A commentary upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the…A commentarie upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the…
A commentary upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the series of the several prophecies contained in that book, deduced according to their order and dependence on each other; the periods and succession of times, at, or about which, these prophecies, that are already fulfilled, began to be, and were more fully accomplished, fixed and applied according to history; and those that are yet to be fulfilled, modestly, and so far as is warrantable, enquired into. Together with some practical observations, and several digressions, necessary for vindicating, clearing, and confirming many weighty and important truths. Delivered in several lectures, by that learned, laborious, and faithful servant of Jesus Christ, James Durham, late Minister of the Gospel in Glasgow. To which is affixed a brief summary of the whole book, with a twofold index, one of the several digressions, another of the chief and principal purposes and words contained in this treatise.
A commentarie upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the series of the several prophecies contained in that book, deduced according to their order and dependance on each other; the periods and succession of times, at, or about which, these prophecies, that are already fulfilled, began to be, and were more fully accomplished, fixed and applied according to history; and those that are yet to be fulfilled, modestly, and so far as is warrantable, enquired into. Together with some practical observations, and several digressions, necessary for vindicating, clearing, and confirming many weighty and important truths. Delivered in several lectures, by that learned, laborious, and faithfull servant of Jesus Christ, James Durham, late Minister of the Gospel in Glasgow. To which is affixed a brief summary of the whole book, with a twofold index, one of the several digressions, another of the chief and principall purposes and words contained in this treatise.
James Durham 1622–1658Edinburgh: printed by Christopher Higgins, 1658
[8], 787, [17] p. · 683k words · Wing D2805 · ESTC R216058
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
yet his pleading that defence, or producing of that discharge, immediately, may be said instrumentally to procure it, because it is not the cautioners payment simply that is sustained, as a relevant defence in judgment, till that be instructed, and except the defence be founded thereon, for, so the Law provideth: so, it is not Christs satisfying simply, but His satisfaction, pleaded by Faith, and ••ed unto, that justifieth; for so the Law of Faith hath enacted; yet the producing of such a discharge, meriteth nothing, but giveth a legal ground of right to the cause that doth merit, and so to what is merited. And the Lord hath appointed this to be the condition of Justification, to wit, the pleading of Christs satisfaction before the bar immediately: for, 1. that stoppeth all mouths; and none can produce that satisfaction, but they must necessarily acknowledge emptiness in themselves, Justice and Grace in God, and love and fullness in the Mediator. 2. The pleading of this, showeth a complete, perfect, equal, evangelic, righteousness in all, whereas if it were any thing in us that were accounted so, then it would not be equal (if perfect) which cannot be said of that which is our righteousness; or, that one man hath better ground to be justified upon, and a better righteousness than another.
yet his pleading that defence, or producing of that discharge, immediatly, may be said instrumentally to procure it, because it is not the cautioners payment simplie that is sustained, as a relevant defence in judgment, till that be instructed, and except the defence be founded thereon, for, so the Law provideth: so, it is not Christs satisfying simplie, but His satisfaction, pleaded by Faith, and ••ed unto, that justifieth; for so the Law of Faith hath enacted; yet the producing of such a discharge, meriteth nothing, but giveth a legall ground of right to the cause that doth merit, and so to what is merited. And the Lord hath appointed this to be the condition of Justification, to wit, the pleading of Christs satisfaction before the barr immediatly: for, 1. that stoppeth all mouths; and none can produce that satisfaction, but they must necessarily acknowledge emptinesse in themselves, Justice and Grace in God, and love and fulnesse in the Mediator. 2. The pleading of this, sheweth a compleat, perfect, equal, evangelick, righteousnesse in all, whereas if it were any thing in us that were accounted so, then it would not be equal (if perfect) which cannot be said of that which is our righteousnesse; or, that one man hath better ground to be justified upon, and a better righteousnesse than another.
3. That Faith is necessary for Justification, so that none can expect to be justified but Believers, hath been also hitherto almost amongst all uncontroverted, till that of late Antinomians have opposed it; But the Scripture is very express, 1. in limiting all the promises of pardon to a Believer, 2. in cursing all that believe not, and declaring them to be under the curse, 3. in placing Faith correlatively taken, in the room that Works had in the first Covenant, which must be in reference to Justification it self, and not the sense thereof only, 4. in asserting that we believe that we may be justified, Gal. 2.16, &c. So that there needeth not much speaking to this, beside, that many things spoken of Repentance, may be applied here. And if it be found, that Faith is either the condition of the Covenant of Grace, or the instrumental cause of Justification, This will necessarily follow, that there is no Justification without it. I know there are some Divines that use different expressions here; yet seeing they also oppose Antinomians, we will not now stick on that.
