HAving then read thoſe words in Rom. 5. 1. The Point obſerved was this, That we are juſtified by Faith.

To write down all the places that give evidence to this truth, were to Tranſcribe almoſt the whole New Teſtament, Gal. 2. 16. We have believed in Jeſus Chriſt, that we may be juſtified by the Faith of Chriſt, where Juſtification is expreſly made a conſequent of Faith: And as Glory follows Juſtification, ſo doth Juſtification follow Vocation unto Faith, Rom. 8. 30. and Righteouſneſs (ſaith the Apoſtle) ſhall be imputed unto us if we believe, Rom. 4. 24. ſo Acts 10. 43. and 13. 39. and 26. 18. with multitudes of other places.

The onely Anſwer which is given to theſe and the like Texts, is this, That by Juſtification we are to underſtand, a Juſtification in the Court of Conſcience, or the Evidence and Declaration of a Juſtification already paſt before God; ſo that Faith is ſaid to juſtifie us, not becauſe it doth juſtifie us before God, but becauſe it doth declare to our Conſciences that we are juſtified: Againſt which Gloſs I have ſeveral things to oppoſe.

1. That it is a contradiction of the Holy Ghoſt: It is well known that the Apoſtle, in the Epiſtle to the Romans and to the Galatians, ſets himſelf on purpoſe to aſſert the Doctrine of Juſtification by Faith, in oppoſition to Works: The queſtion between him and the Jews was not, Whether we were declared to be juſtified by Faith or Works; but, Whether we were juſtified by Faith or Works in the ſight of God, or before God; and he concludes that it is by Faith and not by Works: Thus Rom. 3. 20, 21. Therefore by the deeds of the law, there ſhall no fleſh be juſtified (in his ſight) But now the righteouſneſs of God without the law is manifeſted; &c. The righteouſneſs of God without the Law, is the righteouſneſs of Faith; and by this we are Juſtified in the ſight of God, and not by the deeds of the Law. Again, Gal. 3. 11. But that no man is juſtified by the Law (in the ſight of God) it is evident, For the juſt ſhall live by Faith; where the Argument is clearly this: If we are juſtified by Faith in the ſight of God, then we are not juſtified by Works in the ſight of God: But we are juſtified by Faith in the ſight of God, For the Juſt ſhall live by Faith: Ergo, not by Works: From which places we may ſafely infer, that where elſe the Apoſtle ſpeaks of Juſtification by Faith in oppoſition to Juſtification by Works, he is to be underſtood of Juſtification before God, or in the ſight of God, and not onely of Juſtification in our own Conſciences.

2. It is alſo a moſt unſound aſſertion, that Faith doth Evidence our Juſtification before Faith: The word (Evidence) may be taken improperly, as ſignifying no more then an Argument; and ſo Faith may be ſaid to Evidence Juſtification, as an effect doth argue the cauſe: As laughing and crying may be ſaid to evidence reaſon in a childe, not that it is neceſſary they ſhould evidence it to the childe it ſelf, or to any body elſe; but becauſe they are Arguments affected to prove, that Reaſon muſt be where they are: If Mr. Eyre will ſay that Faith doth evidence Juſtification after this maner; then 1. Juſtification by Faith is not neceſſarily ſo much as a Juſtification in Conſcience; for as a childe may laugh and cry (actions that will argue reaſon in the ſubject where they are) and yet not have the evidence or clear knowledge that himſelf hath reaſon; ſo may it be ſuppoſed, that a Chriſtian may have Faith (which will argue Juſtification) and yet not have the evidence that himſelf is juſtified: We know by daily experience, that many Chriſtians have that in them, which if it were rightly underſtood, would prove that they are juſtified; whiles yet they want the evidence of this Juſtification within themſelves, their conſciences for long time together accuſing and condemning them, whiles there is ground and reaſon that they ſhould excuſe and abſolve them. 2. If Faith evidence Juſtification as an effect of it, then may we as truly be Faithed by our Juſtification, as to be juſtified by our Faith, and we muſt invert the order of the Goſpel; and inſtead of ſaying, Believe and thou ſhalt be juſtified; we muſt ſay henceforward, Thou art juſtified, therefore believe. 3. It will unavoidably follow that we are juſtified by Works as well as by Faith; foraſmuch as our Adverſaries themſelves I think will not deny, that works are an effect of their ſuppoſed Juſtification as well as Faith: I am ſure Chriſt redeemed us, that we ſhould be Zealous of good Works, Tit. 2. 14. And whether theſe works be the firſt effect or the ſecond, and by conſequence the firſt evidence or the ſecond, is not at all material in this caſe; becauſe the Apoſtle, when he denys Juſtification by Works, he excludes Works altogether, Ro. 3. 28. & 4. 5.

But I ſuppoſe this is not Mr. Eyre's meaning; the word (Evidence) therefore may be taken more properly, and ſo Faith may be ſaid to evidence our Juſtification, either Immediately and Axiomatically, or Remotely and Syllogiſtically. Faith doth evidence Exiomatically, as it is an aſſent to the truth of a Divine Teſtimony, concerning ſuch or ſuch a thing: Thus the Apoſtle ſaith, that Faith doth evidence to us, That the world was framed by the word of God, Heb. 11. 1, 3. to wit, as it is a firm aſſent to the Divine Teſtimony of Scripture, That God made the Heavens and the Earth. And thus Faith muſt be ſaid to evidence Juſtification Axiomatically, as it is an aſſent to this Propoſition, I am juſtified: But thus Faith cannot evidence Juſtification. For firſt, There is no ſuch thing written, Ergo, it cannot be evidenced by Faith immediately; Where doth the Scripture ſay, Thou Paul, or thou Peter, or thou Thomas art juſtified? And where there is no Divine Teſtimony, there can be neither Object nor Evidence of Divine Faith. It is the carnal, preſumptuous, damning Faith of the world, to believe that they are juſtified by an Axiomatical aſſent, though they do not come within the compaſs of any general Truth or Promiſe, from which they may infer ſuch a particular concluſion. 2. The Faith by which we are juſtified, is the Faith which the Apoſtles and Miniſters of the Goſpel are to preach to the whole world, and to preſs upon their Conſciences, Acts 20. 21. and 13. 38, 39. But we cannot preſs it upon every man in the world to believe that he is juſtified, and that if he doth not believe this, he ſhall be damned, unleſs we ſhould preſs men to believe a lie: of all men Mr. Eyre cannot do it, unleſs he would perſwade men to believe himſelf to have Preached falſhoods in all the Sermons which he hath formerly made againſt the avouchers of Univerſal Redemption; Ergo, Faith doth not evidence Juſtification Axiomatically.

