\ncan to dethrone him; and have this mental reservation, that they\nintended only to do it for the present, till they have a convenient\nopportunity to join in a successful rebellion. By this means they break\nthrough the solemn tie of religious oaths, elude the law, and impose\nupon the common sense of mankind, in such a way, as even the Heathen\nthemselves are afraid and ashamed to do.\n\n(3.) This farther leads us to consider this Commandment as broken by\nswearing profanely; namely, when we make use of the name of God, and\npretend to confirm what we assert by an appeal to him, and, at the same\ntime, are far from doing this in a religious manner. This many do, who\ngive vent to their passions by profane swearing, by invoking the name of\nGod upon light and trifling occasions, without that due regard that\nought always to be paid to his divine Majesty.\n\nUnder this head we may observe, that cursing is a vile sin, whether a\nman imprecates the wrath of God on himself or others. They who curse\nthemselves, do, in effect, pray that God would hasten their everlasting\ndestruction; as though their damnation slumbered, or as if it were a\nthing to be wished for. These do that which the devils themselves would\nnot venture to do. And to curse others is to put up a profane wicked\nprayer to God, to pour out his vengeance upon them, which is the highest\naffront to him; as though the vials of his wrath were to be emptied on\nmen, when they pleased, to satisfy their passionate revenge against\nthem. This also includes in it a vile instance of uncharitableness,\ntowards those whom we are commanded to love as ourselves, Matt. xxii.\n39. And how contrary is it to that golden rule laid down by our Saviour,\n_All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so\nto them?_ chap. xvii. 12. Thus we are said to break this Commandment by\nperjury or profane swearing. And to this we may add, that it is\nnotoriously broken by sinful vows; either when we resolve, or determine,\nto do what is unlawful, or bring ourselves under solemn engagements, to\ndo that which is lawful, to our own strength, without dependance on the\ngrace of God in Christ.\n\n(4.) It is farther observed in this answer, that men take the name of\nGod in vain, by sinful lots; but this is to be farther explained.\nTherefore let it be considered; That when lots were an ordinance by\nwhich God, in an extraordinary manner, determined things that were\nbefore unknown; they being an instituted means of appealing to him for\nthat end; as in the case of Achan and others, Josh. vii. 13, 14. Acts i.\n26. then lots were not to be used in a common way, for that would have\nbeen a profaning a sacred institution. But since this extraordinary\nordinance is now ceased, it does not seem unlawful, so as to be an\ninstance of profaneness, to make use of lots in civil matters; [213]\nprovided we do not consider them as an ordinance which God has\nappointed, in which we think we have ground to expect his immediate\ninterposure; and to depend upon it as though it were a divine oracle. In\nthis view it would be unlawful at present, to use lots in any respect\nwhatsoever.\n\n(5.) Persons are said to break this Commandment by murmuring,\nquarrelling at, curiously prying into, and misapplying God\u2019s decrees or\nprovidences, or perverting what he has revealed in his word, _i. e._\nwhen we apply things sacred to profane uses, and have not a due regard\nto the glory of God, which is contained therein; when we pervert\nscripture, by making use of those sacred expressions that are contained\ntherein, in our common discourse, as some make the scripture the subject\nof their profane wit and drollery. This is certainly a taking God\u2019s name\nin vain. And, it is farther added, that we do so, by maintaining false\ndoctrines, _i. e._ when we pretend, that such a doctrine is from God,\nwhen it is not, or that he makes himself known hereby; when the doctrine\nis altogether disowned by him.\n\n(6.) This Commandment is farther broken, by making use of God\u2019s name as\na charm; as when the writing, or pronouncing some name of God, is\npretended to be an expedient to heal diseases, or drive away evil\nspirits; which is a great instance of profaneness, and that which he\nabhors.\n\n(7.) This Commandment is farther broken, by reviling or opposing God\u2019s\ntruth, grace, and ways; whereby we cast contempt on that which is most\nsacred, and lightly esteemed that which he sets such a value on, and\nmakes himself known by. To this we may add, that this is done by\nhypocrisy, and sinister ends in religion, whereby we walk, so that we\nare an offence to others, and backslide from the ways of God. This is an\nabuse of that which ought to be our glory, and a disregarding that,\nwhereby God manifests his name and glory to the world.\n\nIII. We are now to consider the reasons annexed to the third\nCommandment. And these are taken,\n\n1. From the consideration of what God is in Himself, as he is the Lord,\nwhose name alone is Jehovah; whereby he puts us in mind of his\nsovereignty over us, and his undoubted right to obedience from us; and\nhereby intimates that his excellency should fill us with the greatest\nreverence and humility, when we think or speak of any thing, by which he\nmakes himself known. Moreover, he reveals himself to his people as their\nGod, that so his greatness should not confound us, or his dread, as an\nabsolute God, whom we have offended, make us despair of being accepted\nin his sight. Therefore we are to look upon him as our reconciled God\nand Father in Christ; which is the highest motive to obedience.\n\n2. The observation of this Commandment is farther enforced, by a\nthreatening denounced against those that break it; concerning whom it is\nsaid, That the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in\nvain. This implies that there will be a judgment, a reckoning day, when\nall shall be called to an account; and it shall be known whether they\nare guilty or not guilty. It is farther observed, that the profaning of\nGod\u2019s name is a sin that carries in it a great weight of guilt, and\nrenders the sinner liable to punishment, in proportion thereunto; and\naccordingly God is said not to hold them guiltless, or that they shall\nnot escape the punishment from him; though they may, and often do,\nescape punishment from men.\n\nThere are many instances of the profanation of the name of God, which no\nlaws of man can reach. As when we attend on his ordinances without that\ninward purity of heart, and those high and becoming thoughts of him,\nwhich we ought always to entertain. On the other hand, human laws\nagainst open profaning the name of God, are not severe enough to deter\nmen from it; and if they are, they are seldom put in execution; which is\none reason why we behold the name of God so openly blasphemed, and yet\nthis iniquity go unpunished from men. Nevertheless, such are to expect\nthat God will follow them with the tokens of his displeasure, sometimes\nwith temporal, at other times with spiritual judgments. And this is\nassigned as a reason why we ought to make mention of the name of God, or\nof every thing whereby he makes himself known, in such a way, as that we\nmay glorify him thereby.\n\nFootnote 210:\n\n _See Vol. I. Quest._ iv.\n\nFootnote 211:\n\n _Quest._ xi.\n\nFootnote 212:\n\n \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 213:\n\n If they appeal to God in an irreverent manner, they are a violation of\n this commandment. If they be not appeals to him, they are in fact, an\n application to him without any knowledge of him, and this is Atheism.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXV., CXVI.\n\n\n QUEST. CXV. _Which is the fourth Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The fourth Commandment is, _Remember the Sabbath day to keep\n it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work; but the\n seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not\n do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant,\n nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is\n within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth,\n the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day;\n wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it._\n\n QUEST. CXVI. _What is required in the fourth Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The fourth Commandment requireth of all men, the sanctifying,\n or keeping holy to God, such set time as he hath appointed in his\n word; expressly, one whole day in seven, which was the seventh from\n the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, and the\n first day of the week ever since, and so to continue to the end of\n the world; which is the Christian Sabbath, and in the New Testament,\n called the Lord\u2019s day.\n\nIn this Commandment it is supposed, that God is the sovereign Lord of\nour time; which is to be improved by us, to the best purposes, as he\nshall direct. And, inasmuch as there are some special reasons which he\nhas appointed for the exercise of religious worship, these are called\n_holy days_, and as we are to abstain from our secular employments\ntherein, while engaging in religious duties, they are called _sabbaths_;\nand that more especially, because they are sanctified, by God, for his\nservice. These are considered more generally, as including in them all\nthose set times which God has appointed in his word, which is contained\nin the moral reason of this Commandment; and therefore, if he was\npleased to institute, as he did under the ceremonial law, various\nSabbaths, or days appointed for rest, and the performance of religious\nworship, his people are obliged to observe them. And therefore, I take\nthe meaning of this commandment to be, Remember a sabbath day, or every\nsabbath day, or every day which God hath sanctified for that end, to\nkeep it holy; and then follows the particular intimation of the weekly\nsabbath. This, as is observed in the answer we are explaining, was the\nseventh day of the week, from the beginning of the world, to the\nresurrection of Christ, and the first day of the week ever since; which\nis the Christian Sabbath, and, in the New Testament, is called the\nLord\u2019s day. In considering the subject-matter of this Commandment, we\nmust\n\nI. Inquire, since it is contained in the decalogue, which is an abstract\nof the moral law; whether we are obliged to observe the Sabbath by the\nlaw of nature, or by some positive law. For the understanding of which,\nlet it be premised, that some laws are moral by way of eminency, or, in\nthe highest sense, as distinguished from all positive law; and others we\nmay call moral-positive, that is, the laws are positive; but yet there\nis some moral reason annexed to enforce our obedience to them. And this\nmoral reason is either what is founded in the sovereignty of God\ncommanding, which takes place in all positive laws, which, in this\nrespect, are moral, though they could not be known without a divine\nrevelation; or else positive laws may have a moral circumstance annexed\nto them, to engage us to obedience, taken from some glory that redounds\nto God, or good to ourselves, by the observation thereof; or from some\nother reason which God annexes to them. As for instance, the reason\nannexed to the fourth Commandment, is taken from God\u2019s resting from the\nwork of creation on the seventh day, and its being sanctified for our\nperforming religious duties therein. Here we shall consider,\n\n1. In what respects the Sabbath is moral in the highest and most proper\nsense of the word, as before mentioned. That this may appear, we shall\nlay down the following propositions, which may be considered in their\nrespective connexion.\n\n(1.) It is a branch of the moral law, that God should be worshipped.\nThis is founded in his divine perfections, in the relation we stand in\nto him, and in the consideration of our being intelligent creatures,\ncapable of worship.\n\n(2.) The moral law obliges us to perform social worship. This appears\nfrom hence, that man, as a creature, is capable of society, and\nnaturally inclined and disposed to it: which we cannot but know, when we\nlook into ourselves, and consider the disposition of all intelligent\ncreatures, leading them together with ourselves, to this end; so that\nwithout any positive law to direct us, we should be naturally inclined\nto converse with one another.\n\n(3.) As man is a creature designed to worship God, as the law of nature\nsuggests, so it appears, from the same law, that he is obliged to\nperform social worship. For if we are obliged to converse with one\nanother, and thereby to be helpful to each other, in other respects;\ncertainly we are obliged, by the same law to converse with one another\ntherein, and to express our united concurrence in those things that\nrelate to the glory of God.\n\n(4.) The law of nature farther suggests, that as the whole of our\nbusiness, in this world, is not included in that of society, which is\nrather to be occasional than stated; and there are other secular\nemployments, which we are to be engaged in, in which we do not converse\nwith others; so we are not to spend our whole time in public or social\nworship. Therefore,\n\n(5.) It follows from hence, that some stated times are to be appointed\nfor this end; and it is agreeable to the law of nature, that God, who is\nthe sovereign Lord of our time, as well as the object of social worship,\nshould appoint these times; that is, that he should ordain a Sabbath, or\nwhat proportion of time he pleases, for us to perform those religious\nduties which he enjoins, therein. These considerations, relating to our\nobservation of the Sabbath, are purely moral, and not positive.\n\n2. We shall shew in what respects the Sabbath is positive, and not moral\nin the highest and most propense sense of the word. Here let it be\nconsidered, that it is the result of a positive law, that one proportion\nof time should be observed for a Sabbath, rather than another; namely,\nthat it should be a seventh, rather than a third, fourth, fifth, or\nsixth part of our time; for this could not have been known by the light\nof nature, any more than the other branches of instituted worship that\nare to be performed therein. So that, whether it be the seventh day in\nthe week, or the first, which we are to observe, this being founded in\nthe divine will, we conclude it to be a positive law. This we are\nobliged to assert, that we may fence against two extremes, namely, that\nof those who, on the one hand, deny the Sabbath to have any thing of a\nmoral circumstance contained in it; and that of others, who suppose that\nthere is no idea of a positive law in it. That, in some respects, the\nfourth Commandment is a branch of the moral law, may be proved from the\nfollowing arguments:\n\n(1.) It is inserted, among other commandments that are moral, which were\nproclaimed by the voice of God from mount Sinai, whereas the ceremonial\nand judicial laws were not; though they were given by divine\ninspiration. _These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the\nmount, out of the midst of the fire of the cloud, and the thick\ndarkness, with a great voice; and he added no more_, Deut. v. 22. _viz._\nat that time.\n\nMoreover, they were written on two tables, with the finger of God, which\nnone of the other laws were; and were laid up in the ark before the\nLord, Exod. xxxi. 18. all which denotes the dignity and perpetuity of\nthese laws, above all others that were ceremonial, judicial, or merely\npositive.\n\n(2.) The Sabbath was enjoined to be observed not only by the Israelites,\nwho were in covenant with God, together with their servants, who were\nmade proselytes to their religion, and were obliged to observe the\nceremonial and other positive laws; but it was also to be observed by\nthe stranger within their gates, namely, the Heathen, who dwelt among\nthem, who were not in covenant with God, and did not observe the\nceremonial law; these were obliged to obey the Sabbath, it being, in\nmany respects, a branch of the moral law.\n\n(3.) If the observation of the Sabbath had been a duty of the\nceremonial, and, in no respects, of the moral law, it would have been\nwholly abolished at the death of Christ; but, though then the day was\naltered, yet there was still a Sabbath observed, after his resurrection,\neven when the ceremonial law was no longer in force.\n\n(4.) The weekly Sabbath is distinguished from all the ceremonial\nfestivals; which are also called _sabbaths_, in that God lays a special\nclaim to it, as his own day; and therefore it is called, in this\nCommandment, _The sabbath of the Lord thy God_; and it is styled, _his\nholy day_; Isa. lviii. 13. by way of eminence, to distinguish it from\nother days, which he has appointed to be, in other respects, devoted to\nhis service; and when changed, it is called The _Lord\u2019s day_, Rev. i.\n10. which is a peculiar honour put upon it. For these reasons we\nconclude, that the Sabbath has in it something moral, and is not a part\nof the ceremonial law.\n\n_Obj._ 1. It is objected, that the Sabbath is included, by the apostle,\namong the ceremonial laws, which were designed to be abrogated, under\nthe gospel-dispensation; and therefore he says, in Col. ii. 16, 17. _Let\nno man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy\nday, or of the new moon; or of the Sabbath days; which are a shadow of\nthings to come; but the body is of Christ._\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that by the Sabbath days, which are\n_a shadow of things to come_, we are to understand the Jewish festivals;\nsuch as the new moons, the passover, pentecost, the feast of\ntabernacles, &c. which are often called sabbaths: wherein holy\nconvocations were held. So that when the apostle says, _Let no man judge\nyou_, in respect of this matter, he means, let none have occasion to\nreprove you for your observing of those days, which were merely\nceremonial, the design whereof was to typify the gospel-rest. Now, that\nthe apostle does not mean the weekly Sabbath, is plain; for hereby he\nwould contradict his own practice, and that of the churches in his day,\nwho observed it; whereas, the other sabbaths were abolished, together\nwith the ceremonial law.\n\nMoreover, it is evident, that he intends no more than the ceremonial\nsabbaths, or Jewish festivals; because he adds, _Let no man therefore\njudge you in meat or in drink_, as well as _in respect of an holy day_,\n&c. by which he does not mean, let no man have reason to judge or\ncondemn you for gluttony or drunkenness, but for your abstaining from\nseveral sorts of meat, forbid by the ceremonial law; by which he means\nthat the distinction of meats is removed under the gospel-dispensation.\nAnd consequently the ceremonial sabbaths, or holy days, are taken away;\nwhich are intended by the _sabbath day_ in that place, and not the\nweekly Sabbath; and therefore our translation rightly renders it, the\n_sabbath days_, not the Sabbath day. Or if it ought to be rendered _the\nsabbath day_, or the weekly Sabbath, because it is distinguished from\nthe holy days before mentioned; then it may be farther replied to it,\nthat he means the seventh-day Sabbath, which was abolished, together\nwith the ceremonial law, in opposition to the Lord\u2019s day; and how far\nthis was a sign or shadow of good things to come, will be considered in\nwhat will be replied to the next objection.\n\n_Obj._ 2. It is farther objected, by those who pretend that the Sabbath\nis a branch of the ceremonial law, that it is said, in Exod. xxxi. 16,\n17. _The children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath throughout their\ngenerations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the\nchildren of Israel for ever, &c._\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied; that whenever the weekly Sabbath has\nan idea annexed to it, agreeably to that of the ceremonial law; as when\nit is said to be _a sign_ between God and Israel, as in this scripture,\nwe are to understand nothing hereby, but that there was a ceremonial\naccommodation annexed to it, as an ordinance for their faith, in\nparticular, signifying the gospel-rest; which signification was not\nannexed to it from the beginning; but when it was given to Israel. From\nthe beginning, it was not a type; but when God gave the ceremonial law,\nit was made a type. Even as the rainbow, which proceeds from natural\ncauses, and was, doubtless, set in the heavens before Noah\u2019s time; yet\nit was not ordained to be a sign of the covenant between God and him,\ntill God ordered it to be so, in his time. Thus God ordained the Sabbath\nto be a type or sign to Israel, when he gave them the ceremonial law,\nthough it was not so before. And at Christ\u2019s resurrection it ceased to\nbe an ordinance, for their faith in the gospel-rest, or to be observed,\nwhen another day was substituted in the room of it, to wit, the first\nday of the week.\n\n_Obj._ 3. It is farther objected, that when the observation of the\nSabbath was enjoined, God bade the Israelites, in Deut. v. 15. to\n_remember that_ they were _servants in the land of Egypt, and that the\nLord_ their _God brought_ them _out thence through a mighty hand, and by\na stretched out arm_; and _therefore commanded them to keep the\nSabbath-day_.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied,\n\n1. That God\u2019s bringing his people out of Egypt, is no argument that this\nis a part of the ceremonial law, which was given soon after that time.\nFor we read in the preface to the ten Commandments, of his bringing his\npeople out of the land of Egypt; which is assigned as a reason why they\nshould observe all the Commandments. Therefore it might as well be\ninferred, that they are all a part of the ceremonial law, as that the\nfourth Commandment is so; because enforced by the same motive.\n\n2. Though this particular reason is given to induce the Israelites to\nobserve this Commandment, and it is in a more especial manner, applied\nto that dispensation of providence which they were lately under; yet\nthis could not be said to take place in the first institution of the\nSabbath, if we suppose that it was instituted before Moses\u2019s time, which\nwe shall endeavour to prove under a following head.\n\n3. This particular reason, taken from their having been _servants in\nEgypt_, is added to enforce the obligation laid on masters, to let their\nservants rest on the Sabbath-day; namely, because they themselves were\nonce servants in Egypt, without any regard had herein to the matter of\nthe Commandments, or any intimation that it is a branch of the\nceremonial law.\n\nII. We shall now consider when this law, relating to the observation of\nthe Sabbath, was first given. There are various opinions about this\nmatter.\n\n1. Some think the Sabbath was first instituted when God spake to Israel\nfrom mount Sinai; inasmuch as it is one of the ten Commandments, which\nGod gave them from thence[214].\n\nBut to this it may be replied, that the Sabbath was observed some days\nbefore Israel came into the wilderness of Sinai, viz. when they were in\nthe wilderness of Sin. Thus Moses, when speaking concerning their\ngathering twice as much _manna_ as was usual, the day before the\nSabbath, assigns this is as a reason for it, _To morrow is the rest of\nthe holy Sabbath unto the Lord_, Exod. xvi. 13. And that this was before\nthey encamped at mount Sinai, appears from hence, namely, that it is\nsaid, that _they came into the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth day of\nthe second month_, ver. 2. Whereas they did not come into the wilderness\nof Sinai, till the _third month_, chap. xix. 1. Therefore,\n\n2. Others fix the Epocha of the giving this law, from their coming into\nthe wilderness of Sin; this being the first time, in which the Sabbath\nis expressly said to be observed, in scripture.\n\nBut to this it may be replied; that nothing can be justly inferred from\nthe mode of expression, used by Moses in this scripture, as though it\nargued the giving a new law, that had not been before observed; but only\nthe putting them in mind of the observation of that day, which had, for\nsome time been disregarded; and accordingly it is assigned as a reason\nof their gathering twice the quantity of manna on the sixth day, which\nsupposes that they knew before hand, that they were to rest on the\nseventh; though it is highly probable, that the observation of this\nCommandment had been neglected, for some years past while they were in\nEgypt; and it may be, that they were not suffered, by those who held\nthem there in bondage, to observe this, and many other of the divine\nlaws. Nevertheless, the memory of the Sabbath was not wholly lost among\nthem, which Moses puts them now in mind of.\n\nThe most probable opinion therefore relating to the institution of the\nSabbath, is, that it was given to man from the beginning; which may be\nargued,\n\n(1.) From the reason annexed to the Commandment, to wit, God\u2019s resting\nfrom his work of creation; and it immediately follows, that when he\nrested from his work, he blessed and sanctified the seventh day; that so\nman might celebrate and commemorate his power and glory displayed\ntherein, Gen. ii. 1, 2, 3.\n\n_Obj._ To this it is objected; that God\u2019s blessing and sanctifying the\nseventh day, may be understood _proleptically_, as denoting, that at\nfirst he sanctified, or ordained that it should be a Sabbath, to his\npeople in the following ages; and that this did not take place till\nMoses\u2019s time; and accordingly they suppose, that he having been speaking\nof the creation of the world, and God\u2019s resting from his work, gives\nthem to understand, that this was the reason of the law, which was now\ngiven them, concerning the observation of the Sabbath, which they never\nheard of before.\n\n_Answ._ But to this it may be replied, That this sense of the text will\nappear very absurd to any unprejudiced person; since if God\u2019s resting\nfrom his work, which is mentioned immediately before, as the reason of\nhis sanctifying the seventh day, is to be taken literally, why must his\nsanctifying the Sabbath be taken figuratively? if the one be an account\nof what was just done, why should the other be an account of what was\nnot to take place till two thousand and five hundred years after?\n\n(2.) If God had a church in the world, and public worship was performed\nby them from Adam to Moses\u2019s time, then, there were set times, in which\nthey were to meet together for that end, and consequently a Sabbath,\nwhich was equally necessary for the good of the church, in foregoing as\nwell as following ages; and therefore we cannot suppose that it should\nbe denied that privilege then, which had been granted it ever since; or,\nthat from Moses\u2019s time they should be obliged to celebrate the glory of\nGod, as their Creator, sovereign Ruler, and bountiful Benefactor; and\nthat a seventh part of time should be allotted them for this service, by\nhis express command, and yet he should lose the glory, and his people\nthe advantage arising from it, before that time.