3. Error 1: Justification from Eternity.
the law, which is only to be found in the gospel; nor for that on earth which is only to be found in heaven: this is the way that they take.
And he that shall tell them their sins can do them no hurt, or their duties do them no good, speaks to them not only as a Barbarian, in a language they understand not, but in such a language as their souls detest and abhor.
Moreover, the zeal and love of Christ and his glory being kindled in their souls, they have no patience to hear such doctrines as so greatly derogate from his glory, under a pretence of honouring {559} and exalting him: it wounds and grieves their very hearts to see the world hardened in their prejudices against reformation, and a gap opened to all licentiousness.
But, notwithstanding this double antidote and security, we find, by daily experience, such doctrines too much obtaining in the professing world. For my own part, he that searches my heart and reins, is witness, I would rather chuse to have my right hand wither, and my tongue rot within my mouth, than to speak one word, or write one line to cloud and diminish the free grace of God. Let it arise and shine in its meridian glory. None owes more to it, or expects more from it than I do; and what I shall write in this controversy, is to vindicate it from those doctrines and opinions, which, under pretence of exalting it, do really militate against it. To begin therefore with the first and leading error.
Error 1: Justification from Eternity Error I. That the justification of sinners is an immanent and eternal act of God, not only preceding all acts of sin, but the very existence of the sinner himself, and so perfectly abolishing sin in our persons,
that we are as clean from sin as Christ himself; αναμαρτητοι, as some of them have spoken. To stop the progress of this error I shall,
1. Lay down the sentence of the orthodox about it.
2. Offer some reasons for the refutation of it.
(1.) That which I take to be the truth agreed upon, and asserted by sound and reformed divines, touching gospel-justification, is by them made clear to the world, in these following scriptural distinctions of it.
Justification may be considered under a twofold respect or habitude.
1. According to God's eternal decree; or, 2. According to the execution thereof in time.
1. According to God's eternal decree and purpose; and in this respect grace is said to be "given us in Christ before the world began," 2 Tim.
1.19. and we are said to be "predestinated to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ," Eph. 1.5.
2. According to the execution thereof in time, so they again distinguish it by considering it two ways:
1. In its impetration by Christ.
2. In its application to us.
That very mercy or privilege of justification, which God from all eternity, purely out of his benevolent love, purposed and decreed for his elect, was also in time purchased for them by the death of Christ,
Rom. 5.9,10. where we are said to be "justified by his blood;" and he is said to have "made peace through the blood of his cross, to reconcile all things to himself," Col. 1.20. to be "delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification," {560} Rom. 4.25.
Once more, "That God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses," 2 Cor. 5.19. God the Father had in the death of Christ, a foundation of reconciliation, whereby he became propitious to his elect, that he might absolve and justify them. Again, 2. It must be considered in its application to us, which application is made in this life at the time of our effectual calling. When an elect sinner is united to Christ by faith, and so passeth from death to life, from a state of condemnation into a state of absolution and favour; this is our actual justification, Rom. 5.1. Acts 13.39. John 5.24. which actual justification is again considered two ways:
1. Universally and in general, as to the state of the person.
2. Specifically and particularly, as to the acts of sin.
As soon as we are received into communion with Christ, and his righteousness is imputed by God, and received by faith, immediately we pass from a state of death and condemnation to a state of life and justification, and all sins already committed, are remitted without exception or revocation; and not only so, but a remedy is given us in the righteousness of Christ against sins to come: and though these special and particular sins we afterward fall into, do need particular pardons; yet, by the renewed acts of faith and repentance, the believer applies to himself the righteousness of Christ, and they are pardoned.