Nor yet can it evidence our Juſtification Syllogiſtically: Such a Syllogiſtical Evidence, is the Evidence of a particular Concluſion, drawn out of ſome general Propoſition by the diſcourſe of Conſcience, in which way a Believer doth evidence his juſtification, by the diſcourſe of his Conſcience after this or the like maner: He that believeth, is juſtified. But (ſaith the Conſcience) I believe: Therefore (ſaith the ſame Conſcience) I am juſtified. The two firſt Propoſitions of which Syllogiſm (which they call the major and minor) muſt firſt be evidenced, before Faith can bring in the main Evidence which lays in the concluſion: I affirm then, That it is impoſſible for a man by Faith, to evidence Syllogiſtically that he is juſtified before Faith, becauſe there cannot be found out a Medium before Faith it ſelf, that will agree with both parts of the Queſtion, and ſo there will be always wanting a major or minor, and the concluſion (in which lies the ſtrength of the Evidence) cannot follow: For all particular Concluſions of perſonal Juſtification, muſt be drawn out of ſome general Promiſe or Propoſition which Faith doth firſt aſſent to and evidence, before it can bring in the Concluſion; which univerſal Propoſition muſt contain that ſort or kinde of perſons, of whom Juſtification may be affirmed: But there is no ſort or kinde of perſons of whom Juſtification may be affirmed Univerſally, but onely ſuch as do believe, which I prove thus; All the world is diſtributed into Believers and Unbelievers, Mark 16. 15, 16. John 3. 17, 18. But Juſtification cannot be affirmed of Unbelievers univerſally; Would it not be accounted a mad evidencing of Juſtification by Faith, to argue thus, All Unbelievers are juſtified: But I am an Unbeliever, Ergo, I am juſtified? where the major is falſe confeſtly; and the minor alſo muſt needs be falſe, becauſe he is ſuppoſed to be a Believer that makes the Syllogiſm, and therefore the concluſion muſt run mad: And if Faith can onely evidence that he that believes is juſtified, then can it not evidence any Juſtification before Believing.

Peradventure it may be ſaid (which onely can be ſaid) That Faith may evidence Juſtification Syllogiſtically, thus, All the elect are juſtified: But (ſaith a Believers Conſcience) I am elect, Ergo, (ſaith the ſame Conſcience) I am juſtified: To which I might anſwer, That the major is utterly falſe; but becauſe that is the Queſtion, I meddle not with it. To the minor I anſwer by denying it, Becauſe we ſpeak not now of what is true in it ſelf (in which ſenſe I acknowledge it to be true, that he that believes is elected) but of what is truly evidenced by Faith; and Faith cannot truly evidence Election before it hath evidenced Juſtification: For I renew the ſame Argument thus, Faith doth evidence Election Axiomatically or Syllogiſtically; not Axiomatically, for the Scriptures no where ſpeak to particular perſons, Thou Peter or Thomas, &c. art Elected: If Syllogiſtically, then either by ſomething before Election, or by the conſequences and effects of it. Before Election there is nothing to evidence it by; and if Faith muſt evidence it by its effects, then it evidenceth Juſtification before Election, becauſe Juſtification is one of the effects of Election. In the mean time, what a miſerable circle is the poor reſtleſs doubting ſoul conjured into, through the want of its Evidence, and knows not where to finde it! his Faith muſt firſt evidence his Juſtification by his Election, and then it muſt evidence his Election by his Juſtification, till in the iſſue this new Goſpel leave him without all Evidence of Eternal Life.

2. But the very truth is, it is not Faith which doth evidence Syllogiſtically, and it is moſt abſurd to ſay we are juſtified by Faith, becauſe Faith doth evidence our Juſtification Syllogiſtically; let the Argument be this, If we are ſaid to be juſtified▪ by Faith, becauſe Faith doth evidence Juſtification Syllogiſtically, then we may be ſaid to be juſtified by ſenſe and reaſon, as well as by Faith, which is abſurd: The reaſon is, becauſe ſenſe & reaſon concur with Faith in a Syllogiſtical evidence; for clearing of which, let us again ſet before us the former Syllogiſm, He that believeth is juſtified; But I believe, Therefore I am juſtified: The major onely is the aſſent or act of Faith: The Aſſumption, an act of ſenſe or ſpiritual Experience: The Concluſion, an act of Reaſon, That he that believes is juſtified; this Faith doth evidence: That I believe, is evidenced to me by mine own Spiritual Experience: That therefore I am juſtified, is the evidence of reaſon, inferring the Concluſion out of the premiſes; wherefore Faith muſt be ſaid to juſtifie in ſome other reſpect, then that it doth evidence Juſtification, or elſe we cannot be ſaid to be juſtified by Faith at all.

A third Argument to prove that the Juſtification by Faith is not meerly a Juſtification in our Conſciences, is this.

That Interpretation of the Phraſe which makes us, at leaſt concurrent cauſes with God, in the formal act of our own Juſtification, is not true: The reaſon is, becauſe our Juſtification by Faith in regard of the formal act of pronouncing us juſt, is in Scripture attributed wholly unto God: It is God that juſtifieth, Rom. 8. 33. that imputeth Righteouſneſs, Rom. 4. 6, 8. We do no more juſtifie our ſelves then we glorifie our ſelves: It is God alone doth both, and we are paſſive in both, Rom. 8. 30.

But to interpret our juſtification by Faith, meerly for a juſtification in our own Conſcienes, is to make us (at leaſt) concurrent cauſes with God, in the formal act of our own Juſtification; This is ſo clear that it needs no proof: For us to be juſtified in our own Conſciences, what is it, but for our own Conſciences to pronounce us juſt? and what is this but for our ſelves to juſtifie our ſelves? And ſo our Juſtification by Faith is not Gods act onely, but our own alſo in part: It is true that the Spirit of God doth juſtifie us in our own Conſciences, but not without the concurrent teſtimony and juſtification of our Conſciences: The Spirit ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) beareth witneſs (not to our Spirits, but) with our Spirits; verily if our hearts condemn us, we can have no evidence nor aſſurance before God, 1 John 3. 19, 20, 21.

You know what was here excepted, viz. That if we were altogether paſſive in being juſtified, then we are juſtified before we believe: An Exception ſo childiſh, That if all Error were not a piece of witchery, I ſhould wonder it ſhould proceed out of that mouth. To believe, is indeed a formal vital act of the ſoul, in genere phyſico; but the uſe of it in Juſtification, is to qualifie us paſſively, that we may be morally and orderly capable of being juſtified by another, even by God, the great Judge of life and death: Will any ſober man impute to us, that becauſe we maintain Juſtification by Faith in this ſenſe, therefore we ſet up our ſelves as Judges together with God of our own ſouls? or that we have therefore a joynt concurrence with him, in making that gracious Law, by and according to which we are juſtified, or in pronouncing a ſentence of Abſolution upon our ſelves? He would be thought more worthy to be derided then diſputed with, that ſhould infer, Becauſe ſome Offenders againſt our Laws are not capable of Pardon, unleſs they can read the Book; therefore he that reads, muſt needs be one of the State in making that Law, or a Judge with his Judge in abſolving himſelf according to that Law: If a Magiſtrate grant a pardon to an Offender upon condition that he accept it, his acceptance is indeed his own act; yet in a Moral conſideration, 'tis onely a paſſive condition making him capable of being pardoned according to the Magiſtrates will (though a man have in himſelf more ability to read and accept of a Pardon, then a ſinner hath to believe) and no man (I trow) will ſay that by his acceptance, he is a concurrent cauſe in the formal act of his own Abſolution: In like maner we ſay, we are not ſocial cauſes with God, either in making the law of Grace, or in pronouncing our ſelves juſt according to that law (and therefore Juſtification by Faith, cannot be onely juſtification in Conſcience) yet Faith is required on our part, which, though Phyſically it be an act, yet morally it is but a paſſive condition, by which we are made capable of being juſtified, according to the order and conſtitution of God: It is God that glorifies us, and not we our ſelves, yet ſurely God doth not glorifie us before we believe.