\n\n_Obj._ It is objected to this, that the scripture is wholly silent as to\nthis matter, and therefore nothing can be concluded in favour of the\nargument we are maintaining.\n\n_Answ._ Some think that the scripture is not wholly silent as to this\nmatter; but that it may be inferred from what we read in Gen. iv. 3, 4.\nin which it is said, that _in process of time it came to pass, that Cain\nbrought an offering unto the Lord_; which was, doubtless, an instance of\npublic worship. We render the words _in process of time_; but they may,\nwith equal justice, be rendered, as it is observed in the margin, _at\nthe end of days_; that is, at the end of that cycle of days which we\ngenerally call _a week_, or on the seventh day; then the offering was\nbrought, and the solemn worship performed, and hereby the Sabbath\nsanctified according to God\u2019s institution. But if this argument be not\nallowed of, it does not follow that the scripture\u2019s not mentioning their\nobserving a Sabbath, gives us just ground to suppose that they did not\nobserve any. It might as well be argued, that because the scripture\nspeaks very little of any public worship performed before the flood,\nthat therefore there was none in the world; or, that because we do not\nread of the church\u2019s observing a Sabbath, and many other parts of\ninstituted worship all the time of the judges, which is said to be\n_about the space of four hundred and fifty years_, Acts xiii. 20.\ntherefore it follows that a Sabbath, was not observed by them, during\nthe whole of that interval, and all instituted worship was wholly\nneglected.\n\nThe next thing to be inquired into is, whether the Sabbath was\ninstituted before or after the fall of our first parents? And it may be\nobserved; that it appears to have been instituted before their fall;\nbecause the reason of its institution was God\u2019s resting from his work of\ncreation, of which we read before the account of their fall, as appears\nfrom the scripture before mentioned.\n\n_Obj._ It is objected that Adam in innocency had no manservant nor\nmaid-servants, nor stranger within his gate; and therefore was not in a\ncapacity of observing this Commandment.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That before the world was increased,\nour first parents might observe the principal thing contained in this\nCommandment, by setting apart a day for religious worship: and when the\nworld increased, the other part of the Commandment, which was only\ncircumstantial, might take place. And, indeed, this objection might be\nas much alleged against Adam\u2019s being obliged to yield obedience to the\nfifth, seventh, and eighth Commandments, as against his obeying the\nfourth.\n\nIII. It is farther observed, in this answer, that the day which we call\na seventh part of time, was the seventh day of the week, from the\nbeginning of the world, till the resurrection of Christ; and the first\nday of the week, ever since, to continue to the end of the world; which\nis the Christian Sabbath, or the Lord\u2019s day. That the seventh day of the\nweek was observed as a Sabbath, at first, is taken for granted; and we\ndo not find that it was abolished by a positive law, so that there\nshould be no Sabbath; but the day was changed, by substituting another\nin the room of it. If, according to the fourth Commandment, there is to\nbe but one Sabbath in the week, and the other six days thereof are\nallowed for our own lawful employments; and if the first day of the week\ncan be proved, as we shall attempt to do, to be the Christian Sabbath,\nthen it follows, that the seventh day ceases to be a Sabbath.\n\nIt may be, indeed, observed, from several ecclesiastical writers, that\nsome in the three first centuries, observed, both the seventh and the\nfirst day of the week. As for the apostles, they often assembled with\nthe Jews, in their synagogues, on the seventh day, Acts xiii. 14. and\nxvii. 2. but this was done with a design to propagate the Christian\nreligion among them, which could not, with equal conveniency, be done on\nother days. And the church afterwards met together on that day, as well\nas the Lord\u2019s day, apprehending that though it was not now to be\nreckoned God\u2019s holy day, or the Christian Sabbath; yet it was expedient,\nthat hereby they should keep up the memory of his having, on that day,\nfinished the work of creation; and others kept it as a day of fasting,\naccompanied with other religious exercises, in memory of Christ\u2019s lying\nthat day in the grave. But this can hardly be justified in them.\nHowever, it is evident that they did not pay the same regard to it as\nthe Lord\u2019s day, nor style it God\u2019s holy day, nor the Christian Sabbath,\nby way of eminency. And some have expressly intimated, that whatever\nregard they paid to the seventh day, or what assemblies soever they held\nfor worship therein, they did not observe it in the same way as the Jews\ndid[215]; neither were they obliged to hold meetings on that day, as\nthey were on the Lord\u2019s day, it being, in part, left to their\ndiscretion; and it was supposed, that they had sufficient leisure from\ntheir secular callings; and therefore might attend to the worship of God\non that day, as an opportunity offered itself; though they did not count\nit equally holy with the Lord\u2019s day; nor were they obliged, when the\nworship was over, to abstain from their secular employment[216]. But\nthis I only mention occasionally, to obviate an objection taken from the\npractice of some of the ancient church, in observing the seventh day of\nthe week, which does not much affect the cause we are maintaining, our\ndesign being to prove that the first day of the week is ordained to be\nthe Christian Sabbath.\n\nBut before we enter on that subject, it may be necessary, to prepare our\nway for it, to premise,\n\n1. That it does not, in the least, derogate from the honour and glory of\nGod, to change the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the\nweek. It would, indeed, derogate from the glory of God, if he should\ntake away one Sabbath, and not institute another in the room of it; for\nthen he would lose the honour of that public worship, which he has\nappointed to be performed on that day.\n\nMoreover, if there be a greater work than that of creation, to be\nremembered and celebrated, it tends much more to the advancing the glory\nof God, to appoint a day for the solemn remembrance thereof, than if it\nshould be wholly neglected. And to this we may add, that if all men must\nhonour the Son, even as they honour the Father, then it is expedient,\nthat a day should be set apart for his honour, namely, the day on which\nhe rested from the work of redemption, or, as the apostle says, _ceased\nfrom it, as God did from his_, Heb. iv. 10.\n\n2. It was expedient, that God should alter the Sabbath, from the seventh\nto the first day of the week; for,\n\n(1.) Hereby Christ took occasion to give a display of his glory, and in\nparticular of his sovereign authority, to enjoin what time he would have\nus set apart for his worship under the gospel-dispensation, as well as\nwhat worship he will have performed therein; and to discover himself to\nbe, as he styles himself; _The Lord of the Sabbath day_, Matt. xii. 8.\n\n(2.) We, in the observation thereof, signify our faith, in a public\nmanner, that Christ is come in the flesh, and that the work of our\nredemption is brought to perfection; and consequently, that there is a\nway prepared for our justification and access to God, as our God, in\nhope of finding acceptance in his sight.\n\n3. All the ordinances of gospel-worship have a peculiar relation to\nChrist; therefore it is expedient that the time in which they are to be\nperformed, under this present gospel-dispensation, should likewise have\nrelation to him; therefore that day must be set apart in commemoration\nof his work of redemption, in which he finished it, and that was the\nfirst day of the week.\n\nThis leads us to consider, what ground we have to conclude that the\nSabbath was changed, from the seventh to the first day of the week after\nthe resurrection of Christ. And this will appear,\n\n(1.) From the example of Christ and his apostles, who celebrated the\nfirst day of the week as a Sabbath, after his resurrection. Thus we read\nin John xx. 19. that _the same day at evening, being the first day of\nthe week, when the doors were shut, where the disciples were assembled\nfor fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst of them, and\nsaid, Peace be unto you_. And ver. 26. _After eight days_, or the eighth\nday after, inclusive, _again his disciples were within; then came Jesus,\nthe doors being shut, and stood in the midst and said, Peace be unto\nyou_. Where we may observe,\n\n[1.] That it was not merely an occasional meeting, but a fixed one,\nwhich returned weekly. Therefore they met eight days after, or the\nfollowing first day of the week; which was the second Christian Sabbath.\n\n[2.] On both these days of their meeting together for public worship,\nChrist appeared in the midst of them, and spake peace unto them; which\nincludes his owning the day, and confirming their faith in the\nobservation of it as a Sabbath, for the future.\n\n_Obj._ It is objected, that the reasons of the apostles\u2019 meeting\ntogether on the first day of the week, was for fear of the Jews; and not\nbecause it was substituted in the room of the seventh day, as a Sabbath\nperpetually to be observed.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that they did not meet together for\nfear of the Jews; but when they were assembled, the doors were shut for\nfear of them. Besides, it may be farther replied, that the fear of\npersecution would have been no warrant for them, not to keep the\nseventh-day-Sabbath, or to substitute another day in the room of it. To\nall which we might add, that they might more securely meet together on\nthe seventh day of the week, than on any other day, if they were afraid\nof disturbance from the Jews; for then they were engaged in worship\nthemselves; and, it is probable, would be rather inclined to let them\nalone, for want of leisure, to give them disturbance in their worship.\n\n(2.) It farther appears, that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh\nto the first day of the week, in that this was a day, in which the\nchurch met, together with the apostles, for solemn public worship. Thus\nwe read in Acts xx. 7. that _upon the first day of the week, when the\ndisciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them_. Where\nwe may observe,\n\n[1.] That it was not a private, but a public meeting of the church; for\nit is said, that the disciples, that is, the church, met together.\n\n[2.] It was not a day occasionally appointed by the apostle, but the\nstated usual time of their meeting; for it is not said Paul designed to\npreach to them on that day, and therefore they met together; but when\nthey came together, _on the first day of the week_, that is, on the day\nof their usual meeting, _Paul preached unto them_.\n\n[3.] The apostle had been with them some days before; for it is said in\nthe foregoing verse, that _he abode there seven days_. Why did they not\nmeet together, and he preach to them the day before, to wit, the seventh\nday of the week, on which day he was with them; but because that was no\nlonger a Sabbath, but changed to the first day?\n\n[4.] The end of their meeting was to break bread. Now, though the word\nis to be preached in season and out of season; yet no day is so proper\nto break bread on, or celebrate the Lord\u2019s supper, as that on which he\nrose from the dead. Besides, when a day is particularly described as\nthat which is set apart for solemn worship, such as preaching and\nbreaking of bread is supposed to be, that must be understood to be the\nSabbath.\n\n[5.] They could not be said now to meet together for fear of the Jews,\nas was before objected to their observing the first Sabbath; for it was\nat Troas, where the Jews had nothing to do, nor could they persecute\nthem; for it was a church of converted Gentiles.\n\n_Obj. 1._ It is objected, that the word which we render the _first day\nof the week_[217], might be rendered _one day_ of the week, or on a\ncertain day.\n\n_Answ._ Our translation of the Greek word, is by far the most proper, as\nall know, who understand that language. Besides, the same words are used\nin John xx. 1. and Luke xxiv. 1. in both which scriptures Christ\u2019s\nresurrection is said to be _on the first day of the week_; how\npreposterous would it be, to render them, on a certain day of the week?\nand if they are, in those scriptures, and others that might be referred\nto, to be rendered, the first day of the week, as all allow they must,\nwhy should they be rendered otherwise in the text under our present\nconsideration?\n\n_Obj. 2._ It is farther objected, that their meeting together, on the\nfirst day of the week, to break bread, does not argue it to be a\nSabbath; because formerly the Lord\u2019s supper used to be administered\nwhenever the word was preached, and that was on other days, besides the\nfirst day of the week; yea, we read, that in some ages of the church,\nthe word was preached, and the Lord\u2019s supper administered, every day.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though the Lord\u2019s supper may be\nadministered on another day, yet this is said to be the day more\nespecially appointed for this solemn ordinance, or for public worship,\nas has been already observed. Besides, though the Lord\u2019s supper was\nadministered on other days after this: yet it will be hard to prove that\nit was administered on any other day but the Lord\u2019s day, in the apostles\ntime.\n\n(3.) The change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the\nweek, may be farther argued from 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. in which the apostle\nsays, As I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye.\n_Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in\nstore, as God hath prospered him; that there be no gatherings when I\ncome._ In which words we may observe,\n\n[1.] That there is a work of charity recommended; a duty most proper for\nthe Sabbath, as a testimony of our thankfulness to God for spiritual\nblessings, held forth to, or received by us, on that day; and it is a\nday in which our hearts are most like to be enlarged to others, when\nmost affected with the love of God to us. Those duties which the prophet\nrecommends as suitable to a fast, which God had chosen, are very\nsuitable to all public ordinances, and in particular to Sabbaths,\nnamely, to _loose the bands of wickedness_, and to _undo the heavy\nburdens, and to deal forth bread to the hungry_, Isa. lviii. 6, 7. If\nthe poor of the church were to be provided for, this was to be done, not\nby a private, but a public collection, whereby more might be raised, and\nno burden laid on particular persons. It is moreover said, that they\nwere to _lay by as God had prospered them_; that is, not only in\nproportion to the increase of their worldly substance, or the success\nthat attended their secular employments on other days; but their\ncompassion to the poor ought to be enlarged, in proportion to the\nspiritual advantage they received from Christ, under his ordinances.\n\n[2.] This was not to be done on one single first day of the week, but on\nthe return of every first day; as all who read this scripture\nimpartially must understand it[218]. Therefore it follows, that the\nfirst day of the week was a day in which the church met together for\nsolemn, public, and stated worship.\n\n[3.] It was not commanded only to this church at Corinth, but is\nagreeable to what had been commanded to _all the churches of Galatia_;\ntherefore it follows, that the churches of Galatia were obliged to\nobserve the first day of the week, as well as that at Corinth. And\ninasmuch as this epistle is directed to _all that in every place call\nupon the name of Jesus Christ_, 1 Cor. i. 2. it may by a parity of\nreason, be applied to them; and accordingly it may be argued, that it\nwas a universal practice of the church, at that time, to meet together\nfor religious worship, on the first day of the week, which argument\ncannot but have some weight in it, to prove the doctrine that we are\nmaintaining, relating to the change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to\nthe first day of the week.\n\n(4.) The change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the\nweek, farther appears, in that there is a day, mentioned in the New\nTestament, which is styled _the Lord\u2019s day_. Thus it is said, _I was in\nthe Spirit on the Lord\u2019s day_, Rev. i. 10. Where it may be observed,\n\n[1.] That there is a peculiar claim that Christ lays to this day as his\nown, distinct from all other days. As the seventh day of the week was,\nbefore this, called, as it is in this Commandment, _The Sabbath of the\nLord thy God_, and elsewhere, his _holy day_, Isa. lviii. 13. so there\nis a peculiar day which our Saviour, who is the Lord here spoken of,\nclaims as his holy day. And what can this be, but that day which he has\ninstituted in commemoration of his having finished the work of our\nredemption?\n\n[2.] It may be farther observed, that when God is said to lay claim to\nthings in scripture, it denotes, that they are of his appointment, and\nfor his glory. Thus the bread and the wine in that ordinance, which\nChrist has appointed in remembrance of his death, is called _the Lord\u2019s\nsupper_, or _the Lord\u2019s table_, denoting that it is an ordinance of his\nown appointment; in like manner _the Lord\u2019s day_ may be fitly so called\nfor this reason, as instituted by him.\n\nThe arguments that have hitherto been brought to prove that the Sabbath\nwas changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, are\nprincipally such as are founded on a scripture-consequence. We shall now\nproceed to prove that this consequence is just, _viz._ that because the\nfirst day of the week was observed by our Saviour, his apostles, and the\nchurch in general, as the Lord\u2019s day, that is, a day instituted by him,\nin commemoration of his having finished the work of our redemption;\ntherefore we ought to observe it for that end. Here it may be\nconsidered,\n\n_1st_, That it is not to be supposed, that it was universally observed\nby the church at random, or by accident, without some direction given\nthem herein. For since the apostles were appointed to erect the\ngospel-church, and, as God\u2019s ministers, to give laws to it, relating to\nthe instituted worship that was to be performed therein, it is as\nreasonable to suppose, that they gave direction concerning the time, in\nwhich public solemn worship should be performed.\n\n_2dly_, Whatever the apostles ordered the church to observe, in matters\nbelonging to religious worship, they did it by divine direction;\notherwise the rules they laid down for instituted worship, could not be\nmuch depended on; and they, would doubtless, have been blamed, as not\nhaving fulfilled the commission, which they received from Christ, to\n_teach_ the church _to observe all things whatever he had commanded\nthem_. Nor could the apostle have made this appeal to the church as he\ndoes; _I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God_,\nActs xx. 27. and elsewhere, _I have received of the Lord that which also\nI delivered unto you_, 1 Cor. xi. 23. and _I delivered unto you first of\nall that which I also received_, chap. xv. 3. Nor would he have acted\nagreeably to the character he gave of himself and the rest of the\napostles; concerning whom he says, _Let a man so account of us, as of\nthe ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover,\nit is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful_, chap. iv. 1.\nAnd he says concerning himself, _I have obtained mercy of the Lord to be\nfaithful_, chap. vii. 25. And elsewhere, _If any man think himself to be\na prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I\nwrite unto you, are the commandments of the Lord_, chap. xiv. 37. and\nconsequently, that whatever directions he gave about the time, as well\nas mode of worship, were instamped with his authority; therefore, an\napostolic intimation contained a divine command relating hereunto.\n\nThose things that were delivered to the church, by persons under divine\ninspiration, are not to be reckoned among the traditions which the\nPapists plead for, which took their rise in those ages when inspiration\nwas ceased. The apostle uses the word _tradition_ in the same sense in\nwhich we are to understand a divine oracle, or a command given by those\nwho were divinely inspired; and accordingly he says, _I praise you,\nbrethren, that you remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances_,\nor, as it is in the margin, _traditions, as I have delivered them to\nyou_, chap. xi. 2. and elsewhere, he exhorts them, to _hold the\ntraditions which they had been taught, whether by word, or his epistle_,\n2 Thess. ii. 15. that is, all those things which had been communicated\nto them by divine inspiration, in whatever form they were transmitted to\nthem, whether by word or writing; which different circumstances of\nimparting them, do not in the least detract from their divine authority.\nThe laws which God gave to his church, were either immediately from\nhimself, as the ten Commandments, or else they were given by those who\nwere inspired for that purpose; and, indeed, the greatest part of\ngospel-worship was of this latter sort; and what was transmitted by the\napostles relating hereunto, was either verbal or real; the former\ncontaining an intimation of what they had received of the Lord, the\nlatter was enforced by their example and practice; which, supposing them\nto be under divine inspiration, was a sufficient warrant for the faith\nand practice of the church, whether relating to the mode or time of\nworship; and consequently the practice and example of the apostles and\nchurch, in their day, in observing the first day of the week, is a\nsufficient argument to convince us concerning the change of the Sabbath,\nfrom the seventh to the Lord\u2019s day, which was to be observed, by the\nchurch, in all succeeding ages.\n\nAs to that question which is proposed by some, namely, when it was that\nChrist gave instructions to the apostles, concerning the change of the\nSabbath? It is an over-curious enquiry, since it is enough for us to\nconclude, that this, together with other laws given by them, relating to\nthe gospel-dispensation, were given by him, during that interval of\ntime, in which _he shewed himself alive after his passion, by many\ninfallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, speaking of the things\npertaining to the kingdom of God_, Acts i. 3. of which, we may\nreasonably suppose this to have been one. But if this be not reckoned\nsufficient for the confirming our faith therein, we have the highest\nreason to conclude, that it was given by the inspiration of the Spirit,\nwhom Christ had before promised unto the apostles to guide _them into\nall truth_; and that he should _shew them things to come_, John xvi. 13.\nby which we are to understand, that he was to lead them, not only into\nthose truths, which were necessary for them to know as Christians, but\nto impart to the churches as ministers, as a rule of faith and practice.\nThis is what, I think, may give us sufficient satisfaction, as to the\ndivine original of the Lord\u2019s day, without our being obliged to have\nrecourse to an ecclesiastical establishment, without a divine\ninstitution; which would very much detract from the dignity and glory of\nit, and the regard that we ought to pay to it, as the Lord\u2019s holy day.\nWe have considered it as instituted by the apostles; and that they had\ninstructions in all things relating to the edification of the church;\nand that they were so faithful in what they imparted, that they cannot\nbe, in the least, suspected of intruding any invention of their own into\nthe worship of God, in this, any more than any other branch thereof, to\nsuppose which, would leave us in the greatest uncertainty, as to what\nconcerns matters of the highest importance.\n\nThus concerning the observation of the Lord\u2019s day, as founded on a\ndivine warrant, given to the church by the ministry of the apostles, who\nwere appointed, by God, to make known those laws to them, which respect\nthe manner and time in which he will be worshipped, under the\ngospel-dispensation.\n\nThe next thing to be considered, is, that the church in, and after the\napostles time, universally attended to the religious observation of the\nLord\u2019s day; which was celebrated as a Sabbath in all succeeding ages.\nThis is so evident, from the history of what relates thereunto, that it\nneeds no proof. That the apostles and the church, in their day, observed\nit, has been already considered; and that the observation thereof was\ncontinued in the church, after their death, appears from the writings of\nmost of the Fathers, who speak of it as a day in which the church met\ntogether for public worship, and paid a much greater deference to it\nthan any of the other days of the week, wherein they occasionally\nattended on the exercise of religious duties. Thus Ignatius, who lived\nin the beginning of the second Century, advises every one who loved\nChrist, to celebrate the Lord\u2019s day, which was consecrated to his\nresurrection; and he calls it the queen, and chief of all days[219].\nAlso Justin Martyr, who lived about the middle of the same Century, in\none of his apologies for the Christians, says, That on that day, which\nthey, viz. the Heathen, call Sunday, all who live in cities or villages,\nmeet together in the same place, where the writings of the apostles and\nprophets are read, and we all assemble; it being the day in which God\nfinished the creation, and Jesus Christ, our Saviour, rose from the\ndead. For the day before Saturday he was crucified, and the day after\nit, that is, Sunday, he appeared to his apostles and disciples, and\ninstructed them in those things which we propose to your\nconsideration[220].\n\nIn the third Century, when persecution so much raged against the church,\nit is well known, that Christians distinguished themselves, by the\ncharacter of observers of the Lord\u2019s day, which they reckoned a badge of\nChristianity[221].\n\nI need not descend any lower, to prove that the Lord\u2019s day was\nuniversally observed by the church, in commemoration of Christ\u2019s\nresurrection, in all succeeding ages; for that is generally allowed.