Filter authors and titles

A37035:1053

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…

Name: A commentary upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the…
Author: James Durham

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.

:1050p. 245–246

If it be said, Cannot Faith then, properly taken, be in any respect counted a condition, or ground of right? For Answ. In sum we say, 1. That Faith at most is but the condition on which Christ becometh our Righteousness, or is imputed to us for our Justification; and so Faith it self properly cannot be our righteousness. 2. We say, that when Faith is called the condition of the Covenant, or our righteousness, it doth not imply that it is properly imputed; but it showeth to whom and upon what terms Christs Righteousness is imputed, or, how a sinner may have access to be justified by it 3. We say, that Faith ⟨p. 246⟩when it is called the condition, is ever to be taken strictly, that is, as it receiveth Christ; and by that manner of acting, is differenced from all other graces and works. And so, 4. We say, that it cannot be conceived under this consideration, but as looking to Christs Righteousness, as the object thereof; even as we cannot conceive a consent, which constituteth a Marriage, without respect unto the party consented unto, and his offer, or declaration of his will preceding, without which no consent could be constitutive of Marriage, or be a ground of claim to any of the goods or privileges of such a person; or, as we cannot conceive looking to the brazen Serpent, as the condition upon, or mean by which health was gotten, but with respect to the object thereof, to wit, the Serpent; and the ground and warrant preceding, to wit, Gods appointment; without which, a look, considered simply in it self, is not so to be esteemed.

If it be said, Cannot Faith then, properly taken, be in any respect counted a condition, or ground of right? For Answ. In sum we say, 1. That Faith at most is but the condition on which Christ becometh our Righteousnesse, or is impured to us for our Justification; and so Faith it self properly cannot be our righteousnesse. 2. We say, that when Faith is called the condition of the Covenant, or our righteousnesse, it doth not imply that it is properly imputed; but it sheweth to whom and upon what terms Christs Righteousnesse is imputed, or, how a sinner may have accesse to be justified by it 3. We say, that Faith ⟨p. 246⟩when it is called the condition, is ever to be taken strictly, that is, as it receiveth Christ; and by that manner of acting, is differenced from all other graces and works. And so, 4. We say, that it cannot be conceived under this consideration, but as looking to Christs Righteousnesse, as the object thereof; even as we cannot conceive a consent, which constituteth a Marriage, without respect unto the party consented unto, and his offer, or declaration of his will preceding, without which no consent could be constitutive of Marriage, or be a ground of claim to any of the goods or priviledges of such a person; or, as we cannot conceive looking to the brazen Serpent, as the condition upon, or mean by which health was gotten, but with respect to the object thereof, to wit, the Serpent; and the ground and warrand preceding, to wit, Gods appointment; without which, a look, considered simply in it self, is not so to be esteemed.

:1051p. 246

If it be yet urged further here, that if Faith properly taken, be the condition of the Covenant of Grace, and hath in that succeeded in the room that Works had in the Covenant of Works, Then Faith must be our Evangelic-righteousness, because Works then were our legal-righteousness, and that upon which our right to life did stand; But the former is truth; He that said, do and live, faith now, believe and be saved, Ergo, &c. Ans. 1. This will say nothing for Faith largely taken, as comprehending Works; but at the most for Faith strictly taken, as contradistinguished from them; and so there will not be that same kind of causality in both, but the contrary. 2. In this condition, Faith is never to be taken, without implying the object Christ; or without respect to its proper aptitude, for receiving of Him, and so believe and thou shalt be saved, implieth still this, receive Christ and rest on His Righteousness, or submit to Christs Righteousness, and accept of Him for that end, that He may be righteousness to thee, and thou shalt be saved: it is impossible to conceive it otherwise, at least rightly. Now, when upon believing, Justification doth follow, and the person is declared just, it cannot be said that the act of believing properly is imputed, and that upon that account he is declared just; it is rather Christs Righteousness believed on, that is imputed to him; and upon that account he is declared just, which is the very terms of the Covenant of Redemption, whereby the sinners sins are imputed to Christ; whereupon He, as Cautioner, is sentenced and made sin, that His Righteousness may be imputed to us, and so we upon that account made righteous, and that in him, and not in our selves, as it is, 2 Cor. 5.21. which implieth, that even our Evangelic-righteousness, whereby we are absolved, is in Him, and not in our selves, as the sin for which He was sentenced, was in us, and not in Him. 3. There is this difference betwixt the two Covenants, as was said, The one is a servile Covenant (to say so) and must have what is engaged to in it, performed, before one have right to what is promised; and so works were in the Covenant of Works, the condition upon which life was to be expected; and without the actual performing of which, there could have been no pleading for it: but this, to wit, the Covenant of Grace, is a conjugal Covenant;