I ſhall adde but one thing more, which I wiſh may be ſeriouſly conſidered: If juſtification by Faith muſt be underſtood of juſtification in our Conſciences, then is not the word Juſtification taken properly, for a juſtification before God, in all the Scriptures, from the beginning to the end; We read of no juſtification in Scripture but by Faith or Works; when the Scriptures ſpeak of juſtification by Works, Mr. Eyre ſays it muſt be underſtood of a juſtification before men; when it ſpeaks of juſtification by Faith, he ſays in like maner, it muſt be underſtood of a juſtification before our own Conſciences, and neither of theſe the juſtification before God, and verily, neither of them of much worth in the Apoſtles judgement, 1 Cor. 4. 3. And yet of any other juſtification before God, which is neither of theſe two, we do not read in all the Scripture; The Antinomians may read their eyes out before they produce us one Text for it: And what a moſt incredible thing is it, that a word ſo often uſed, ſhould never be read in its moſt natural and true ſignification? and that ſo glorious a Bleſſing as Juſtification before God, ſhould never be mentioned by its own name in all the Bible? yea verily, the whole comfort of this ineſtimable Bleſſing will be utterly taken from us; for if the Scripture doth not ſay that any man is juſtified before God, then no mans Faith can evidence to him that he is juſtified before God: And if juſtification by Faith be not juſtification before God, then is there no juſtification before God for any man living promiſed in Scripture: peradventure they may grant that Juſtification in this or that place is meant of juſtification before God; but their grant doth neither make nor mar, if the evidence of the Text do not compel and convince the underſtanding.

Having thus cleared the coaſt of this Exception, which for ought I can ſee is the onely Obſtruction in the way; I paſs on to propound ſome Arguments, by which it may be proved, That we are juſtified by Faith in the ſight of God, and not before.

The firſt is drawn from the nature of Juſtification, which is an Abſolution of a Sinner from Condemnation, by that gracious Sentence and ſignal Promiſe in the Goſpel, He that believes ſhall not enter into condemnation: We are not to conceive of Juſtification as an internal immanent act of God, reſolving privatly in his own breſt, not to proſecute his right againſt a Sinner; but it muſt be ſome declared, promulged act, which may be our legal diſcharge from the accuſation & condemnation of the Law; for as ſin is not imputed where there is no Law, Rom. 5. 13. ſo neither is Righteouſneſs imputed without Law. And as our condemnation is no ſecret act or reſolution of God to condemn, but the very voice and ſentence of the Law, Curſed is he that ſinneth (and therefore he whom God in his eternal Decree hath purpoſed to ſave, may yet for the preſent be under the ſentence of condemnation, as the Epheſians, whom God had choſen to eternal Life, Eph. 1. 4. were yet ſometimes the children of Wrath, chap. 2. 3.) ſo on the contrary, our Juſtification muſt be ſome declared, promulged act or ſentence of God, which may ſtand good in Law, for the diſcharge of the ſinner from condemnation. Indeed to our private forgiveneſs one of another, it being meerly an act of Charity, there is no more required, then a Reſolution within our ſelves to lay aſide our thoughts of revenge, and not to proſecute our right againſt him that hath injured us. But the forgiveneſs of a Magiſtrate being an act of Authority, muſt be by ſome formal Act of Oblivion, by which all former Acts and Orders againſt Delinquents may be invalidated; A Vote in the Houſe, or a Declaration that ſuch an Act ſhall come forth, is no legal ſecurity to a Delinquent. So then, Gods forgiveneſs being an Act of Authority, muſt neither be an hidden ſecret purpoſe in his own heart, nor a meer promiſe or Declaration of an Act of Pardon that ſhall be made hereafter; but a formal Act of Pardon it muſt be, that ſhall make the Law of condemnation to be of no force againſt him that pleads it. And this formal Act of Pardon can be no other then the ſentence of the Goſpel, He that believes ſhall be ſaved, which is ſometimes called the Law of Faith, Rom. 3. 27. ſometimes the Law of Righteouſneſs, Rom. 9. 31. in reference to which it is that the Lord ſays, He that believes, is paſſed from death to life, John 5. 24. ſo that as every man is then condemned when the Law condemns him (whatſoever the purpoſes of God may be, unknown to us) ſo on the contrary, a man is then juſtified when the Goſpel juſtifies him, and not before.

The Argument then is in ſum this,

If there be no Act of Grace declared and publiſhed in the word, which may be a legal diſcharge of the Sinner while he is in unbelief; then no unbelieving Sinner is juſtified: The reaſon is, becauſe Juſtification imports a legal diſcharge of the Sinner, by ſome Act of Grace declared and publiſhed in the Goſpel.

But there is no Act of Grace declared and publiſhed in the Word, which may be a legal diſcharge of the ſinner whiles he remains in unbelief. Ergo. If there be any ſuch Act, let it be produced.

2. The ſecond Argument is this: They that are under condemnation, cannot at the ſame time be juſtified; but all the world is under condemnation before Faith, Ergo, none of the world are juſtified before Faith: The major muſt needs be true, becauſe Juſtification and Condemnation are contraries, and contraries cannot be verified of the ſame ſubject at the ſame time. Juſtification is a moral life, and Condemnation a moral death; a man can no more be in a juſtified Eſtate and a ſtate of Condemnation both at once, then he can be alive or dead both at once, or a bleſſed man and a curſed man both at once. What? that the Apoſtle deſcribes juſtification by non-condemnation, Rom. 8. 1. and oppoſeth it unto condemnation, as inconſiſtent with the ſame perſon at the ſame time, ver. 33, 34. and are at as mortal enmity one with another, as good and evil, light and darkneſs.