\nTherefore, all that I shall add to illustrate this argument, taken from\nthe practice of the Christian church, from our Saviour\u2019s resurrection,\nto this day, is,\n\n_1st_, That it cannot reasonably be supposed, that God would suffer his\nchurch universally to run into so great a mistake, as to keep a wrong\nday as a weekly Sabbath; and that not only in one or two, but in all\nages, since our Saviour\u2019s time. Now, whatever error particular churches\nhave been suffered to imbibe, God has not left them all in general; and\nthat before the corruption and apostasy of the church of Rome, as well\nas since the Reformation, to be deceived, which they must be said to\nhave been, had they esteemed that God\u2019s holy day, which he has neither\ninstituted, nor owned as such.\n\n_2d_, God has not only suffered all his churches to go on in this error,\nif it be an error, and not undeceived them, but he has, at the same\ntime, granted them many signal marks of his favour; and has, to this\nday, in many instances, owned the strict and religious observation\nthereof; which we can hardly suppose he would have done, if it were not\nof his own institution; nor that he would have given a sanction to it,\nby being present with his people, when attending on him therein, in the\nordinances of his own appointment. This leads us to consider,\n\nIV. The proportion of time that is to be observed as a weekly Sabbath.\nThus it is said in this answer, we are to keep holy to God, one whole\nday in seven. A day is either artificial or natural. The former is the\nspace of time from the sun\u2019s rising, to its setting; the latter contains\nin it the space of twenty four hours. Now the Lord\u2019s day must be\nsupposed to continue longer than the measure of an artificial day;\notherwise it would fall short of a seventh part of time. But this has\nnot so many difficulties attending it, as that has which relates to the\ntime of the day when it begins. Nevertheless, we have some direction, as\nto this matter, from the intimation given us, that Christ rose from the\ndead _on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, while it\nwas yet dark_, John xx. 1. Luke xxiv. 1. Therefore the Lord\u2019s day begins\nin the morning, before sun rising; or, according to our usual way of\nreckoning, we may conclude, that it begins immediately after midnight,\nand continues till mid-night following; which is our common method of\ncomputing time, beginning the day with the morning, and ending it with\nthe evening; and it is agreeable to the Psalmist\u2019s observation; _Man\ngoeth forth to his work, and to his labour_ in the morning, _until the\nevening_, Psal. civ. 23. Rest, in order of nature, follows after labour;\ntherefore the night follows the day; and consequently the Lord\u2019s day\nevening follows the day, on which account it must be supposed to begin\nin the morning.\n\nAgain, if the Sabbath begins in the evening, religious worship ought to\nbe performed sometime, at least, in the evening; and then, soon after it\nis begun, it will be interrupted by the succeeding night, and then it\nmust be revived again the following day. And, as to the end of the\nSabbath, it seems not so agreeable, that, when we have been engaged in\nthe worship of God in the day, we should spend the evening in secular\nemployments; which cannot be judged unlawful, if the Sabbath be then at\nan end. Therefore, it is much more expedient, that the whole work of the\nday should be continued as long as our worldly employments are on other\ndays; and our beginning and ending the performance of religious duties,\nshould in some measure, be agreeable thereunto. Again, this may be\nproved from what is said in Exod. xvi. 23. _To-morrow is the rest of the\nholy Sabbath unto the Lord._ Whereas, if the Sabbath had begun in the\nevening, it would rather have been said, this evening begins the rest of\nthe holy Sabbath.\n\nAnother scripture generally brought to prove this argument, is in John\nxx. 19. _The same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when\nthe doors were shut, where the disciples were assembled for fear of the\nJews, came Jesus, and stood in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be\nunto you_; it is called _the evening of the same day_; so that the\nworship which was performed that day, was continued in the evening\nthereof. This is not called the evening of the next day, but of the same\nday in which Christ rose from the dead; which was the first Christian\nSabbath.\n\n_Object._ To this it is objected, that the ceremonial Sabbaths under the\nlaw, began at evening. Thus it is said, in Lev. xxiii. 5. _In the\nfourteenth day of the first month, at even, is the Lord\u2019s passover_; and\nver. 32. speaking concerning the feast of expiation, which was on the\ntenth day of the seventh month, it is said, _It shall be unto you a\nSabbath of rest; and ye shall afflict your souls in the ninth day of the\nmonth, at even: From even unto even shall ye celebrate your Sabbath._\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be answered; that the beginning of sacred days is\nto be at the same time with that of civil; and this was governed by the\ncustom of nations. The Jews\u2019 civil day began at evening; and therefore\nit was ordained that from evening to evening, should be the measure of\ntheir sacred days. Our days have another beginning and ending; which\ndifference is only circumstantial. Whereas, the principal thing\nenjoined, is, that one whole day in seven, be observed as a Sabbath to\nthe Lord.\n\nFootnote 214:\n\n \u201cThe devoting of a _seventh Part of Time_ in a holy manner to the\n Lord, belongs unchangeably to the _moral_ nature and obligation of the\n _fourth Commandment_, which is transferred in the New Testament, from\n the _seventh_ to the _first_ day of the week. (See _John_ xx. 26. and\n _Acts_ xx. 7.) To this it may not be amiss to add the judicious note\n of Mr. _Kennicott_ in his dissertation on the oblations of _Cain_ and\n _Abel_, p. 184, 185, where he says, \u2018The sabbath, or weekly day of\n holiness, might well be called a _sign to the_ Jews;\u2019 for the _Jewish_\n sabbath was a _sign_, as being founded on a double reason, the second\n of which (the _Egyptian_ deliverance) evidently distinguished that\n people from all others, and was therefore as a sign constantly to\n remind them of the particular care of heaven, and what uncommon\n returns of goodness they were to make for so signal a deliverance. But\n there is great reason to believe, that the sabbath of the _Israelites_\n was altered with their year, at their coming forth from _Egypt_; and a\n short attention to this point may not be here improper, the case then\n seems to be this. At the finishing of the creation, God sanctified the\n seventh day; this seventh day, being the first day of _Adam\u2019s_ life,\n was consecrated by way of first-fruits to God; and therefore _Adam_\n may reasonably be supposed to have _began_ his computation of the\n _days of the week_ with the _first whole day_ of his own existence;\n thus the sabbath became the first day of the week; but when mankind\n fell from the worship of the true God, they first substituted the\n worship of the sun, in his place, and preserving the same weekly day\n of worship, but devoting it to the sun, the sabbath was called\n _Sunday_; for that _Sunday_ was the first day of the week, and is so\n still in the east, is proved by Mr. _Selden_ (Jus. Nat. and Gent. Lib.\n 3. Cap. 22.) Thus the _sabbath of the Patriarchs_ continued to be the\n _Sunday of the idolaters_, till the coming up of the _Israelites_ out\n of _Egypt_; and then, as God altered the beginning of their year, so\n he also changed the day of their worship from _Sunday_ to _Saturday_;\n the first reason of which might be, that as _Sunday_ was the day of\n worship among the Idolaters, the _Israelites_ would be more likely to\n join with them, if they rested on the same day, than if they were to\n work on that day, and serve their God upon another. But a second\n reason certainly was, in order to perpetuate the memory of _their\n deliverance on that day from_ Egyptian _slavery_; for _Moses_, when he\n applies the fourth Commandment to the particular cases of his own\n people, _Deut._ v. 15, does not enforce it, as in _Ex._ xx. 11. by the\n consideration of _God\u2019s resting on that day_ which was the sabbath of\n the Patriarchs; but binds it upon them by saying, _Remember that thou\n wast a servant in Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out\n thence through a mighty hand, and by a stretched-out arm; therefore\n the Lord thy God hath commanded_ THEE _to keep this_ SABBATH-DAY.\n Allowing then the preceding observations, we immediately see, how the\n sabbath naturally reverted to _Sunday_, after the abolition of\n _Judaism_ without any express command for the alteration. To which he\n adds a quotation from Bp. _Cumberland_, (Orig. Gent. Antiq. p. 400.)\n which speaks of the _Gentiles_, as called, after Christ\u2019s time into\n the same universal church with the Patriarchs; and another from\n _Justin Martyr_, \u03a4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b7\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1, \u03b5\u03bd\u1f21 \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\n \u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c8\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u0399\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\n \u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b5\u03ba \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7. Apol c. s. 89. The purport of which is, that\n all Christians generally assembled for religious worship on the\n _Sunday_; because it is the first day in which God finished the\n creation of the world; and on the same day of the week, Jesus Christ,\n our Saviour, rose from the dead.\u201d\n\n GUYSE.\n\nFootnote 215:\n\n _Vid. Athanas. Hom. de Semente._\n\nFootnote 216:\n\n _Vid. Ignat. Epist. ad Magn._ _And much more to the same purpose may\n be seen in a learned book, intitled_ Dies Dominica, _in cap._ iii. _&\n alibi passim_.\n\nFootnote 217:\n\n \u0388\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6 \u03bc\u03b9\u1fb6 \u03c4\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03b2\u03b2\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. _On the first from the Sabbath_; so the Jews\n named the days of the week.\n\nFootnote 218:\n\n \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03b2\u03b2\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 219:\n\n _Vid. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes._\n\nFootnote 220:\n\n _Vid. Just. Mart. edit. a Grab. Apol. 1. \u00a7 87, & 89. It may be\n observed, that that Father is not alone in his calling it Sunday; for\n Tertullian [Adv. Gent. Cap._ xvi.] _calls it so. And Jerom says it may\n be so called, because the Sun of Righteousness arose with healing in\n his wings; but it is generally called_ the Lord\u2019s day; _and that not\n only by others, but by the same Fathers; except in their apologies for\n the Christian religion against the Heathen, they used the word in\n compliance with their mode of speaking. But that which is more\n strange, and savours a little of affectation, is, that Justin, and\n some other of the Fathers, should chuse to use a circumlocution,\n instead of Friday, as he calls it, the day before Saturday. And\n Ignatius, [in Epist. ad Trall.] calls it_ parasceva, _or, the\n preparation for the Sabbath, as the Jews did; and Iren\u00e6us calls it the\n day before the Sabbath, [in Lib._ v. _adv. Her. Cap._ xxiii.] _which\n the learned Grabe supposes to be for this reason; that they might shew\n how much they detested the name of Venus, to whom Friday was dedicated\n by the Heathen. And they ought to have been as cautious of using the\n word Sunday, since that was not only dedicated to the Sun. But some\n took occasion from thence, to asperse the Christians, as though they\n had worshipped the Sun; which Tertullian, in [Apol. adv. Gen. Cap._\n xvi.] _is obliged to exculpate them from._\n\nFootnote 221:\n\n Dominicum agere, _or_ celebrare, _was a phrase well known in that age,\n in which many Christians were put to death, upon their being examined,\n and boldly professing that they observed the Lord\u2019s day; and the\n assemblies, in which all the parts of public worship were performed on\n that day, were generally called Synaxes_.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXVII., CXVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. CXVII. _How is the Sabbath, or Lord\u2019s day to be sanctified?_\n\n ANSW. The Sabbath, or Lord\u2019s day, is to be sanctified, by an holy\n resting all the day, not only from such works as are, at all times,\n sinful, but even from such worldly employments and recreations as\n are on other days lawful, and making it our delight to spend the\n whole time (except so much of it as is to be taken up in works of\n necessity and mercy) in the public and private exercises of God\u2019s\n worship; and to that end we are to prepare our hearts, and with such\n fore-sight, diligence and moderation to dispose, and seasonably to\n dispatch our worldly business, that we may be the more free and fit\n for the duties of that day.\n\n QUEST. CXVIII. _Why is the charge of keeping the Sabbath more\n specially directed to governors of families, and other superiors?_\n\n ANSW. The charge of keeping the Sabbath is more especially directed\n to governors of families and other superiors, because they are bound\n not only to keep it themselves, but to see that it be observed by\n all those that are under their charge; and because they are prone\n oft-times to hinder them by employments of their own.\n\nIn explaining the former of these answers, which more especially\nrespects the manner how the Sabbath is to be sanctified, let it be\nconsidered,\n\nI. That we are to prepare our hearts, and with such foresight,\ndiligence, and moderation, to dispose, and seasonably to dispatch, our\nworldly business, that we may be more free and fit for the business of\nthat day. We do not read, indeed, that there is any time sanctified, or\nset apart by God, in order to our preparing for the Sabbath; but this\nmatter is left to our Christian prudence. Yet we read in the New\nTestament, of the day of preparation for the Sabbath; that is, the day\nbefore the Jewish Sabbath; which persons who had any sense of the\nimportance of the work to be performed on the following day, thought it\ntheir duty to prepare for before-hand, at least, to give dispatch to\ntheir worldly business; that their thoughts might be fixed on the work\non which they were to engage on the day ensuing. Thus we read, that\n_that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on: And they\nreturned and prepared spices and ointments, and rested the Sabbath day,\naccording to the commandment_, Luke xxiii. 54, 56. The mixing of\nointments and spices, which were compounded according to the custom of\nthose times, for the embalming of the dead, was a work of labour, and\nnot fit to be done on the Sabbath. Therefore they did this the day\nbefore, that they might not be brought under any necessity of performing\nthat servile work therein, which might be done on another day. And this\npractice of dispatching worldly business, in order to their being\nprepared for the sacred employment of the Sabbath, seems to have been\ninculcated, when the observation of that day was revived by Moses in the\nwilderness of Sin; on which occasion he says, _To-morrow is the rest of\nthe holy Sabbath unto the Lord. Bake that which ye will bake, and seethe\nthat ye will seethe: and that which remaineth over, lay it up for you to\nbe kept until the morning_, Exod. xvi. 23. The meaning of which is, they\nwere to gather the manna, which would take up a considerable time, and\ngrind or prepare it for baking or seething; which was a servile, or\nlaborious work, that might as well be done the day before. Accordingly\nthey were commanded then to dispatch or finish it, that they might rest\nin, and sanctity the Sabbath immediately following.\n\nAs for the time which the more religious Jews took, in preparing for the\nSabbath before it came, something of this may be learned from the\npractice of holy Nehemiah; whereby it appears, that they laid aside\ntheir worldly business, in order to their preparing for the Sabbath the\nday before, at sun-set, or when it begun to be dark. Thus it is said,\n_That when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the Sabbath,\nhe commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should\nnot be opened till after the Sabbath_, Neh. xiii. 19. However, this is\ndiscretionary, and therefore some Jewish writers observe, that many of\nthem began to prepare for the Sabbath the evening before, at six\no\u2019clock, and some of them at three; and others spent the whole day\nbefore in the dispatch of their secular business, that they might be\nbetter prepared for the Sabbath; and this, as to what is equitable or\nmoral therein, is, doubtless, an example to us: so that we may say as\nHezekiah did in his prayer; _The good Lord pardon every one that\nprepareth his heart to seek God; the Lord God of his fathers, though he\nbe not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary_, 2\nChron. xxx. 18, 19.\n\nThis leads us to consider the duties to be performed preparatory to the\nright observing the Lord\u2019s day; and, in order hereunto, we ought, the\nevening before, to lay aside our care and worldly business, that our\nthoughts may not be incumbred, diverted, or taken up with unseasonable\nor unlawful concerns about it. This is a duty very much neglected; and\nthe omission thereof is one reason of our unprofitable attendance on the\nordinances of God on the Lord\u2019s day. Thus many keep their shops open\ntill midnight; and by this means make encroachments on part of the\nmorning of the Lord\u2019s day, by indulging too much sleep; which occasions\ndrowsiness under the ordinances, as well as their thoughts being filled\nwith worldly concerns and business therein. And to this we may add, that\nall envyings, contentions, evil surmising against our neighbour, are to\nbe laid aside, since these will tend to defile our souls and to deprave\nour minds, when they ought wholly to be taken up about divine things.\nThus the apostle advises those to whom he writes, to _lay aside all\nmalice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil\nspeaking_, and _as new born babes_ to _desire the sincere milk of the\nword, that_ they might _grow thereby_, 1 Pet. ii. 1, 2.\n\nMoreover, we are to endeavour to bring our souls into a prepared frame\nfor the duties of the Lord\u2019s day, the evening before, by having our\nthoughts engaged in those meditations that are suitable thereunto;\nparticularly, we are to consider the many lost Sabbaths we have to\naccount for, or repent of, as also the wonderful patience of God, who\nhas, notwithstanding spared us to the approach of another Sabbath; and\nwhat precautions are necessary to be used, that we may not profane or\ntrifle it away. It would also be expedient for us to meditate on the\nvanity of worldly things, which we have laid aside all our care about,\nand think how contemptible the gain thereof is, if compared with\ncommunion with God, which is our great concern; and therefore we are to\nconsider ourselves as having a greater work to transact with God on his\nown day, and desire to have no disturbance from the world therein. And\nto these meditations we ought to join our fervent prayers to God; that\nthe sins committed by us in former Sabbaths may be forgiven, that he may\nnot be provoked to withdraw the influences of his Spirit on the\napproaching day; and that the world with the cares thereof, may not then\nbe a snare to us, through the temptations of Satan, together with the\ncorruption of our own hearts, whereby our converse with God would be\ninterrupted, that by this means we may wait on the Lord without\ndistraction. We ought also to pray, that he would also assist his\nministers in preparing a seasonable word, that may be blest to ourselves\nand others. Thus the apostle exhorts the church, to _pray always with\nall prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and to watch thereunto with\nall perseverance, and supplication for all saints; and for him, that\nutterance might be given unto him, that he might open his mouth boldly\nto make known the mystery of the gospel_, Eph. vi. 18, 19. We ought to\nbe very importunate with God, that he would sanctify, and fill our\nthoughts from the beginning to the end of the Lord\u2019s day, which he has\nconsecrated for his immediate service and glory.\n\nII. We are now to consider what we are to rest and abstain from, on the\nLord\u2019s day; and this is included in two general heads, namely, not only\nfrom things sinful, but what is in itself lawful, on other days.\n\n1. As for those things which are sinful on other days, they are much\nmore so on the Sabbath; for hereby we contract double guilt, not only in\ncommitting the sin, but in breaking the Sabbath; and such sins are, for\nthe most part, presumptuously committed, and greatly tend to harden the\nheart; and not only hinder the efficacy of the ordinances, but if\nallowed of, and persisted in, are a sad step to apostacy.\n\n2. We break the Sabbath by engaging in things that would be lawful on\nother days; and that in two particular instances here mentioned;\n\n(1.) When we engage in worldly employments. These, we are wholly to lay\naside, or abstain from; particularly buying or selling, or encouraging\nthose who do so. We have a noble instance of zeal in Nehemiah, relating\nto this matter; wherein he says, _In those days saw I in Judah, some\ntreading wine-presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and\nleading asses; as also wine, grapes and figs, and all manner of burdens,\nwhich they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day. And I testified\nagainst them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of\nTyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold\non the Sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I\ncontended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, what evil thing\nis this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath day?_ Neh. xiii. 15, 16, 17.\nAnd the prophet Jeremiah speaks to the same purpose, when he prohibits\ntheir _carrying burdens on the Sabbath day_, or _doing any work_\ntherein; and exhorts them to _hallow the Sabbath day, as God commanded\ntheir fathers_, Jer. xvii. 21, 22. This may tend to reprove those\ntradesmen who post their books, state their accounts, or prepare their\ngoods, which are to be exposed to sale on the following day. And if we\ndo not run these lengths, in profaning the Sabbath; yet we are highly\nguilty when our thoughts and discourse run after our covetousness, which\nis, in effect, a saying as they did who complained, _When will the new\nmoon be gone, that we may sell corn, and the Sabbath, that we may set\nforth wheat_, Amos viii. 5. This the prophet reproves, when he says,\n_They come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as\nmy people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with\ntheir mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their\ncovetousness_, Ezek. xxxiii. 31.\n\n(2.) The Sabbath is violated by recreations; which we are therefore to\nabstain from: otherwise we spurn at the Sabbath; accordingly the prophet\nIsaiah speaks of those who sanctify _the Sabbath_, as turning away their\n_foot from doing their pleasure on God\u2019s holy day, and calling the\nSabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable, honouring him, not\ndoing their own ways, nor finding their own pleasure, nor speaking their\nown words_, Isa. lviii. 13.\n\n[1.] The recreations we are to abstain from, on the Lord\u2019s day, are\nunnecessary visits by which the worship of God in families, is\ninterrupted, the minds of men perverted, and filled with vanity, the\nmotions of the Spirit quenched, and the advantage of public worship\ngreatly hindered, if not wholly lost.\n\n[2.] Walking in the fields; whereby instead of meditating on the word,\nthe mind is diverted from it. To which we may add,\n\n[3.] The taking unnecessary journeys; which, according as they are\ncircumstanced, will appear to be no other than finding our own pleasure,\nand doing our own works on God\u2019s holy day.\n\nWe read, indeed, in Acts i. 12. of _a Sabbath-day\u2019s journey_; which\nseems to argue, that it was not unlawful to travel on the Lord\u2019s day.\nBut, that we may not mistake this matter, let it be considered, that _a\nSabbath-day\u2019s journey_, according to Jewish writers, contained the\nlength of two thousand cubits, or, about a mile; which was, ordinarily\nspeaking, the length of their cities, together with their respective\nsuburbs. Therefore, since this is the measure of a Sabbath-day\u2019s\njourney, it implies, that they were not to go out of their cities to\ndivert themselves, or to undertake journeys, under a pretence of\nbusiness. Thus they were commanded _to abide every man in his place on\nthe seventh day_, Exod. xvi. 29. that is, not to wander out of their\ntents, to take the air, though they were obliged to go out of their\ntents to the tabernacle, the place of public worship, which was pitched\nin the midst thereof, for the conveniency of coming to it. Hither,\nindeed, they went, from their respective tents; which was the only\njourney they took, unless in case of necessity, on the Sabbath-day.\n\nTo this we may add, that it is not lawful, on the Sabbath-day, for\npersons to divert themselves by talking of news, or common affairs;\nwhich unseasonable discourse oftentimes gives a check to those lively\nframes of spirit we have had under the word preached; and by indulging\nsuch discourse, we not only break the Sabbath ourselves, but by our\nexample, induce others to do the same. I do not say but that it may be\nseasonable to meditate on the providence of God towards the church and\nthe world, on the Lord\u2019s day, as well as at other times; but then we\nmust take heed that his glory, and not barely our own diversion, is a\ngreat inducement thereunto.