If it be yet urged further here, that if Faith properly taken, be the condition of the Covenant of Grace, and hath in that succeeded in the room that Works had in the Covenant of Works, Then Faith must be our Evangelick-righteousnesse, because Works then were our legal-righteousnesse, and that upon which our right to life did stand; But the former is truth; He that said, do and live, faith now, believe and be saved, Ergo, &c. Ans. 1. This will say nothing for Faith largely taken, as comprehending Works; but at the most for Faith strictly taken, as contradistinguished from them; and so there will not be that same kind of causality in both, but the contrary. 2. In this condition, Faith is never to be taken, without implying the object Christ; or without respect to its proper aptitude, for receiving of Him, and so believe and thou shalt be saved, implyeth still this, receive Christ and rest on His Righteousnesse, or submit to Christs Righteousness, and accept of Him for that end, that He may be righteousnesse to thee, and thou shalt be saved: it is impossible to conceive it otherwise, at least rightly. Now, when upon believing, Justification doth follow, and the person is declared just, it cannot be said that the act of believing properly is imputed, and that upon that account he is declared just; it is rather Christs Righteousnesse believed on, that is imputed to him; and upon that account he is declared just, which is the very terms of the Covenant of Redemption, whereby the sinners sins are imputed to Christ; whereupon He, as Cautioner, is sentenced and made sin, that His Righteousnesse may be imputed to us, and so we upon that account made righteous, and that in him, and not in our selves, as it is,

:1052p. 246

therefore is not the condition thereof in all things to be squared by that. Beside, works were the very material righteousness upon which Justification was founded in the Covenant of Works; but to say of Faith, as taken in itself and without respect to Christ, that it were so the condition now, would be absurd, Christ being by the whole strain of the Gospel holden forth to be rested on before we can be justified: and yet even this would not confirm any way what is said of the joint concurrence of Grace and works in that same kind of causality with Faith:

therefore is not the condition thereof in all things to be squared by that. Beside, works were the very materiall righteousnesse upon which Justification was founded in the Covenant of Works; but to say of Faith, as taken in itself and without respect to Christ, that it were so the condition now, would be absurd, Christ being by the whole strain of the Gospel holden forth to be rested on before we can be justified: and yet even this would not confirm any way what is said of the joynt concurrance of Grace and works in that same kind of causality with Faith:

:1053p. 246–247

If it be further said, may not Faith properly taken be called the condition upon which Christs Righteousness becometh a sinners, and is imputed to him? Answ. 1. This confirmeth what we say: for, if Faith be the condition upon which Christ becometh our Righteousness, Then it is Christ who is our Righteousness, and not Faith strictly and properly taken, much less largely, as comprehending all other Graces: for if it were our righteousness properly, there needed no imputation of Christs after our believing, except it be said (as some Papists say) that it is imputed to make up our defects, and to make our holiness acceptable; and so it were our Faith and Works that should be justified by the imputation of Christs Righteousness, and not our persons: which is contrary to Scripture. 2. This is, upon the matter, the same with what we said, as is hinted: for suppose a debtor to be pursued, he pleadeth absolution, because his Cautioner hath payed, and he produceth the discharge given to him, wherein that is acknowledged; his pleading so and producing ⟨p. 247⟩of that discharge, may be someway called the ground that giveth him right in Law to have that payment of the Cautioners imputed to him, yet his absolution floweth from the complex business, not of his pleading simply, but of the cautioners paying, his pleading of that payment, and the Laws accepting of that defence and imputing of it to him; and so from all these together his absolution floweth: just so it is here, our Justification floweth from Christs satisfaction, being accepted and rested on by us, and imputed to us by God. And therefore, thirdly, though Faith properly be the condition upon which Christs Righteousness is imputed to us (I had rather call it the mean by which it is apprehended) yet it followeth not, that therefore Faith properly taken, is our righteousness, and as such, is imputed to us, and accounted so, seeing still this presupposeth the imputation of Christs Righteousness in order of nature to intervene betwixt our believing and our Justification: and therefore that His Righteousness imputed, must be properly our righteousness, seeing we upon account, and considered as such, (to wit, as having Christs Righteousness imputed to us) are justified; and upon that Righteousness imputed, Justification is immediately grounded.