But now that all the world is under condemnation before Faith (which is the minor) are the very words of the Lord Jeſus, John 3. 18. He that believeth not, is condemned already: The Lord is proving that he came not into the world to condemn the world; he proves it by a disjunction thus, Then either he muſt condemn them that believe, or them that do not believe; not them that believe, For he that believeth is not condemned; nor them that do not believe, For he that believeth not is condemned already, to wit, by the ſentence of the Law, Curſed is every one that ſinneth; ſo that Chriſt ſhould not need to come into the world to condemn it, which is alſo the meaning of that other phraſe, verſe 36. He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him; that is, the wrath of God by the Law is upon every ſinner, yet not ſo neceſſarily, but that by believing he may eſcape it; but if he believeth not, then the wrath of God abideth on him, the ſentence of the Law ſhall ſtand good againſt him for ever. If then it be objected, that when it is ſaid, He that believeth not, is condemned; condemnation muſt be underſtood of the condemnation of Conſcience, not before God; I Anſwer, 1. The condemnation here ſpoken of▪ is the condemnation of the Law, and that pronounceth all men guilty, not onely in their own conſcience, but before God, Rom. 3. 19. That all the world may become guilty before God. 2. The condemnation in conſcience of the unbelieving world, is either true or falſe; If true, then it is according to the judgement of God, and ſpeaks as the thing is, and ſo God condemns as well as the conſcience; and in this caſe we may ſay as John doth, 1 John 3. 20. If our hearts condemn us, God is greater then our hearts and knoweth all things, and by conſequence doth much more condemn us; If falſe, then (ſeeing all the unbelieving world is under the ſame condemnation) the conſcience of an unbeliever when it condemns him for drunkenneſs, adultery, ſwearing, &c. is erroneous; and the way to comfort them, is to perſwade them ſo, and thereby to blinde their eyes, and harden their hearts, and ſear up their conſciences, that they may never ſee nor be affected with ſin, till they fall irrecoverably into everlaſting flames. 3. The condemnation with which the unbeliever is condemned, is expreſſed verſe 36. by the abiding of the wrath of God upon him. 4. It is alſo oppoſed unto ſalvation, verſe 17. God ſent not his Son to condemn the world, but to ſave it; and ſurely the condemnation which is oppoſed to Salvation, is more then the condemnation of a mans own conſcience; for that may very well conſiſt with Salvation; yea they that are ſaved, are for the moſt part more ſubject to it in this life, then they that periſh.

3. A third Argument is drawn from the ſeveral compariſons by which juſtification by Faith is illuſtrated: Sometimes 'tis compared to the Iſraelites looking up to the Brazen Serpent for healing, Joh. 3. 14. & Num. 21. 8, 9. As then they were not firſt healed, and then looked up to ſee what healed them; but they did firſt look upon the Serpent and then they were healed: Even ſo is it the will of God, That whoſoever ſeeth and believeth the Son, ſhall be juſtified, John 6. 40. He is not firſt juſtified and then ſeeth the Son; ſometimes Faith is compared to eating, and Juſtification to the nouriſhment which we receive by our meat, John 6. 51, 52, 53, 54. We are not firſt nouriſhed and then eat the meat that nouriſheth us; but we eat our meat that we may be nouriſhed by it. In like maner we are not firſt juſtified, and then believe on Chriſt that hath juſtified us; but we believe in Chriſt that we may be juſtified.

4. A fourth Argument is drawn from the perpetual oppoſition between Faith and Works, from whence the Argument is this, What place and order Works had to juſtification in the Covenant of Works, the ſame place and order Faith hath to our juſtification in the Covenant of Grace: But Works were to go before our Juſtification in the Covenant of Works, Ergo, Faith is to go before our Juſtification in the Covenant of Grace: To the minor I ſay nothing, becauſe there is not a man in the world that doth deny it as I know of, and that being granted, the major alſo muſt be out of queſtion: If the tenor of the firſt Covenant, Do this and live, by the conſent of all People and Nations, Jews and Gentiles, will undeniably evince that Works were neceſſary Antecedents of juſtification in that Covenant; why then ſhould not, Believe in the Lord Jeſus and thou ſhalt be ſaved (which is the tenor of the New Covenant, Rom. 10. 6, 9.) plead as ſtrongly for the like neceſſity of the Antecedency of Faith to juſtification in this Covenant? 2. Faith and Works have the like order to juſtification in their reſpective Covenants, or elſe juſtification by Faith and juſtification by Works are not oppoſed; for Oppoſita ſunt circa idem. The Jews looked after Righteouſneſs by the works of the Law, The Apoſtle tells them they muſt ſeek it by Faith; Now, if they ſay we muſt be juſtified by Works, to wit, formally and before God; and the Apoſtle ſay, Nay, but we muſt be juſtified by Faith, to wit, declaratively, and before Conſcience; then the eſtabliſhing of juſtification by Faith, will not deſtroy juſtification by Works; and ſo there will be nothing but falſhoods and equivocations, in all the Apoſtles Diſputations againſt Juſtification by Works: And how eaſily might the Jews and the Apoſtle have been reconciled? They ſay, We muſt be juſtified by Works; and he ſays, We muſt be juſtified by Faith; it is but diſtinguiſhing; Works do juſtifie us before God, but Faith muſt evidence and declare this to us, and they are agreed.

5. Adde further what the Apoſtle ſays, 1 Cor. 6. 11. Such were ſome of you, but you are waſhed, but you are juſtified in the name of the Lord Jeſus: Where the oppoſition between the time paſt and the time preſent, doth evidently argue that the words have this ſenſe, Such and ſuch you were in time paſt (Fornicators, Idolaters, &c. and therefore muſt have been ſhut out of the Kingdom of God verſe 10.) But (Now) you are waſhed: (Now) and not before, you are juſtified in the name of the Lord Jeſus, that is, through Faith in his name: compare Acts 3. 16. and 10. 43. If then the Corinthians were not juſtified before Faith, Why are Engliſhmen? It is to no purpoſe to ſay here, That now they were declared in their own Conſciences to be juſtified, and ſo they were not before, whiles they lived in thoſe abominable ſins. For 1. Why may not we underſtand the word (Sanctified) in the ſame ſenſe, ſeeing we are ſaid to be ſanctified by Faith, Acts 26. 18. and 15. 9. 1 Pet. 1. 22. as well as juſtified by Faith? And ſo ſuppoſe that theſe Corinthians had a ſeed of Grace before, but buried under the dirt and rubbiſh of vile ſins, till by Faith they came to ſee that they were ſanctified: There is nothing can be alledged for Juſtification before believing, which will not hold as ſtrongly for Sanctification before believing; nor any reaſon why Sanctification ſhould not be underſtood for a Sanctification declared, as well as Juſtification for a Juſtification declared. 2. The Juſtification which they now had, was that which gave them right and title to the Kingdom of God, which right and title they had not before, no more then others that did yet continue in Idolatry, Fornication, Uncleanneſs, and the other ſins ſpecified: It is acknowledged of all hands, that Juſtification includes an adjudging of us unto life, or a giving us a right to the Heavenly Kingdom; if then theſe Corinthians had this right before they believed, then did their Faith give them no more ſecurity of Salvation in point of right then they had before, or then might be affirmed of them who did yet abide in their ſins; and by conſequence, if they had lived and dyed in their ſins, they might have gone to Heaven notwithſtanding; though for want of Faith, to ſee this their right, they could not have departed with ſo much comfort of Spirit: For if faith do onely declare that we have a Title to the Heavenly Kingdom, then it makes no relative change in our condition, from a ſtate of death into a ſtate of life; and ſo whether we believe or no, all is one as to the certainty of our Salvation, though we want the evidence and perſwaſion of it. If it be here ſaid, that all whom God in his ſecret juſtification hath adjudged unto life, ſhall have the evidence thereof by Faith. I Anſwer, This evidence is of ſuch neceſſity, as that if they have it not, they ſhall loſe that life to which they are adjudged, or no; If not, then whether they believe or do not believe, they ſhall be ſaved: If it be, then is there no abſolute juſtification before Faith, and juſtification muſt be conditional, and the immediate and abſolute right to life muſt be acknowledged to be a conſequent of Faith, which will at once overthrow Mr. Eyres Opinion, and confirm this Argument without any more ado.