\n\nIII. When it is said, in the fourth Commandment, that _thou shalt do no\nmanner of work on the Sabbath day_, there is an exception hereunto, or\nan intimation, that works of necessity and mercy, though they contain in\nthem something servile or laborious, may, notwithstanding, be done on\nthe Lord\u2019s day. Some things are necessary, as they tend to the support\nof nature; as eating and drinking; and therefore the providing food for\nthat end, is, doubtless, lawful; especially if too much time be not\nspent therein, too many servants, or others, detained from the worship\nof God thereby, or entertainments and splendid feasts made; in which,\nvariety of things are prepared, to please the appetite; and all this\nattended with vain and trifling conversation, unbecoming the holiness of\nthe day. There are also other works of necessity, which may be done on\nthe Sabbath-day, _viz._ such as are subservient to the worship of God;\nwithout which, it is impossible that the public exercises thereof should\nbe performed. Thus, under the ceremonial law, there were many laborious\nservices that attended public worship; particularly the killing those\nbeasts that were appointed for sacrifice, on the Sabbath-day; though we\nare exempted from this under the gospel-dispensation. To this, it is\nprobable, our Saviour refers, when he says, \u2018Have ye not read in the\nlaw, how that the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are\nblameless,\u2019 Matt. xii. 5. that is, perform those servile works,\nsubservient to public worship; which, according to your method of\nreasoning, would be a profaning the Sabbath.\n\nHere it is enquired, by some, whether it be lawful to kindle a fire on\nthe Sabbath-day, since this seems to be forbidden the Israelites; to\nwhom Moses says, \u2018Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations,\nupon the Sabbath-day,\u2019 Exod. xxv. 3. Some are of opinion, that if this\nbe lawful at present, agreeably to what we generally practice, it is a\npeculiar privilege attending the gospel-dispensation; which may give us\noccasion to explain what is meant by this prohibition.\n\n1. It cannot be hereby forbidden, to kindle a fire, for their\nrefreshment, in cold weather; for that is as necessary as any of the\nother conveniences of life, such as eating, drinking, sitting down when\nwe are weary, _&c._ and it was done with very little pains or\ndifficulty; so that it would not much hinder the religious exercises of\nthat day. On the other hand, the not making a fire, provided the season\nof the year was extremely cold, would indispose men for the worship of\nGod. Therefore,\n\n2. It is most probable, that the meaning of that scripture is this; that\nsince, at that time, wherein this law was given, many of them were\nemployed in the work of building and adorning the tabernacle; which, as\nall artificers know, required the kindling of fires for the melting of\nmetals, heating of iron tools, _&c._ and, whereas the people might be\napt to think, that, because the building of the tabernacle required\nexpedition, they might kindle fires, and therewith employ themselves in\nthe work thereof, on the Sabbath-day. Therefore Moses tells them, that\nit was not a work so absolutely necessary, as that it required, that\nthey should attend to it herein; which seems to be the reason of that\nlaw, which prohibited the kindling a fire on the Sabbath-day.\n\nAs for the application of this law, to the dressing of food, which seems\nto be prohibited in that scripture, \u2018Bake that ye will bake to day, and\nseethe that which ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over, lay it\nup to be kept for you until the morning,\u2019 Exod. xvi. 23. The meaning\nthereof seems to be this; Bake, or seethe that which is necessary for\nyour food, the day before the Sabbath, and lay up the rest, to be baked\nor seethed on the Sabbath. The command more especially prohibits their\ngathering manna on the Sabbath, and preparing it for baking or seething;\nwhich would have taken up too great a part of the day, and have been a\ndiversion from the religious worship thereof. But the baking or\nseething, which would have afforded but a small interruption to the work\nthereof, does not seem to have been forbidden.\n\nAnd this leads us to enquire, what judgment we may pass on the _stoning\nthe man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath-day_; which we read of in\nNumb. xv. 32, _&c._ The gathering of sticks for the making a fire on the\nSabbath-day, seems to be a work of necessity; and therefore some may be\nready to conclude that the punishment inflicted on him was too severe.\nBut, instead of excepting against the greatness of the punishment\ninflicted, I would rather infer from hence, that the crime was very\ngreat. For,\n\n(1.) He might have gathered sticks on other days, and thereby have\nprovided a sufficient quantity for his necessary use, on the\nSabbath-day; or else, he should have been content to have been without a\nfire on that day; rather than give so ill a precedent of the breach of\nthe Sabbath.\n\n(2.) It is probable he did this, not to supply his present necessities,\nbut to increase his store; and, that he did not gather a few sticks, but\na large quantity; which cannot be pretended to be a work of necessity.\n\n(3.) It is not unlikely, that the man made a practice of it, for several\nSabbaths together; and so lived in a total contempt and neglect of God\u2019s\npublic ordinances.\n\n(4.) It is also reasonable to suppose, that he did this presumptuously,\npublicly, and in defiance of the divine command, after having been\nreproved for it; and he might obstinately vindicate this wicked\npractice, and resolve, for the future, to persist in it; for that is the\nnature of a presumptuous sin. And it is plain, that he sinned\npresumptuously therein; inasmuch as God, in the verses immediately\nforegoing, had threatened, that _the soul that doth ought\npresumptuously_, or, as it is in the margin, _with an high hand_, who\n_reproached the Lord_ herein, _should be cut off_; and then this account\nof the man\u2019s being stoned for gathering sticks on the Sabbath-day, is\nbrought in as an instance of a just punishment of a presumptuous sinner.\n\nThese things being duly considered, we cannot take occasion from hence,\nto conclude, as many do, that there is this difference between the legal\nand the gospel-dispensation, in that the Sabbath was formerly to be\nobserved more strictly than now; and that this was a part of the yoke\nwhich neither they nor their fathers were able to bear, the relaxation\nwhereof is reckoned a branch of that liberty which we have under the\ngospel. But this sounds very ill in the ears of all serious Christians,\nwho think the duties of religion, and the strictness of our obligation\nthereunto, a privilege rather than a burden. Thus concerning the\nlawfulness of our performing works of necessity on the Sabbath-day.\n\nWe proceed farther to consider, that works of mercy ought to be done on\nthat day; such as visiting and preparing medicines for the sick,\nrelieving the poor, providing food and water for cattle, and other brute\ncreatures. This our Saviour vindicates by his practice, and illustrates\nby asserting the necessity of _lifting out a sheep_, that was _fallen\ninto a pit_, on the Sabbath-day, Matt. xii. 10-13. However, when we\nmaintain the lawfulness of performing works of necessity and mercy, on\nthe Sabbath-day, the following cautions ought to be attended to;\n\n[1.] Let the necessity be real, not pretended; of which, God and our own\nconsciences are the judges.\n\n[2.] If we think that we have a necessary call to omit, or lay aside our\nattendance on the ordinances of God, on the Sabbath-day, let us take\nheed that this necessity be not brought on us by some sin committed,\nwhich gives occasion to the judicial hand of God; and that province,\nwhich renders it necessary for us to absent from them, should be rather\nsubmitted to, than matter of choice or delight.\n\n[3.] If necessity obliges us to engage in secular employments on the\nLord\u2019s day, as in the instances of those whose business it is to provide\nphysic for the sick, let us, nevertheless, labour after a spiritual\nframe, becoming the holiness of that day, so far as may consist with\nwhat we are immediately called to do.\n\n[4.] As we ought to see that the work we are engaged in is necessary; so\nwe must not spend more time therein than what is needful.\n\n[5.] If we have a necessary call to engage in worldly matters, whereby\nwe are detained from public ordinances, we must endeavour to satisfy\nothers, that the providence of God obliges us hereunto; that so we may\nnot give offence to them, or they take occasion, without just reason to\nfollow their own employments; which would be a sin in them.\n\nIV. We are to sanctify the Sabbath, by spending the whole day in the\npublic and private exercises of God\u2019s worship, and herein to maintain a\nbecoming holy frame of spirit, from the beginning of the day to the end\nthereof. Therefore,\n\n1. In the beginning thereof; let not too much sleep make intrenchments\non more of the morning of the day than what is needful, particularly,\nmore than what we allow ourselves before we begin our employments on\nother days. And let us begin the day with spiritual meditations, and\ncarefully watch against worldly thoughts, as what will give us great\ninterruption and hinderance in the work thereof. And let us be earnest\nwith God in prayer, that he would prepare our hearts for the solemn\nduties we are to engage in; let us consider the Sabbath as a very great\ntalent that we are entrusted with; and that it is of the greatest\nimportance for us to improve it, to the glory of God and our spiritual\nadvantage.\n\n2. While we are engaged in holy duties, especially in the public\nordinances of God\u2019s worship, let us endeavour to maintain a becoming\nreverence, and filial fear of God, in whose presence we are, and a\nlove to his holy institutions, which are instamped with his authority.\nLet us moreover watch and strive against the first motions and\nsuggestions of Satan, and our corrupt hearts, endeavouring to divert\nus from, or disturb us in holy duties. And let us often lift up our\nhearts to God, by spiritual, short ejaculatory prayers, for help from\nhim, to enable us to improve the word, and, at the same time,\nendeavour to our utmost, to affect our hearts with a sense of the\ngreat worth of gospel-opportunities. Let us also cherish, improve, and\nbless God for all the influences of his Holy Spirit, which he is\npleased, at any time, to grant to us; or bewail and lament the want\nthereof, when they are withheld.\n\n3. In the intervals between our attendance on the ordinances of God\u2019s\npublic worship, we are to engage in private duties, and worship God in,\nand with our families; and in order hereunto, call to mind what we have\nheard, impress it on our own souls, recommend it to those whom we\nconverse with, and are concerned for; and take heed that we do nothing,\nbetween one public ordinance and another, which may unfit us for the\nremaining duties of the day; but, on the other hand, strive against, and\ngive a check to the least motions thereof in our own souls.\n\n4. The Sabbath is to be sanctified in the evening thereof, when the\npublic ordinances are over; at which time we are to call to mind what we\nhave received from God, with thankfulness, and how we have behaved\nourselves in all the parts of divine worship, in which we have been\nengaged. Let us enquire, whether the Sabbath was welcome to us, and we\nrejoiced in it as a blessing, as well as set about the observing of it\nas a duty? as the Psalmist says, \u2018I was glad when they said unto me, Let\nus go into the house of the Lord,\u2019 Psal. cxxii. 1. Moreover, let us\nenquire, whether our ends were right in all the duties we performed?\nwhether the glory of God, and the good of our own souls, has been our\ngreat concern? Or, whether we have been only influenced by custom, and\nrested in a form of godliness, without regarding the power thereof, and\nloved the opinion and praise of men more than of God? Let us enquire,\nwhether our minds, our affections and outward gestures have been grave,\nsedate, and composed, and we ready to receive whatever God has been\npleased to impart in his word? and whether we have had a due sense of\nthe divine perfections impressed on our spirits, and of the infinite\ndistance there is between the great God and us? whether we have seen our\nneed of the word, as Job says, that he _esteemed the words of God\u2019s\nmouth more than his necessary food_? Job xxiii. 12. and, whether we have\nnot only attended to, but applied every truth to our own souls, as\ndesiring to retain, improve, and make it the rule of our conversation?\n\nWe are also to consider, what we have received from God under his\nordinances; whether we have had any sensible communion with him, any\nexperiences of his love, or impressions of his power on our hearts?\nwhether we have had fellowship with the Father, and with his Son Jesus\nChrist? whether, as we have gone from one ordinance to another, we have\ngone from strength to strength, our faith being more lively, our love to\nGod increased, and our spiritual joy enlarged by every duty? Let us\nenquire, whether, we have learned some doctrine from the word, which we\nunderstood not, or, at least, have been more confirmed therein, after\nsome degree of wavering, or have been affected with some truth which we\nnever saw such a beauty and glory in before? whether we have been melted\nunder the word; if it has been, as the prophet speaks, _like fire_; or,\nas _the hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces_, Jer. xxiii. 29. or, as\nthe disciples say one to another, _Did not our heart burn within us\nwhile he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the\nscriptures?_ Luke xxiv. 32.\n\nAnd we may comfortably conclude, that we have received good under the\nordinances, if we have been brought into an holy and lively frame of\nspirit; and the more we attend to them, the more our hearts are drawn\nforth to desire and delight in them; and especially when public duties\nfit us for private, and from the advantage that we receive from such\nopportunities, we are more disposed to walk with God in all the affairs\nand businesses of life, so that our whole conversation in this world,\nreceives a tincture from the benefit which we gain by that communion\nwhich we enjoy with God in his ordinances on his own day.\n\nThus we are to take a view of our behaviour when engaged in public\nworship; and if we have received any spiritual advantage, the glory\nthereof is to be given to God. But if, on the other hand, upon a strict\nand impartial enquiry into the frame of our spirits under the\nordinances, we have, as it too often happens, reason to complain of our\ndeadness and stupidity under them; if we have not experienced that\nsensible communion with God, which we have at other times enjoyed, or\nhave reason to say, that we wax worse, rather than better, under them;\nlet us dread the consequence hereof, lest this should issue in a\njudicial hardness of heart, and habitual unprofitableness, under the\nmeans of grace. We ought, in this case, to search out, and be humbled\nbefore God, for that secret sin, which is as a root of bitterness which\nsprings up within us, and troubles us; and be still pressing after that\nspecial presence of God in his ordinances, that will have a tendency to\npromote the life and power of religion in our souls.\n\nAnd to this we may add; that besides our dealing thus with ourselves in\nour private retirements, after having attended on public worship, we are\nto endeavour to sanctify the Sabbath in our families, in the evening\nthereof. Family-worship is to be neglected no day; but on the Sabbath,\nit is to be engaged in with a particular relation to the duties which we\nhave been performing in public; accordingly it is mentioned in one of\nthe answers we are explaining, that the charge of keeping the Sabbath is\ndirected to the governors of families, and other superiors; inasmuch as\nthey are bound, not only to keep it themselves, but to see that it be\nobserved by all those who are under their charge, and not to hinder\nthem, as many are prone to do, by employing them in those works which\nare foreign to the duties of the day. Masters of families are not only\nto restrain immoralities in those who are under their care, on the\nSabbath-day, but to lay their commands on them, to engage with them in\nthe worship of God therein, as they expect a blessing from him on their\nundertakings. Thus Joshua resolves, that _he and his house would serve\nthe Lord_, Josh. xxiv. 15. and God speaks to the honour of Abraham, when\nhe says, _I know him that he will command his children and his household\nafter him; and they shall keep the way of the Lord_, Gen. xviii. 19.\nSuperiors have no power to dispense with any of God\u2019s commandments, to\ndisengage those who are under them, from yielding obedience thereunto.\nBut, on the other hand, they are obliged to see that all, under their\ncare, perform their duty to God, as well as to them, and, particularly,\nthat of sanctifying the Sabbath. Therefore they are to restrain them\nfrom taking their own diversions, or finding their own pleasure in\nsinful recreations on the Lord\u2019s day; and impress on them those suitable\nexhortations, that may have a tendency to promote religion in their\nfamilies; by which means they may hope for a peculiar blessing from God,\nin every relation and condition of life.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXIX., CXX., CXXI.\n\n\n QUEST. CXIX. _What are the sins forbidden in the fourth\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sins forbidden in the fourth Commandment, are, all\n omissions of the duties required, all careless, negligent, and\n unprofitable performing of them, and being weary of them, all\n profaning the day by idleness, and doing that which is in itself\n sinful, and by all needless works, words, and thoughts about worldly\n employments and recreations.\n\n QUEST. CXX. _What are the reasons annexed to the fourth Commandment\n the more to enforce it?_\n\n ANSW. The reasons annexed to the fourth Commandment, the more to\n enforce it, are taken from the equity of it, God allowing us six\n days of seven for our own affairs, and reserving but one for\n himself, in these words, [_Six days shalt thou labour, and do all\n thy work_,] from God\u2019s challenging a special propriety in that day,\n [_The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God_] from the\n example of God, who, _in six days made heaven and earth, the sea,\n and all that in them is and rested the seventh day_; and from that\n blessing which God put upon that day, not only in sanctifying it to\n be a day for his service, but in ordaining it to be a means of\n blessing to us in our sanctifying it; [_wherefore the Lord blessed\n the Sabbath-day and hallowed it_.]\n\n QUEST. CXXI. _Why is the word_ Remember _set in the beginning of the\n fourth Commandment_?\n\n ANSW. The word _Remember_ is set in the beginning of the fourth\n Commandment, partly because of the great benefit of remembering it;\n we being thereby helped, in our preparation, to keep it; and in\n keeping it better, to keep all the rest of the commandments, and to\n continue a thankful remembrance of the two great benefits of\n creation, and redemption, which contain a short abridgment of\n religion; and partly because we are very ready to forget it; for\n that there is less light of nature for it, and yet it restraineth\n our natural liberty in things at other times lawful; that it cometh\n but once in seven days, and many worldly businesses come between,\n and too often take off our minds from thinking of it, either to\n prepare for it, or to sanctify it; and that Satan, with his\n instruments much labour to blot out the glory, and even the memory\n of it, to bring in all irreligion and impiety.\n\nThe method in which we shall proceed, in speaking to these answers,\nshall be,\n\nI. To consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment; and these are,\n\n1. The omission of the duties required. Sins of omission are exceeding\nprejudicial; because, though they have a tendency to harden the heart,\nand stupify the conscience; yet they are, of all others, least regarded.\nAs for the omission of holy duties, on the Sabbath-day; this is a\nslighting and casting away a great prize, put into our hands; and\ntherefore, in such a case, it will be said, _Wherefore is there a price_\nput into _the hands of a fool to get wisdom, seeing he hath no heart to\nit_, Prov. xvi. 16. It may be also observed, that this is generally\nattended with the neglect of secret duties, and is an in-let to all\nmanner of sins, and to a total apostasy from God.\n\n2. The next thing forbidden in this Commandment is, the careless\nperformance of holy duties; that is, when our hearts are not engaged in\nthem, or we content ourselves with a form of godliness, denying the\npower thereof, have no sense of God\u2019s all-seeing eye, or dread of\nspiritual judgments, or being given up to barrenness and\nunprofitableness, under the means of grace. Such a frame of spirit as\nthis, is always attended with a declining state of religion; especially\nif we do not lament and strive against it.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that we greatly sin, when we profane the day by\nidleness; and that either by sleeping away a great part of the morning\nof the day, as though it were a day of sloth, and not of spiritual rest,\ndesigned for religious exercises; or drowsiness under the ordinances, as\nthough we had no concern in them; whereby we give all about us to\nunderstand, that we do, as it were, withdraw our thoughts from the work,\nwhich we pretend to be engaged in. In some, indeed, this proceeds very\nmuch from the weakness of their natural constitution. Such may be heavy\nand weary in duty, though they, are not weary of it; and this is what\nthey lament, and are far from giving way to; though they are, sometimes,\nunavoidably overtaken with it. In this case, though it cannot be excused\nfrom being a sin; yet it is such, as, it is to be hoped, our Saviour\nwill cover, with the mantle of his love, or, at least, not charge upon\nthem for their condemnation; though he may reprove them for it, to bring\nthem under conviction. Thus he dealt with his disciples, when he _came\nto them, and found them asleep_, Matt. xxvi. 40, 41. and though he\ntacitly reproves them, yet he does not infer from hence, that they were\nwholly destitute of faith; but charges their unbecoming carriage\ntherein, on the weakness of faith, being impowered by the infirmities of\nnature, when he says, _The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is\nweak_.\n\nThere are other sins forbidden in the fourth Commandment, that are\nparticularly mentioned in this answer, which have been occasionally\ninsisted on, in considering how the Sabbath is to be sanctified; in\nwhich we have shewn, that, as we are not to do that which is in itself\nsinful, so we are to abstain from our worldly employments and\nrecreations, and endeavour to fence against that vanity of thoughts,\nwhich will have a tendency to alienate our affections from God, or\nhinder the success of ordinances; and therefore we pass them over at\npresent, and proceed to consider,\n\nII. The reasons annexed to this Commandment. And,\n\n1. It is highly reasonable that we should sanctify the Lord\u2019s day, since\nhe is pleased to allow us six days out of seven, for the attending to\nour worldly affairs, and reserves but one to himself. This supposes that\nwe are allowed to engage in our secular callings on other days: and\ntherefore, though it be brought in occasionally, in this commandment, it\nis a duty belonging to the second table rather than the first;\nparticularly, it seems to be a branch of the eighth Commandment;\nhowever, it is alleged as a reason of our observing this Commandment. It\nis a very large allowance that God has made, of six days in seven, for\nour own employments. If, on the other hand, he had allowed us but one\nday in seven for them, and laid claim to six days, to be set apart for\nreligious worship, none would have had reason to complain, since he,\nbeing the absolute Lord of our time, may demand what proportion of it he\npleases; and they who are truly sensible of the real advantage that\nthere is in the attendance on all God\u2019s holy institutions, and consider\nthe Sabbath as a privilege and blessing, would not only think it\nreasonable, but a great instance of the kindness of God to man, had this\nearth so much resembled heaven, that there should be a perpetual Sabbath\ncelebrated here, as there is there, where the saints count it their\nhappiness to be engaged without interruption, in the immediate service\nof God.\n\n_Obj._ It is objected, by some, that they cannot spare a seventh part of\ntime for religious duties, out of their worldly business; and that it is\nvery hard for them to get bread for their families, by all their\ndiligence and industry. Others allege, that the Sabbath is their\nmarket-day, wherein, by selling things, they get more than they do on\nother days.\n\n_Answ._ 1. As to the former part of the objection, taken from the\ndifficulty of persons subsisting their families, it may be replied; that\nGod is able to made up the loss of the seventh part of time, so that\ntheir not working therein, shall not be a real detriment, to those who\nare in the fewest circumstances in the world, God has ordered it so,\nthat our observing his holy institutions, shall not, in the end, prove\ndetrimental to us. Thus when Israel was commanded to rest, and not to\ncultivate their land for an whole year together, every seventh year,\nprovidence so ordered it, that they were not sufferers thereby, inasmuch\nas the year before brought forth enough for three years, Lev. xxv.\n20-22. and when they were not to gather manna on the seventh day of the\nweek, there was a double quantity rained upon them, which they gathered\nthe day before, Exod. xvi. 22-24. Therefore, why may we not conclude,\nthat, by the blessing of God, what is lost by our not attending to our\nsecular callings on the Lord\u2019s day, may be abundantly made up, by his\nblessing succeeding our endeavours on other days.\n\nAs to that part of the objection, in which it is pretended that the\nLord\u2019s day is their market-day, in which they expect more advantage than\non other days; it may be replied, that if this is true, it arises from\nthe iniquity of the times; and it should be a caution to us, not to\nencourage those who expose their wares to sale on the Sabbath-day; since\nif there were no buyers, there would be no sellers; and this public and\nnotorious sin would be hereby prevented. We have a noble instance of\nthis in Nehemiah, whose wisdom, zeal, and holy resolution, put an\neffectual stop to this practice, in his dealing with those who _sold\nfish on the Sabbath-day_, Neh. xiii. 16-21. First, he _shut the gates of\nthe city against them_; and when he saw that they continued without the\nwalls, hoping, by some means or other, to get into the city, or to\nentice some to come out to buy their merchandize; then he _testified\nagainst them_, and commanded them not to continue without the walls, and\nby this means, gave a check to that scandalous practice. Moreover, this\ngain of iniquity is not to be pretended as a just excuse for the breach\nof a positive commandment; since, what is gotten in a way of\npresumptuous rebellion against God, it is not like to prosper, whatever\npretence of poverty may be alleged, to give countenance thereunto.