VI. The doctrine of the saints perseverance. Under which article
VI. The doctrine of the saints perseverance. Under which article
1. Some passages of scripture, made use of in favor of this doctrine, are represented as a sandy foundation to build it upon. It seems that Job 17:9, is not a promise of God, but only the sentiment of Job. Be it so: Since it is a good one, and God has testified of him that he spoke the thing that was right, it should be abode by. Moreover, since Job spake under divine inspiration, why should not these words be esteemed a promise of God by the mouth of Job? The good work, mentioned in Philippians 1:6, which the apostle was confidently persuaded, not barely hoped, would be performed until the day of Christ, he intimates, was either planting the church at Philippi, or an inclination to liberality; he does not know which. What should induce him to propose the latter sense, I cannot imagine; since there is not the least hint, in the text or context, of the liberality of these persons: And as for the former, that can never be intended; since planting of a church was a good work external and visible among them, and not a good work begun in them, in their hearts, and that in each of them singly and separately, as this was; for the apostle says, even as it is meet for me to think this of you all. The everlasting righteousness, said to be brought in by Christ, Daniel 9:24, is suggested to be a covenant, whose terms of acceptance are unalterable. But the covenant of grace never goes by this name; and was it so called, it must be with respect to the everlasting righteousness of Christ, which always continues a justifying one to those interested in it; and therefore they shall never enter into condemnation, or finally and totally perish. Besides, the covenant confirmed by Christ, is spoken of verse 26, as distinct from this righteousness. Once more: If the justification and glorification of converted Gentiles are inseparably connected together, Romans 8:30, then those who are truly converted, and are justified by the righteousness of Christ, shall certainly be saved; and which is a doctrine to be defended, without establishing the principle of fatality, or stoical enthusiasm. The prophetic texts in Isaiah 54:10, and 59:21, 40, Hosea 2:19, in favor of the saints final perseverance, are left untouched, and are not meddled with by this writer.
2. Such passages of scripture as seem to militate against the perseverance of the saints, are brought upon the carpet; particularly, we are charged with giving an absurd and contradictory turn to 26, in supposing that the prophet, by a righteous man’s turning from his righteousness, means a hypocrite’s turning from his hypocrisy, from his feigned righteousness. But this is to give a perverse turn to our words and sense; for we say not, that the prophet means an hypocrite turning from a counterfeit and hypocritical righteousness to a real one, but a man’s turning from an external moral righteousness to an open, shameful course of sinning: All mere outward righteousness is not hypocrisy, as the case of Paul before conversion shows, Acts 23:1, Philippians 3:6, which a man may have, destitute of the true grace of God, and may turn from into open sin; and is no instance of the apostacy of a real saint, or a truly just man; which this man is not said to be, in the passage referred to; and is elsewhere described as one that trusts to his own righteousness, and committeth iniquity. (Ezekiel 33:13) The text in 6, is only transcribed at large, and the reader left to judge of the meaning of it. The spiritual meat and drink, 5, the Israelites partook of in the wilderness, were the typical manna, and the water out of the rock; which they might do, and not partake of the spiritual blessings of grace signified by them: though, no doubt, many of them did; for the temporal calamities that befell them in the wilderness, are no proofs that they perished eternally. See Psalm 99:8. To persevere in grace and holiness, is a blessing of grace bellowed upon truly converted persons; to make use of means of enjoying this blessing, is a duty, such as to be strong in the Lord, to watch in prayer, etc. Ephesians 6:10, 19, and which the apostle Paul himself made use of: Though, when he says, Lest I myself should be a cast-away, (1 Corinthians 9:27) the word αδοκιμος, which he uses, does not signify a reprobate, or one rejected of God, but one rejected and disapproved of by men; his concern was not lest he should fall from the divine favor, or come short of happiness, of both which he was fully persuaded, Romans 8:38, 39, 2 Timothy 1:12, which persuasion was not built upon his own resolution and watchfulness, but upon the nature of God’s love, and the power of Christ; but lest by any conduct of his, his ministry should be rendered useless among men. The instances of David and Peter are no proofs of the final and total apostasy of saints, since they were both recovered from their falls by divine grace. Judas, indeed, fell from his election to an office, but not from election to grace and glory, in which he never had any interest; and also from his ministry and apostleship, which is never denied to be an outward favor, though no inward special grace, and so nothing to the purpose. The chapters referred to, 33, 20 and 39, 29 and 22, 32, 22. I have largely considered elsewhere, and have shown that they have nothing in them repugnant to the saints final perseverance; where I have also considered the several cautions and exhortations given to the saints respecting this matter; and have shown the nature and use of them; to which I refer the reader.
3. Under this head is again introduced the doctrine of God’s seeing no sin in his people. In order to set this doctrine in a proper light, we distinguish between God’s eye of omniscience and of justice; with the one he does, and with the other he does not behold the sins of his people, being justified by the righteousness of his Son: we also distinguish between the correction or chastisement of a father, and the punishment of a judge; which distinction we think might be allowed, and thought sufficient to keep the door shut, and not to open it to all manner and degrees of immorality, falsehood and lewdness, as this man suggests; though we do not distinguish, as he foolishly insinuates, between being chastened and punished in hell fire: who ever talked of fatherly chastisements in hell? The text in Numbers 23:21. He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, etc. he says, is spoken of the whole body of Israel, all the posterity of Jacob, who apostatized, rebelled, fell, and were cut off through unbelief, and so no ways serves our cause. I answer, that that whole body of people were a typical people, typical of all God’s elect, or his spiritual Israel, and what is spoken typically of them, is really true of the other; and as all that people were, on the day of atonement, typically cleansed from all their sins and transgressions, hence God, in respect to that, beheld no iniquity in them; so the whole spiritual Israel of God, or all God’s elect, being cleansed from their sins, and having them all really expiated by the blood and sacrifice of Christ, God sees no iniquity in them to take vengeance on them for it. But if this will not do, this man has more to say, and that is, that learned men say, for he is no judge himself, that the Hebrew original will justify another reading, namely, he doth not approve of outrage against the posterity of Jacob, nor vexation against Israel. I reply, that as our version agrees with the context and design of the writer, so it entirely accords with the original Hebrew, and much more so than this other reading does; and is confirmed by the Samaritan, Syriac and Arabic versions, and by such learned men as Vatablus, Pagnine, Arias Montanus, Junius and Tremellius, Drusius, Fagius, Ainsworth, etc. and could this new translation, though it is wholly borrowed from Gataker be justified, it would be so far from militating against, that it would rather establish the doctrine we contend for; for, if God disapproves of outrage and vexation against his people by others, he himself will give them none; or, in other words, he sees no sin in them so as to punish them himself: moreover, if this text was out of the question, the doctrine we plead for will stand its ground, we are not in such poverty and distress; for besides Jeremiah 50:20, which has been produced already, though this writer takes no notice of it, we have many others which contain the same truth (see Psalm 32:1, 85:2, 50:2, 51:7; 1 John 1:7; Song of Solomon 4:7; Ezekiel 16:14; Isaiah 43:25, 44:22; Colossians 1:21, 22, 2:10; Revelation 3:18, 14:5).