What remains to be done, is to remove thoſe Objections which ſeem of weight to Mr. Eyre for confirmation of his Opinion.

The firſt is drawn from thoſe Scriptures which ſeem to hold forth an immediate actual reconciliation of ſinners to God upon the death of Chriſt, without the intervention of Faith: As Matth. 3. 17. This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleaſed; viz. with ſinners, and Rom. 5. 10. We were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son.

Anſw. To the former of theſe places I anſwer: 1. That the well▪ pleaſedneſs of God need not be extended beyond the perſon of Chriſt, who gave himſelf unto the death, an offering and a ſacrifice unto God of a ſweet ſmelling ſavor, Eph. 5. 2. 2. If we ſhould extend it alſo unto men (which is neither neceſſary nor probable) yet will the words prove no more, then that it is through Chriſt that God is well pleaſed with men, whenſoever it be that he is well pleaſed: Verbs and Participles of the preſent Tenſe (though the Verb in this place be not the preſent Tenſe, but the firſt Aoriſt) have ſometimes the ſignification of the future Tenſe, as John 4. 25. The Meſsiah cometh, that is, will ſhortly come; and chap. 5. 25. The hour is coming, and now is, that is, will ſhortly be; and 14. 3. If I go, I come again (ſo in the Greek) that is, I will come again, 2 Cor. 3. 16. When it (namely Iſrael) ſhall turn to the Lord, the vail ſhall be taken away: The Verbs in the Greek are both of the preſent Tenſe, hundreds of the like inſtances are obvious; ſomtimes they are Notes of affirmation without reference to any determinate time, as Rom. 8. 24. By hope we are ſaved; not preſently, for it follows immediately, hope that is ſeen is not hope, for what a man ſeeth, why doth he yet hope for? Ergo, to be ſaved by hope, imports that a man is not yet ſaved; but the meaning is, That it is in the way of hope and patient expectation that men are ſaved, whenſoever it be that they are ſaved: So 1 Cor. 15. 57. Thanks be unto God that giveth us the victory, to wit, the victory over death by and in the Reſurrection; and the meaning is, That it is through God that we have the Victory, be it when it will be that we have it; for if the words muſt needs be underſtood as if we had the Victory preſently, then Paul, and the Chriſtians of his age were raiſed before they were dead, and the Chriſtians of following ages before they were born: So Heb. 10. 35. Your confidence hath a great recompence of reward, that is, ſhall have, Jam. 1. 17. Every good gift cometh down from above, not as if it muſt needs be coming down when the Apoſtle ſpake thoſe words; but that whenſoever any receives a good gift, it is from God: But why do we fight againſt God? Is it not the teſtimony of the holy Ghoſt as expreſs as words can deliver it, That without Faith it is impoſsible to pleaſe God, or to be pleaſing unto God, as Enoch was by Faith, Heb. 11. 5. 6. It was a poor anſwer that Mr. Eyre gave to Mr. Good, when he asked him, Whether God were well pleaſed with unregenerate men, to ſay, He was well pleaſed with unregenerate men, but not with their unregeneracy; as if God were well pleaſed with unregenerate men whiles unregenerate, but afterwards were well pleaſed with their unregeneracy alſo.

The like Anſwer I give to Rom. 5. 10. we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son, to wit, That Chriſts death was the price of our Reconciliation, and and ſo it is through the death of Chriſt that we are reconciled, be it when it will be that we are reconciled: Here then we muſt diſtinguiſh, as it were, of three Periods of the will of God. 1. As it may be conceived, immediatly after ſin committed, before the conſideration of the death of Chriſt: And now is the Lord at enmity with the ſinner, though not averſe from all ways and means, by which he may return to Friendſhip with him again. 2. As it may be conceived after the conſideration of the death of Chriſt; and now is the Lord not onely appeaſable, but doth alſo promiſe that he will be reconciled with ſinners, upon ſuch terms as himſelf ſhall propoſe. 3. As the ſame will of God may be conſidered after an interceſſion on Chriſts part, and Faith on the ſinners part, and now is God actually reconciled and in Friendſhip with the ſinner; when then the Apoſtle ſays, We are reconciled through the death of Chriſt, he doth not mean, That immediatly upon the death of Chriſt we are actually reconciled unto God (for in the very next verſe he ſaith, That through Chriſt we have now (and not before) received the atonement, or reconciliation, which in plainer terms is this, That now, that is, ſince we are Believers, we are actually reconciled unto God.) But his meaning is, That through the death of Chriſt it is, that the promiſe of reconciliation is made, by and according to which we are actually reconciled unto God after we believe, ſuitable to that of the Lord Jeſus, This is the new Teſtament in my blood (obtained and ſealed by my blood) which was ſhed for the remiſsion of the ſins of many, Matth. 26. 28. The ground of all this is, becauſe the death of Chriſt was not ſolutio ejuſdem, but tantidem, not the payment of that which was in the obligation, but of the equivalent, being not the payment of the debtor, but of the ſurety; and therefore it doth not deliver us ipſo facto, but according to the compact and agreement between the Father and him, when he undertook to be our ſurety: If a debtor bring me what he owes me, it diſchargeth him preſently; but the payment of a ſurety, is a payment refuſable of it ſelf, and therefore effects not the diſcharge of the principal debtor, but at the time, and according to the conditions agreed upon between the Surety and the Creditor. If then our Adverſaries could prove, either that it was the will of God in giving up Chriſt to the death, or the will of Chriſt in giving himſelf to the death, that this death of his ſhould be available to the immediate and actual Reconciliation and Juſtification of the ſinner, without any condition performed on the ſinners part, it were ſomthing to the purpoſe: But till this be done (which indeed can never be done) they were as good ſay nothing: When Chriſt gives us an account both of his own and his Fathers will in this matter, he tells us, That this is the will of him that ſent him, That whoſoever ſeeth the Son and believeth on him, may have everlaſting life, John 6. 40. without which Faith, Chriſt ſhall profit us nothing, Gal. 5. 4. 1 John 5. 11, 12. He that hath not the Son hath not life. So much for that Objection.

The next (which was one of the two made uſe of againſt me after Sermon) is this.

Object. 2. If we are juſtified in Chriſt, then we are juſtified before we believe: But we are juſtified in Chriſt. Ergo.