\n\n2. Another reason annexed to enforce our observation of the Sabbath-day,\nis taken from God\u2019s challenging a special propriety in it. Thus it is\ncalled the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; a day which he has consecrated,\nor separated to himself, and so lays claim to it. Therefore it is no\nless than sacrilege, or a robbing of him, to employ it in any thing but\nwhat he requires to be done therein.\n\n3. God sets his own example before us for our imitation therein. Thus it\nis said, _In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the\nseventh day, and hallowed it_. It is observed, that God was six days in\nmaking the world; whereas, had he pleased, he could have created all\nthings with the same beauty and perfection in which they are at present,\nin an instant; but he performed this work by degrees, that he might\nteach us, that whatever our hand finds to do, we should do it in the\nproper season allotted for it; and as he ceased from his work on the\nseventh day, he requires that we should rest from ours, in conformity to\nhis own example.\n\n4. The last reason assigned for our sanctifying the Sabbath, is taking\nfrom God\u2019s blessing and sanctifying it, or setting it apart for an holy\nuse. To bless a day, is to give it to us as a particular blessing and\nprivilege. Accordingly we ought to reckon the Sabbath as a great\ninstance of God\u2019s care and compassion to men, and a very great\nprivilege, which ought to be highly esteemed by them. Again, for God to\nsanctify a day, is to set it apart from a common, to an holy use; and\nthus we ought to reckon the Sabbath as a day signalized above all\nothers, with the character of God\u2019s holy day; and as such, it is to be\nemployed by us in holy exercises, answerable to the end for which it was\ninstituted.\n\nIII. It is observed in the last answer we are explaining, that the word\n_Remember_ is set in the beginning of the fourth Commandment; from\nwhence we may observe, our great proneness, through worldly business,\nand Satan\u2019s temptations, to forget the Sabbath. We may also learn from\nhence, the importance of our observing it; without which, irreligion and\nprofaneness would never universally abound in the world; and, on the\nother hand, in our observing this day as we ought to do, we may hope for\ngrace from God, whereby we may be enabled to keep his other\ncommandments. Again, the word _Remember_, prefixed to this Commandment,\nnot only imports that we are to call to mind, that this particular day\nwhich God has sanctified, is a Sabbath, or to know what day it is, in\nthe order of the days of the week; but we ought to endeavour to have a\nframe of spirit becoming the holiness of the day, or, to remember it, so\nas to keep it holy. It is certain, that it is an hard matter, through\nthe corruption of nature, to get our hearts disengaged from the vain\namusements and entanglements of this present world; by which means we\nlose the advantage that would redound to us, by our conversing with God\nin holy duties. Therefore we are to desire of him, that he would impress\non our souls a sense of our obligation to duty, and of the advantage\nwhich we may hope to gain from it. And to induce us hereunto, let it be\nconsidered,\n\n1. That the profanation of the Sabbath is generally the first step to\nall manner of wickedness, and a making great advances to a total\napostasy from God.\n\n2. The observing of it is reckoned as a sign between God and his people.\nIt is, with respect to him, a sign of his favour; and with respect to\nman, it is a sign of their subjection to God, as their King and\nLawgiver, in all his holy appointments.\n\n3. We cannot reasonably expect, that God should bless us in what we\nundertake, on other days, if we neglect to own him, on his day, or to\ndevote ourselves to him, and thereby discover our preferring him, and\nthe affairs of his worship, before all things in the world.\n\nFrom what has been said in explaining this Commandment, we may infer,\n\n(1.) That, this may serve to confute those who think that the\nobservation of days, in general, or, that the keeping the first day of\nthe week as a Sabbath, is a setting up the ceremonial law, without\ndistinguishing a right between a ceremonial and a moral precept. For,\nhow much soever the observation of the seventh day, might have a\nceremonial signification annexed to it, as it was given to Israel, from\nmount Sinai, it is possible for the typical reference thereof, to cease;\nand yet the moral reason of the Commandment remain in force to us, as it\nis a day appointed by God, in which he is to be worshipped, so that we\nmay have ground to expect his presence, and blessing, while attending on\nhim in his holy institutions.\n\n(2.) Others are to blame, who think that every day is to be kept as a\nSabbath, pretending that this is most agreeable to a state of\nperfection. But this is contrary to God\u2019s allowing us six days for our\nown employment; and, indeed, none, who make use of this argument, do, in\nreality, keep any day as a Sabbath, at least, in such a way as they\nought.\n\n(3.) Others are guilty of a great error, who think that the Sabbath is,\nindeed, to be observed; but there is no need of that strictness which\nhas been inculcated; or, that it should be kept holy, from the beginning\nto the end thereof. Some suppose, that the only design of God in\ninstituting it was, that public worship should be maintained in the\nworld; and therefore, that it is sufficient if they attend on it,\nwithout endeavouring to converse with him in secret.\n\n(4.) What has been said, is directly contrary to their opinion, who\nthink that the Lord\u2019s day was a mere human institution; without\nconsidering, as has been hinted, that what the apostles prescribed,\nrelating thereunto, was by divine direction; which opinion, if it should\nprevail, would open a door to great carelessness and formality in holy\nduties, and would be an inducement to us to profane the day in various\ninstances.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXXII.\n\n\n QUEST. CXXII. _What is the sum of the six Commandments, which\n contain our duty to man?_\n\n ANSW. The sum of the six Commandments, which contain our duty to\n man, is to love our neighbour as ourselves, and to do to others what\n we would have them do to us.\n\nAs the first table of the ten Commandments respects our duty to God, the\nother contains our duty to our neighbor; which is comprized in the\ngeneral idea of _love_. This is therefore styled the sum of the\nfollowing six Commandments; and it is included in our Saviour\u2019s words;\n_Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself_, Matt. xxii. 39. and\nelsewhere, _Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so\nto them_, chap. vii. 12. Here it may be observed,\n\nI. That we are commanded to love our neighbour as ourselves. This\nimplies in it,\n\n1. A caution against a selfish temper; as though we were born only for,\nor were obliged to do good to none but ourselves. This is what the\napostle reproves, when he says, _Men shall be lovers of their\nownselves_, 2 Tim. iii. 2. that is, they shall study and consult the\nhappiness, ease, and comfort of none but themselves.\n\n2. It farther implies in it, our using endeavours to promote the good of\nall, whom we converse with; and thereby rendering ourselves a blessing\nto mankind. It does not, indeed, exclude self-love, which it supposes to\nbe a duty; but obliges us to love others as well as ourselves, in things\nthat relate to their spiritual and temporal good. This leads us to\nenquire,\n\n(1.) Whether we ought to love others better than ourselves; or what the\napostle intends, when he says, _Let each esteem other better than\nthemselves_? Phil. ii. 3.\n\n_Answ._ [1.] It cannot be hereby intended, that they, who have attained\na great measure of the knowledge of the truths of God, should reckon\nthemselves as ignorant of, or unstable in, the doctrines of the gospel,\nas those who never made them the subject of their study and enquiry;\nnor, that they, who have had large experience of the grace of God,\nshould conclude that they have no more experience thereof than those who\nare unregenerate, and have not taken one step heavenward. But,\n\n[2.] The meaning is, that the greatest saint should not think himself\nbetter than the least, any otherwise than as he has received more from\nthe discriminating grace of God; as the apostle says, _Who maketh thee\nto differ from another; and what hast thou, that thou didst not\nreceive?_ 1 Cor. iv. 7. And, indeed, such an one may see more sin in\nhimself than he can see in any other; and therefore, may have reason to\nreckon himself, as the apostle speaks, _the chief of sinners_, 1 Tim. i.\n15.\n\n[3.] The best saints would have been as bad as the vilest of men, had\nthey been left to themselves; and it may be, some of them who have had\nless grace, have had fewer talents, and opportunities of grace, than\nthey have had; which they have improved better, in proportion to what\nthey have received, than they have, the many advantages which God has\nbeen pleased to bestow on them.\n\n(1.) Our next enquiry may be, whether our love to our neighbour should\nextend so far, as that we should be willing, were it needful, to lay\ndown our lives for them; as it is said, in 1 John iii. 16. _We ought to\nlay down our lives for the brethren_; and in Rom. v. 7. _Peradventure,\nfor a good man some would even dare to die._\n\n_Answ._ [1.] By _laying down_ our _lives_ in these scriptures, is\nprincipally intended hazarding our lives, or exposing ourselves to the\nutmost danger, even of death itself, for others. But,\n\n[2.] We are not to do this rashly, and at all times; but when God, who\nis the sovereign Lord of our lives, calls us to it. And,\n\n[3.] This ought not to be for every one, but for the _brethren_,\nespecially for those who are more eminently useful in the church of God\nthan ourselves or others. Accordingly the apostle says, _for a good\nman_; that is, one who is a common good, or a blessing to many others,\n_one would even dare to die_.\n\n[4.] This must be, at such times, when in exposing ourselves for the\nsake of others, we give our testimony to the gospel; and, in defending\nthem, plead the injured cause of Christ and religion.\n\nII. This loving our neighbour as ourselves is farther illustrated in\nthis answer, by doing to others what we would have them to do us. This\nis one of the most undeniable, and self-evident truths contained in the\nlaw of nature. So that whatever disputable matters there may be, as to\nwhat respects other duties, this is allowed of by all mankind. Many,\nindeed, do not conform their practice to this rule; which gives occasion\nto the injuries done between man and man. However the vilest of men,\nwhen they deliberate on their own actions, cannot but blame themselves\nfor acting contrary thereunto. Thus Saul did, when he said unto David,\n_Thou art more righteous than I; for thou hast rewarded me good; whereas\nI have rewarded thee evil_, 1 Sam. xxiv. 17. Therefore we conclude, that\nit is one of the first principles of the law of nature; and may well be\ncalled, as it is in this answer, the sum of the Commandments of the\nsecond table, or that, to which they are all reduced. There are two\nthings, which we shall lay down, relating to this golden rule, of doing\nto others as we would that they should do to us.\n\n1. It is miserably neglected by a great part of the world; as,\n\n(1.) By them who turn away their hearts from the afflicted; so as not to\npity, help, or endeavour to comfort them in their distress. The Psalmist\nwas of another mind, when he says, _As for me, when they were sick, my\nclothing was sackcloth. I humbled my soul with fasting, and my prayer\nreturned into mine own bosom. I behaved myself as though he had been my\nfriend or brother. I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his\nmother_, Psal. xxxv. 13,-15.\n\n(2.) They who deny to others those natural, civil, or religious\nliberties, which, by God\u2019s appointment, they have a right to, or envy\nthem the possession thereof, may be said to neglect this golden rule.\n\n2. We are farther to enquire, how this rule, of doing to others what we\nwould have them do to us, may be of use, in order to our right observing\nthe Commandments of the second table?\n\n_Answ._ The fifth Commandment, which requires the performance of all\nrelative duties, would be better observed, did superiors put themselves\nin the place of inferiors, and consider what they would then expect from\nthem; and the same they ought to do to them. Again, the sixth, seventh,\nand eight Commandments, that respect the life, honour, or wealth of\nothers; if these are dear to us, ought we not to consider, that they are\nso to others; and if we would not be deprived of them ourselves, how\nunreasonable is it for us to do any thing that may tend to deprive\nothers of them? Again, if, according to the ninth Commandment, our good\nname be so valuable, that we ought to maintain it, should not this rule\nbe observed by defamers, slanderers, and backbiters, who do that to\nothers which they would not have done to themselves? And the tenth\nCommandment, which forbids our uneasiness at, or being discontented\nwith, the good of others, or endeavouring to supplant, or divest them of\nthe possession of what God has given them in this world. This cannot be\ndone by any one who duly considers, how unwilling they would be to have\nwhat they possess taken away, to satisfy the covetousness, or lust, of\nothers.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXXIII., CXXIV., CXXV., CXXVI., CXXVII., CXXVIII.\n\n\n QUEST. CXXIII. _Which is the fifth Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The fifth Commandment is, _Honour thy father and thy mother,\n that thy days may be long upon the land, which the Lord thy God\n giveth thee_.\n\n QUEST. CXXIV. _Who are meant by father, and mother, in the fifth\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. By father and mother, in the fifth Commandment, are meant not\n only natural parents; but all the superiors in age, and gifts, and\n especially such as by GOD\u2019s ordinance, are over us in place of\n authority, whether in family, church, or common-wealth.\n\n QUEST. CXXV. _Why are superiors styled, father and mother?_\n\n ANSW. Superiors are styled father and mother, both to teach them in\n all duties towards their inferiors, like natural parents, to express\n love and tenderness to them, according to their several relations,\n and to work inferiors to a greater willingness and cheerfulness in\n performing their duties to their superiors, as to their parents.\n\n QUEST. CXXVI. _What is the general scope of the fifth Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The general scope of the fifth Commandment, is, the\n performance of those duties which we mutually owe in our several\n relations, as inferiors, superiors, or equals.\n\n QUEST. CXXVII. _What is the honour that inferiors owe to their\n superiors?_\n\n ANSW. The honour which inferiors owe to their superiors, is, all due\n reverence, in heart, word, and behaviour; prayer, and thanksgiving\n for them, imitation of their virtues and graces; willing obedience\n to their lawful commands, and counsels, due submission to their\n corrections, fidelity to, defence, and maintenance of their persons\n and authority, according to their several ranks, and the nature of\n their places; bearing with their infirmities, and covering them in\n love, that so they may be an honour to them and their government.\n\n QUEST. CXXVIII. _What are the sins of inferiors against their\n superiors?_\n\n ANSW. The sins of inferiors against their superiors, are, all\n neglect of the duties required towards them, envying at, contempt\n of, and rebellion against their persons, and places, in their lawful\n counsels, commands, and corrections, cursing, mocking, and all such\n refractory and scandalous carriage, as proves a shame and dishonour\n to them and their government.\n\nIn the fifth Commandment, no other relations are mentioned, but father\nand mother; yet it may be observed,\n\nI. That, hereby, all superiors in general are intended; as many others\nare called _fathers_ in scripture, besides our natural parents, _viz._\n\n1. Superiors in age. Thus it is said, _Rebuke not an elder, but intreat\nhim as a father, and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as\nmothers, the younger as sisters, with all purity_, 1 Tim. v. 1, 2.\n\n2. They, are also called _fathers_, who are superior in gifts; and\naccordingly have been the first inventors of arts, which have been\nuseful to the world. Thus Jabal is said to be _the father of such as\ndwell in tents, and have cattle_, Gen. iv. 20. that is, the first that\nmade considerable improvements in the art of husbandry; and Jubal is\nsaid to be _the father_, that is, the instructor _of all such as handle\nthe harp and organ_, ver. 21. or the first that made improvements in the\nart of music.\n\n3. Persons to whom we owe, under God, our outward prosperity and\nhappiness. In this sense Joseph, though a subject, a young man, and a\nlittle before, a prisoner, is called _a father to Pharaoh_, chap. xlv.\n8. as he was an instrument to support his greatness, and preserve him\nfrom the inconveniences of a seven years famine.\n\n4. Princes, great men, and heads of families, are called _fathers_. Thus\nNaaman was by his servants, 2 Kings v. 13.\n\n5. Men of honour and usefulness in the church are so called. Thus when\nElisha saw Elijah ascend into heaven, he cries out, _My father, my\nfather, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof_, chap. ii. 12.\nAnd Joash, the king of Israel, used the same expression to Elisha, _when\nfallen sick_, chap. xiii. 14. And this is implied in the apostle\u2019s\nstyling those whom he had been of use to, for their conviction, and\nenlightening in the doctrines of the gospel, _My little children_, Gal.\niv. 19.\n\n6. Good kings and governors are called _fathers_. Thus it is said,\n_Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and queens thy nursing mothers_,\nIsa. xlix. 23.\n\nII. We have an account, in one of the answers we are explaining, of the\nreason why superiors are styled father and mother; namely, to denote,\nthat they should behave towards their inferiors, with that love and\ntenderness, as though they were natural parents. Authority is not only\nconsistent herewith, but it ought to be exercised, by superiors towards\ninferiors, in such a way. Thus Job, when in his prosperity, was, as it\nwere, a common father to all that were under him; accordingly he says,\n_I delivered the poor that cried, and the fatherless, and him that had\nnone to help him_, Job xxix. 12. upon which occasion he says, _I was a\nfather to the poor_, ver. 16. And ministers, who, in some respects, are\nsuperior in office to others; when their reproofs are mixed with\ntenderness and compassion towards the souls of men under their care, are\ncompared to the nurse that _cherished her children_; as _being\naffectionately desirous_, and _willing to impart to them, not the gospel\nof God only, but also their own souls, as being dear to them_, 1 Thess.\nii. 7, 8.\n\nIII. We have, in another of the answers under our consideration, an\naccount of the general scope of the fifth Commandment; and, as it\nrequires the duties to be performed by every one in their several\nrelations; these are considered either as superiors, inferiors, or\nequals. There are several sorts of relations wherein persons are styled\nsuperior or inferior to one another.\n\n1. Such as are founded in nature; as that of parents and children.\n\n2. There are such relations as are political, designed for the good of\nmankind, living together as members of the same common-wealth, in which\nevery one has a right to his civil liberties, which are to be enjoyed by\none, and defended by the other; of this sort is the relation of\nmagistrates and subjects.\n\n3. There is a relation founded in mutual compact and agreement,\nrespecting things to be done, on the one side, and gratifications to be\nallowed, on the other; of this kind is the relation between master and\nservant. The only difficulty that arises from the account we have of the\nobligation of persons to give honour to others, respects superiors\nhonouring inferiors. For the understanding of which, let it be\nconsidered,\n\n(1.) That superiors are not obliged to shew the same marks of honour to\ntheir inferiors, as inferiors are bound, by the laws of God and nature,\nto express to them. Nevertheless,\n\n(2.) There is a duty which the greatest owe to the least; and there is\nalso a degree of honour, which the lowest of men, as reasonable\ncreatures, or Christians, have put upon them by God; and this is to be\nregarded by those who are, as to their condition in the world, superior\nto them.\n\n(3.) The meanest and lowest part of mankind, are, in many respects,\nnecessary and useful to those who are much their superiors; and are to\nbe regarded by them in proportion thereto. And the performing the duties\nwhich such owe to them, is called an honouring them.\n\nIV. We have, in another of the answers we are explaining, an account of\nthe honour which inferiors owe to their superiors. Here it will be\nnecessary for us to premise some things concerning the measure of\nsubmission and obedience which inferiors owe to superiors, of what kind\nsoever the relation be. As,\n\n1. When the authority God has invested superiors with, is abused, and\nthe highest end of all sort of government, to wit, the glory of God, and\nthe good of mankind, can never be attained, nor is, indeed, designed; or\nwhen the commands of superiors contradict the commands of God, we are to\nobey him rather than men, Acts iv. 19.\n\n2. If we cannot obey the commands of superiors, as being unjust, we must\npray that God would interpose, direct, and over-rule their authority,\nthat it may not be abused by them; or become a snare, or an occasion of\nsin, to us.\n\n3. Though we cannot yield obedience to them, in those things that are\ncontrary to the laws of God, this does not discharge us from our\nobligation to obey their commands, in other things, agreeable thereunto;\nsince we are not to suppose that the abuse of their authority in some\ninstances, divests them of it in all respects.\n\nV. We shall now proceed to consider the duties which inferiors owe to\ntheir superiors. And,\n\n1. That of children to parents. This is founded on the law of nature, as\nunder God, they derive their being from them; and they are obliged\nthereunto, from a sense of gratitude for that love, tenderness, and\ncompassion which they have shewn to them. Therefore the apostle says,\nthat _this is right_, Eph. vi. 1. that is, equitable, and highly\nreasonable; and elsewhere, that it is _well-pleasing unto the Lord_,\nCol. iii. 20. This duty includes in it several things.\n\n(1.) They are sometimes to shew the regard they have to them by outward\ntokens of respect. Thus Solomon, though his character, as a king,\nrendered him superior to all his subjects; yet he expressed a great deal\nof honour by outward gestures to his mother; when she went to him to\nspeak in the behalf of Adonijah: it is said, that \u2018the king rose up to\nmeet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his throne, and\ncaused a seat to be set for the king\u2019s mother; and she sat on his right\nhand,\u2019 1 Kings ii. 19.\n\n(2.) They ought to be ready to do them any acts of service, which are\nnot unlawful or impossible, when commanded by them. Thus Joseph obeyed\nJacob, when he sent him to see where his brethren were, and what they\nwere engaged in, Gen. xxxvii. 13. and David obeyed Jesse, when he sent\nhim to his brethren to the camp of Israel, 1 Sam. xvii. 17, 20. This\nservice is required more especially of them, while they live with their\nparents, are maintained by them, and not, by mutual compact, become\nservants to others.\n\n(3.) Another duty which they owe, is, patient submission to their just\nreproofs, design for their good. Thus the apostle says, \u2018We have had\nfathers of our flesh, which corrected us; and we gave them reverence,\u2019\nHeb. xii. 9.\n\n(4.) They are to attend to, and comply with, their wholesome advice and\ninstruction. Thus it is said, _A wise son heareth his father\u2019s\ninstruction_, Prov. xiii. 1. and, on the other hand, he is branded with\nthe character of a _fool_ who _despiseth it_, chap. xv. 5. and it is\nfarther added, _He that regardeth reproof is prudent_.\n\n(5.) Children are to express their duty to their parents, by a thankful\nacknowledgment of past favours; and accordingly ought to relieve them,\nif they are able, when their indigent circumstances call for it; and\nendeavour to be a staff, comfort, and support to them, in their old age.\nThis is contained in the message which Joseph sent to Jacob, when he\ninvited him to come down to him into Egypt, Gen. xlv. 9,-11. So when\nRuth bare a son to Boaz, her mother Naomi\u2019s companions blessed her, and\nsaid, _He shall be unto thee a restorer of thy life, and a nourisher of\nthine old age_, Ruth iv. 15.\n\n(6.) Children are to pay deference to, and, so far as it concerns the\nglory of God, and their own future good, be advised, by their parents,\nin disposing of themselves in marriage, or any other important change of\ntheir condition and circumstances in the world. Herein they acknowledge\ntheir authority as superiors, and the care and concern which it is\nsupposed they naturally have for their welfare, as a part of themselves.\nMoreover, by this they pay a deference to their wisdom and judgment, as\nbeing superior in age, and probably, in wisdom, as well as relation. And\nthis ought to be done out of a sense of gratitude for past favours\nreceived; and prudence will, for the most part, dictate as much,\nespecially when they depend on them for present, or expect future\nadvantages from them. This is also an expedient to maintain love and\npeace in families, which is oftentimes broken by the contrary practice.\nAnd it may be farther recommended, from the laudable examples hereof in\ngood men; as Isaac, who submitted to the direction of his father Abraham\nherein; and Jacob, Gen. xxiv. who was determined by the consent of\nLaban, chap. xxix. Many more instances might be given to the same\npurpose. And, on the other hand, Esau\u2019s contrary practice hereunto is\nrecorded in scripture, as a vile instance of disobedience; _which was a\ngrief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah_, chap. xxvi. 35. And it was,\ndoubtless, an argument that he had no regard to God or religion.