Notes: Sect. 7. — The Antinomian Faith rejected.
Notes: Sect. 7. — The Antinomian Faith rejected.
190
What this is in the speaker’s sense, he immediately explains at large. In a word, in his sense, it is to be Antinomian indeed. The sum of his compliment made to Evangelista, or the author, whichever you please, lies here; namely, that he had stopped listening to him, because he did not preach the gospel so purely as some others in the place; yet in his opinion, he understood it better than many others; and (to carry the compliment to the highest pitch) it was by his means he turned downright Antinomian. One would think that whatever was the measure of the author’s pride or humility, self-denial or self-seeking, he had as much common sense as would render this address not very influential with him, or at least it would teach him that publishing it was not the most proper means for commending himself. So that publishing it may rather be imputed to the author’s self-denial than to the lack of it; though I presume the considering reader will neither impute it to the one nor to the other.
191
The preacher taught, according to his text, that man’s own righteousness had no hand in his justification and salvation; he dehorted from putting confidence in good works; and exhorted by faith to lay hold on Christ’s righteousness only. And this hearer inferred from this that there was no need at all for good works; as if one should conclude that because it is the eye only that sees, there is therefore no need at all for hand or foot. So the apostle Paul’s doctrine was misconstrued: Rom. 3.8, “Some affirm that we say, Let us do evil that good may come.” Indeed, in the apostles’ days, the doctrine of free grace was actually thus abused to Antinomianism by some “turning the grace of God into lasciviousness,” Jude 4. The apostle was aware of the danger on that side, through the corruption of the hearts of men; Gal. 5.13, “Brethren, you have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh.” Ministers of Christ (who was himself accounted “a friend to publicans and sinners,” etc., Matthew 11.19) and followers of Paul’s doctrine — which in the eyes of carnal men, had a show and semblance of favouring sinful liberty — ought to set the apostles’ example in this matter before them in a special manner; with fear and trembling, keeping a jealous eye on the danger from that part; especially in this day, in which the Lord’s indignation is visibly going out in spiritual strokes, as a despised gospel; knowing that the gospel of Christ is to some “the savour of death unto death,” 2Cor. 2.16, and that “there are those who twist the Scriptures to their own destruction “2Pet. 2.17.
192
How easy it is to pass from legalism to Antinomianism! Had this poor man, under his trouble and disquiet of conscience, fled to Jesus Christ for purging his conscience from guilt by Christ’s blood, and sanctifying his nature by Christ’s Spirit; and not put his own confessions of sins, prayers for pardon, and promises of amendment, in place of Christ’s atoning blood; and his own blind and faithless resolutions to amend, in place of the sanctifying spirit of Christ; he would have escaped this snare of the devil, Heb. 9.14; Rom. 7.4-6.
193
See note page 40.
194
1Joh 3:10 Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God.
195
This doctrine of our author is far from cherishing presumption, or opening a gap to licentiousness.
196
That is, to scale and get into it by their own good works.
197
The offences of these men, taxed here, were both against the law (or covenant) of works; for they must have been against that law which they were under, and not another; and both of them were as yet under the law, or Covenant of Works, as both were unbelievers, which was told to Antinomista on page 97, as it was told to Nomista on page 92; which is why it is manifest that the matter of the law does not mean the Law of Christ, but the matter of the Law of Works, that is, the Ten Commandments; this is because they stand in the Covenant of Works, which Antinomista had no regard for in his conduct, though they had all the authority and binding force on him found in that covenant. And as he offended against the matter of it, so did Nomista against the form of it, in seeking to be justified by his obedience; for the Covenant of Works never bound a sinner to seek to be justified by his obedience to it; but on the contrary, it always condemned that as presumption, staking down the guilty under the curse, without remedy, till satisfaction is made by another hand.