3. That Faith is necessary for Justification, so that none can expect to be justified but Believers, hath been also hitherto almost amongst all uncontroverted, till that of late Antinomians have opposed it; But the Scripture is very expresse, 1. in limiting all the promises of pardon to a Believer, 2. in cursing all that believe not, and declaring them to be under the curse, 3. in placing Faith correlatively taken, in the room that Works had in the first Covenant, which must be in reference to Justification it self, and not the sense thereof only, 4. in asserting that we believe that we may be justified, Gal. 2.16, &c. So that there needeth not much speaking to this, beside, that many things spoken of Repentance, may be applied here. And if it be found, that Faith is either the condition of the Covenant of Grace, or the instrumental cause of Justification, This will necessarily follow, that there is no Justification without it. I know there are some Divines that use different expressions here; yet seing they also oppose Antinomians, we will not now stick on that.
There is more difficulty in conceiving of the manner how faith concurreth: that there is some eminency in it, is acknowledged both by Papists, who account it a radical grace, having influence on all other graces, and so having special influence on that which they call Justification; and also by some others, who, making works with it to be conditions of the new Covenant, do yet acknowledge a special aptitude in it, for applying of Christs righteousness; and that therefore it is the principal condition, and other things, less principal. In this indeed these of the last opinion, seem to differ from us, 1. That they place Faith, Repentance, and Works in one and the same kind of causality in reference to Justification. 2. That this causality, is but to account them all causes sine quibus non. 3. That all instrumentality is denied to Faith. 4. That Faith is not alone the condition from any respect to its immediate acting on its object Christ, but as other graces are. 5. That Christ is not our immediate Evangelic righteousness, but Faith properly taken, and that as comprehending all other duties and graces under it; and so it is both properly taken, and improperly. 6. That therefore we may▪ be said to be justified by works as by Faith, Faith being taken largely for all. Although where the thing is clear, and Christ is rested on in Justification, and His satisfaction acknowledged (as is in this case) there needeth be no great debate for words and terms of condition, imputation, instrument, &c. yet these being still used among Divines, we conceive there is no just reason to cast them, the use of them having now of a long time made them to pass in this matter, without mistake or strict binding of them to the acceptions wherein they are used in other matters: much less is there reason to cry down the matter expressed by them: And it cannot but be sad, that such new controversies should be moved. We are persuaded, that the reflecting on many worthy men, the obscuring of the trodden path by new Questions and Objections, the confounding of Readers by proposing, as it were, of a different strain of the Covenant, from what formerly hath been preached, the giving of an open door to men to propose new draughts in all things, and that not in expressions only, but also, (as is alleged) in fundamental material ⟨p. 237⟩things, &c.
There is more difficulty in conceiving of the manner how faith concurreth: that there is some eminency in it, is acknowledged both by Papists, who account it a radicall grace, having influence on all other graces, and so having special influence on that which they call Justification; and also by some others, who, making works with it to be conditions of the new Covenant, do yet acknowledge a special aptitude in it, for applying of Christs righteousnesse; and that therefore it is the principal condition, and other things, lesse principal. In this ndeed these of the last opinion, seem to differ from us, 1. That they place Faith, Repentance, and Works in one and the same kind of causality in reference to Justification. 2. That this causality, is but to account them all causes sine quibus non. 3. That all instrumentality is denied to Faith. 4. That Faith is not alone the condition from any respect to its immediate acting on its object Christ, but as other graces are. 5. That Christ is not our immediate Evangelick righteousnesse, but Faith properly taken, and that as comprehending all other duties and graces under it; and so it is both properly taken, and improperly. 6. That therefore we may be said to be justified by works as by Faith, Faith being taken largely for all. Although where the thing is clear, and Christ is rested on in Justification, and His satisfaction acknowledged (as is in this case) there needeth be no great debate for words and terms of condition, imputation, instrument, &c. yet these being still used among Divines, we conceive there is no just reason to cast them, the use of them having now of a long time made them to passe in this matter, without mistake or strict binding of them to the acceptions wherein they are sed in other matters: much lesse is there reason to cry down the matter expressed by them: And it cannot but be sad, that such new controversies should be moved. We are perswaed, that the reflecting on many worthy men, the obscuring of the troden path by new Questions and Objections, the confounding of Readers by proposing, as it were, of a different strain of the Covenant, from what formerly hath been preached, the giving of an open door to men to propose new draughts in all things, and that not in expressions only, but also, (as is alleaged) in fundamentall materiall