\n\nNevertheless, this obligation is not without some exceptions; for,\n\n[1.] We do not speak of parents that are so far deprived of judgment,\nthat they are not fit to determine this matter; nor,\n\n[2.] Such as have divested themselves of the natural affection of\nparents, and entertaining an ungrounded prejudice against some of their\nchildren, are endeavouring to expose them to ruin, that they may shew\nmore kindness to others. These forfeit that right, which is otherwise\nfounded in nature.\n\n[3.] If parents, by refusing to comply with the desire of their\nchildren, plainly, in the judgment of the wisest of men, obstruct their\nhappiness, and the glory of God herein. Or, if they have no reason for\ntheir not complying, or the reason given is contrary to the laws of God,\nor the common sense of all impartial judges; especially if the affair\ntook its first rise from them, and afterwards they changed their mind,\nwithout sufficient ground. This, without doubt, lessens, or it may be so\ncircumstanced, that it wholly takes away the charge of sin in the child,\nin acting contrary to the will of his parents, and fastens the guilt on\nthem.\n\n[4.] The case is vastly different, when applied to children who are so\nfar from being dependent on their parents, that they depend on them.\nNevertheless, in this case, some deference and respect ought to be paid\nto them; and as it is the children\u2019s duty, it may be their interest so\nto do; since we can hardly suppose, that parents, who depend on their\nchildren, would oppose their happiness, in an affair that is apparently\ncontrary to their own interest, if they did not think that they had\nsufficient reason for it; which ought to be duly weighed, that it may be\nknown, whether their advice is expedient to be complied with, or no. And\nif in this, or any other instance, children are obliged to act contrary\nto the will of their parents; they ought to satisfy them, that it is not\nout of contempt to their authority, but a conscientious regard to the\nglory of God; and that it is conducive to their happiness, in the\nopinion of the wisest and best of men.\n\n2. We shall now consider the duty of servants to their masters. This\ndepends upon, and is limited by the contract, which first brought them\ninto that relation, the not fulfilling whereof, renders them guilty of\nunfaithfulness. And it is no less an instance of immorality, for them to\nrob them of that time, which they have engaged to serve, than it is to\ntake away any part of their estate. But more particularly,\n\n(1.) Servants ought to behave themselves, in their calling, with\nindustry, being as much concerned for their masters interest as their\nown. Thus Joseph, though a foreigner, and one who does not appear to\nhave expected any reward for his service, but a maintenance, served\nPotiphar. In the like manner Jacob served Laban, though an unjust,\nsevere and unrighteous master. This may lead us to enquire concerning\nthe duty of servants, when their masters are froward, passionate, and\nunreasonable in their demands, which renders their service very irksome\nand unpleasant; but let it be considered in this case,\n\n[1.] That, the master\u2019s passion, which is his sin, ought not to draw\nforth the corruption of his servant; for, sin indulged by one, is no\nexcuse for its being committed by another. The apostle Peter supposes\nthe case under our present consideration, and gives this advice;\n_Servants be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good\nand gentle, but also to the froward_, 1 Pet. ii. 18.\n\n[2.] If the master\u2019s demands are unreasonable, the servant must know the\nextent of his contract and obligation, which he must, in justice, fulfil\n_as unto Christ_, Eph. vi. 5,-8. And, as for those services that are\nreckoned unreasonable, and not agreeable to the contract. These, if\ndemanded, are rather to be referred to the determination of others,\nsince persons are apt to be partial in judging in their own cause.\n\nThere seems, indeed, to be an exception to this, in some instances,\nwhich we find in scripture, of the unlimited obedience of servants under\nthe ceremonial law, which was not founded in, nor the result of any\ncontract between their masters and them; accordingly we read, that\npersons became servants,\n\n_1st_, Through poverty; by reason of which, they sold themselves for the\npayment of debts. In this case there was a kind of contract, indeed; and\nthe service to be performed ought, (pursuant to the law of God and\nnature,) to have been agreeable to, and adjusted by the value of the\ndebt contracted.\n\n_2d_, Prisoners taken in war, were treated as servants, and, as such,\nsold to others. In this case, all the children that were born to them,\nduring their servitude, were the property of the master; and these are\ncalled home-born servants, who had not so much liberty allowed them as\nwhen they were servants by mutual compact, as is most common among us;\nin which case both parties are bound by this agreement.\n\n3. We proceed to consider the duty of the members of a common-wealth, or\nbody-politic, to their lawful magistrates, as the apostle says, _Let\nevery soul be subject unto the higher powers_, Rom. xiii. 1. Here we may\nobserve,\n\n(1.) The necessity and the end of civil government. This will appear, if\nwe consider mankind in general, as prone to be influenced by those\npassions, which are not entirely under the conduct of reason, and, if no\ncheck were given to them, would prove injurious to societies. We may\nalso observe, that God has, in his law, ordained certain punishments to\nbe inflicted, with a design to restrain those corruptions, and to keep\nthe world in order. And that this end may more effectually be answered,\nit is necessary, that some should be set over others, to administer\njustice, in chastising the guilty, and defending the innocent; otherwise\nthe world would be filled with confusion, and men would commit sin with\nimpunity; and more resemble brute creatures than those that are endowed\nwith reason, and as such, capable of moral government; as it is said\nwhen _there was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in\nhis own eyes_, Judges xxi. 25.\n\nWe proceed now to consider the advantage of civil government. It is in\nitself a blessing to mankind, when it does not degenerate into tyranny.\nSo that good magistrates are a great instance of divine favour to a\nnation; as the queen of Sheba said to Solomon, _Happy are thy men, and\nhappy are these thy servants which stand continually before thee, and\nhear thy wisdom. Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted in thee,\nto set thee on his throne, to be king for the Lord thy God. Because thy\nGod loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee\nking over them, to do judgment and justice_, 2 Chron. ix. 7, 8. And it\nis included among the blessings of the gospel-state, that _kings should\nbe their nursing fathers, and their queens their nursing mothers_, Isa.\nxlix. 23. Such are said, as David was, to be _raised up, to fulfil the\nwill of God_, Acts xiii. 22.\n\nNevertheless, civil government may be so administered, that it may cease\nto be a blessing to the subjects. Thus Samuel describes the miserable\nestate of a people, whose kings endeavour to establish their own\ngreatness by enslaving and plundering their subjects _taking their sons_\nand _daughters_ by force, to be their servants; seizing their _fields_,\ntheir _vineyards and olive-yards, and the tenth of their increase_;\nwhich would oblige them to _cry unto the Lord, because of their\noppression_, 1 Sam. viii. 11,-18. And we have an instance of this in\nRehoboam, who was herein as remarkable for his want of conduct, as his\nfather was for his excelling wisdom. His rough and ill-timed answer to\nhis subjects, in which gave them to expect nothing else but oppression\nand slavery, issued in the revolt of the ten tribes from his government,\n1 Kings xii. 13, 14.\n\nFrom this different method of the administration of civil government,\nwhereby it rendered either a blessing or an affliction to the subjects;\nwe may infer,\n\n[1.] That when that which is in itself a blessing, is turned into a\ncurse, this may be looked upon as a punishment inflicted by God, for the\niniquity of a people. Thus he says, _I gave thee a king in mine anger,\nand took him away in wrath_, Hosea xiii. 11.\n\n[2.] We have great reason to be well-pleased with, and to bless God for\nthe government we are under, as not being exposed to the slavery that\nsome other nations are; who have no laws, but what result from the\narbitrary will of their prince; and who can call nothing they have their\nown. This should make us prize the liberties we enjoy; and be a strong\nmotive to us to give due and cheerful obedience to our rightful and\nlawful sovereign, and all magistrates under him, who rule in\nrighteousness, and are a terror to evil doers, but a praise to them that\ndo well.\n\n[3.] This affords matter of reproof to the restless tempers of those,\nwho are under the mildest government; which is administered beyond all\nreasonable exception, our enemies themselves being judges, who would\nconfess the same, were they not blinded with prejudice; which puts them\nupon betaking themselves to railery, instead of better arguments. These\nare reproved by the apostle, who speaks of some _that walk after the\nflesh, in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous\nare they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil, even of\ndignities_, 2 Pet. ii. 10. This leads us\n\nTo consider the honour that subjects owe to their lawful magistrates.\nAccordingly,\n\n_1st_, They are highly to resent, and endeavour, in their several\nstations and capacities, to check the insolence of those who make bold\nwith the character, and take the liberty to reproach their magistrates\nin common conversation; which is directly contrary to the law of God;\nthat says, _Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought, and curse not\nthe rich in thy bed-chamber. For a bird of the air shall carry the\nvoice; and that which hath wings shall tell the matter_, Eccles. x. 20.\n\n_2dly_, We are to support the honour of government, by paying those\ntributes which are lawfully exacted. Thus the apostle says, _Render to\nall their due; tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom,\nfear to whom fear, honour to whom honour_, Rom. xiii. 7.\n\n_3dly_, We are to pray for a blessing from God, on the administration of\nour civil governors, that it may be under the divine direction, and tend\nto answer the great ends of government, viz. the glory of God, and the\nwelfare of the subject. And here I cannot but observe, that no one on\nearth has a power of discharging subjects from their obedience to their\nlawful governors, who endeavour to rule them according to the laws of\nGod and nature, and those fundamental constitutions that are agreeable\nthereto. Therefore it is a most detestable position advanced by the\nPapists, that the pope has a power to excommunicate and depose sovereign\nprinces; though it does not appear that he has received any such\nauthority from Christ, but herein intermeddles with a province that does\nnot belong to him. For princes do not receive their crowns from him; and\ntherefore are not to be deposed by him. In opposition hereunto, it may\nbe alleged,\n\n_1st_, That this is directly contrary to the temper of the blessed\nJesus, and of the apostles, and primitive Christians; who did not\nencourage their followers to depose Heathen kings and emperors; but on\nthe other hand, exhorted them to _submit to them in all things_,\nconsistent with the glory of God, and the good of mankind; _not only for\nwrath, but for conscience sake_, ver. 5.\n\n_2dly_, The church has no temporal sword committed to her, all its\ncensures being spiritual. Temporal punishments are left in the hands of\nthe civil magistrate; concerning whom, the apostle says, that _he is the\nminister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be\nafraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of\nGod, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil_, ver. 4. On\nthe other hand, when speaking concerning those, who have the government\nof ecclesiastical matters committed to them, he says, _The weapons of\nour warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down\nof strong holds_, 2 Cor. x. 24.\n\nThe arguments generally used by the Papists, to support the cause of\nrebellion, and their usurped power to depose magistrates, who are not of\ntheir communion, are very weak, and most of them, such as may easily be\nanswered; as,\n\n1. When they allege the commission given by Christ, to Peter, _Feed my\nsheep_, John xxi. 17. They pretend, that to feed, is the same as to\ngovern; and that this implies a power of punishing; which they suppose\nto be so far extended, as that the bishop of Rome may depose sovereign\nprinces, as occasion offers; and that this power was given to Peter and\nhis successors, which the popes of Rome pretend to be.\n\nBut to this it may be replied; that this commission given by Christ to\nPeter, to _feed his sheep_, imports his feeding them with knowledge and\nunderstanding, and not lording it over God\u2019s heritage. Thus our Saviour\nsays, _The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they\nthat exercise authority over them, are called benefactors. But ye shall\nnot be so; but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger;\nand he that is chief as he that doth serve_, Luke xxii. 25, 26.\nMoreover, their pretence that the bishops of Rome are Peter\u2019s\nsuccessors, contains a claim of what they have not the least shadow of\nright to; and is, indeed, to place them in Peter\u2019s chair, who are the\ngreatest opposers of his doctrine.\n\n2. Another argument they bring, tending to overthrow the power of the\ncivil magistrate, is, that, as the soul is more excellent than the body,\nand its welfare to be preferred in proportion thereunto; so the church\nis to take care of the spiritual concerns of mankind, to which all\ntemporal concerns are to give place; therefore its power is greater than\nthat of the civil magistrate.\n\n_Answ._ To this it may be replied; that this similitude does not prove\nthe thing for which it is brought; and though it be allowed, that the\nsoul is more excellent than the body; yet its welfare is not to be\nsecured by inflicting corporal punishments, such as persecutions and\nmassacres; which, to abate and encourage, is to cast a reproach on\nreligion; and it will tend very much to weaken the interest of Christ in\nthe world.\n\nMoreover, the magistrate is ordained by God, to defend the religious as\nwell as civil liberties of his subjects; which is included in the\napostle\u2019s exhortation; let prayers be made _for kings and for all in\nauthority; that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness\nand honesty_, 1 Tim. ii. 2. and elsewhere we are exhorted, to _submit to\ngovernors, as unto them who are sent by the Lord, for the punishment of\nevil doers, and for the praise of them that do well_, 1 Pet. ii. 14.\n\n3. There is another argument which they make use of, taken from Azariah\nthe priest\u2019s opposing king Uzziah, for intruding himself into the\npriest\u2019s office, in burning incense in the temple. Thus it is said, in 1\nChron. xxvi. 16-18. that \u2018when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to\nhis destruction. For he transgressed against the Lord his God, and went\ninto the temple of the Lord, to burn incense upon the altar of incense.\nAnd Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him four-score\npriests of the Lord, that were valiant men. And they withstood Uzziah\nthe king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to\nburn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that\nare consecrated to burn incense. Go out of the sanctuary, for thou hast\ntrespassed, neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God.\u2019 To\nsupport their argument, taken from this scripture, they observe, that\nthe priests, who went in with Azariah, are said to be _valiant men_, and\nso ready to commit any hostilities against the king. Azariah also\nthreatens him, when he tells him, _It should not be for his honour_; and\nperemptorily commands him, to be gone out of the temple. This they\nsuppose, is a flagrant instance of the power of the church over the\ncivil magistrate, in all those things that interfere with what is\nsacred.\n\nBut to this it may be replied;\n\n(_1st_,) That Uzziah\u2019s sin, according to the law of that dispensation,\nwas very great, and against an express command of God, who had ordered,\nthat none should officiate in the priest\u2019s office, but those who were of\nthe family of Aaron.\n\n(_2dly_,) Azariah, and the rest of the priests, did not attempt to\ndepose him, but to prevent his going on in his sin; which would not be\nfor his honour, as the high-priest tells him. And this he says, not in a\nmenacing way, as signifying that he would inflict some punishment on\nhim; but as declaring what God would do against him, that would tend to\nhis dishonour for this sin.\n\n(_3dly_,) Though the high-priest, in God\u2019s name, commanded him to go out\nof the sanctuary; yet he did not lay violent hands on him, at least,\ntill the leprosy was seen upon him. Ver. 27. \u2018And Azariah the chief\npriest, and all the priests looked upon him, and behold, he was leprous\nin his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself\nhasted also to go out, because the Lord had smitten him.\u2019 This they did,\nbecause a leper was not, according to the law of God, to enter into the\ncongregation, inasmuch as he would defile it.\n\n(_4thly_,) He was not properly deposed; but, by this plague of leprosy,\nrendered incapable of reigning; and therefore \u2018he lived alone,\u2019 ver. 21.\n\u2018in a several house, being a leper; for he was cut off from the house of\nthe Lord: and Jotham his son was over the king\u2019s house, judging the\npeople of the land.\u2019 This was agreeable to the law of God, touching the\nleper, in which it is said, that \u2018all the days wherein the plague shall\nbe in him, he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone,\nwithout the camp shall his habitation be,\u2019 Lev. xiii. 46. It may farther\nbe observed, that his son managed the affairs of the kingdom for him; so\nthat the use which is made by the Papists of this scripture, to give\ncountenance to their doctrine of deposing princes, is foreign to the\ntrue sense thereof.\n\n4. There is one more scripture-example which the Papists bring, whereby\nthey defend their practice, not only of deposing, but murdering princes;\nand that is in 2 Kings xi. 15. _But Jehoiada the priest commanded the\ncaptains of the hundreds, the officers of the host, and said unto them,\nhave her forth without the ranges; and him that followeth her, kill with\nthe sword. For the priest had said, let her not be slain in the house of\nthe Lord._ But to this it may be replied,\n\n[_1st_,] That Athaliah was plainly an usurper, not only by reason of her\nsex, since a woman was not to reign over Israel, or Judah: But she\nkilled all the seed royal, to establish herself in the throne, except\nJoash, who escaped, being hid from her fury, in an apartment belonging\nto the temple, 2 Chron. xxii. 11.\n\n[_2dly_,] What Jehoiada did in deposing her, was not only with a good\ndesign to set up the lawful heir; but it was done by an express command\nof the Lord, chap. xxiii. 3.\n\n[_3dly_,] Joash was proclaimed, and anointed, and universally owned as\nking by the people, before Athaliah was slain, 2 Kings xi. 12,-14.\n\nVI. We are now to consider the sins of inferiors against their\nsuperiors. These are expressed in general terms, in one of the answers\nwe are explaining; namely, neglecting the duties we owe to them, envying\nat, and contempt of their persons, places, and lawful counsels and\ncommands, and all refractory carriage, that may prove a shame and\ndishonour to their government; but, more particularly, inferiors sin\nagainst their superiors.\n\n1. In divulging their secrets; and that either as to what respects the\naffairs of their families, or their secular callings in the world.\n\n2. In mocking, reproaching, or exposing their infirmities. Thus it is\nsaid, _The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his\nmother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles\nshall eat it_, Prov. xxx. 17.\n\n3. In endeavouring to make disturbance or disorders in families, or the\ncommon-wealth, through discontent with their station as inferiors, or a\ndesire to rule over those to whom they ought to be in subjection.\n\n4. Servants sin, in neglecting to fulfil their contract, or do the\nservice which they engaged to perform, when they first entered into that\nrelation. Or when they are only disposed to perform the duties incumbent\non them, when they are under their master\u2019s eye, having no sense of\ncommon justice, or their obligation to approve themselves to God, in\nperforming the duties they owe to man. Thus the apostle exhorts\nservants, to _be obedient to them which are their masters, with fear and\ntrembling, in singleness of heart, as unto Christ. Not with eye-service,\nas men-pleasers, but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God\nfrom the heart_, Eph. vi. 5, 6.\n\n5. Children sin, by being unnatural to their parents, who refuse or\nneglect to maintain them if they need it, especially when they are aged;\nwhereby they will appear to have no sense of gratitude, for past\nfavours, nor regard to that duty which nature obliges them to perform.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXXIX., CXXX., CXXXI., CXXXII., CXXXIII.\n\n\n QUEST. CXXIX. _What is required of superiors towards their\n inferiors?_\n\n ANSW. It is required of superiors, according to that power they\n receive from God, and that relation wherein they stand, to love,\n pray for, and bless their inferiors; to instruct, counsel, and\n admonish them; countenancing, commending, and rewarding such as do\n well; discountenancing, reproving, and chastising such as do ill;\n protecting, and providing for them all things necessary for soul,\n and body; and by grave, wise, holy, and exemplary carriage, to\n procure glory to God, honour to themselves, and so to preserve the\n authority which God hath put upon them.\n\n QUEST. CXXX. _What are the sins of superiors?_\n\n ANSW. The sins of superiors are, beside the neglect of the duties\n required of them, and inordinate seeking of themselves, their own\n glory, ease, profit, or pleasure; commanding things unlawful, or not\n in the power of inferiors to perform; counselling, encouraging, or\n favouring them in that which is evil, dissuading, discouraging, or\n discountenancing them in that which is good; correcting them unduly,\n careless exposing, or leaving them to wrong, temptation, and danger;\n provoking them to wrath; or any way dishonouring themselves, or\n lessening their authority, by an unjust, indiscreet, rigorous, or\n remiss behaviour.\n\n QUEST. CXXXI. _What are the duties of equals?_\n\n ANSW. The duties of equals are, to regard the dignity and worth of\n each other, in giving honour to go one before another, and to\n rejoice in each others gifts and advancement, as in their own.\n\n QUEST. CXXXII. _What are the sins of equals?_\n\n ANSW. The sins of equals are, beside the neglect of the duties\n required, the undervaluing of the worth, envying the gifts, grieving\n at the advancement or prosperity one of another, and usurping\n pre-eminence one over another.\n\n QUEST. CXXXIII. _What is the reason annexed to the fifth Commandment\n the more to enforce it?_\n\n ANSW. The reason annexed to the fifth Commandment, in these words,\n [_That thy days may be long upon the land, which the Lord thy God\n giveth thee_] is an express promise of long life and prosperity, as\n far as it shall serve for God\u2019s glory, and their own good, to all\n such as keep this Commandment.\n\n1. We are to consider the duties which superiors owe to their inferiors.\nWhatever circumstance of advancement one has above another in the world,\nthis is a peculiar gift of God, and should not give occasion to that\npride of heart which is natural to fallen man, which puts him upon\ncasting contempt on those who are below him; much less should they\noppress others, who are in a lower station of life than themselves; but\nshould endeavour to do good to them, and thereby glorify God. And,\nindeed, as every relation is mutual, and calls for its respective\nduties, so that superiors expect the duty which belongs to them, from\ninferiors; it is equally just and reasonable that they should not\nneglect those duties which they are obliged to perform to them; though\nthey be of another nature, different from those which they demand from\nthem. Here we shall consider,\n\n2. The duty of parents to children. This not only includes in it the\nusing their utmost endeavours to promote their worldly advantage, as to\nwhat respects their present or future condition in life; but they ought\nto have a just concern for their spiritual welfare, which is a duty very\nmuch neglected, though it be incumbent on all parents, and will be\nperformed by those who have a sense of God and religion upon their\nspirits; this the apostle calls _bringing them up in the nurture and\nadmonition of the Lord_, Eph. vi. 4. When children are first capable of\nbeing instructed; or when they first take in the knowledge of common\nthings; then it is the parent\u2019s duty to instil into them those things\nthat are spiritual. It is, indeed, a difficult matter to speak to them\nabout divine things, so as to lead them into the knowledge thereof; and\nit requires a great measure of wisdom and faithfulness in them. One of\nthe first duties that they owe to them, is acknowledging God\u2019s right to\nthem, putting them under his care, giving them up to him, hoping and\ntrusting in Christ, that he will bestow on them the saving blessings of\nthe covenant of grace, and that in their early age of life. Moreover,\nsince children soon discover themselves to have a corrupt nature: This\nought to be checked and fenced against, as much as it is in our power:\nSince all habits of sin are of an increasing nature, and though it be\ndifficult to prevent them; yet we shall find it much more so to root\nthem out.\n\nNow that we may instil into the minds of children, the principles of\nreligion, as soon as they are capable of receiving instruction, let it\nbe observed,\n\n(1.) That parents must take great care that they neither speak nor act\nany thing before their children, which may tend to corrupt their minds,\nor afford a bad example, which it would be of pernicious consequence to\nthem to follow; nor ought they to suffer those passions to break forth,\nwhich may render them mean and contemptible in the eyes of their\nchildren; or give them occasion, by their example, to indulge the same\npassions.