:1054p. 247

Yet, Fourthly, All this doth say nothing for Faith largely taken, as comprehending all Gospel-duties: for, though Faith strictly taken be necessary for having right to Christs Righteousness, or having it imputed to us; yet are not actual works so, by any means; but through the imputation of Christs Righteousness, we are first accepted, and then bring forth these good works; which showeth that they do not go before that imputation of Christs Righteousness, or our Justification, but that rather they follow thereupon. For, if we cannot do good works, till we be Sanctified, and if none be Sanctified, but such as are Justified, and these two cannot be separated; no not for an instant of time (for it cannot be said that a man is Sanctified, but not yet Justified, aut contra) Then it will follow, that a man is Justified before he hath actual works, (it is of such we debate, and not of habitual seminal holiness) for he may be, and is Sanctified before he can have them, much more ere he persevere in them. And so consequently, actual good works cannot concur to Justification as Faith doth, or be the condition thereof; But the former is true and clear: Therefore so is the latter also: which is the thing that was in Question. Lastly, we say, if Faith properly, and largely taken according to their meaning, (or yet strictly) be imputed to us for Righteousness, Then either Christs Righteousness is not imputed, but our Faith only, or Christs Righteousness and our Faith properly taken also; But neither can be said: not the first, to wit, that the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed to us, but Faith only, That I suppose is not intended: neither can the latter be said, viz. that Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and Christ also: for then, Christ is either imputed for our total righteousness, and so Faith cometh not in, or, as a partial righteousness, and that is absurd. Again, either His Righteousness is imputed to us before we believe, (and so before our Faith can be imputed) which is false: for, that would make Christs Righteousness to be ours before we were in Covenant internally; Or, it is imputed to us after we believe, and so after our own Faith is imputed to us and accepted for Righteousness; But that cannot be; for then we would be righteous, before the imputation of Christs Righteousness; which is absurd:

Yet, Fourthly, All this doth say nothing for Faith largly taken, as comprehending all Gospel-duties: for, though Faith strictly taken be necessary for having right to Christs Righteousnesse, or having it imputed to us; yet are not actuall works so, by any means; but through the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse, we are first accepted, and then bring forth these good works; which sheweth that they do not go before that imputation of Christs Righteousnesse, or our Justification, but that rather they follow thereupon. For, if we cannot do good works, till we be Sanctified, and if none be Sanctified, but such as are Justified, and these two cannot be separated; no not for an instant of time (for it cannot be said that a man is Sanctified, but not yet Justified, aut contra) Then it will follow, that a man is Justified before he hath actuall works, (it is of such we debate, and not of habituall seminall holinesse) for he may be, and is Sanctified before he can have them, much more ere he persevere in them. And so consequently, actuall good works cannot concur to Justification as Faith doth, or be the condition thereof; But the former is true and clear: Therefore so is the latter also: which is the thing that was in Question. Lastly, we say, if Faith properly, and largely taken according to their meaning, (or yet strictly) be imputed to us for Righteousnesse, Then either Christs Righteousnesse is not imputed, but our Faith only, or Christs Righteousnesse and our Faith properly taken also; But neither can be said: not the first, to wit, that the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed to us, but Faith only, That I suppose is not intended: neither can the latter be said, viz. that Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and Christ also: for then, Christ is either imputed for our totall righteousness, and so Faith cometh not in, or, as a partiall righteousness, and that is absurd. Again, either His Righteousness is imputed to us before we believe, (and so before our Faith can be imputed) which is false: for, that would make Christs Righteousness to be ours before we were in Covenant internally; Or, it is imputed to us after we believe, and so after our own Faith is imputed to us and accepted for Righteousness; But that cannot be; for then we would be righteous, before the imputation of Christs Righteousness; which is absurd:

