Aphorisms of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…Aphorismes of justification, with their explication annexed wherein also is opened the nature of…

TO your second Objection about Christs active and passive Righteousness; You should have overthrown my grounds, and not only urge my going against the stream of Divines: As I take it for no honour to be the first inventing a new opinion in Religion, so neither to be the last in embracing the truth: I never thought that my faith must follow the major vote; I value Divines also by weight, and not by number; perhaps I may think that one Pareus, Piscator, Scultetus, Alstedius, Capellus, Gataker, or Bradshaw, is of more authority then many Writers and Readers: View their Writings, and answer their Arguments, and then judg.

TO your third, about the violation of the Covenant, I shall willingly clear my meaning to you as well as I can, though I thought what is said had cleared it. The 34 Aphorism (which is it you object against) doth thus far explain it, 1. That I speak of Gods Covenant of Grace only, or his new Law, containing the terms on which men live or dye. 2. That by Violation I mean the breaking or non-performance of its conditions, or such a violation as bringeth the offender under the threatening of it, and so maketh the penalty of that Covenant breaking due to him. 3. I there tell you, that the new Covenant may be neglected long, and sinned against objectively, and Christs Commands may ⟨p. 231⟩be broken, when yet the Covenant is not so violated. The Tenor of the Covenant me-think should put you quite out of doubt of all this, which is He that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned. The unbelief and rebellion against Christ, which the godly were guilty of before believing, is a neglect or refusal of the Covenant; and I acknowledge that all that while they were in a damnable state, that is, in a state wherein they should have been damned, if they had so dyed; for then their unbelief had been final.

TO your third, about the violation of the Covenant, I shall willingly clear my meaning to you as well as I can, though I thought what is said had cleared it. The 34 Aphorism (which is it you object against) doth thus far explain it, 1. That I speak of Gods Covenant of Grace only, or his new Law, containing the terms on which men live or dye. 2. That by Violation I mean the breaking or non-performance of its conditions, or such a violation as bringeth the offendor under the threatning of it, and so maketh the penalty of that Covenant breaking due to him. 3. I there tell you, that the new Covenant may be neglected long, and sinned against objectively, and Christs Commands may