\n\n(2.) They must take heed that they do not exercise severity for trifles,\nor those inadvertencies which children are chargeable with, on the one\nhand; nor too much indulge them in that incorrigibleness and profaneness\nwhich they sometimes see in them, on the other.\n\n(3.) They must separate from them all companions, or servants, from whom\nthey may imbibe the principles of sin, and oblige those who have the\nimmediate care of their education, to instil into them the principles of\nreligion, and, at the same time, to recommend to them, the pleasure,\nbeauty, and advantage of holiness in all, but especially in young ones.\n\n(4.) The examples which we have, either in scripture, or our own\nobservation in the world, of those who have devoted themselves to God,\nand been religious betimes, is to be frequently inculcated, for their\nimitation, with all the affecting and moving expressions that it is\npossible for them to use, and with a particular application thereof to\ntheir case; and, on the other hand, the miserable consequences which\nhave attended persons neglecting to embrace the ways of God in the days\nof their youth, and the sore judgments which often ensue hereupon; as it\nis said, _His bones are full of the sin of youth_, Job xx. 11.\n\n(5.) Reproofs for sin are to be given, with a zeal and concern for the\nglory of God; and yet with that affection as may convince children, that\nin those things, in which they are ready to think their parents their\nenemies, they appear to be their greatest friends.\n\n(6.) They, who have the care of children, ought to take heed, that they\ndo not lead them into, or give them occasion, to rest in, a formal, or\nexternal appearance of religion, on the one hand; nor, on the other\nhand, are they to use any methods which may induce them to think, that,\na burden, or a reproach, which they ought to esteem their delight and\nhonour.\n\n(7.) Those opportunities are more especially to be embraced, when\ninstructions are most likely to be regarded by them; as when they are\ninquisitive about divine things. This should give the parent occasion to\nbe particular in explaining them to them. Thus God commands Israel,\n_when thy son asketh thee in time to come, what mean the testimonies and\nthe statutes, and the judgments; which the Lord thy God commanded you?_\nto _say unto him, we were Pharaoh\u2019s bondsmen_, Deut. vi. 20, 21. and so\nthey were to relate to them those dispensations of providence towards\nthem, that gave occasion to these statutes which he had appointed.\n\n(8.) Parents should let their children know, that their obedience to\nGod\u2019s commands, will always entitle them to the greatest share in their\naffection, that this may be a motive and inducement thereunto.\n\n2. We are now to consider the duty which masters owe to their servants.\nAnd,\n\n(1.) They ought to recommend the good ways of God to them, endeavouring\nto persuade them to be religious; and, by their exemplary conversation\nin their families, whereby they adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour,\nin all things, afford them an additional motive hereunto.\n\n(2.) They should encourage religion in their servants, as well as\ndiligence and industry. For, as the one tends to their advantage, to\nwhom their service is due; the other tends to the glory of God, and the\ngood of their souls, who are found in the practice of it.\n\n(3.) Masters should endeavour to instruct their servants in the\nprinciples of religion, especially if ignorant. And,\n\n(4.) They should allow them sufficient time for religious duties; which,\nif needful, ought to be taken out of that time, wherein they would\notherwise be employed in their service: And this they ought to do, as\nconsidering, that the best Christians are like to make the most faithful\nservants.\n\n3. We are now to consider the duty of magistrates towards their\nsubjects. This consists,\n\n(1.) In their endeavouring to promote their liberty, safety, and\nhappiness, by the justice and clemency of their administration. Thus it\nis said, _He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of\nGod_, 2 Sam. xxiii. 3. By this means they will lay their subjects under\nthe highest obligation to duty and obedience; and the respect which they\nhave from them, will render the station, in which they are, more\nagreeable.\n\n(2.) They ought to defend the rights of subjects, when injured, against\ntheir oppressors; that they may appear to be, as it were, their common\nfathers, to whom they have recourse in all difficulties, and find\nredress.\n\n(3.) They ought to encourage and support the common design of\nChristianity, by suppressing irreligion and profaneness, and every thing\nwhich is a scandal to the Christian name, or a reproach to a\nwell-ordered government. This leads us,\n\nII. To consider the sins of superiors. These sin in their behaviour\ntowards their inferiors,\n\n1. By pride and haughtiness; when they treat those who are below them,\nwith contempt and disdain; as though, because they are not, in many\nrespects, their equals, they are not their fellow-creatures. This\ndiscovers itself either in reproachful words or actions. Thus the\nPharisees treated those whom they apprehended inferior to them, in gifts\nor station, in the church, with contempt; so that they often made use of\nthat aphorism; _This people, who knoweth not the law, are cursed_, John\nvii. 49.\n\n2. Another sin of superiors is, when masters exact severe and unmerciful\nlabour, beyond what is reasonable, of their servants, which is little\nbetter than the oppression of the Egyptian task-masters; who commanded\nthem to make brick without straw, Exod. v. 15,16. and beat, and dealt\nseverely with them, because they could not fulfil their unreasonable\nexactions.\n\n3. Sin is committed by those who, being princes, or generals, exercise\ninhuman cruelty, contrary to the law of nature and nations, towards\ntheir conquered enemies, when they have them in their power. This David\nseems to have been charged with, as a blemish in his reign; when he\n_put_ the men of Rabbah, after he had conquered them, _under saws, and\nunder harrows of iron, and made them pass through the brick-kilns. Thus\ndid he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon_; which seems hardly\njustifiable by marshal law; and therefore it must be reckoned a failing\nin him; especially unless the Ammonites had done something\nextraordinary, to deserve such treatment, or had used Israel in the like\nmanner, so that this might be reckoned a just reprizal upon them, 2 Sam.\nxii. 31.\n\nAnd to this we may add, that magistrates do not behave to their\nsubjects, as they ought, and therefore commit sin, when they inflict\npunishment beyond what the law directs, or the crime deserves. Thus\nsmall offences are not to be punished with death, as capital crimes are,\nsince the punishment must be greater or less, in proportion to the\ncrime. Thus God enjoined a certain number of stripes for some crimes\ncommitted, which they were not to exceed; _whereby their brother would\nseem vile unto them_, Deut. xxv. 2, 3. that is, they would treat him\nwith a greater severity than the nature of the crime demanded.\n\n4. Superiors sin, when they take advantage on the necessities of the\npoor; in buying or selling, which is called, a _grinding the faces of\nthe poor_, Isa. iii. 14, 15.\n\n5. Masters, or parents sin, in giving undue correction to their servants\nor children, for small faults as when they neglect to perform some\npunctilio\u2019s, of respect, which are due to them, with greater severity\nthan they do, open sins against God, or when they are transported with\nunreasonable passion for trifles; whereby they render themselves hated\nby them, and provoke them to wrath, rather than answer the end of\nchastisement, which is the glory of God and their good. This the apostle\nforbids parents to do, Eph. vi. 4. And elsewhere, he speaks of the\n_fathers of our flesh chastizing us after their own pleasure_, Heb. xii.\n10. as being disagreeable to the divine dispensations, and consequently\nnot to be justified in them that practise it.\n\n6. Superiors sin, when they command those things, of their inferiors,\nwhich are in themselves sinful, which they cannot, in their consciences,\ncomply with. And to this we may add, their demanding those things which\nare impossible, and being enraged against them for not doing them.\n\n7. Superiors sin, when they surmise their inferiors have committed a\nfault, which they resent, and punish, without suffering them to\nvindicate themselves, though they request this favour in the most\nsubmissive way. This is to extend their authority beyond the bounds of\nreason. We shall now consider,\n\nIII. The duty of equals. And,\n\n1. They ought to encourage and strengthen the hands of one another in\nthe ways of God, which is the great end and design of Christian\nsocieties.\n\n2. They ought to sympathize with one another in their weakness, warning\nand helping each other, when exposed to temptations, or overcome by\nthem.\n\n3. They ought to defend one another when reproached by the enemies of\nGod and religion.\n\n4. To love one another, and rejoice in each others welfare And,\n\n5. To withdraw from the society of those who are a reproach to, or\nendeavour to turn them aside from the good ways of God.\n\nIV. We shall now consider the sins of equals; which they are guilty of,\n\n1. When they entertain unjust and unfriendly quarrels, contrary to that\nlove, which ought to be amongst brethren.\n\n2. When they affect, or usurp pre-eminence over one another; as\nDiotrephes did, whom the apostle speaks of, who _loved to have the\npre-eminence amongst them_, 3 John, ver. 9. Christ\u2019s disciples\nthemselves were sometimes liable to this charge; especially when _there\nwas a strife among them, which of them should be accounted greatest_,\nLuke xxii. 24. which our Saviour is so far from commending in them, that\nhe reproves them for it.\n\n3. It is a great sin, when equals endeavour to make breaches amongst\nthose, who are otherwise inclined to live peaceably with one another.\nThis is the wretched employment of tale-bearers, busy-bodies,\nmake-bates, and slanderers, who delight to raise and propagate false\nreports; as the Psalmist supposes some inclined to do, who are\ndistinguished from those who do not _backbite with their tongue_, nor\n_take up a reproach against their neighbour_, &c. Psal. xv. 3. and it is\nreckoned one of those things which the Lord hates, Prov. vi. 19.\n\n4. They are guilty of sin, when they insult, and take occasion, to\nexpose their brethren, for those weaknesses and infirmities which they\nsee in them, not considering that they are also liable to the same\nthemselves.\n\n5. When they endeavour to ensnare and entice others to sin. This vile\npractice Solomon takes notice of, chap. i. 10, 15. and cautions those\nwho are thus tempted against consenting to, or complying with them. We\nare now to consider,\n\nV. The reasons annexed to the fifth Commandment, which are included in\nthat promise of long life, to such as keep it. It is enquired by some,\nwhether this promise is to be applied to none but the Israelites; since\nthere is mention of the land which the Lord gave them, to wit, Canaan?\nTo which it may be replied; that though they might make a particular\napplication of it to themselves; yet it extends to men in all ages and\nplaces. Accordingly the apostle Paul mentioning this Commandment, and\nthe promise annexed to if, instead of those words, _That thy days may be\nlong in the land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee_, alters the mode\nof expression, that it may be applicable to us as well as them, when he\nsays, _That thou mayest live long on the earth_, Eph. vi. 2, 3. This may\ngive us occasion to enquire,\n\n1. Whether this promise be made good as to the letter of it, to all that\nkeep this Commandment; especially since we find, that, according to the\ncommon methods of providence, some good men live but a short time in\nthis world, when the wicked oftentimes live to a great age. That the\nlives of some good men have been short, needs not be proved. Abijah, the\nbest of Jeroboam\u2019s family, in whom some good thing was found, towards\nthe Lord God of Israel, died when a child, 1 Kings xiv. 12, 13. And\nJosiah, who was one of the best of the kings that reigned over Judah,\nlived but thirty nine years; for it is said, that _he was eight years\nold when he began to reign; and he reigned thirty and one years_, 2\nKings xxii. 1. And Enoch excelled all the patriarchs who lived before\nthe flood, and was more honoured in that he was translated to heaven,\nwithout dying; yet he continued but a little while in this world, if we\ncompare the time he lived here, with the time which men generally lived\nbefore the deluge; which was but _three hundred and sixty five years_;\nwhereas, several others are said to have lived above nine hundred years.\nAnd Joseph, who was the most remarkable, for shewing honour to parents,\nand performing the duties belonging to other relations, of any we read\nof in scripture; he lived but an _hundred and ten years_, Gen. l. 26.\nWhereas Levi, who had been a reproach to his father, and a dishonour to\nthe family in general, lived an _hundred thirty and seven years_, Exod.\nvi. 16.\n\n2. We shall now consider, how such dispensations of providence may be\naccounted for, consistently with the promise annexed to this\nCommandment. Accordingly it may be observed,\n\n(1.) That, when God takes his saints out of the world when young, it is\nsometimes a peculiar instance of compassion to them, in taking them from\nthe evil to come. Thus Josiah died, as was but now hinted, when young;\nbut this was in mercy to him, that he might not see the evil which God\nwould bring on Judah for their sins, 2 Kings xxii. 20.\n\n(2.) They are, at their death, possessed of a better world, which is the\nbest exchange: So that were the matter referred to their own choice,\nthey would choose heaven before the longest life, and the best\nadvantages they can enjoy in this world.\n\n(3.) Old age is not a blessing, unless it be adorned with grace. _The\nhoary head is_, indeed, _a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of\nrighteousness_, Prov. xvi. 13. but not otherwise. Good men are not\ndestroyed by the blast of God\u2019s wrath, but gathered, like a shock of\ncorn, when fully ripe; they are meet for, and then received into a\nbetter world. Therefore _the child_ dying in Christ, is said _to die an\nhundred years old_, Isa. lxv. 20.\n\n3. We shall now enquire, how far, or in what respects, we are to hope\nfor, and desire the accomplishment of the promises of temporal good\nthings.\n\n(1.) Temporal good things are not to be desired ultimately for\nthemselves, but as subservient to the glory of God. And long life in\nparticular is a blessing, so far as it affords more space to do service\nto the interest of Christ in the world.\n\n(2.) They are to be desired, with an entire submission to the will of\nGod, and a resolution to acknowledge, that he is righteous, and to\nmagnify his name, though he deny them to us, as considering that he\nknows what is best for us, and may do what he will with his own.\n\n(3.) We are to desire that God would give us temporal good things in\nmercy, as pledges of eternal happiness, and not in wrath. Thus the\nPsalmist says; _There be many that say, who will shew us any good? Lord,\nlift thou up the light of thy countenance upon us_, Psal. iv. 6.\n\n4. We shall now enquire with what frame of spirit we ought to bear the\nloss of temporal good things, which we have been encouraged by God\u2019s\npromise, to hope for. In answer to this, let it be considered, that if\nGod does not fulfil his promise in the way and manner which we expect,\nin granting us temporal good things; yet,\n\n(1.) We must justify him, and condemn ourselves; none can say, that he\ndoes not forfeit all blessings daily. Therefore we are to say; let God\nbe true, and every man a liar. He is a God of infinite faithfulness; but\nwe are unfaithful, and not stedfast in his covenant.\n\n(2.) We are not to conclude, that our being deprived of temporal good\nthings, which we expect, is a certain sign that we have no right to, or\ninterest in those better things that accompany salvation; as the wise\nman says, _No man knoweth either love or hatred, by all that is before\nhim_, Eccles. ix. 1.\n\n(3.) We are to reckon the loss of temporal good things as a trial of our\nfaith and patience; and endeavour, under such disappointments, to make\nit appear, that the world was not the main thing we had in view; but\nChrist and spiritual blessings in him, were the spring of all our\nreligion.\n\n5. It may farther be enquired; what are those things that tend to make a\nlong life happy, for which alone it is to be desired? It may be\nobserved, that life is sometimes attended with those miseries, which\ninduce a believer to desire to depart, and be with Christ, as the weary\ntraveller desires rest. And it may be observed, that though, in the\npromise annexed to the fifth Commandment, we have no mention of any\nthing but long life; yet the apostle, when explaining it, adds, that\nthey shall have a prosperous life; without which, long life would not be\nso great a blessing. Thus he says, _That it may be well with thee, and\nthou mayest live long upon the earth_, Eph. vi. 3. Now there are three\nthings which tend to make a long life happy.\n\n(1.) Experience of growth in grace, in proportion to our advances in\nage, according to that promise, _They shall bring forth fruit in old\nage; they shall be fat and flourishing_, Psal. xcii. 14.\n\n(2.) When we retain our natural abilities, and that strength and vigour\nof mind, which we have formerly had. This some are deprived of, through\nthe infirmities of old age; whereby they may be said to out-live\nthemselves. It was a peculiar blessing, which God granted to Moses;\nconcerning whom it is said, that _he was an hundred and twenty years old\nwhen he died_; and yet _his eye was not dim, nor his natural force\nabated_, Deut. xxxiv. 7.\n\n(3.) Old age is a blessing, when our usefulness to others, in our day\nand generation, is continued. Thus Joshua died an old man; but it was a\npeculiar blessing that he was useful to the end; for in the very close\nof his life he _made a covenant with the people in Shechem_, Josh. xxiv.\n25. compared with 29. and laid strict commands on them, to behave\nthemselves towards God, as they ought to do.\n\n\n\n\n Quest. CXXXIV., CXXXV., CXXXVI.\n\n\n QUEST. CXXXIV. _What is the sixth Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sixth Commandment is, [_Thou shalt not kill_.]\n\n QUEST. CXXXV. _What are the duties required in the sixth\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The duties required in the sixth Commandment are, all careful\n studies, and lawful endeavours to preserve the life of ourselves,\n and others, by resisting all thoughts and purposes, subduing all\n passions, and avoiding all occasions, temptations, and practices,\n which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any; by just\n defence thereof against violence, patient bearing of the hand of\n God, quietness of mind, cheerfulness of spirit, a sober use of meat,\n drink, physic, sleep, labour, and recreations, by charitable\n thoughts, love, compassion, meekness, gentleness, kindness,\n peaceable, mild, and courteous speeches and behaviour, forbearance,\n readiness to be reconciled, patient bearing and forgiving of\n injuries, and requiting good for evil, comforting and succouring the\n distressed, and protecting and defending the innocent.\n\n QUEST. CXXXVI. _What are the sins forbidden in the sixth\n Commandment?_\n\n ANSW. The sins forbidden in the sixth Commandment are, all taking\n away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public\n justice, lawful war, or necessary defence; the neglecting or\n withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life,\n sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge, all excessive\n passions, distracting cares, immoderate use of meat, drink, labour,\n and recreations; provoking words, oppressing, quarrelling, striking,\n wounding, and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life\n of any.\n\nIn explaining this Commandment, we are,\n\nI. To consider the positive part thereof, or the duties required in it,\nnamely, that we should use all lawful endeavours to preserve our own\nlife, and the life of others; and consequently we should avoid all those\npassions, and other things, which may afford an occasion to take it\naway, and live in the constant exercise of the duties of temperance and\nsobriety, as to what respects ourselves; meekness, gentleness, and\nforgiving injuries, as to what concerns others.\n\nIn this Commandment it is supposed, that life is the most valuable\nblessing of nature; and therefore to take it away, is to do the utmost\ninjury that can be attempted against us. The valuableness of the life of\nman appears in four things.\n\n1. It is the result of the union of the soul with the body, which is the\nprinciple of those actions that are put forth by us as intelligent\ncreatures; and therefore life is to be esteemed in proportion to the\nexcellency thereof; which, is the noblest part of the creation, angels\nexcepted.\n\n2. Nothing can compensate or satisfy for the taking away the life of\nman, how much satisfaction soever may be given for the loss of other\nthings.\n\n3. We may observe, that man, in this respect, is the subject of the\ndivine image; which supposes us to have a more excellent life than any\nother creatures in this lower world; and it is assigned as a reason of\nour obligation to preserve it, Gen. ix. 6.\n\n4. Life is given and continued to us, that hereby the most valuable ends\nmay be attained, conducive to the glory of God, the advancement of\nreligion in the world, and promoting our everlasting happiness. From\nwhence we may take an estimate of its excellency; and it contains the\nhighest motive to us, to yield obedience, to this Commandment.\n\nThis leads us to consider the means which we are to use, to preserve our\nown lives, and the lives of others. As to what respects the preservation\nof our own life; we are not to rush presumptuously into danger of death,\nwithout a divine warrant, for that is to be prodigal of life. We are\nalso to exercise sobriety and temperance, avoiding gluttony,\ndrunkenness, lust, and all exorbitant passions, which tend to impair the\nhealth, as well as defile the conscience. Moreover, when occasion\nrequires it, we are to have recourse to the skill of physicians, and\nmake use of those proper medicines, that may conduce to repair the\nweakness and decays of nature.\n\nAs to what concerns our endeavours to preserve the lives of others; we\nare to caution them against those things, which would tend to destroy\ntheir health, and, by degrees, their lives. And we must also discover\nand detect all secret plots and contrivances which may be directed\nagainst them; and we are to support and relieve those who are ready to\nperish by extreme poverty; yea, though they were our enemies, Rom. xii.\n20. Job xxxi, 19, 20, 22. We are also to defend them who are in imminent\ndanger of death, Psal. lxxxii. 3, 4. Prov. xxiv. 11, 12.\n\nNevertheless, we must not use unwarrantable means, though it were to\nsave our own lives. As, in times of persecution, we are not to renounce\nthe truths of God, or give occasion to the common enemy, to revile, or\nspeak evil of them, to avoid suffering for the cause thereof. This was\nthat noble principle by which the martyrs, whom the apostle speaks of,\nwere acted; _They were tortured, not accepting deliverance_, Heb. xi.\n35. that is, when they were exposed to the most exquisite torments, and\ntheir lives offered them, in case they would deny Christ, they would not\naccept deliverance on so dishonourable terms. Neither are we, at any\ntime, to tell a lye, or act that which is contrary to truth, though it\nwere to save our lives. This leads us,\n\nII. To consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment; and these are\neither the taking away of life, or doing that which has a tendency\nthereunto.\n\n1. It is unlawful to take away the life of another. But this is to be\nconsidered with some exceptions, or limitations.\n\n(1.) This may be done in lawful wars. Thus we read of many wars begun\nand carried on, and much blood shed therein, by God\u2019s direction, and\nwith his approbation and blessing; upon which occasion it is said, that\n_the war was of God_, 1 Chron. v. 22. Nevertheless, when wars are\nproclaimed, merely to satisfy the pride and avarice of princes, as in\nBenhadad\u2019s war against Ahab, 1 Kings xx. 1. _& seq._ or the Romans, who\nmade war on the countries round about them, merely to enlarge their own\ndominions, by ruining others; or, like those which the Devil excites,\nand Antichrist carries on against the church, for their faithfulness to\nthe truth, Rev. xii. 17. chap. xiii. 7. these wars are unlawful; and all\nthe blood shed therein, is a breach of this Commandment.\n\n(2.) It is no violation of this Commandment, to take away the life of\noffenders, guilty of capital crimes, by the hand of the civil\nmagistrate; for this is elsewhere commanded, and magistrates are\nappointed for that end, Deut. xvii. 8,-10.\n\n(3.) It is no breach of this Commandment, when a person kills another\nwithout design, or the least degree of premeditated malice.\nNevertheless, the utmost caution ought to be used, that persons might\nnot lose their lives through the carelessness and inadvertency of\nothers.\n\n(4.) In some instances, a person may kill another in his own defence,\nwithout being guilty of the breach of this Commandment. But this is to\nbe considered with certain limitations; as,\n\n[1.] If there be only a design, or conspiracy against our lives, but no\nimmediate attempt made, to take them away; we are to defend ourselves,\nby endeavouring to put him that designed the execrable fact, out of a\ncapacity of hurting us, by having recourse to the protection of the law;\nwhereby he may be restrained from doing it, or we secured. This was the\nmethod which Paul took, when the Jews had bound themselves with an oath,\nto slay him; he informed the chief captain of this conspiracy, and had\nrecourse to the law for his safety, Acts xxiii. 21.\n\n[2.] If there be a present attempt made against our lives, we should\nrather chuse to disarm, or fly from the enemy, than take away his life;\nbut if this cannot be done, so that we must either lose our own lives,\nor take away his, we do not incur the least guilt, or break this\nCommandment, if we take away, his life, to preserve our own, especially\nif we were not first in the quarrel; nor give occasion to it by any\ninjurious or unlawful practices.