:1055p. 247

or, lastly, both must be imputed together; which also cannot be: for, if both be imputed together properly, Then both in the same sense or kind of causality, or in diverse senses: the first cannot be said; for that would make both meritorious, which is disclaimed: if the last be said, then it must be so as the one is imputed to us for our legal-righteousness, to wit, Christs satisfaction, and the other as our Evangelic, to wit, Faith; But, 1. That is the thing already spoken to, and doth divide Christ and our Gospel-righteousness; Or, 2. It turneth to this, that Christ is the thing that satisfieth Justice, but Faith is the ground or mean by which we come to have title to that satisfaction; which is the thing that is granted, and we suppose is the thing that by some is intended: and is in sum, that, to which others give the name of the instrumental cause. And if so, there needeth not be contending for words: for, both are acknowledged, to wit, that by Christs Righteousness, only as the meritorious cause, we are justified, and that there is no right to plead Justification by that, except by Faith, or upon condition of believing, by which, actual right to Christ, and by Him Justification, is obtained.

or, lastly, both must be imputed together; which also cannot be: for, if both be imputed together properly, Then both in the same sense or kind of causality, or in diverse senses: the first cannot be said; for that would make both meritorious, which is disclaimed: if the last be said, then it must be so as the one is imputed to us for our legall-righteousness, to wit, Christs satisfaction, and the other as our Evangelick, to wit, Faith; But, 1. That is the thing already spoken to, and doth divide Christ and our Gospel-righteousness; Or, 2. It turneth to this, that Christ is the thing that satisfieth Justice, but Faith is the ground or mean by which we come to have title to that satisfaction; which is the thing that is granted, and we suppose is the thing that by some is intended: and is in sum, that, to which others give the name of the instrumentall cause. And if so, there needeth not be contending for words: for, both are acknowledged, to wit, that by Christs Righteousnesse, only as the meritorious cause, we are justified, and that there is no right to plead Justification by that, except by Faith, or upon condition of believing, by which, actuall right to Christ, and by Him Justification, is obtained.

:1056p. 247–248

Further, it cannot be said, that they are imputed jointly: for then, 1. Either that imputation must be an instantaneous act, at the first believing, or exercise of Faith; and so Justification must be an instantaneous act also; which they will not grant: because the Faith ⟨p. 248⟩that is imputed (according to them) is Faith and the exercise of holiness persevered in; for which cause, Justification to them is a continued act. 2. It must be instantaneous, but not imputed, till Faith and Holiness be persevered into; and by this, neither Christs Righteousness, nor Faith is imputed to the person, not can he be accounted in friendship with God, or to be in Christ, or righteous, till his life be closed: for, he cannot be accounted so, till he be justified; and he is not justified, till these be imputed to him for Righteousness: Or, 3. that imputation must be a continued act, from the first closing with Christ till the end. But how can that be? For, 1. It is hard to conceive the act of the imputation of our faith to be continued, but more hard to conceive the imputation of Christs Righteousness to be a continuing act: for, Christs Righteousness, at the first, is perfect, and it is to be imputed to the Believer; if therefore one may be called a Believer, it is to be imputed to him instantly. 2. Imputation being a judicial word and act, it supposeth an instant sentencing of such a righteousness to belong to such a person, as it were, and to be accepted for him: for, if he hath not perfect right, there is no legal imputation, (to say so;) but if it be perfect, then it is an instantaneous act. 3. If it be continued, then it is continued as if at first it were not a perfect imputation or perfectly imputed; But that were to say that it is not imputation: if it be continued as perfect, then it is supponed to be instantaneous, and past; and what was said for Justification, doth hold here. Indeed if the meaning be that the Gospel doth continue to impute Righteousness, even after Faith, till the Believer be in Heaven, and to account such a sinner just by virtue thereof, That is truth; But that speaketh the changed state of a sinner, upon the account of an imputation and justification already: so indeed, the word of the Gospel continueth still to pronounce Believers justified upon that account, and that imputation in its virtue never ceaseth;