shall be more prejudicial to edification, nor the bringing forth of this shall be useful: for, if by this all the former Doctrine of Justification be enervated, where are we till now? if it stand so as the followers thereof may attain Heaven: what is the use of this so full a new mould, with so much professed danger in, and dissatisfaction with, the former? will it not be welcome to Papists, to have Protestants speaking in their terms, and homologating them in condemning the former language of the most eminent Reformers? and though unlearned, or unread Divines be the Epithets of the opposers of this Doctrine, yet possibly experience may show that such may most readily be the embracers of it. I say again, when the Church is overwhelmed with controversies already, it is not fit to contend for words, seeing there is some agreement in the nature of Faith, and in the necessity of works; and we are sure where both these are, there can be no hazard: yet, if under this new model, an other matter be comprehended, than formerly hath been intended by other expressions in the writings of others, it cannot be so easily approven, lest we should condemn the generation of Gods People who have gone before us: laying by therefore prejudice and contention for words, we shall a little (so far as our scope permitteth) enquire in the truth of Faiths peculiar concurring for the application of Christs Righteousness in the Covenant of Grace, and what may be said of works. In reference to which, we would premit,
shall be more prejudiciall to edification, nor the bringing forth of this shall be usefull: for, if by this all the former Doctrine of Justification be enervated, where are we till now? if it stand so as the followers thereof may attain Heaven: what is the use of this so full a new mould, with so much professed danger in, and dissatisfaction with, the former? will it not be welcome to Papists, to have Protestants speaking in their terms, and homologating them in condemning the former language of the most eminent Reformers? and though unlearned, or unread Divines be the Epithers of the opposers of this Doctrine, yet possibly experience may shew that such may most readily be the embracers of it. I say again, when the Church is overwhelmed with controversies already, it is not fit to contend for words, seing there is some agreement in the nature of Faith, and in the necessity of works; and we are sure where both these are, there can be no hazard: yet, if under this new model, an other matter be comprehended, than formerly hath been intended by other expressions in the writtings of others, it cannot be so easily approven, lest we should condemn the generation of Gods People who have gone before us: laying by therefore prejudice and contention for words, we shall a little (so farr as our scope permitteth) enquire in the truth of Faiths peculiar concurring for the application of Christs Righteousnesse in the Covenant of Grace, and what may be said of works. In reference to which, we would premit,
1. That this way of Covenanting, is borrowed from the practice of man with man, to set forth somewhat of a spiritual nature betwixt God and man: for which end, the similitudes of Covenanting, Marrying, Treating, Accusing, Justifying, &c. are borrowed, as hath been said.
1. That this way of Covenanting, is borrowed from the practice of man with man, to set forth somewhat of a spiritual nature betwixt God and man: for which end, the similitudes of Covenanting, Marrying, Treating, Accusing, Iustifying, &c. are borrowed, as hath been said.
2. That though all mutual Covenants have their conditions; yet are they to be distinguished, because sometimes the Covenant is such, as entering into it entitleth to the benefits comprehended in it, as in a Marriage-covenant, entry thereunto entitleth the Wife unto the Husband, and all that is his: sometimes again, the relation must not only be entered, but all the terms thereof actually performed, before there be a right to the thing promised; thus is the covenant betwixt a Master and a Servant: for though the Servant be the Masters Servant at the first instant of the agreement, yet hath he not a right to the covenanted hire, till he hath performed the service and accomplished his Term: in the first of these Covenants, that which entereth one in that relation, is the condition, not so in the second.
2. That though all mutual Covenants have their conditions; yet are they to be distinguished, because sometimes the Covenant is such, as entering into it intitleth to the benefits comprehended in it, as in a Marriage-covenant, entry thereunto intitleth the Wife unto the Husband, and all that is his: sometimes again, the relation must not only be entered, but all the terms thereof actually performed, before there be a right to the thing promised; thus is the covenant betwixt a Master and a Servant: for though the Servant be the Masters Servant at the first instant of the agreement, yet hath he not a right to the covenanted hire, till he hath performed the service and accomplished his Term: in the first of these Covenants, that which entereth one in that relation, is the condition, not so in the second.