\n\nHere it may be enquired, whether it be lawful for two persons to fight a\nduel, upon a set challenge, or provocation given? In answer to which,\nlet it be considered,\n\n_1st_, That, when a war, between two armies, may be issued, and the\nshedding of much blood prevented hereby, it is not unlawful, provided it\nbe by mutual consent, and with the approbation of those on both sides,\nwho have a right of making war and peace; and if the matter in\ncontroversy may be thus decided, without tempting providence. We have a\nremarkable instance of this, in the duel fought between David and\nGoliath, in 1 Sam. xvii. Nevertheless,\n\n_2dly_, It is unlawful for two persons, each seeming too prodigal of his\nlife, to challenge, accept of, and, pursuant thereunto, to endeavour to\nput an end to each others life, merely to gratify their own passion, or\npride. This, though falsely called honour, will, in reality, render them\nvile in the eyes of God, and notoriously guilty of the breach of this\nCommandment.\n\nHere we may consider the wicked practice of those who have obliged poor\nwretches, who were under their command, to murder one another for their\ndiversion. This Joab and Abner did, when they said, _Let the young men\narise and play before us; and every one thrust his sword in his fellows\nside_, 2 Sam. ii. 14,-16. There is also an unlawful diversion, which,\nthough not altogether so barbarous and cruel, is, in some respects, a\nbreach of this Commandment, _viz._ when persons fight with, and wound\none another, without design of killing, merely to get a little money,\nwhile entertaining a number of unthinking persons with their folly; in\nwhich case they that fight, and they that look on, are equally guilty,\nProv. xxvi. 18, 19. Thus concerning the sin of killing another; we shall\nnow account for two or three difficulties that occur in scripture,\nrelating to the actions of some good men, who seem to have been guilty\nof the breach of this Commandment; but were not really so.\n\n_1st_, It is enquired, whether Elijah was chargeable with the breach of\nit in destroying Baal\u2019s prophets, which we read of in 1 Kings xviii. 40.\nwherein it is said, that _he ordered that none of them should escape;\nand he brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there_.\n\nIn answer to which, it may be observed, that it was not a small\ninoffensive error that these prophets of Baal were punished for; but\napostasy from God. And that the persons who were thus punished, deserve\nit, will appear, if we consider,\n\n[1.] That, they were the advisers and ring-leaders of all Israel\u2019s\nidolatry, and the abettors and principal occasion of that violent\npersecution, which then raged against the Lord\u2019s prophets, and true\nworshippers.\n\n[2.] Had they only been false prophets, and not persecutors, they were\naccording to the law of God to be put to death, Deut. xiii. 6,-9.\n\n[3.] This was done after a solemn appeal to God, and an answer from\nheaven, by fire, which determined, not only who was the true God, but\nwho were his prophets, and consequently whether Elijah deserved death,\nas an impostor, or Baal\u2019s prophets.\n\n[4.] Ahab himself was present, and all his ministers of state, who had a\nright to execute justice on false prophets; and, it is highly probable,\nthat they consented to, and many of them had an immediate hand in their\ndeath, which might be occasioned by a sudden conviction in their\nconsciences, proceeding from the miracle which they had just before\nobserved, or from the universal cry of the people against them; so that\nthe thing was plainly of the Lord, to whom Elijah brought a great deal\nof honour, and was far from being chargeable with the breach of this\nCommandment.\n\n_2dly_, It is farther enquired, whether Abraham\u2019s offering Isaac was a\nbreach of this Commandment? This is proposed as a difficulty by those\nwho do not pay that deference to divine revelation, as they ought, nor\nconsider, that God cannot command any thing which is contrary to his\nperfections; nor do his people sin in obeying any command that is given\nby him. However, that this matter may be set in a just light, let it be\nconsidered,\n\n[1.] That God, who is the sovereign Lord of life, may take it away,\nwhen, and by whom he pleases. Therefore Isaac had no more reason to\ncomplain of any wrong or injury done him, by God, in ordering his father\nto sacrifice him, than any one else has, who dies by his immediate hand,\nin the common course of providence.\n\n[2.] Abraham could not be said to do this with the temper and\ndisposition of a murderer, which such have, who are guilty of the breach\nof this Commandment, who kill persons in a passion, or out of envy or\nmalice, being void of all natural affection or brotherly love; but he\nacted plainly in obedience to God\u2019s command. His hand was lifted up\nagainst one whom he loved equally to, or, it may be, more than his own\nlife, and, doubtless, he would rather have been, had God so ordered it,\nthe sacrifice, than the offerer.\n\n[3.] This was done, as is more than probable, with Isaac\u2019s full consent.\nHence some think, that his faith was no less remarkable herein than that\nof Abraham. His willingness to be offered, evidently appears, in that\nAbraham was in his feeble and declining age, and Isaac in his full\nstrength; for it was not a little strength which was sufficient to carry\nwood enough to answer this occasion, which we read he did, Gen. xxii. 6.\nBesides, if Isaac had resisted, none was at hand to assist Abraham\nagainst him, and, doubtless, he would have strove in this matter as one\nwho desired to be overcome. Therefore we must suppose, that it is so far\nfrom being a breach of this Commandment, that it was one of the most\nremarkable instances of faith in scripture; and God\u2019s design in ordering\nhim to do this, was, that it might be a type whereby he would lead him\ninto the glorious mystery of his not sparing his own Son, the Lord Jesus\nChrist, and of his willingness to lay down his life a ransom for his\npeople.\n\n_3dly_, Some charge Moses with being guilty of the breach of this\nCommandment, in killing the Egyptian, which we read of in Exod. ii. 11,\n12. But, to vindicate him from this charge, let it be considered,\n\n[1.] That the Egyptian, whom he slew, not only _smote an Hebrew_, as it\nis in this chapter, but he did it wrongfully, as it is observed in Acts\nvii. 24. there was no offence given, nor just reason for this injurious\ntreatment, and to oppress or abuse one that is in a miserable condition,\nas the Hebrews were at that time, is an heinous crime in God\u2019s account.\nMoreover, to _smite_, in scripture, is often taken, for to _slay_; so\nthat it is not improbable, that the Egyptian slew the Hebrew; or if he\ndid not, it might be such an injury as deserved death; which would have\nbeen inflicted in another manner, had not Israel been denied, at that\ntime, the protection of the law.\n\n[2.] Moses was, at this time, raised up, and called by God, to be a\nruler and a judge, to defend the cause of his oppressed people; and in\nthis action he first began to fulfil his commission; though the people\nrefused to own him, and seemed to join with those that designed him evil\nfor it; for which reason their deliverance was put off forty years\nlonger, while he was an exile in the land of Midian, Acts vii. 24, 26.\ncompared with 30. Now to slay a public enemy and oppressor, and, as it\nis probable, one who had forfeited his life, and that with a commission\nfrom God, to act as a ruler and a judge over his people, cannot be\nreckoned a breach of this Commandment. Thus concerning the violation of\nthis Commandment, as including in it the murdering of our neighbour.\n\n2. This Commandment is notoriously broken by those who lay violent hands\non themselves, which we have no instance of any good man, in scripture,\nthat was ever suffered to do, but only such who were, like Saul,\nAhitophel, Judas, and others, of the most infamous character. This is a\nsin which is attended with many aggravations; For,\n\n(1.) It is to act as though our lives were at our own disposal; which\nare to be considered as a talent which we are entrusted with by God, to\nimprove for his glory; and he alone has a right to dispose thereof at\nhis pleasure.\n\n(2.) This argues, and arises from, the highest discontent and impatience\nunder the hand of God, which is contrary to that temper, which we ought\nto exercise as Christians, who profess subjection to him.\n\n(3.) It is contrary to nature, and that principle of self-preservation\nwhich God has implanted in us; and, indeed, he that does this, not only\nacts below the reason of a man, but does that which even brutes\nthemselves are not inclined to.\n\n(4.) It is a giving place to, and gratifying the Devil, who acts\nagreeably to his character, as a murderer from the beginning, when he\ntempts men to destroy both soul and body at once.\n\n(5.) It is presumptuous and bold to resolve, that whatever measure of\nduty God has prescribed for us to fill up in this world, we will serve\nhim no longer. If marshal law punishes deserters with death, is there\nnot a severe punishment due unto those who do, as it were, desert the\nservice of God by self-murder? Nothing is more certain than this, that\nif duty be enjoined by God, the time in which it is to be performed, is\nalso fixed by him, and not left to our determination.\n\n(6.) It is a rushing hastily into eternity, not considering the\nconsequence thereof, nor the awful tribunal of Christ, before which they\nmust immediately appear, and give an account of this, as well as other\nsinful actions of life.\n\n(7.) It is done with such a frame of spirit, that a person cannot, by\nfaith, commit his soul into the hands of Jesus Christ; for that requires\na better temper of mind than any one can be supposed to have, who\nmurders himself.\n\nHere it may be enquired, since, as was before observed, no good man was\never guilty of this crime, whether Samson did not break this Commandment\nin pulling down the house upon his own head, as well as the Philistines?\n\nTo this it may be answered,\n\n[1.] That Samson\u2019s life, at this time, was a burden to himself, useless\nto his brethren, a scorn to the open enemy, and an occasion of their\nascribing their deliverance to their idol; and probably, it would have\nbeen soon taken away by them; which circumstances, though they would\nnot, in themselves, have been sufficient to justify this action; yet\nthey might justify his desire, that God would put an end, to his life,\nand release him out of this miserable world; especially if this would\nredound more to his glory than any thing he could do for the future, or\nhad done in the former part of his life.\n\n[2.] It plainly appears, that God, in answer to his prayer, not only\ngave him leave to take away his own life, together with the lives of his\nenemies, but he wrought a miracle to enable him to do it; and therefore\nit was a justifiable action, and no breach of this Commandment, Judges\nxvi. 28,-30.\n\n3. We shall now consider the heinous aggravation of this sin, of taking\naway the life of another unjustly, and the terrible judgments that such\nhave ground to expect, who are guilty hereof.\n\n(1.) According to the divine law, this sin is to be punished with death,\nby the hand of the civil magistrate, Deut. xix. 11, 12. Thus Joab, who\nhad deserved to die for murders formerly committed, was slain, by\nDavid\u2019s order, by his son Solomon; though he sought protection by taking\nhold of the horns of the altar, 1 Kings ii. 28, 29. Many other crimes\nmight be expiated by sacrifices, which God ordained should be offered\nfor that end; whereas, no satisfaction was to be accepted for this sin\nbut the blood of the murderer, Numb. xxxv. 31. And it is a matter of\ndispute with some, whether kings, who may pardon many crimes, by virtue\nof their prerogative, can, according to the laws of God, pardon murder,\nwithout being supposed to extend their clemency beyond its due bounds?\n\n(2.) God often gives up those who are guilty of the sin of murder, to\nthe terrors of a guilty conscience, which is a kind of hell upon earth;\nas in the instances of Cain, Lamech, and others, Gen. iv, 13,-15. and\n23, 24.\n\n(3.) Such are followed with many remarkable instances of divine\nvengeance; so that the blast of providence attends all their\nundertakings. Thus David, after he had killed Uriah, was followed with\nsuch rebukes of providence, that the latter part of his life was\nrendered very uneasy thereby; and what the prophet foretold was\nfulfilled, that _the sword should never depart from his house_; that is,\nas long as he lived, 2 Sam. xii. 9, 10.\n\n(4.) The judgments of God for his sin, are oftentimes transmitted to\nposterity. Thus Simeon and Levi\u2019s murder of the Shechemites, was\npunished in the tribes that descended from them; who, according to the\npatriarch\u2019s prediction, were _divided in Jacob, and scattered in\nIsrael_, Gen. xlix. 7. And Saul\u2019s slaying the Gibeonites, was punished\nin David\u2019s time, by a famine occasioned thereby, 2 Sam. xxi. 1. And the\nmurders which the Jews had committed on the prophets in former ages,\nwere punished in the destruction of their state and nation; when _all\nthe righteous blood_ that had been _shed upon the earth, came upon\nthem_, Matt. xxiii. 35.\n\n(5.) Their lives are often shortened, and they brought to the grave with\nblood. Thus Absalom perished by the just judgment of God, for the murder\nof his brother, as well as his other crimes; and in this the Psalmist\u2019s\nobservation holds true, that _bloody and deceitful men shall not live\nout half their days_, Psal. lv. 23. We are now to consider,\n\n4. That this Commandment may be broken otherwise than by the taking away\nthe life of our neighbour. It may be committed by a person in his heart,\nwhen he has not an opportunity to execute his malicious designs; or is\nafraid to do it, because of the punishment from men, which will ensue.\nThus the apostle says, _Whosoever hateth his brother, is a murderer_, 1\nJohn iii. 15. Of this we have an instance in wicked Ahab; who _hated_\nMicajah, because he _prophesied not good concerning him, but evil_, 1\nKings xxii. 9. And, it is more than probable, that this hatred would\nhave broke forth into murder, could he have laid hold on the least\nshadow or pretence that might have put a colour on so vile an action.\nAnd Jezebel was guilty of this sin, who threatened to murder the prophet\nElijah, chap. xix. 2. and the Jews, who were filled with malice against\nour Saviour; for which reason they would have put him to death at that\ntime; but they feared the people, Mark xi. 18. And as this is a sin that\nreigns in wicked men, there are some instances hereof even in good men.\nThus David carried his resentment too far against Nabal, though a\nchurlish and ungrateful man, when he resolved, in his passion, not only\nto take away his life, which was an unjustifiable action, but to destroy\nthe whole family, the innocent with the guilty, 1 Sam. xxv. 21, 22. and\nhe was sensible of his sin in this passionate resolution, which\noccasioned his blessing God for his preventing it, by Abigail\u2019s prudent\nmanagement.\n\nThere is another instance of sinful and unaccountable passion, that\ncannot be excused from a degree of heart-murder in Jonah; who was very\nangry because God was gracious, and spared Nineveh, on their repentance;\nand in this fit of passion, he desires that God would take away his\nlife, justifies his anger, and, as it were, dares him to cut him off;\nwhich was as bad a frame as ever any good man was in. And all this took\nits rise from pride, lest some should think him a false prophet, who did\nnot rightly distinguish between what God might do, and would have done,\nhad they not repented, and what he determined to do, namely, to give\nthem repentance, and so to spare them. I say, rather than be counted a\nfalse prophet, which, it may be, was a groundless surmise, he was angry\nwith God for sparing it, Jonah iv. 1-4.\n\nHere it will be enquired, whether all anger is sinful, or a breach of\nthis Commandment? To which it may be answered, That since the apostle\nsays, _Be angry and sin not_, Eph. iv. 26. it implies, that there may be\nanger which is not sinful; but, on the other hand, may rather be styled,\na zeal for God. Of this kind was that anger which our Saviour expressed\nagainst the Scribes and Pharisees, when he calls them _serpents, a\ngeneration of vipers_, Matt. xxiii. 33. and when he whipped the buyers\nand sellers out of the temple; on which occasion it is said, _The zeal\nof thine house hath eaten me up_, John ii. 15, 17. And the apostle\nreproved Elymas the _sorcerer_, who endeavoured to _turn away the deputy\nfrom the faith_, with words that seemed full of anger; when he addressed\nhimself to him in this manner; _O full of all subtilty, and all mischief\nthou child of the Devil, thou enemy of all righteousness; Wilt thou not\ncease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?_ Acts xiii. 10. And Peter\ncould not reprove that vile hypocrite Simon Magus, when he offered to\npurchase the conferring the Holy Ghost, without expressing some anger\nand resentment, as the cause required, when he says, _Thy money perish\nwith thee_, &c. chap. viii. 20, 21, yet that he might let him know that\nit was only zeal to God that provoked his anger, he gives him friendly\nadvice to repent of this his wickedness, ver. 22. From whence we may\ntake occasion to enquire,\n\n(1.) What is the difference between sinful anger or passion, and an holy\nzeal for God?\n\n[1.] An holy zeal for God, leads us rightly to distinguish between the\nperson reproved, and his actions, that give us occasion for it; so that\nwe hate the sin, but not the person that commits it. Thus the Psalmist\nsays, _I hate the work of them that turn aside_, Psal. ci. 3. But sinful\nanger is principally directed against the person with whom we are\noffended.\n\n[2.] The honour of God is the only motive that excites holy zeal; but\npride or evil surmise, is generally the occasion of sinful anger. Thus\nJehu\u2019s executing the vengeance of God, in cutting off Ahab\u2019s wicked\nfamily, was right, as to the matter of it; yet it had a great mixture of\nambition, pride, and private hatred of them, as those whom he thought\nwould stand in competition with him for the crown; and for this action\nhe also desires the applause and esteem of the people; and therefore\nsays to Jonadab, _Come with me, and see my zeal for the Lord_, 2 Kings\nx. 16. so that the one is attended with many Other graces, the other\nwith many sins.\n\n[3.] Holy zeal for God inclines us to express anger against his enemies,\nwith sorrow and reluctancy, as being grieved for their sin, and at the\nsame time desiring their reformation and salvation; but sinful anger\nmeditates revenge, is restless till it has accomplished it, Prov. iv.\n16. and pleased with having opportunities of executing it.\n\n[4.] Holy zeal sets aside, or is not much concerned about injuries as\ndirected against ourselves; but as they reflect dishonour on the name of\nGod, or are prejudicial to his interest in the world. With this view it\nwas that David says concerning Edom, _Happy shall he be that dasheth thy\nlittle ones against the stones_, Psal. cxxxvii. 9. when at the same\ntime, he professes, that it was for Jerusalem\u2019s sake that he desired the\nruin of his enemies, and not his own; for he says, that he _preferred\nJerusalem above his chief joy_, ver. 6. Whereas, on the other hand,\nsinful anger designs or wishes evil to others, to promote our own\ninterest and advantage.\n\n(2.) We shall now consider the aggravations of sinful passion.\n\n[1.] It unfits a soul for holy duties. Accordingly our Saviour advises\nhis people, first to _be reconciled to their brethren, and then come and\noffer their gift_, Matt. v. 23, 24.\n\n[2.] If attempt to reprove sin, or persuade to duty, in passion, it will\ntend to take away the force, and hinder the success of the arguments we\nuse.\n\n[3.] It will occasion sorrow and shame, when reflected on in our most\nserious thoughts.\n\n[4.] It will expose us to Satan\u2019s temptations, and occasion a multitude\nof sins; therefore the apostle calls it, a _giving place to the Devil_,\nEph. iv. 27.\n\n[5.] The smallest injuries are hereby magnified, and our resentments\nexceed their due bounds. We do not consider, as we ought to do, that the\ninjuries done against us, are very small when compared with the sins we\ncommit, whereby we dishonour God.\n\n[6.] It is opposite to a Christian temper, and very much unlike that\nframe of spirit, which our Saviour has recommended concerning loving our\nenemies, Matt. v. 44. and is also contrary to his example, _Who, when he\nwas reviled, reviled not again_, 1 Pet. ii. 23.\n\n[7.] As it is a stirring up our own corruptions, so it tends to stir up\nthe corruption of others, and provoke them to sin, as one flame kindleth\nanother, and hereby increaseth itself, Prov. xxvii. 17.\n\n(3.) We shall farther enquire, how we are to deal with those whom we\nconverse with, who are addicted to passion or anger?\n\n[1.] We are to exercise a calm, meek, and humble disposition, bearing\nreflections with patience, and replying to them with gentleness;\nespecially when it is more immediately our own cause, and not the cause\nof God which is concerned herein. _A soft answer turneth away wrath_,\nchap. xv. 1. _He that is slow to wrath, is of great understanding_,\nchap. xiv. 29,\n\n[2.] Let us take heed that we do nothing that tends to stir up the\npassions of any. If a superior is disposed hereunto, let us prudently\nwithdraw from him; if it be an inferior, let us reprove him with\nfaithfulness; if it be in an equal, let us take away the edge of it, by\nmeekness, love, and tenderness towards him, having compassion on his\nweakness; let us bear injuries without revenging them, and _overcome\nevil with good_, Rom. xi. 19,-12.\n\nEND OF THE THIRD VOLUME.\n\n\n\n\n DR. SCOTT\u2019S\n\n ANSWER TO THE BISHOP OF LINCOLN.\n\n\n PROPOSALS\n\n BY W. W. WOODWARD, PHILADELPHIA,\n\n _FOR PUBLISHING BY SUBSCRIPTION_,\n\n The Rev. Dr. Thomas Scott\u2019s Remarks\n\n ON\n\n \u201c_The Refutation of Calvinism_,\n\n BY GEORGE TOMLINE, D.D.\n\n LORD BISHOP OF LINCOLN.\u201d\n\n\nThe writings of this eminent divine are held in the highest estimation\nby the pious of various denominations. He is acknowledged to be one of\nthe best advocates for evangelical truth, which the present age has\nproduced. His commentary on the scriptures has passed through three\nlarge editions in this country and a fourth, larger than either of the\nformer is now preparing for press by W. W. W. in 3 vols. quarto, 7\ndollars per volume, without any marginal references\u2014the notes following\nimmediately after the text.\n\nThe work now proposed for publication is a most able and elaborate\ndefence of those doctrines which are commonly called evangelical, and\nwhich are by no means peculiar to the Calvinists. The bishop of Lincoln,\npublished what he was pleased to call \u201ca Refutation of Calvinism,\u201d under\nwhich \u201cproscribed and odious name,\u201d says the Christian Observer, \u201che has\nattacked some of the fundamental points of that faith, which was once\ndelivered to the saints.\u201d\n\n\u201cIn this work of the Bishop,\u201d continues the Christian Observer, \u201che has\ngreatly mistaken and misrepresented the sentiments and the persons he\nundertook to refute, and in many important points has maintained\ndoctrines contrary to the declarations of scripture.\u201d\n\nDr. Scott, in his remarks upon this publication of the Bishop of\nLincoln, most ably defends that system of religion, which a great body\nof christians supposed to be contained in the scriptures, from the\nuncandid and illiberal attacks of its enemies, and obviates the\nunfounded objections which are so often brought up against it. The\nreviewers in the _Christian Observer_, after occupying about sixty pages\nof their miscellany in commenting on the excellencies of Dr. Scott\u2019s\n\u201cremarks,\u201d conclude their review with the following passage. \u201cWe cannot,\nhowever, conclude this long extended article, without recommending the\nstudy of Dr. Scott\u2019s laborious work to such of our readers as feel\ninterested in these discussions. It will amply repay those who are\nwilling to undertake and patiently to pursue its perusal. If it does not\nafford, what cannot be expected from any human performance, a\nsatisfactory solution of the difficulties which must ever attend _some_\nof the subjects of which it treats, it will be found to contain a large\nand valuable mass of observations on other most important theological\ntopics; and will, at least, leave on the mind of every unprejudiced\nreader a strong impression of the extensive scriptural knowledge, the\ncontroversial ability, and what is far more estimable than any other\nqualities and attainments, the christian moderation and charity, and the\nmature and vigorous piety of its author.\u201d\n\n\nCONDITIONS.\n\n\n_The work shall be comprised in two large octavo volumes\u2014answering as a\nsixth and seventh volume to his Miscellaneous works, published by W. W.\nWoodward; or will be sold separate in two volumes. It shall be printed\non good paper with a fair type, and shall be delivered to subscribers\nfor two dollars and fifty cents per volume, bound, and two dollars and\ntwenty-five cents in boards, payable on delivery of each volume._\n\n_Those who interest themselves in the work and procure five subscribers,\nthey becoming responsible for their subscriptions, shall receive every\nsixth copy for their trouble._\n\n_The work shall be put to press as soon as a number of subscribers shall\nhave been procured sufficient to warrant the undertaking, Persons\nholding subscription papers are requested to return them by the first\nJanuary next, to W. W. Woodward, Bookseller, Philadelphia._\n\nPhiladelphia, August 21, 1815.\n\n\n\n\n \u25cf Transcriber\u2019s Notes:\n \u25cb The author\u2019s archaic punctuation, spellings, and capitalization\n have been retained.\n \u25cb Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only\n when a predominant form was found in this book.\n \u25cb Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_).\n \u25cb Footnotes have been moved to follow the chapters in which they are\n referenced.","title":"A Body of Divinity, Vol. 3 (of 4): Wherein the doctrines of the Christian religion are explained and defended, being the substance of several lectures on the Assembly's Larger Catechism","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":281601}