Further, it cannot be said, that they are imputed joyntly: for then, 1. Either that imputation must be an instantaneous act, at the first believing, or exercise of Faith; and so Justification must be an instantaneous act also; which they will not grant: because the Faith

:1057p. 248

But it cannot be said that the Word doth continue to justify, as justifying denoteth the changing of a persons state, from a state of enmity to a state of friendship: even as an absolved Rebel, or Debtor, once pronounced free by virtue of such a persons intercession, or Cautioners payment, doth continue to be declared free, that is, his absolution continueth in force; but properly, the act of freedom, or absolving, doth not continue, but is instantaneous upon the production of such rights.

But it cannot be said that the Word doth continue to justifie, as justifying denoteth the changing of a persons state, from a state of enimitie to a state of friendship: even as an absolved Rebel, or Debtor, once pronounced free by vertue of such a persons intercession, or Cautioners payment, doth continue to be declared free, that is, his absolution continueth in force; but properly, the act of freedom, or absolving, doth not continue, but is instantaneous upon the production of such rights.

:1058p. 248

To shut up this, we may illustrate the way of Justification, which is more clearly expressed in the Gospel under these expressions, believe and thou shall be saved, by comparing it with the more obscure and typical expressions used under the Law: for, it is certain the substance is the same; and what is our legal-righteousness, was theirs; and what was their evangelic-righteousness, is ours also. Now, the terms or expressions of the Old Testament run thus, Levit. 4. vers. 3, 4, &c. When a man sinneth, he shall bring his offering, &c. and he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering, and it shall be accepted for him, to make atonement for him, &c. In which words there is an express condescending upon the Lords side to propose something as a righteousness for a sinner, which was to be accepted for him; yet, I suppose, no Christian will say, that it was the external sacrifice itself, that was to be accepted for such, nor that it was the act of the Faith of the offerer alone, that was so accepted: for then there needed no sacrifice, but it behoved to be the thing typified by that sacrifice, to wit, the Sacrifice of Christ, looked to, apprehended and pleaded by the Faith of the offerer, that was so accepted. Yet, the external sacrifices in the Old, are as expressly said to be accepted for a sinners Justification, or as an atonement for him, as Faith is said to be accounted for righteousness in the New: and as it cannot be said, that by virtue of Christs satisfaction, or the Covenant with him, it was procured that such performances and sacrifices should be accepted of themselves, as the persons immediate evangelic-righteousness, though their ceremonial Law was their Gospel; So it cannot be said, that there is any such bargain concerning Faith in the New Testament; but that Christ apprehended by Faith, is the Righteousness both under the Old and New Testament: which is the thing we intend.