3. Hence we may distinguish the condition of a Covenant: sometimes it is taken materially (to say so) and more largely, to wit, for all the duties that are required of one in that relation, and so a Wives dutifulness to her Husband after Marriage, and an adopted Sons dutifulness to his Father after adoption, &c. may be called conditions of the Marriage-covenant, and of adoption: sometimes again▪ a condition is taken more strictly, and, to say so, formally, that is, for such a thing as maketh up the relation, and entitles one to, and instates him in, the privileges Covenanted: So, formal consenting in Marriage, is the condition; and a Sons actual accepting of the offered adoption, and engaging himself to be dutiful, do enstate him in the privilege of a Son, although he hath not yet actually performed all that he is engaged unto: and in this respect, the actual performing of some duties, is rather the duty of one in such a relation, than the condition required to the up-making of it.
3. Hence we may distinguish the condition of a Covenant: sometimes it is taken materially (to say so) and more largely, to wit, for all the duties that are required of one in that relation, and so a Wifes dutifulnesse to her Husband after Marriage, and an adopted Sons dutifulnesse to his Father after adoption, &c. may be called conditions of the Marriage-covenant, and of adoption: sometimes again▪ a condition is taken more strictly, and, to say so, formally, that is, for such a thing as maketh up the relation, and entitles one to, and instates him in, the priviledges Covenanted: So, formall consenting in Marriage, is the condition; and a Sons actuall accepting of the offered adoption, and engaging himself to be dutifull, do enstate him in the priviledge of a Son, although he hath not yet actually performed all that he is engaged unto: and in this respect, the actuall performing of some duties, is rather the duty of one in such a relation, than the condition required to the up-making of it.
4. There is a difference betwixt these privileges and benefits of a Covenant that flow from it as such, and to all in such a relation: thus all wives, as such, have interest in their Husbands, all adopted Children in their Parents, what ever years they be of, &c. and these benefits and privileges of a Covenant, which are but conditionally promised, even to these within such relations, and require more than being in Covenant▪ as although a Wife cannot but have interest in her Husband, as she is a Wife; yet can she not plead the Dowry covenanted, except she continue a faithful Wife; for, if she fail in the essentials of the covenant, she may be divorced: or, an adopted Son, cannot plead actual possession of the inheritance, though •e be a Son, till the term come that is appointed by the Father, or he perform something called-for in the right of adoption, which is insinuated also, Gal. 4.1, 2, &c.
4. There is a difference betwixt these priviledges and benefits of a Covenant that flow from it as such, and to all in such a relation: thus all wifes, as such, have interest in their Husbands, all adopted Children in their Parents, what ever years they be of, &c. and these benefits and priviledges of a Covenant, which are but conditionally promised, even to these within such relations, and require more than being in Covenant▪ as although a Wife cannot but have interest in her Husband, as she is a Wife; yet can she not plead the Dowry covenanted, except she continue a faithfull Wife; for, if she fail in the essentials of the covenant, she may be di•orced: or, an adopted Son, cannot plead actuall possession of the inheritance, though •e be a Son, till the term come that is appointed by the Father, or he perform something called-for in the right of adoption, which is insinuated also, Gal. 4.1, 2, &c.
1. If we take the condition largely and materially for what is called-for from one in Covenant; so works may be called the condition of the Covenant, even as a Wife, or So•, their performing of conjugal and filial duties to the Husband or Parent, may be called conditions of Marriage, and adoption: ⟨p. 238⟩yet if we consider the condition of the Covenant of Grace strictly and formally, as that which doth actually interest one in, or entitle him unto, Christs Righteousness, and maketh him a Son, that is Faith properly taken, as it doth unite with Christ, Joh. 1.12. because it is impossible to conceive one to believe in Christ, but he must be conceived to have title to him, as a Wife hath to her Husband, or a Son hath to his Father. And so he cannot be conceived to be a Believer, but he must be justified: because to have interest in Christ and His Righteousness, cannot be separated from Justification.
1. If we take the condition largely and materially for what is called-for from one in Covenant; so works may be called the condition of the Covenant, even as a Wife, or So•, their performing of conjugall and filiall duties to the Husband or Parent, may be called conditions of Marriage, and adoption: ⟨p. 238⟩yet if we consider the condition of the Covenant of Grace strictly and formally, as that which doth actually interest one in, or entitle him unto, Christs Righteousnesse, and maketh him a Son, that is Faith properly taken, as it doth unite with Christ, Ioh. 1.12. because it is impossible to conceive one to believe in Christ, but he must be conceived to have title to him, as a Wife hath to her Husband, or a Son hath to his Father. And so he cannot be conceived to be a Believer, but he must be justified: because to have interest in Christ and His Righteousnesse, cannot be seperated from Justification.