Anſw. We may conceive of a Threefold Juſtification. 1. a Juſtification purpoſed in the decree of God, Gal. 3. 8. The Scriptures foreſeeing that God would juſtifie the Gentiles through Faith. 2. A Juſtification purchaſed and impetrated in the death of Chriſt, who by his death hath obtained eternal Redemption for us, Heb. 9. 12. which Redemption is the Remiſſion of ſins, Eph▪ 1. 7. 3. There it alſo a Juſtification exemplified in the reſurrection of Chriſt, who himſelf was juſtified in his own reſurrection, and thereby became the exemplary cauſe of Juſtification to believers, by vertue of which themſelves ſhall alſo be juſtified in ſuch time, and upon ſuch terms as ſhall be agreed upon between the Father and Chriſt! (I uſe the term of an exemplary cauſe, rather then of a common perſon, becauſe a common perſon may be the effect of thoſe whom he repreſents (as the Parliament of the Commonwealth) but Chriſt is ſuch a common perſon, as that he is the cauſe of thoſe whom he repreſents in every thing in which he repreſents them) ſo that when we ſay, We are juſtified in Chriſt, the meaning is no more but this, That Chriſt is made the cauſe and patern, according to which Juſtication ſhall certainly follow on them that believe: But what is this to our deliverance from condemnation? or what benefit do we receive by it before we believe? Should a man argue thus in any other benefits we receive by Chriſt and from Chriſt as the exemplary cauſe, he would make himſelf deſervedly ridiculous. For example, We are ſaid to be riſen with Chriſt, Chriſt himſelf being riſen from the dead, and become the firſt fruits of them that ſlept, 1 Cor. 15. 20. So that Chriſt in his reſurrection, is the exemplary cauſe of our reſurrection, in which we are therefore ſaid to bear the image of the heavenly Adam, verſe 49. Would any ſober man infer; Therefore our own perſonal reſurrection is paſt already, to wit, before our ſelves are dead; or that we are not to be raiſed at all, becauſe we are riſen already in Chriſt? Yet no man living can ſhew any reaſon of difference why we may not as juſtly infer that our reſurrection is paſſed already, becauſe we are riſen in Chriſt; as that our Juſtification is paſt before we believe, becauſe we are juſtified in Chriſt: No doubt but moſt men would account the juſt contrary a neceſſary conſequence. Again, We are ſanctified in Chriſt as well as juſtified in Chriſt: Our old man is crucified with him, Rom. 6. 6. and he is ſaid to be made Sanctification to us as well as Righteouſneſs, 1 Cor. 1. 30. And why then may we not inveigh againſt Regeneration and perſonal Sanctification, as well as againſt perſonal Juſtification? for if we are ſanctified in Chriſt, then we are ſanctified before Faith, and we need not mortifie ſin and dye to the world, &c. all this is done already in Chriſt, in whom we are ſanctified before Faith, we need onely to have it declared to us, that we are ſanctified. To draw up the Anſwer more cloſe; Juſtification is either cauſal and virtual, or actual and formal: The former is no other then a Juſtification of Chriſt himſelf, with a connotation of others, who by virtue of this Juſtification of his, are themſelves to be juſtified in due time; as our reſurrection in Chriſt is nothing elſe but Chriſt himſelf riſen, as the firſt fruits of them that ſlept, and ſo become the exemplary cauſe of a reſurrection afterwards to follow us; but as the reſurrection of Chriſt makes no real change in us till our ſelves be riſen; ſo neither doth the juſtification of Chriſt make any moral change in us from death to life, till our ſelves be juſtified: Actual and formal juſtification is, when we are acquitted from the guilt of ſin by the gracious ſentence of the Goſpel, He that believes ſhall not enter into condemnation: Now then if we ſpeak of Juſtification formal, then▪ I deny that we are juſtified in Chriſt (which is the opponents Aſſumption.) And if we ſpeak of Juſtification cauſal, then I do utterly deny the Propoſition; viz. That if we are juſtified in Chriſt, then we are juſtified before we believe; the Reaſon is, becauſe to be juſtified in Chriſt, is not to be juſtified ſimply (no more then to be riſen in Chriſt, is to be riſen ſimply, or to be glorified in Chriſt, is to be glorified ſimply) and therefore the inference is a dicto ſecundum quid, ad dictum ſimpliciter: They are credulous ſouls I'le aſſure you, that will be drawn by ſuch Decoys as theſe into Schiſm and Faction, to the hardening and diſcomforting of more hearts in one hour, then the Opinion it ſelf (ſhould it obtain) will do good to, while the world ſtands.

Object. 3. The laſt and great Argument ſucceeds, and that is this: If we are in Covenant before we believe, then we are juſtified before we believe: But we are in Covenant before we believe. Ergo.

Anſw. Were it ſuppoſed that we were in Covenant before Faith, yet would the Propoſition be faulty: The Reaſon, becauſe the Bleſſings of the Covenant have an order and dependance one upon another, and are enjoyed ſucceſſively one after another: God in his Covenant promiſes Holineſs and Glory as well as Juſtification; yet he would argue moſt abſurdly that ſhould ſay, We are ſanctified and glorified before Faith, becauſe we are in Covenant bfore Faith: But I am unwilling to multiply quarrels: If the great difference lay here, it were an eaſie matter to be reconciled.

2. I do utterly deny the Aſſumption; viz. That we are in Covenant with God before we believe; if at leaſt the Phraſe of being in Covenant be underſtood, properly, for ſuch an intereſt in the Covenant as gives a man right and title to the Bleſſings of the Covenant: That in this ſenſe we are not in Covenant before we believe, is that which I ſhall prove by and by. But firſt, I ſhall give Mr. Eyre a fair hearing, though he would not give it me, and I believe is reſolved to give it to no body elſe, whiles the judgement of the cauſe muſt be left to the people.

The proof of the Aſſumption ſtands thus: If the Spirit be given us before we believe, then we are in Covenant before we believe: But the Spirit is given us before we believe: Ergo, the proof of the minor is from the tenor of the New Covenant, Heb. 8. 10, 11. I will put my laws into their minde, and they ſhall all know me, which is a promiſe of giving the Spirit to work Faith.

Anſw. The Explication of the terms of this Argument is a ſufficient refutation of it: God is ſaid to give in Scripture, ſometimes when no receiving follows; and thus the Word (Give) ſignifies no more then the will of God, conſtituting and appointing: Thus God (gave) his Son unto death, that is, conſtituted and appointed that he ſhould die: There is no other name (given) under Heaven, Acts 4. 12. that is, no other name appointed; ſo Eph. 1. 22. and 4. 11. and a hundred other places: In this ſenſe, the giving of the Spirit is no more then the ſending, and as it were the conſtituting of the Spirit, to be by way of ſpecialty the worker and cauſe of Faith. 2. The word (give) doth ſometimes include a receiving and poſſeſſion of the thing given, as in the ordinary uſe of the word; and thus the Spirit is given when we receive him, and are as it were poſſeſt of him, and he becomes ours, and dwells in us: Thus the Lord promiſeth to give the Spirit to them that ask him, Luke 11. 13. and we are ſaid to receive the ſpirit by Faith, Gal. 3. 14. and the Spirit is ſaid to dwell in us by Faith, Eph. 3. 16, 17. with Rom. 8. 10, 11. and of this latter way of giving the Spirit, is the Queſtion to be underſtood.