To shut up this, we may illustrate the way of Justification, which is more clearly expressed in the Gospel under these expressions, believe and thou shall be saved, by comparing it with the more obscure and typicall expressions used under the Law: for, it is certain the substance is the same; and what is our legall-righteousnesse, was theirs; and what was their evangelick-righteousnesse, is ours also. Now, the terms or expressions of the Old Testament run thus, Levit. 4. vers. 3, 4, &c. When a man sinneth, he shall bring his offering, &c. and he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering, and it shall be accepted for him, to make atonement for him, &c. In which words there is an expresse condescending upon the Lords side to propose something as a righteousnesse for a sinner, which was to be accepted for him; yet, I suppose, no Christian will say, that it was the external sacrifice itself, that was to be accepted for such, nor that it was the act of the Faith of the offerer alone, that was so accepted: for then there needed no sacrifice, but it behoved to be the thing typified by that sacrifice, to wit, the Sacrifice of Christ, looked to, apprehended and pleded by the Faith of the offerer, that was so accepted. Yet, the external sacrifices in the Old, are as expresly said to be accepted for a sinners Justification, or as an atonement for him, as Faith is said to be accounted for righteousnesse in the New: and as it cannot be said, that by vertue of Christs satisfaction, or the Covenant with him, it was procured that such performances and sacrifices should be accepted of themselves, as the persons immediat evangelick-righteousnesse, though their ceremonial Law was their Gospel; So it cannot be said, that there is any such bargain concerning Faith in the New Testament; but that Christ apprehended by Faith, is the Righteousnesse both under the Old and New Testament: which is the thing we intend.

:1059p. 248

Concerning Repentance.

:1060p. 248–249

Repentance is much called-for in these Epistles, and that with peremptory certification of coming wrath, if the same prevent it not, as we may see, Chap. 2. vers. 5. in the Epistle to these of Ephesus, who look like a people real in the Work of God, though ⟨p. 249⟩under some decay: It is also called-for from Pergamos, vers. 16. Yea Jezebel hath a door of mercy opened to her, upon supposition of Repentance, vers. 21, 22. This also is required of Sardis, Chap. 3. vers. 3. and of Laodicea, vers. 21. For clearing of which places, and other truths concerning Repentance, it may be enquired, once for all, 1. If Repentance be simply necessary for preventing of wrath and obtaining of the pardon of sin? 2. In what respect it is necessary, and how it doth concur thereto? 3. If to a Believers recovery after his sin, the exercise of Repentance be necessary? 4. If so, what kind of Repentance?

REpentance is much called-for in these Epistles, and that with peremptory certification of coming wrath, if the same prevent it not, as we may see, Chap. 2. vers. 5. in the Epistle to these of Ephesus, who look like a people real in the Work of God, though ⟨p. 249⟩under some decay: It is also called-for from Pergamos, vers. 16. Yea Iezebel hath a door of mercy opened to her, upon supposition of Repentance, vers. 21, 22. This also is required of Sardis, Chap. 3. vers. 3. and of Laodicea, vers. 21. For clearing of which places, and other truths concerning Repentance, it may be enquired, once for all, 1. If Repentance be simplie necessary for preventing of wrath and obtaining of the pardon of sin? 2. In what respect it is necessary, and how it doth concur thereto? 3. If to a Believers recovery after his sin, the exercise of Repentance be necessary? 4. If so, what kind of Repentance?

:1061p. 249

For understanding of all, we would premit, that Repentance may fall under a threefold consideration, 1. It may be considered as somewhat previous in time to the exercise of Faith and Pardon of sin. This is properly legal-sorrow, and is a common work of the Spirit, which may be in one, whose sins will never be pardoned: it is therefore not of it self gracious, although the Lord may sometimes make use thereof, for a sinners humbling and wakening before his conversion. This is not the Repentance that is pressed here.

For understanding of all, we would premit, that Repentance may fall under a threefold consideration, 1. It may be considered as somewhat previous in time to the exercise of Faith and Pardon of sin. This is properly legall-sorrow, and is a common work of the Spirit, which may be in one, whose sins will never be pardoned: it is therefore not of it self gracious, although the Lord may sometimes make use thereof, for a sinners humbling and wakening before his conversion. This is not the Repentance that is pressed here.

:1062p. 249¶2

2. It may be considered, as it doth not only follow pardon, but also the intimation thereof; so it is a melting of heart, and a self-loathing that floweth from felt love, as the promise of the Covenant is, Ezek. 16.63 . and 36.31. This is the melting of heart, spoken of in that woman, Luke 7. Who loved much, because much was forgiven her, vers. 47. Neither is this that which is principally intended here.