Again, they carefully distinguish betwixt, 1. Its application by God to our persons. And,
2. Its declaration, or manifestation in us, and to us.
Which manifestation, or declaration, is either, 1. Private, in the conscience of a believer, or,
2. Public, at the bar of judgment.
And thus justification is many ways distinguished. And, notwithstanding all this, it is still actus indivisus, an undivided act, not on our part, for it is iterated in many acts; but on God's part, who at once decreed it; and on Christ's part, who by one offering purchased it, and, at the time of our vocation, universally applied it, as to the state of the person justified; and that so effectually, as no future sin shall bring that person any more under condemnation.
In this sentence or judgment the generality of reformed, orthodox divines are agreed; and the want of distinguishing (as they, according to scripture, have distinguished) hath led the Antinomians into this first error about justification, and that error hath led them into the most of the other errors. That this doctrine of theirs (which teaches that men are justified actually and completely, before they have a being) is an error, and hath no solid foundation to support it, may be evidenced by these three reasons. {561} 1. Because it is irrational.
2. Because it is unscriptural.
3. Because it is injurious to Christ and the souls of men.
Reason 1. It is irrational to imagine, that men are actually justified before they have a being, by an immanent act or decree of God.
Many things have been urged upon this account, to confute and destroy this fancy, and much more may be rationally urged against it: let the following particulars be weighed in the balance of reason.
1. Can we rationally suppose, that pardon and acceptance can be affirmed or predicated of that which is not? Reason tells us, Non entis nulla sunt accidentia; that which is not, can neither be condemned nor justified: but before the creation, or before a man's particular conception, he was not, and therefore could not in his own person be a subject of justification. Where there is no law, there is
no sin; where there is no sin, there is no punishment; where there is neither sin nor punishment, there can be no guilt; (for guilt is an obligation to punishment) and where there is neither law nor sin, nor obligation to punishment, there can be no justification. He that is not capable of a charge, is not capable of a discharge. What remains then, but that either the elect must exist from eternity, or be justified in time? It is true, future beings may be considered as in the purpose and decree of God from all eternity, or as in the intention of Christ, who died intentionally for the sins of the elect, and rose again for their justification; but neither the decree of God, nor the death of Christ takes place upon any man for his actual justification, until he personally exist: for the object of justification, is a sinner actually ungodly, Rom. 4.5. but so no man is, or can be so from eternity. In election, men are considered without respect to good or evil done by them, Rom. 9.11. not so in actual justification.
2. In justification there is a change made upon the state of the person, Rom. 5.8,9. 1 Cor. 6.9,10,11. By justification men pass from a state of death to a state of life, John 5.24. but the decree or purpose of God, in itself, makes no such actual change upon the state of any person: it hath indeed the nature of an universal cause; but an universal cause produceth nothing without particulars. If our state be changed, it is not by an immanent act of God: hence no such thing doth transire. A mere velle non punire, or intention to justify us in due time and order, makes no change on our state till that come, and the particular causes have wrought. A prince may have a purpose or intention to pardon a law-condemned traitor, and free him from that condemnation in due time; but whilst the law that condemned him, stands in its full force and power against him, he is not justified or acquitted, {562} notwithstanding that gracious intention, but stand still condemned. So it is with us, till by faith we are implanted into Christ. It is true Christ is a surety for all his, and hath satisfied the debt; he is a common head to all his, as Adam was to all his children,
Rom. 5.19. but as the sin of Adam condemns none but those that are in him; so the righteousness of Christ actually justifies none but those that are in him; and none are actually in him but believers:
therefore, till we believe, no actual change passeth, or can pass upon our states. So that this hypothesis is contrary to reason.
Reason 2. As this opinion is irrational, so it is unscriptural. For 1. The scripture frequently speaks of remission or justification as a future act, and therefore not from eternity, Rom. 4.23,24. "Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for ours also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him," &c.
And, Gal. 3.8, "The scriptures foreseeing that God would justify the Heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham."
The gospel was preached many years before the Gentiles were justified; but if they were justified from eternity, how was the gospel preached before their justification?
2. The scripture leaves all unbelievers, without distinction, under condemnation and wrath. The curse of the law lies upon them all till they believe, John 3.18. " He that believeth in him is not condemned; but he that believeth not, is condemned already." And, Eph.