2. The Spirit may be ſaid to be given three ways. 1. Eſſentially. 2. Perſonally. 3. In reference to his operations: The Spirit is not given to us eſſentially, for ſo he is God, and is equally every where, nor can he be more peculiarly in one, then in another. Nor 2. Perſonally; for that cannot be conceived without a perſonal union, which would denominate us as truly to be the Spirit of God, as the like union in the man Chriſt Jeſus, did denominate him to be the Son of God. 3. The Spirit therefore muſt be ſaid to be given to us, in regard of ſome peculiar operations which he worketh in us, which are incommunicable to thoſe which have not the Spirit: ſo that common convictions, illuminations, humiliations, ſome joys of heart, and the like, which are tranſient Works of the Spirit, common to them that are ſaved and to them that periſh, Heb. 6. 4. Matth. 13. 20. and all other works which may either go before or be without Faith; theſe are none of them ſuch kinde of works, as that in reſpect of them the Spirit ſhould be ſaid to be given to us: wherefore there being no peculiar work of grace before Faith it ſelf, which may not be wrought in a Hypocrite (which hath not the Spirit) as well as in a childe of God; therefore the Spirit is neither given nor received before Faith be wrought, but is given and received together with Faith in the ſame inſtant of time, and not before. Indeed, as every cauſe is in nature before its effect; ſo the Spirit alſo in order of cauſes is before Faith, but that he is therefore given to us in the leaſt atome of time before the being of Faith, is a meer non-ſequitur, and contrary to the received maxime, Poſita cauſa in actu, ponitur effectus; which rule Mr. Eyre hath often abuſed, to prove a Juſtification immediatly upon the death or reſurrection of Chriſt, and yet here he cannot underſtand it; ſo that as a man doth firſt build himſelf an houſe, and then dwells in it: So the Lord Jeſus by his Spirit doth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heb. 3. 3. build, and organize, and prepare, (as we render the Greek wood, Luke 1. 17.) the ſoul to be a houſe unto himſelf, and then by the ſame Spirit dwells in it immediatly. And this is that which I would have ſpoken publiquely in anſwer to this Argument, if Mr. Eyre had not been beyond meaſure obſtreperous.

Yet here it may be demanded, Whether Faith it ſelf be not given to us by vertue of the Covenant made withus.

Anſw. Faith is not given to us by vertue of the Covenant made with us, but by vertue of the Covenant made with Chriſt; that is, God hath promiſed and covenanted with Chriſt, that if he will lay down his life for the redemption of ſinners; thoſe ſinners ſhall be drawn to believe in Chriſt, and thereby to partake of the benefits of his death: That this is ſo, the Scriptures are plain, Iſa. 53. 10. When thou ſhalt make his ſoul an offering for him, he ſhall ſee his ſeed: He ſhall ſee of the travel of his ſoul, by his knowledge ſhall my righteous ſervant juſtifie many; ſo Iſa. 55. 4. 5. Behold thou ſhalt call a nation that thou knoweſt not, and nations that knew not thee, ſhall run unto thee, becauſe of the Lord thy God, and for the holy One of Iſrael, for he hath glorified thee, Pſal. 2. 8. Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, &c. So Pſal. 110. 3. Matth. 12. 21. And why did the Lord appoint Apoſtles and Miniſters to carry the ſound of the Goſpel from one end of the earth to the other, and ſubdueth Nations to the obedience of the Faith, but that he may accompliſh his promiſes made to his Son? ſuch as are recorded in Pſal. 89. 25, 26, &c.

Now to the words of the Covenant, Jer. 31. 31. repeated by the Apoſtle, Heb. 8. 10. This is the Covenant that I will make with the houſe of Iſrael: I will put my laws into their mindes, and write them in their hearts, and I will be to them a God, and they ſhall be to me a people. From whence Mr. Eyre infers, That the Spirit and Faith is given by vertue of the Covenant made with us.

But I anſwer. 1. That if Mr. Eyre will urge the words of this Text rigorouſly, they would prove more then he would have: For it is manifeſt, That this Covenant contains a promiſe of ſending Chriſt into the world, and giving him up to death for our ſins; as the Apoſtle doth directly prove, Heb. 10. 14, 15, 16. and why then may it not be inferred, That the elect are in Covenant with God, not onely before they believe, but alſo before the death of the Mediator, and ſo his death was not to obtain all or any of the bleſſings of the Covenant, but onely (as the Socinians) to declare and confirm to us, That we may believe, that God of his own meer good will, without expecting any ſatisfaction, will do all this good for us; for if it be a good conſequence: We are in Covenant before we believe, becauſe the Covenant promiſeth to give us Faith: Then is this alſo a good conſequence, We are in covenant before the death of Chriſt, becauſe the Covenant promiſeth to give Chriſt to death. And what anſwer Mr. Eyre will give to avoid this conſequence (for I preſume he will not grant it) and to defend his poſition, that we are in Covenant with God upon the death of Chriſt, and not before, notwithſtanding the Covenant Promiſe to give Chriſt; the ſame Anſwer will ſerve my turn for the vindication of my Aſſertion; That we are in Covenant with God upon believing, and not before, notwithſtanding the ſame Covenant promiſe Faith.

2. But upon a moſt ſerious peruſual of this Text, I finde it ſo contradictory, to Mr. Eyr's purpoſe, that I cannot but wonder what he means to ſhelter his Opinion under the protection of it: If we read the words in Heb. 8. 10. or Jer. 31. 33. and compare them with other places of Scripture, we ſhall finde three things of diſtinct conſideration, the concluſion of which, is the only ſupport of this feeble Argument. 1. There is the matter and bleſſings of the Covenant on Gods part: I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people: In which words, as many bleſſings, temporal and eternal are promiſed: ſo peculiarly pardon of ſin, mentioned in the words next following (for which the Covenant on Mount Sinai, to which this oppoſed, made no proviſion) and therefore when the Apoſtle mentioneth this Covenant again, he leaves out thoſe words, I will be their God, &c. and takes notice of the great bleſſing contained in them, namely, Pardon of ſin, Heb. 10. 17. 2. There is expreſſed the bond and condition of it on our part, and that is, Faith; which is confeſſedly ſignified in thoſe words, of putting Gods Laws in our mindes, and writing them in our hearts: In theſe two things is the tenor and formality of the New Covenant: They that believe, the Lord will be their God, and they ſhall be his people; and this is the Covenant ſo long before promiſed, but moſt expreſly Enacted in the days of the New Teſtament. But thirdly, There is alſo a Promiſe and Declaration that God will work this condition, by which, men ſhall have an intereſt in this Covenant, and a right and title to the bleſſings thereof: I will put my laws into their mindes, that is, I will give them Faith; which Faith is not promiſed as an effect of the Covenant already made, but as the means by which we are brought into Covenant, and thereby inveſted in a right to all the bleſſings of it: So that the words are in this ſenſe, This is the Covenant which I will make with the houſe of Iſrael, when I ſhall write my Laws in their hearts, I will be their God, &c. I do not herein give the Grammatical Tranſlation of the words; though if a man ſhould read the words thus, This is the Covenant which I will make, ſaith the Lord, that giveth his Laws into their mindes, and writeth them in their heart, &c. he would be ſo far from offering violence, either to the Greek Tranſlation of the LXX, which the Apoſtle follows, or to the Hebrew Text in the Prophet; as that he might juſtifie it by many examples. But the matter is of no conſequence at all to either ſide: You ſee the ſenſe which I give of the words.