:1063p. 249¶3

3. We may consider Repentance as a work of sanctifying Grace, rising from the sense of by-past sin, and hope of future mercy, whereby the heart is both affected with indignation in respect of what is past, and warmed with desire and love in respect of what it expecteth, and so differeth from the first, which ariseth from apprehended future wrath; and from the second, which floweth from self-received mercy. This Repentance goeth alongst with Faith and the exercise thereof, for the attaining of the hoped-for remission, with a through impression of the freeness thereof in respect of the persons felt sinfulness. That is the sorrow after a godly manner, which is spoken of, 2 Cor. 7.11. and it is that which is principally intended here, and in other places where Repentance is required in order to remission of sin.

3. We may consider Repentance as a work of sanctifying Grace, rising from the sense of by-past sin, and hope of future mercy, whereby the heart is both affected with indignation in respect of what is past, and warmed with desire and love in respect of what it expecteth, and so differeth from the first, which ariseth from apprehended future wrath; and from the second, which floweth from self-received mercy. This Repentance goeth alongst with Faith and the exercise thereof, for the attaining of the hoped-for remission, with a through impression of the freenesse thereof in respect of the persons felt sinfulnesse. That is the sorrow after a godly manner, which is spoken of, 2 Cor. 7.11. and it is that which is principally intended here, and in other places where Repentance is required in order to remission of sin.

:1064p. 249

In Answer then to the first Question, We say, that Repentance, understood in the last sense, is simply necessary for the obtaining of the pardon of sin, so that without it no unreconciled sinner can expect peace with God: which we thus make out, 1. from several places of Scripture, and first, by these places where the command of Repentance is prefixed to the obtaining of pardon, and preventing of wrath; and that by way of certification, that if it be not, remission is not to be expected, as Acts 3.19. Repent that your sins may be blotted out: which doth imply, that without this, the blotting out of sin is not to be expected: otherwise the proposing of the blotting out of sin, could be no great motive to press the exercise thereof; which is the Apostles scope: as also, Acts 2.38. Acts 8.22. and so in all other places, where Repentance is pressed as a mids for attaining of that end.

In Answer then to the first Question, We say, that Repentance, understood in the last sense, is simply necessary for the obtaining of the pardon of sin, so that without it no unreconciled sinner can expect peace with God: which we thus make out, 1. from severall places of Scripture, and first, by these places where the command of Repentance is prefixed to the obtaining of pardon, and preventing of wrath; and that by way of certification, that if it be not, remission is not to be expected, as Acts 3.19. Repent that your sins may be blotted out: which doth imply, that without this, the blotting out of sin is not to be expected: otherwise the proposing of the blotting out of sin, could be no great motive to presse the exercise thereof; which is the Apostles scope: as also, Acts 2.38. Acts 8.22. and so in all other places, where Repentance is pressed as a mids for attaining of that end.

:1065p. 249¶2

2. We may add these places where the connection between Repentance and Pardon is more peremptorily enforced, as Luke 13.2, 3. Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish: than which nothing can be more clear; and Prov. 28.13. He that covereth sin, shall not prosper: but he that confesseth and forsaketh (which is, upon the matter, all one with Repentance) shall find mercy.

2. We may adde these places where the connexion between Repentance and Pardon is more peremptorily enforced, as Luke 13.2, 3. Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish: than which nothing can be more clear; and Prov. 28.13. He that covereth sin, shall not prosper: but he that confesseth and forsaketh (which is, upon the matter, all one with Repentance) shall find mercy.

Position

Cited: :1053
On this page: :1050–1065
Section: :1004–1058
Whole work: 3,503 passages

Cite

James Durham, A commentarie upon the book of the Revelation Wherein the text is explained, the… (Edinburgh, 1658), lect. 3, pp. 246–247. EEBO-TCP A37035.

Or select words in any passage to make an image of them.

The book

Title as printed: 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.
Author: James Durham 1622–1658
Place: Edinburgh
Printer: Christopher Higgins
Year: 1658
Size: [8], 787, [17] p.
Words: 683,470
Catalogue: Wing D2805 · ESTC R216058
Text: EEBO-TCP A37035

Passages: 3,503
Sections: 149

Title page

The author

James Durham 1622–1658

PuritansScotland

Minister in Glasgow.