2. We say, if we look to such privileges of the Covenant of Grace as presuppose something beside being in Covenant to anteced, as for example, entering into life, admission unto Glory, and the like; in that respect, works, and holiness may be called the condition of Salvation, because that is not actually attained without these; even as a Wives dutifulness may be called the condition of her obtaining her Dowry, yet neither is this properly a condition of Marriage, nor the other, of Covenanting with God: but if we look to the privileges which follow the Covenant immediately and do agree to a Covenanter as such, as, to be justified, adopted, &c. in that respect, not works, but Faith is to be called the condition of the Covenant and of Justification: because, by Faith they are instated into that Covenant, and so in these privileges that agree to a Covenanter as such.
2. We say, if we look to such priviledges of the Covenant of Grace as presuppose something beside being in Covenant to anteced, as for example, entering into life, admission unto Glory, and the like; in that respect, works, and holinesse may be called the condition of Salvation, because that is not actually attained without these; even as a Wifes dutifulnesse may be called the condition of her obtaining her Dowry, yet neither is this properly a condition of Marriage, nor the other, of Covenanting with God: but if we look to the priviledges which follow the Covenant immediately and do agree to a Covenanter as such, as, to be justified, adopted, &c. in that respect, not works, but Faith is to be called the condition of the Covenant and of Justification: because, by Faith they are enstated into that Covenant, and so in these priviledges that agree to a Covenanter as such.
Hence, 3. We may see, that when we speak of the Covenant of Grace and its condition, it is not to be compared with every covenant amongst men indifferently, as suppose, to that agreement that is betwixt a Master and a Servant, and a Husband-man and his Labourer for his hire, which presupposeth working, (and so the performing thereof must go before ere the Servant or Labourer can plead any thing upon their agreement) but it is like a Marriage-covenant or free adoption, which doth indeed infer duties to follow in the respects foresaid, and doth imply an engagement to perform them, but doth not-presuppose the actual performance thereof, before any right can be pleaded by such relations, but only consenting and engaging to the same. Hence in Scripture, the Covenant of works is compared to that Covenant which is betwixt Masters and Servants, and the Husband-man and his hired Labourers, &c. and the reward is called debt, or hire, not because of any merit or condignity in the works; (which cannot be pleaded, even in Adams ▪ case) but because the performance of the duties of holiness and obedience, was necessarily presupposed to the having right to the great privileges contained in that Covenant: for, though Adam was in Covenant with God at first; yet could he not claim life by virtue thereof, till he had continued in the obedience of the Commands, and actually performed the same, as Servants must do before they can plead for their hire. Again, the Covenant of Grace is compared to free adoption, or a mans entitling of a stranger to his inheritance upon condition of his receiving that, and to Marriage betwixt Man and Wife (which is frequent in Scripture;) not because the Covenant of Grace requireth not holiness and works, but because it doth not require them actually to pr••ede a persons title to all the privileges covenanted, and doth freely entitle him to the same, upon his entry therein, as a Wife is entitled to what is the Husbands, upon her Marriage with him, although afterward she be to perform the duties of that relation, rather as duties called-for by it, than as conditions of it. Hence we may call the Covenant of works, a servile-covenant, and the Covenant of Grace, a filial or conjugal Covenant: and therefore, although holy duties be required in both; yet there is difference, and the one is of works, and the other of Grace.