And that this is the true ſenſe of the place, is moſt evident, if we compare it with other Scriptures where this Covenant is mentioned: For example, Jer. 24. 7. I will give them an heart to know me that I am the Lord; and they ſhall be my people and I will be their God: for (or when) they ſhall return unto me with their whole heart, where we have the very ſame Arguments as here; viz. The bleſſings promiſed: I will be their God: The condition on the peoples part, which is their returning with their whole heart, and the cauſe of this return: I will give them an heart: The Apoſtle is yet more diſtinct, Heb. 10. 14, 15, 16, 17. He proves that Chriſt hath for ever perfected them that are ſanctified; whereof (ſaith he) the holy Ghoſt is a witneſs to us; for after that he had ſaid before, This is the Covenant that I will make with them, I will put my laws into their heart—And their ſins and their iniquities I will remember no more: Before which laſt words muſt be repeated theſe (Then he ſaith) or (Then it followeth) and ſo the whole ſentence runneth thus: For after he had ſaid before, I will put my laws into their hearts; then he ſaith, Their ſins and their iniquities I wil remember no more; which clauſe (as is already obſerved) is one of the ſpecial and noble bleſſings contained in that general promiſe, I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people; from which diſtribution of the words of the Covenant, we may (as before) obſerve: 1. Where begins the grand promiſe of the Covenant, to wit, in thoſe words, I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people. 2. The Qualification of the perſons to whom this promiſe is made: They are ſuch in whoſe hearts Gods Laws are written, that is, ſuch as believe. 3. The efficient cauſe of this their Faith, and that is, God himſelf: I will write my laws in their hearts: The ſame Covenant is delivered in other terms in Scripture, in all which the giving of the firſt Grace is promiſed, not as a part of the Covenant, but as the means and qualification on mans part for his entrance into Covenant, as Ezek. 11. 19, 20. I will put a new ſpirit within them, that they may walk in my ſtatutes and do them; and they ſhall be my people, and I will be their God, which is the ſum of the Covenant on Gods part; ſo in Ezek. 36. 25, 26, 27, 28. Again, the Lord promiſeth, That he will cleanſe and purifie them; and ſo they ſhall be his people, and he will be their God, Ezek. 37. 23. which is the grand promiſe of the New Teſtament, as the context makes it manifeſt: And after he had promiſed that they ſhould walk in his judgements, and obſerve in his ſtatutes; it follows, Moreover, I will make a Covenant of peace with them, it ſhall be an everlaſting Covenant, which in ſum is this, I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people, verſe 24. 26, 27.

The premiſes being conſidered, it is an eaſie matter to take the elevation of all the ſtrength which our opponents can gather out of this Text: If they will argue rightly, they muſt caſt their Argument into ſome ſuch form as this. They concerning whom God hath promiſed that he will give them Faith, they are in Covenant before they believe: But concerning the elect, God hath promiſed that he will give them Faith. Ergo. Here the major is utterly untrue; for the promiſe of Faith (which in reference to us is rather a Declaration, de futuro, of what God will do, then a promiſe) is the promiſe of the condition by which we are brought into Covenant; and therefore, though God hath declared that he will give Faith, it will by no means follow, that we are in Covenant before Faith: But let them frame their Argument how they pleaſe, it concerns not me to be ſolicitous about that. I ſhall advance one Argument againſt them from this their place of refuge, and paſs on: If God be not the God of any, nor they his people before they believe, then none are in Covenant with God before they believe: But God is not the God of any before they believe. Ergo. For the propoſition, he is deſtitute of common ſenſe that ſhall deny it: The being of the Covenant conſiſts in that properly which God hath in us, and we in him. The Aſſumption is proved thus: If God promiſe to give Faith, that we may be his people, and he our God; then till that Faith be given, he is not our God, nor we his people; for it is in vain for God to give Faith for an end, which may be well enough attained without Faith: But God promiſeth to give Faith, that he may be our God and we his people, Jer. 31. 33. Heb. 8. 10. Ezek. 11. 19, 20. and 36. 25, 26, 27, 28. & 37. 23, 24, 26, 27. beſides multitudes of other Scriptures. I have onely one obſervation to adde, which the moſt learned amongſt the Jewiſh and Chriſtian Writers do often take notice of, and that is this: That God is never ſaid to be our God in reference to his giving of the firſt grace, but onely in reference to the bleſſings which he promiſeth to them that have Faith, Heb. 11. 16. He is not our God that he may give us Faith, but is every where ſaid to give us Faith, that he may be our God: In times paſt you were not a people, but are now the people of God, 1 Pet. 2. 10.

And now I might ſpare the pains of further proof of the poſition laſt defended; Viz. That we are in not Covenant before Faith. yet to the Scriptures already advanced, let me adde a few more, Iſa. 55. 3. Come unto me (that is, Believe in me, John 6. 35.) and I will make an everlaſting Covenant with you. 2. The voice of the Goſpel (which is the Covenant of Grace) is every where, Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved; in oppoſition to the Covenant of Works, which ſaith, Do this and live, Rom. 10. 5. 6. 9. This is the Covenant whereof Chriſt is Mediator, Heb. 9. 15. That they that are called (unto Faith) ſhall receive the promiſe of the eternal inheritance. 3. The Covenant of Grace is preached to every man, and every man called upon to fulfil the conditions of it, that he may receive the bleſſings of it, which condition is Faith, Heb. 4. 1, 2, 10. Is there an abſolute promiſe made to every man that God will give him grace? or is it ſenſe to exhort men to take hold of Gods Covenant (as the phraſe is, Iſa. 66. 4, 6.) or to enter into Covenant with God, if the Covenant be onely an abſolute promiſe on Gods part? or to exhort men to be ſtedfaſt in the Covenant of God, to hold faſt the faith, and their confidence in Chriſt? as the Scriptures are wont to do, Heb. 3. 12, 13, 14. and 10. 23. or to accuſe, and blame, and damn men for unbelief, and rejecting of the Goſpel? Was it ever known that men ſhould be counted worthy of death, for not being the objects of an abſolute promiſe? 4. If the Covenant of grace be an abſolute promiſe, then no men in the world but wicked & ungodly men, are in covenant with God: When a covenant is fulfilled, it ceaſeth to be any more a covenant. In this life we are properly ſaid to be in covenant with God; when we ſhall be perfected in glory in the heavenly kingdom, we cannot properly be ſaid to be in covenant: Now abſolute promiſes of grace are made onely to wicked men; when grace is given them, then is the covenant ſo far forth fulfilled, and ſo far forth they ceaſe to be in covenant; and ſo none but wicked men ſhall be perfectly in covenant with God: But it is beſide my purpoſe & work to follow this purſuit any further.

Thus then you have with advantage, the copy of the Sermon you have often deſired; to which, though it is likely, ſomthing is or will be ſaid (which at this diſtance I am never like to hear of) yet ſure I am that nothing can be anſwered conſiſtent with the truth of Scriptures. I am ſorry for the breaches that are amongſt you, for the grief of the godly, and the hardning of multitudes to their own deſtruction. The God and Father of▪ the Lord Jeſus reſtore you to peace, and quiet that ſpirit of Diviſion that is gone abroad amongſt you: to his Grace I commend you, & reſt,

Imprimatur, Edm. Calamy.

May 26. 1652. Yours in the neareſt bonds, Benj: Woodbridge.