2.3,12,13. The very elect themselves were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. They were at that time, or during that state of nature, (which takes in all that whole space betwixt their conception and conversion) without Christ, without hope, without God in the world. But if this opinion be true, that the elect were justified from eternity, or from the time of Christ's death, then it cannot be true, that the elect by nature are children of wrath, without Christ, without hope, without God in the world; except these two may consist together, (which is absolutely impossible) that the children of wrath, without God, Christ, or hope, are actually discharged from their sins and dangers, by a free and gracious act of justification.
Objection. But doth not scripture say, Rom. 8.33, "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect?" If none can charge the elect, then
God hath discharged them.
Solution. God hath not actually discharged them, as they are elect, but as they are justified elect; for so runs the text, and clears itself in the very next words, It is God that justifieth. When God hath actually justified an elect person, none can charge him.
3. It is cross to the scripture order of justification, which {563} places it not only after Christ's death in the place last cited, Rom. 8.33, but also after our actual vocation; as is plain, ver. 30, "Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified." It is absurd to place vocation before predestination, or glorification before justification; Sure then it must be absurd also to place justification before vocation; the one as well as the other confounds and breaks the scripture order: You may as well say, men shall be glorified that were never justified, as say they may be justified before they believed, or existed. So that you see the notion of justification from eternity, or before our actual existence, and effectual vocation, is a notion as repugnant to sacred scripture, as it is to sound reason.
Reason 3. And as it is found repugnant to reason and scripture, so it is highly injurious to Jesus Christ and the souls of men.
(1.) It greatly injures the Lord Jesus Christ, and robs him of the glory of being our Saviour; for if the elect be justified from eternity, Christ cannot be the Saviour of the elect, as most assuredly he is; for if Christ save them, he must save them as persons subject to perishing, either de facto or de jure. But if the elect were justified from eternity, they could, in neither respect, be subject to perishing: For he that was eternally justified, was never condemned, nor capable of condemnation; and he that never was, nor could be condemned, could never be subject to perishing; and he that never was, nor could be subject to perishing, can never truly and properly be said to be saved.
If it be said the elect were not justified till the death of Christ, I demand then what became of all them that died before the death of
Christ? If they were not justified, they could not be glorified; for this is sure, from Rom. 8.30, that the whole number of the glorified in heaven is made up of such as were justified on earth: Let men take heed, therefore, lest, under pretence of exalting Christ, they bereave him of the glory of being the Saviour of his elect.
(2.) It bereaves him of another glorious royalty. The scripture every where makes our justification the result and fruit of the meritorious death of Christ, Rom. 3.24,25. Rom. 8.3,4. 2 Cor. 5.19,20. Gal.
3.13,14. Eph. 1.17. but if men were justified from eternity, how is their justification the fruit and result of the blood of the cross? as it plainly appears from these scriptures to be. Nay,
(3.) This opinion leaves no place for the satisfaction of justice by the blood of Christ for our sins. He did not die according to this opinion to pay our debts. And here Antinomianism and Socinianism {564} meet, and congratulate each other: For if there were no debts owing to the justice of God from eternity, Christ could not die to pay them; and it is manifest there were no debts due to God's justice from eternity, on the account of his elect, if the elect were from eternity justified; unless you will say, a person may be justified, and yet his debts not paid: For all justification dissolves the obligation to punishment.
If there were any debt for Christ to pay by his blood, they must either be his own debts, or the elect's. To say they were his own is a blasphemous reproach to him; and, according to this opinion, we cannot say they were the elect's; for if they were justified from eternity their debts were discharged, and their bonds cancelled from eternity. So that this opinion leaves nothing to the blood of Christ to discharge, or make satisfaction for.
(4.) And as it hath been proved to be highly injurious to the Lord Jesus, so it is greatly injurious to the souls of men, as it naturally leads them into all those wild and licentious opinions, which