Hence, 3. We may see, that when we speak of the Covenant of Grace and its condition, it is not to be compared with every covenant amongst men indifferently, as suppose, to that agreement that is betwixt a Master and a Servant, and a Husband-man and his Labourer for his hire, which presupposeth working, (and so the performing thereof must go before ere the Servant or Labourer can plead any thing upon their agreement) but it is like a Marriage-covenant or free adoption, which doth indeed inferr duties to follow in the respects foresaid, and doth imply an engagement to perform them, but doth not-presuppose the actuall performance thereof, before any right can be pleaded by such relations, but only consenting and engaging to the same. Hence in Scripture, the Covenant of works is compared to that Covenant which is betwixt Masters and Servants, and the Husband-man and his hired Labourers, &c. and the reward is called debt, or hire, not because of any merit or condignity in the works; (which cannot be pleaded, even in Adams case) but because the performance of the duties of holinesse and obedience, was necessarily presupposed to the having right to the great priviledges contained in that Covenant: for, though Adam was in Covenant with God at first; yet could he not claim life by vertue thereof, till he had continued in the obedience of the Commands, and actually performed the same, as Servants must do before they can plead for their hire. Again, the Covenant of Grace is compared to free adoption, or a mans entitleing of a stranger to his inheritance upon condition of his receiving that, and to Marriage betwixt Man and Wife (which is frequent in Scripture;) not because the Covenant of Grace requireth not holinesse and works, but because it doth not require them actually to prede a persons title to all the priviledges covenanted, and doth freely entitle him to the same, upon his entry therein, as a Wife is entitled to what is the Husbands, upon her Marriage with him, although afterward she be to perform the duties of that relation, rather as duties called-for by it, than as conditions of it. Hence we may call the Covenant of works, a servile-covenant, and the Covenant of Grace, a filial or conjugall Covenant: and therefore, although holy duties be required in both; yet there is difference, and the one is of works, and the other of Grace.
Neither is it the difference, that works in the one were meritorious, and in the other not: for there is proper merit in neither, nor is the difference to be placed in this, that the one requireth works perfectly holy as the condition thereof, and the other Evangelic works not perfectly holy: because so, there were not the same law for ordering of holy duties to us which they had, no• that same absolute pattern of holiness for our copy, to wit, Gods holiness, calling us to be holy, as He is holy; nor were defects, in reference to our perfect holiness, sinful under the Covenant of Grace, if perfection were not required therein: all which are false, besides that so it were s•ill of works: But the difference lieth in this, that our working is not to be the ground of our right to the inheritance, nor actually to precede our right as in the Covenant of Works it was necessary; but, believing and consenting only.
Neither is it the difference, that works in the one were merito•ious, and in the other not: for there is proper merit in neither, nor is the difference to be placed in this, that the one requireth works perfectly holy as the condition thereof, and the other Evangelick works not perfectly holy: because so, there were not the same law for ordering of holy duties to us which they had, no• that same absolute patern of holinesse for our copy, to wit, Gods holinesse, calling us to be holy, as He is holy; nor were defects, in reference to our perfect holinesse, sinfull under the Covenant of Grace, if perfection were not required therein: all which are false, besides that so it were s•ill of works: But the difference lieth in this, that our working is not to be the ground of our right to the inheritance, nor actually to precede our right as in the Covenant of Works it was necessary; but, believing and consenting only.
This difference betwixt the Covenant of Works and of Grace, may be conceived thus: Suppose a debtor being sued for his own debt, should either plead no debt, or that he had paid it, or would pay it; this is the Covenant of Works: Again, that of Grace, is, as a ⟨p. 239⟩debtor acknowledging debt, but being unable to pay, pleadeth only the cautioners payment, and expecteth to be absolved upon that account; and not as if by a cautioners intervening, he had all the debt forgiven him to so much, or had a new bargain given him for a penny yearly, or a pepper-corn in the place of a thousand talents; and, in a word, so much down, or that for gold, ure of gold should be accepted: For so, 1. some would have their penny more weighty than others, and thereby be more justified than others, or at least have a better ground to be justified upon. 2. It would be still the same kind of condition, and so the same Covenant in kind (m•jus & min•s […] variant speciem:) for, paying of one bushel, for an hundred chalders, still saith it is victual-rent, although it be of Grace, that it is so little: and indeed so, the first Covenant might be called of Grace, because the good promised were so far beyond the rent required: and so it were but as a man that did at first require a talent, for that which were worth much more, and should afterward alter and require only a shekel. 3. It cannot be so; for, the sinners charge, is not that he wants his penny or pepper-corn, but that he hath broken the Law; his righteousness therefore must be such as doth meet that charge, as, Rom. 8.34. and so it must be such a righteousness as must stand before Justice, and be equipollent, at least, to his own fulfilling the Law, or his having satisfied the penalty thereof. 4. When the Apostle opposeth the righteousness of the Law and Gospel, he opposeth not as it were a thousand talents to a penny, or one sort of works to an other, but the righteousness of Christ, or, to be found in Him▪ to all kind of works whatsoever, Phil. 3.9. 2 Cor. 5.21. Gal. 3