Transcription key

•: an illegible letter
〈…〉: illegible words
〈non-Latin alphabet〉: Greek or Hebrew the transcribers did not key
▪: illegible punctuation
⟨p. 12⟩: a page break in the printed book

If it be further said, may not Faith properly taken be called the condition upon which Christs Righteousnesse becometh a sinners, and is imputed to him? Answ. 1. This confirmeth what we say: for, if Faith be the condition upon which Christ becometh our Righteousnesse, Then it is Christ who is our Righteousnesse, and not Faith strictly and properly taken, much lesse largely, as comprehending all other Graces: for if it were our righteousnesse properly, there needed no imputation of Christs after our believing, except it be said (as some Papists say) that it is imputed to make up our defects, and to make our holinesse acceptable; and so it were our Faith and Works that should be justified by the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse, and not our persons: which is contrary to Scripture. 2. This is, upon the mater, the same with what we said, as is hinted: for suppose a debtor to be pursued, he pleadeth absolution, because his Cautioner hath payed, and he produceth the discharge given to him, wherein that is acknowledged; his pleading so and producing ⟨p. 247⟩of that discharge, may be someway called the ground that giveth him right in Law to have that payment of the Cautioners imputed to him, yet his absolution floweth from the complex businesse, not of his pleading simply, but of the cautioners paying, his pleading of that payment, and the Laws accepting of that defence and imputing of it to him; and so from all these together his absolution floweth: just so it is here, our Justification floweth from Christs satisfaction, being accepted and rested on by us, and imputed to us by God. And therefore, thirdly, though Faith properly be the condition upon which Christs Righteousnesse is imputed to us (I had rather call it the mean by which it is apprehended) yet it followeth not, that therefore Faith properly taken, is our righteousnesse, and as such, is imputed to us, and accounted so, seing still this presupposeth the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse in order of nature to interveen betwixt our believing and our Justification: and therefore that His Righteousnesse imputed, must be properly our righteousnesse, seing we upon account, and considered as such, (to wit, as having Christs Righteousnesse imputed to us) are justified; and upon that Righteousnesse imputed, Justification is immediatly grounded.

that is imputed (according to them) is Faith and the exercise of holinesse persevered in; for which cause, Justification to them is a continued act. 2. It must be instantaneous, but not imputed, till Faith and Holinesse be persevered into; and by this, neither Christs Righteousnesse, nor Faith is imputed to the person, not can he be accounted in friendship with God, or to be in Christ, or righteous, till his life be closed: for, he cannot be accounted so, till he be justified; and he is not justified, till these be imputed to him for Righteousnesse: Or, 3. that imputation must be a continued act, from the first closing with Christ till the end. But how can that be? For, 1. It is hard to conceive the act of the imputation of our faith to be continued, but more hard to conceive the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse to be a continuing act: for, Christs Righteousnesse, at the first, is perfect, and it is to be imputed to the Believer; if therefore one may be called a Believer, it is to be imputed to him instantly. 2. Imputation being a judiciall word and act, it supponeth an instant sentencing of such a righteousnesse to belong to such a person, as it were, and to be accepted for him: for, if he hath not perfect right, there is no legall imputation, (to say so;) but if it be perfect, then it is an instantaneous act. 3. If it be continued, then it is continued as if at first it were not a perfect imputation or perfectly imputed; But that were to say that it is not imputation: if it be continued as perfect, then it is supponed to be instantaneous, and past; and what was said for Justification, doth hold here. Indeed if the meaning be that the Gospel doth continue to impute Righteousnesse, even after Faith, till the Believer be in Heaven, and to account such a sinner just by vertue thereof, That is truth; But that speaketh the changed state of a sinner, upon the account of an imputation and justification already: so indeed, the word of the Gospel continueth still to pronounce Believers justified upon that account, and that imputation in its vertue never ceaseth;

Reformers309

Puritans1,782

Westminster Assembly24

Evangelicals36

Concerning Repentance.