From this also it doth appear, that Covenanting doth in order of nature precede Justification: because, by Covenanting and being in Covenant, we come to have a right thereto, as to a promise of the Covenant, as the accepting of an offered pardon, doth go before ou• having actual right to the following privileges, or a woman's consent before her actual claim to the Husbands goods, though the one is not supposed to be without the other; even as the breach of Covenant, doth precede our being liable to condemnation by the Law. Hence also we may someway gather, that there may be some formal different consideration of the condition of Justification, from the condition of the Covenant: for, Justification being a legal judicial act, it must presuppose such a condition as may be a ground in Justice to absolve a sinner; and therefore in this, Christs satisfaction, as presented and pleaded, must be the only ground; for, it is with respect to that only, by which a sinner can be justified; and this is, to be found in Christ, Phil. 3.9. Covenanting again, being a mutual deed, wherein the Lord condescendeth to make a free offer, and to admit in Covenant upon condition of receiving, the condition here must be that which enticeth to that thing offered, and entereth the person within the bond of the Covenant, which must be Faith. Hence these two acts of Faith, whereby it is defined, may be thus conceived, 1. It receiveth Christ, and so it entereth into, and closeth with, the Covenant, and getteth instantly a title to what is contained therein. 2. It resteth on him; which must be judicially understood, as o•• resteth on a relevant defence, and therefore pleadeth it, as it is said, Rom. 2. that the Jews rested on the Law, which was to expect Justification by it, and so to rest on the righteousness thereof; in which sense we now rest by Faith on Christs Righteousness: this supposeth one to be in Him, and in the Covenant, and it looketh, as such, to Justification; and in respect of its manner of acting immediately on Christ our Righteousness, it may well be called the instrumental cause of our Justification. Thus, suppose a sinner to be lying under Gods curse, and suppose the Mediator to have satisfied, and a Proclamation to be made that whatsoever sinner liable to the curse for sin, will accept of Christs Righteousness, and rest thereon, he shall be justified. 1.
A sinner is induced to receive that offer, which is done by consenting, and submitting to that way of obtaining righteousness; this is the closing with the Covenant▪ and thus Faith is the condition thereof. Then, 2. Suppose him to look to the charge that standeth against him for his former sins in Gods threatened curse▪ and to satisfy this he giveth-in Christs satisfaction; which being offered to him for this end that he, upon the receiving thereof, may be justified; he, by Faith resting on Gods faithful Word, through Christ, repelleth all these charges, by presenting that as his defence, and by the letter of the Law of Faith, which saith, He that believeth shall not come into condemnation, but hath passed from death to life, he is absolved: and this is Justification, even ⟨p. 240⟩as he was formerly condemned by the Law of Works. Here the only meritorious cause of the absolution, and the righteousness upon which the sentence passeth, is, the Cautioners payment; yet so as it is Judicially pleaded: in which respect, we say that Faith is instrumental. And though this pleading of it be necessary, and the Law absolveth not but when the ground i• instructed; yet this pleading or instructing, is not the persons righteousness properly, or the ground of his absolution; but that which is pleaded and instructed, to wit, the Cautioners payment: which being according to Law instructed, is the ground of absolving the debtor from the charge: this is plain even in the dealing of humane Courts. And the tenor of the way of Justification, being holden forth in the Word with respect to a judicial procedure in humane Courts, as is said, it can no other way be more satisfyingly cleared.
A sinner is induced to receive that offer, which is done by consenting, and submiting to that way of obtaining righteousnesse; this is the closing with the Covenant▪ and thus Faith is the condition thereof. Then, 2. Suppose him to look to the charge that standeth against him for his former sins in Gods threatned curse▪ and to satisfie this he giveth-in Christs satisfaction; which being offered to him for this end that he, upon the receiving thereof, may be justified; he, by Faith resting on Gods faithfull Word, through Christ, repelleth all these charges, by presenting that as his defence, and by the letter of the Law of Faith, which saith, He that believeth shall not come into condmnation, but hath passed from death to life, he is absolved: and this is Justification, even
. &c. and to have the righteousness of Faith, and the righteousness of Christ, and the righteousness by Faith, are ever one and the same, and are still opposed to Works.
This difference betwixt the Covenant of Works and of Grace, may be conceived thus: Suppose a debtor being sued for his own debt, should either plead no debt, or that he had paid it, or would pay it; this is the Covenant of Works: Again, that of Grace, is, as a ⟨p. 239⟩debtor acknowledging debt, but being unable to pay, pleadeth only the cautioners payment, and expecteth to be absolved upon that account; and not as if by a cautioners interveening, he had all the debt forgiven him to so much, or had a new bargain given him for a peny yearly, or a pepper-corn in the place of a thousand talents; and, in a word, somuch down, or that for gold, ure of gold should be accepted: For so, 1. some would have their peny more weighty than others, and thereby be more justified than others, or at least have a better ground to be justified upon. 2. It would be still the same kind of condition, and so the same Covenant in kind (m•jus & min•s 〈…〉 variant speciem:) for, paying of one bushell, for an hundred chalders, still saith it is victual-rent, although it be of Grace, that it is so little: and indeed so, the first Covenant might be called of Grace, because the good promised were so far beyond the rent required: and so it were but as a man that did at first require a talent, for that which were worth much more, and should afterward alter and require only a shekel. 3. It cannot be so; for, the sinners charge, is not that he wants his peny or pepper-corn, but that he hath broken the Law; his righteousnesse therefore must be such as doth meet that charge, as, Rom. 8.34. and so it must be such a righteousnesse as must stand before Justice, and be equipollent, at least, to his own fulfilling the Law, or his having satisfied the penalty thereof. 4. When the Apostle opposeth the righteousnesse of the Law and Gospel, he opposeth not as it were a thousand talents to a peny, or one sort of works to an other, but the righteousnesse of Christ, or, to be found in Him▪ to all kind of works whatsoever, Phil. 3.9. 2 Cor. 5.21. Gal. 3. &c. and to have the righteousnesse of Faith, and the righteousnesse of Christ, and the righteousnesse by Faith, are ever one and the same, and are still opposed to Works.
From this also it doth appear, that Covenanting doth in order of nature precede Justification: because, by Covenanting and being in Covenant, we come to have a right thereto, as to a promise of the Covenant, as the accepting of an offered pardon, doth go before ou• having actuall ri•ht to the following priviledges, or a womans consent before her actuall claim to the Husbands goods, though the one is not supposed to be without the other; even as the breach of Covenant, doth precede our being liable to condemnation by the Law. Hence also we may someway gather, that there may be some formall different consideration of the condition of Justification, from the condition of the Covenant: for, Justification being a legall judiciall act, it must presuppose such a condition as may be a ground in Justice to absolve a sinner; and therefore in this, Christs satisfaction, as presented and pleaded, must be the only ground; for, it is with respect to that only, by which a sinner can be justified; and this is, to be found in Christ,
. Covenanting again, being a mutuall deed, wherein the Lord condescendeth to make a free offer, and to admit in Covenant upon condition of receiving, the condition here must be that which enti•eth to that thing offered, and entereth the person within the bond of the Covenant, which must be Faith. Hence these two acts of Faith, whereby it is defined, may be thus conceived, 1. It receiveth Christ, and so it entereth into, and closeth with, the Covenant, and getteth instantly a title to what is contained therein. 2. It res•eth on him; which must be judicially understood, as o•• resteth on a relevant defence, and therefore pleadeth it, as it is said,
. that the Iews rested on the Law, which was to expect Justification by it, and so to rest on the righteousnesse thereof; in which sense we now rest by Faith on Christs Righteousnesse: this supposeth one to be in Him, and in the Covenant, and it looketh, as such, to Justification; and in respect of its manner of acting immediately on Christ our Righteousnesse, it may well be called the instrumentall cause of our Justification. Thus, suppose a sinner to be lying under Gods curse, and suppose the Mediator to have satisfied, and a Proclamation to be made that whatsoever sinner liable to the curse for sin, will accept of Christs Righteousnesse, and rest thereon, he shall be justified. 1.
•
⟨p. 240⟩
as he was formerly condemned by the Law of Works. Here the only meritorious cause of the absolution, and the righteousnesse upon which the sentence passeth, is, the Cautioners payment; yet so as it is Judicially pleaded: in which respect, we say that Faith is instrumentall. And though this pleading of it be necessary, and the Law absolveth not but when the ground i• instructed; yet this pleading or instructing, is not the persons righteousnesse properly, or the ground of his absolution; but that which is pleaded and instructed, to wit, the Cautioners payment: which being according to Law instructed, is the ground of absolving the debtor from the charge: this is plain even in the dealing of humane Courts. And the tennor of the way of Justification, being holden forth in the Word with respect to a judiciall procedour in humane Courts, as is said, it can no other way be more satisfyingly cleared.
